By statistical methods I mean Munter's reduction or 3x3 method and all the variations of this approach. I would be curious to hear what non-europeans think of it.
In german speaking Europe, Munter (or variations thereof) has been taught pretty much as the be-all-end-all solution for avalanche risk mitigation for recreational users for 20 years. At least partially due to this, the avalanche danger level is all that registers from the bulletin for a lot of people (you don't need anything else to do the basic Munter calculation, although some additional information can be incorporated). In the most basic type of recreational avalanche course the focus would typically be on Munter, without mentioning anything that involves digging at all, or even discouraging people from digging pits. The argument is that most incidents can be avoided if you stick to Munter and everything else is so confusing for people that it is not beneficial. (which is true for a lot of people and a lot of settings)
Recently there has been an increasing tendency to also look at other stuff again (i.e. dig and differentiate between types of danger, rather than just level of danger), at least at the higher end of the avalanche education spectrum (professional forecasters were always digging, of course). However, Munter is still mostly the standard that everyone is held to when determining whether something was overly reckless, in general and typically also in legal settings.
In Austria we just had 2 high profile incidents with 6 fatalities, both guided groups, and both well within what Munter "allows". This has sparked quite some discussion about whether there is some kind of systemic flaw in how danger levels are assigned in the bulletin or, alternatively, a problem with Munter. A lot of people seem to think if something slides even though it was "allowed" according to Munter, the danger level must have been wrong. (For both incidents the danger level was clearly accurate in terms of the definition of the danger scale and the other content of bulletin is also above reproach, stating exactly where the problem areas are and what the problem is.)
I am under the impression that Munter never really took off in North America, at least not to the extent that it did here. Is this true? Is it used at all? Is it taught and if so to what kind of user? What tactics for minimizing risk are taught at the most basic level of avalanche education?
Bookmarks