Vail wants this image censored.

[Bunion 2020]

Thanks buddy, some people say I am full of shit. Prepping for a Colonoscopy right now so I should have that sorted out pretty soon.

No shit.....

[Meadow Skipper]

…The public knows more about ski area snow safety than the pros on powder days.

That chaps my ass so badly.

[Core Shot]

Thanks buddy, some people say I am full of shit. Prepping for a Colonoscopy right now so I should have that sorted out pretty soon.

No shit.....

That chaps my ass so badly.

Bunion wins the ass chap today

[Bunion 2020]

Thinking of you pal. Every trip.

[TahoeJ]

At $120 a pop that's kinda like a patrolman for the day per shot.

Woah. Is that factoring in maintainence and what have you or is the ammo just that expensive? I imagine shooting that thing can be pretty satisfying sometimes.

[noparking]

Woah. Is that factoring in maintainence and what have you or is the ammo just that expensive? I imagine shooting that thing can be pretty satisfying sometimes.

maintenance isn't factored into that number but that doesn't cost most programs much. bullets can be had slightly cheaper in a place like LCC compared to other places where you can't place a bulk order. we were paying $135 at my last program. in the grand scheme of things shooting a 105 is a lot cheaper than the other options(at least in the permanent/semi permanent RAC world) even after 13 years of shooting it still hasn't got old.

[Core Shot]

Thinking of you pal. Every trip.

Whenever you drink that colon blow.

It’s a full on Core Shit.

[telefreewasatch]

Like to start a discussion on what an avalanche is in folk's opinion.
Merriam Webster defines it as:
A large mass of snow, ice, earth, rock, or other material in swift motion down a mountainside or over a precipice.

I focus on the words large and swift. Both are relative, no? When one makes a turn and snow slides down the hill slowly, overwhelms and kills a small insect, is that an avalanche?
If a table top piece of snow releases under one's skis and one is swept off a cliff and dies, was this an avalanche fatality or a fall? How about a minor slough doing the same?
If a person hits a tree and dies from a minor amount of snow moving down the hill was this an avalanche or a collision?
Is a graupel storm a "constant avalanche" on steep slopes?
Point is that gravity moves things down the hill, us included.

When someone dies in a class 1 slide like what happened at Whistler last week, was that an avalanche?
Be interesting to know the cause of death on that one, poor soul.
Like I said above, it's global news when the word avalanche gets used in a fatality...
Thoughts?

[TahoeJ]

IMO unless there's a slab fracture and release it doesn't really "count" as an avalanche. I've been taken out by a pretty substantial slough train in AK and certainly wouldn't say I was caught in a slide.

I think this is how most experienced skiers / riders see it. But an amateur / novice might see a big slough build up and call that an avalanche.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

IMO unless there's a slab fracture and release it doesn't really "count" as an avalanche. I've been taken out by a pretty substantial slough train in AK and certainly wouldn't say I was caught in a slide.

I think this is how most experienced skiers / riders see it. But an amateur / novice might see a big slough build up and call that an avalanche.

What about a large slough,skier triggered or natural, that entrains all the soft snow on a large slope with no slab present? Enough to bury or carry a skier over cliffs, through trees or into another terrain trap. I’d call that a soft snow avalanche.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Buster Highmen]

I think of avalanches broadly

Basically, any quantity of frozen water that keeps its momentum for at least 20 feet. Doesn't have to be fast (see slishalanche in the PNW spring/summer). doesn't have to be cohesive.

In terms of media, "avalanche" sells!

[old goat]

If a skier is carried by moving snow over a cliff or into a tree and dies, that's an avalanche fatality, regardless of the size of the avalanche. If a skier is knocked off his feet by his slough or because the snow gives way but then continues to fall due to the steepness of the slope I wouldn't call that an avalanche death. I guess the defining characteristic that makes it an avalanche death is that there is enough snow moving to transport the victim. There might be times when it's hard to tell the difference but I doubt there are many. There are certainly plenty of avalanche deaths caused by impact where the victim was not buried.

[adrenalated]

I define an avalanche as snow moving downhill.

Not all avalanches are dangerous. They also certainly do not need to be slabs to be avalanches, nor are slab avalanches always dangerous or non-slab avalanches never dangerous.

[Bunion 2020]

^^^ Bueno!

[Canada1]

Like to start a discussion on what an avalanche is in folk's opinion.
Merriam Webster defines it as:
When someone dies in a class 1 slide like what happened at Whistler last week, was that an avalanche?
Be interesting to know the cause of death on that one, poor soul.
Like I said above, it's global news when the word avalanche gets used in a fatality...
Thoughts?

I think sluff that buries you is an avalanche. But really it's just semantics. If it takes you out and you go into a no fall zone, it is still your mistake.

[garyfromterrace]

Agree, no free pass. Every inbound slide that occurs needs to be investigated, but there seems to be an assumption out there that is shit happens it is due to a mistake of the avi mitigation team. That is not always the case. Pushed too far, and we will see resorts begin to restrict more terrain and hold more terrain and bomb more terrain before they ever let us ski it.

Well said.

And, IMHO a slough is an avalanche, just a small one that you can manage.

[TahoeJ]

Well said.

And, IMHO a slough is an avalanche, just a small one that you can manage.

Oh for sure, by definition slough is absolutely an avalanche and pretty sure defined as such in all of the AIRIE guide books, etc... I guess what I was saying was how we tend to think of them in a more practical sense.

For example, when you say you get "caught" in an avalanche we tend to think of a slab, whereas if an idiot like me tries to outrun his slough and gets taken out, well, that's just poor slough management in steep terrain.

[nickinbc]

IMO unless there's a slab fracture and release it doesn't really "count" as an avalanche.

So you wouldn't call a huge wet slide an avalanche? Maybe started by a glide crack or wet snow coming off trees or rocks.

[telefreewasatch]

I define an avalanche as snow moving downhill.

I don't disagree with what you say, however,
Is a glacier an avalanche?
Graupel rolling downhill a continuous avalanche?
The recent fatality at Whistler was due to cornice failure.
Is a cornice fall really an avalanche?
Thoughts from the collective?

As Bunion and Ottime both said, a ski area cannot stabilize every square inch of terrain before opening it. We used to not bother with smaller pieces of new snow while doing control work. Called em public education. Those pieces have gotten so small these days and the time it takes to control every table top piece of snow that may want to slide down the hill gotten so long that openings are delayed and can be lost in the face of continued storm or the next storm too quick on the last's heels.

Edit to clarify: A person does not have to be killed, buried, or even injured in an avalanche for the press and public to be enthralled by the event in the US. Avalanches are sexy. Killed or injured = probable lawsuit, thus the overly thorough mitigation.

[old goat]

I don't disagree with what you say, however,
a glacier is an avalanche?
Graupel rolling downhill is a continuous avalanche?
The recent fatality at Whistler was due to a cornice failure.
Would he have died regardless of the cornice triggering the tiny avalanche underneath?
Is a cornice fall an avalanche?
Thoughts from the collective?

My point is the same as Ottime made in that a ski area cannot stabilize every square inch of terrain before opening it. We used to not bother with smaller pieces of new snow while doing control work. Called em public education. Those pieces have gotten so small these days and the time it takes to control every table top piece of snow that may want to slide down the hill gotten so long that openings are delayed and can be lost in the face of continued storm or the next storm too quick on the last's heels.

Edit to clarify: A person does not have to be killed, buried, or even injured in an avalanche for the press and public to be enthralled by the event in the US. Avalanches are sexy. Killed or injured = probable lawsuit, thus the overly thorough mitigation.

Aha, now we've finally figured out what ax you're grinding. You claim that by falsely calling incidents like this avalanches ski areas can justify taking longer to get stuff open. I claim BS. As evidenced by the fact that people do die in post control in bounds avalanches from time to time. And a significant number of those are patrollers BTW. So obviously they aren't controlling every small "piece of snow". (Is that a technical term?)

Sounds like you want to see more terrain open faster, at the price of more bodies. What's your number?

[::: :::]

Lotta assuming/projecting there, OG

[doebedoe]

The recent fatality at Whistler was due to a cornice failure. ...
Is a cornice fall an avalanche?

I assume this is rhetorical? Because every professional avalanche organization I know in North America or am involved with recognizes cornice fall as a specific avalanche type:

https://avalanche.org/avalanche-ency...anche-problem/
https://www.avalanche.ca/glossary/te...lanche-problem

You don't get to just change the definition of avalanches that is the norm--a large volume of snow moving fastly downhill--because of your personal experience.

The unnerving thing about this avalanche fatality is specifically how not-isolated this slide was. There were at least 4, D1.5 or larger slides inbounds on terrain open to the public in 2-3 days of operations.

Maybe there was just an odd problem and didn't respond to mitigation. Maybe typical mitigation work failed. Maybe procedures failed. Maybe this is just the acceptable amount of risk deemed acceptable (i.e. they did everything to protocol, nothing unduly forced patrols hand in opening terrain, shit just happens and we accept this risk). We don't know until we get the results of an investigation.

[paulster2626]

I wonder how the investigation is coming along.

[telefreewasatch]

Sounds like you want to see more terrain open faster, at the price of more bodies. What's your number?

You don't know what you are talking about.
And the statement above is a dickhead one.
The best strategy for a Class A avalanche area is to let no snowflake go undisturbed.
Moguls from the dirt up.
By opening terrain when cover is scant one has a good chance for a solid pack the rest of the year.
I used to worry when we opened stuff on thin snow that we would see more head injuries.
Doesn't happen. Folks do better that I figured.
And head injuries are not global news...
This strategy is what prevents large old snow catastrophic avalanches.
When one is only dealing with new snow instability terrain should open more quickly and safely on account of the above.
However, when one feels the need to deal with every table top piece of NEW snow, the overall goal of skier compaction can be reduced resulting in larger inbound slides.
And we are, in my opinion, keeping the public from getting their fix in a timely fashion.

I am very aggressive about getting terrain open with new snow.
I am very conservative about getting terrain open with deep slab potential.
One cannot outsmart deep slab.

Point is that when we are hunting down every little "piece of snow" we lose sight of the big picture of overall in area stability. The public is the greatest tool we have to make the snow safe.

[paulster2626]

The best strategy for a Class A avalanche area is to let no snowflake go undisturbed.
Moguls from the dirt up.
By opening terrain when cover is scant one has a good chance for a solid pack the rest of the year.
...
This strategy is what prevents large old snow catastrophic avalanches.
When one is only dealing with new snow instability terrain should open more quickly and safely on account of the above.
However, when one feels the need to deal with every table top piece of NEW snow, the overall goal of skier compaction can be reduced resulting in larger inbound slides.
And we are, in my opinion, keeping the public from getting their fix in a timely fashion.

I am very aggressive about getting terrain open with new snow.
I am very conservative about getting terrain open with deep slab potential.
One cannot outsmart deep slab.

Point is that when we are hunting down every little "piece of snow" we lose sight of the big picture of overall in area stability. The public is the greatest tool we have to make the snow safe.

Assuming we're still talking about Whistler, isn't the history of the snowpack there a favourable one for low avy risk? Like it starts out super-wet, sticks to everything, and then gets gradually lighter as the season gets rolling? Also it's not uncommon to already have 1m of snowpack in the alpine by the time the mountains open up in the first place. I've never had a problem with how quickly W/B patrol can get stuff open - imo they are world-class at this, and you can usually set your watch to it.

I've always been curious how they actually pack down snow in the early season though. They do this in Highland Bowl, right? Just have people walk up and down smooshing down the snow? How many people do this, and how many days? And how much snow is packed down before it opens?