Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 77
  1. #51
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    108
    Yep, and that entire track is gone in the slide photos.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Screenshot 2023-03-27 150258.jpg 
Views:	177 
Size:	288.6 KB 
ID:	453433

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Not in the PRB
    Posts
    30,886
    Ah, missed the caption for the photo in the report.

    If that doesn't put the whole heuristic trap of "just gonna poke around, take a look, scout" into focus... Wow.
    "fuck off you asshat gaper shit for brains fucktard wanker." - Jesus Christ
    "She was tossing her bean salad with the vigor of a Drunken Pop princess so I walked out of the corner and said.... "need a hand?"" - Odin
    "everybody's got their hooks into you, fuck em....forge on motherfuckers, drag all those bitches across the goal line with you." - (not so) ill-advised strategy

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    cb, co
    Posts
    4,760
    Quote Originally Posted by Danno View Post
    That second pic, does it show their skin track on the left edge zig-zagging up the slope?
    Yes. That thing kept luring them on, 10' at a time...
    Last edited by goldenboy; 03-27-2023 at 06:26 PM.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Denial
    Posts
    2,429
    Quote Originally Posted by dmcd View Post
    Attachment 453416
    Attachment 453417

    Beautiful but terrifying knowing the forecast and what the next few minutes would bring. To think back to what they'd started the day having planned and where they ended up.
    Wow, these had to have been taken minutes before their lives changed forever.
    The whole human race is de evolving; it is due to birth control, smart people use birth control, and stupid people keep pooping out more stupid babies.

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    18,362
    Vallecito is where I would die. I've worked on lines for 5-8 years and backed off after severe commitment each time. I have no problem with that when my nose doesn't smell like perfect fucking peaches, but Vallecito would get me every time. Hell, I did that on a sidecountry line this past week. Just turned the fuck around.
    Is it radix panax notoginseng? - splat

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    2,403
    In looking for lessons from this one thing I'm thinking about is hypothermia/frostbite. Does anyone have an idea of what low temperatures were for the night that the survivors were making their way out?

    Reading that report makes me want to give everyone involved a hug. What a terrible series of events and a true miracle that two of them survived.


    Edit: After thinking about this a bit more I'm certain my touring group doesn't bring enough warm stuff in case of accident so that's one of my takeaways.

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Nov 2022
    Posts
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by bennymac View Post
    Iím just a newbie jong looking to learn - how much would the 48 reported avalanches (up to size 3) in the week prior factor into decision making about even getting onto any steep alpine slopes - regardless of how disciplined you are about wide spacing and regardless of how safe it will be once you summit the ridge top

    (maybe thatís too complicated to answer in a general sense and is more dependent on what you are seeing in the immediate zone surrounding you?)
    Not trying to Monday morning QB, but in the effort helping you gather some takeaways here are my thoughts. I was skiing in the area the day before this happened. It has been relatively stable in Marble all season, but the day before this there were several large avalanches in the area. It was known that E aspects were reactive from the recent storm. That would give me enough pause to at least put more margin in elsewhere. That margin would come from either not skiing avy terrain, or if I were to ski avy terrain I would expose 1 person at a time, ski a planar slope with no exposure or terrain traps, not bring my dog, and ski it earlier in the day.

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    9,300ft
    Posts
    20,914
    Quote Originally Posted by powdork View Post
    They didn't plan to go there that day so why not bring the dog along? And there's no problem with the dog walking up the skin track with them (their plan wasn't to ski that terrain). The ridge heading south to their objective could be different if it's knifelike or if the cornices are a problem. There are reasons not to bring a doggoe, and many of those reasons depend on the dog. The dog wasn't the problem in this case. The problem was their frothing and their inexplicable decision of riders 2 and 3 to start up before 1 made it to the ridge.
    But they did bring the dog, then went places inappropriate for a dog.

    Dogs don't derive enjoyment from terrain because they are happy basically anywhere. All they care about is being out with their human. Gnar, summits, and objectives are 100% about human desires, not that of the pet.

    Dogs don't understand start/safe zones nor 1 by 1 travel. Neither do some humans.

    Pets don't belong in avalanche terrain. Neither do some humans... even those that do are capable of human error.
    Quote Originally Posted by blurred
    skiing is hiking all day so that you can ski on shitty gear for 5 minutes.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    108
    Taking a dog is a great reason to back out of proposed consequential stuff or is a good excuse to turn back and could limit the ratcheting up of objectives.
    Last edited by dmcd; 03-28-2023 at 11:55 AM.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Not in the PRB
    Posts
    30,886
    Quote Originally Posted by dmcd View Post
    Taking a dog is a great reason to back out of proposed consequential stuff or is a good excuse to turn back and could limit the ratcheting up of objectives.
    exactly. the idea that it was fine because they didn't originally intend to go there, and it was fine to continue up that ridge because they didn't intend to ski that line, seems ludicrous to me. I will say that looking at those pics says to me that bringing the dog was definitely not their biggest mistake, but it definitely was a mistake.
    "fuck off you asshat gaper shit for brains fucktard wanker." - Jesus Christ
    "She was tossing her bean salad with the vigor of a Drunken Pop princess so I walked out of the corner and said.... "need a hand?"" - Odin
    "everybody's got their hooks into you, fuck em....forge on motherfuckers, drag all those bitches across the goal line with you." - (not so) ill-advised strategy

  11. #61
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    9,539
    Quote Originally Posted by concierge View Post
    Not trying to Monday morning QB, but in the effort helping you gather some takeaways here are my thoughts. I was skiing in the area the day before this happened. It has been relatively stable in Marble all season, but the day before this there were several large avalanches in the area. It was known that E aspects were reactive from the recent storm. That would give me enough pause to at least put more margin in elsewhere. That margin would come from either not skiing avy terrain, or if I were to ski avy terrain I would expose 1 person at a time, ski a planar slope with no exposure or terrain traps, not bring my dog, and ski it earlier in the day.
    Gotcha - thanks

  12. #62
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tahoe
    Posts
    15,773
    Quote Originally Posted by summit View Post
    But they did bring the dog, then went places inappropriate for a dog.

    Dogs don't derive enjoyment from terrain because they are happy basically anywhere. All they care about is being out with their human. Gnar, summits, and objectives are 100% about human desires, not that of the pet.

    Dogs don't understand start/safe zones nor 1 by 1 travel. Neither do some humans.

    Pets don't belong in avalanche terrain. Neither do some humans... even those that do are capable of human error.
    Really sweeping statements there. I'm sure you meant some qualifications to 'pets don't belong in avalanche terrain'. A dog doesn't need to understand any of those things if he just understands 'here'. My point is, they brought the dog, then they went places inappropriate for people. And they did it poorly. If a dog is well behaved (mine aren't) they don't present additional avalanche risk. Yes the dog shouldn't have been there, but only because the entire party shouldn't have been there. There are definitely places, conditions where a dog shouldn't be but skiers can safely navigate. That wasn't one of them.
    Don't get me wrong. I wish I could drive there and look for Ullr with my dogs who are like souls. It has me very sad. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't have been together that day. Everything still lies on their decision to push forward, and then their putting themselves all in harm's way at once.
    powdork.com - new and improved, with 20% more dork.

  13. #63
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    On another tangent.
    Posts
    3,527

    3 Caught, 1 Still Missing, Marble, CO

    Itís not a gray decision. Itís red or green for me regarding bringing a dog, much less even considering going some days. In light of the incident a few days prior, the rating and the 2500 slide video just before, how can one rationalize and knowingly put their dog potentially in harmís way?



    You know some of decision making these days is affected by attention and ďLikesĒ on social media.



    Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
    Last edited by Alpinord; 03-29-2023 at 08:54 AM.
    Best regards, Terry
    (Direct Contact is best vs PMs)

    SlideWright.com
    Ski, Snowboard & Tools, Wax and Wares
    Repair, Waxing, Tuning, Mounting Tips & more
    Add TGR handle to notes & paste 5% TGR Discount code during checkout: 1121TGR

  14. #64
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    cow hampshire
    Posts
    7,741
    RIP. Horrible

  15. #65
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Where the sheets have no stains
    Posts
    20,466
    Dogs don't derive enjoyment from terrain because they are happy basically anywhere. All they care about is being out with their human. Gnar, summits, and objectives are 100% about human desires, not that of the pet.
    Exactly. People take their fucking dogs way too many places the animal doesn't belong. Saw a dog fall 200' into Negro Bill canyon off the Slick Rock trail. The poor things feet were already leaving blood on the rock from running on the sandstone to keep up and the party was well back from the start/end.
    I have been in this State for 30 years and I am willing to admit that I am part of the problem.

    "Happiest years of my life were earning < $8.00 and hour, collecting unemployment every spring and fall, no car, no debt and no responsibilities. 1984-1990 Park City UT"

  16. #66
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    cow hampshire
    Posts
    7,741
    Yeah, so many over the years have taken their dog up Tuckerman in NH. Makes zero sense. Then again, the owner in many cases doesn't belong up there either. That place is the ultimate shitshow of kooks because of the easy access.

  17. #67
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    NCW
    Posts
    4,230
    I have to disagree somewhat with the above that dogs don't appreciate terrain or activity. My dogs love nothing more than a rip around the local bike loop or a mellow road "tour". They display a different kind of energy surrounded by the smells and sounds in the woods. That said, I do agree that they're not driven by objectives (but neither am I, really.)

    I learned my lesson in my 20s when I took my dog on an overnight yurt trip. Well, we started late, then it started snowing heavily and we lost our route. That was a long fucking night watching the dog suffer in the cold as we backtracked to another yurt we passed on the way in. As soon as the occupants opened the door the dog shot into the shelter and went deep under the bunks. I'll be forever grateful to those boy scouts and their leaders who allowed us to bivy on their floor. I'll never take a dog into the bc again during winter. There are simply too many variables to manage to keep them and the group safe.

  18. #68
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,502
    I fear the dog survived the avalanche, only to get it's <possibly torn> pack caught on something, left to suffer and die. From the link below, a Marble resident said prints were found with what looked like to be dragging something along. Or perhaps it had a wounded leg that got worse as time went on.

    I tour with my dog, but never on anything that can slide, never anything more than 5 miles, and never when the temps are expected to be below 20 degrees. Sure, bad shit can still happen, but I've mitigated much of the risk this way. Soul turns in safe terrain and we have a blast. Having previously had a dog named Ullr- he passed several years ago at the age of 14.5- this hits to my heart. I still hold out hope that the survivor gets his buddy back, but it's not looking good thus far. I hope I'm wrong.

    RIP to the lost. I've thought about CAIC's report for days now. Always something to learn.

    https://www.denver7.com/news/local-n...ng-since-slide

  19. #69
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tahoe
    Posts
    15,773
    Quote Originally Posted by Alpinord View Post
    It’s not a gray decision. It’s red or green for me regarding bringing a dog, much less even considering going some days. In light of the incident a few days prior, the rating and the 2500 slide video just before, how can one rationalize and knowingly put their dog potentially in harm’s way?
    Obviously they thought they had outsmarted harm. If they thought the dog was in danger on that slope, why would you put your partners there?
    powdork.com - new and improved, with 20% more dork.

  20. #70
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tahoe
    Posts
    15,773
    I'm confused as to why they wouldn't skin up the low angle slopes at the head of the canyon they had decided to descend. Was skinning up the slide path in the right of the photo part of their conservative plan before they changed? That looks sketchy enough in the conditions
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	2r4iu6kf57a0o8bblbkobvx3dj79.jpg 
Views:	120 
Size:	1.32 MB 
ID:	453710


    edit-looking at caltopo slope angles, there don't really appear to be any real safe zones going south down the ridge, but damn they nailed the unsafe zone
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	rapid.jpg 
Views:	125 
Size:	708.3 KB 
ID:	453714
    Last edited by powdork; 03-29-2023 at 08:59 PM.
    powdork.com - new and improved, with 20% more dork.

  21. #71
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    32
    [QUOTE=powdork;6834003]I'm confused as to why they wouldn't skin up the low angle slopes at the head of the canyon they had decided to descend. Was skinning up the slide path in the right of the photo part of their conservative plan before they changed? That looks sketchy enough in the conditions


    Because they didnít have enough knowledge, sorry but that skin track is crazy.

  22. #72
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    2,193
    Seems irrelevant to comment on the skin track when it had nothing to do with the deadly slide. You guys want to comment on what skis they should have been on too?

    From what I read where the slide happened - thin snowpack partially on a slid surface bed. Lower down - fatter snowpack and therefore safer - I don't see any sympathetic slides happening lower down. But without being a local who skis there a lot, who knows.

  23. #73
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tahoe
    Posts
    15,773
    Quote Originally Posted by muted reborn View Post
    Seems irrelevant to comment on the skin track when it had nothing to do with the deadly slide. You guys want to comment on what skis they should have been on too?

    From what I read where the slide happened - thin snowpack partially on a slid surface bed. Lower down - fatter snowpack and therefore safer - I don't see any sympathetic slides happening lower down. But without being a local who skis there a lot, who knows.
    Because it shows their risk tolerance and decision making on what was supposed to be a scouting trip.
    powdork.com - new and improved, with 20% more dork.

  24. #74
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Boulder
    Posts
    1,385
    Quote Originally Posted by powdork View Post
    Because it shows their risk tolerance and decision making on what was supposed to be a scouting trip.
    There's no way up that drainage without traveling through/underneath avalanche terrain. If your position is that their BTL/NTL skin track was an inappropriate route choice for the conditions, then I presume it is also your position that it was an inappropriate decision to be in that drainage at all, "scouting trip" or otherwise. There are more exposed slopes near the entrance to the drainage.

    From Caltopo it looks to be the safest route up that slope - one that avoids more 35+ deg terrain than any other route. There is an argument that they could've reduced exposure by staying in the dense trees on either side of the path. Don't think that particular piece of their route is much of an indicator for high risk tolerance, lack of knowledge, or any other "gotchas" some are suggesting.

  25. #75
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    4,795
    My takeaway on this incident is that they never seemed to have a descent plan. Getting to the top was the loose objective but getting down doesn't seem to have a discussion. Each party member probably were not ok with that but the mountain drew them in. Seen this before with climbers/hikers on 14ers.com but not so much with Backcountry skiers.

    Awful incident

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •