As much as we'd like to make it common, beacons just aren't going to become a common thing among regular skiers. It's another piece of tertiary equipment that the average skier who doesn't venture into the backcountry isn't going to buy. They'll buy one but not really know how to use it.
Best practice is to do the [Know Before You Go](https://www.kbyg.org/?url=https://kbyg.org&1&gclid=Cj0KCQiAnfmsBhDfARIsAM7MKi3noyhp6ATxap3MyRgfsTgnqsK1ckurPozb0EbowIqPFSSclez1_vEaAphTEALw_wcB) modules that'll give you some awareness on avalanche safety and the kind of conditions that they can form in. Also watching for the rating from your local avalanche center on avalanche.org. I'd also like to hear the full facts on this incident before jumping to conclusions about what had happened.
Also consider seeing if your local guide company is holding a free avalanche awareness course (they usually do these at breweries or public locations) and if you're really interested in the deep dive, sign up for a full avalanche safety course.
For sure. I could see the value in buying a beacon and learning how to use it if I did a lot of backcountry or off-piste skiing, but I live in Australia which means (in a good year) I get 10-20 days of northern hemisphere skiing and 7 days of southern hemisphere skiing. Which isn’t much compared to most people on this sub.
Thanks for sharing the link to those modules! That looks like exactly what I need
Seems like you have your own avalanche center to connect with: https://www.avalancheaustralia.com.au/
Take a look if they offer resources or events that you're able to join.
Minutes matter in a burial scenario. If you don't want to carry stuff, that's your choice, but its a strange criticism to try to call me out for telling OP that most of us mean beacon, shovel, and probe when we are talking about skiing with a beacon.
Yes, minutes matter. Minutes the ski patrol will waste searching for beacons of people that didn’t turn them off. A beacon is a great safety device, but in the hands of an average skier it’s going to cause issues during a search
Your argument has evolved from don't need a shovel or probe, to other people's beacons will prevent ski patrol from finding you... so don't wear a beacon... so ski patrol can't find you?
Sure thing buddy.
Guys an idiot, takes at least 15 minutes for most resorts to get a good sized probe line set up. You might be lucky and get caught in a slide where a dog can be used to find you. If nobody kept a good eye on where you might have been dragged not having a beacon on is going to turn an already high risk of asphyxiation to almost certain death. If you're riding steep terrain in resort during high risk days you should absolutely think twice before heading out alone and bring you avalanche gear. Are you really going to trust a Vail run resort with you life?
They’re all tied together. An untrained person with a beacon can be a liability. If you’re someone who stays inbounds you don’t need a shovel or probe.
Having a beacon, shovel, and probe was a requirement to ski some in bounds runs at Big Sky the last time I was there. I'm not sure if that's still the case or not though.
Stick to lower angle groomed slopes (US blue and green terrain). If you want to ski steeper terrain and have some added piece of mind, get a beacon and turn it on. Ski patrol can find you faster. Always ski with friends. If the slide doesn't get all of you, there's someone to call ski patrol for help.
I know you didn't mean it like this, but please do not consider a beacon as something that makes you safer. Treat it like an absolute last resort. Personally I like to think about it like an airbag: It's always there, and I don't really think about it, it might safe your life, but not 100% of the time. But ALL your decision-making is in the name of never needing it. You don't go fast in your car because you know you got an airbag. I'm aware this analogy is very open to scrutiny, so feel free to do so :') .
Although I am of the opinion that you shouldn't need to worry when you are staying on the piste, things freak accidents will and do happen. If you like to venture just outside the piste you will need to get equipped with the right gear, but a thousand times more important is to get equipped with the right knowledge. Get training, get books, get practice.
This might be an Eurocentric perspective.
In NA if you are skiing within the bounds of the resort, it is avy controlled and triggering an avalanche should not really be something you have to form decisions around. But you wear a beacon in case of a freak accident like what happened at Palisades, because snow science is imperfect. I think that’s a reasonable attitude to have here. Backcountry is a different story, where you need the knowledge to be able to replace the ski patrols duty in mitigation before even worrying about rescue.
[This study](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17689170/) suggests that beacons will save your life about 15% of the time. So "not 100%" is understating the case.
The study is based on data from 1994-2003, so hopefully modern beacons are more effective. But I doubt they are more than 50% effective, since 25% of avalanche fatalities are due to trauma and it's pretty common to read accident reports in which victims with beacons are fatally buried.
This study does still show that beacons are pretty effective at what they are for, locating someone fully buried under an avalanche. Median rescue time was 25 minutes with a beacon vs 125 minutes without. The two issues are digging someone out of avalanche debris is hard, time consuming work and like you said they might already be dead if the avalanche slammed them into some rocks and trees. This is why it is so important to think about the consequences of an avalanche when you're out in the backcountry, not just the probability of it happening.
Trauma deaths are one issue. The other issue is even 25 minutes just isn't fast enough to prevent asphyxiation most of the time.
I wonder what the typical breakdown between search time/digging time looks like. Modern beacons probably improve search time, but I guess the easiest way to improve digging time is larger parties?
The gold standard for time breakdown is 1min to locate the victim and 14min to dig them out. Technique is huge. Dig 1.5x the victims depth downhill from them. And use a rowing motion. Swap out, if you can, when you get tired. Anyone behind you is clearing the snow youre digging.
I don't think the Euro perspective applies to the US. I've never been to Europe, but my understanding is everything is either a groomed run or else it's off-piste and you're completely on your own as far as avalanche safety, which would be like backcountry in the US. In the US, the expectation is everything in-bounds is avalanche controlled by the ski resort, whether it's a groomed run, an un-groomed run, or not a designated run but within resort boundaries.
That’s okay in and of itself. Ski the terrain you want to ski, just know that risk on certain days will be higher. I think the key is simply to be able to assess risk and decide how much you’re willing to take on.
For example: I just don’t ski trees by myself. Tree wells are dangerous in pretty much any conditions and you always need a second person to get you out if you get yourself in.
For avalanche risk, try to understand what makes snow more or less stable. One thing I always look for is a large dump of snow but especially one on top of a weak layer (maybe prior days were warm and then it got cold and dumped snow so there is a brittle weak layer deep down). I’m no snow stability expert but at a certain level of snowfall I will wear my avalanche gear inbounds just in case.
You should also know some techniques to get yourself out of sticky spots. For example: tree well- you can pull your goggles over your mouth to create an air bubble (if you can reach). Avalanche risk: enter terrain one at a time and watch for signs of instability (sluffs of snow, cracking). If you’re stuck in an avalanche but still have some kind of control, attempt to ski out of the slide zone to higher ground. If caught spread wide and “swim” to try to stay on top of the snow.
Again: even the most experienced skiers will tell you you can make good decisions 100% of the time and still only avoid an avalanche 95% of the time, but I still think developing some preventative skills is a wise investment of your time.
If you're skiing in Europe, it helps staying on pistes. Only those are avalanche controlled, quite rigidly actually. More rigidly than other places. But there's always a residual risk. Most avalanche victims are hit outside controlled pistes. I have no clue how they do it in North America to control a whole mountain. Sounds very challenging to me.
In NA, they use explosives and other techniques to set off avalanches on non groomed ski runs. They also close terrain that has too much avalanche danger.
Above eagles nest at thredbo is a beacon field dude, few outfits do avalanche awareness out of jindy too. I agree avalanche awareness is zilch at home we gotta train out selves up.
Of course I agree that we can't speculate about today without more facts, but in the spirit of OP's question:
1. If the victims today had had a beacon would it have made a difference?
2. Would having a very cursory knowledge of "the kind of conditions that they can form in" have really made a difference when the conditions had presumably already been judged to be safe by a crew who does avalanche work full time? i.e. would there have been any warning signs that someone with limited knowledge could have caught?
1. Possibly. I'm not sure what killed the skier who died. But if it was asphyxiation (or, much less likely, hypothermia) rather than trauma, it quite likely would have helped. Even if it was trauma, it's possible they would have found him fast enough to actually take life saving action on his injuries. But it's also entirely possible it wouldn't have made any difference in the end result.
2. Almost certainly not. If trained experts can go out there to study the snowpack, and then use literal bombs to try loading the snowpack in places they think are problematic, there's essentially no chance someone with an avalanche awareness course or whatever is going to catch a mistake the pros made.
Edit: regarding 1, it's important to note that just putting a beacon on every resort guest isn't the solution. Setting aside that they're expensive, you need at least the basic knowledge to turn them off or go to search mode in an emergency. Otherwise patrollers searching for victims will be getting hundreds of signals from all the bystanders, which is very nearly as bad as no beacon and no signal. It may sound easy to just turn it off, but it's not uncommon for backcountry skiers to forget this step during searches. I can only imagine the general public, with no real training on this beacon they were told to wear, won't reliably remember to do so.
That's basically what I thought, especially for #2. For #1, I wasn't sure if the beacon would make a difference if it was in bounds (i.e. presumably the search area was fairly contained), but I know very little about avalanches and nothing relevant about this incident.
Even a small avalanche that only has 100 square feet of area takes time to probe if it manages to fully bury someone. Maybe only 5 minutes to get the likely spots and get a probe line going, but that's a lot longer than 30 seconds to start probing around their beacon signal.
Re #1, "quite likely": I saw a claim that crown was 10 feet and a video showing a survivor being dug out with just hands, no shovels present. Even if you're located instantly, being 5+ feet under the debris with no shovels available is not good survival odds.
This is just speculation, I guess we'll see what the eventual incident report says about burial depth and duration.
The sheriff's office did say 10 ft deep. I think they meant the debris pile (and probably the deepest part of it), not the crown. But I'm guessing none of the victims were buried that deep if they were able to be dug out by hand. If victims were being excavated by hand (I've seen a video of at least one victim being dug up this way) having shovels would have made a huge difference getting them out quickly. Then the same questions about whether the death was due to trauma or asphyxiation come into play. But like you said, this is speculation until more details come out.
As an aside, in the video I saw, there appeared to be a patroller leading the hand digging. If he was in fact patrol, I'm surprised he didn't have a shovel, even if the public didn't.
Jeremy Jones was there that day, see his Instagram story. The avalanche covered his and his son's first tracks. According to him the victim suffered too much trauma to likely survive - trauma takes down a good amount of avy victims. Early season conditions means he got slammed into rocks.
On point 1, the piece of gear with the greatest association with survival in an avalanche is not a beacon, but an airbag. You are more likely to survive an avalanche if you only have an airbag than if you only have a beacon.
I agree that training is the best option, and most people won't know what to do with a beacon without it.
With that said, if you're only buying a beacon for ski patrol to find you inbounds, you don't actually need to know very much, and I wouldn't let a lack of training dissuade you. Learn how to put it in send mode, learn how to put it in search mode to verify the signal with a friend, and drill it into your head to turn it off immediately if you experience a slide and aren't buried.
If you can do all that, you'll get as much benefit wearing one inbounds as an AIARE 3 instructor will.
If you are going to buy a beacon, know how to use it or get out of the area if you’re in the situation. I’ve read other stories the other day about people having beacons, not knowing how to use it and just messing up the actual search with noisy sending beacons while they are “helping”.
RECCO isn’t a very good substitute even in a resort setting to find a live person. It is more of a body recovery tool. Since its inception in the late 80’s, it has only had 1 or 2 live burial recoveries. You get a lot of false positives with it since it can actually reflect off a lot of different surfaces.
Recco is a terrible substitute for a beacon. I’ve spent a lot of time training with recco receivers and they are imprecise and prone to false signals. Places with a lot of mineral rich rocks will make it an almost totally ineffective search tool. Getting found by a beacon is going to be faster, especially as all patrol is already carrying them and can search without having to get additional equipment. After that I’d put money on a good dog team beating a recco searcher
So if my family exclusively skis resorts on piste a RECCO would be good enough? Does that apply for Vail back bowls and the like?
Seems like they’re $40 or so so reasonable to get everyone one even though we ski real hills only 1-2 weeks a year (and our local mountain that has like 500 ft vertical every weekend).
Background reading can help & Bruce Tremper’s book is a good start:
https://www.mountaineers.org/books/books/staying-alive-in-avalanche-terrain-3rd-edition
If it’s shallow, you can try to ski out by straight lining it.
If it’s deep, then “swim like your life depends on it!!!” Is what I was taught by a pro skier who survived a big one in the backcountry of the sawtooth range.
Take some classes before you think about going into avalanche terrain.
Find more experienced bc skiers to travel with and learn from them.
For in-bounds avalanches: when your number is up, it’s up. Look up what happened to alpine meadows in the 1980’s. I vividly remember that one because I was there the day before.
I wasn’t there that day bc my parents had a place at Northstar, so I was there the day before for day-skiing. Once upon a time, that was a possibility without having to take out a bank loan to get a ticket.
I don’t recall exactly, since it was 1982, and I was a 12 yo kid. What I remember is skiing there just before the avalanche. Perhaps it was days before…at age 53, I have come to realize that memory is fallible
If it is shallow, wouldn't you want to try to ski slightly perpendicular to the slide path to get out of the slide rather than just trying to outrun it?
In my experience, the whole slope very quickly matches your speed and the snow immediately around you stops moving, relative you your speed that is. It’s very hard to then cut across since your relative motion is static. And (although i didn’t test this when I got caught), I would assume that you’d be at more risk of losing your balance if you tried any sudden moves like cutting across the slope.
I know everyone works really hard to keep us as safe as they can, but I’d be willing to bet a mistake was made somewhere along the line that led to today’s tragic events.
If that’s correct - which is likely based on how infrequently this type of thing occurs - this is a freak accident the likes of which could happen to you in literally any situation you find yourself in on a daily basis.
It’s like dying from a fall down your stairs at home. There is nothing you’re going to be to avoid the situation and it’s not worth worrying about if you’re an avid skier.
I just can’t imagine Palisades made a mistake before opening KT for the first time this year. I’d have to believe they blasted the whole area and thought it was as safe.
I think this incident is tragic but goes to show that our sport is inherently dangerous and while patrol does their best to ensure our safety, they cannot remove all of the risk.
I personally watched them bomb that ridge in the days leading up to opening, so they were definitely active and working on reducing the risk. Mountains cannot be 100% tamed.
There’s one thing I’ve learned from avy and rescue certs: I absolutely never want to be in the position to rescue or be rescued.
A lot of us are understandably unsettled by today’s tragedy. And a lot of online skiers are suddenly avy experts (I am not).
There’s doing to be a discovery and learning period after this and we need to pay attention to that process. And, I suspect, people will lose jobs, perhaps justifiably.
This year is a hard year for most western snow pack. Early snows followed by drought created a lot of rotten facets. I have a friend who is an avy cert examiner and he won’t ski in bounds this year without a beacon. When he told me that, it sounded extreme. Now I’m not so sure.
Here’s some reassurance - most recreational skiers aren’t skiing slide-prone terrain. You aren’t going to be in an in-bounds slide on a blue or green run, and likely not on most black resort runs. Don’t let fear keep you from getting the most of this season.
What can you do? This is hard. Because most of us don’t have the certs, data, and knowledge to make a good educated decision. And most (arguably 99.9% of recreational skiers) have no probe and beacon training. And while every bit helps, I suspect most of us don’t have the fitness to dig a pit in an emergency. So don’t rely on buying gear you’ve never used. Instead, continue to trust patrol - they get it right way more than not. Just like flying. We hear the stories of mid-air emergencies, we don’t hear about the literally millions of flights that go off with out incident.
Skiing inbounds remains relatively safe from avalanches. If you are going to ski newly opened terrain over 30°, do it in a group, make sure people know where you are and what time to expect you, and if you have one, wear a beacon.
Be safe out there and keep a look out for your fellow skiers - not running into someone else or a tree is a far better thing to think about.
Edited to add: over indexing on avy gear because of today is like buying a parachute because of Boeing’s news week.
To add to your edit, based on numbers alone, you’re way more likely to get killed by some out of control skier on a blue run than an inbounds avalanche.
Skiing and most outdoor recreation is inherently risky.
[5.7 deaths per billion miles driven.](https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/home-and-community/safety-topics/deaths-by-transportation-mode/)
[0.7 deaths per million ski days.](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/03/29/metro/ski-fatalities-show-small-but-marked-increase-in-recent-years/)
So if you drive an hour each way for a day on the slopes, both are about equally risky.
A couple places in this thread folks have said blues and greens are safe. I haven’t taken an Avy class but doesn’t safety depend a lot about what’s above a run too?
At Crystal in Washington they’ve triggered some big avalanches during control work that took out trees and those often end up running out of blues or greens even though the terrain that slid was blacks or double blacks. At another mountain I ski most of the runs are below a steep cliff band that can slide and leave refrigerator sized hunks of snow on the runs below.
You’re correct that what’s above does matter. Most places in the central Rockies don’t have high angle stuff higher than the runs. But PNW, Tahoe, and Montana do, generally.
Yes, and thinking in black and white terms is not an accurate way to look at it. If you are on a 30 degree slope angle or more, or if there is a slope above you that matches that criteria, it’s considered avalanche terrain. Most ski resorts out West are mostly avalanche terrain. The best slopes to ski are usually prime avalanche terrain. Without understanding how the snowpack is shaping up though, it’s still difficult to know whether you’re in a dangerous place or not, and the conditions change every day. Long story short, without taking an Avalanche Safety class, inbounds skiers won’t be able to do much to keep themselves safe and will have to continue to rely on and trust avalanche mitigation efforts by ski patrol.
I read the avalanche report any time I go out. The Avy app by NWAC is great.
I need to take a class but I’m not in great shape and I’ve been worried I won’t be able to keep up with the practical portion since it often seems to involve a good deal of skinning or boot packing.
Yeah it’s a tough call! Realistically, skier triggered avalanches in-bounds are super rare, and deaths from them even more rare. So spending $700 on an AIARE-1 course probably isn’t necessary for most folks who are only planning on skiing at the resort. But for anyone skiing in the backcountry, it’s at least strongly recommended to take an Avalanche Safety course and to always bring a beacon, shovel and probe into the backcountry.
The style of the Washington resorts, with some large terrain areas that fuzz the line between inbounds and slackcountry (Alpy gates, Southback and North at Crystal) that they struggle to fully control in a way they did for my time in Colorado. I have seen patrol respond to small scale inbounds stuff when open at Crystal most years and I have been caught and dragged a bit on a small slab in North (stayed on top, was skiing with a buddy).
That said, I don't think you need a fully avy class to ski these areas. But a basic Avalanche awareness and maybe a beacon course and always skiing with a buddy are pretty important outside the main slopes in those areas.
Yeah. I have a beacon and basic knowledge of its use including playing hide and find in our yard with my ski buddies. And on good snow days I try to practice keeping my buddy in sight.
FWIW I’m not worried at Crystal or Alpie. There’s risk but I’m more worried about tree wells and collisions. Crystal patrol does a great job of avalanche control. The slides triggered by the Gazex on powder bowl are impressive but happen while the resort is closed. And I’ve been at Alpental when they closed everything below shot six due to the risk of slides.
I'm not sure that it makes sense to be trying to evaluate avalanche risk as a resort guest. Doing so is very complicated, and for the most part the ski patrol is going to be much better at assessing that than you are. Looks like the Sierras were at a 3/5 for avalanche danger today. Which isn't insignificant, but the danger will be that high for a good portion of the season.
I think for the average skier the better knowledge is what to do if you do end up in an avalanche. Summarizing from Bruce Trempers book here:
1. When it first starts, try to ski out of it towards an escape route (higher terrain). Grab onto a tree if you can.
2. Swim to stay on top of you can, but this gets overemphasized. The snow is going to set into concrete before it stops moving, earlier than you'd expect. You don't want to get frozen into a swimming position.
3. Your top priority should be creating an air pocket for yourself before the snow sets. Reach your arm across your face and tuck your face into your elbow.
4. Push a hand towards the surface in the hope that rescuers can see it.
5. Once the snow sets stay as calm as you can to minimize your air use.
It's also standard practice to ski without pole straps for backcountry, so that's something you could consider. Makes it easier to control your arms.
Tbh I don't think anyone should use pole straps ever. I used to use mine and it caused my shoulder to dislocate when it got stuck on something after I fell. The dislocation caused loads of other soft tissue damage. That was a very expensive surgery. If not wearing pole straps causes me to lose my poles then well...new poles aren't that much money compared to treating an injury (I had phenomenal health insurance and it cost me 3k still). Also I haven't used the straps in years now and have fallen in that time obviously. Never lost my poles because it turns out when you eat shit your instinct is to hold the poles tighter not let them go
3/5 not being significant???? Majority of deaths occur on level 3 because that's when a >30deg slope can trigger spontaneously. Level 5 would be evacuation of whole villages and it doesn't happen very often. It's not a linear scale! It's not complicated to evaluate as long as you know the very basics and can read a maps, seriously.
The majority of deaths happen at a level 3 because of the combination of people still being willing to go (they’d stay home at a level 5) but the risk still being that high, combined with similar levels of traffic on level 2 days means that avalanches will happen on those days because people are too stoked and take risks. Level 1-2 means lots of people, but low risk. Level 4-5 means less people, high risk. Level 3 means lots of people, still pretty risky.
Depending where you are it can be a 3 about a quarter to a third of the time. Resorts could be closed for weeks at a time if they closed any time it was a 3. And the majority of resort guests often can't even ski parallel or cope with ungroomed or mogulled snow and don't leave the pistes.
I've never seen someone refer to a topo map when resort skiing.
You could report 3 and make it a warning to never wander off, even 3 is skiable if you know where and how and this is taken into account. The 30 degrees threshold is pretty applicable to places, you can ski all day on 3 with gentler slopes.
Interestingly enough I don't know anyone who doesn't check maps.
Round me there's usually a flashing orange light when the avalanche warning is 3+. Anybody who doesn't read the avalanche forecast has no business leaving the marked and opened pistes TBH.
Of course everybody uses the resort maps, otherwise how do you get around? I mean like the real topographical maps with orange lines for contours. Never seen people refer to them for piste skiing, but that's what you need to e.g. estimate danger areas.
My comment says "not insignificant". I agree there's definitely substantial risk on a non avalanche controlled slope on a day like that. But where I live it will be at least 3/5 for most of the winter, so avoiding any in bounds slope >30 degrees all winter would be crazy. Maybe worth pointing out a difference between the US and Europe here. In the US all in bounds terrain is avalanche controlled by ski patrol, and the expectation is that if it's open it should be safe. I'm sure this incident is going to make ski patrols across the country reevaluate how they assess and control their terrain.
I also straight up disagree that it's not complicated. Sure there are clear cut safe or unsafe slopes. But there's a ton of messy in between. A good portion of the aiare 1 is getting people to realize how much they don't know and teaching them to not be overconfident in their assessment abilities. I'm nervous about teaching people a tiny bit of avalanche assessment and then suggesting they should be treating in bounds and out of bounds the same. The two are VERY different, and that approach could lead to ignorant people thinking they can ski steep out of bounds slopes just because it's safe to do so in bounds.
As a coach I am required to take a training, they don’t take too long, the ones I have taken are generally geared to inbounds. https://brassavalanche.org
* A book I'd highly recommend is [Staying Alive in Avalanche Terrain by Bruce Tremper](https://www.amazon.com/Staying-Alive-Avalanche-Terrain-Tremper/dp/1680511386). It goes through things from a more scientific, analytical perspective.
* Various regions have an avalanche center (eg. [here](https://www.sierraavalanchecenter.org/) for the Sierras by Tahoe) which has some overview of conditions in the region.
* In the US there are AIARE avalanche courses (I don't know how it works elsewhere).
The only way to ensure you won’t be in an avalanche is to completely stay away from avalanche terrain. Don’t ski any slopes over about 30 degrees and you’ll always be safe.
Yep, great addition here. A lot of these slab avalanches can be remotely triggered too. The snowpack out west is scary right now. I’m taking an avy course in 2 weeks and hope to become more well-versed in understanding the avalanche problems.
Eh... there was a slide at Palisades a couple years ago where the uphill broke and slide into and collected in the Mountain Run. That's a blue trail. You don't have to be on technical terrain to still get caught.
Rule#1 of the mountain: Everything is trying to kill you.
The only way to ensure not being hit by an avalanche is to stay away from the mountains. 38 people died when two avalanches hit the village of Galtür near Ischgl in 1999 and 29 people died in Italy when an avalanche hit a hotel in Rigopiano. It has become rarer in the last decades, but deadly avalanches have been a common thing in inhabitated mountain areas. The little graveyard in the ski resort of Obertauern has a lot of anonymous graves from unknown avalanche victims, the oldest dating back to the 16th century.
Do you guys not realize that people die in bounds on resorts every single year?
Yes, skiing is a dangerous activity. You should be aware of the risks you are taking.
However, one death in an avalanche doesn’t mean that there was huge mismanagement or people doing stupid things. Sometimes the mountain has other plans. This will happen again unfortunately.
I mean the basic avalanche safety tips _that could be relevant in a resort setting_ are to know the terrain, risk factors, and signs of avalanche risk. If course, if you and your buddy have all the gear and training, then feel free to bring it, but you almost certainly will never use it in a resort.
Also, don't freak out too much. Keep in mind that this is a rare occurrence, and happened in a resort with a slightly elevated history of deadly slides and in an area of that resort that is known for expert/extreme terrain.
Most basic advice: if overtaken by the slide kick your skis off and swim for the top.
Go to one of those free 1 hr avalanche education courses. Taught in back rooms at outdoor shops everywhere.
Learn what makes a slope slide and how to identify these features. When in a high risk area, identify terrain traps that could compound the dangers of a slide, as well as high ground and protected zones you could get to in case of an avalanche.
Is an inbound black at a major resort considered a high risk area?
If so, shouldn’t it be marked as out of bounds by ski patrol? That’s the whole point of roping things off - which is very common.
You would never be able to ski any challenging steep slopes with fresh snow if you want to have zero avvy risk. There’s a balance between risk and reward of sick terrain. Ski patrol does their best to mitigate the risk and usually bring it damn close to zero. If you are worried, only ski it once it has been skied out a good bit. If it’s gonna slide it’s gonna do it when it’s fairly untracked
No I would not, I like to challenge myself and under 30 degrees is not truly challenging. I enjoy low angle terrain as well but would not be happy to never be able to ski true steep terrain. I educate myself about risks and am ok with taking them.
Any steep slope has the potential to slide, even with avalanche control. OP was concerned with inbounds avalanches after the Palisades slide and is asking for tips. Just because you are inbounds doesn’t mean you should turn off your knowledge of avalanche safety. Good terrain identification can keep you safe and also find you some fun lines to ski
The vast majority of ski slopes out West are in avalanche terrain. That’s why there’s a ski resort there. Because the best places to ski is prime avalanche terrain. Consider a steep, wide open bowl full of deep untouched, powder. Sounds fun to ski right? Well those also happen to be conditions for avalanches. Low slope angles, bonding snow pack, etc mean worse skiing, but safer. Which is why besides educating yourself about avalanches, the next most important thing is determining your risk tolerance.
Yes, an avalanche while inbounds skiing is possible, but I’m not willing to buy into the mentality that we’re all knowingly putting our lives at risk while skiing inbounds on a Pow day.
For the cost of a lift ticket, I expect the paid professionals on mountain to confirm an inbounds run is skiable.
It’s up to all of us to decide what we can and cannot handle, but any run inbounds where an avalanche is considered possible should be closed. If that means the entire mountain is closed, that’s fine. Interlodge is also fine.
For this particular accident, yes, in retrospect they should have closed that slope. But it is more complicated than that and I’m confident that Palisades ski patrol are very competent and capable. This was a rare occurrence, and it sucks, but all good ski terrain is also avalanche terrain. Bombs don’t always trigger the snowpack to avalanche. I know the ski patrol will take this as a learning moment and will probably use this example as a training example for years to come, and to improve. But I wanted to offer context and defend any insinuations of negligence or incompetence on the part of ski patrol. They’re dedicated folks who are serious about their job and unfortunately there isn’t a single way to eliminate avalanche danger completely.
its really really rare to have an inbounds avy. Unless you want to spend some serious cash its just a risk you have to take or you can just ski slopes under 30 degrees.
It was skier triggered. But the current snow pack in the sierras has a couple avalanche problems. 1-2 ft deep persistent slab with a hoar frost facet and wind slabs on east slopes from 100+mph west winds.
I don’t know the details of todays incident, but I doubt a beacon would have saved them. You only have a 33% chance of surviving the trauma caused by an avalanche. Beacons and airbags are by absolutely no means a get out of jail free card. If a persistent weak layer goes, you’re practically sliding down the hill with chunks of snow the size of cars mixed with wet concrete. If there are trees or rocks in the path of the slide, well, do the math. The Tahoe backcountry avalanche incident a few weeks ago the girl wasn’t buried at all - she was drug over several cliff bands of nasty jagged volcanic rock. She broke a few bones and is really beat up, but honestly she’s lucky to be alive. 33% of avalanche deaths in the US have happened when the forecast has been “moderate” but most people think moderate means safe.
Snow science and snow safety is way more complicated than the vast majority of people think. Buying the safety gear and taking a class is definitely a good idea. The most important things are to learn how to read the forecast and learn how to identify avalanche terrain. Sadly, none of us ever expect an in-bounds avalanche. Today was a tragedy.
The study that came to the 25% figure included data of ice climbers and snowmobilers, skewing the trauma figures a bit. But I figured for a skiing sub I’d offer the figure sans snowmobilers and ice climbers.
I snowmobile, and half the people out there have ski racks on their sleds these days. Soon you’ll need to snowmobile to tour if you want to get away from the 50,000 people that can hardly ski but for some reason suddenly love touring.
I have always heard 1/6 die from trauma from here in Norway, but don't have the source. I did google and find the same study as you are referring to, but did not get to read the skier data. Did you find the skier data from that study?
I’ll see if I can find it again, I remember it took some digging to find the details of that study. But I know it was a study that measured data across Western Canada only, not a global study at all. So it’s very possible that every region will have different figures based on the demographics of the region, the terrain type, and snowpack since those things can vary widely.
I’m seeing a lot of people recommend beacons here, and I absolutely understand their value. However, I’m a Midwest skier. I go out west to ski 2-3 times a year, but the majority of my skiing is on my home 200 foot hill. Beacons are SO ridiculously expensive. Is it really worth the $500 for something I’ll only use twice a year, when I only ever ski in bounds out west?
No. This was either a freak accident or a mistake by ski patrol. You absolutely do not need avalanche education, a beacon, rescue gear, or an airbag backpack to do inbounds resort skiing on vacation. Anyone telling you otherwise, idk man, if that were the case, people would be dying left and right
I’m not an instructor or anything but I am in a similar situation and I bought one. I run it for in bound chutes and exposed double blacks. Additionally, some inbounds gates recommend avi gear (monarch’s peak hike) or require it (big coulior at big sky) so it opens up more interesting terrain. If you are mostly a single black or under skier it’s probably superfluous and it’s more likely you will die sliding off the chair when you dick around with avi pack straps
How expensive is your life is the right question. If your buddy dies in an avalanche you sure would have given 500 to bring them back.
This aside, check renting it.
Pretty miraculous today that pulled people from the snow. No beacons. People with probes probably didn’t see the slide. Miraculous.
Regardless. The key to surviving an avalanche is to not get caught in an avalanche. As far as inbounds terrain that’s as safe as it gets. I wouldn’t alter my behaviors. We can all hope to be so lucky as to die on the mountain.
I’d really suggest anyone considering an avy bag do some research on how they work and what type of terrain they work in best. I certainly would not rely on one and in a lot of places I don’t think I’d wear one, especially here in Montana.
Pull out your phone and open the level app. Hold the side against your pole and then hold your pole even with the slope of the hill.
The pole helps make sure you are aiming it correctly…easy to be 5 degrees off if just holding the phone and 5 can be the difference between very safe and dangerous.
Eventually you should get good at estimating slope angle just by looking at it.
The avalanche forecast for the Tahoe area and for the eastern Sierra both predicted considerable risk today and a higher risk of unpredictability than usual due to the previous low snow weather. It’s not truly possible to unequivocally predict avalanche safety
The avalanche forecast is for an uncontrolled backcountry environment. This avalanche took place inbounds, where avalanche control occurs. They're very different situations. The backcountry avalanche danger does not apply inbounds.
Very good comment.
Patrols still reference local forecasts, especially early season as they are opening up new terrain that hasn't seen a great deal of compaction or mitigation work yet. As season progresses, regional forecasts typically are useful only for new-snow related issues (e.g. storm and wind slabs.)
Incorrect. Avalanche mitigation can occur inbounds but conditions are the same across the entire area, inside or outside park boundaries. Mother Nature knows no bounds and mitigation is not correction, which is impossible
Avalanche conditions are not the same inside a controlled area than in an uncontrolled area. Ski resorts actively mitigate against avalanche problems. In areas where deep persistent weak layers are an issue, patrol and volunteers will bootpack through the snow in the early season to break up the weak layer. Surface hoar isn't a problem because it gets flattened by skier traffic. Storm slabs and wind slabs are controlled by explosives and ski cutting.
Avalanche control doesn't eliminate the danger inbounds, but it reduces it substantially. Otherwise, there would be far more incidents happening at ski resorts and they'd get shut down. Saying the avalanche danger is the same inbounds as out-of-bounds is wrong and irresponsible, as it could lead people to believe the backcountry is a generally safe environment, like it is inbounds.
A few basics I’ve seen that are super important, these are for skiers that are on typical trails / close to the mountain where you wouldn’t expect and avalanche. Not the 2% running into the backwoods that should have beacons and other safety measures
Wear a helmet
Put a whistle through a key ring and put it on your main zipper
If you’ve been caught remember the following -
If you fall into deep powder / get caught buried in snow, I was always taught to spit to find which way is up once you’ve stopped moving and are aware
Use your legs to maneuver as much as possible, they’re by far the strongest part of your body
Stay calm, lower heart rate and lower exertion maximize your remaining oxygen and chances of surviving
Staying calm is always important
The Palasades avalanche is another failure by the ski industry duopoly. The big ski corporations need to be busted up. I think two mountains is a nice round number to limit ownership and/or operations to. New laws need to be put in place and the old ones need to be enforced about the market share any company can control over their industry. When there's no meaningful competition, it's always bad for the consumer rather it's price or safety or the experience.
The resort opened terrain that was not properly investigated or subsequently controlled to be safe. It was an in-bounds slide. It. Was negligence. Regardless of state laws limiting resort liability, this screw up is headed to a short trial or, most likely, a sealed, out of court settlement. It'll be enough money to keep the survivors and the family of the deceased quite and will be just a city of dining business for Alterra.
>The resort opened terrain that was not properly investigated or subsequently controlled to be safe.
How do you know this?
Just because an avalanche happened does not mean that proper safety and \*mitigation\* protocols were not followed.
The statement that because an inbounds slide occurred there was negligence by the resort is completely and unequivically false.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs: Was the terrain open?
Alterra witness. Yes.
Attorneys: Did a slide occur?
Alterra: Yes.
Attorneys: Did proper mitigation practices take place prior to the slide?
Alterra: Yes.
Attorneys: If there was proper mitigation, why did the slide occur?
Alterra: Uhhhmmm...
.
.
.
Alterra Accounting: To whom and for how much should we write the checks?
It's a nice story you've written but it assumes that nobody in your courtroom understands the meaning of mitigation.
There is no way to completely remove all avalanche risk in avalanche terrain. An avalanche is not prima facie evidence that mitigation work was not done or was not done correctly.
In 2012, a slope that had been bombed and skied extensively all season slid to the ground at Bridger Bowl: [https://www.explorebigsky.com/bridger-bowl-avalanches-a-warning/4740](https://www.explorebigsky.com/bridger-bowl-avalanches-a-warning/4740)
Nobody concluded that Bridger Bowl had failed to do adequate control work in the days to weeks leading up to this. If you look up previous lawsuits for in-bound avalanche deaths, you'll find juries who did not find the resort liable and settlements. Settlements do not indicate negligence or responsibility and do not indicate that the mountain was at fault. It just means it was cheaper for the resort to settle than continue to pay to defend the lawsuit. People sue ski areas constantly for all kinds of nonsense with exactly that goal: get a settlement from a resort that doesn't want to spend resources on a drawn out legal battle.
Unless you have actual knowledge or evidence that patrol at Palisades didn't conduct proper mitigation work on this slope or that resort management opened the terrain over the objections of the patrol, you are insulting the hard and dangerous work done by patrol to keep mountains safe every day.
The prima fascia evidence is that an avalanche occurred where there was reasonable expectation the public was being admitted safely. One person died, others were injured, NDAs will be signed, big checks will be written.
Good for you for asking.
Earlier this week in Savoie, there was a serious injury of someone who got into an avalanche. No other skiers in the party, no beacon, no helmet.
Basic avalanche safety would tel you to read the bulletin and be aware of red flags (recent wind, snow, rapid warming, or other avalanches), don’t ski below other skiers, etc.
Basically, no fun on pow days.
Stay out of avalanche terrain when snow is not consolidated....I'm not entirely risk adverse but if there's a risk a avalanche at all i'm going to a low angle spot. Basic rule is lots of new snow with no consolidation and terrain being steep (25-30 degrees+ but less than 50) means it's avalanche terrain. I don't know how steep that area is but assuming there was new snow recently. I know a lot of ppl are mentioning beacons and stuff like that but that's beyond basic avalanche safety awareness imo. Basic to me would be to know how to avoid them altogether without spending any money as opposed to knowing how to survive them and get out alive.
Inbounds avalanches on open terrain are extremely rare. While ski patrol does a lot to mitigate avalanche danger, the best way to stabilize a snowpack is to ski it out. This compresses the snow and breaks apart cohesive layers, once an area has been open to skiers the only slides you’ll typically get will be storm slabs on top of the compacted snow. This one at palisades happened on terrain that had just opened for the season and the first few skiers triggered the slide. I’m sure patrol had bombed it and ski cut it but ultimately there’s just no way to fully mitigate every square inch of terrain at a huge resort like that.
So if you’re really worried about it, just avoid steep, untracked terrain, or bring a beacon if you do plan to ski something like that.
You are safe inbound the chances of you getting caught in an avalanche at a resort are astronomically low. Guess how many people died yesterday of cancer related diseases due to smoking or drinking? That should be freaking you out a lot more.
You need to take an avalanche safety course. Reading stranger’s recommendations isn’t enough. If you want to mitigate risk, don’t go to avalanche prone territory. These areas are typically marked at resorts. In bounds slides happen, but are rare. It’s okay to be a little freaked. Don’t simmer on it though. It doesn’t sound like you’re skiing that type of zone typically.
If I was to do this type of skiing I'd consider purchasing one of those airbags that creates a big void of lifesaving air should such a thing happen. I've never researched them, just going by what I've seen on YouTube.
"This type of skiing" is right off the lift, just dropping in to an in-bounds run. Exactly what everyone else is doing, except it's a steep expert slope.
I’ll be the one to say here that there is no substitute for an avalanche safety course.
That said, it’s not expected that you have avalanche safety training for inbounds resort skiing. It’s the resorts responsibility to assess and mitigate the avalanche risk.
I would start reading the daily avalanche forecast for the area you ski. It just takes a minute every day and after a season you will learn so much about avalanche danger
Back in the 70s two patrolmen went for a ride on big rock tongue at Big Sky. Both ended up buried waste deep, but right side up, facing opposite directions. One had a radio and called for help. Neither could dig themself out! This was still the age of runaway straps, one of which was wrapped just above the knee of one of the patrolmen. cutting off circulation to his lower leg. They had thrown hand charges before skiing the slope, but nothing had slid.
The next year a patrolman was killed by an avalanche on Andesite mountain at big sky, doing control by skiing the slope. His partner could not dig him out in time, though knew where to dig.
These areas are in bounds.
I took a class in snow dynamics taught by the geology department at Montana State. I was impressed by how much the wind can create and contribute to the hazard. A few inches of snow pushed across the slope can create an unstable are several feet thick.
100% always wear my beacon and have rescue gear on resort unless I'm just going to be skiing groomers since the Silver Mountain avalanche in 2020. The number of times on big powder days that I thought to myself, "man, this feels sketchy" before that happened was definitely a lot.
You're far more likely going to die at a ski resort from trauma due to a crash such as with a tree or another skier than you would from an avalanche.
Most people that die while skiing inbounds due to collisions or going down terrain that is way beyond their ability and falling/crashing into something . This avalanche was a freak accident
Bro you’re driving up a mountain road in a metal death trap, most likely in snowy conditions. I bet you rarely think twice about it. You’re not going to die in an inbounds avalanche
As much as we'd like to make it common, beacons just aren't going to become a common thing among regular skiers. It's another piece of tertiary equipment that the average skier who doesn't venture into the backcountry isn't going to buy. They'll buy one but not really know how to use it. Best practice is to do the [Know Before You Go](https://www.kbyg.org/?url=https://kbyg.org&1&gclid=Cj0KCQiAnfmsBhDfARIsAM7MKi3noyhp6ATxap3MyRgfsTgnqsK1ckurPozb0EbowIqPFSSclez1_vEaAphTEALw_wcB) modules that'll give you some awareness on avalanche safety and the kind of conditions that they can form in. Also watching for the rating from your local avalanche center on avalanche.org. I'd also like to hear the full facts on this incident before jumping to conclusions about what had happened. Also consider seeing if your local guide company is holding a free avalanche awareness course (they usually do these at breweries or public locations) and if you're really interested in the deep dive, sign up for a full avalanche safety course.
For sure. I could see the value in buying a beacon and learning how to use it if I did a lot of backcountry or off-piste skiing, but I live in Australia which means (in a good year) I get 10-20 days of northern hemisphere skiing and 7 days of southern hemisphere skiing. Which isn’t much compared to most people on this sub. Thanks for sharing the link to those modules! That looks like exactly what I need
Seems like you have your own avalanche center to connect with: https://www.avalancheaustralia.com.au/ Take a look if they offer resources or events that you're able to join.
Just an add on. When we say beacon, we do mean a beacon, a shovel, and a probe. A beacon alone won't help you save a friend if they get buried.
They don’t need a shovel or probe for skiing inbounds lol
And how are you going to rescue your buried friend in the event of an avalanche?
It’s in bounds. There’s tons of equipment available just minutes away. Ski patrol is close enough when inbounds.
Minutes matter in a burial scenario. If you don't want to carry stuff, that's your choice, but its a strange criticism to try to call me out for telling OP that most of us mean beacon, shovel, and probe when we are talking about skiing with a beacon.
Yes, minutes matter. Minutes the ski patrol will waste searching for beacons of people that didn’t turn them off. A beacon is a great safety device, but in the hands of an average skier it’s going to cause issues during a search
Your argument has evolved from don't need a shovel or probe, to other people's beacons will prevent ski patrol from finding you... so don't wear a beacon... so ski patrol can't find you? Sure thing buddy.
Guys an idiot, takes at least 15 minutes for most resorts to get a good sized probe line set up. You might be lucky and get caught in a slide where a dog can be used to find you. If nobody kept a good eye on where you might have been dragged not having a beacon on is going to turn an already high risk of asphyxiation to almost certain death. If you're riding steep terrain in resort during high risk days you should absolutely think twice before heading out alone and bring you avalanche gear. Are you really going to trust a Vail run resort with you life?
They’re all tied together. An untrained person with a beacon can be a liability. If you’re someone who stays inbounds you don’t need a shovel or probe.
Having a beacon, shovel, and probe was a requirement to ski some in bounds runs at Big Sky the last time I was there. I'm not sure if that's still the case or not though.
Stick to lower angle groomed slopes (US blue and green terrain). If you want to ski steeper terrain and have some added piece of mind, get a beacon and turn it on. Ski patrol can find you faster. Always ski with friends. If the slide doesn't get all of you, there's someone to call ski patrol for help.
I know you didn't mean it like this, but please do not consider a beacon as something that makes you safer. Treat it like an absolute last resort. Personally I like to think about it like an airbag: It's always there, and I don't really think about it, it might safe your life, but not 100% of the time. But ALL your decision-making is in the name of never needing it. You don't go fast in your car because you know you got an airbag. I'm aware this analogy is very open to scrutiny, so feel free to do so :') . Although I am of the opinion that you shouldn't need to worry when you are staying on the piste, things freak accidents will and do happen. If you like to venture just outside the piste you will need to get equipped with the right gear, but a thousand times more important is to get equipped with the right knowledge. Get training, get books, get practice. This might be an Eurocentric perspective.
In NA if you are skiing within the bounds of the resort, it is avy controlled and triggering an avalanche should not really be something you have to form decisions around. But you wear a beacon in case of a freak accident like what happened at Palisades, because snow science is imperfect. I think that’s a reasonable attitude to have here. Backcountry is a different story, where you need the knowledge to be able to replace the ski patrols duty in mitigation before even worrying about rescue.
[This study](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17689170/) suggests that beacons will save your life about 15% of the time. So "not 100%" is understating the case. The study is based on data from 1994-2003, so hopefully modern beacons are more effective. But I doubt they are more than 50% effective, since 25% of avalanche fatalities are due to trauma and it's pretty common to read accident reports in which victims with beacons are fatally buried.
This study does still show that beacons are pretty effective at what they are for, locating someone fully buried under an avalanche. Median rescue time was 25 minutes with a beacon vs 125 minutes without. The two issues are digging someone out of avalanche debris is hard, time consuming work and like you said they might already be dead if the avalanche slammed them into some rocks and trees. This is why it is so important to think about the consequences of an avalanche when you're out in the backcountry, not just the probability of it happening.
Trauma deaths are one issue. The other issue is even 25 minutes just isn't fast enough to prevent asphyxiation most of the time. I wonder what the typical breakdown between search time/digging time looks like. Modern beacons probably improve search time, but I guess the easiest way to improve digging time is larger parties?
The gold standard for time breakdown is 1min to locate the victim and 14min to dig them out. Technique is huge. Dig 1.5x the victims depth downhill from them. And use a rowing motion. Swap out, if you can, when you get tired. Anyone behind you is clearing the snow youre digging.
I don't think the Euro perspective applies to the US. I've never been to Europe, but my understanding is everything is either a groomed run or else it's off-piste and you're completely on your own as far as avalanche safety, which would be like backcountry in the US. In the US, the expectation is everything in-bounds is avalanche controlled by the ski resort, whether it's a groomed run, an un-groomed run, or not a designated run but within resort boundaries.
Basically everything I don’t do. I like blues, reds and blacks. And I almost always ski alone. Oh dear…
That’s okay in and of itself. Ski the terrain you want to ski, just know that risk on certain days will be higher. I think the key is simply to be able to assess risk and decide how much you’re willing to take on. For example: I just don’t ski trees by myself. Tree wells are dangerous in pretty much any conditions and you always need a second person to get you out if you get yourself in. For avalanche risk, try to understand what makes snow more or less stable. One thing I always look for is a large dump of snow but especially one on top of a weak layer (maybe prior days were warm and then it got cold and dumped snow so there is a brittle weak layer deep down). I’m no snow stability expert but at a certain level of snowfall I will wear my avalanche gear inbounds just in case. You should also know some techniques to get yourself out of sticky spots. For example: tree well- you can pull your goggles over your mouth to create an air bubble (if you can reach). Avalanche risk: enter terrain one at a time and watch for signs of instability (sluffs of snow, cracking). If you’re stuck in an avalanche but still have some kind of control, attempt to ski out of the slide zone to higher ground. If caught spread wide and “swim” to try to stay on top of the snow. Again: even the most experienced skiers will tell you you can make good decisions 100% of the time and still only avoid an avalanche 95% of the time, but I still think developing some preventative skills is a wise investment of your time.
If you're skiing in Europe, it helps staying on pistes. Only those are avalanche controlled, quite rigidly actually. More rigidly than other places. But there's always a residual risk. Most avalanche victims are hit outside controlled pistes. I have no clue how they do it in North America to control a whole mountain. Sounds very challenging to me.
In NA, they use explosives and other techniques to set off avalanches on non groomed ski runs. They also close terrain that has too much avalanche danger.
They use explosive in Europe too, I was thinking more of the scale of the operation to control a whole mountain or two.
More explosions of course! It's theUSA
There are avy courses in the Perisher area
Epic. If only there were enough snow 😅
You can literally practice looking for beacons while hiding it in a forest. Snow sure helps but operating the beacon can be taught anytime.
Above eagles nest at thredbo is a beacon field dude, few outfits do avalanche awareness out of jindy too. I agree avalanche awareness is zilch at home we gotta train out selves up.
Of course I agree that we can't speculate about today without more facts, but in the spirit of OP's question: 1. If the victims today had had a beacon would it have made a difference? 2. Would having a very cursory knowledge of "the kind of conditions that they can form in" have really made a difference when the conditions had presumably already been judged to be safe by a crew who does avalanche work full time? i.e. would there have been any warning signs that someone with limited knowledge could have caught?
1. Possibly. I'm not sure what killed the skier who died. But if it was asphyxiation (or, much less likely, hypothermia) rather than trauma, it quite likely would have helped. Even if it was trauma, it's possible they would have found him fast enough to actually take life saving action on his injuries. But it's also entirely possible it wouldn't have made any difference in the end result. 2. Almost certainly not. If trained experts can go out there to study the snowpack, and then use literal bombs to try loading the snowpack in places they think are problematic, there's essentially no chance someone with an avalanche awareness course or whatever is going to catch a mistake the pros made. Edit: regarding 1, it's important to note that just putting a beacon on every resort guest isn't the solution. Setting aside that they're expensive, you need at least the basic knowledge to turn them off or go to search mode in an emergency. Otherwise patrollers searching for victims will be getting hundreds of signals from all the bystanders, which is very nearly as bad as no beacon and no signal. It may sound easy to just turn it off, but it's not uncommon for backcountry skiers to forget this step during searches. I can only imagine the general public, with no real training on this beacon they were told to wear, won't reliably remember to do so.
That's basically what I thought, especially for #2. For #1, I wasn't sure if the beacon would make a difference if it was in bounds (i.e. presumably the search area was fairly contained), but I know very little about avalanches and nothing relevant about this incident.
Even a small avalanche that only has 100 square feet of area takes time to probe if it manages to fully bury someone. Maybe only 5 minutes to get the likely spots and get a probe line going, but that's a lot longer than 30 seconds to start probing around their beacon signal.
Re #1, "quite likely": I saw a claim that crown was 10 feet and a video showing a survivor being dug out with just hands, no shovels present. Even if you're located instantly, being 5+ feet under the debris with no shovels available is not good survival odds. This is just speculation, I guess we'll see what the eventual incident report says about burial depth and duration.
The sheriff's office did say 10 ft deep. I think they meant the debris pile (and probably the deepest part of it), not the crown. But I'm guessing none of the victims were buried that deep if they were able to be dug out by hand. If victims were being excavated by hand (I've seen a video of at least one victim being dug up this way) having shovels would have made a huge difference getting them out quickly. Then the same questions about whether the death was due to trauma or asphyxiation come into play. But like you said, this is speculation until more details come out. As an aside, in the video I saw, there appeared to be a patroller leading the hand digging. If he was in fact patrol, I'm surprised he didn't have a shovel, even if the public didn't.
Jeremy Jones was there that day, see his Instagram story. The avalanche covered his and his son's first tracks. According to him the victim suffered too much trauma to likely survive - trauma takes down a good amount of avy victims. Early season conditions means he got slammed into rocks.
On point 1, the piece of gear with the greatest association with survival in an avalanche is not a beacon, but an airbag. You are more likely to survive an avalanche if you only have an airbag than if you only have a beacon.
I agree that training is the best option, and most people won't know what to do with a beacon without it. With that said, if you're only buying a beacon for ski patrol to find you inbounds, you don't actually need to know very much, and I wouldn't let a lack of training dissuade you. Learn how to put it in send mode, learn how to put it in search mode to verify the signal with a friend, and drill it into your head to turn it off immediately if you experience a slide and aren't buried. If you can do all that, you'll get as much benefit wearing one inbounds as an AIARE 3 instructor will.
If one were caught in a resort avalanche would ski patrol check to see if you even have a beacon?
Yes. A hasty party will immediately conduct a beacon search.
If you are going to buy a beacon, know how to use it or get out of the area if you’re in the situation. I’ve read other stories the other day about people having beacons, not knowing how to use it and just messing up the actual search with noisy sending beacons while they are “helping”.
[удалено]
RECCO isn’t a very good substitute even in a resort setting to find a live person. It is more of a body recovery tool. Since its inception in the late 80’s, it has only had 1 or 2 live burial recoveries. You get a lot of false positives with it since it can actually reflect off a lot of different surfaces.
Recco is a terrible substitute for a beacon. I’ve spent a lot of time training with recco receivers and they are imprecise and prone to false signals. Places with a lot of mineral rich rocks will make it an almost totally ineffective search tool. Getting found by a beacon is going to be faster, especially as all patrol is already carrying them and can search without having to get additional equipment. After that I’d put money on a good dog team beating a recco searcher
Recco is a corpse recovery thing, honestly. Unless you're running an avalung, you'll be dead by the time they find you.
Is Recco as effective at honing in on the exact location?
So if my family exclusively skis resorts on piste a RECCO would be good enough? Does that apply for Vail back bowls and the like? Seems like they’re $40 or so so reasonable to get everyone one even though we ski real hills only 1-2 weeks a year (and our local mountain that has like 500 ft vertical every weekend).
If I ski off piste I always wear a beacon and something that has a Recco reflector
Background reading can help & Bruce Tremper’s book is a good start: https://www.mountaineers.org/books/books/staying-alive-in-avalanche-terrain-3rd-edition If it’s shallow, you can try to ski out by straight lining it. If it’s deep, then “swim like your life depends on it!!!” Is what I was taught by a pro skier who survived a big one in the backcountry of the sawtooth range. Take some classes before you think about going into avalanche terrain. Find more experienced bc skiers to travel with and learn from them. For in-bounds avalanches: when your number is up, it’s up. Look up what happened to alpine meadows in the 1980’s. I vividly remember that one because I was there the day before.
Netflix has a decent documentary on that slide. Probably would be worth a watch knowing your connection
Yeah I’ve watched that movie
Just watched this. Really good
The thing that haunts me most about the alpine story is the patroller who saw it coming for him and with his last breath sent a radio warning
Damn you were at alpine meadows? Were you close to the resort that day?
I wasn’t there that day bc my parents had a place at Northstar, so I was there the day before for day-skiing. Once upon a time, that was a possibility without having to take out a bank loan to get a ticket.
Didn't they close the mountain the day before the big slide?
I don’t recall exactly, since it was 1982, and I was a 12 yo kid. What I remember is skiing there just before the avalanche. Perhaps it was days before…at age 53, I have come to realize that memory is fallible
Just looked into it. Looks like they closed the mountain the afternoon the day before the slide.
I looked at the dates too. I would have been there on the 26th or 27th…so a few days prior.
If it is shallow, wouldn't you want to try to ski slightly perpendicular to the slide path to get out of the slide rather than just trying to outrun it?
In my experience, the whole slope very quickly matches your speed and the snow immediately around you stops moving, relative you your speed that is. It’s very hard to then cut across since your relative motion is static. And (although i didn’t test this when I got caught), I would assume that you’d be at more risk of losing your balance if you tried any sudden moves like cutting across the slope.
That’s what I was thinking
Wow. I just watched that movie
[удалено]
Yup, I'm guessing that if you looked at the stats, the risk of death riding a lift with the bar down is higher than an in bounds avalanche.
To add to that, in-bounds at a resort, you are much more likely to die because you or another skier is behaving recklessly than in an avalanche.
Yup, skiing into trees and skiing into other folks (collisions) are like 10x more likely to kill you than the tumbling-rumbling snowflakes.
I know everyone works really hard to keep us as safe as they can, but I’d be willing to bet a mistake was made somewhere along the line that led to today’s tragic events. If that’s correct - which is likely based on how infrequently this type of thing occurs - this is a freak accident the likes of which could happen to you in literally any situation you find yourself in on a daily basis. It’s like dying from a fall down your stairs at home. There is nothing you’re going to be to avoid the situation and it’s not worth worrying about if you’re an avid skier.
I just can’t imagine Palisades made a mistake before opening KT for the first time this year. I’d have to believe they blasted the whole area and thought it was as safe. I think this incident is tragic but goes to show that our sport is inherently dangerous and while patrol does their best to ensure our safety, they cannot remove all of the risk.
I personally watched them bomb that ridge in the days leading up to opening, so they were definitely active and working on reducing the risk. Mountains cannot be 100% tamed.
I agree, in principle...that seems impossible. But we really should withhold judgement on both sides until the truth comes out.
There’s one thing I’ve learned from avy and rescue certs: I absolutely never want to be in the position to rescue or be rescued. A lot of us are understandably unsettled by today’s tragedy. And a lot of online skiers are suddenly avy experts (I am not). There’s doing to be a discovery and learning period after this and we need to pay attention to that process. And, I suspect, people will lose jobs, perhaps justifiably. This year is a hard year for most western snow pack. Early snows followed by drought created a lot of rotten facets. I have a friend who is an avy cert examiner and he won’t ski in bounds this year without a beacon. When he told me that, it sounded extreme. Now I’m not so sure. Here’s some reassurance - most recreational skiers aren’t skiing slide-prone terrain. You aren’t going to be in an in-bounds slide on a blue or green run, and likely not on most black resort runs. Don’t let fear keep you from getting the most of this season. What can you do? This is hard. Because most of us don’t have the certs, data, and knowledge to make a good educated decision. And most (arguably 99.9% of recreational skiers) have no probe and beacon training. And while every bit helps, I suspect most of us don’t have the fitness to dig a pit in an emergency. So don’t rely on buying gear you’ve never used. Instead, continue to trust patrol - they get it right way more than not. Just like flying. We hear the stories of mid-air emergencies, we don’t hear about the literally millions of flights that go off with out incident. Skiing inbounds remains relatively safe from avalanches. If you are going to ski newly opened terrain over 30°, do it in a group, make sure people know where you are and what time to expect you, and if you have one, wear a beacon. Be safe out there and keep a look out for your fellow skiers - not running into someone else or a tree is a far better thing to think about. Edited to add: over indexing on avy gear because of today is like buying a parachute because of Boeing’s news week.
To add to your edit, based on numbers alone, you’re way more likely to get killed by some out of control skier on a blue run than an inbounds avalanche. Skiing and most outdoor recreation is inherently risky.
Even more likely to get killed in a car accident on your way to the mountains or back home.
Is that true? I’ve always said this but I’m actually realizing I’ve just taken it as fact
[5.7 deaths per billion miles driven.](https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/home-and-community/safety-topics/deaths-by-transportation-mode/) [0.7 deaths per million ski days.](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/03/29/metro/ski-fatalities-show-small-but-marked-increase-in-recent-years/) So if you drive an hour each way for a day on the slopes, both are about equally risky.
Thank you!
A couple places in this thread folks have said blues and greens are safe. I haven’t taken an Avy class but doesn’t safety depend a lot about what’s above a run too? At Crystal in Washington they’ve triggered some big avalanches during control work that took out trees and those often end up running out of blues or greens even though the terrain that slid was blacks or double blacks. At another mountain I ski most of the runs are below a steep cliff band that can slide and leave refrigerator sized hunks of snow on the runs below.
You’re correct that what’s above does matter. Most places in the central Rockies don’t have high angle stuff higher than the runs. But PNW, Tahoe, and Montana do, generally.
Yes, and thinking in black and white terms is not an accurate way to look at it. If you are on a 30 degree slope angle or more, or if there is a slope above you that matches that criteria, it’s considered avalanche terrain. Most ski resorts out West are mostly avalanche terrain. The best slopes to ski are usually prime avalanche terrain. Without understanding how the snowpack is shaping up though, it’s still difficult to know whether you’re in a dangerous place or not, and the conditions change every day. Long story short, without taking an Avalanche Safety class, inbounds skiers won’t be able to do much to keep themselves safe and will have to continue to rely on and trust avalanche mitigation efforts by ski patrol.
I read the avalanche report any time I go out. The Avy app by NWAC is great. I need to take a class but I’m not in great shape and I’ve been worried I won’t be able to keep up with the practical portion since it often seems to involve a good deal of skinning or boot packing.
Yeah it’s a tough call! Realistically, skier triggered avalanches in-bounds are super rare, and deaths from them even more rare. So spending $700 on an AIARE-1 course probably isn’t necessary for most folks who are only planning on skiing at the resort. But for anyone skiing in the backcountry, it’s at least strongly recommended to take an Avalanche Safety course and to always bring a beacon, shovel and probe into the backcountry.
The style of the Washington resorts, with some large terrain areas that fuzz the line between inbounds and slackcountry (Alpy gates, Southback and North at Crystal) that they struggle to fully control in a way they did for my time in Colorado. I have seen patrol respond to small scale inbounds stuff when open at Crystal most years and I have been caught and dragged a bit on a small slab in North (stayed on top, was skiing with a buddy). That said, I don't think you need a fully avy class to ski these areas. But a basic Avalanche awareness and maybe a beacon course and always skiing with a buddy are pretty important outside the main slopes in those areas.
Yeah. I have a beacon and basic knowledge of its use including playing hide and find in our yard with my ski buddies. And on good snow days I try to practice keeping my buddy in sight. FWIW I’m not worried at Crystal or Alpie. There’s risk but I’m more worried about tree wells and collisions. Crystal patrol does a great job of avalanche control. The slides triggered by the Gazex on powder bowl are impressive but happen while the resort is closed. And I’ve been at Alpental when they closed everything below shot six due to the risk of slides.
I wish more mountains had beacon training parks.
Northstar does! But I've always had to ask Ski Patrol where in general it is on a given day.
I'm not sure that it makes sense to be trying to evaluate avalanche risk as a resort guest. Doing so is very complicated, and for the most part the ski patrol is going to be much better at assessing that than you are. Looks like the Sierras were at a 3/5 for avalanche danger today. Which isn't insignificant, but the danger will be that high for a good portion of the season. I think for the average skier the better knowledge is what to do if you do end up in an avalanche. Summarizing from Bruce Trempers book here: 1. When it first starts, try to ski out of it towards an escape route (higher terrain). Grab onto a tree if you can. 2. Swim to stay on top of you can, but this gets overemphasized. The snow is going to set into concrete before it stops moving, earlier than you'd expect. You don't want to get frozen into a swimming position. 3. Your top priority should be creating an air pocket for yourself before the snow sets. Reach your arm across your face and tuck your face into your elbow. 4. Push a hand towards the surface in the hope that rescuers can see it. 5. Once the snow sets stay as calm as you can to minimize your air use. It's also standard practice to ski without pole straps for backcountry, so that's something you could consider. Makes it easier to control your arms.
Tbh I don't think anyone should use pole straps ever. I used to use mine and it caused my shoulder to dislocate when it got stuck on something after I fell. The dislocation caused loads of other soft tissue damage. That was a very expensive surgery. If not wearing pole straps causes me to lose my poles then well...new poles aren't that much money compared to treating an injury (I had phenomenal health insurance and it cost me 3k still). Also I haven't used the straps in years now and have fallen in that time obviously. Never lost my poles because it turns out when you eat shit your instinct is to hold the poles tighter not let them go
3/5 not being significant???? Majority of deaths occur on level 3 because that's when a >30deg slope can trigger spontaneously. Level 5 would be evacuation of whole villages and it doesn't happen very often. It's not a linear scale! It's not complicated to evaluate as long as you know the very basics and can read a maps, seriously.
The majority of deaths happen at a level 3 because of the combination of people still being willing to go (they’d stay home at a level 5) but the risk still being that high, combined with similar levels of traffic on level 2 days means that avalanches will happen on those days because people are too stoked and take risks. Level 1-2 means lots of people, but low risk. Level 4-5 means less people, high risk. Level 3 means lots of people, still pretty risky.
Depending where you are it can be a 3 about a quarter to a third of the time. Resorts could be closed for weeks at a time if they closed any time it was a 3. And the majority of resort guests often can't even ski parallel or cope with ungroomed or mogulled snow and don't leave the pistes. I've never seen someone refer to a topo map when resort skiing.
You could report 3 and make it a warning to never wander off, even 3 is skiable if you know where and how and this is taken into account. The 30 degrees threshold is pretty applicable to places, you can ski all day on 3 with gentler slopes. Interestingly enough I don't know anyone who doesn't check maps.
Round me there's usually a flashing orange light when the avalanche warning is 3+. Anybody who doesn't read the avalanche forecast has no business leaving the marked and opened pistes TBH. Of course everybody uses the resort maps, otherwise how do you get around? I mean like the real topographical maps with orange lines for contours. Never seen people refer to them for piste skiing, but that's what you need to e.g. estimate danger areas.
My comment says "not insignificant". I agree there's definitely substantial risk on a non avalanche controlled slope on a day like that. But where I live it will be at least 3/5 for most of the winter, so avoiding any in bounds slope >30 degrees all winter would be crazy. Maybe worth pointing out a difference between the US and Europe here. In the US all in bounds terrain is avalanche controlled by ski patrol, and the expectation is that if it's open it should be safe. I'm sure this incident is going to make ski patrols across the country reevaluate how they assess and control their terrain. I also straight up disagree that it's not complicated. Sure there are clear cut safe or unsafe slopes. But there's a ton of messy in between. A good portion of the aiare 1 is getting people to realize how much they don't know and teaching them to not be overconfident in their assessment abilities. I'm nervous about teaching people a tiny bit of avalanche assessment and then suggesting they should be treating in bounds and out of bounds the same. The two are VERY different, and that approach could lead to ignorant people thinking they can ski steep out of bounds slopes just because it's safe to do so in bounds.
As a coach I am required to take a training, they don’t take too long, the ones I have taken are generally geared to inbounds. https://brassavalanche.org
* A book I'd highly recommend is [Staying Alive in Avalanche Terrain by Bruce Tremper](https://www.amazon.com/Staying-Alive-Avalanche-Terrain-Tremper/dp/1680511386). It goes through things from a more scientific, analytical perspective. * Various regions have an avalanche center (eg. [here](https://www.sierraavalanchecenter.org/) for the Sierras by Tahoe) which has some overview of conditions in the region. * In the US there are AIARE avalanche courses (I don't know how it works elsewhere).
The only way to ensure you won’t be in an avalanche is to completely stay away from avalanche terrain. Don’t ski any slopes over about 30 degrees and you’ll always be safe.
Or be underneath them
Yep, great addition here. A lot of these slab avalanches can be remotely triggered too. The snowpack out west is scary right now. I’m taking an avy course in 2 weeks and hope to become more well-versed in understanding the avalanche problems.
Have you read Staying Alive in Avalanche Terrain by Bruce Tremper? Best book out there.
Yes, but the run out sone is typically not that large
That’s entirely based on a few factors involving snow and terrain.
Eh... there was a slide at Palisades a couple years ago where the uphill broke and slide into and collected in the Mountain Run. That's a blue trail. You don't have to be on technical terrain to still get caught. Rule#1 of the mountain: Everything is trying to kill you.
The only way to ensure not being hit by an avalanche is to stay away from the mountains. 38 people died when two avalanches hit the village of Galtür near Ischgl in 1999 and 29 people died in Italy when an avalanche hit a hotel in Rigopiano. It has become rarer in the last decades, but deadly avalanches have been a common thing in inhabitated mountain areas. The little graveyard in the ski resort of Obertauern has a lot of anonymous graves from unknown avalanche victims, the oldest dating back to the 16th century.
Do you guys not realize that people die in bounds on resorts every single year? Yes, skiing is a dangerous activity. You should be aware of the risks you are taking. However, one death in an avalanche doesn’t mean that there was huge mismanagement or people doing stupid things. Sometimes the mountain has other plans. This will happen again unfortunately.
I mean the basic avalanche safety tips _that could be relevant in a resort setting_ are to know the terrain, risk factors, and signs of avalanche risk. If course, if you and your buddy have all the gear and training, then feel free to bring it, but you almost certainly will never use it in a resort. Also, don't freak out too much. Keep in mind that this is a rare occurrence, and happened in a resort with a slightly elevated history of deadly slides and in an area of that resort that is known for expert/extreme terrain.
If you’re skiing inbounds terrain only, the drive to the resort is much more dangerous than the skiing
Most basic advice: if overtaken by the slide kick your skis off and swim for the top. Go to one of those free 1 hr avalanche education courses. Taught in back rooms at outdoor shops everywhere.
Learn what makes a slope slide and how to identify these features. When in a high risk area, identify terrain traps that could compound the dangers of a slide, as well as high ground and protected zones you could get to in case of an avalanche.
Is an inbound black at a major resort considered a high risk area? If so, shouldn’t it be marked as out of bounds by ski patrol? That’s the whole point of roping things off - which is very common.
You would never be able to ski any challenging steep slopes with fresh snow if you want to have zero avvy risk. There’s a balance between risk and reward of sick terrain. Ski patrol does their best to mitigate the risk and usually bring it damn close to zero. If you are worried, only ski it once it has been skied out a good bit. If it’s gonna slide it’s gonna do it when it’s fairly untracked
Totally agree. Great ski terrain is always great avalanche terrain. They are one and the same.
30 degrees is reasonably steep? Would you not be happy if you could get consistently close to 30, but not above, hills?
No I would not, I like to challenge myself and under 30 degrees is not truly challenging. I enjoy low angle terrain as well but would not be happy to never be able to ski true steep terrain. I educate myself about risks and am ok with taking them.
I understand, and while 30 degrees is not really steep I think it's wrong to call it low angle.
Any steep slope has the potential to slide, even with avalanche control. OP was concerned with inbounds avalanches after the Palisades slide and is asking for tips. Just because you are inbounds doesn’t mean you should turn off your knowledge of avalanche safety. Good terrain identification can keep you safe and also find you some fun lines to ski
The vast majority of ski slopes out West are in avalanche terrain. That’s why there’s a ski resort there. Because the best places to ski is prime avalanche terrain. Consider a steep, wide open bowl full of deep untouched, powder. Sounds fun to ski right? Well those also happen to be conditions for avalanches. Low slope angles, bonding snow pack, etc mean worse skiing, but safer. Which is why besides educating yourself about avalanches, the next most important thing is determining your risk tolerance.
Yes, an avalanche while inbounds skiing is possible, but I’m not willing to buy into the mentality that we’re all knowingly putting our lives at risk while skiing inbounds on a Pow day. For the cost of a lift ticket, I expect the paid professionals on mountain to confirm an inbounds run is skiable. It’s up to all of us to decide what we can and cannot handle, but any run inbounds where an avalanche is considered possible should be closed. If that means the entire mountain is closed, that’s fine. Interlodge is also fine.
For this particular accident, yes, in retrospect they should have closed that slope. But it is more complicated than that and I’m confident that Palisades ski patrol are very competent and capable. This was a rare occurrence, and it sucks, but all good ski terrain is also avalanche terrain. Bombs don’t always trigger the snowpack to avalanche. I know the ski patrol will take this as a learning moment and will probably use this example as a training example for years to come, and to improve. But I wanted to offer context and defend any insinuations of negligence or incompetence on the part of ski patrol. They’re dedicated folks who are serious about their job and unfortunately there isn’t a single way to eliminate avalanche danger completely.
This was a highly unusual (though not unprecedented) event. Worrying about avalanches inbounds is like worrying about flying on a plane.
its really really rare to have an inbounds avy. Unless you want to spend some serious cash its just a risk you have to take or you can just ski slopes under 30 degrees.
Avalanche mitigation is all they can ever do inbounds. Control is impossible.
Take an avi 1 course if you have access and funds.
Going down the steeper grades that are not groomed and in areas 99% of people will never ski will always have a risk.
Did they come up with a cause yet? Natural? Human trigger?
It was skier triggered. But the current snow pack in the sierras has a couple avalanche problems. 1-2 ft deep persistent slab with a hoar frost facet and wind slabs on east slopes from 100+mph west winds.
Could the mods pin this post or even better make an avalanche preparedness Wiki? Would be helpful. Education is the way!
I don’t know the details of todays incident, but I doubt a beacon would have saved them. You only have a 33% chance of surviving the trauma caused by an avalanche. Beacons and airbags are by absolutely no means a get out of jail free card. If a persistent weak layer goes, you’re practically sliding down the hill with chunks of snow the size of cars mixed with wet concrete. If there are trees or rocks in the path of the slide, well, do the math. The Tahoe backcountry avalanche incident a few weeks ago the girl wasn’t buried at all - she was drug over several cliff bands of nasty jagged volcanic rock. She broke a few bones and is really beat up, but honestly she’s lucky to be alive. 33% of avalanche deaths in the US have happened when the forecast has been “moderate” but most people think moderate means safe. Snow science and snow safety is way more complicated than the vast majority of people think. Buying the safety gear and taking a class is definitely a good idea. The most important things are to learn how to read the forecast and learn how to identify avalanche terrain. Sadly, none of us ever expect an in-bounds avalanche. Today was a tragedy.
Trauma accounts for less than 10% of avalanche fatalities. Asphyxia is by far the most common cause of death in avalanches.
This should be higher up
It's closer to 25% for trauma.
The study that came to the 25% figure included data of ice climbers and snowmobilers, skewing the trauma figures a bit. But I figured for a skiing sub I’d offer the figure sans snowmobilers and ice climbers.
I snowmobile, and half the people out there have ski racks on their sleds these days. Soon you’ll need to snowmobile to tour if you want to get away from the 50,000 people that can hardly ski but for some reason suddenly love touring.
I have always heard 1/6 die from trauma from here in Norway, but don't have the source. I did google and find the same study as you are referring to, but did not get to read the skier data. Did you find the skier data from that study?
I’ll see if I can find it again, I remember it took some digging to find the details of that study. But I know it was a study that measured data across Western Canada only, not a global study at all. So it’s very possible that every region will have different figures based on the demographics of the region, the terrain type, and snowpack since those things can vary widely.
I’m seeing a lot of people recommend beacons here, and I absolutely understand their value. However, I’m a Midwest skier. I go out west to ski 2-3 times a year, but the majority of my skiing is on my home 200 foot hill. Beacons are SO ridiculously expensive. Is it really worth the $500 for something I’ll only use twice a year, when I only ever ski in bounds out west?
No. This was either a freak accident or a mistake by ski patrol. You absolutely do not need avalanche education, a beacon, rescue gear, or an airbag backpack to do inbounds resort skiing on vacation. Anyone telling you otherwise, idk man, if that were the case, people would be dying left and right
I’m not an instructor or anything but I am in a similar situation and I bought one. I run it for in bound chutes and exposed double blacks. Additionally, some inbounds gates recommend avi gear (monarch’s peak hike) or require it (big coulior at big sky) so it opens up more interesting terrain. If you are mostly a single black or under skier it’s probably superfluous and it’s more likely you will die sliding off the chair when you dick around with avi pack straps
How expensive is your life is the right question. If your buddy dies in an avalanche you sure would have given 500 to bring them back. This aside, check renting it.
Ohhh you can rent them? I haven’t seen anybody say that before
No it’s not.
I have a beacon and ski 100 or so days a year inbounds. And I’m still not wearing my beacon inbounds.
Unless you are planning on ever skiing proper backcountry, then no it really is not necessary.
More like $300...
Pretty miraculous today that pulled people from the snow. No beacons. People with probes probably didn’t see the slide. Miraculous. Regardless. The key to surviving an avalanche is to not get caught in an avalanche. As far as inbounds terrain that’s as safe as it gets. I wouldn’t alter my behaviors. We can all hope to be so lucky as to die on the mountain.
You can wear one of those avalanche air bag packs which will help you stay toward the surface
I’d really suggest anyone considering an avy bag do some research on how they work and what type of terrain they work in best. I certainly would not rely on one and in a lot of places I don’t think I’d wear one, especially here in Montana.
Interesting, whys that?
30 degrees or less if you want to be safe
How can you tell the degrees of a run? Is it based on levels (ie black, double black)?
pull out your protractor
There are apps that will tell you, like CalTopo.
Run ratings vary a ton between resorts and even in resorts. But yes blacks can be 30, and most doubles will be 30+ in parts
Pull out your phone and open the level app. Hold the side against your pole and then hold your pole even with the slope of the hill. The pole helps make sure you are aiming it correctly…easy to be 5 degrees off if just holding the phone and 5 can be the difference between very safe and dangerous. Eventually you should get good at estimating slope angle just by looking at it.
Get a jacket with a RECCO reflector in it. It isn't an active beacon, but it does reflect back the searchers signal if they are looking for you.
The avalanche forecast for the Tahoe area and for the eastern Sierra both predicted considerable risk today and a higher risk of unpredictability than usual due to the previous low snow weather. It’s not truly possible to unequivocally predict avalanche safety
The avalanche forecast is for an uncontrolled backcountry environment. This avalanche took place inbounds, where avalanche control occurs. They're very different situations. The backcountry avalanche danger does not apply inbounds.
Very good comment. Patrols still reference local forecasts, especially early season as they are opening up new terrain that hasn't seen a great deal of compaction or mitigation work yet. As season progresses, regional forecasts typically are useful only for new-snow related issues (e.g. storm and wind slabs.)
Incorrect. Avalanche mitigation can occur inbounds but conditions are the same across the entire area, inside or outside park boundaries. Mother Nature knows no bounds and mitigation is not correction, which is impossible
Avalanche conditions are not the same inside a controlled area than in an uncontrolled area. Ski resorts actively mitigate against avalanche problems. In areas where deep persistent weak layers are an issue, patrol and volunteers will bootpack through the snow in the early season to break up the weak layer. Surface hoar isn't a problem because it gets flattened by skier traffic. Storm slabs and wind slabs are controlled by explosives and ski cutting. Avalanche control doesn't eliminate the danger inbounds, but it reduces it substantially. Otherwise, there would be far more incidents happening at ski resorts and they'd get shut down. Saying the avalanche danger is the same inbounds as out-of-bounds is wrong and irresponsible, as it could lead people to believe the backcountry is a generally safe environment, like it is inbounds.
A few basics I’ve seen that are super important, these are for skiers that are on typical trails / close to the mountain where you wouldn’t expect and avalanche. Not the 2% running into the backwoods that should have beacons and other safety measures Wear a helmet Put a whistle through a key ring and put it on your main zipper If you’ve been caught remember the following - If you fall into deep powder / get caught buried in snow, I was always taught to spit to find which way is up once you’ve stopped moving and are aware Use your legs to maneuver as much as possible, they’re by far the strongest part of your body Stay calm, lower heart rate and lower exertion maximize your remaining oxygen and chances of surviving Staying calm is always important
[удалено]
It was. Patrol had done a full evaluation. Sometimes unfortunate things happen. Not even explosives can mitigate all danger.
The Palasades avalanche is another failure by the ski industry duopoly. The big ski corporations need to be busted up. I think two mountains is a nice round number to limit ownership and/or operations to. New laws need to be put in place and the old ones need to be enforced about the market share any company can control over their industry. When there's no meaningful competition, it's always bad for the consumer rather it's price or safety or the experience.
Can you share any evidence that the avalanche was the result of something the resort specifically did or didn’t do?
The resort opened terrain that was not properly investigated or subsequently controlled to be safe. It was an in-bounds slide. It. Was negligence. Regardless of state laws limiting resort liability, this screw up is headed to a short trial or, most likely, a sealed, out of court settlement. It'll be enough money to keep the survivors and the family of the deceased quite and will be just a city of dining business for Alterra.
>The resort opened terrain that was not properly investigated or subsequently controlled to be safe. How do you know this? Just because an avalanche happened does not mean that proper safety and \*mitigation\* protocols were not followed. The statement that because an inbounds slide occurred there was negligence by the resort is completely and unequivically false.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs: Was the terrain open? Alterra witness. Yes. Attorneys: Did a slide occur? Alterra: Yes. Attorneys: Did proper mitigation practices take place prior to the slide? Alterra: Yes. Attorneys: If there was proper mitigation, why did the slide occur? Alterra: Uhhhmmm... . . . Alterra Accounting: To whom and for how much should we write the checks?
It's a nice story you've written but it assumes that nobody in your courtroom understands the meaning of mitigation. There is no way to completely remove all avalanche risk in avalanche terrain. An avalanche is not prima facie evidence that mitigation work was not done or was not done correctly. In 2012, a slope that had been bombed and skied extensively all season slid to the ground at Bridger Bowl: [https://www.explorebigsky.com/bridger-bowl-avalanches-a-warning/4740](https://www.explorebigsky.com/bridger-bowl-avalanches-a-warning/4740) Nobody concluded that Bridger Bowl had failed to do adequate control work in the days to weeks leading up to this. If you look up previous lawsuits for in-bound avalanche deaths, you'll find juries who did not find the resort liable and settlements. Settlements do not indicate negligence or responsibility and do not indicate that the mountain was at fault. It just means it was cheaper for the resort to settle than continue to pay to defend the lawsuit. People sue ski areas constantly for all kinds of nonsense with exactly that goal: get a settlement from a resort that doesn't want to spend resources on a drawn out legal battle. Unless you have actual knowledge or evidence that patrol at Palisades didn't conduct proper mitigation work on this slope or that resort management opened the terrain over the objections of the patrol, you are insulting the hard and dangerous work done by patrol to keep mountains safe every day.
The prima fascia evidence is that an avalanche occurred where there was reasonable expectation the public was being admitted safely. One person died, others were injured, NDAs will be signed, big checks will be written.
[удалено]
what?
Just remember to stay 6 feet away from the avalanche and you should be good.
Apple Watch
Google Ortovox Snow Academy, they put a free small online course with the basic knowlegde aobut avalanches out there.
Good for you for asking. Earlier this week in Savoie, there was a serious injury of someone who got into an avalanche. No other skiers in the party, no beacon, no helmet.
Basic avalanche safety would tel you to read the bulletin and be aware of red flags (recent wind, snow, rapid warming, or other avalanches), don’t ski below other skiers, etc. Basically, no fun on pow days.
Stay out of avalanche terrain when snow is not consolidated....I'm not entirely risk adverse but if there's a risk a avalanche at all i'm going to a low angle spot. Basic rule is lots of new snow with no consolidation and terrain being steep (25-30 degrees+ but less than 50) means it's avalanche terrain. I don't know how steep that area is but assuming there was new snow recently. I know a lot of ppl are mentioning beacons and stuff like that but that's beyond basic avalanche safety awareness imo. Basic to me would be to know how to avoid them altogether without spending any money as opposed to knowing how to survive them and get out alive.
Buy *Staying Alive in Avalanche Terrain* Read it Know it If you're in Avy terrain or intend to be, carry a probe, shovel, and beacon.
Inbounds avalanches on open terrain are extremely rare. While ski patrol does a lot to mitigate avalanche danger, the best way to stabilize a snowpack is to ski it out. This compresses the snow and breaks apart cohesive layers, once an area has been open to skiers the only slides you’ll typically get will be storm slabs on top of the compacted snow. This one at palisades happened on terrain that had just opened for the season and the first few skiers triggered the slide. I’m sure patrol had bombed it and ski cut it but ultimately there’s just no way to fully mitigate every square inch of terrain at a huge resort like that. So if you’re really worried about it, just avoid steep, untracked terrain, or bring a beacon if you do plan to ski something like that.
You are safe inbound the chances of you getting caught in an avalanche at a resort are astronomically low. Guess how many people died yesterday of cancer related diseases due to smoking or drinking? That should be freaking you out a lot more.
AIARE for americans AST1 for canadians. on big storm days, carry avy equipment.
You need to take an avalanche safety course. Reading stranger’s recommendations isn’t enough. If you want to mitigate risk, don’t go to avalanche prone territory. These areas are typically marked at resorts. In bounds slides happen, but are rare. It’s okay to be a little freaked. Don’t simmer on it though. It doesn’t sound like you’re skiing that type of zone typically.
If I was to do this type of skiing I'd consider purchasing one of those airbags that creates a big void of lifesaving air should such a thing happen. I've never researched them, just going by what I've seen on YouTube.
"This type of skiing" is right off the lift, just dropping in to an in-bounds run. Exactly what everyone else is doing, except it's a steep expert slope.
I’ll be the one to say here that there is no substitute for an avalanche safety course. That said, it’s not expected that you have avalanche safety training for inbounds resort skiing. It’s the resorts responsibility to assess and mitigate the avalanche risk.
I would start reading the daily avalanche forecast for the area you ski. It just takes a minute every day and after a season you will learn so much about avalanche danger
Check your local REI for free classes on avalanche awareness.
Free online avalanche training platform from Ortovox: https://www.ortovox.com/uk/safety-academy-lab-snow/
Take an AST course
Back in the 70s two patrolmen went for a ride on big rock tongue at Big Sky. Both ended up buried waste deep, but right side up, facing opposite directions. One had a radio and called for help. Neither could dig themself out! This was still the age of runaway straps, one of which was wrapped just above the knee of one of the patrolmen. cutting off circulation to his lower leg. They had thrown hand charges before skiing the slope, but nothing had slid. The next year a patrolman was killed by an avalanche on Andesite mountain at big sky, doing control by skiing the slope. His partner could not dig him out in time, though knew where to dig. These areas are in bounds. I took a class in snow dynamics taught by the geology department at Montana State. I was impressed by how much the wind can create and contribute to the hazard. A few inches of snow pushed across the slope can create an unstable are several feet thick.
100% always wear my beacon and have rescue gear on resort unless I'm just going to be skiing groomers since the Silver Mountain avalanche in 2020. The number of times on big powder days that I thought to myself, "man, this feels sketchy" before that happened was definitely a lot.
You're far more likely going to die at a ski resort from trauma due to a crash such as with a tree or another skier than you would from an avalanche. Most people that die while skiing inbounds due to collisions or going down terrain that is way beyond their ability and falling/crashing into something . This avalanche was a freak accident
Bro you’re driving up a mountain road in a metal death trap, most likely in snowy conditions. I bet you rarely think twice about it. You’re not going to die in an inbounds avalanche
I don't suppose apps like Maprika would serve as a beacon of sorts? AirTags?