 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
experience with avalanche forecasting and
winter recreation management. He served as
a Recreation Management Specialist with the
U.S. Forest Service at locations such as
Jackson, Wyoming, and the Wasatch Front of
Utah, as well as here in the Island Park area.
As a resident of Island Park, he shares a
concern that winter users understand the
danger they face in backcountry areas.
Readers of this site should carefully consider
information and concepts on this page before
backcountry travel.
Experience has taught that it is NOT really
possible for most people to learn enough
about weather and avalanches to do an
adequate job of evaluating avalanche hazards
in order to be able to avoid them. This is
especially true if they attempt frequent
exposure to steep ( >30 degrees), open
slopes. Even with years of experience,
avalanche control specialists at ski areas
have lost their lives. The same slope area
can slide more than once, and it isn't always
the snow that kills or injures. We have seen
chests compressed against tree trunks, so
that breathing was impossible. We have seen
victims bleed to death due to major arteries
being slashed by limbs broken off by the
victim sliding along the trunk of an alpine fir
tree. We have also seen avalanche
forecasters hit by slides while they were
evaluating pockets of snow that had
previously slid. Luckily they survived--
although buried to the chest.
Avalanche slopes don't always fail with the
first skier or snomachine impact. We have
seen entire tram-car loads of 60 skiers saved
from a major slab avalanche at a ski area,
because the forecaster had a hunch his
computer had missed something. Sixty
skiers had already skied the bowl, but the
second car of the day was stopped from
unloading, while the slope was shot and
cleared of a 4-6' slab in a 100 acre area.
These experiences shout in our ears--to
stop and be extra cautious--and
as we share these concerns and some
further avalanche philosophy, we hope that
you will listen and consider...........................
As stated on the Avalanche Forecasts page, many avalanche incidents involving
backcountry visitors occur on days with a forecast rating of MODERATE hazard
as described by the 5-level national rating scale. The definition of a MODERATE
forecast rating (US Avalanche Danger Scale) includes: "Natural avalanches
possible; human triggered avalanches possible; unstable slabs possible on
steep slopes; and use caution in steeper terrain on certain aspects".
Since avalanche forecasts are GENERAL in their application, it is likely that
under MODERATE rated conditions, there will likely be pockets of more highly
unstable snow on steep(>30 degrees), open slopes than those described by a
MODERATE forecast. Since these pockets are generally not detectable by a
limited number of snow-study pits, the backcountry visitor may be more highly
at risk, than the MODERATE rating would imply. As backcountry visitors
continue to poke around (e.g.--hill climbing with a snowmachine) on steep
slopes, they eventually locate the unstable pocket by triggering a larger area
into an avalanche (see photo example). We have also observed this situation to
occur (very infrequently) even in ski resorts where avalanche prone slopes are
controlled or closed to prevent access.
Therefore, the bottom line, and safest approach seems to be to limit exposure
to the hazard on days with a forecast rating of MODERATE or higher. By
applying the "+1 Rating" method, a LOW hazard day would be treated as a
MODERATE day, and a MODERATE day would be treated as a CONSIDERABLE
hazard day. The concept is applied by simply adding "1" level higher rating to
the forecast rating for the day. The reason for this concept is that pockets of
instability will nearly always exist (see photo example), and forecasters always
warn, for example--that even LOW hazard does not mean "no hazard". So--on
MODERATE hazard forecast days, which would equate to a CONSIDERABLE hazard
condition, it would be appropriate to reduce the exposure and risk by avoiding
gullies and slopes >30 degrees. This is appropriate because "natural avalanches
are possible and human triggered avalanches are probable" according to the
CONSIDERABLE forecast rating level. This is a different approach than the US
Avalanche Danger Scale, which does not begin to suggest restricting travel in
avalanche terrain under a MODERATE forecast. It simply says: "Use caution in
steeper terrain". Thus, the "+1 Rating" method provides a safer guideline for
use, since it suggests limiting travel.
The "+1 Rating" concept would even be more appropriate on CONSIDERABLE
forecast days, where the US Avalanche Danger Scale simply says: "Be
increasingly cautious in steeper terrain". If you treat a CONSIDERABLE
forecast as HIGH--then you will follow the national definition that says: "Travel
in avalanche terrain is not recommended". Since many avalanche injuries and
fatalities occur on MODERATE days, why would anyone want to go into or near
avalanche terrain and take multiple risks of exposure, when the hazard is in
reality (due to unstable pockets) at CONSIDERABLE, or even higher?????
indicated in the US Avalanche Danger Scale
(Safety Basics) "No matter what the current
avalanche danger, there are avalanche-safe
areas in the mountains". Therefore, the
backcountry visitor simply needs to take
adequate steps to insure his/her safety. The
hazard evaluation discussion which follows
(in white column--at the right), is presented to
encourage visitors to take time to gain enough
knowledge, experience and training to travel
safely in or near avalanche terrain.
The conservative, +1 Rating Concept (in white
column--at right), is designed to allow a winter
enthusiast time to gain such knowledge
without suffering injury or death.
avalanches. Fremont County S&R will be your BEST FRIEND if you are in need. Consider joining their cause by making a donation.
