I just wanted to be sure we are talking about the same thing- Post Control Release… I would hate to compare apples to oranges… Not many deaths out there at a ski area that weren’t post control… only one I’ve found and that was on a path that runs every 50 years… not alot of history on that path.

Discussions from your statements:
“The trend of excusing Professionals especially Ski Area Professionals is troubling and misguided. A competent Professional in a controlled area should get it right at such a high percentage as to be very low-risk indeed.”
Are there examples of this?? I find very rarely a ski area to ever be excused from any percieved wrong… it’s the American way- to sue.

“The properly trained Professionals given the funding and manhours should absolutely monitor and reduce inbounds hazard to near zero. Any less is just a cop-out to allow for less expense for the Operator.”
I don’t think I”ve ever NOT thrown a shot because I thought I could save the ski area money… I didn’t throw it because there was nothing to throw it at… all the snow had blown off. I am pretty sure an inbound slide is something that no ski area would ever want to deal with. In my experience there has always been an open dialogue between the avalanche forecaster and the patrol. With lots of support from the forecasters to use as many explosives as we think we needed.

“There are plenty of examples of post-control release to be studied, again in one’s own area that history should be fresh in one’s mind. 50 or 100 lbs of ANFO is cheap insurance in my view to protect thousands of skiers who pass under/ on a face. Elevating this relatively simple science to a mysterious level is just lame, in my view. ”
Snow science has only been around for about 50 years, and post control release has gotten very little study. To have a post control release in 5-10 years at a ski area is actually a pretty rare thing, so to even get a chance to study them is hard. Most patrollers aren’t even around for more that 10 years and the ones that are probably have very little scientific data on the evewnt and cannot therefore give their insite on it. Having all the elements line up like last year was astonishing and to have that many accidents even more frightening. Your assumption that just dumping 50-100#s of ANFO on a slope and it will be safe is off base. There is an artical in: The Avalanche Review Vol.27, No.4 page 24-25 that goes into a discussion on some research done at Copper Mountain in CO. They dump about 50#s on a slope with no resluts, only to come back the next day and pop out a 3 foot slab with a 1kg hand charge. I would also attest that to even get that much explosive up the hill at some ski areas would be quite a feat indead as some ski area lifts don’t go all the way to the top and having hiked 25# of ANFO up 1800 vert myself, I can attest to the endevor it is. Placement is probably the key element. There are studies that have shown where good placements are, but there are many ways to approach a slope and how to control it which depnd on loading (high wind vs. low winds) and slope configuration (ridges vs. chutes vs. open slopes) and all can vary even more if there are undulations which would create even more starting zones within the same path. You will also find in avalanche.org that in some instances over 300 people skied the slope before it slid… how do you forecast for that? Maybe you have some knowledge that I don’t. If so please explain- but keep it in laymans terms.. I’m either too lazy to understand or too stupid.
As for a scientists and compitent personell know it all, recently a very well respected and knowledgeable avalancvhe forecaster was killed in Alaska while out on a field trip. Obviously if he knew everything he would still be here today. Snow science is a science and therefore based on theory. We don’t know all there is to know about avalanches.

“I see no need to compare the size of anything or scores.”
I put the numbers out there for you to see that the numbers are pretty close to 0. Less that 10 people have died due to avalanche in less than 15 years (go to Avalanche.org to check my numbers) compaired to probably over 1/2billion skier visits for those same 15 years… compare that number to the number of people that die due to other causes at ski areas… much diferent munbers.

“There is no statement by me for “100%”, but an intelligent person can use control, closure, and other precautions to approach 100%. I view that as stepping up and being responsible, a trait not always found in ski area workers, for sure, in my experience. ”
If this is where your coming from, we will never see eye to eye or have a positive debate. My experience from ski areas are that the employees are very dedicated individules especially considdering the amount that they are paid for what they put their bodies through every season including the hazard they encounter on a daily basis.

“I currently work in healthcare, where one performs to a very high level daily tasks which are much more complex and exacting than ski area avalanche hazard mitigation.”
I am suprised you to bring this up , especially in the state in which the healthcare system is in. I have my own personal story of nearly being killed by my healthcare providers and have many a friend and family member that have been provided less that professional care by someone being paid many many times more than any partoller.

“I observed folks who perhaps lacked confidence in the field of avalanche science/ hazard mitigation and overused closure, and slowly did AC routes that could be done safely much more quickly- there is a point when timid or slovenly performance actually add to the problem”
Rushing through a control mission just to have it accomplished is risky business and can lead to missing something important such as a deeper burried unstable layer.
Snow settles overtime and can build strenght. Some programs rely on this, especially those in places with low snow fall rates, thus saving more snow on the hill to ski. Not to say they don’t control it, they just let time do its magic and work for them. Some programs also go piece by piece due to limits on manpower and yet others do it to slowly open the mountain so as to concentrate skier compaction before opening up new terrain (especially the big ski areas) there by alowing for onsistent compaction, a plus is that the pow pow lasts through out the day and the resort isn’t skied out by 11am.

“I have not said that I assume absolute safety, my experience tells me that I do not necessarily trust ski area or highway workers. with some of the history of errors. ”
Once again some examples would be great. I will admit, though that mistakes have been made in the past and would further hazard a guess that leasons were learned. I don’t hold contempt for healthcare workers even though I was almost killed due to mistakeds made. I am positive that the mistakes made by the professonals helping me wont be made again by those individules or even their agencies. I still go to the doctor and am sure I will end up in the ER at some point in my life again and will trust the folks issuing care to do their best.

On another note- I don’t want people to get the impression that I see it as ok for people to be taken out by avalanche. Some of the case studies I read brought tears to my eyes, not because I knew them, but because I have been through what they have and know how the friends and family feel- my heart goes out to those that have suffered that loss and even to those that have themselves been killed doing something that can be so freeing to the soul. But like I said, we live and learn and the leason I take with me is that nothing is ever safe and to have a plan B.

The ski hill just sits there in front of you and is observed 24/7 and is skied on daily, hazard controlled constantly, telemetry all over it, years of history and observation. It is not like one is trying to forecast on an untouched slope. That amount of ski area data may be used very successfully, and serious avalanche hazard mitigation will reduce the problem. There are plenty of examples of post-control release to be studied, again in one’s own area that history should be fresh in one’s mind. 50 or 100 lbs of ANFO is cheap insurance in my view to protect thousands of skiers who pass under/ on a face. Elevating this relatively simple science to a mysterious level is just lame, in my view.

As far as “peppering slopes”- placement of charges in the path, their location in relation the snowpack (on, under, above), the bomb size in relation to the necessary transmission of the shock wave to the weakness intended to be initiated, eg that shock wave transmission varies according to water content and other snow characteristics- all of this stuff is established in the literature and known by competent AC folks.There are folks that I have observed who never get this stuff, and there are smart folks who have done this work many more years than I have who are incredibly knowledgeable and skilled.

My experience and observation support my statement in my mind, I see no need to compare the size of anything or scores. If my statements are faulty in your view and you support your ideas with logic and observation, great. There is no statement by me for “100%”, but an intelligent person can use control, closure, and other precautions to approach 100%. I view that as stepping up and being responsible, a trait not always found in ski area workers, for sure, in my experience. I currently work in healthcare, where one performs to a very high level daily tasks which are much more complex and exacting than ski area avalanche hazard mitigation. My view is that some folks make ski area avalanche hazard mitigation into something beyond what it is. Some folks doing AC in my past experience did not want to sweat, or do the tough job quickly or make the tough call for closure in the face of uncertainty. On the other hand, I observed folks who perhaps lacked confidence in the field of avalanche science/ hazard mitigation and overused closure, and slowly did AC routes that could be done safely much more quickly- there is a point when timid or slovenly performance actually add to the problem- again my view.

Actually I do not ski tour anywhere near ski areas, but to answer what I think is a question, the backcountry usually has very little correlation to a ski area that is regularly skied and controlled. I have not said that I assume absolute safety, my experience tells me that I do not necessarily trust ski area or highway workers. with some of the history of errors. However, I stand by my assertion that it can be done when done well with a very high degree of certainty.

I’m curious about your experience. How much were you right? How long did it take you to get the experience and judgement to be 100% right? Most pros start out as rookies with little experience or training. Most of their experience is/ was gained on the job.

I have had the job of professional patroller for over 10 years at a class A area (220 paths inbounds) and now another few for a state highway department as an avalanche forecaster. Though my experience I have realized that I am not god and hence am not right 100% of the time. This past season saw ALOT of post control realeases all across the western US… when you pepper a slope you would expect it NOT to slide afterward (we’re talking over 70 lbs of explosives) and they have still slid… All I’m saying is that it’s a reality. The ski areas are there and they do their best. When have you ever been right 100% of the time?

You had an argument of keeping things low risk… The average ski area is open from December 1 to April 15, a total of 136 days. There are aproximatly 35 ski areas in 11 states that do control work( there might actually be more- that was just off the top of my head) and some of these ski areas ar open from mid October into May, June or even July (Colorado I think actually has bragging rights to one of the longest ski seasons thanks to man made snow. And there has even been an ISSW presentation on manmade snow avalanches, which I didn’t think was possible… Google ISSW to find out more info). Anyways back to topic… 136 days multiplied by 35ish resorts is about 4760 possible control days (possibly more if a ski area has to do control to even open for employees to set up or tear down). Now how many employees does it take to do control? At the ski area I worked at is was 26-28 (we’re a small resort). Maybe thats an average to go with… another ski area close by utilizes 8-10- different terain configuration and management. so i’ll go with 25 to be on the conservitive side. Take the 35 resorts and multiply by 25 employees that’s 875 people doing control on 4760 days and anyone of those employees can have a bad day- we all do… well you can see where I’m going with this. Then start looking at skier visits (I’m guessing over 50 million skier visits to these resorts alone. Mamoth, Vail, Breck, Copper, Squaw, Alpine, Aspen, Telluride, Jackson probably are over 2 million skier visits each) and accidents which were about 10 this season in bounds and …. pretty small numbers as far as accidents per visit. You might argue that 1 is a high number and it is definately a tragedy… Squaw Valley even lost one of their employees to one this year. But They are all learning experiences… The thing I learned is that I am NEVER 100% right and my best educated guess is still just a guess. So I wear a tranciever and ski with a partner who is also beeping because I have a plan B if all goes to pot. I take responsibility for my safety. I dont expect the ski area to be 100% safe- because it will never be.

Next question: Suppose you show up at your favorite resort (or at least your local resort/ski hill). I just dumped 3 ft and thye opperator refuses to open due to a suspected hazard. You were there early enough to hear contorl work being done and maybe even saw some results from the parking lot. What do you do ?

A) Randonnee up the hill anyways thinking they did control… what could be the matter?
B) Your not going home… you called in sick to ski some pow and they should not be closed… they did control. Go complain to guest relations to open the resort.
C) Go ski you favorite Backcountry haunt, it’s close to the resort and there’s 3 feet of new. There’s gotta be some low angle hippy pow to ski or is that steep line calling your name?
D) Go home… time to spned some quality time with the wife or get those chores done she’s been asking you for a week to do.
E) insert favorite excuse here.

Anyway you slice it were all human and such will make mistakes. We are also obligated to die. Hopefully not due to the mistakes we make.

Robert put it best “I hope this makes people realise they are always responsible for their own safety, “even” when skiing inbounds, and should not rely on someone else to do their thinking for them.”

The trend of excusing Professionals especially Ski Area Professionals is troubling and misguided. A competent Professional in a controlled area should get it right at such a high percentage as to be very low-risk indeed. Yes, I had that job, the ultimate call for over 200 avalanche paths inbounds at a ski area. The properly trained Professionals given the funding and manhours should absolutely monitor and reduce inbounds hazard to near zero. Any less is just a cop-out to allow for less expense for the Operator.

First I have a question to pose to the community: How much risks does an inbounds skier assume? My thought is it depends ALOT on the skier.

Some seem to think that there should be no responsibility, while others definatly pushed the boundries… Silverton was mentioned. Mt. Baker was not mentioned although they acutally opened up the resort (very steep and avy prone) for a couple days a couple years ago having done very little control, but required skiers (and snowboarders) to have all neseceties. They are also one of the leaders in deep snow asphixiation (resorts in Tahoe are also in there). Remember, even if you don’t think you should have to ski inbounds with a tranciever… inbounds slides happen and to ignore this is well, ignorant… keep it real.

Let me just put this out there just to help keep it real… No steep ski area is ever 100% free of hazard. The Alps a few years ago had a moguled PISTE slope slide and burry many folks, and there are many more tails of this… I have my own from Copper Mountain about 15 years ago. The patrol had opened up a slope, but due to low snow cover and just opening it up they were directing people down… modified guiding style. I had about 6 runs on it and it was beginning to look tracked out byt the end of the day. The next day it slid to ground- 4 foot crown. Took 2 more months to get snow on it to ski.

Some myths to dispell… Most ski areas are using Recco now, but it’s slow to find people. It takes time to get it on scene- figure 5-10 minutes and another 5-10 to find a victum…15 minutes to dig someone up burried 1 meter deep is really good, but 50% are dead after 30 minutes burried (if not the 25% that die by trama on the way down). Dogs work great, but once again 5 to 10 minutes to get a dog on scene… 5 to 15 minutes to search depending on size, slope and obsticals present, you might be alive when my dog finds you, but will probably be dead by the time I dig you up. With a tranciever, If i see you get burried, I can find you in about 3 to 5 minutes, 15 to 20 minutes to dig you up… you might actually survive to ski another day… A tranciever really is the best method and it’s great to see more folks getting them especially with the cost of gear going over $1000 for a good set up. There are more tools on the market though… the Avalung, Air bags… more gets invented all the time.

The best way to not die in an avalanche is to NOT get caught (take a level I and II avalanche course), use propper ski party management and get a tranciever. Avalanche training: $200-$500, Tranciever: $200- $300. The cost of another pow day: priceless. Anyways, I hope some of this helped… Stay well… Work hard, Party hard, Ski harder!