Hoe attachments offer important benefits to avalanche shovels, particularly when snow needs to be moved quickly. Photo: Aidan Goldie
In the years that I have been backcountry skiing, I have only owned two backcountry shovels. While an avalanche shovel will be perhaps that single most durable piece of backcountry gear in the kit, I decided to buy a new only a couple of seasons into backcountry skiing. There was nothing wrong with my original shovel, only it was missing a unique element — the hoe attachment, — that prompted me to leave my trusty metal shovel on the shelf and purchase the one in my pack today.
The replacement shovel has all of the necessary features: it collapses to store neatly in a backpack, is lightweight but durable, and has a larger metal shovel blade (9×11 inches) adept for moving large volumes of snow and performing standardized avalanche pit tests. The major thing that sets it apart from the variety of shovels I see backcountry travelers using is this: the hoe feature. But why is the hoe so great?
I developed a few small scientific trials to answer my question: does a hoe attachment increase the digging efficiency of a metal backcountry shovel? Here’s what I found.
What a hoe does and why it matters
The hoe feature on a shovel allows the user to change the angle of the shovel blade from being in-line with the handle to a 90-degree bend. This effectively provides the shovel with a significant mechanical advantage that will increase the effectiveness of the shovel handle as a lever arm to more effectively pry snow.
Of course, my anecdotal findings are not founded in anything more than opinion. But the ability to move more snow in the same amount of time could prove to be invaluable in a situation where seconds count, as in an avalanche rescue. In an average rescue scenario where a victim only has enough air for ten to fifteen minutes before succumbing to asphyxiation, any increase in digging efficiency could really prove to be the difference between a successful rescue and an unsuccessful one.
One hoe, three trials
In my small experiment, I identified three variables, the use of the hoe attachment, snow quality (fresh vs avalanche debris), and the digger themself. With one of my backcountry ski partners, we came across a recent slide and the pile of avalanche debris. Probing around, we found an average depth of about 160 cm. We set up a quick experiment. The objective was to dig down to the ground as quickly as possible. One person used a shovel in its standard configuration, and the other used the hoe attachment. Then we did the experiment again, switching shovels to control for differences in shoveling abilities. I replicated this experiment three times with three different partners.
After averaging the time that it took each individual to dig one meter down using each type of shovel configuration and controlling for individual digging ability, I had my results. In my informal scientific trials with a small sample size, I found that the backcountry skier using a shovel in hoe mode was able to move snow about twenty percent faster than their straight-shoveled counterpart. On average, a difference in time of 10.8 minutes versus 13.4 minutes.
There are a few reasons why a hoe configuration might confer to better digging ability. The mechanical advantage given by the hoe gives the digger the ability to pry the hard debris apart, something more challenging to do with a straight-handled shovel. The hoe configuration also makes it possible to swing down into the snow, transferring more power to break through debris blocks. This displaces energy away from critical digging muscles leading to a more efficient digging technique. A combination of these two factors makes it easier to cut through avalanche debris in particular, compared to undisturbed snow.
Conclusions
The twenty percent efficiency gained by using the hoe configuration in your backcountry shovel could translate to a rescuer moving the same amount of snow in twelve minutes with a hoe attachment than they would in fifteen minutes without. This may seem marginal, but avalanche rescues are a game of margins.
While there is a small scientific basis for this article, this is really a foundation for future backcountry skiers to build upon. The main takeaway is to practice your digging. Know your gear and work on your companion rescue. The gained efficiency you could gain by using the hoe attachment is lost without systematic rescue digging. Dedicate a day to practice with your regular touring partners. Find a parking lot where a snowplow has piled hardened snow that resembles avalanche debris and work on digging efficiently. Find out what ten minutes of digging feels like and just how physically exhausting it can be.
While I have made multiple sacrifices for the sake of weight and bulk in my touring pack, I haven’t compromised the size or ability of my backcountry shovel. This rescue item is not for me, after all, but for my touring partners. Carrying anything less than the best is a statement that I am not wholly committed to their rescue. These small trials helped me discover that using the hoe attachment on my shovel may better meet that standard of excellence, but in reality, the hoe and the digging practice made me a better touring partner.
Ready to upgrade your avalanche shovel? We particularly like BCA’s RS EXT and D2. We’ve gotten word that Mammut’s popular Alugator Lite shovel will include a hoe version next fall.
Aidan Goldie is a Basalt-based backcountry skier and photographer. When he is not climbing and descending peaks in the American West, he is an outdoor educator, working with schools and nonprofits guiding groups through the Colorado wilderness.
21 comments
I’m not convinced.
“In contrast to manufacturer-funded studies in artificial environments and a single rescuer configuration, our real world on-snow testing in a small group configuration shows that the hoe function lowers rescue performance (-15%) in avalanche rescue. The hoe function therefore only might makes sense for very specific, nonavalanche related rescue scenarios such as tree well accidents, where large masses of soft snow need to be moved from the lower end of the tree. Whereas this finding is not reflected in the UIAA SafeCom standard 156, it is an important fact to be communicated in avalanche rescue training.”
https://arc.lib.montana.edu/snow-science/objects/ISSW2018_O16.2.pdf
Thanks to Andrew for sharing the link to real science.
With regard to the OP and the statement that the hoe configuration provides “mechanical advantage”, someone doesn’t understand physics. Mechanical advantage is a function of the handle length of the shovel, not the angle of attachment. Certainly some people may find an ergonomic advantage, but if the handle length is the same then the mechanical advantage is equal.
The discrepancies between Aidan’s test, and the “real science” linked in the comments may largely be due to the differences in the snow quality used in testing. Aidan’s test occurred in avalanche debris, whereas the testing referenced above describes the great care taken to select snowpack that was “very moderate.”
Thousands years of manual labor reflects Aidan’s findings. Picks and hoes have always been the first choice for breaking up compacted material; shovels are for moving loosened material, leaning on, and photo ops at ribbon-cutting ceremonies.
I’m amazed at the negativity in these comments. Since when did a comments section turn into a game of ‘gotcha’? I get fact checking and offering unexamined info, but we could all do without the attitude people constantly assert when trying to illustrate how much smarter they are than others. Aiden could have included the study above for context, but he didn’t fabricate his own data to mislead people. We also passed this draft by the folks at BCA, who, I believe, know a whole lot about mechanical advantages and shovel performance.
The two comments while not affirmative are accurate and I’m not feeling the “attitude”. They should be taken as peer review feedback on a theory and presentation.
Really these safety things need more questioning attitude as there had been lots of bad info out there over the years.
As Lou days further down, the consistency of the snow is a factor in this, I’m not sure you’d find me running over to a fresh slide, minutes after it occurs to test my shovel speed unless it was real rescue… So I imagine real scenario data is going to be hard to come by.
Well said Apingaut.
I think the main point of the poster is lost on people in these comments. I’ll refresh people’s memories.
“While there is a small scientific basis for this article, this is really a foundation for future backcountry skiers to build upon. The main takeaway is to practice your digging. Know your gear and work on your companion rescue. The gained efficiency you could gain by using the hoe attachment is lost without systematic rescue digging.”
The point was that avalanche rescues are a game of margins and without practicing your shoveling, regardless of head configuration, these seconds of potential efficiency are lost.
In today’s culture, using the word “scientific” seems to always push buttons. Relax folks. Aidan did a good job testing and writing his analysis. In my opinion it was adequately scientific. And supported my own anecdotal experience with snow hoes: they’re quite useful but organized digging no matter what the type of shovel is the key thing. Lou
Aaron brings up a good point. The big variable in all these studies of shovels and such is the type of snow that’s moved. My favorite example of this is the Genswein (spelling) shovel test, years ago. They destroyed shovels by digging and prying in highly dense snow. In my experience with live companion rescue (both real and simulated), snow density isn’t usually as much of an issue as Genswein postulated. But the industry bought into it and we got shovels that are sometimes, if not often, heavier than necessary for one-time companion rescue. That’s not to say heavy duty shovels don’t have a place, such as SAR and constant pit work. But shows that snow type and density are a key thing in all these tests and studies. Another thing: more than one engineer has told me that it’s axiomatic you can’t make a test that exactly simulates real life, at least in the sense of anything with a modicum of complication. So tests, such as this one of shovels or mine of bindings should only be a point of departure for consideration and discussion. Lou
Interesting, I’ve never seen that setup. Nice write up, Thanks.
However, drawing on my experience as a professional roof shoveler in the Elk Mountains for going on near two decades now that hoe set up looks questionable.
Got any video action footage?
Yes, another request for video.
One thing that probably matters a lot is slope. On lower angles I have not had much luck with the hoe mode, but on steeper debris slopes I could imagine it working better.
The advantage of a shovel with “hoe mode” is to the secondary shovelers clearing the loose snow that the primary digger has already loosened.
Your unscientific test with the too-small sample size actually measured the wrong activity (primary digging as opposed to clearing already loosend snow).
Zippy,
Seems like it was a pretty good representation of a single rescuer scenario
anything smaller or subtler than this > http://tyromont.com/de/produkte/categories/bergrettung/products/lawinen-schaufel-alu.html
or this https://www.ebay.de/itm/Universal-Schneeschaufel-Made-in-Austria-schneeabweisende-Speziallegierung-/323516949086
is kind of a “big compromise”. rescuers in Alps do know WHY they have these in their packs when going to dig someone out.
of course they are second to come at place of disaster but even they are under risk of secondary/following avalanches. so they minimise the risk by using the best suitable shovels to reduce time at risk {ratio factors > weight/output/endurance}.
Rambo skills {full power and long endurance} are of course welcome and needed, no other way was till now invented to deliver those miracle results.
no hoe option in those 2? well, the avalanche debris field is a totally different garden either…
“We’ve gotten word that Mammut’s popular Alugator Lite shovel will include a hoe version next fall.”
That shovel is very small. I know ’cause I carry one. I’m sure it’s better than a good luck charm for rescue, but I doubt that hoeing with it would be any better than shoveling with it. My advice remains, Stay Out of Trouble.
Another thing: A shovel can be used like a hoe.
I agree with Manasseh, I think there must be a lack of snow in your neck of the woods or something.
For 42 years I owned and operated a heavy construction business that performed a lot of earthwork. Every service truck and piece of heavy equipment had digging tools on it for handwork, fire suppression if necessary, cleaning off equipment, and even occasionally scraping off boots. I hate to admit how many heavy duty steel bladed shovels, with solid fiberglass handles, we wore out or broke over the years, both the blade and the handle- maybe 50-75 shovels. By that I mean the blade is worn down 2-3″ and the handle sometimes more. Though most all our work was done with equipment and mechanical compaction, we’d often have certain structures (welded wire, concrete, crib, wire baskets, and RSE walls) that required hand work along the face. And we’re digging in a variety of soil and backfills, that have some of the same characteristics as snow.
IMO, shoveling efficiency is far more dependent on the shovelers strength and sustainability and how organized the crew is, if there is more than one person. Any shovel that can fit in a pack, is also a compromise for a real long handled shovel for longer term use. I’ve had the shovel shown in the photo and have had it since it was first introduced by K2 several years ago. I think it works great for certain functions. Yes, you can perform the same task’s with a straight blade, but this gives you the option. Don’t forget that this shovel can also be used as a straight blade, so there is nothing lost if you like that position. The solid head is also handy for driving stakes, nails, tapping something open, etc. The handle can also store straps and bolts/nuts for rescue sled. I’m far more concerned about the ability of my 60-70’s year old partners than the shovel itself.
I’ve dug thousands of soil pits (picture a snow profile but for soil description and study). I always used a combination of a sawed-off handle polaski (picture robust axe like hoe mostly used for forest fire fighting) and a shovel (with welded tang). Chop chop with the ‘hoe’, scoop scoop with the shovel. Back and forth.
I’ll clarify my last entry as the soil pit analogy is backwards to the avalanche rescue extraction as the shape of the hole is different. My point remains, both tools are useful when used in a certain sequence and the right application.
Does anyone feel like like the increased temptation to apply lever action in the hoe configuration could place much more stress on the material of the shovel, especially in compacted debris, leading to a higher probability of equipment failure? Is the shovel construction adequately reinforced for this possibility?
this is how PROs do it. http://tyromont.com/produkte/categories/lawinenprodukte.html
no hoe since avalanche debris is kind of a different garden to play in {time is life, on both ends of the handle/shovel}.
Comments are closed.