Kumapix 0 Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Spud - I was wasting time at work and found your thread from last year about your trip to Chamonix, and in it you mentioned that the europeans don't put much stock in pits but you didn't elaborate. I'm sure you've gone into it more since then but I didn't have the energy to search for it. Can you sum it up for me? Link to post Share on other sites
marnix 0 Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 The times I went out with a guide in Europe I have never seen anyone dig a snowpit. Maybe they completely trust their gut feeling or patrolling reports? But probably the guides are lazy. Might be an explanation why there were some many fatal backcountry accidents this seasons in Europe. Link to post Share on other sites
sava 0 Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 Kumapix: don't know if Spud'll be answering your question (see off topic) Link to post Share on other sites
Kumapix 0 Posted March 25, 2006 Author Share Posted March 25, 2006 doh! Link to post Share on other sites
damian 0 Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 hey Kuma, here is a long response. Not all will be correct and not all is my opinion. It is just what I have seen, heard and felt in my time here. Besides on my level 1 course, I have never seen anyone dig a snow pit for profile analysis nor for a stability test. Nearly all my BC play has been in the Chamonix area, so please do not take my statement as representative of France or the Alps in general (although, it may well be quite accurate). The response I get from guides and instructors on this topic seems to reflect the following: 1. snow pits are great for teaching and observing layer weakness 2. snow pits tell you about layer weakness in one tiny spot across a huge area of BC travel 3. your focus and energy should go into other av probability indicators eg... 4. know the snow pack and history and area rather than relying on a few holes in the snow that give a false sense of security 5. if you want to constantly monitor the snow pack at certain elevations and aspects then digging and maintaining many pits across your area over the entire season is worthwhile. 6. If you are riding a big slope that drops from 3300m down to 2300m over about 1500m horizontal run. How many pits would you dig before deciding it was safe. Where would you dig them? 7. If your are touring over an 8 hour day of ascent and descent covering countless aspects of alpine terrain over perhaps 10kms, you are going to be constantly engaging av terrain. It is all around you, everywhere, so you minimise the risk by route selection, not by digging perhaps 20 pits over the entire tour. 8. If you arrive in a new area and are going to ride a slope then digging around is worthwhile to get a feel for the snow and climate history, but if you are already that short of av risk info then you are already in trouble. 9. I have heard of multiple instances and spoken with different guides who have all turned away from a slope after 3 hours hiking due to excessive whoomphing or unexpected wind slab and other indicators. 10. you hear of people digging to take a look at the layers, but almost never to conduct one of the many stability tests that are very popular in America. These are the themes I have picked up over the last 2 seasons around Chamonix. I agree with most of them, but still do not feel comfortable in my av risk assessment on the 'moderately high risk days' when most of us are riding powder. I was talking to a local boarder who is an absolute expert rider in very difficult off piste terrain. We were looking at lines across the valley over lunch. When I mentioned one line looked very prone to avalanche he said 'of course, if it is steep and it has snowed then it will slide. If you ride something steep, then it will slide'. His attitude was that everything worth riding was an av risk and after snow you can guarantee that some good slopes will slide, so you stay away or approach them differently. I also suspect that so many people take so many risks here that the av risk is not singled out as one particular dragon. It is just part of the whole array of dangers (falling over a cliff or down steep rocks, falling into a crevasse, getting hit by a serac fall, getting caught in an avalanche). This culture of risk only applies to some participants, not all. Other observations: Many times av risk is obviously high and there are obviously wide ranges of slopes that are affected. But other times the risk is only moderate and the side/back country is being ridden left right and centre and one guy rides one partially tracked bowl and crack, it slides under him. No one else set one off and no other aspects or elevations slide that day. His slide was 'only' 30m wide and 40m long, perhaps a touch bigger. But he is dead and everyone else had a great day riding powder that fell 3 days earlier. These are the incidents that scare me. Digging a pit wont help. Nothing will. It could happen to any one of us. Switzerland: The av centre at Davos maintains permanent snow pit sites and publishes profiles on the web and also at each major off piste resort. I have not seen this in France. I like scanning the profile chart before going up the cable car. But again, it is a profile for one spot and I get a false sense of security. I think that there are obvious routes and conditions where av risk is high and you are being irresponsible. The rest of the time I think it is pot luck so I am very cautious and always suspect the worst in a hope to turn luck my way a little. But there are so many variables, you will never notice them all. If there is new snow or recent wind or rapid warming then expect a slide. Something is going to slide somewhere. ps - besides in my AIARE level 1 course, I have never dug a snow pit, but have only recently ventured into the Alps unguided, and that was in spring when the entire pack was corn. Plus I nearly always ride where it is already well tracked (still no where near a safe bet). I am amazed at how many 'indicators' I notice... and then I am worried at how many I miss until after I have passed the risk that they revealed. My girlfriend and I enjoyed digging profiles and recording data quite a lot. It appeals to the scientist in both of us. And that is the problem: you feel like you have investigated something in a meaningful way when in fact you have investigated very little and certainly nothing significant enough to get a scientific sense of decision making. pps - for the sheer number of BC participant each day in places like Chamonix, I am amazed that there are not more accidents. The hit rate is actually statistically low considering how many people are out there and how frequently they are at it. Although I concede that France had a bad season for deaths, many of which where experienced people. Link to post Share on other sites
Kumapix 0 Posted April 29, 2006 Author Share Posted April 29, 2006 great post spud. You summed it up real well. I actually feel like my bc knowledge just went up a few points Link to post Share on other sites
Fattwins 0 Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 follow this rule and youll reduce your risk as well. 30 cms in 30 hours or less on more than 30degrees is pretty dangerous. Link to post Share on other sites
mattlucas 0 Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Quote: Originally posted by Fattwins: follow this rule and youll reduce your risk as well. 30 cms in 30 hours or less on more than 30degrees is pretty dangerous. The trick to this rule is that you have actually follow it Link to post Share on other sites
Fattwins 0 Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 yes you do. i still follow that rule though when heading into real bc just not ob Link to post Share on other sites
ibk6020 0 Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 "risk" well it says it all!! a risk is a risk! snowpits not the best indicator at all you have to know about "slope direction" "wind blown areas" "sun exposure" well i could go on for a while but it all adds up to risk!!! Link to post Share on other sites
ibk6020 0 Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 but you can always minimise the risk by being properly equipped and knowledgeable about bc riding and rescue! Link to post Share on other sites
damian 0 Posted September 5, 2006 Share Posted September 5, 2006 Quote: Originally posted by ibk6020: "risk" well it says it all!! a risk is a risk! snowpits not the best indicator at all you have to know about "slope direction" "wind blown areas" "sun exposure" well i could go on for a while but it all adds up to risk!!! gee, thanks man. that sorts it all out. "i could go on for a while" but that would be mean. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts