Mt Bachelor Avalanche

That sounds like a standard corporate approach which implies that all the external communication is done through the authorized personel and punishes every attempt of getting the info out through the other sources. I heard about the avalanche today from the skiers, nothing was on the conditions page...

Mt Hood Meadows was much more open last year about the avalanche in Heather canyon. They posted the pictures and description of the event on their blog page...

I will be heading out to Bend/Bachelor in a couple of weeks. This is too bad. The more information on mountain/snow safety available to the public, the better. Most people on this site are well informed on the risks of snowsports, and understand that just because you are inbounds, doesn't mean you are still not responsible for yourself. I think the more information of this kind is put out, the more people will be educated in the actual dangers of this sport, and they are not invunerable while skiing inbounds. I also think the resorts try to promote this "100% safe" feeling to the ignorant crowd, and keep such information private is a way of doing it.

And maybe I am just rambling... but that could be the New Year's Eve drinks already in me :)

Thanks Newfy for exposing their non-information. Just in teen male rescued on NW terr. last night. No mention of that on Facebook.

Any info relative and true about Mt.B is posted on my facebook for other skiers to see.

I remember editing the other thread that the ski area requested you to delete, and felt important information that was valuable to the skiing public was lost as a result.  Ski patrol has routinely been prohibited from discussing any official activity, from injury and rescue to avalanche activity.  I recall a Jackson Hole patroller being fired for discussing an avalanche a couple years ago.  No question that a different standard is applied to resort employees and patrol.  There is nothing the resort can (or should) do when a member of the public posts something, but they act very strongly to prohibit any information being released from any person with a relationship to the resort.  Seems to be SOP.

This sounds like typical POWDR Corp. stuff.  I know the current Mt. Bachelor president from his days at Killington prior to taking the Mt.Bacheor job.  Always thought he was a pretty decent guy, but the lawyers seem to run everything these days. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimH 

...the lawyers seem to run everything these days. 

Anything plaintiffs attorneys can seize out of context and use to wrong money out of something, they will.  So, leaving PR concerns aside, it's reasonable to want to control any info at all that gets put out by any resort employees.

Aside from that, inbounds slides are a worry mainly to patrollers.  They are a big story when a member of the public gets caught inbounds, but overall just not a very big risk.  It's not that different from surfers and sharks.  I'd take the bet that skiing or riding inbounds at the end of a big cycle is still much safer, all risks including mildly elevated slide risk being considered, than driving to Mallville Junction for more beer at the end of the day.

And, like surfers and sharks, publicizing a slide doesn't really do anything to educate, as opposed to sensationalize, about a very small risk to begin with.  The information on how to reduce an already minimal exposure to inbounds slide risk is already out there, and in fact for the internet savvy pretty much free.   

That said, I do know how frustrating it can be to feel muzzled by corporate policies, or be met with knowing shrugs by employees.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CTKook 

Anything plaintiffs attorneys can seize out of context and use to wrong money out of something, they will.

Heh, good Freudian typo.

Newfy,

The ironic thing is that the PR department couldn't even proof read their press release.

Glad to know they are on top of it.

Mike 

Quote:

Originally Posted by CTKook 

 

And, like surfers and sharks, publicizing a slide doesn't really do anything to educate, as opposed to sensationalize, about a very small risk to begin with.  The information on how to reduce an already minimal exposure to inbounds slide risk is already out there, and in fact for the internet savvy pretty much free.   

 

That said, I do know how frustrating it can be to feel muzzled by corporate policies, or be met with knowing shrugs by employees.

Somehow I feel like this is the proper indicator for all that 

Here is the example of how it should be done and I believe many people appreciated the information and visuals:

http://www.skihood.com/Community-and-News/Meadows-Blog/Posts/2010/01/Anatomy-of-an-Avalanche

I was at Bachelor on Wed. when the slide apparently happened.  At the top of Skyliner on the whiteboard in the lifthouse it said that Summit crossover was closed with the word slide next to it.  I assumed there had been a little slough that covered the area.  I couldn't really see any trace of the slide in that area today.

Quote:

Originally Posted by VladL 

Quote:

Originally Posted by CTKook 

 

And, like surfers and sharks, publicizing a slide doesn't really do anything to educate, as opposed to sensationalize, about a very small risk to begin with.  The information on how to reduce an already minimal exposure to inbounds slide risk is already out there, and in fact for the internet savvy pretty much free.   

 

That said, I do know how frustrating it can be to feel muzzled by corporate policies, or be met with knowing shrugs by employees.

Somehow I feel like this is the proper indicator for all that 

 

Here is the example of how it should be done and I believe many people appreciated the information and visuals:

 

http://www.skihood.com/Community-and-News/Meadows-Blog/Posts/2010/01/Anatomy-of-an-Avalanche

 

 

It's a cool report and article, but so what.  It could be an article about rockfall, rattlesnake bites, clean-up sets, or for that matter shark attacks.  Good article, though.  The good visuals also do add to storytelling value.

Also given the facts on where that slide originated and the fact no one was caught, the legal aspect was easier for them than in some other cases. 

well - what exactly happened at Heather last yr?  (I ski a day or two at Hood every year, am going back end of January, and usually do Heather Canyon early in the dat weather/visibility permitting) 

Quote:

Originally Posted by CTKook 

It's a cool report and article, but so what.  It could be an article about rockfall, rattlesnake bites, clean-up sets, or for that matter shark attacks.  Good article, though.  The good visuals also do add to storytelling value.

 

Also given the facts on where that slide originated and the fact no one was caught, the legal aspect was easier for them than in some other cases. 

What did I miss? This is not an article with artist's pictures. The page shows actual location with actual description of the event and clearly explains what and when happened, what could have been the consequences and what are the risks of going down to Heather and what all the patrol's effort to reduce risk equal to if you factoring in all the Nature's variables.

If you are not skiing MHM and Heather than it's just a nice article. When you spend every weekend there and you and your kids are going there it is whole lot of different story. I was in Heather week after the event and was impressed by how the slope maintenance guys managed to clean the debris and make it skiable. the size of these ice boulders. I admit - MHM was lucky that the slide happened ~7PM and no one was caught in it but I know for sure they wouldn't hide anything. MHM management in general was pretty open about all the issues happening on their premisses, they didn't hide last year fatalities and were prompt to report them on their blog page. Respect to them for keeping things honest and that's what matters.

Legal disclaimer: I'm just a humble MHM pass holder, not associated with or employed by the resort.

Unfortunately, the vast majority of skiers and boarders are blissfully ignorant and only read headlines. believe rumors and word of mouth from others who are not fully informed or understanding. If an area+avalanche is a headline, despite the details that don't get read nor understood, it equals danger, don't go there and loss of income.....and liability.

During a recent storm, a not yet opened run apparently slid to the ground, it was not mentioned anywhere and we skied it a couple days later. A few weeks ago, a lift went on the fritz and riders were stuck for 1 1/2 hours. It was then nonoperational for several days. No mention anywhere obvious. Maybe for the greater good and not creating over blown fears just before the Christmas break?

On one hand I really would like to continue to believe in and to live in Vladl's and Newfy's world of full disclosure, but unfortunately, I think CTKook is brutally accurate......and it's disappointing as the SOP.

thanks VladL- - - I missed that link.   I'll be skiing MHM 2/4 .... hopefully weather will be as good as those pictures....sans avalanche.

Inbound avalanches and cornice fractures do not seem a great risk because people regularly avoid dangerous areas based on their personal experience. When people ignore the danger, the risk becomes pretty high indeed. Patrol cannot bomb or cut every dangerous area on the mountain, there are just too many avalanche zones to manage every one. So ski smart, be responsible for yourself are good ideas. Know that even a sluff can do you in.

I do support the idea that patrol are not allowed to discuss avalanche releases, natural and skier releases. They are too busy and would be hassled endlessly by curious skiers. If a skier educates himself well, he can visit the fringe of the site and see what happened. I don't think a cover-up is ever necessary, and Squaw never does that, but patrol need to be insulated from all that.

When the Sunrise chair was first installed at Bachelor it was named "Avalanche", and one run was also, it was either Roostertail or Marshmall from what I can remember.

PS-how many posts does one need to add pictures?

Thanks, I was ready to start digging thru boxes in the attic to find an old map.

Quote:

Originally Posted by slider 

I can understand why resorts do not want their staff posting details of an event.... Just in case it's mentioned more could have been done etc..... It could open up all sorts of liability issues.

However, the resorts themselves do need to start being more honest and open....

Lake Louise does a good job with this : http://lakelouiselowdown.wordpress.com/

Suspension was probably appropriate if you wrote about a patient's injuries, as you did here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by newfydog 
This is a sore subject with me.  A few years ago I was in on the patrol at a resort when an avalanche bowled over nine people.  I may well have saved a little boy by scooping him up and carrying him while we were bashed and tumbled down the mountain.  I took his mother off that hiil in a toboggan, on oxygen with a fractured sternum.  When I wrote of my experience on Epicski, I was suspended from the patrol, even though there was nothing in my post which was not true, and and all but a few details had been released by the management.

 

I didn't know that there was any place on Bachelor steep enough to slide. I skied there a lot during the winter if '92-'93, which if anyone remembers was huge. There were days that there was too much snow and not enough fall line to ski. Quality problem to have, but man that place is flat. 

thanks. good work on that. history repeats itself when it comes to avalanches.