8 Skiers dead after accidental Avalanche in California!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nature is harsh. You can prepare and have all the experience and training and equipment in the world but when it becomes man against natural forces - be it fire, water, cold, snow - nature is stronger.

But there is also an incredible amount of reward for spending time in nature and reaping the benefits of the beauty and adventure. Is there a risk - of course. But life has risk and you only live one life. We can all die tomorrow. For those of us who aren't risk adverse, you accept the risk of nature and adventure just like you do every time you get in your car.

Growing up without your mom because she wasn't risk adverse and loved nature? I doubt most kids think that's worth the cost.

Its a fluke accident. That is why it made the news. Women and yes mothers (and fathers) go into the backcountry and the ocean and other places that have risk - all the time and 99.999% of the time, it all goes well. Driving a car is still more dangerous.

Not a fluke accident at all.

Will wait to hear from the survivors about their decision making. I don't believe that the guides, the tour company, and the women were completely indifferent to all the warnings, intentionally ignored all protocols, and deliberately put themselves directly into harms way.

They set out on a ski trip on Sunday with warnings of extreme weather approaching. That was a stupid decision.

New poster here. I can imagine they felt pressure to participate. Group think is the most dangerous dynamic when assessing risk. They booked this 9 months ago apparently. I imagine they were excited, spent much energy and time planning it out, and I assume a few of them were pushing harder for it, and the others fell in line and agreed. This happens in all groups.

The biggest lesson is if you feel there’s a risk, bow out - even if it means disappointing your group or losing big money.

I guarantee that time-driven anxiety played a huge role in this poor decision making.

These are wealthy women who are executives, busy moms, and advanced outdoorsmen. They planned this long in advance and likely couldn’t accommodate rescheduling. Then they decide to leave (rather than wait it out an extra day or two) likely because people have to get back to their real life responsibilities.

From everything I read, the guide took them on an alternative route back to the parking lot that was less avalanche prone than the normal route. But they still had to pass at the bottom of a few couloirs and were too close to the run out. With the poor weather, they may not have seen how close they were to the couloir run out. It was just dumb bad luck - the couloir avalanched as they were passing by it. 10 minutes before or later they would’ve been fine.

I highly doubt this was just some bad coincidence. They absolutely could have triggered the avalanche

I assume they were 100 meters spaced to not trigger an avalanche, and to be able to see one start and abort the traverse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is tragic.

I'll never be faced with this dilemma, because although I love to ski, backcountry skiing is well beyond my ability level. But, even if I were inclined to do so, stories like this would make me reconsider.

Same but I love watching videos of it. I *wish* I could do it. It looks amazing - like flying. I think it would be addictive.

I'm interested in hearing what drove their decisions. Someone upthread said they ran out of food. Maybe knowing they'd be stuck for days in the cabins with no food drove them to try to get out.

The guides and hut bookings dictate the schedule. You have to move on as the next group arrives at the hut. They are fully booked with a new group heading out every day. The cabins are small and people are paying a lot of money for these trips.

I have done backcountry hikes and there is zero flexibility in the schedule. One time when we couldn't move on due to a crazy rain storm and a flooded river, we had no accommodation as the next group had already moved in. We had to sleep outside and we had equipment but the temperature had dropped much lower than expected and it was really, really cold and wet.

It's not rocket science that people die when bad decisions are made. For example when hiking Mt Everest and getting caught in a storm. Yet it happens year after year. But you don't need to climb Mt Everest or ski in the back country.

+1 Too many posters trying to defend stupidity and hubris as being brave and adventuresome.

Some of us are neither defending it, nor relishing it and milking the moment to feel superior. It’s called being a decent human being.

Commenting on the obvious does not equate to relishing anyone's deaths and the sadness for the precious children who will grow up without their moms.

Their foolish, selfish, heedless moms! Who had messed up priorities and values! Unlike US!

I mean, we’re excited! The topic of this thread is “8 Skiers dead after accidental Avalanche in California!”

!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is tragic.

I'll never be faced with this dilemma, because although I love to ski, backcountry skiing is well beyond my ability level. But, even if I were inclined to do so, stories like this would make me reconsider.

Same but I love watching videos of it. I *wish* I could do it. It looks amazing - like flying. I think it would be addictive.

I'm interested in hearing what drove their decisions. Someone upthread said they ran out of food. Maybe knowing they'd be stuck for days in the cabins with no food drove them to try to get out.

The guides and hut bookings dictate the schedule. You have to move on as the next group arrives at the hut. They are fully booked with a new group heading out every day. The cabins are small and people are paying a lot of money for these trips.

I have done backcountry hikes and there is zero flexibility in the schedule. One time when we couldn't move on due to a crazy rain storm and a flooded river, we had no accommodation as the next group had already moved in. We had to sleep outside and we had equipment but the temperature had dropped much lower than expected and it was really, really cold and wet.

There is no evidence that another group moved into the huts. It was white out conditions with two more days of heavy storm predicted, so it's hard to imagine someone trying to get in. Also, Hwy 80 had been closed since Monday, so anyone from out of town wouldn't be getting in anyway. There was a very small window of slightly better (not great) weather on Tuesday morning, after heavy snow fall Monday night, which might have convinced the group it would be okay to leave. The group obviously assessed the risk to be relatively low. Otherwise they would at least have taken the path through Euer Valley.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is tragic.

I'll never be faced with this dilemma, because although I love to ski, backcountry skiing is well beyond my ability level. But, even if I were inclined to do so, stories like this would make me reconsider.

Same but I love watching videos of it. I *wish* I could do it. It looks amazing - like flying. I think it would be addictive.

I'm interested in hearing what drove their decisions. Someone upthread said they ran out of food. Maybe knowing they'd be stuck for days in the cabins with no food drove them to try to get out.

The guides and hut bookings dictate the schedule. You have to move on as the next group arrives at the hut. They are fully booked with a new group heading out every day. The cabins are small and people are paying a lot of money for these trips.

I have done backcountry hikes and there is zero flexibility in the schedule. One time when we couldn't move on due to a crazy rain storm and a flooded river, we had no accommodation as the next group had already moved in. We had to sleep outside and we had equipment but the temperature had dropped much lower than expected and it was really, really cold and wet.

It's not rocket science that people die when bad decisions are made. For example when hiking Mt Everest and getting caught in a storm. Yet it happens year after year. But you don't need to climb Mt Everest or ski in the back country.

+1 Too many posters trying to defend stupidity and hubris as being brave and adventuresome.

Some of us are neither defending it, nor relishing it and milking the moment to feel superior. It’s called being a decent human being.

Hogwash. The more we talk about it the more people might reconsider thrill seeking for the sake of thrill seeking. They can't say they didn't know there weren't risks, or worse, avalanches are unknown and completely unpredictable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But people keep insisting climate change isn’t real. Despite the avalanche of evidence. Pun intended.

All I know is we never had avalanches like this 20 years ago.

Absolutely not true. You're obviously not someone that skis out west much less does helicopter back country skiing.

Grew up skiing out west. Know people killed in their car from an avalanche 20+ years ago. Daily avalanche control is a thing that's been done for decades. Choosing not to ski during HIGH avalanche warnings is also a thing.

Avalanches were basically unheard of until the early 2000’s. And when I say unheard of, I literally mean “no one had ever seen one, ever”. Now they’re commonplace.

Nope, you're wrong. I grew up in Washington State in the 90s. We talked about avalanche danger regularly (we skied, my dad climbed Rainier and other local to Washington mountains) and there were warnings then.

Not only do I remember talking about them, there was a Lake Tahoe Avalanche that killed 7 people in 1982. Which has been in the news this week because it was close to where this weeks Lake Tahoe avalanche was.

I grew up literally in the shadow of Mt Hood in the 70’s-80’s. We had never heard of an avalanche until about 2004. We didn’t even know what the word meant. This is climate change.

You didn’t know what the word avalanche meant until 2004? You must be super dumb and the schools you went to failed you.

I guess that PP must have been super confused about the 1978 movie "Avalanche" with Rock Hudson. Their tiny little hamlet, cut off from the rest of the US, didn't know about this word until 2004 for some reason.

DP


The point is that there were never avalanches before the 2000’s, and they’re happening all the time now because of climate change.


Are you dense, or just a maga climate denier? Which is it?

NP. Neither MAGA nor a climate denier but old enough to know there were avalanches pre 2000s.

Don't you have a LFL you need to vandalize?

What else do you think is brand new since 2000? Were you born in 1999 and think nothing happened before then?

I know what’s different!

Rich moms who take the newly opened backcountry Tahoe ski route trip with costly paid guides, the weekdays after Ski Week.

Read the SF chronical for real info. Not DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is tragic.

I'll never be faced with this dilemma, because although I love to ski, backcountry skiing is well beyond my ability level. But, even if I were inclined to do so, stories like this would make me reconsider.

Same but I love watching videos of it. I *wish* I could do it. It looks amazing - like flying. I think it would be addictive.

I'm interested in hearing what drove their decisions. Someone upthread said they ran out of food. Maybe knowing they'd be stuck for days in the cabins with no food drove them to try to get out.

The guides and hut bookings dictate the schedule. You have to move on as the next group arrives at the hut. They are fully booked with a new group heading out every day. The cabins are small and people are paying a lot of money for these trips.

I have done backcountry hikes and there is zero flexibility in the schedule. One time when we couldn't move on due to a crazy rain storm and a flooded river, we had no accommodation as the next group had already moved in. We had to sleep outside and we had equipment but the temperature had dropped much lower than expected and it was really, really cold and wet.

It's not rocket science that people die when bad decisions are made. For example when hiking Mt Everest and getting caught in a storm. Yet it happens year after year. But you don't need to climb Mt Everest or ski in the back country.

+1 Too many posters trying to defend stupidity and hubris as being brave and adventuresome.

Some of us are neither defending it, nor relishing it and milking the moment to feel superior. It’s called being a decent human being.

Commenting on the obvious does not equate to relishing anyone's deaths and the sadness for the precious children who will grow up without their moms.

Their foolish, selfish, heedless moms! Who had messed up priorities and values! Unlike US!

I mean, we’re excited! The topic of this thread is “8 Skiers dead after accidental Avalanche in California!”

!

They're.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nature is harsh. You can prepare and have all the experience and training and equipment in the world but when it becomes man against natural forces - be it fire, water, cold, snow - nature is stronger.

But there is also an incredible amount of reward for spending time in nature and reaping the benefits of the beauty and adventure. Is there a risk - of course. But life has risk and you only live one life. We can all die tomorrow. For those of us who aren't risk adverse, you accept the risk of nature and adventure just like you do every time you get in your car.

Growing up without your mom because she wasn't risk adverse and loved nature? I doubt most kids think that's worth the cost.

Its a fluke accident. That is why it made the news. Women and yes mothers (and fathers) go into the backcountry and the ocean and other places that have risk - all the time and 99.999% of the time, it all goes well. Driving a car is still more dangerous.

Not a fluke accident at all.

Will wait to hear from the survivors about their decision making. I don't believe that the guides, the tour company, and the women were completely indifferent to all the warnings, intentionally ignored all protocols, and deliberately put themselves directly into harms way.

They set out on a ski trip on Sunday with warnings of extreme weather approaching. That was a stupid decision.

New poster here. I can imagine they felt pressure to participate. Group think is the most dangerous dynamic when assessing risk. They booked this 9 months ago apparently. I imagine they were excited, spent much energy and time planning it out, and I assume a few of them were pushing harder for it, and the others fell in line and agreed. This happens in all groups.

The biggest lesson is if you feel there’s a risk, bow out - even if it means disappointing your group or losing big money.

I guarantee that time-driven anxiety played a huge role in this poor decision making.

These are wealthy women who are executives, busy moms, and advanced outdoorsmen. They planned this long in advance and likely couldn’t accommodate rescheduling. Then they decide to leave (rather than wait it out an extra day or two) likely because people have to get back to their real life responsibilities.

From everything I read, the guide took them on an alternative route back to the parking lot that was less avalanche prone than the normal route. But they still had to pass at the bottom of a few couloirs and were too close to the run out. With the poor weather, they may not have seen how close they were to the couloir run out. It was just dumb bad luck - the couloir avalanched as they were passing by it. 10 minutes before or later they would’ve been fine.

Yup. Frog Lake huts are booked into next year. If they were gonna go it was now or never.

Oh, well.

No one had the balls to say it nor do it. Oh well indeed.

Even normal Tahoe homes needed to be dug out this week, let alone back country huts and super deep skiing (ie risky).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, tragedy, exclamation point!

We make better decisions and are better people. Smug smile.

FAFO, the tension builds…

They’re rich, white, privileged women and bad things happened to them…yes, yes, right there, oh yeahhhhh!

It's not being smug to realize it actually doesn't take much of a brain to review weather reports before traveling and think perhaps best to not go back country skiing when the probability of major snowfall and avalanches have been predicted for a week in an area known for heavy, dangerous snowfalls. Even more important to use sound judgment when you have young children.

Unf the whole situation is congruent with that high death rate Everest year in 1998 or wherever.

The cyclone storm was on radar for coming and a bunch of people decided to still go for it during a short window. Some refused to turn back at the magic 2pm afternoon time to make it down safely in a normal day and got caught so high up no help could come until next day light.

One group aborted and didn’t try to summit. They all lived.

Half of another group went quickly, made it down.

Another group coddled some slow people and half got caught near the summit, below the summit, and that texas guy somehow made it to a small high up base camp.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, tragedy, exclamation point!

We make better decisions and are better people. Smug smile.

FAFO, the tension builds…

They’re rich, white, privileged women and bad things happened to them…yes, yes, right there, oh yeahhhhh!

It's not being smug to realize it actually doesn't take much of a brain to review weather reports before traveling and think perhaps best to not go back country skiing when the probability of major snowfall and avalanches have been predicted for a week in an area known for heavy, dangerous snowfalls. Even more important to use sound judgment when you have young children.

Unf the whole situation is congruent with that high death rate Everest year in 1998 or wherever.

The cyclone storm was on radar for coming and a bunch of people decided to still go for it during a short window. Some refused to turn back at the magic 2pm afternoon time to make it down safely in a normal day and got caught so high up no help could come until next day light.

One group aborted and didn’t try to summit. They all lived.

Half of another group went quickly, made it down.

Another group coddled some slow people and half got caught near the summit, below the summit, and that texas guy somehow made it to a small high up base camp.

I believe the Texas guy was a surgeon who lost both his hands due to frost bite. A costly error.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is tragic.

I'll never be faced with this dilemma, because although I love to ski, backcountry skiing is well beyond my ability level. But, even if I were inclined to do so, stories like this would make me reconsider.

Same but I love watching videos of it. I *wish* I could do it. It looks amazing - like flying. I think it would be addictive.

I'm interested in hearing what drove their decisions. Someone upthread said they ran out of food. Maybe knowing they'd be stuck for days in the cabins with no food drove them to try to get out.

Could be.

They should make facts like that known before everyone imagines some Animal Farm situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is tragic.

I'll never be faced with this dilemma, because although I love to ski, backcountry skiing is well beyond my ability level. But, even if I were inclined to do so, stories like this would make me reconsider.

Same but I love watching videos of it. I *wish* I could do it. It looks amazing - like flying. I think it would be addictive.

I'm interested in hearing what drove their decisions. Someone upthread said they ran out of food. Maybe knowing they'd be stuck for days in the cabins with no food drove them to try to get out.

The guides and hut bookings dictate the schedule. You have to move on as the next group arrives at the hut. They are fully booked with a new group heading out every day. The cabins are small and people are paying a lot of money for these trips.

I have done backcountry hikes and there is zero flexibility in the schedule. One time when we couldn't move on due to a crazy rain storm and a flooded river, we had no accommodation as the next group had already moved in. We had to sleep outside and we had equipment but the temperature had dropped much lower than expected and it was really, really cold and wet.

So weird that when that happened and inclement weather means doubling up, all these like minded Extreme Sports folks don’t let everyone stay inside the damn hut overnight.

It’s out of everyone’s control. Double up the hut.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is tragic.

I'll never be faced with this dilemma, because although I love to ski, backcountry skiing is well beyond my ability level. But, even if I were inclined to do so, stories like this would make me reconsider.

Same but I love watching videos of it. I *wish* I could do it. It looks amazing - like flying. I think it would be addictive.

I'm interested in hearing what drove their decisions. Someone upthread said they ran out of food. Maybe knowing they'd be stuck for days in the cabins with no food drove them to try to get out.

It was the scheduled end of their trip. And no one goes into the backcountry without a little bit of extra food (at least some protein bars), so it's extremely unlikely they were in a desperate situation. All the known facts suggest that they just didn't view the situation as higher than typical risk. Even the fact that they were bunched together when the avalanche occurred. If they did, there are things they would have done differently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nature is harsh. You can prepare and have all the experience and training and equipment in the world but when it becomes man against natural forces - be it fire, water, cold, snow - nature is stronger.

But there is also an incredible amount of reward for spending time in nature and reaping the benefits of the beauty and adventure. Is there a risk - of course. But life has risk and you only live one life. We can all die tomorrow. For those of us who aren't risk adverse, you accept the risk of nature and adventure just like you do every time you get in your car.

Growing up without your mom because she wasn't risk adverse and loved nature? I doubt most kids think that's worth the cost.

Its a fluke accident. That is why it made the news. Women and yes mothers (and fathers) go into the backcountry and the ocean and other places that have risk - all the time and 99.999% of the time, it all goes well. Driving a car is still more dangerous.

Not a fluke accident at all.

Will wait to hear from the survivors about their decision making. I don't believe that the guides, the tour company, and the women were completely indifferent to all the warnings, intentionally ignored all protocols, and deliberately put themselves directly into harms way.

They set out on a ski trip on Sunday with warnings of extreme weather approaching. That was a stupid decision.

New poster here. I can imagine they felt pressure to participate. Group think is the most dangerous dynamic when assessing risk. They booked this 9 months ago apparently. I imagine they were excited, spent much energy and time planning it out, and I assume a few of them were pushing harder for it, and the others fell in line and agreed. This happens in all groups.

The biggest lesson is if you feel there’s a risk, bow out - even if it means disappointing your group or losing big money.

I guarantee that time-driven anxiety played a huge role in this poor decision making.

These are wealthy women who are executives, busy moms, and advanced outdoorsmen. They planned this long in advance and likely couldn’t accommodate rescheduling. Then they decide to leave (rather than wait it out an extra day or two) likely because people have to get back to their real life responsibilities.

From everything I read, the guide took them on an alternative route back to the parking lot that was less avalanche prone than the normal route. But they still had to pass at the bottom of a few couloirs and were too close to the run out. With the poor weather, they may not have seen how close they were to the couloir run out. It was just dumb bad luck - the couloir avalanched as they were passing by it. 10 minutes before or later they would’ve been fine.

I highly doubt this was just some bad coincidence. They absolutely could have triggered the avalanche

I assume they were 100 meters spaced to not trigger an avalanche, and to be able to see one start and abort the traverse.

I think they were all together actually. They were all found together, except for the one who is still missing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, tragedy, exclamation point!

We make better decisions and are better people. Smug smile.

FAFO, the tension builds…

They’re rich, white, privileged women and bad things happened to them…yes, yes, right there, oh yeahhhhh!

It's not being smug to realize it actually doesn't take much of a brain to review weather reports before traveling and think perhaps best to not go back country skiing when the probability of major snowfall and avalanches have been predicted for a week in an area known for heavy, dangerous snowfalls. Even more important to use sound judgment when you have young children.

Unf the whole situation is congruent with that high death rate Everest year in 1998 or wherever.

The cyclone storm was on radar for coming and a bunch of people decided to still go for it during a short window. Some refused to turn back at the magic 2pm afternoon time to make it down safely in a normal day and got caught so high up no help could come until next day light.

One group aborted and didn’t try to summit. They all lived.

Half of another group went quickly, made it down.

Another group coddled some slow people and half got caught near the summit, below the summit, and that texas guy somehow made it to a small high up base camp.

I believe the Texas guy was a surgeon who lost both his hands due to frost bite. A costly error.

^ Responding my myself b/c I wanted to get it right. He was a pathologist who lost 1 hand and fingers from the other. But the interesting thing about him is after this disaster he turned his life around and no longer sought out extreme adventures. He instead prioritized his family and fixed broken relationships. That is the part that normal people can't relate to. These people actually do have messed up priorities and different values but it takes a near death experience for them to re-evaluate things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is tragic.

I'll never be faced with this dilemma, because although I love to ski, backcountry skiing is well beyond my ability level. But, even if I were inclined to do so, stories like this would make me reconsider.

Same but I love watching videos of it. I *wish* I could do it. It looks amazing - like flying. I think it would be addictive.

I'm interested in hearing what drove their decisions. Someone upthread said they ran out of food. Maybe knowing they'd be stuck for days in the cabins with no food drove them to try to get out.

The guides and hut bookings dictate the schedule. You have to move on as the next group arrives at the hut. They are fully booked with a new group heading out every day. The cabins are small and people are paying a lot of money for these trips.

I have done backcountry hikes and there is zero flexibility in the schedule. One time when we couldn't move on due to a crazy rain storm and a flooded river, we had no accommodation as the next group had already moved in. We had to sleep outside and we had equipment but the temperature had dropped much lower than expected and it was really, really cold and wet.

It's not rocket science that people die when bad decisions are made. For example when hiking Mt Everest and getting caught in a storm. Yet it happens year after year. But you don't need to climb Mt Everest or ski in the back country.

+1 Too many posters trying to defend stupidity and hubris as being brave and adventuresome.

Some of us are neither defending it, nor relishing it and milking the moment to feel superior. It’s called being a decent human being.

Hogwash. The more we talk about it the more people might reconsider thrill seeking for the sake of thrill seeking. They can't say they didn't know there weren't risks, or worse, avalanches are unknown and completely unpredictable.

However, the CONDITIONS for creating avalanches are predictable.

Heavy, high volume snow + craggy peaks & river valleys + sunny warmer day temps = moving supporting downhill snow (uphill avalanche starts) or cleaving off snow (downhill avalanche starts) = avalanche