Pencil_Pusher Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 True enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter_Baer Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 (edited) All I'm saying is that there are two facts about the accident: 1. the NWAC indicated on 12/28 that skier-triggered avalanches on steep lee slopes below high ridges were probable and that those slopes offered the greatest risk that day. 2. a person in a Mountaineers party died in a skier-triggered avalanche the next day on a steep lee slope below a high ridge. Thus the question I raised initially: why did a group organized by a highly safety-oriented organization end up on a slope that the NWAC claimed would have the highest probability of avalanching on a day when the baseline risk was "considerable"? If safety takes priority over fun - an ethic the Mountaineers are notorious for demonstrating - why didn't the group decide to head to an area that would offer a lower (if not zero) known risk of avalanche? I think these are legitimate questions to ask, at least for anyone considering signing up for a future Mountaineers ski outing. I haven't offered or encouraged any speculation on what happened once they left the parking lot - as you said, we don't even have a full first-person account yet, and we know nothing about the group dynamics, what stability tests they did, etc. Those facts will be instructive when they come to light and may help answer these questions. Edited January 3, 2003 by Peter_Baer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.