Which readers own a transceiver.............

[AHM]

Here's the deal.................

Riv: I am going skiing off the backside of Alp d'Huez (the grand Sabat). It's all off piste. I need to drive to get to Alp d"Huez. I'll maintain that statistically my greatest chance of being injured is while driving to and from the ski area than out on the hill. A whole lot of skiers were off piste last year, but the avi deaths in the US were pretty small (4 total in CO alone, although I think 49 in France--a bit more cowboy approach to the sport, but fully recognizing the dangers). A whole lot of skiers get in their cars each day (whether skiing or not), not really taking into account that they stand a much greater chance to be injured while driving in their car than skiing. That is the point. But we really do not think about the dangers in our car. Many are on cell phones, doing a variety of tasks besides driving, driving high performance cars quite fast--get on the interstate, people are rippin' . But no one thinks its very dangerous.

But gee, mention avalanche conditions or not skiing with a helmet and the board goes nuts, all the while being at a far greater statistical risk of getting hurt while being in the car. Guided off piste opps have an excellent safety record and are regularly bringing skiers in and out of avalanche terrain. Training and education is what keeps it as safe as it can be.

What I have maintained from the get go, is if you are gonna go, be prepared take the training etc. Believe whatever you want, take whatever safety training you want. For me, I take a transceiver, probe and shovel with me when I am going to be in avalanche terrain. I consider it managed risk, just like the rest do when they get in the car.

 

[riverc0il]

like i said before, you are miss using statistics. the statistics that compare how likely you are to be killed doing one activity compared to another does not limit population pools, it compares death to total population and is misleading statistics when used out of context. i would maintain that within the avi prone BC skier pool only, car deaths and avi deaths are likely fairly similar. this is within the avi prone BC skier pool only, keep in mind. and for what it is worth, my own record of serious injuries is skiing=1, car accident=0. because i engage in risky skiing behavior, i am definitely far more likely to be injured on the slopes than driving to the slopes, especially considering the area my commute takes place in. that is another aspect of that stat that is misleading, it is an all emcompassing average that includes lots of city and drink driving deaths. skier commutes usually happen during early morning and early evening on the weekends... periods of light traffic and low drunk driving danger. etc. the more likely to die driving than...... stat comparison simply is not a valid statistical comparison, imo, and is misused to construe risk evaluation.

What I have maintained from the get go, is if you are gonna go, be prepared take the training etc.

indeed. preparation and studying up are essential for any backcountry travel, especially in avi prone areas.

 

[sledhaulingmedic]

Putting it all in perspective

This past Spring, I left work to head North for some fun in the orn and sun and a workmate, noting the helmet on my pack commented: "I see you have the helmet, try not to smack into too many trees!".

My response was paraphrased from a HAZMAT text: "My helmet is my last line of defense, not my first." (The orginal quote dealt with chemical protective clothing and how you should not solely depend on it to keep you safe, but rather by minimizing exposure to the hazardous material through appropriate staregy and tactics.)

Long and the short:

A seat belt and airbags are not your first line of defense: paying attention, driving defensively are.

A helmet, release bindings, goggles, etc, aren't primary tools of risk management, good judegment, staying alert, skiing within your ability are.

Going into avi terrain? Avi probe, beacon, shovel, etc. are important, but proper information, risk assessment, route selection and decison making, as well as rescue skills AS A GROUP are what are really going to detirmine whether or not you're more likely to come back OK.

RECCO only helps if someone knows to look for you.

A tranceiver only helps if someone knows to look for you.

A radio will only do you good if:
a. You can talk into it and give your location
b. Someone can hear you

Finally, any discussion of risk management needs to include the "time" variable:

A minor knee injury that prevents return to civilization under your own power can easily become life-threatening if it requires an unplanned night in the woods in sub-freezing temps.

A witnessed shallow burial in an avi, with the appropriate equipment, may have a happy, albeit "enlightenlng" ending. Brain cells die after 4 minutes without oxygen. Time is not on your side. If you want to get out, you can't wait for help to come, you have to bring help with you.

To summarize:

Safety and risk management are all about the choices "you" (that's "you", Plural, as in more than one of you) make. Equipment is not a substitute for knowledge. Knowledge might sugest that certain equipment is a good idea. FInally, waiting for help sucks.

 

[Hawkshot99]

If you think that you might be a rope ducker in avie terrain, it would be very beneficial to buy a transceiver, take an avalanche course and make sure you are ready if something happens

Yes this is good, but to add to that, make sure your ski buddies are prepared and have knowledge of everything needed. Because when you are buried, all your seaching skills mean nothing, your life is dependent on them.