Copyright © 2010 Mountain Pro LLC.
Avalanche educators (myself included) regularly discuss the necessity for designing backcountry tour plans that contain “ideal, safer and safest” route options; and being truly content with each of the options should a given option prove unrealistic or in many cases too risky. Typically, the accompanying instructional aids look something like this:
IDEAL
SAFER
SAFEST
So when two (dare I say relatively accomplished) ski mountaineers, myself and IFMGA Mountain Guide Geoff Unger set out to plan an ambitious high mountain traverse outside of my backyard in Crested Butte, Colorado, one might assume that we would plan and implement a reasonable back-up plan. Having been all but enamored with the local ski terrain lately (see previous posts), I had devised a master plan and quickly roped in a partner for an ambitious, remote and inspiring traverse of some of the most rugged ski terrain in the area.
IDEAL
Despite an unfavorable weather forecast and some lingering upper elevation instability, Geoff and I, loaded down with enough food for a veritable backcountry feast and more technical ski mountaineering gear than usual, arrived at the trailhead in the wee hours. Knowing full well that the first leg of our tour was to include several miles of flat terrain before one of the worst locals’ tracks in the universe, we employed some non-traditional techniques: skinny 30mm width skins for extra glide on the flats, and ski crampons (the most under-utilized piece of backcountry gear) for our ascent of the skin track steepened by ego.
Excited about donning the ’scheisen!
Hours later it was very clear that our initial plan of Schuykill Ridge to Scarp Ridge via the heart of the Ruby Range was guarded by a slope that both of us saw as clearly impassable. Instead of skiing the glorious NE slopes of the ridge, our ambition got the better of us and we descended into the seldom visited in winter- oh-be-joyful creek to a steep ridgeline across the valley. Hours later, we confirmed that this route also- would not go. And so it was- option 3. The safest option. Only not in the couch potato kind of way, not even in the fun powder skiing consolation kind of way. Nope, this option was the robotic death slog. Over 2okm of it.
The realized ultimate reality tour. Option 3.So the megatour didn’t go. We were just simply unwilling to accept that amount of risk given the snow conditions for that terrain. After all that terrain and an unacceptable distance:turns ratio, my perspective has expanded to realize the unlimited potential of this area. Just a quick glance at the maps and the ski mountaineers’ imagination will run wild. With only fitness, motivation, and stability being the limiting factors.
photos: Mike Bromberg and Geoff Unger
Thanks to Geoff Unger for getting after it with me, I hope your legs are recovering well! Looking forward to getting out with you again.
MB
February 19, 2010 at 12:28 am
Well Mike, I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head here. We made the “safe decisions” and it turned out that we had even more horizontal distance than we would have had for the mega alpine traverse that we had planned. My legs are now recovering well, but I am reminded of all the flat skinning that we did in gloppy snow down oh-be-joyful. While I am sure that this is an excellent hike in the summer I would like to tentatively rename it oh-be-suckful in winter.
In past conversations about stability and decision making Mike and I have discussed our decisions in backcountry terrain matching our stability analysis. This may seem like a simple concept, but when you look at all the different factors that make up a decision when you are out in the terrain, the connection may become difficult to point out.
We simply reached a point on this tour where we had backed down from slopes that we felt were unsafe only to encounter more of the same on our Plan B. It may be more challenging to back down on your ’safer’ option’ after giving up the ideal, but this plays into the human factor that is getting a lot of press these days in avalanche circles.
The most glorious option is not always the safest way to go and if you find yourself faced with multiple decisions that send shivers down your spine… Then you find yourself slogging for well over 20 kilometers for only a few thousand measly vertical of powder skiing. Well I guess it could have been worse. Could have done 24K of dead flat skiing.
Thanks Mike.
February 19, 2010 at 9:26 am
Thanks for the commentary Geoff. As per our “rolling the dice” discussion during out tour, check out this link to Jamieson’s paper on “Simple calculations of avalanche risk for backcountry skiing” http://www.ucalgary.ca/asarc/RiskCalc_ISSW09_Jamieson
I’m off to Leadville for the weekend. Huge storm coming to central mountains this weekend!
March 2, 2010 at 1:11 pm
That is one of my favorite papers!! (maybe) My only complaint is that everyone knows that all water sports are terrifying….and much more terrifying than a casual day at Taylor Canyon on 5.9 R.