Embedded Files
Ian Nicholson
How avalanche problems drive terrain selection
How avalanche problems drive terrain selection
Planning Observations to reduce uncertainty
Planning Observations to reduce uncertainty
Avalanche problems help provide specific context about the nature of the avalanche hazard. This characterization drives planning concepts and considerations about which observations you should expect to make in the field. While you should strive to have a large quiver of observation tools at your disposal in the event you encounter unexpected conditions; the majority of the time you should have a pretty good idea of what the avalanche problems are. Now in your planning, you need to think about how to look for and track the various avalanche problems in order to verify the forecast and target any uncertainty about the conditions. The Avalanche and Observations Reference (the A+O, introduced previously) highlights signs of unstable snow, relevant observations, tests, and considerations for each avalanche problem. While the A+O is hardly an exhaustive list, is a great starting point to help you figure out what you should be careful of and what you should be looking for during the planning stages and then executed on your trip.
Matching the observations to the avalanche problem
Matching the observations to the avalanche problem
An essential part of making observations is matching the correct observation or crucial signs of instability to the avalanche problem. If you mismatch the observation to the problem you will likely not get the whole picture about what is going on or worse you could miss it entirely. Where you take your observations from can be just as crucial as the observation we choose. Looking for wind slabs too far down from the ridge or searching for facets on a slope that sees too much sun can give us false positive results and be potentially dangerous. As a result, you need to continually gather information and NEVER trust your life to a single positive observation. You never know when you got a one-off result, had poor site selection, chose the wrong test or observation for the avalanche problem or poorly executed the observation. The CAA attributes poor craftsmanship to be the number one reasons recreational level backcountry travelers miss critical results.
A scientist’s approach to data collection
A scientist’s approach to data collection
When it comes to gathering information it’s important to approach observation gathering as a scientist would to validate a finding or solve a problem; more targeted and quality data points are better than fewer. Single data points don’t tell us much, and even two points barely establish a trend. It is certainty no something to gamble our life on.
Observations are like the pieces of a puzzle
Observations are like the pieces of a puzzle
It helps to think of observations like pieces of a puzzle and the picture in the puzzle is what is going on in the snowpack. Not all the pieces of this puzzle are the same size; some give us more information and some give us less. However, even if you have one of the bigger pieces you rarely can see all of what’s going on in the whole picture. Observations in the backcountry are the same way. Once there are enough pieces in place we start to see the picture more clearly and generally speaking the more pieces we have in place the easier it is to see a clear picture of what's going on. While we don’t want to spend the majority of our day in the backcountry gathering data, making a point to gather a number of targeted and timely observations to support or deny our terrain decisions based on the avalanche problem is essential to having a safe and successful trip.
Lastly, attempt to be as objective as possible. Avoid seeing what you want to see. Are you seeing what you’d thought you see? Or are you seeing something different? Do you still feel good about continuing with your plan? Look for clues to support or deny your hypothesis about what’d you thought you see,
Page updated
Report abuse