|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|01-13-2009 02:58 AM|
Seriously? Its not like the goddamn helicopter flew in and landed on the side of the mountain to rescue them.
It flew over them and made sure they didnt go the wrong direction into very dangerous territory. Then they left...
You guys make it sound like they called in the damn national guard to fly from half way acros the country to rescue these guys with ropes off the side of a cliff.
What if those people HAD gone the wrong direction? No matter their experience, it sounds like it was pretty much sheer cliffs...sounds like a reasonable thing to do to check on them. I am sure if the people at grouse knew or were told who these people were and that they knew the way none of this would have happened, it sounds like the Senior management contact at Grouse that supposedly told these 4 it was ok is the one that failed here.
|01-13-2009 12:17 AM|
|mag⋅net⋅ism||Media spin is total bananas! I heard about this incident from my roommate who pointed me to a few CTV news online stories. I felt like these guys took a totally boneheaded, unnecessary risk. BUT after reading threads on the TGR forum and the North Shore Rescue blog and seeing the back-and-forth that ensued I feel much differently. It seems much more like they were being made an example of, as if these four riders became scapegoats and attention-getters. I don't like the idea of people who ruin it for the rest of us, and that goes for Grouse Mgmt too -- what the hell would have happened if they had tied up NSR resources with this total farce of a "rescue" and other people didn't get help they legitimately needed in the meantime?? Have we not already learned our lesson from the boy who cried wolf? The whole thing seems ridiculous, though it's easy to be a critic with my butt on a couch and my fingers on keys...|
|01-12-2009 02:19 PM|
i think that it had somedissagrees before and this was like an wendetta for the boys
|01-12-2009 02:08 PM|
|Flick Montana||If you look at it from the ski patrol perspective, if something HAD happened to those guys and the Grouse patrol hadn't done everything they could to stop them, someone probably would have sued. BS lawsuits make our country go round.|
|01-12-2009 01:26 PM|
I think these guys were douchebags for ducking the ropes and getting caught doing it and still going. Grouse has been very strict on the rules for a while now. I got my pass taken away for riding under the chair on a run that was closed because there were no lights. I had a high powered headlamp on and didn't see a problem with it. I was given a stern lecture about there not being patrol on the run and what if something happened to me etc. I know it wouldn't have been a problem at Seymour.
These guys knew the risks and say that they were prepared. If they went out of bounds, Who cares? they knew the risks and the backcountry is for all of us to enjoy. There was no need to waste RCMP resources on calling in the chopper right away and also getting S&R involved. They could have just waited half an hour max and catch them when they were returning to the ski area. and if they didn't return after a while, call S&R or make them spend the night in the bush and let them think about their actions.
That's just my .02
|01-09-2009 01:36 PM|
|killclimbz||In a snowcat or heli operation the reality is going to be different. I assume everyone has a beacon on, but the people with full gear (beacon, shovel, probe) are going to be the the guides/patrollers. They are the ones who know how to properly use the gear anyway. If I was for some reason using those services, I would bring my own basic gear and would just plan to assist if there was a rescue situation.|
|01-09-2009 12:49 PM|
Originally Posted by killclimbz View Post
|01-09-2009 11:58 AM|
|killclimbz||Anything less than 1 shovel, 1 probe, 1 beacon, per person is unacceptable...|
|01-09-2009 11:03 AM|
a) Grouse says they had 1 shovel. Group says they had 3. We'll say they had 2.
b) The group of 4 split into 2. We'll assume they had 1 shovel per mini-group.
c) The group says they are all experienced in the backcountry. They say there was no avalanche forecast for that specific area. They say they analyzed the conditions themselves, and deemed the risk to be at a moderate level.
d) The group ducks the boundary rope. Grouse says it was right under a CLOSED sign.
e) A ski patroller calls them back. Group says they didn't hear. Grouse says the group ignored the patroller.
f) Grouse calls in NSR and RCMP and whatnot.
g) The group make their split and complete their descent correctly and without incident.
h) Ski patrol apprehends them.
i) Grouse gets the media in on this apparently juicy story, possibly to make an example out of those evil rope-duckers (you may have your car in any color you wish, as long as it's black).
|01-09-2009 10:40 AM|
Wow, this is a lot more interesting than I thought it would be when I came in here. It sounds like they are implementing their new preventative rescue attempts.
I don't like the idea of sending in the cavalry for people who may not need rescued, but if the ski patrol didn't know who they were, how could they just sit back and say, "Yeah, they probably know what they're doing."
In light of all the recent avalanche-related deaths, I don't know that I disagree with what they did. It's so hard to get all the facts of the story right. The guys say they were experienced in backcountry, but they weren't properly equipped. All the knowledge in the world won't save you in an avalanche if you aren't equipped.
I don't know. I'm a little on the line with this one. I think it turned out poorly either way.
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|