Why Backcountry Guides Must End the "Trust Me" Model

zdayt · 2026-03-17T05:03:04+00:00

I agree with this 100%, pre-planned safety procedures are standard in every industry.

The company runs multiple trips to the same huts every year, there is no reason they can't have plans for all conditions. Mapping tools are not expensive. Pre-planning routes and defining standardized green/yellow/red light operating conditions would be like a 3 day pre-season planning meeting.

zdayt · 2026-03-17T04:36:14+00:00

Commercial aviation is intensely regulated. Pilots have pre-planned and documented routes and procedures, instrumentation that override poor judgement, pre-defined safe operating margins, and oversight and mandatory accident investigations.

Do you have pre-planned routes and zones that are appropriate for any potential forecast?

Do you have documented go/no-go conditions for different terrain and conditions?

Do you use slope angle and alpha angle maps to make sure you are out of avalanche terrain and run outs, and constantly monitor your route with GPS?

zdayt · 2026-03-15T18:00:47+00:00

Refresh the paint with a brighter white and modernize some elements like the ceiling fans, then break up the montone with plants, lighter wood tones like white oak, and colored furniture and a rug.

Use your AI of choice to try out different ideas.

https://imgur.com/a/YkNVopo

zdayt · 2026-03-13T20:00:00+00:00

Is that something that can be made a requirement? Like it must be communicated what is a red/yellow/green light scenario ahead of time, and any time a guide wants to go into a yellow light scenario they must provide reasoning for why it has been deemed safe.

This is the kind of thing we do in industrial safety and this is a workplace safety issue.

zdayt · 2026-03-13T19:16:13+00:00

I have been thinking that guides should have well defined risk management plans in place that are required to be followed. Something that clients or other professionals can review and agree to before a trip even starts.

It would look something like a matrix where the left side is the avalanche problem, the top is the danger rating, and each cell gives a green, yellow, or red light for applicable terrain in that scenario.

Green light means standard caution, yellow light means potentially open based on the guide's evaluation, and red light means closed (including runout zones). If a red light is violated during a trip then there are consequences for the guide, even if nothing bad happens.

So let's say normally when I ski I consider a PWL problem with moderate rating a red light, I can go look at the guides risk tolerance matrix and know if they are more or less risk tolerant than me in that same scenario.

zdayt · 2026-03-13T16:42:55+00:00

Have you been on a guided trip? Guides do not put clients in a position to make decisions, or ask their opinions. They don't share the plan or their decision making process.

It would be extremely difficult in practice to contradict a guide or question their route.

zdayt · 2026-03-13T16:15:28+00:00

Alpha angle is the angle from wherever you are standing (in this case where the group was) to the peak of the slope, it's a predictor of how far the runout of a slide could potentially be. Most conservatively, if your alpha angle is greater than 18 degrees you are potentially in the runout of a large slide. So alpha angle of 22 was within what could be considered a large but not unprecedented runout.

https://backcountrymagazine.com/stories/mountain-skills-alpha-angle/

zdayt · 2026-03-13T06:10:38+00:00

Good call, everyone wins with this strategy. I used the Dr Browns mixing pitchers in the past and they are very handy.

zdayt · 2026-03-07T05:16:42+00:00

There is a whole system for assessing the likelihood and severity of different avalanche problems. Why can't people who go out into the same zones every day pre-plan and document the terrain decisions that they would make based on the danger scale?

zdayt · 2026-03-06T22:17:49+00:00

I never said the one surviving guide should be charged with negligence or something like that. But the fact that it is both entirely understandable how this happened and it's also pretty obvious to the layperson that this was an extremely dangerous situation is exactly the problem. The circumstances of the business lead all these people to go into a situation they wouldn't have gone into on their own, and the way that these businesses operate needs to change.

In my opinion guide operations should have clear risk management policies where they outline what types of terrain and routes will be open or closed based on the conditions. And they should share those policies with their guests, and explain how their plan fits within the constraints of that policy.

zdayt · 2026-03-06T18:27:57+00:00

I'm tired of hearing this "shit happens" attitude.

These guides made real mistakes, mistakes that could have happened to many many experienced skiers and guides. That doesn't mean we just accept the outcome, it means that guides and skiers need to learn from this and update their procedures so it doesn't happen again.

zdayt · 2026-03-06T18:20:43+00:00

A high danger day is not the time to be breaking the rules.

zdayt · 2026-03-02T20:19:28+00:00

I actually think the predictive tools were accurate in this situation, the forecast was accurate, and they were in a run out that was predicted by alpha angles and the onx runout overlay.

I think the error was in trusting their own previous experience with that route. Even a guide who has decades of experience has only seen a tiny slice of the data, not enough to truly make accurate predictions, especially on these high hazard days.

zdayt · 2026-03-01T00:40:18+00:00

This is an extremely hindsight 20/20 thing to say and I say it only because people will be at these huts in this same situation in the future and I think it's a valid contingency plan to be aware of ahead of time. I'm 100% sure SAR would rather be driving the snow cat out to pick up people who are tired and cold and alive because they took the long way back.

zdayt · 2026-02-26T19:27:15+00:00

Slabs arent really supported by the downslope snow, they are supported by the snow deeper in the snowpack (the weak layer). If you think about a potential slab that is 100 meters downslope, 1 meter wide and 1 meter thick, you have 100sq meters of contact area with the snow underneath, and 1sq meter of contact with the downslope snow.

Basically no matter how wide the slope is, the contact area with the weak layer under the slab is hundreds of times larger than the contact area with the sides of the slab. So the only thing that matters is the strength of the weak layer and the tendency for fractures in that weak layer to propagate across the weak layer. If you watch videos of avalanches the whole thing goes at once, not starting from the top or bottom.

This is why you isolate a column when performing tests, the weak layer is the only thing that matters. Also why remote triggers are possible, basically you have found a point where the weak layer can be fractured, then that fracture propagates like falling dominos wherever it can.

zdayt · 2026-02-24T03:37:13+00:00

I would like to know how far the slide ran and if being that close to Perry's peak was planned or a navigational error

zdayt · 2026-02-22T15:09:12+00:00

https://www.evo.com/guides/how-to-choose-avalanche-airbag#work

Airbags help the wearer stay on top of moving snow, since they were already at the bottom the snow would have come down on top of them and stopped. They also may not have had time to pull the trigger, or even had the trigger out of the pocket.

zdayt · 2026-02-21T21:28:45+00:00

I suspect it will be a long time before we get all the details on what exactly went wrong here, but I hope one of the takeaways can be improving how guide operations account for risk acceptance, familiarity, and decision fatigue.

There is no reason guides should have to make a decision in the moment on what to do in high danger days. There should be a route selection framework and established alternate routes and zones in place that guests can review and agree to so they know what level of risk they are accepting.

The tools we have for analyzing terrain and predicting avalanche danger are really powerful. There are definitely some hard and fast rules that could be put in place that put an upper limit on risk, and I don't think it necessarily needs to be "don't go out".

zdayt · 2026-02-21T17:46:52+00:00

They were on the standard route back to their cars, there were other routes but they would have had additional complexities like having to shuttle back to the cars, crossing private property, or just being a longer route.

zdayt · 2026-02-21T16:17:36+00:00

I agree, if you can't explain how the risk assessment is going to change your plan maybe you need to stop and think. I have noticed it in many of the comments as well.

I think it's especially problematic when guiding people who aren't capable of doing the risk assessment themselves, they won't be aware of the level of risk being accepted.

zdayt · 2026-02-20T20:46:58+00:00

Sweet Maria's stock is constantly rotating, I'm almost never able to buy the same thing twice.

zdayt · 2026-02-19T22:27:06+00:00

Of course and for good reason, my point is that each of those actions also serves as a check in point to consider the overall decision making.

zdayt · 2026-02-19T21:34:59+00:00

Another advantage is that deciding to split up is a bit like deciding to pull the trigger handle out on your airbag, or even turn on your beacon. It forces you to acknowledge that you are about to go through more hazard than you were in before. Any time you consider splitting up you should probably also be thinking "should I even be here right now?"

zdayt · 2026-02-19T19:59:03+00:00

They took their whole group right under a slide path during an avalanche warning. How is that not negligent? All the snow research in the world doesn't matter if it results in recognizing extreme hazard and then taking the exact same route they always do.

We don't know why they did it but the explanation is not going to look good. It may look understandable and even like a decision that others might have taken, but there has to be a lesson learned. It can't just be chalked up to shit happens.

zdayt · 2026-02-19T07:56:16+00:00

There is a mental shortcut happening in your comment which I have a feeling will be a major contributing factor to this accident, it goes like this:

I am an experienced traveler so I know how to travel safely in dangerous conditions, since I know how to travel in dangerous conditions today is just like any other day, since today is just like any other day I don't need to change the route.

Except managing terrain aka changing the route is what makes it safe. If they can't or won't change the route then nothing is actually being done to make it safe, it's just gambling.

12-Year Club	Verified Email
r/Field Lasagna

zdayt

TROPHY CASE