babble-intro-img
babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.

Avalanche tragedy in BC - here we go again!

NorthReport
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2008

""


Comments

NorthReport
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2008

This is too much death. Kinda reminds me of coal mining in China, except those miners are working for a living, so they don't necessarily have a choice.

German tourist killed in B.C. avalanche


A man from Germany was killed on Monday afternoon, after getting caught in an avalanche in the Kootenays.

A group of 11 skiers was heli-skiing with RK heliski east of Jumbo Mountain, when an avalanche came roaring down a run called 'Perogie.' Three men from Germany were caught in it, and the guide and other skiers in the group rushed to pull them out of the snow with the assistance of beacons.

One man received non life-threatening injuries, while another was partially buried but rescued. The third man, a 34-year-old, was found unresponsive.

He was flown to Invermere Hospital, but did not survive.

Officials say weather conditions at the time of the avalanche were considered good. RCMP and the B.C. coroner’s office is now investigating.
Read it on Global News: Global BC | German tourist killed in B.C. avalanche

http://www.globaltvbc.com/german+tourist+killed+in+bc+avalanche/64428121...


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

NR really, avalanche deaths remind you of coal mining in China?  That is just bizarre. 

The back country in BC is dangerous at this time of the year.  The heli-ski company should be sent the bill for every last dime of public money spent to rescue this clients from its inherently dangerous business.  They need to insure their business fully not use the public rescue services for free.


Serviam6
Offline
Joined: Nov 7 2012

kropotkin1951 wrote:

NR really, avalanche deaths remind you of coal mining in China?  That is just bizarre.

 

That seemed like quite an association to me as well.


lagatta
Offline
Joined: Apr 17 2002

Yes, I'm sure the Chinese miners would have opted for a less hazardous job if they had the choice. We also have a guy lost in the Parc de la Gaspésie, and there is a major snowstorm in Eastern Québec and much of the Atlantic provinces - he decided to take off alone, apart from his group of friends. Although he has a sleeping bag and food supplies, it seems odd.


lagatta
Offline
Joined: Apr 17 2002

Yes, I'm sure the Chinese miners would have opted for a less hazardous job if they had the choice. We also have a guy lost in the Parc de la Gaspésie, and there is a major snowstorm in Eastern Québec and much of the Atlantic provinces - he decided to take off alone, apart from his group of friends. Although he has a sleeping bag and food supplies, it seems odd.


NorthReport
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2008

Serviam6
Offline
Joined: Nov 7 2012

NorthReport wrote:

revelstoke

 

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/group-caught-in-revelstoke-b-c-avalanche-on...

 

And another one bites the dust!

Is that really a respectful way to talk about someone who was just killed? I don't understand what you're trying to get at here?


Sven
Offline
Joined: Jul 22 2005
kropotkin1951 wrote:

The heli-ski company should be sent the bill for every last dime of public money spent to rescue this clients from its inherently dangerous business.  They need to insure their business fully not use the public rescue services for free.

And I suppose skiers, generally, should be sent a bill "for every last dime of public money" spent to aid them if they get in an accident, because skiing is a dangerous -- and wholly unecessary -- activity. And I would also suppose that people who neglect their health by doing no exercise and overeating should be sent a bill "for every last dime of public money" spent to send ambulances to save them when they are flailing on the ground with heart attacks that they are responsible for, due to their own irresponsibility. My, what righteous indignation, kropotkin... Besides, I would imagine that the heli-company and its owners pay more in taxes annually than you could even imagine paying yourself...

Sven
Offline
Joined: Jul 22 2005
Serviam6 wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

And another one bites the dust!

Is that really a respectful way to talk about someone who was just killed?

I guess, but who really gives a shit if someone dies in an avalanche, other than friends and next of kin? I would imagine that tens of thousands of people expire every day in this world from causes little more remarkable than a natural avalanche.

kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

Sven I actually think that no one should be charged but they have started charging people who are out of bounds at ski resorts.  This company should have proper insurance to cover the risk of their private business.  Who knows what causes avalanches in heli-ski areas but I know that you have to fly in to take the risk.  This is not the fire department answering a call this is search and rescue crews with all their equipment like helicopters. Not for someone who drove off a road or had an accident but to rescue someone who paid money for a thrill.  Why should I insure that risk in this capitalist society.


Sven
Offline
Joined: Jul 22 2005
kropotkin1951 wrote:

Why should I insure that risk in this capitalist society.

I suppose I feel the same way about having to help pay for the astronomical costs associated with the poor health of the 35%+ of people who are obese, the vast majority of whom are in that condition due to their own irresponsibility. They are being no less selfish than the capitalist heli-company by imposing the costs of their poor health decisions on those who make better choices.

kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

No you miss the point. It is not the people who are using the search and rescue it is the business. Part of their business model is taking people to remote locations to engage in an inherently risky pastime.  The company needs to cover all the costs of that enterprise.  The people like the German tourists needs to be charged enough to pay for insurance for the COMPANY to be able to reimburse our public search and rescue teams it is their business model that has introduced the risk not human being.  I for one don't buy the crap that a corporation is a person and should be treated as one. 

This German tourist does not get to Jumbo Glacier except in the company helicopter.  His party of skiers could have paid an extra 50 or 100 bucks to get proper insurance but they didn't. It all about insuring the companies risk.


Unionist
Offline
Joined: Dec 11 2005

Sven wrote:
kropotkin1951 wrote:

Why should I insure that risk in this capitalist society.

I suppose I feel the same way about having to help pay for the astronomical costs associated with the poor health of the 35%+ of people who are obese, the vast majority of whom are in that condition due to their own irresponsibility. They are being no less selfish than the capitalist heli-company by imposing the costs of their poor health decisions on those who make better choices.

NorthReport made an injudicious remark, so the rugged individualist defenders of capitalism weigh in against his insensitivity. What a laugh. I advise kropotkin not to respond to such provocations, but of course he's a free agent and more than capable of stating and defending his viewpoint (which I basically share).

However, the above-cited comment is against babble policy and I've flagged it as offensive.

 


MegB
Offline
Joined: Nov 28 2001
Sven wrote:
kropotkin1951 wrote:

Why should I insure that risk in this capitalist society.

I suppose I feel the same way about having to help pay for the astronomical costs associated with the poor health of the 35%+ of people who are obese, the vast majority of whom are in that condition due to their own irresponsibility. They are being no less selfish than the capitalist heli-company by imposing the costs of their poor health decisions on those who make better choices.
Sven, this comment is offensive on several levels and is not an appropriate response to kropotkin's comment. Not only is it highly insulting to people who struggle with their weight, it shows a complete lack of understanding of the issues around obesity and betrays an ignorance and bigotry that violates the spirit of babble. This is not up for discussion. Do not use this offensive pov to frame an argument again.

Sven
Offline
Joined: Jul 22 2005

When, Rebecca, do people have a significant degree of responsibility for their own lives?  Or does "the spirit of babble" mean that individuals have no agency over their own lives and are simply beings that are acted upon by external forces beyond their control?


JKR
Offline
Joined: Jan 15 2005
Sven wrote:
I suppose I feel the same way about having to help pay for the astronomical costs associated with the poor health of the 35%+ of people who are obese, the vast majority of whom are in that condition due to their own irresponsibility. They are being no less selfish than the capitalist heli-company by imposing the costs of their poor health decisions on those who make better choices.
One difference between people who have obesity and "heli-skiers" is that heli-skiers happily choose to engage in heli-skiing while people with obesity are generally not happy with their obesity. Science has shown that obesity is not caused by a lack of willpower. Science has shown that people who eat the same can have vastly different body forms. Gary Taubes, writer of "Good Calories, Bad Calories" and "Why We Get Fat" has done a good job explaining to the general public the up to date science relating to obesity.

kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

Sven wrote:

 does "the spirit of babble" mean that individuals have no agency over their own lives and are simply beings that are acted upon by external forces beyond their control?

It seems to me that the heii-skiers in this instance were acted upon by statistically predicable external forces beyond their control. Which is why they should be required to insure against the cost of having to rescue them.

As for your obesity shit . Well I would like to lose 20 pounds and the stupid charts say I should lose 50 but the latter no matter how much I would like it to happen and how successful I have been in other areas of my life, its not going to happen. If you know so little about diet and nutrition maybe you should just shut your pie hole on the subject.


Serviam6
Offline
Joined: Nov 7 2012

If someone disregards a no skiing sign and chooses to ski in banned areas then I think they should be held financially accountable for a determined amount of the rescue costs if it comes to that.

 

 

 


Unionist
Offline
Joined: Dec 11 2005

Serviam6 wrote:

If someone disregards a no skiing sign and chooses to ski in banned areas then I think they should be held financially accountable for a determined amount of the rescue costs if it comes to that.

I agree. But if it's truly a "banned area" (and arguably it should be), why wouldn't the province do the banning, by legislation? Most law-abiding skiers would comply - others would incur a (maybe small) risk of having to pay a fine if caught. An ounce of prevention is worth a rescue team and funeral expenses of cure.

 


Serviam6
Offline
Joined: Nov 7 2012

I don't have a good answer for you Unionist. I ski but I'm not very knowledgeable about skiing and I've never been to any extreme sking destinations like those found in BC.   If I had to guess I would say that the banning of certain areas is very dependent on constantly changing weather conditions and the local resorts "best guess".  I'm not sure how that would work with the law and legislation. 

Provinvial parks (Sandbanks in Picton Ontario) can give fines for different violations (open alcohol, firebans, cutting trees) because it's a park controled by the province.  Ski resports are private owned aren't they?  I really don't know how it could work.

I'm not sure about fines for skiing on banned areas (perhaps a year banned from the resort?) but I think if a skier went off trail, needed rescuing by search and rescue and ended up having to pay the province $10'000 or $20'000 for fuel, ages, maintence costs etc.. people might think twice about disregarding the banned areas.


MegB
Offline
Joined: Nov 28 2001

Sven wrote:

When, Rebecca, do people have a significant degree of responsibility for their own lives?  Or does "the spirit of babble" mean that individuals have no agency over their own lives and are simply beings that are acted upon by external forces beyond their control?

What part of "not up for discussion" do you not understand? Take a hike.


6079_Smith_W
Offline
Joined: Jun 10 2010

Were they out of bounds?

I didn't watch the video clip, but it did not say so in the story. But yes, I think that should be the measure for charging people for search and rescue. If an area is deemed safe then there's no reason why people shouldn't be in there, enjoying themselves, nor why businesses (many of which are local ventures) shouldn't be in there too.

On the other hand, one presumes these companies have insurance. If a lot of S and R time and effort goes into that one would think that should kick in. After all, different rules apply for corporations for all sorts of things - some bad, but some good and appropriate.

And it is especially so when you consider that rescuers can put themselves in danger by doing their jobs.

One other thing that is probably a bigger problem is how technology allows some people to get into back country who are probably unprepared for it. ATVs, motorboats and seadoos, and modern snowmobiles in particular have are a problem both when it comes to some people getting themselves into danger, and in terms of impact on wildlife and the environment. People used to have to work and have experience to get that far into the bush. Now some people can rip up trails and do it within an hour or so.

On an unrelated note. This is pretty minor when one considers that if your house burns down in any rural area where firefighting is not part of municipal services, you get a bill for it.

And I think the guy was from Karlsruehe not whatever that misspelling was.


jas
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2005

lagatta
Offline
Joined: Apr 17 2002

Sadly, they found the body of the Pont-Rouge (Québec City suburb) man who set off by himself from a skiing and hiking trip in the Chic-Choc mountains in the Gaspé. Of course we have nothing as high as the mountains in BC, but they are among the highest mountains in Québec and there was a hell of a lot of snow. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2013/02/24/quebec-bertrand-...


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

There are no boundary's for heli-skiing other than what the operator considers safe.  At mountain resorts the ski areas have designated runs and rope barriers usually saying where the ski area ends.  The snow on the other side of the rope always looks like fresh powder and often at the top you can't tell that the slope you are starting down does not end well.

 


NorthReport
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2008

 

Severe avalanche warnings issued for North Shore, Sea to Sky region  BY MARY FRANCES HILL FEBRUARY 25, 2013  0  

 Severe avalanche warnings issued for North Shore, Sea to Sky region Footage of freeskier Sverre Liliequist outrunning an avalanche. Severe avalanche warnings have been issued for North Shore, Sea to Sky region for this week.

 

http://www.vancouversun.com/travel/skiguide/Severe+avalanche+warnings+is...


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or register to post comments