The Rescue Compass: a new avalanche rescue decision-making tool (from SLF)
ise
Posted: 19 December 2011 06:03 PM
Sr. Member
Total Posts: 544
Joined 2006-01-24
One of the many interesting things on SLF website, just launched today :
The Rescue Compass: a new avalanche rescue decision-making tool
Rescuers attending to avalanche victims are sometimes exposed to considerable risk. Against this background, the Avalanche Rescue Commission of ICAR, the International Commission for Alpine Rescue, called for the creation of a handy risk management instrument to assist rescuers.
Interesting is not a word I would choose to use,Alarming would be more fitting.
Surely part and parcel to being a rescue worker in any field be it the mountain,At sea or in a combat zone is that you are going to exposed to risk,You understand this when you take the job or sign up,It is what you have chosen to be, part of a well trained team that know they are risking themselves to help save the lifes of others.The thought of a rescue worker consulting a rescue decision making tool as an individual or a team before attempting a rescue of any kind causes me concern.
As a prevention tool it could be interesting though.
The utility of decision support models in avalanche safety is well known. I’m not entirely sure I see why rescue workers, or those involved in ad-hoc rescues, wouldn’t want to use them. It’s also well known that rescuers that don’t make some level of risk evaluation before intervening often become involved in their own incidents.
I found the book “managing risks in extreme environments” interesting, as it compares risk management in mountain rescue with other extreme situations. I often found as a rescuer that the risk couldn’t be avoided if you wanted to save someone’s life, especially going into avalanche terrain - but you could reduce the consequences to your team or yourself by thinking ahead and having another team in a safe zone ready to come in a dig you out. Kind of risk reduction vs consequence reduction. With avalanche rescue “tools” cant replace the human ability to collate info and the sense and instinct that comes from years of dealing with bad experiences - which is rescue from the mountains. Gut feeling should never be ignored.
Not just that, but more & more safety gear like transceivers or air-bags. And way more training around and courses etc. And a growing number of transceiver parks and so on.
As far as air-bags etc, I read an article recently ( maybe on this site ) where someone commenting on increasing number of rescues, speculated it was perhaps due to air-bags giving people an increased feeling of security and thus becoming less risk-averse.
There was a very similar situation with the widespread uptake of ABS systems ( that’s anti-skid in spite of the co-incidence of initials !) on lower-priced cars twenty-odd years ago. Thanks to the much larger sample and the relative ease of reconstructing accidents on roads, they confirmed that this feeling of “invulverability through technology” definitely led to more dangerous driving habits.
As far as air-bags etc, I read an article recently ( maybe on this site ) where someone commenting on increasing number of rescues, speculated it was perhaps due to air-bags giving people an increased feeling of security and thus becoming less risk-averse.
There was a very similar situation with the widespread uptake of ABS systems ( that’s anti-skid in spite of the co-incidence of initials !) on lower-priced cars twenty-odd years ago. Thanks to the much larger sample and the relative ease of reconstructing accidents on roads, they confirmed that this feeling of “invulverability through technology” definitely led to more dangerous driving habits.
There’s no data to support the suggestion that ABS is leading to more interventions, it could be true but there’s no data right now but the problems of risk homeostasis, as you say, are well known.
Yes all that new gear is good, when You are experienced and know how to use it. I remember one year in Valmorel overlooking La Rave with guests from the piste, 2 guys was climbing over the fence into the area, and I asked them are You aware that avalance risk is 4, and got the answer “no but we have transcivere and shovels so no problem”
This seems to be many 1 or 2 weeks ski vacation per year people’s answer to “how do i deal with avalance risk”. And that’s when all the new security equipments become false security.
Yes all that new gear is good, when You are experienced and know how to use it.
I don’t think it’s quite as black and white as that. There’s a measurable “bump” in risk for people with entry level training and experience compared to either totally inexperienced or expert level decision making. It could be that ABS and other gear could potentially smooth that bump. Or it might make it bigger of course, it’s hard to be sure.
In terms of training, I think people neglect first aid and navigation training. People ought to be able to read 1:25k maps, understand the contours, know what they mean and be able to locate themselves to a few metres. Personally I have double sided laminated 1:25 maps in my pocket when I’m out, one side with the plain terrain on and the reverse with the same map but steep areas superimposed onto it.
That’s a good tip about the maps Ian, they have laminators in Lidl and apart from making fake ID (no only joking) that would be a good use.
I’ve no problems with the gear but the various avalanche avoidance methodologies risk creating some confusion, especially if people amalgamate various methodologies into some kind of meta-method. There is already an issue with Munter and his various methods. I see the reduction method regularly referred to as the 3x3.
Regarding ABS, if everybody wore one I think avalanche deaths would be cut by half despite risk homeostasis… about the same result as if everyone used one of the avalanche avoidance methodologies.
That’s a good tip about the maps Ian, they have laminators in Lidl and apart from making fake ID (no only joking) that would be a good use.
Aldi here did the laminate material, I bought a lot and I use it for all kinds of things. I’ve single sided things and I’ve found pens that stay fixed in the field but wipe off with spirits later. Totally invaluable.
davidof - 21 December 2011 07:27 PM
Regarding ABS, if everybody wore one I think avalanche deaths would be cut by half despite risk homeostasis… about the same result as if everyone used one of the avalanche avoidance methodologies.
That’s a tough one, the SLF reports here for incidents are good enough that you can plug the data into decision support models and see how that works out. Not surprisingly you see most incidents are occurring at points where pretty much all of the models would have produced “no-go” conclusions. But of course that doesn’t include zero-event data so you’re not getting a measure of mobility reduction. Some efforts have been made to quantify mobility reduction and Munter(BRM), with the high weight on slope angle, causes high mobility reduction compared to, for example, Nivotest or “Obvious Clues"/"Checklist Sum”.
That’s a tough one, the SLF reports here for incidents are good enough that you can plug the data into decision support models and see how that works out. Not surprisingly you see most incidents are occurring at points where pretty much all of the models would have produced “no-go” conclusions.
You have done a deeper analysis than me. I was taking Munter’s original reduction method where he based it on a 50% reduction in accident rates.
I may be being conservative on ABS systems. However I think the 97% “survival rate” they quote is an overstatement of what would happen if everyone used one.
Looking at the community ski touring websites today there are certainly trips being posted every day that would fail the Munter criteria.
