I am researching legal stuff on avalanches. Some mountain professionals are advertising and offering to investigate avalanche incidents independently. I wouldn't regard myself as being either qualified or desiring to take on such a burden as avalanches have provided me with enough drama and loss. However, its interesting to look back on precedent to satisfy my curiosity as to where these investigations lead. I have undertaken avalanche hazard evaluation for ski areas as part of prevention and rescue plans where foresight is needed, but post accident investigation makes me uneasy unless its low key and done as impartial data collection is done discreetly.
There is nothing wrong with bringing information and closure to relatives or families by answering questions informally about accidents but when it comes to skiing litigation is rampant in all aspects of events. This is so unlike mountaineering where folk, families included, accept shit happens. I worry that this could change in our ever more popular mountain sports. It set me thinking. If someone ends up making a case for a plaintiff, who then has the knowledge and experience to act for the defence? Expert testimony often cancels itself out in the courts nullifying itself. But damage to reputations and press reporting wrecks lives. I hope its left to the rescuers and police or at worst an FAI to conclude cause and effect in these things. HindsightFor an up to date take on the subject of avalanches Mark Diggins gave an excellent interview and I can recommend Secrets of the Snow by Chapelle
There is a lot on avalanche control and prevention as ski professionals which we would all do well to heed, especially in ski rescue where public safety is a big part of the job.
Avalanches as weapons
Avalanches as weapons
No comments:
Post a Comment