Search of Latest Revelstoke Avalanche Site Concluded

Saturday, March 20, 2010 10:48 AM

Revelstoke, B.C.- The search of Friday's avalanche site near Revelstoke has been concluded and RCMP say there are no other victims.

A 30 year old man from calgary died in the afternoon slide at the Eagle Pass Peak area near Three Valley Gap.

The investigation has confirmed that there were two groups of snowmobilers in the area at the time that the slide occurred. Two snowmobilers were ascending the hill, (known as highmarking) when the avalanche triggered, classifying the slide as human triggered.

A massive slide broke and has been catagorized as a class 4 avalanche. A second group of 10 snowmobilers were at the base and had positioned themselves in a location which did minimize the effect of the slide. One of the ten, however was buried by the slide. The deceased is a 30 year old male of Calgary, Alberta. Police are continnuing their assistance to the family of the deceased. Another male was injured, but the injuries were minor not requiring medical attention.

Revelstoke RCMP and Sicamous RCMP conducted a canvassing effort at known staging parking lots throughout Friday evening in order to confirm the numbers of persons known to be in the area. Investigators determined that there were upwards of 66 known users logged in at the area trail head entry point, however witness statements indicate that the known persons in the immediate slide area was limited to those twelve persons.

The BC Coroners Service along with RCMP Forensic Identification members will conduct an aerial survey, with both agencies continuing their investigations into the incident.

It has been confirmed that no further victims were located yesterday by Search and Rescue, nor did the avalanche rescue dogs indicate any sign of more persons buried.

"Based on witness accounts and the findings of yesterdays search effort, the search is deemed concluded. We can state with high degree of confidence that all persons involved have been accounted for. Area instability at the present time does not permit searchers to return to the area without stabilization efforts in addition to the current information there is no known need for searchers to continue at this time. The Revelstoke Search and Rescue Team and CARDA were again instrumental in to the quick and professional response, in addition to several local heli ski Co. including Selkirk-Tangiers Heli-ski and Canadian Mountain Holidays (Heli)", stated Cpl Dan Moskaluk.

"Once again within just one week of a previous deadly slide, we have a stark reminder of the risks associated to back country snowmobiling activity. In this instance the affected group had taken some precaution by placing themselves in a safe position to minimize the risk, it is evident that 100 percent of risk cannot be eliminated," added Cpl Moskaluk.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Saturday, March 20, 2010 10:48 AM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: He spoke on March 20 2010 1:24 PM

what can you say, snowmobiling in the upper reaches is dangerous, they knew it was dangerous. so why do it. because they think they can be better than forces of nature.

So who pays for all the costs of digging out the dead bodies, of these risk takers. We should be sending the families a bill for the cost of it all. This will be a deterent to the snowmobilers.

Posted by: chrislivingdowntown on March 20 2010 3:01 PM

Thats right

Posted by: Dragonmaster on March 20 2010 3:52 PM

First of all shame on you for saying such a thing, you're both sick!

Secondly "ascending a hill" is not known as "highmarking".
Highmarking is the attempt to get as high up the hill as you can on your snowmobile. Many times you can't get all the way up and many times you can.Its all good! As long as you pay attention to what you 're doing. People have been doing it safely for dozens of years. Sometimes people are not paying attention and they get bit.

Sledding in the mountains is no more dangerous than driving an automobile. If you don't pay attention to what you are doing or if those around you do not pay attention to what they are doing while you are driving or sledding, the end result can be identical. However more people are killed every day while being involved in car crashes than are killed in a whole year in avalanches or simple snowmobile incidents in BC. So the next time we hear about sledders, skiers or hikers dying in an avalanche or soccer moms crashing their mini vans into a tree, everyone should remember that NOT PAYING ATTENTION can kill or injure anyone, not just sledders. Pretty strange that the outcry about the odd sledder dying in an avalanche makes the outcry about thousands every year dying on our streets doing something acceptable to everyone, (driving automobiles) sound like a whisper. No one has any trouble with taxpayers paying for the rescue and medical costs for their loved ones that have been involved in an automobile crash, yet when it is a sledder or other recreationist that is in the minority, the outcry against them benefitting from the same taxpayer dollar funded services is hypocritical to say the least!

Posted by: He spoke on March 20 2010 4:21 PM

On a skihill, it clearly indicates that the snowpack is unstable outside the skihill limit, and you decide it does not apply to you, because your mommy said your special. You get lost, and you cause a search and rescue, guess what your send a bill.

So should the sledders which knowingly go into a situation which is not safe, cause and accident, that person or his/her estate should pay for the cost of the rescue incurred or at least a maximum of $10,000.00.

Why should my taxes be paying for an avoidable accident.

If you were to go on the highway, when you have been informed that it is too dangerous. You should be aware then that you are driving with out collision insurance, that is a fair ruling.

If your drunk and you drive, you have no insurance, so what is the difference.

Accidents happen, and we need a infrastructure to rescue people. The rescueing of people should not leave the rescuers at risk. Accidents happen, avoidable accidents caused by intentional disobedience is unacceptable... that is my opinion.

Posted by: acrider54 on March 20 2010 4:36 PM

Have to call you on this on Dragon.

"As long as you pay attention to what you 're doing. People have been doing it safely for dozens of years. Sometimes people are not paying attention and they get bit."

Your reference to snowmobiling and driving an automobile is no comparison at all.

If they were paying attention they would have heeded the warnings and they would have put in to practise their avalanche checks before "high marking" Maybe even taken an overall look at the area. Those riders should not be in the mountains at all.

Sad to say but as I said years ago to my snowmobile partners "The Albertans are coming in to BC and they are going to screw it up for all of us" Seems my prediction is coming true.

Watch out for new laws and regulations because some people are just too stupid or too inexpierenced to be riding where they are. Obviously we are too stupid to look after ourselves so the governement has to step in and regulate us. (a policed state we live in now, laws for everything)

I have a sled for sale because I'm tired of seeing the inexpierenced idiots out not only in the mountains but everywhere else I go. They trench the trails in because they don't know how to handle the power, high mark from every direction, three going up three coming down, just waiting for a disaster. It's a lot safer staying home these days.

Too much horsepower for the new rider that do not have a clue.

Posted by: chrislivingdowntown on March 20 2010 4:48 PM

It's a rich mans sport and I don't feel sorry for these rich boys at all. Anyone who can afford a big truck and a machine like that is a rich boy who has nothing to do but take risks. Good riddance goofs.

Posted by: acrider54 on March 20 2010 4:54 PM

Well Chris....I just don't know what to say, I think maybe....Oh well never mind.

Posted by: MrPG on March 20 2010 5:04 PM

Yeah, chris has some serious jealousy issues. Not too hard to figure that out.

Posted by: inga1 on March 20 2010 5:12 PM

chris your not to smart poor guy we should all get together and buy chris a sled and a truck so he isn't left out

Posted by: inga1 on March 20 2010 5:14 PM

i think chris is the goof sorry budd

Posted by: northman on March 20 2010 5:27 PM

"Anyone who can afford a big truck and a machine like that is a rich boy who has nothing to do but take risks"

-Its called working smart for your money and having enough left over to enjoy yourself because your time on this rock is limited.

-The avalanche problems are created by people (sledders, skiers, snowboarders) who do not RESPECT or know the land base they are accessing.

-Check your snow folks..

Posted by: chrislivingdowntown on March 20 2010 5:45 PM

Bla the only people making money up here are cops lawyers and so called social workers. There are no mill rights just pot growers is what they were I bet.

Posted by: greatmysticbushape on March 20 2010 6:08 PM

who cares. they know the risk and more power to them. why should we have to give any thought or time to hear their sob story. don't even ask about the money spent trying to warn them and beg them to not do it. stand back and let'em do their thing, period.

Posted by: chrislivingdowntown on March 20 2010 6:40 PM

Thats right greatmysticbushape that is the point I am trying to make. Why should we care,

Posted by: gus on March 20 2010 8:06 PM

There is dising a snowmobile .....

There is drivng a car .....

Those two can be considered parallel activities.

There is high marking .....

There is drag racing on the road ......

Those two can be considered parallel activities generally practiced by a bunch of high risk taking yahoos ....

People get killed in all four situations. But, in the latter two, it is more often per distance travelled than in the former. Riders/drivers and innocent bystanders get killed in the latter two cases totally due to high risk takers.

It is the way of the world. We are all different. But, as has been said, those high risk takers should not be doing so at our collective cost.

On top of that, we should not feel sorry for them. We should celebrate the fact that they lived their lives to the fullest degree they felt was needed for them to be happy.

Remember the "motto" of the USA .... life, liberty and the pusuit of happiness.

Posted by: gus on March 20 2010 8:08 PM

Looking back on that post of mine .... maybe "dising" would look better if it was "riding" .. LOL

Posted by: Dragonmaster on March 20 2010 8:29 PM

He Spoke says, "Why should my taxes be paying for an avoidable accident"
"The rescueing of people should not leave the rescuers at risk"

LOL, then your taxes shouldn't be paying for ANY type of avoidable accident including any that involve you, your family members or friends.
Fortunately for everyone, our society is somewhat compassionate. When are you going to learn the meaning of that word?
Do you know the meaning of the word "selfish"?
Please explain where any rescuers were, are at risk. Those involved in SAR don't put themselves into any situation that would put themselves at risk. Your statement is rubbish!

An accident by definition is unavoidable. People like to use the word accident so as not to point fingers of blame at one another when most incidents that are referred to as accidents are truly the results of a lack of due care and attention.
It makes no difference if it's a sledder in the mountains or your sister that was killed in a car crash. A lack of due care and attention will kill in any dangerous activity including driving automobiles. It's not the activity, it's the person and their ability to pay attention while partaking in dangerous activities.
Therefore anyone that tries to single out any one type of activity as being a candidate for having the participants paying for their own rescue is a complete hypocrite!

acrider54 says, "If they were paying attention they would have heeded the warnings and they would have put in to practise their avalanche checks before "high marking" Maybe even taken an overall look at the area. Those riders should not be in the mountains at all"

You completely missed the moral of the story ac. The issue here is who should pay for someones rescue, correct?
I agree, if the sledders were paying attention this wouldn't have happened. Just like if someone driving their car to work was paying attention they wouldn't have driven through that red light and killed that family.
Having explained that to you, why should we be expected to pay for the car crash incident if we shouldn't be expected to pay for the sledders incident? They are both the results of someone not paying attention.

chrislivingdowntown...hmmmm, nevermind I'll get myself banned!

Posted by: chrislivingdowntown on March 20 2010 8:37 PM

Dragonmaster I don't care what you think.

Posted by: greatmysticbushape on March 20 2010 9:37 PM

dragon - at least consider not allocating finite public funding on divining the propensity of snow to roll down a hill in the middle of nowhere on any given Sunday if a jackass runs a motorized device up it and perhaps tell us the moral responsibility of having it instead assigned to help our kids living below the poverty line or health care for our seniors.

Posted by: inga1 on March 20 2010 10:43 PM

I don't think chrislivingdowntown can keep up.|dragon dont get yourself banned for that guy it doesent matter what you say he wont get the point I dont think hes to bright.We live in the north we ride sleds we fish we hunt and it will always be that way I agree thay should not be in the mountins right now but boys will always play with there toys some like danger I ride a sled and you would not get me up there. We will help no matter what thats the way of the world like it or not and chris i feel bad for you.

Posted by: gus on March 21 2010 12:49 AM

They are both the results of someone not paying attention.

Car drivers have insurance. It is what is called a no fault insurance. Does not matter who is at fault, the costs are paid. Your premium might go up, depending on the situation. You might get a traffic ticket and a fine if you are driving without due regard.

Snowmobilers typically have insurance as well. I believe it is also a law, but not sure. Damage to the vehicle will be paid and any liability there might be if others get injured or die. The same for the rider, I assume. The biggest difference might actually be that there are no tickets and fines. However, it would be interesting to see if anyone has ever made a criminal case out of it. Manslaughter. A few of those and some jail time and people might be a little bit more cautious about riding straight up what any dope in the world would know to be an avalanche waiting to happens while they are riding up on the trigger to set it off.

Posted by: northman on March 21 2010 9:15 AM

What do you guys have to say about the two "skiers" that just got killed.. Different attitude when snowmobiles arent involved.

Posted by: MrPG on March 21 2010 9:18 AM

"Different attitude when snowmobiles arent involved."

No, not really. People going into the mountains when there is a high risk of avalanche. It doesn't matter whether they were on snowmobiles or skis.

Posted by: northman on March 21 2010 9:58 AM

I agree.. The messge was more intended for those that are dead set against snowmobilers and they use the avalances as an exuse to persue their own agenda and to confirm thier beliefs.

Posted by: interceptor on March 21 2010 10:53 AM

Hey Chris - your tax dollars can help with search and rescue the same way my tax dollars go towards busting grow ops because of your "hobby" - see how that works?

Posted by: detoe43 on March 21 2010 11:27 AM

Nope Northman, as I've written previously
I've seen backcountry skiers & boarders
make some incredibly stupid decisions.
As for dragonmasters' first post,when the
police close a highway & you get caught
or in an accident while driving on said highway, you're in deep doo-doo. As for
an accident being unavoidable...huh???
Accidents are caused, they result from
poor decisions, lack of attention or the "It can't happen to me" attitude.
"Acts of God" could be considered
unavoidable.
ChrisLDT???? I own a sled & am definitely
not rich or have a grow -op in my basement.
I'm not a lawyer or a cop, I just saved my money. Not a hard concept.
I do agree with Northman, there is a small
but vocal group of bcskiers that have an agenda to shut all users & access to the bc
but themselves. They will use any excuse to accomplish these ends, whether it be environmental or safety.