Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Education not legislation: Let’s keep the Nanny State out of the backcountry

There are no avalanche experts. They’re all dead. – Ed Lachapelle, 1985 By Michel Beaudry Enough already. With mountain deaths dominating headlines this winter in B.C.
1603alta

There are no avalanche experts. They’re all dead.

– Ed Lachapelle, 1985

By Michel Beaudry

Enough already. With mountain deaths dominating headlines this winter in B.C., a veritable orgy of blame and recrimination has descended upon the province of late. Everyone, it seems, has suddenly become an avalanche expert. Whether radio talk show host or newspaper editor, national news anchor or online blogger, the message is depressingly similar: close the backcountry! Put trespassers in jail! Make the mountains safe again by keeping people out!

As a lifelong backcountry user, I find this mass hysteria almost comic. Why? Because it doesn’t make any sense…

Do we close the province’s beaches after a drowning? Do we shut down the bars when somebody dies of alcohol poisoning? Of course we don’t.

So why the heck is B.C.’s Solicitor General wading into the current avalanche debate with talk of legislating access to the backcountry? Does he really know what kind of a Pandora’s box he’s opening here?

Let me put it bluntly. The moment the government starts regulating backcountry access is the moment the B.C. mountain tourism sector goes into a tailspin. C’mon now. It wasn’t that long ago that our reigning premier challenged us to double the size of the tourism business in this province. As Pique editor Bob Barnett explained last week, the widespread response was to develop far more recreational real estate than the resident population could ever use. And that can work — up to a point.

But let’s not fool ourselves. Promoting mountainside real estate to out-of-province buyers can only be successful if we continue to deliver on the promise of a “Supernatural B.C.” Compared to any other destination in the world, British Columbia boasts a relatively pristine, accessible (and peaceful) mountain wilderness with huge global appeal. It’s our ace in the hole — our differentiator if you will — and without it, we just become part of the chorus. As French journalist Mathieu Ros puts is so well: “Whistler’s reputation in Europe has nothing to do with lifts and resorts and fancy hotels. It’s more about the potential for wilderness adventures throughout British Columbia — it’s your wild forests, your long winter seasons and your untouched snow. You see, we have all the lift-accessed skiing we need in the Alps. What we don’t have is the kind of backcountry that you guys take so much for granted.”

See what I’m saying? If playing to your strengths is key to achieving sustained prosperity, the last thing the B.C. mountain tourism industry needs is to transform backcountry enthusiasts into potential outlaws.

That’s only the tip of the problematic iceberg, however. Creating legislation that regulates users’ access to the backcountry will only result in more financial headaches for the province’s struggling snowsport sector. Think about it. If it suddenly becomes illegal to cross ski area boundaries, who will have to pay to police these borders? The ski areas of course. And where will those extra shekels come from? Out of your pocket, most likely…

“I don’t think legislation is the answer,” says Whistler Mayor Ken Melamed. A passionate backcountry enthusiast and a long time patroller on Whistler Mountain, Melamed understands all too well the ups and downs of high country travel. He also understands how important adventure tourism is to Whistler’s future. “It basically comes down to one thing,” he explains. “People have to learn that the mountains are nothing like the urban neighbourhood they left back home. Unlike in Europe, where people are taught to respect the mountains, North Americans mostly see the mountains as a Disneyworld/shopping-mall experience. And that has got to change…”

He’s right. Indeed, industry professionals across the continent need to re-examine the way they promote the sport to their constituents. Sponsoring films that feature young hotshots out-skiing Alaskan slides is a questionable tactic at best. At worst, it seriously undermines any safety message the industry might want to impart to its consumers. But I’m afraid it’s going to get worse before it gets better. Given the user-friendly nature of modern mountain gear, the I-can-ride-out-of-any-danger trend is sure to lead a whole plethora of young neophytes into a potentially deadly relationship with the backcountry.

“The (snowsport) industry is fixated on a specific demographic right now,” explains Melamed. “They’re selling immediate gratification. Forget paying your dues. Forget learning about the environment. This is all about having fun.” He sighs. “But at what cost?”

Let’s call a spade a shovel. Most avalanche deaths — and the great majority of backcountry incidents — involve young males between the ages of 19 and 40. Which is fine; that’s what young males are hard-wired to do. But as I said before: to penalize the whole backcountry community — many of whom just want to go for a quiet walk in the mountains — for the transgressions of a few is both insane and unworkable.

So what to do? Clearly, the Nanny State has no place in the backcountry. Rather, I think the solution resides in creating the kind of focused education campaign that has been so successful in convincing young people that such things as smoking cigarettes and drinking-and-driving are no longer cool.

I can already see a few of you rolling your eyes at this. But consider the drop in teenage smoking in the last 10 years. Would it have happened otherwise?

Education. Education. Education. That’s what it’s all about. Getting the word out. Passing the message. Teaching folks how to take responsibility for their own actions. Heck, it’s the first law of parenting. You put your finger in the socket, kid, chances are you’re going to get shocked. It’s that simple.

Decisions have consequence No whining. No citing excuses. If you screw up, you deal with it. Which brings me to my next point. I think it’s absolutely insane for us to provide people with a free skyhook out of the backcountry. You play, you pay baby . That’s my motto.

And though it’s considered contentious in some circles, it’s an attitude that’s slowly gaining ground in mountain communities. “I don’t buy the argument that people would rather stay lost than pay to get found,” says Mayor Melamed. “In my experience, people getting rescued are ready to pay just about anything to be warm and safe again.” Besides, he adds, the escalating costs to Search and Rescue programs — both emotionally and financially — are simply too high to justify free rescues anymore. “It’s just not sustainable,” he says.

His sentiments are echoed by other mountain professionals. “When we opened 7th Heaven,” says W/B’s Arthur De Jong, “we were in a sense opening up a whole new mountain environment. It was a huge change. Going from treeline to alpine entailed all sorts of new responsibilities.” Blackcomb’s patrol manager at the time, De Jong soon found out just how wild it could get. “From the get-go, people got stupid and went in over their heads. So we decided to get tough. Amongst the signs, fences, guards, waivers, education efforts we set in place, we also invoked the principle of deterrent.”

Meaning? During De Jong’s time as manager, the Blackcomb patrol actually collected on 80 per cent of their backcountry rescues. He laughs. “I was a hard-ass on this issue. Did I really want the money? Of course not. What I wanted were the headlines: Backcountry users will pay for rescue costs. No free lunch out there.” The message, he says, was clear.

No question. The backcountry is dangerous. And yes, if you’re not careful, it can kill you. So how do you make sure people clearly understand the risks of venturing out-of-bounds — especially in a season like this one?

The irony here is that there is more backcountry-education material available than ever before. From week-long courses to detailed websites, from the Canadian Avalanche Association to the International Federation of Mountain Guides Associations, B.C. users have more information at their fingertips than just about any user group on the planet. So why isn’t it being put to better use?

Again, the answer is relatively straightforward. Not enough people have died to change folks’ behaviours yet. I know that sounds callous. And I’m sure I’ll get hammered for saying this. But it’s the truth. We’ve been lucky. Were it not for the bizarre conditions that created a once-in-a-generation killer snowpack in the Coast Mountains, I probably wouldn’t even be writing this piece. As avalanche expert Chris Stethem wrote in his letter to the editor last week: “I don't think the conditions have been this tricky in the Whistler area since the low snow winter of 1979...”

So let’s keep things in perspective. Let’s not panic and call on the government just yet. Instead, let’s work together to find a better solution. We really don’t have a choice here. Our future depends on it…