# Project Zero?



## BurtonAvenger (Aug 14, 2007)

Well that article doesn't do shit to tell what Project Zero is and digging around the Internet I haven't found shit. 

What I've come to the conclusion of is that they're looking to reinvent how people are informed as more ill-informed people are going into the BC. That they truthfully don't know what they're doing. And finally that begging for money is needed for whatever reason.


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

Yeah, that's kind of what I took from the whole thing too.


----------



## aiidoneus (Apr 7, 2011)

> Currently the thinking is, ‘I have my beacon, shovel, probe. Let’s go.’


There a heck of a lot of people that don't even get that far.

EDIT: From what I can gather, they want companies that make avy gear to have a focused concise safety message. That way consumers will have it drilled into their brain. They spent there first 91k finding out what that message might be. Now they want companies to agree to fund advertising the message when selling Avalanche gear.

More informative (slightly) : http://www.adventure-journal.com/20...fort-aims-to-reduce-avalanche-deaths-to-zero/


----------



## wrathfuldeity (Oct 5, 2007)

In generally…and to preface…avy ed is good.

The article and underlying agenda is bunk shit. Zero tolerance is a political rhetoric catch phrase that plays well to the retarded sheepeoples. Underlying it is…give me some money so I can jackoff another season and protect my little fiefdom territory. The real cost to get to zero…would be damm near impossible….like the NASA budget. It is similar to the CPR moving target…the last cpr training…was mind numbing dumb…sure might keep somebody going…which I have done…but in some sense for most folks its to give them a false sense of doing (or the ability to do) something worthwhile and meaningful.

Apologies…end of rant…I get to deal with the Zero concept in my face everyday …it comes out of the 1980’s litigious, mba and political fucktard mindset. Now crawling back into my hole. Mods delete and spank me if you want.


----------



## BurtonAvenger (Aug 14, 2007)

wrathfuldeity said:


> In generally…and to preface…avy ed is good.
> 
> The article and underlying agenda is bunk shit. Zero tolerance is a political rhetoric catch phrase that plays well to the retarded sheepeoples. Underlying it is…give me some money so I can jackoff another season and protect my little fiefdom territory. The real cost to get to zero…would be damm near impossible….like the NASA budget. It is similar to the CPR moving target…the last cpr training…was mind numbing dumb…sure might keep somebody going…which I have done…but in some sense for most folks its to give them a false sense of doing (or the ability to do) something worthwhile and meaningful.
> 
> Apologies…end of rant…I get to deal with the Zero concept in my face everyday …it comes out of the 1980’s litigious, mba and political fucktard mindset. Now crawling back into my hole. Mods delete and spank me if you want.


This is the best quote on the site right now.


----------



## killclimbz (Aug 10, 2007)

I know some of the guys spearheading this initiative and they are the best of the best. Hell, FOBP is vested in this. Right now it is fairly vague, partially because this is such a multifaceted problem. Anyone who has been around avalanche education for the past few years will have seen the shift in what is taught. Communication, group dynamics, and observation are the main points in a level 1 these days. Not a lot of emphasis on snow pits and tests, if any. 

Remember how ABS would brag about their "90%" survival rate with there airbags. The editor of powder mag called them out on it. Shortly after the UAC put out an article showing you can expect a 10-20% bump in your survival chances with an airbag. Manufacturers need to look at how they present this stuff to the masses. Even BCA has bee guilty of encouraging people to get rad. 

I feel that Project Zero is something worth supporting. The past three seasons in Colorado have seen 7, 11, and 8 deaths respectively. Our average was 6 a year, that may go up in a season or two at this rate. 

Can we get to zero? Probably not, but we can reduce it with some hard work. 

Tom and Dale are two of the best guys we could hope for to lead this, so don't write it off as a cash grab. If they can get it going, good things will come out of it. I have no doubt.


----------



## lab49232 (Sep 13, 2011)

killclimbz said:


> I know some of the guys spearheading this initiative and they are the best of the best. Hell, FOBP is vested in this. Right now it is fairly vague, partially because this is such a multifaceted problem. Anyone who has been around avalanche education for the past few years will have seen the shift in what is taught. Communication, group dynamics, and observation are the main points in a level 1 these days. Not a lot of emphasis on snow pits and tests, if any.
> 
> Remember how ABS would brag about their "90%" survival rate with there airbags. The editor of powder mag called them out on it. Shortly after the UAC put out an article showing you can expect a 10-20% bump in your survival chances with an airbag. Manufacturers need to look at how they present this stuff to the masses. Even BCA has bee guilty of encouraging people to get rad.
> 
> ...


Glad that somebody is trying to get something done, but you can't start releasing information and asking for money when you don't really have any plan to lay out. That's just terrible business and you're gonna cost yourself support you would have otherwise received. Never rush to market with an undeveloped product, tt will kill it before it even starts.


----------



## BurtonAvenger (Aug 14, 2007)

^ He's right. They need a prepared statement of purpose and statement of initiative made up that they can use over and over again. By giving that writer cart blanché that article did them a disservice.


----------



## killclimbz (Aug 10, 2007)

The problem is that they are trying to identify what the problems are and how to address them. Also, this is a bc mag article not an official statement from them as to how they are proceeding. Tom and Dale are both very analytical guys. You can bet they have a plan. I am sure they share it in more detail with big donors.

This is also not new. I posted up about this initiative a few times last season. 

Support it or not. Fwiw, I think this is a good thing.


----------



## lab49232 (Sep 13, 2011)

killclimbz said:


> The problem is that they are trying to identify what the problems are and how to address them. Also, this is a bc mag article not an official statement from them as to how they are proceeding. Tom and Dale are both very analytical guys. You can bet they have a plan. I am sure they share it in more detail with big donors.
> 
> This is also not new. I posted up about this initiative a few times last season.
> 
> Support it or not. Fwiw, I think this is a good thing.


No one is arguing that it's not a good idea. But if you want my money you have to give me a reason to give you money. Going "hey guy's we're gonna do something, trust us, we'll show you what it is once we have your money" is the same approach Scientology has. 

They should honestly try and get that article taken down or release a better statement themselves. If they don't have a plan on how to proceed yet then they should be keeping it under wraps. Everyone knows avy deaths are a problem, so wanting to solve it doesn't create an initiative. I want to fix the problem too but I don't have a plan to present to people hence why I don't have any reason to be requesting money. I'd love to support them if they give me a reason to but this just makes it look bad. :dunno:


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

Yep, right now they're going to have to give people a better idea of exactly what they have planned before they're going to see wallets opening up. They may be very analytical guys, but they desperately need a good communicator/marketer to help them out because they're doing a terrible job of selling their concept.


----------



## wrathfuldeity (Oct 5, 2007)

BC folk, Please accept my apologies....must be pms time...i seems to be pissing folks off today. The whole Zero concept just drives me ape shit :crazy2: Its the neo uber corporate fascism So it seems to me that there is corporate delusional culture of zero. And it seems that the attorneys, mba's, policy and procedural hacks have all subscribed. However through out human history absolutely no one can control another person's behavior...(even god allows for free will) and anybody that think they are able to control behavior is absolutely has grandiose and paranoid delusions...at best it is submitted or negotiated. OTHO human history generally bears out that given quality education, awareness and open dialogue...folks are generally smart and make corrective decisions... especially if they are so inclined and invested in the process. In summary hopefully the bc folks are generally invested in their own survival. Instead of having a mono-centric corporate culture...there ought to be a nod to each person/local/hill having their own locally developed culture...diversity to develop avy education. Sure its good to get together to discuss and share what worked for their hill...but a zero mono culture rhetoric is bat shit crazy. Shit going back into my hole...anybody got a tampon.

edit...sticks dick head out again...so the question is how to get folks that are venturing into bc...to become personally invested...i.e., aware, educated and responsible.


----------



## killclimbz (Aug 10, 2007)

Bad day wrath? 

You basically hit what they are trying to do on the head. 

Personally, I like the goal of zero. That is a great thing to strive towards. We all know that it is probably never going to be reached. It is a reminder that we can always do better. There are a lot of stakeholders at play. 

Donate or not to it. Other places where your money is well spent. Your local avalanche center, AAIRE, FOBP (got to plug us), AAA. 

It has been identified that behavior/group dynamics seem to be the biggest factor as of late. How best to address it is next. Lots of trial and error is going to happen with that one. Not an easily quantifiable thing.


----------



## mhaas (Nov 25, 2007)

Utah had zero bc skier/rider deaths last season. And only one the previous season. I don't know how the number of skiers compare to other states but there are a ton of people out there every day . Maybe just luck but it's possible.


----------



## killclimbz (Aug 10, 2007)

Anyone who travels in the backcountry is a part of this. So snowshoers and snowmobilers are included as part of the project. Though brappers are whole nother subset that needs a program more directly targeted at them.


----------



## wrathfuldeity (Oct 5, 2007)

Okay trying to be a little more constructive. It seems there are four major parties involved in decreasing avalanche deaths. The primary party is the BC rider. Their primary goal is staying alive which is primarily done by being aware and educated and secondarily being equipped. The secondary party is a ski patrol, resort person and search and rescue. Their goal is to keep people safe, out of trouble and mitigate avalanche risk. The third-party are the manufacturers of BC equipment, their goal is to make money by selling their equipment and hopefully they have a sense of responsibility beyond just making money and avoiding litigation. This is done by inspiring us to venture in to potential avalanche terrain. The fourth party is that of the educators…the avalanche course folks.

At the local level forming a coalition of the invested parties could occur quite easily and efficiently. However at the regional and national levels that potentially involve “standards and certifications” is another can of worms.

So just as a thought of how something might look. So at the local ski board filmfest…the first film could include some footy of the past years avalanche with a brief discussion by the responding patrollers search and rescue folks on what went wrong and how to potentially avoid similar incidents. Part of this presentation could also involve the local avy forecaster and links to get the most current and up-to-date avalanche risk information, who to contact for avalanche courses and a list of local shops that carry BC equipment...this might be a 20-30 minute presentation. Hopefully, the resort could also note/instruct folks to check with ski patrol/hut about current risk and terrain. The idea is that local folks see that this happens at their hill, they see the patrol hut and they see the aftermath of the tragedy... So that gets the local person to buy in, or mom and dad to pay attention… Basically raising awareness amongst the community. Hopefully the local filmfest is an annual event that will include timely examples of avalanche film from the past year…. Keeping everything fresh.

Manufacturers can also participate. They could offer a coupon for avalanche education. An example, by a probe get a five dollars coupon, a shovel another five dollar coupon, a beacon a $10 coupon, a float/air bag get a $20 coupon. These coupons would be good at any “standard or certified” avalanche education program. The education program could also sell books, reinforce the local links that have up-to-date avy forcast and the like. The provider of said program would then send these coupons to the manufacturer for reimbursement. Ideally these coupons could be used/or transferable to anyone wishing to take an avalanche course... That way your new buddy would know how to dig your buried ass out.

So there you have it. All four parties involved, relatively simple without all that much additional cost involved. And tailored to your local ski/boarder culture, terrain, conditions and community. I’m sure this is nothing new… But hey this is not rocket science. Around here pnw I think things are pretty well together but could be improved. However it would be cool to see some local avalanche film at the filmfest and it would be nice to see manufacturers offering coupons for avy courses.


----------



## ShredLife (Feb 6, 2010)

welllp - if i die in the BC just don't count it... in fact:


----------

