Several months back I posted the following article, and then removed it because it appeared from the article that I was revealing information only known to the police. Even though all of the information in the article was part of the public record, I thought that the appearance of revealing insider information was enough to make it a sensitive topic, and reserved the publication until the foot could be properly identified.

Coquitlam SAR provided the search report and our copy of the newspaper to the police as a part of the investigation. Note that the two SAR members on the cover are pulling the subject's boat and not a search boat.

Regarding the foot I talked about in a previous post, at SAR training last night it turned out that several team members recalled a search in Sasamat Lake for a missing fisherman... in 1987. We looked into our archives, and came up with the following:

Also in the archives was the following search report; it does not contain the name of the subject.

It's hard to believe that this was 24 years ago, but according to information I've heard through the grapevine the boot was a design that was popular in that time period. The Coroner's service and RCMP are aware of this search. While team members believe it is likely that this boot belonged to the subject of this search, it's by no means certain and at this point it is only speculation.

Related posts:

1. More on that foot
2. Foot in Boot

Foot Identified | Oplopanax Horridus

Some people may be quizzical about why I chose this as an example of a scary moment when clearly I've done other things that people regard as risky. The answer comes down to the difference between hazard, risk, and consequences.

Definitions

For the purposes of this conversation, hazard is something dangerous, and capable of causing harm. Hazard can be expressed as a probability of an event happening. The event may be a landslide, an earthquake, or hurricane. In the case of SAR it could be an avalanche, rock fall, or a helicopter engine failure.

Risk is the exposure to the hazard, or the likelihood of the hazard causing death and destruction. In my case, risk is the possibility of a hazard having a negative impact on my health. Without exposure, there is no risk, and without a hazard there is no exposure.

Consequences are a measure of the severity of the damage than an event may cause.

The ways to reduce risk are to reduce or remove the hazard, reduce or remove the exposure (risk), or minimize the consequences.

Avalanches

Using avalanches as an example, the avalanche hazard is determined by the Avalanche Association in the bulletin. The snow's stability and susceptibility to avalanches is described. If you never leave your home, you are not exposed to the hazard, and so you are not at risk. The consequences of an avalanche depend on the size, and include injury, burial and possibly death.

The hazard reduction strategy that most people are familiar with is the blasting the ski patrollers do in lift assisted ski areas. This and other techniques effectively remove the unstable snow, thus removing the hazard.

Backcountry skiers learn how to travel safely in avalanche terrain by using techniques reduce their exposure to unstable snow, either by managing the terrain to find areas of stable snow, or by using travel techniques to reduce the time they are exposed.

And finally, devices such as avalanche air bags, avalanche transceivers, shovels, probes and skiing one at a time down a slope, reduce the consequences of an avalanche -- the airbags reducing the chance of burial, the transceiver increases the chance of being found alive, shovels and probes assist finding and digging up the subject, and skiing one at a time reduces the number of people buried if an avalanche occurs.

Consequences

The issue with many so-called "extreme" sports such as rock climbing, mountaineering and extreme skiing is that viewers conflate the consequences with the risk. I'm not saying that these things are safe, because there are hazards and the participants in these pursuits are exposed to risk. However, it's easy to be impressed with the activity merely from the consequences of failure while not necessarily understanding the actual risk.

When I'm doing a helicopter rescue I'm undertaking a certain amount of risk, but not as much as people think. What impresses people is the perception of the risk, or rather the consequences, of being dangled so far above the ground on the end of 150 feet of rope.

In reality almost none of the risk of this technique are from the height, the rope, or anything to do with the attachment to the helicopter. Almost all of the hazard exists in the helicopter and the pilot -- the helicopter could suffer a mechanical issue that would result in a crash, or the pilot might manoeuvre the rescuer into a tree or the ground.

In the first case, the chance of a mechanical issue occurring exists for all helicopter operations whether you're inside or outside the machine, and the actual risk is quite small. The consequences of being outside the machine are higher since you're not protected by seat belts and the helicopter's structure.

In the second case, the hazard is purely in the hands of the pilot, which is why a SAR team's relationship with the helicopter operator and pilots is so close, and why the standards for the pilots is so high.

Back to the bog

Which leaves the question, why should a mundane activity like wading through Burnaby Lake be so scary?

The first reason was, unlike helicopter rescue, avalanche rescue and all of the many other modes of rescue I've been trained for, I'd never had to wade through deep, thick mud in search of a corpse. The unfamiliarity of the situation made me uncomfortable.

Secondly, because of the unfamiliarity I was unable to judge the level of hazard, therefore also unaware of my risk, or the consequences. How deep was the muck? Would the dry suit and PFD work, or would be be sucked under? If one of us got stuck, would the other SAR guy be able to get us unstuck?

As that search went on I found that it wasn't as risky as it had appeared when we started, and that by using a pole, and staying within a pole's reach of each other we were more than capable of extracting each other from the muck, as long as one person had good footing. By alternating leads we were able to progress through the much and complete the task safely.

Related posts:

1. Avalanche Accidents and Hazard rating

Hazard, Risk and Consequences | Oplopanax Horridus

This isn't like the other Google Alerts service which lets you enter a few search terms and have Google email you when new results are found (although this tool is also useful for alerting you for public safety).

Google Public Alerts is a tool based on Google Maps that shows relevant alerts from public safety agencies such as the NOAA (for oceanographic information), the US National Weather Service, and the USGS (for earthquakes) among others.

Unfortunately, most of the reporting agencies are US based, which makes this tool only useful to a small fraction of the world's population. Looking at the map it's clear it only works for the US, as weather warnings stop at the border. Canada's a really safe place!

On the plus side, it's a good start, and it provides a way to integrate various public warning systems into an easy-to-use map.

The mapping aspect is important because it will allow people to clearly see what alerts are relevant to them, where Twitter and other "systems" typically contain too much information, and it's easy to miss the important stuff.

On the technical side, Google is using the Common Alerting Protocol (CAP), an international standard for publishing and sharing alerting data. I've had some experience using CAP while writing emergency management software. Seeing Google subscribe to it's use is a good thing siunce it would be easy for them to develop their own system. Adopting a standard means that existing publishers will be able to integrate their data into the system, and it will encourage more agencies to adopt CAP.

Any agencies who wish to provide alerting data to Google Public Alerts can contact them (see FAQ question 12) if they already publish in CAP version 1.2.

Related posts:

1. Google moves to Crowdsourcing

Google Public Alerts | Oplopanax Horridus

It has the locations of all of the SAR teams in BC, and includes all of the incidents from 2011  and 2012 that have spatial coordinates entered into the BC SAR Information System (BCSARIS).

Map of BC SAR Teams and Incidents from 2011 /2012

In Rick's words

Some of the location data (lat/lon, UTM) was on BCSARIS, some I guessed at from the description either in the task report or from the incident summaries and looking it up on Google Earth or in the BC Gazeteer spreadsheet. Many teams didn't include any information at all so the incident location is the hometown of the team (look at Chilliwack!)

All teams in BC are required to enter data into the BCSARIS system, but there are different levels of compliance. From my efforts on the InfoSAR project I can tell that most teams don't enter all their tasks, and many teams don't bother with coordinates.

That's too bad, because maps like the one Rick produced are very useful for planning. For example, books like Robert Koester's Lost Person Behaviour were written by analyzing many years worth of data on searches like these. British Columbia happens to have one of the largest number of SAR incidents per year of any single jurisdiction in Canada or the US (US SAR teams are usually managed on a county-by-county basis by various Sheriffs) and would be an amazing source of data for future reference.

In addition, knowing where people get lost, and what kinds of injuries they sustain could lead to trail or signage improvements. Several years back my team did some trail work that eliminated lost people on a trail in our area.

Rick made the map using ArcGIS, and published it on ArcGIS Explorer Online. The site can take a little while to load so be patient.

The link to the map: BCSARA Member Groups

If anyone has any questions about this map I'd be happy to forward requests to Rick, feel free to contact me or comment below.

Related posts:

1. Distribution of SAR Incidents in BC
2. Frequency of SAR Incidents
3. Accidents in Incidents: A review of SAR-related injuries

Map of SAR Incidents in BC 2011 | Oplopanax Horridus

I wrote about this last year, based on some comments I heard while attending the CAA's Annual conference and AGM. The CAA posted about it again today, which makes me believe they are still encountering users on courses and members of the public who are confused about the terminology.

Let's be clear on  the terminology we're using. We used to refer to "avalanche beacons", but the proper name is avalanche transciever because they can both receive and transmit.

A locator beacon, on the other hand, does not receive, but only transmits it's location to an overhead satellite or radio location system.

I've reproduced the CAA's notice below.

Related posts:

1. Beacons and Transceivers, what’s the difference
2. The ACC requires digital avalanche beacons

Beacons vs Transceivers again | Oplopanax Horridus

To give credit where it's due, teams in the Lower Mainland and the Sea-To-Sky have huge call volumes, mostly due to the large populations we serve, and we also pull off our fair share of challenging rescues. However, this is a huge province, and the kinds of rescue we do here are different than elsewhere in BC.

If you'd like a taste of what the rest of BC is doing, take a look at the PEP incident Summaries. Not a week goes by without teams from all over BC responding to tasks big and small. Unfortunately you can't subscribe to them as tweets or as RSS because they're in PDF format.

I've started to build a list of links to SAR resources and agencies in BC, including a list of all of the SAR teams in BC with links to the web pages. Feel free to contact me with any suggestions or corrections to the list. Take some time and check out what the SAR team in your corner of the province is up to.

No related posts.

SAR Teams in BC | Oplopanax Horridus

Posted on the SledLink page, the "STOP" tool advises sledders to

1. Stop in an area free of avalanches, regroup and communicate.
2. Think about terrain features, and avalanche triggers
3. Observe weather and snowpack
4. Plan the route based on the observations

There's a lot more on this, but you should get it from the horse's mouth, no point in me copying it and taking any credit. It's all good advice, and like I wrote previously, it's basically encouraging sledders to stop and make more observations.

Related posts:

1. Situational Awareness: Sledder vs Skier
2. Situational Awareness: Skier vs Sledder
3. Death on Snowmobile: part 3 what worked

Sledder Situational Awareness again | Oplopanax Horridus

The course was three days, the first two being in the classroom and the third being a field day filled with four scenarios.

The first classroom day was spent on "AvSAR" or Avalanche Search and Rescue, with the focus being on the actual response to an avalanche from an Incident Command point of view. This covered communications, managing resources, and using the ICS organization chart and how to assign people to various roles.

The second classroom day consisted of the Medical Aspects of Avalanche Rescue seminar by Dr. Renata Lewis that the CAA has previously delivered at professional development (CPD) sessions. This seminar reviews the latest research on avalanche survival and how to treat avalanche victims, applying triage techniques and transporting subjects. This session also included hands-on training with some medical equipment related to hypothermia treatment, spinal immobilization, and patient transport.

The third day, as mentioned above, was a very full day of avalanche rescue scenarios. This involved applying the techniques learned in the first two days, including resource management, and triage. The final scenario station included using the RECCO system, probing techniques, and a demonstration from a trained CARDA Dog team.

At the outset of the course the instructors were clear that while they were in front of the class instructing us, they recognized that the level of experience in the room dealing with ICS and avalanche rescue probably was greater than the information contained in the course, and they were learning from us just as much as we were from them. This was part of the value of the course from a Ground SAR manager's point of view -- the experience of the fellow students.

Attending the course were Avalanche forecasters working with the Ministry of Transportation, Heli-Ski guides, Ski patrollers, SAR managers and members, Canada Parks wardens, Metro Vancouver watershed managers, and one member of the Canadian Forces from Rescue Squadron 442, CFB Comox. There was an immense depth and breadth of experience in the room, from nuts and bolts rescue, to long range planning and safety, and including a high degree of pre-hospital care experience.

As students we worked together on several tabletop problems, exchanging different views on how to manage the scenarios given to us. Of great value was understanding how different industries perceive avalanche risk and rescue.

An example is that Heli-Ski companies never ski when the weather prevents them from flying, so they always have air support. If an accident happens, the various operations respond to assist each other, and response times are very quick. Ski patrollers and cat ski/snowmobile guides similarly enjoy quick response times. In contrast, SAR team response times can be quite slow because of difficulty accessing terrain, and the conditions that lost or injured subjects find themselves in.

On the flip side, SAR teams have dedicated training and resources specifically for SAR, and SAR only. Most of the other industries have SAR and safety as a part of the operation, and often have to re-purpose resources for the rescue. An example is the radio dispatcher will often function as an operations manager or communications director during a rescue. Dedicated rescue and transportation equipment may be light or minimal as the weights in a helicopter are carefully managed to maximize fuel and the number of customers who can fly. SAR teams will have dedicated resources and specialized for their roles, and since many teams respond to searches several times a year the rescue plans will be well understood by all team members.

SAR is also the only agency in the above list that specialized in searching rather than just rescue. This is an important point because many SAR responses involve travelling in avalanche terrain when there is no actual avalanche reported. All of the training and techniques to manage avalanche risk have to be used, as well as the knowledge and training on how to rescue a team member from a possible avalanche, even though the response may be for a lost or injured subject. From this point of view, SAR spends more time analyzing the transportation of members rather than assuming that a helicopter or snow cat is available.

Another consideration is that SAR members are often called out to search when people are overdue, meaning the response take place at night. This puts SAR managers in the difficult position of weighing avalanche risk, and the inability to make good observations of snow conditions, against the safety of the subject. It's possible a SAR manager would need to hold back searchers if the risk was too high.

I believe that most SAR teams with the possibility of a response into avalanche terrain should send at least one SAR manager on this course. The value is in working with other avalanche professionals, and similarly other industries can learn a lot from a SAR manager knowledgeable in the application of ICS to a rescue. Teams should also consider sending senior members as well.

Related posts:

1. SARDay 104-106: Organized Avalanche Response

CAA AvSAR Course | Oplopanax Horridus

One of the guys on my SAR team just got back from the CAA ITP Level 1: Snowmobile course in Revelstoke, BC. His comment on the course was that he didn't understand how "you guys" (meaning skiers) could do what they did on the course, as he described the distances travelled, and the variety of terrain they toured through.

This is the sledder's view of the world. While a skier might travel 20km in a day, someone on a snowmobile will do that in a few minutes. Their opportunity is this; they can see much more terrain than a skier can in one day. It's also their risk (as I wrote n the last post).

Skiers can chose an area depending on the conditions, and be happy in that area for a day. Sledders, with greater speed, could easily get bored staying in the "safe" zone.

The key to maintaining situational awareness while snowmobiling is this; use your strengths (speed, distance) to counter your weaknesses (lack of opportunity for observations). Stop, and poke in the snow -- learn a few analytical skills for studying the snowpack. You can't hear "whumphs," and often won't notice shooting cracks or other obvious signs of snow instability. Make up for it by being able to stop, dig a quick pit, and write down what you see, even if it's a sketch. Temember to record the location, elevation, and aspect (use your GPS and compass.

A sledder's avalanche field book could easily be huge by the end of the season!

Avalanche Field Notebook

As the day and the season progresses, a sledder's knowledge of the terrain and the snowpack history could easily be better than a skier's, but only if they take the time to make the observations.

Related posts:

1. Situational Awareness: Skier vs Sledder
2. Backcountry Skier dies on Mount Seymour

Situational Awareness: Sledder vs Skier | Oplopanax Horridus

Map of Pitt Lake

No related posts.

Older Map of Pitt Lake | Oplopanax Horridus