Wasatch Tours Volume 1

by Alexis Kelner & Dave Hanscom

Aeronautical Hazards

Commercial helicopter skiing recreation is authorized by the U.S. Forest Service on lands under its jurisdiction. On application, and payment of a (usually small) fee, Special Use Permits are granted to concessionaires for permission to operate their businesses on the National Forest. The permit system is intended to assure that permittees operate safely, responsibly, and with proper training, equipment, insurance, etc. If the number of written complaints to local officials of the Forest Service is any indication, not all helicopter skiing operations in the Wasatch may be operating safely and responsibly.

Two commercial heli-skiing businesses are based in the Wasatch Mountains. Wasatch Powderbird Guides pursue their business mostly in the Central Wasatch; their special use permit also allows them to operate as far north as the Francis Peak area above Farmington, as far south as Springville's Hobble Creek Canyon, and as far east as the Uinta mountains. Diamond Peak Heli-Ski Adventures operated on private lands in the mountains east of Ogden until the January 1993 helicopter crash that killed one of its owners.

Compared to heli-skiing in the Canadian Rockies, where approximately 50 patrons and personnel have been killed while heli-skiing since the early 1970's,* Wasatch Powderbird Guides appear to be operating a relatively safe business for their clientele. The company has been involved in only one serious (non-injury) helicopter crash and three---what they consider ``serious''---avalanche accidents since commencement of business in 1973.

* footnote: The ``approximately 50 patrons and personnel'' killed includes about 40 avalanche fatalities. The remainder of the victims either collided with trees or rocks, fell into ``tree wells,'' or died in helicopter crashes.

Some non-permitted area helicopter charters have transported skiers and Very Important Persons to mountain summits along the Wasatch. Such unauthorized flights and landings are illegal and prosecutable, and pilots involved in these activities are known as ``renegades.'' Unauthorized heli-skiing landings are not limited to renegades; on at least one occasion forest officials reprimanded operators of Powderbird Guides for similar infractions.

The remainder of this section outlines touring hazards that the authors, several avalanche professionals, and numerous backcountry tourers believe have been created by activities associated with helicopter skiing. Based on content of numerous letters of complaint, official ``for the record'' memoranda, and other public communications,* hazards that may be initiated by heli-skiing fall into three clearly defined categories: direct heli-hazards, indirect heli-hazards, and latent heli-hazards. Central Wasatch areas that may have potential for exposure to such hazards are plotted in the map shown on the following page.

* footnote: The helicopter and subsequent explosives hazards sections are based on extensive examination of numerous Forest Service documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act and by other means. In addition, the authors have received, over the years, many copies of complaints submitted to the Forest Service and to the Flight Standards office of the Federal Aviation Administration.

Direct Heli-hazards

Direct heli-hazards include flying or landing of helicopters above tourers, skiing above tourers, and setting off explosives while conducting avalanche control work.

Salt Lake backcountry skier Lori Webb described the following incident: ``As much as possible we carefully choose a safe route away from avalanche paths. Another party of skiers were making a higher traverse in the same area. My partner and I were halfway up the slope when a helicopter flew through the pass just barely above the top of the pass. The reverberation of the helicopter blades set off three avalanches. The other ski party shouted to us `Avalanche!' We skied down and out of the path of the slide . . . the incident certainly points out the conflicts that will continually arise when helicopter skiing is permitted in areas frequented by winter mountaineers.''

Craig W. Beasley, Salt Lake, described an incident that especially concerned him: ``Four people, including myself, were just below the ridge removing our climbing skins in preparation for a descent into Days Fork. While doing so, a Powderbird Guides helicopter attempted three landings directly above us during exceedingly windy conditions. The helicopter was unable to stabilize and could not land until the fourth attempt.'' Because Mr. Beasley had worked on a mountain rescue team for four years, he was very aware of hazards associated with operation of helicopters in windy and high altitude conditions. ``All four of us felt that the helicopter hovering overhead jeopardized our safety.''

On a Saturday in mid-December 1992, Victor Heilweil, his wife Ann, and two friends were touring in the upper regions of Big Cottonwood Canyon's Silver Fork when they were subjected to a very unpleasant and dangerous encounter with a group of heli-skiers. In a complaint to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Mr. Heilweil described the incident:

``My wife and I were traversing along the ridge towards Flagstaff Peak when a helicopter landed right between us, easily within 30 feet of each of us. It was so close that the intense wind and blast of snow that it created nearly knocked me over. . . . As I passed one of the guides, he asked me how I was doing in a pleasant manner, and I responded that I thought it was unnecessarily dangerous for the helicopter to land so close to us. He then completely changed his tone of voice and stated that he had authority from the Alta Sheriff's Department to have me arrested for obstructing the landing of the helicopter, and threatened to physically force me into the helicopter and transport me down to the Sheriff's Office. He also asked for my name so that he could call up `the authorities' on his walky-talky.''

Mr. Heilweil suggested to the FAA that the heli-ski concession should abide by ``some sort of safety code while operating aircraft on public lands where other people are present'' and that the heli-ski operators ``have more flexibility in their flight plans, so that if they see other backcountry users, they are able to land elsewhere and avoid this type of confrontation.''*

* footnote: Victor Heilweil's letter is not the only complaint describing intimidation. In another instance a heli-ski pilot is reported to have used his aircraft to chase a backcountry tourer.

Thankfully, no reported examples exist showing that backcountry tourers were endangered by avalanches released above them by explosive charges thrown from the heli-ski aircraft. The topic, however, continues to be the subject of frequent discussions and ``for the record'' memoranda by independent avalanche professionals and Forest Service avalanche hazard evaluators.

``I write this to protest the actions and philosophy with which WPG Wasatch Powderbird Guides uses explosives in the backcountry,'' a very agitated Utah Avalanche Forecast Center hazard forecaster Brad Meiklejohn wrote in a ``for the record'' memo early in 1991. ``My sense is that WPG likes to throw explosives and likes to see avalanches run.'' To emphasize his point Meiklejohn ennumerated one special use permit violation ``wherein they produced avalanches . . . in an area they do not ski'' and several examples of excessive bombardment episodes. ``As an individual and a professional,'' he concluded his letter, ``I am indignant.''

In a January, 1990 letter urging officials of the Wasatch/Cache National Forest to curtail or to limit the heli-ski operation's use of explosives, American Avalanche Institute's president Rod Newcomb expressed concern for the safety of backcountry tourers: ``When Powderbird Guides began using explosive testing for stability evaluation, the density of skiers in the Wasatch was low. As the years have gone by, the numbers of backcountry skiers has increased. . . . I feel it is only a matter of time before one of the triggered avalanches encounters a person hidden in the trees below an avalanche path. This will not only be an avoidable accident, it will very likely result in restrictions for other permittees, such as myself, in the use of explosives.''

The Special Use Permit granted the heli-ski concession directs blasters to overfly and ``canvass'' the proximity of the target for tourers and winter campers. All explosives work is to be concluded by 9:00 a.m.

Indirect Heli-Hazards.

Though ``indirect'' heli-hazards may be somewhat more subtle than the direct variety, because of their relationship to avalanche bombing they may be equally dangerous.

Sympathetic Avalanche Releases. Any time an avalanche starts to run down a slope or a chute, the air and ground vibrations it generates may trigger avalanches in adjacent---or nearby---slopes or gullies. Such avalanche releases are called sympathetic releases. Forest Service manuals frequently warn avalanche workers to be especially cautious of such releases when firing artillery to stabilize slopes. Sympathetic snowslides have occurred even on slopes along the opposite side of a canyon from the target slopes. A classic case of sympathetic release was observed during artillery control work at Alta's Greely Hill; its description in the Forest Service's Snowy Torrents, is worth repeating:

``Shots then fired on the Greely Hill slopes released slides from adjacent hillsides. The fracturing continued to propagate clear around Albion Basin, releasing the Sugarloaf and Devil's Castle slides, and eventually releasing two small slides on the southwest face of Mount Wolverine, across the valley from the original target.''

Wise backcountry skiers should not be ignorant of a possible sympathetic release avalanche hazard when they tour in areas used by helicopter skiers.

When tourers hear the loud reports of nearby explosives detonating, they should make certain they are not standing on or at the base of an avalanche slope.

Post-Control Releases. ``If an explosive fails to release an avalanche,'' international avalanche authority Ron Perla writes, ``it may in fact weaken rather than stabilize a slope.'' Perla explains that explosive control is most effective on slopes that are heavily skied, and hence compacted such that underlying layers offer solid support. ``This is usually the case within developed ski areas. In the back-country, this is usually not the case. Any snow slab, over a weak base, that fails to release when bombed, may be made into a hair trigger trap to be set off by a ski tourer. This is true irrespective of the explosive size.''

Post-control release is another hazard that may be associated with the heli-ski concession's use of explosives. At least one of their three ``serious'' avalanche incidents occurred on a slope that had been tested with explosives before being declared to be safe for skiing. Forest Service case histories also document numerous instances of post-control avalanches that have entrapped and injured skiers even though the slopes had been blasted and skied.

Whenever tourers come onto a slope pock-marked with the black powder marks that result from explosives detonations they should not presume the slope is safe to cross. The safety-conscious tourer will treat any slope capable of avalanching with the greatest caution even if it has been blasted and skied.

The Permit Process

When the helicopter skiing concession first commenced operations near Alta, some town residents expressed outrage at the disruption it caused to the serene mountain environment. ``F___ Helicopters,'' painted in three-foot block letters on the roof of one Alta official's residence, denoted the intensity of feelings.

By the end of 1990, the helicopter skiing concession had sewn up (under its Special Use Permit) most of the skiable non-wilderness terrain in the Wasatch Mountains. At the same time the ranks of backcountry tourers had increased beyond the wildest expectations of the handful who rediscovered the sport in the 1960's. A recent Forest Service analysis indicates that the Central Wasatch alone receives 80,000-90,000 backcountry skiing day visits annually. Heli-skiing, on the other hand, accounts for only 1,000-2,000 skier days. Concerned tourers began asking Forest Service officials how they could justify allowing so few heli-skiers to spoil and endanger the backcountry recreational experiences of so many. Many canyon residents also complained of noisy helicopter overflights that disturbed their serene environments.

When the heli-ski Special Use Permit came up for renewal in January 1991, forest officials initiated a ``professionally directed'' mediation process to resolve mounting friction between the two user groups. The backcountry skiers' representatives' goal was resolution of conflicts. In a lavish brochure distributed to their clientele, the heli-ski concession declared that their permit could not be revised ``to the satisfaction of both parties,'' essentially a No Compromise position. Alternate weekends use patterns or alternating terrain usage proposals, that would have assured both user groups equal access to undisturbed terrain, were rejected by heli-ski negotiators. After several sessions of failure to compromise, mediation was discontinued.

Forest Service officials then continued the process required for permit renewal. That the officials favored the heli-ski concession became obvious on reading the range of alternative actions they published.* All alternatives appeared to have taken at face value the heli-ski permittee's claims that any modification of their permit would lead to the concession's demise. Forest officials discounted all substantive proposals to resolve conflicts proffered by backcountry advocates.

* footnote: Those who desire additional information on the heli-skiing controversy should ask for the ``Heli-skiing File'' at university libraries.

The heli-skiing issue's undesirable outcome will be debated again in 1995 or '96, when the permit comes up for renewal. It would be prudent for concerned backcountry recreationists, canyon residents and visitors to become informed of the issues and to pledge vigorous participation in the renewal process.*

* footnote: In skiing regions all over the world---except in the crowded Wasatch---helicopter skiing operations are allowed only in remote non-public areas, far from highways and public transportation, residential, and business environments.

When the recreational helicopter skiing concession first commenced operations near Alta, some town residents expressed outrage at the disruption it caused to the serene mountain environment. "F___ Helicopters," painted in three-foot block letters on the roof of one Alta resident's home, denoted the intensity of feelings.

Commercial helicopter skiing recreation is authorized by the U.S. Forest Service on lands under its jurisdiction. On application, and payment of a fee, Special Use Permits are granted to concessionaires to operate their businesses on the National Forest. The permit system is intended to assure safe and responsible operation. If the number of complaints to officials is any indication, the local heli-skiing permittee Wasatch Powderbird Guides (WPG), appears to be operating irresponsibly and not always safely. The heli-ski operators have more written complaints lodged against them than complaints lodged against italicize all end italics permittees who conduct business on lands administered by the Salt Lake Ranger District.

Wasatch Powderbirds' rise to infamy commenced in the mid-1970's, with the Forest Service assuming the role of a kindly godfather toward the fledgling corporation. When heli-guides were caught red-handed landing skiers in an off limits area, the District Ranger registered "disapproval"-- and suggested that the violator apply "formally" to add the terrain to WPG's permit.

The Heli-skiing conflict came to a focus during Congressional debates establishing the U.S. Forest wilderness areas in Utah. A provision in the proposed Utah Wilderness Act would have permitted WPG to continue heli-skiing in several Utah wilderness areas. The head of the U.S. Forest Service, as well as local and national consevation groups, strongly opposed the provision. Senator Jake Garn then proffered a "compromise:" the offensive and precedent setting langauge was stricken, but several heli-skied drainages were cherry-stemmed out of the Olympus and Twin Peaks wilderness areas. The legislation, however, provided for continued Forest Service regulation of heli-ski activities on the terrain withdrawn. By the end of l990, Wasatch Powderbird Guides' had included in their Special Use Permit most of the skiable non-wilderness terrain in the Wasatch Mountains. At the same time the ranks of backcountry winter recreationists had increased phenomenally. Concerned tourers began asking Forest officials how they could justify allowing a very small and exclusive group of heli-skiers to spoil and endanger the backcountry recreational experiences of so many. Many canyon residents, such as those living in upper Lambs Canyon, also complained of helicopter overflights that disturbed their serene mountain environments.

When the heli-ski Special Use Permit came up for renewal in January, 1991, forest officials initiated a "professionally directed" mediation process to resolve mounting friction between the two user groups. The backcountry skiers' goal was a resolution of conflicts. In a lavish brochure distributed to their clientele, the heli-ski concession declared that their permit could not be rewised "to the satisfaction of both parities," essentially a No Compromise position. Proposed by backcountry advocates terrain use patterns that would have assured both user groups italics equal end italics access to undisturbed terrain were rejected by heli-ski officials.

After the failure of mediation Forest officials then continued the permit renewal process. During a crowded meeting at the Whitmore Library later that year, Forest Supervisor Susan Giannettino announced some mitigating measures

imposed to be on WPG's operations. Hardly had the official concluded when an agitated heli-guide dramatically--and tearfully-- announced the consequence: Wasatch Powderbird Guides was going out of business!

It was too good to be true. And it wasn't. Within a few months, after pressures applied by politicians like Jake Garn, the Regional Forester relaxed some of Giannettino's measures; he also directed forest personnel to develop a monitoring system to ascertain conflicts.

The stage is now set for the 1997 edition of the heli-skiing permit renewal process. Forest officials and backcountry users are now armed with reams of data on conflicts and more and diverse allegations of heli-skiing abuses. Leaders of a Girl Scout camp near Provo have threatened to have heli-skiers arrested for trespass. A private property owner in the South Fork area has complained of heli-ski copters landing on his property and damaging fences. Wasatch Mountain State Park managers, as well as Provo City officials, have complained of WPG's unauthorized use of public roads and lands for landing sites. Salt Lake teacher Ellie Ienatsch has observed the WPG copter repeatedly spook golden eagles from their nesting sites in Big Cottonwood. Such thoughtless fly-by's, she believes, have resulted in the deaths of several eaglets.

Individuals urging curtailment of copter skiing will be confronted with "heli-myths" promulgated by WPG' employees, backers and clients. "We were there long before the tourers," some will claim, ignorant of the fact that ski tourers have toured the Wasatch since the early 1920's. The noise output of the copter, some heli-ski proponents will insist, is no louder than that of a bus. "Tourers have all the wilderness areas to tour in," others will proclaim, not realizing that none other than WPG's owner Greg Smith has pronounced such lands unsuitable for ordinary cross-country use. Due to "the steepness of topography and the severity of high altitude conditions," he wrote to the Forest Service, "large tracts of the Wasatch in general and the Lone Peak Wilderness Area specifically are less than ideal for cross-country (lightweight) use."

As is usual, forest officials have put out a range of alternatives--along with length of the heli-skiing season (Dec. 15 - Mar. 15) and a limit on the number of copters--for the public it YOU end it to comment on. One excellent alternative would not renew the permit. Period! End of all heli-skiing conflicts in the Wasatch. Onother alternative would prohibit heli-skiing during weekends in the tri-canyons area. Scoping documents detailing all proposed alternatives can be obtained by calling the forest headquarters or distrcit office near you. it The public comment period ends on April __ end so act now to help eliminate and/or minimize the heli-skiing nuissance. Please keep in mind that failure to acitvely promote good alternatives may lead to 5 more years of unfettered heli use and abuse. No one's conscience should be burdened with such a grim prospect!