|
current planned Canadian AvalancheDanger Rating Sys-
tem is shown below in Table 4.
 But the most contentious issue has been the use of one
word:CONSIDERABLE.
WhiletheCanadianavalanche communityhadgone
aheadwith the introduction of the danger scale in Canada
we had rather naively and in blessed ignorance not con-
sulted with our good neighbors to the south.This led to a
diplomaticexchange ofnotesbetweenthe Presidents of
theAmericanAssociationofAvalancheProfessionals
(AAAP) and the Canadian Avalanche Association (CAA)
andan evenmore memorablemeetingin a small hotelroom
during the last ISSW that was referred to earlier.Now the
issue had come out of the closet.
Canadians haveused the word considerable for the past
two winters.For the public and the users of the Bulletin it
has achieved a good level of acceptance and understand-
ing and is clearly a word that cannotbe confused with any
combination of words.The news media, whoalthough we
6
|
may often criticize theirdescription ofavalanche events
areultimatelytheprimarycommunicatorwiththebest
resources todisseminateinformationareusing thecon-
siderableword.Itisusedbytheradio,television,and
print media.The widest distribution of avalanche infor-
mation on television and radio is usually when the danger
ishighorextremebutoccasionallycircumstancessee
widespread use of the word considerable.
Finally and perhaps most importantly is the public, the
traveler in the mountains,how do they find it?Certainly
in the first season we had some inquiries, literally a hand
full.Wehave on file now a record of communication and
commentsfrom people who like the new scale.We, the
providersofthisavalanche informationmustnotforget
who we serving.That is not to say we must compromise
ourprofessionalandtechnical standardsbutthe useof
this word does not do that.
|
|
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
