I wish this article had explicitly talked about the fact that a guide company is going to be motivated to make bad decisions in a season where they have gotten very little snow. It comes across as embarrassingly naive for the article to repeatedly say, “we have no idea why they made this bad decision.” We have to assume unsafe choices are heavily motivated by money, and it’s important to say that. Especially with the dynamic that these are wealthy people, largely women. I have no doubt sexism and capitalism were heavy contributors to this tragedy.
While I agree that money was likely a contributing factor, it was just one of many factors. In my mind, the biggest contributing factor was the fear of missing out. Fear of missing out on epic first tracks in powder. Fear of missing out on the togetherness of friends. Fear of missing out on the hard-to-come-by stay at the Frog Lake huts. Fear of missing out on making memories of an adventure of a lifetime. Fear of missing out on the joy of a life well lived doing what these people loved. And, as you said, the fear of missing out on income (guide company) or non refundable costs (clients).
This storm was accurately predicted a week in advance, but the fear of missing out on these opportunities outweighed the potential danger of the storm in their minds.
I drive over Donner Pass every other weekend including on the Sunday that this group started their adventure. Myself and others knew that we had to be home and off the roads and mountains by Sunday night if we wanted to be safe. The worst of the storm was supposed to hit Monday and Tuesday and it was predicted to be big enough to close roads, businesses and schools for multiple days. Residents were warned to stay put.
The decision to proceed with this trip was the first mistake. The money would have been a factor for this initial decision, but this mistake alone did not have to have a deadly consequence. Once the decision to go was made and they set skis on the route to the huts, the money no longer factored in. It was the decisions and factors encountered after they were at the huts that ultimately led to this avoidable tragedy.
The second major mistake was the decision to leave the safety of the huts in the heart of the storm in high avalanche danger conditions. But again, this mistake did not mean certain death. It was the decision to take a route that was known to expose them to high avalanche danger that was the costliest decision. Even if you take what you perceive to be the safest path through a high danger corridor, you only remove a fraction of the risk. The smartest and right choice would have been to take the safest path through a very low danger corridor, even if it’s longer, less fun and requires inconvenient logistics (getting back to vehicles at the end). Had they done this, they would likely be alive.
All this is not to say that I place blame or that I don’t understand how this could have happened. I understand exactly how it happened. I have spent countless hours in the backcountry and have had many close encounters with danger and even brushes with death. We all accept risk in one form or another on a daily basis. Our tolerance goes up as our comfort, skills and experience increase. Nine times out of 10, things go exactly as expected. It’s the tenth time that catches you off guard and a single crux decision (or more commonly, a series of decisions) that can lead you astray. Consequences are high when up against Mother Nature’s wild and uncontrollable lands. But that’s what also draws us out there.
Personally, I believe that the group did some things right (avoiding the notch, keeping distance between skiers when on steeper slopes prior to the avalanche, staying on slopes under 30 degrees at the time of avalanche, and staying low on the slope and in the trees), which demonstrated their awareness of the threat of avalanche. The whiteout conditions and deep powder had them bunched up on a fairly benign slope at the time of the avalanche, leading me to believe, they did not recognize the danger above them. The guides likely thought they were far enough out of the likely path of an avalanche, which they almost were. Another 50 yards lower (according to reports) and they would have been safe.
I have been nearly ill contemplating this tragedy. It is so terribly sad imagining the loss and grieving that is going on by family, friends, survivors and the community. My heart goes out to all.
True, though I'd hope to think the guides would put their own safety and the others in their care first but perhaps they didn't have the right processes in place to make the safest decision. Such a unnecessary tragedy.
Agree. One would reasonably assume that the guides valued their own and their clients’ lives enough to make the decisions they thought would keep them alive.
What is in question is if the guides were clearly made aware of how high the avalanche danger was and if the guides themselves or staff back at the office made the decision to use the route they chose. What or who motivated that decision? Chances are they were all well aware of the danger and took a calculated risk with the understanding that they’d avoid slopes over 30 degrees, they’d practice proper avalanche safety practices while exiting and they’d avoid known/obvious avalanche paths. They possibly even had a discussion with consensus, and the high level of experience, skills and competency of the group gave them the confidence to carry out this plan/route.
In the end, had they continued to keep a safe distance between travelers as they had earlier, 1 or 2 lives might have been lost at most. While a loss of even one life would still have been tragic, it’s a bit more comprehensible.
I think this incident will lead to changes in the backcountry guiding industry and with avalanche safety training (prime case study of what not to do and how quickly things go wrong). It just reinforces the importance of being able to turn around, pivot, use a back-up plan or to just cancel plans altogether when the loss of life is imminent.
What specifically are you implying? Just get the existence of an economic system in which private mountain guides exists is why this can happen? I’m glad the article stuck to the facts and not some grand philosophical argument.
Do you have details on the sexism motivation? Are you implying the guides would have felt less pressure to make it a great experience or to press on if they were leading men? Or are you suggesting that they would have had more fear for their and their clients lives if they were leading men?
I’m not implying anything? But I’ll restate what I said: resorts and guides have been hurting for income this year. The snow drought has been the worst in decades, and comes after years of erratic weather and shortening snow seasons. It has been dire. So then you finally have snow, and even as people’s spidey senses are tingling, we are tasking people whose livelihoods depend on profiting off bringing people outside to say, “no, this isn’t safe.” It’s easy to armchair quarterback it and say you wouldn’t make that decision, but these people have tons of social and financial pressure that pushed them to put people in harms way instead of riding out the storm in a cabin with a plush leather couches and hot water. When people have a financial motivation to make bad decisions, I think it’s important to be explicit about that. Someone was making money off this trip.
I’ll concede my point bout sexism wasn’t fleshed out. But I am a women who has worked in the outdoor industry and recreated in the outdoors. You can’t divorce the gender dynamics in the outdoors and outdoor industry from the fact that seven women died in this tragedy. There’s all sorts of ways this can show up. I have no doubt these
women were accomplished skiers - but sexism hurts us in all sorts of ways. Many many strong women have been pushed by male companions or guides to do things they have felt were unsafe. Many many strong women have not been listened to when they tell male companions and guides they are hurt, tired, or scared. Additionally women are seriously underrepresented in the outdoor industry. I’ve been to conferences with fewer than seven women, so for seven women to die is an absolutely bonkers over representation. Finally, sexism shows up in our lives in all sorts of insidious ways. How much avalanche safety is taught, or tools developed, by men and with men in mind? How different are women’s bodies and how often are women in the room when products are designed or safety plans created?
Oh, yeah, I don’t doubt that financial pressures played a role in heading out there in the first place, tough to cancel a trip when you are hurting for income. And heading back the way they did, rather than a safer way further from their vehicles may have been motivated by a spirit of customer service. I think equating that to capitalism is a little bit of an over generalization, but, yeah, I get it.
And, yeah, I totally agree that sexism is pretty insidious and ever present. I just don’t think it creates an easy explanation for this particular tragedy.
I’m with you, I personally don’t see the implication of being female (and having perceived wealth) in relation to this incident. I think you were meaning to respond to the original comment, not me.
These women were more competent and experienced than some of the male clients, according to one of the male survivor’s accounts. One of the guides that did not survive was a competent female as well. So, I’m not sure what HarveyPeligro was interpreting as sexism. These deaths did not fall upon any of these victims as a result of male v female.
This article is amazing. I read it a year or so ago after listening to a podcast about the avalanche.
It’s amazingly well written and the way it explains it all to a non-skier is first class.
One thing I'm thinking about with this article is how many people die on Los Angeles' Mt. Baldy. 24 people have died there in the last decade, despite it being less than an hour from the heart of Los Angeles.
It's specifically because Mt. Baldy is so accessible that it's so deadly. There's a sense that, because the city is right there, nothing bad can really happen. Thousands of people have done these routes before and taken their pictures and told their stories, so it will work out for this hiker as well.
While I don't know what the decision-making process here was, I can't help but wonder if it was something similar. There is so much infrastructure to rescue people around Tahoe, and so well-travelled that there's a certain complacency inherent to it. You forget that this is a wild place, where people can, will, and have died, and believe instead that that is the fate of someone else.
Good comparison and makes me think of Mt Hood, which is an hour from Portland and one of the deadliest mountains in the country with 10,000 people climbing it each year.
One of my favorite longreads, about the 1986 disaster on Mt Hood that killed 9 people (including 7 high school students) that were on a field trip:
Thank you for sharing, I hadn't read about this before - such a tragic story.
It’s hard to even imagine what the students trapped in the ice cave went through, it feels so raw and terrifying considering they thought it would be a safe field trip. The bravery of the people on the trip who tried to correct course is so moving, as well as the compassion in grief shown by those who did survive. Genuinely shocked the rescuers found anyone alive in those conditions.
Sheesh. Skiing was already an unimaginable hobby to me as a southerner but I literally can’t fathom dying this way. May the deceased rest in peace, and the survivors continue to recover physically and emotionally.
[OP] Aschebescher | 20 hours ago
Archived and unpaywalled: https://archive.ph/pWovk
Stay1nAliv3 | 18 hours ago
There are so many unanswered questions- hopefully the surviving guide ends up talking. It’s horrific how easily preventable the situation was
7312throwaway | 35 minutes ago
My thoughts exactly. It seemed like the reporter wasn't able to get a lot of people involved to talk to them directly.
HarveyPeligro | 11 hours ago
I wish this article had explicitly talked about the fact that a guide company is going to be motivated to make bad decisions in a season where they have gotten very little snow. It comes across as embarrassingly naive for the article to repeatedly say, “we have no idea why they made this bad decision.” We have to assume unsafe choices are heavily motivated by money, and it’s important to say that. Especially with the dynamic that these are wealthy people, largely women. I have no doubt sexism and capitalism were heavy contributors to this tragedy.
frogs96 | 7 hours ago
While I agree that money was likely a contributing factor, it was just one of many factors. In my mind, the biggest contributing factor was the fear of missing out. Fear of missing out on epic first tracks in powder. Fear of missing out on the togetherness of friends. Fear of missing out on the hard-to-come-by stay at the Frog Lake huts. Fear of missing out on making memories of an adventure of a lifetime. Fear of missing out on the joy of a life well lived doing what these people loved. And, as you said, the fear of missing out on income (guide company) or non refundable costs (clients).
This storm was accurately predicted a week in advance, but the fear of missing out on these opportunities outweighed the potential danger of the storm in their minds.
I drive over Donner Pass every other weekend including on the Sunday that this group started their adventure. Myself and others knew that we had to be home and off the roads and mountains by Sunday night if we wanted to be safe. The worst of the storm was supposed to hit Monday and Tuesday and it was predicted to be big enough to close roads, businesses and schools for multiple days. Residents were warned to stay put.
The decision to proceed with this trip was the first mistake. The money would have been a factor for this initial decision, but this mistake alone did not have to have a deadly consequence. Once the decision to go was made and they set skis on the route to the huts, the money no longer factored in. It was the decisions and factors encountered after they were at the huts that ultimately led to this avoidable tragedy.
The second major mistake was the decision to leave the safety of the huts in the heart of the storm in high avalanche danger conditions. But again, this mistake did not mean certain death. It was the decision to take a route that was known to expose them to high avalanche danger that was the costliest decision. Even if you take what you perceive to be the safest path through a high danger corridor, you only remove a fraction of the risk. The smartest and right choice would have been to take the safest path through a very low danger corridor, even if it’s longer, less fun and requires inconvenient logistics (getting back to vehicles at the end). Had they done this, they would likely be alive.
All this is not to say that I place blame or that I don’t understand how this could have happened. I understand exactly how it happened. I have spent countless hours in the backcountry and have had many close encounters with danger and even brushes with death. We all accept risk in one form or another on a daily basis. Our tolerance goes up as our comfort, skills and experience increase. Nine times out of 10, things go exactly as expected. It’s the tenth time that catches you off guard and a single crux decision (or more commonly, a series of decisions) that can lead you astray. Consequences are high when up against Mother Nature’s wild and uncontrollable lands. But that’s what also draws us out there.
Personally, I believe that the group did some things right (avoiding the notch, keeping distance between skiers when on steeper slopes prior to the avalanche, staying on slopes under 30 degrees at the time of avalanche, and staying low on the slope and in the trees), which demonstrated their awareness of the threat of avalanche. The whiteout conditions and deep powder had them bunched up on a fairly benign slope at the time of the avalanche, leading me to believe, they did not recognize the danger above them. The guides likely thought they were far enough out of the likely path of an avalanche, which they almost were. Another 50 yards lower (according to reports) and they would have been safe.
I have been nearly ill contemplating this tragedy. It is so terribly sad imagining the loss and grieving that is going on by family, friends, survivors and the community. My heart goes out to all.
halfhoursonearth_ | 7 hours ago
True, though I'd hope to think the guides would put their own safety and the others in their care first but perhaps they didn't have the right processes in place to make the safest decision. Such a unnecessary tragedy.
frogs96 | 6 hours ago
Agree. One would reasonably assume that the guides valued their own and their clients’ lives enough to make the decisions they thought would keep them alive.
What is in question is if the guides were clearly made aware of how high the avalanche danger was and if the guides themselves or staff back at the office made the decision to use the route they chose. What or who motivated that decision? Chances are they were all well aware of the danger and took a calculated risk with the understanding that they’d avoid slopes over 30 degrees, they’d practice proper avalanche safety practices while exiting and they’d avoid known/obvious avalanche paths. They possibly even had a discussion with consensus, and the high level of experience, skills and competency of the group gave them the confidence to carry out this plan/route.
In the end, had they continued to keep a safe distance between travelers as they had earlier, 1 or 2 lives might have been lost at most. While a loss of even one life would still have been tragic, it’s a bit more comprehensible.
I think this incident will lead to changes in the backcountry guiding industry and with avalanche safety training (prime case study of what not to do and how quickly things go wrong). It just reinforces the importance of being able to turn around, pivot, use a back-up plan or to just cancel plans altogether when the loss of life is imminent.
Ordinary-Ant-7896 | 5 hours ago
What specifically are you implying? Just get the existence of an economic system in which private mountain guides exists is why this can happen? I’m glad the article stuck to the facts and not some grand philosophical argument.
Do you have details on the sexism motivation? Are you implying the guides would have felt less pressure to make it a great experience or to press on if they were leading men? Or are you suggesting that they would have had more fear for their and their clients lives if they were leading men?
HarveyPeligro | 3 hours ago
I’m not implying anything? But I’ll restate what I said: resorts and guides have been hurting for income this year. The snow drought has been the worst in decades, and comes after years of erratic weather and shortening snow seasons. It has been dire. So then you finally have snow, and even as people’s spidey senses are tingling, we are tasking people whose livelihoods depend on profiting off bringing people outside to say, “no, this isn’t safe.” It’s easy to armchair quarterback it and say you wouldn’t make that decision, but these people have tons of social and financial pressure that pushed them to put people in harms way instead of riding out the storm in a cabin with a plush leather couches and hot water. When people have a financial motivation to make bad decisions, I think it’s important to be explicit about that. Someone was making money off this trip.
I’ll concede my point bout sexism wasn’t fleshed out. But I am a women who has worked in the outdoor industry and recreated in the outdoors. You can’t divorce the gender dynamics in the outdoors and outdoor industry from the fact that seven women died in this tragedy. There’s all sorts of ways this can show up. I have no doubt these women were accomplished skiers - but sexism hurts us in all sorts of ways. Many many strong women have been pushed by male companions or guides to do things they have felt were unsafe. Many many strong women have not been listened to when they tell male companions and guides they are hurt, tired, or scared. Additionally women are seriously underrepresented in the outdoor industry. I’ve been to conferences with fewer than seven women, so for seven women to die is an absolutely bonkers over representation. Finally, sexism shows up in our lives in all sorts of insidious ways. How much avalanche safety is taught, or tools developed, by men and with men in mind? How different are women’s bodies and how often are women in the room when products are designed or safety plans created?
Ordinary-Ant-7896 | 2 hours ago
Oh, yeah, I don’t doubt that financial pressures played a role in heading out there in the first place, tough to cancel a trip when you are hurting for income. And heading back the way they did, rather than a safer way further from their vehicles may have been motivated by a spirit of customer service. I think equating that to capitalism is a little bit of an over generalization, but, yeah, I get it.
And, yeah, I totally agree that sexism is pretty insidious and ever present. I just don’t think it creates an easy explanation for this particular tragedy.
frogs96 | 4 hours ago
I’m with you, I personally don’t see the implication of being female (and having perceived wealth) in relation to this incident. I think you were meaning to respond to the original comment, not me.
These women were more competent and experienced than some of the male clients, according to one of the male survivor’s accounts. One of the guides that did not survive was a competent female as well. So, I’m not sure what HarveyPeligro was interpreting as sexism. These deaths did not fall upon any of these victims as a result of male v female.
previousinnovation | 15 hours ago
I highly recommend this article for more detail on what happened https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2026/02/28/us/tahoe-avalanche-survivors.html?unlocked_article_code=1.PlA.RLYa.PH_yrT-d9Tkj&smid=nytcore-ios-share
butterbeanscafe | 11 hours ago
This article is amazing. I read it a year or so ago after listening to a podcast about the avalanche. It’s amazingly well written and the way it explains it all to a non-skier is first class.
manchegobets | 9 hours ago
Do you remember which podcast?
butterbeanscafe | 6 hours ago
Yes- it’s on the Wondery app- Against The Odds.
Season 13- avalanche at tunnel creek.
Edit- I realized that the article I’m thinking of it listed above in the thread and it’s about Tunnel Creek but I still highly recommend this podcast!
Quouar | 17 hours ago
One thing I'm thinking about with this article is how many people die on Los Angeles' Mt. Baldy. 24 people have died there in the last decade, despite it being less than an hour from the heart of Los Angeles.
It's specifically because Mt. Baldy is so accessible that it's so deadly. There's a sense that, because the city is right there, nothing bad can really happen. Thousands of people have done these routes before and taken their pictures and told their stories, so it will work out for this hiker as well.
While I don't know what the decision-making process here was, I can't help but wonder if it was something similar. There is so much infrastructure to rescue people around Tahoe, and so well-travelled that there's a certain complacency inherent to it. You forget that this is a wild place, where people can, will, and have died, and believe instead that that is the fate of someone else.
Forsaken_Juice1859 | 16 hours ago
Good comparison and makes me think of Mt Hood, which is an hour from Portland and one of the deadliest mountains in the country with 10,000 people climbing it each year.
One of my favorite longreads, about the 1986 disaster on Mt Hood that killed 9 people (including 7 high school students) that were on a field trip:
https://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/exploration-survival/mount-hood-disaster-1986/
Quouar | 14 hours ago
Thanks for the link! Mountain stories are some of my absolute favourite stories to read.
halfhoursonearth_ | 7 hours ago
Thank you for sharing, I hadn't read about this before - such a tragic story.
It’s hard to even imagine what the students trapped in the ice cave went through, it feels so raw and terrifying considering they thought it would be a safe field trip. The bravery of the people on the trip who tried to correct course is so moving, as well as the compassion in grief shown by those who did survive. Genuinely shocked the rescuers found anyone alive in those conditions.
Stillsharon | 4 hours ago
Do you have an unpaywalled link? Thanks in advance!
semucallday | 7 hours ago
This happens in Vancouver's North Shore mountains for the same reasons.
Kdubntheclub | 18 hours ago
This reminded me of the incredible piece on Stevens Pass: https://www.nytimes.com/projects/2012/snow-fall/index.html#/?part=tunnel-creek
previousinnovation | 15 hours ago
They have a great piece on this incident, too https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2026/02/28/us/tahoe-avalanche-survivors.html?unlocked_article_code=1.PlA.RLYa.PH_yrT-d9Tkj&smid=nytcore-ios-share
ratchetjupitergirl | 19 hours ago
Sheesh. Skiing was already an unimaginable hobby to me as a southerner but I literally can’t fathom dying this way. May the deceased rest in peace, and the survivors continue to recover physically and emotionally.
manolosandmartinis44 | 15 hours ago
https://archive.is/osymt if anyone's caught by the paywall looks in mirror