A couple of incidents in the last few days have highlighted for me the issue of personal responsibility.

Incident 1:
On Christmas Day I was enjoying my second run off top of the Brevent. Category 3 day on 35 degree terrain in the company of one of my neighbours. Fully tooled up with transceivers, shovels and probes, we were taking it nice and steady. On the traverse to the Hotel Face, two reps for a well-known British ski package company with no packs passed us. I mentioned to one of them that it might be a good idea to be equipped, to which the response was: “I’ve got a transceiver but I left my ABS at home today because I didn’t expect to be skiing off piste”.

Incident 2:
Fast forward to a visit to Crans Montana on the 28th December, and the front cover of Le Matin, a local Valais newspaper, caught my eye. A family of 4 were avalanched on the south face of Mont Gelé in Verbier , with no transceivers, shovels or probes and (according to the head of safety at Téléverbier), no idea that they were doing anything unsafe.

In typical tabloid fashion, this escalates into a debate as to whether off piste skiers involved in avalanches should pay extra for their rescues, over and above any private insurance premium they might already have paid. According to a spokesperson for Suva quoted in Le Matin, the average cost to the insurance company of an avalanche incident is 50,000 Swiss francs.

To me, the debate isn’t really about that- all we have to do is look at the two pictures published in the paper of folk crossing the line in Verbier. On the cover, a tourer is stepping the fences at the top of Mont Fort. On the inside page, a boarder ducks a rope somewhere in Verbier. Aside from what they have on their feet, there’s one striking difference in the two shots - what they have on their backs.

In one, the person may have taken some personal responsibility by equipping themselves correctly for off piste terrain. In the other, they haven’t. And remember, there’s no such thing as a little bit off piste. It’s like being pregnant – you either are, or you’re not. And once you cross that line, you most definitely are…

Happy New Year, and happy hors-piste.

As little as 5 years ago, this was an easy question to answer as the selection available to the ski-tourer was relatively restricted and generally there was just one ski of choice that most guides used which inevitably filtered down to more general usage. Atomic 9.22’s, Bandits, Legend 8000’s – they all came and dominated the field for a while. These days there’s a myriad of choice with all the big ski brands producing at least one touring ski, and some of them producing a wide range.

In addition, the idea of what constitutes a good touring ski has changed. It used to be narrow and straight to ease the uphill. But nowadays, unless we’re Patrouille de Glacier racer types, we place more of an emphasis on the pleasure in the descent and compromise on the ease of uphill.

Yes – compromise is the name of the game when selecting a ski, and I’ve been reminded of this directly as over the last couple of months I’ve been through the agony of choice myself, selecting a touring ski for the coming season.

Rule 1: if it ain’t broke don’t fix it
If you’ve got a setup that works for you, there’s no reason to succumb to the marketing to get the latest technical feature or this season’s topsheet graphic. I skied on Atomic 9.22’s for the first 4 years of my guiding career. But this year, after going from via Legend 4800’s to Altitrail Powders which I’ve been on for 3 years, I needed a change.

Rule 2: what do I need from the ski?
It’s a bugger really - a touring ski has to do everything: powder, crust, ice, steeps, skinning, and it has to be as light as possible. Or does it? I selected the Altitrail Powder on a weight basis as well as the recommendation of highly experienced ski guides but (crucially) without testing them. I attended the 4th British Ski Mountaineering Symposium and listened to Simon Christy speaking on the subject of kit with the title “Lighter, Faster, Better?”. We came to the conclusion that the ideal touring ski has:

• an underfoot width of 82-95mm to give enough flotation and more tolerance and
• a turn radius of 18-21m. Any less than this means the ski will snatch sideways in crust and will chatter on steep hard terrain

Rule 3: make a list
I’m a bit of a list maniac - making a spreadsheet of possible options with dimensions, weights, constructions helps me to make sense of the chaos out there.

Rule 4: talk to loads of people
I spoke to other guides, skiers, shops, read reviews and garnered as many opinions as I could. I even got some ideas via a Facebook post. In particular, Andy at Back Country in Ilkley gave me some great alternative ideas.

Rule 5: if at all possible, try before you buy
Testing touring skis is really hard, as most shops mount demo models with downhill bindings, and so you’re not going to be able to test them with your touring boots without risking spiral fractures. But there’s still benefit to testing with downhill boots to get a comparative thing going and, let’s face it, if you can’t control the ski in downhill boots, then it’s going to be a ‘mare in touring boots. I was really lucky to get a tip from local guide Fred Bernard that Grands Montets Sports held one of the models I was looking at (and even in a touring binding too – bonus!).

Rule 6: love at first pitch
If there’s any doubts after the first pitch, forget it. Don’t tell yourself you could get used to it because you like the colour, the name, the price, the way your mate skis on them etc. You won’t, and you’ll always doubt yourself on testing terrain.

If it’s love, then go with it. No need to test a load of others. Get that credit card out and buy into the dream

So what have I bought?

I looked at these skis:

Scott Crusairs and Powdairs
Dynastar Mythic Lights
K2 Waybacks and Coombacks
Zag Ubacs

But in the end I fell in instant love with Trab Volares. Suits me, sir!
100mm underfoot and a 25m turn radius, so you can ignore any or all of the above advice.
Happy shopping!