From: <willisnot@yahoo.com>

Subject: RE: AR for wimps - down with GPS

Date: 2008-06-17 13:27

Here's a draft letter in response.  I know Jason, I am the most repected navigator outside our team and should likely send the community to calm the chaos and establish us as the smarter and sillier team that is not a one line bitch answer or selfish rant.  Does this work let me know.:

Hi Jason, 

Your silliness is missed here in NorCal.  Since you left our team the Avocados have grown and now we smell quite over ripe and are terribly bruised.

Yes, we too were not happy with the decision. In fact, this race has been “dumbed” down a bit to allow many low experienced racers going and we feel bad for them that they are being led to an ever more expensive "PQ DQ." 

PQ Race manager, Chris Caul said that adding the GPS is due to increasing risk of walking into avalanche areas. The data from Sensors in the snow pack agrees with his assessment and suggests there are real issues of both dry and wet type avalanches.  So, on the face of it the decision sounds fair because we think death by suffocation sucks (no pun intended).

However, adding a GPS can both reduce and add risk at the same time. On one hand, the rule reduces risk of "other" teams possibly triggering avalanches that could hurt us. On the other hand, the rule can actually work against PQ and add risk. 

The old adage is that once you add a safety item into a system, teams/individuals get too comfortable real risks and thus take bigger chances (i.e. average automobile speeds increased with the addition of the safety belt: safeties on guns; condoms; pre-nuptual agreements, the list goes on).  

An example in this in PQ terms is that teams may become too confident in navigating and venture out in whiteout conditions using a GPS unit they are not familiar with ending up separated cold and dead.

With the GPS announcement we assumed that the decision was not just based on risk alone and that there may be more factors at play in this decision.  

For one, the permitting in the US Forest Service areas (according to the leaked course) specified that racers need to be on trails in many parts of that planned course.  So, with snow in those areas it may be hard to stay on trail and thus GPS will help us not violate the USFS Permit.   

Second, they may be in need of more volunteers and would be strained trying to run search and rescue operations.  I am PURELY GUESSING there is a volunteer issue because the cold last week likely scared off the willing some volunteers.

We were actually more disappointed with the course leak and the fact this race was easy for teams to scout close to there home and no embargo. If the PQ route does not delineate from the leaked route the GPS rule counters course poachers. 

The GPS rule does not hurt us in the o'course; using a GPS in an o'course is slower than having very good orienteering skills which AR navigators should posses.  

As California race director, Mike Murphy once said as he pointed at a GPS as I asked him if he would allow it in a race, "Sure you can use that, anybody that thinks that will actually help them make them faster is kidding themselves. You'll spend more time f---ing with it than you would actually be MOVING!" Where the rule hurts us is in night navigation and deep forest navigation, which we have been focusing on.  For those using GPS, I bid you luck keeping up with us.

Best regards,
The Dirty Avocados



>Hi all-
>Galen and I are in agreement - we're updating www.baarbd.org - stay tuned!
>-Jen
>
______________________________________
Sent from my www.pageflakes.com startpage