standardised avalanche reports michael staudinger, lwz - salzburg

Standardised Avalanche Reports

Michael Staudinger, LWZ - Salzburg

Do back country skiers understand the avalanche report in the way the producers intend that?

Result: Yes and No !!!

2/3 can reproduce the danger level correctly.

but:

2/3 are not able to quote the additional information in the avalanche reports correctly.

Who knows the additional information in the avalanche reports ? ? ?

- people with avalanche trainings,

- experts in snow and avalanches

- using avalanche strategies (50% of the users),

- those who consider avalanche reports as important

- those who can recognize terrain features

1. A picture says more than 1000 words!

The reader translates the report into pictures and compares this with reality

> > > source of errors

example:ask person about slope exposition –

he´ll roll his eyes and talk with his hands and arms

2. First things first!

Description of the avalanche situation should be the first topic

Information on the snow cover is important, but needs more expert knowledge to be understood.

Weather is important, but there are weather reports and readers look for avalanche information first.

3. From the simple to the complex!

A user with poor expert knowledge should find those informations he needs the most (exposition, height etc.)on the best place.

The more a user studies the avalanche report,the more possibilities in the mountains he should be offered.

This rule would motivate the user to go further into the text and to translate these informations into real terrain.

E.g. :         danger level 3

         Regional danger level e. g. for Silvretta: below 2000m

         Exposition: North to Southeast         danger spots: close to ridges

4. Standardised Layout:

Learning new icons needs time

They only work if they are :

standardised across the Alps!

Once reports are standardised, a large synergy potential becomes available (approx factor 10)

(example of the European danger scale)

European Weather Warnings

European Weather Warnings

Launch on 23rd March 2007: 12 Mio hits/day !

Science of communication :

3 Rules for the warning of the public:

Science of communication :

3 Rules for the warning of the public:

• Infos have to be clear and concise- speak like the people

(floods: these houses have to be evacuated)

Science of communication :

3 Rules for the warning of the public:

• Infos have to be clear and concise- speak like the people

(floods: these houses have to be evacuated)

• System has to be consistent as a whole: Warnings - Definitions

Science of communication :

3 Rules for the warning of the public:

• Infos have to be clear and concise- speak like the people

(floods: these houses have to be evacuated)

• System has to be consistent as a whole: Warnings - Definitions

• Good symbols concentrate the information,

raise the level of attention - (learning phase)

Amount of information > > > >

Pyramid of informaton:pen

etra

tion

dep

th >

> >

danger level

Texts:1. Avalanche danger2. Snow cover 3. Weather

user knowledge today:

2/3

1/3

greenhorn

danger level

Texts:1. Avalanche danger2. Snow cover 3. Weather

user knowledge today:

2/3

1/3

greenhornmountain guide

commission

3

danger degree

Language independent

Avalanche danger

user knowledge tomorrow:

2/3

1/3 >> 2/3

¼ >> 2/3 !!

greenhorn

Texte:1. Avalanche danger2. Snow cover3. Weather4. Tendency

3

danger degree

Texte:1. Avalanche danger2. Snow cover3. Weather4. Tendency

user knowledge tomorrow:

„greenhorn“

„Snowslabs on southeastern slopes

above 2000m already in the morning“

wet + dry aval. seperately

Bavaria:

history of danger level

DAV –Piktogramme

(user representatives)

all information pictogrammed!

DAV - Symbols

Conclusion:

too little remains in the memory of the users of the avalanche reports

We should transport more than only danger degrees

Recommandations:

Standardised contents (and order of the different elements)

Standardised graphical concepts

Conclusion of the working group on avalanche reports:

Standardised graphical concepts (icons):

aspects ***

time development ***

elevation ***

regional danger levels ** (decided by regional aval. service

Proposal for standardised report:

Change of danger level during the day:

Proposal for standardised report:

Change of danger level during the day:

Most critical slope aspect:

Proposal for standardised report:

Change of danger level during the day:

Most critical slope aspect:

Most critical height:

Display changes during the day: morning

Change of danger level during the day:

Most critical slope aspect:

Most critical slope height:

Display changes during the day: afternoon

Change of danger level during the day:

Most critical slope aspect:

Most critical slope height:

Web new:

Does it matter if we loose users?

• Approx. domestic users (all alpine countries)

2002 2003 2004 2006 2007 2008 2009

4 Mio

8 Mio

12 Mio

16 Mio

Does it matter if we loose users?

• Estimated domestic users (all alpine countries)

• Users outside the own region

2002 2003 2004 2006 2007 2008 2009

4 Mio

8 Mio

12 Mio

16 Mio

Does it matter if we loose users?

• Estimated domestic users (all alpine countries)

• Users outside the own region

2002 2003 2004 2006 2007 2008 2009

4 Mio

8 Mio

12 Mio

16 Mio

Does it matter if we loose users?

• Estimated domestic users (all alpine countries)• Users outside the own region• Integrated outside users

2002 2003 2004 2006 2007 2008 2009

4 Mio

8 Mio

12 Mio

16 Mio

Additional users

2007 20092008

4 Mio

8 Mio

12 Mio

16 Mio

Additional users

2007 20092008

20 Mio Users!

4 Mio

8 Mio

12 Mio

16 Mio

Technical solution:

• 1. Production in each country

• 2. production on a single website +deep link

Txs for your attention!!