To see the Recco gear review scroll to the bottom of the post.
Dale Atkins from RECCO wrote me:
Dear Jake,
To borrow your own words, “if you had put any thought” into researching (or had any experience in organized avalanche rescue) your review of the RECCO Rescue System, I think you would have drawn a very different conclusion. There are reasons that more than 700 rescue services around the world use the system. The system works; it finds people and sometimes those persons are alive. Perhaps you thought that writing a controversial review makes for more interesting reading. That might be true when the effort is well researched and facts are fuzzy, but a review filled with half-truths and spiced with hyperbole and falsehoods is malicious. Unfortunately, to an uninformed public your review comes off as authentic. Tragically, your review adversely affects the efforts of ski patrols and mountain rescue teams around the world. Even worse, your efforts might remove any chance at luck a buried person might need.
RECCO saves lives.
You might not know this but RECCO saves lives. The tally is not many, but that’s the nature of avalanche rescue. The first life saved was in 1987, and just about every year the system saves several lives. Those persons and their families are more than happy to have been found by the RECCO System (and some of those folks didn’t even have RECCO reflectors). So far all live rescues have occurred in Europe where we have more detectors and more reflector-equipped skiers and riders, but we are increasing numbers of detectors and reflectors in North America. Also, every winter rescue teams find buried, unlucky, deceased folks, even here in North America too. While these lives were not saved, the RECCO System enabled rescue teams to search quickly with fewer rescuers, which means those teams exposed fewer rescuers to potential dangers. For example, this winter in Chamonix the RECCO System located the body of a person 60 meters down in a glacial crevasse, not an area where you could field lots of searchers. (The person was recovered.)
The French avalanche association (ANENA) recommends RECCO reflectors. Early last winter the French national association for the study of snow and avalanches recommended publically skiers and snowboarders have both transceivers and RECCO reflectors. << http://www.anena.org/espace_presse/communique_recco.pdf >> Back in 2006 the International Commission for Alpine Rescue offered a similar statement when they wrote “To be equipped with a transceiver or at least a transponder, e.g. the Recco system, renders organized rescue more efficient.” << http://www.ikar-cisa.org/ikar-cisa/documents/2007/20061014-Statement-Avalanche-Safety-Dev-E.pdf >>
RECCO reflectors are not a substitute for beacons.
I need to clear up a point that you seemed to have missed. Just about all of our materials, which include booklets, movies, hangtags, and garment tags say “The RECCO System is not a substitute for the transceiver.” We WANT people to be equipped with and know how to use transceivers (aka beacons) because transceivers are the BEST tool for companion rescue. The RECCO System is only another tool for organized rescue teams. Why? Because a lot (about half) of buried victims need more help than what their friends can give. You might be surprised to know that sometimes organized rescue – even in North America and in the backcountry – arrives at the same time or even before companions have started the search for a buried friend. This is one of the reasons why our R9 Detector also includes an avalanche rescue beacon (457 kHz) receiver, so a single rescuer can search for both RECCO reflectors and an avalanche beacon at the same time.
Surviving an avalanche burial is luck.
Getting buried in an avalanche is bad news and I give you credit for mentioning the part from the Barryvox user’s manual, “only about half of all victims who have been completely buried in avalanches are rescued alive.” Actually, the numbers are much worse. In fact, 10-years of data from United States presented at the 2010 International Snow Science Workshop showed that only about 15% of victims totally buried and without avalanche rescue transceivers survived. If you remove from this tally those buried victims whose yells from under the snow were heard, only 7% of buried victim survive. Beacons improved the statistics but not nearly as much as most people think. When considering only folks wearing an avalanche beacon the statistic improved to 39%. Sadly, this statistic has actually been decreasing steadily (from 50%) over the past five years. Surviving an avalanche burial – even when wearing an avalanche beacon and any other device – is luck.
RECCO reflectors put you in a place to be lucky.
While I never try to trust in luck, I do believe in luck and it’s important to put yourself in positions where you can be lucky. Remember that if you’re completely buried with no rescue device and too deep for your yells to be heard, you will have to be extremely lucky to survive (7%). Like an avalanche rescue beacon, RECCO reflectors put you in a place to be lucky.
Unfortunately many folks who are neophyte-sidecountry or -backcountry riders, venture out with nothing. While they maybe good skiers and snowboarders they are ignorant or sometimes chose to ignore backcountry dangers, so they don’t carry beacons, probes, and shovels. At least RECCO reflectors stuck to their jacket (pants, boots, or helmet) offer a basic rescue system.
While reflectors can help neophytes, reflectors can also aid experts. Too often even experts forget to carry (or chose not to carry) or turn on their beacons. For these cases when boneheaditis sets in RECCO reflectors, again, provide a basic or backup rescue system.
We’re very clear that the RECCO System does not guarantee survival. The System puts people in a place to be lucky. If you or a friend were buried, I suspect you would want every opportunity to be lucky so you would have a better chance to survive. The RECCO System gives another chance.
“I have reflectors, they might tempt me to make bad decisions.”
Whoa, now you’re probably thinking, “Well, RECCO reflectors lead people to make bad/risky decisions.” Do seatbelts tempt you to drive recklessly? I think not and the same applies to RECCO reflectors.
Every winter a lot of very experienced – even experts – skiers, riders, and snowmobilers, who have significant amounts of avalanche awareness training make dumb and sometimes fatal mistakes, and they didn’t even have RECCO reflectors. In the mountains (as well as at home or in the city) people make wrong or dumb decisions all the time. Some people choose to take risks, no matter what. Intelligent folks take risks responsibly.
The RECCO System is sophisticated technology.
You state the RECCO detector “is nothing more than an Alpine metal detector.” Not even close. The technologies are totally different, unrelated and give vastly different performances. The best metal detectors have only a range of a couple of meters, and most only offer much less. The RECCO System has a range of up to 200 meters. When speaking about RECCO there are sound technology and search reasons why riders should have two reflectors. It’s not marketing hype. Two reflectors increase the probability and range of detection, which are serious concerns when you’re under the snow, whether in an avalanche or headfirst in a tree well.
RECCO is fast and rescue teams are arriving sooner.
You grumble that RECCO is fast but only after it arrives on scene, and you snidely gripe, “Yeah maybe an hour later once you’re already dead.” Yes, organized rescue is often handicapped by distance and travel time. But once rescuers arrive would you rather they search with RECCO’s handheld radar system and be done in minutes, or have 20-40 people pushing in probe poles for two to twenty hours?
About your one-hour comment, you probably didn’t know that about 1 in 4 buried victims are still alive after one hour, and some (lucky) people survive for many, many hours under the snow. When a rescue team shows up one, two, or ten hours later, there is still a chance that the buried victim might be alive. That’s why we as rescuers search with all available tools: transceivers, RECCO detectors, dogs, and lastly probe poles.
Thanks to cell phones, satellite phones, PLBs, and SPOTs rescue teams are often notified within minutes of an accident. Helicopters, snowmobiles and snowcats allow teams to travel faster and reach accident sites sooner. In more cases, and these incidents are not just inside of ski areas or in Europe, rescue teams are reaching avalanches at the same time as companions or even before companions. It makes sense that rescuers, skiers and riders use beacons and RECCO reflectors to speed up the search. This is one of the reasons why our R9 Detector also includes an avalanche rescue beacon (457 kHz) receiver, so a single rescuer can search for both RECCO reflectors and an avalanche beacon at the same time.
More deflectors out there than you might think.
The RECCO detector is a tool for organized rescue teams and there are more detectors out there than you might think. In your new backyard – the Whistler-Blackcomb area from Squamish to Pemberton – we have placed more than a dozen detectors. In Canada we have equipped more than 50 resorts, SAR teams and national Parks, and plan to provide more detectors. Stateside we have equipped about twice that number. In some local spots, for example Colorado’s Front Range and Summit/Eagle county areas, more than 24 detectors are in the hands of ski patrols and mountain rescue teams. In and near the Aspen resorts the ski patrols and local mountain rescue team have 11 detectors. Similar numbers of detectors cover the Jackson area in Wyoming, Utah’s Wasatch, California’s Lake Tahoe, Bozeman-Big Sky area of Montana, Washington’s Cascade mountains and numerous other mountain areas.
The Original Gear Review posted by Unofficial Networks
If you have put any thought into how someone might be rescued from an avalanche then you already know that the RECCO Rescue System is a scam in all but the rarest of cases.Stitched into many jackets, some pants, and increasingly more common other snow-sport outerwear is a small electrical strip that is one piece of the RECCO Rescue System. The other half is a “rescue network” that many ski areas advertise, and is in reality, nothing more than an alpine metal detector. RECCO says that it, “utilizes advanced radar technology to make a quick location of an avalanche victim possible” Quick? They proceed to say that “the two part RECCO system is advanced rescue technology that enables fast searching and directional pinpointing of a victim’s precise location” Fast? Yeah maybe an hour later once you’re already dead. RECCO then advertises that “the reflector requires no training, no batteries, and never needs to be switched on” They claim that the RECCO reflector is “maintenance free”. Perfect for Joey’s to venture into the backcountry without proper avalanche gear or knowledge.
RECCO “recommends” two reflectors per person for optimal system performance. Come on…Really? A sales person working for commission will tell you that the RECCO strip in your jacket may save you in the case of an avalanche, but lets think this through. Unless a ski patroller on a RECCO-equipped mountain happens to witness an in-bounds slide and has the bulky RECCO locator device on hand or very near (almost never the case), then the small chip in your jacket, and probably pants too, is an overpriced way of helping to find your body in the spring. If it were possible to request a item without RECCO capabilities then I would recommend that you save the extra money and put it towards a beacon. But it’s not possible to buy the jacket that you’re interested in and opt out of buying the RECCO Rescue System so all that I hope you get out of this rant is a more realistic sense of security while wearing the prevalent RECCO device.
RECCO concludes their pamphlet by saying, “the RECCO Rescue System does not prevent avalanches or guarantee the survival or localization of a victim. Remember, knowledge and common sense are the best ways to avoid accidents”. My MAMMUT Barryvox avalanche beacon user’s manual ends their pamphlet with similar words but continues to say, “Be aware that, in spite of practice and all the technical advances, only about half of all victims who have been completely buried in avalanches are rescued alive”. RECCO should maybe add a sentence to say, If you think the RECCO rescue reflector will suffice for an proper avalanche beacon in an avalanche scenario you will die!
RECCO is better then nothing BUT it gives your average Joey skier a false sense of security. Because they have a RECCO strip in their jacket they think it is ok to go ski terrain they might otherwise think twice about. This is dangerous and puts lives in risk.
RECCO = Dead Body Finder.
What’s the female version of an average Joey called?
Of the in-bound avalanche deaths in the US in the past 5 years, how many “dead body’s” had a transceiver on vs RECCO? Or none at all?
its a jamie
you realise that almost every avalanche victim dies from trama? besides by the time they were dug up even with a transceiver (faster) they would have sufficated or are already dead from trama.
Trauma* and also the statistic is 40% die from trauma which is not “almost every avalanche victim”
agreed. UN – do a little more research next time you crazy hippies. all avi tools only have value if the proper knowledge of procedure and risks is understood in advance.
my comment was not meant to agree with tim conrad above. i agree with the letter dale wrote. tim, i think most people who have recco in their jackets don’t really know what its for. its for ski areas not backcountry landscapes. increased awareness of the dangers is the first step, all the tech can come later. i think the recco devices should be hidden in the gear, providing the ‘if all else fails’ rescue tool and body locator without giving a false sense of security.
billygoat, your right. increased awareness is Key and I would feel much better if the devices were hidden. When recco first came out I was at a ski shop back in NY and the sales guy was selling a jacket to a New Yorker heading out west for the first time. He was telling the guy “and this thing back here sends out a single that will save your ass in an avalanche.”
The man was very impressed and very miss informed.
People need to be educated that it is a “if all else fails” device not a “it’s OK I got a RECCO” device.
Get educated and be safe out there.
Tim, don’t forget an Avalanche beacon is for exactly the same thing. If all else fails and your caught in an avy it MIGHT save your ass. Beacons should never be thought of as “it’s ok I’ve got a beacon” either.
Treat avalanche terrain and conditions the same no matter what gear your carrying.
Absolutely!
Education is key. And I would hope we could all agree, that something is better than nothing. And Recco actually advocates how their product is not meant to be a replacement for education,or a beacon. They state in their tags the importance of both these aspects. And further more, from a brands perspective, if the recco device is not seen on the jacket then their is no reason for any brand to have it on their jackets, because they are not in business to make sure people are safe, they are in the business of selling jackets. If the recco is just a secret then why would they ever include it in the jacket? This argument seems stupid. Why would you criticize recco. The “guy at the shop” in NY is obviously the one who is providing the misinformation. The truth is when used properly and with the right tools the recco device does help to find people who are lost or burried.
Neither device will stop your pelvis from being pulled apart and dilated 4cm, one horrific example.
Yeah, you’re alive alright. Of this you are CERTAIN because you feel like a Turkey Day wishbone.
No device will stop being swept over a cliff line either.
Or swan-diving a tree well…
You really néed to stop with the false/blatantly wrong/terribly misinformed articles. This isn’t new, but it shouldn’t continue
And tim is a kook. Dont be a kook tim.
unofficially, that response has gotta sting.
no they relize that gapers just cant keep there mouth shut..
Despite recco’s rebuttal, I think UN’s gear review still stands. Recco might be a valuable tool in the US one day , but no yet. Once every major ski area in North America has a detector, and recco strips become standard in all snow gear, they will undoubtedly save some people caught by inbounds avalanches, but for backcountry skiing the system is far from being a valuable life saving device. Until recco makes truly portable and affordable detectors, the primary role of recco in North America, will be limited to body recoveries.
be safe
Tim, who I have never met, is not a “kook.”
I, like many others who take backcountry safety seriously and are still alive because of it, train with our buddies on rescue techniques and the efficient use of our beacons. I have heard too many times (and once is too many) some macho dude from some city coming out for the week, saying something like “yeah, I got this thing on my jacket so I don’t need a beacon.” If that guy is reading this, please for the love of G-d don’t drop in above me!
As we all know, if you get buried, you have about 4 minutes of oxygen before you start getting brain damage (without an avalung)(this “after an hour crap” is for the birds). This being said, your buddies are your REAL chance at survival, and if you’ve planned correctly in your backcountry travel, they WILL be there before ski patrol. By the time ski patrol gets out to you, you’re going to be a dead popsicle….with a RECCO patch. RECCO is a mediocre rescue aid, and for many, a licence to act irresponsibly. If RECCO is what you need, why does EVERY SINGLE patroller strap on a beacon and check it, with their buddies, before they walk out of the morning meeting….?
I can’t believe we are even discussing this.
practice, lots. Know your gear, the best beacon in the world is the one you’re good with, and come home happy, tired, and safe.
Thanks Ari!
you nailed it.
recco is for finding corpses. casket companies love recco. recco makes gape bags feel secure, falsely so. its better than nothing but so is a fart in a vacuum.
Already been said, Recco = corpse recovery system
the unofficial guys posted another horribly misinformed article, riddled with grammatical errors? that’s so weird…
a website called Unofficial that reports information with grammar mistakes and info that is not 120% verified? that’s so weird……
your an idiot
Rock on Unofficial you guys on to something here.
Recco is a commercial scam to sell clothing. Patrol do not endorse it as Dales F’ing photos would suggest; and we shouldn’t be giving Dale a place to push his crap. Skiers should reject it so as not to be saps in the game.
Seriously? Then why does every large avalanche program Patrol practice with and use Recco? Right now recco is best used inbounds and for side country rescues in the US. With Reccos in every top shack, they’re almost just as fast as a patrol beacon. A patrol beacon would only be faster if they happened to be skiing above where your slide took place. And a patrol beacon or recco is probably going to be faster coming from the top shack than you and your joey buddies who only practice with your beacons 5 times a year.
Yes Recco is no substitute for a beacon, and skiing out of bounds without a beacon is plain stupid. Skiing in bounds with a beacon is smart, skiing inbounds with a recco will only increase your chances. To say that Recco=dead body finder is false.
That said, buy a beacon and practice.
I have worked and trained on Recco. Beacons are faster, period. You don’t have to put on earphones, anti reflective arm and leg wear, and a transceiver is less cumbersome.
That said, they are a useful tool to Ski Patrol when….
There is an unwitnessed in bounds slide that could potentially have a victim in it who IS NOT wearing a transceiver. Or….it is witnessed and the victim again DOES NOT have a transceiver on. Get it? It is used in conjunction to a full search, but will follows second to a TRANSCEIVER search.
Which begs the question. Does RECCO give the average skier a “false sense of security?”
I believe it does and it is used more for a secondary tool for Ski Patrol. If the average person is presented with the option to wear a reflector and not have to learn, understand and properly use a transceiver, they will likely take the less difficult option every time.
To the “anonymous” post…..grow a spine and stop worrying about grammar. And if you’re not one of “the unofficial guys” what are you doing reading these posts?
i glue this recco reflector shit to my skis. it works great if I ever lose them in the powder.
way betta than powda cords!
what an awesome idea. never thought of that
So if you lose a ski, you really think patrol is going to go find it for you? Talk to any Patrol and they will advocate that you don’t RECCO your poles or skis because it then will give false signals when they are actually trying to save someone.
Come on guys, Recco makes no claim that their product is a substitute for any safety gear. To optimise your safety when skiing I think people should explore all techniques and technologies. The most important is education, but if the Recco gear saves 1 life then I would say its worth it.
What if the RECCO is responsible for a misinformed vacationer venturing into the back country and then this vacationer triggers a slide above someone else? When we are dealing with slim chances of everything here, why does nobody mention that RECCO ‘could’ aid in you demise too. Extensive research would suggest that there is a 7% chance of that happening also.
I’m going out to buy new outerwear for my whole family for our vacation we take to Tahoe every year. If we were skiing Alpine Meadows and and one of my kid’s triggered a slide and got buried, would they have an increased chance of being found since Alpine uses the Recco system? And we ski In Bounds at Whistler a couple weeks each year. How much $$ does the system add to outerwear for the upgrade? Would it help in any way if my kid missed a turn at the resort and was lost maybe in a tree well but alive?
If the answer is yes to any of those questions and if it’s less than $100 per jacket than it would probably be worth it to buy the system for my family. Doesn’t seem like that hard of a decision. If it increases the safety of the participant, even if they’re ignorant of the limitations of the system, than it is a useful product.
Maybe Recco could put in a little more effort to ensure that everybody knows that a proper Beacon will provide even more safety. More transparent marketing or something.
Recco may be a corpse detecting system, but it is better than not finding your corpse. Most backcountry skiers know that the beacons are used to find and be found, and that they are the only way to be saved in an avalanche. If people think it will save them, then it is not Recco’s fault. It is theirs for not taking the steps to learn about backcountry safety. Recco not only finds people who have been burried, it also is used to find people who are lost in the backcountry which is as likely and significant as avalanche hazard. They don’t advertise that recco should take the place of a beacon, they advertise that it can be used in conjuncion. To address Recco as a scam is just as ignorant as the people who think that they don’t need a beacon because they have Recco on their equipment. It is up to you know it all’s to inform these people what the true dangers and precautions are with backcountry skiing.
recco is useful in post control inbounds avalanches or tree well burials where the victim is most likely not expecting back country conditions. its not perfect but better than only having a probe line. good dogs can be kick ass but take longer to get to the scene without sled or toboggan assistance.
the issue i have with their advertising is saying recco doesnt need maintenance batteries or training. this could by construed as implication of equality with a beacon.
every patrol ive worked for, exchanged or trained with has them and trains with them. even though they mostly get used on slow days to see if you can find a lost ski, cell phone , etc. by getting a hint of reflection from the object.
Gotta call bull on this. Every patroller I know, including me, thinks recco is worthless. Its for body retrieval. The order for rescue is a beacon search then avy dog, we’re not going to take out a system in the hopes that you were wearing pants that had some random reflector.
Also, what the hell kind of dogs are you using. Goldens are used most often for a reason. They are able to run through the snow really well, I’ve gone in up to 3 feet with them. Plus they’re small, you can easily pick them up and ski them to a scene.
But you’re right, we do train on slow days, cause we’re not busy then.
I am not a hater on the Recco, but I do think its usefulness is WAY overstated. I am glad to see this debate and hope that all the haters out their keep reading our “junk” in the future.
UPDATE: ALL BACKCOUNTRY SKIING & SNOWBOARDING IS HEREBY PROHIBITED. TO MANY AVERAGE JOEY SNOW ENTHUSIASTS OUT THERE WITH OUT THE PROPER INFO. THIS ALSO INCLUDES ANY POWDER DAY SKIING @ ANY RESORT.
recco found my go pro.
recco seems like a really good idea for finding a lost ski or gopro.
As much as RECCO is not what they make it out to be, please dont put RECCO on an object that you might lose. It creates false signals for if it does need to be used. It might be GAPERISH, but I tie a pow cord to my gopro just incase and have a piece of tape on the camera with my name and number. Hate the system all you want, but dont risk providing false signals.
PLEASE SEE WHAT ANONYMOUS WROTE @ JUNE 22, 2011 AT 12:20 PM
-Well said Mr.
I have to agree with everyone else to not mix up inbounds, sidecountry and backcountry skiing and their relevance to Recco. I think that that is one of the major differences in Recco’s application in Europe and in North America where off piste skiing in Europe is a different animal than backcountry and sidecountry skiing in North America.
Also I believe something like 25% of all fatalities from avalanches in North America occur due to trauma versus something lower, I believe under 10%, in Europe. Mostly because of how much more skiing occurs below treeline or near treeline in North America.
In the end personal responsibility and the actual risks associated with skiing are played down as skiing is pushed as family fun recreation, like Disney Land- at least from my experience in California. Just be aware of the risks and take responsibility for your actions. Your safety is mostly in your hands.
I have spoken with a few ski patrollers about RECCO, they also agree about the dead body finder.
I also know some patrollers and they say it’s only used to find the body…
The odds of a Recco system saving your life are significantly worse than the odds of winning the lottery. Save your money, spend it on lottery tickets, and if you win, hire a few ski patrol guys to follow you wherever you go (24 x 7).
Recco is a marketing scam. I already assumed this but the volume of comments here by Rexco marketing goons only serves to confirm this view.
If they really wanted their system to save lives they would make it clear that the system should in no way encourage a skier to go beyond their ability and training. Unfortunately, Recco’s marketing goons understand that if they say anything that makes people think it is a system for people who have avalanche training, their target market shrinks by about 98%.
They do put this information on all their tags. I am not a marketing goon either. Just another guy who actually read the tag. Did you?
Did you actually look into these statistics? What about the statistics of actually surviving an avalanche. I find it so amusing how everyone is angry that this system doesn’t just save everyone. Next you people will be complaining that shovels don’t automatically shovel for you, and that probes don’t probe for you. The recco device is only a small part of trying to be safe. It is not the answer.
I have never seen a more unprofessional response from a company on any topic, ever.
Who runs RECCO, high school juniors? I will never buy a RECCO product. Not because I question whether they might work or not, but because I have a general rule that I don’t buy stuff from jerks, and the guy who wrote the reply is clearly a jerk.
i agree. they must receive a lot of similar criticism of how worthless their invention actually is which gets their blood boiling. it really isn’t that hard to write a professional response to unofficials review.
Hi Guys,
I am the “jerk” that @Seriously?? and @negative nancy wrote about. Notice, I use my name and I am not hiding behind some anonymous handle. Also, I am the only “RECCO” person who has responded to this banter. Sure, RECCO pays my bills, but I have been using the system in rescue work long before I ever went to work for RECCO. But before I continue, let me tell you about my rescue and avalanche experience, then I’ll let you judge. In more than 30 years of avalanche work and avalanche rescue (including 20 years of professional ski patrolling and 20+ years as working as avalanche researcher and forecaster), I have participated in more than 40 avalanche rescues and have dug out more bodies than care to count. The facts are simple: avalanche burials kill, and it doesn’t matter whether you wear a beacon around your neck, carry a ham sandwich in your pocket, or have RECCO reflectors on your jacket. If you are totally buried, and you don’t have a beacon — you’re hosed. (Any beacon user — including ski patrollers and guides — who says they would never forget carry or turn on their beacon is dishonest, or hasn’t been around long enough to make that mistake. Not turning on a beacon or forgetting it altogether happens to professionals — myself included — a lot more than we care to admit.)
In the absence of a beacon, you better hope that the responding ski patrol/rescue team has skilled and experienced rescuers with well-trained dogs (and handlers) AND RECCO. Both technologies are equally important and should be used to search simultaneously. Dogs (and handlers) have bad days and miss buried victims, and some people don’t have RECCO reflectors.
In the US in actual rescues, the miss rate with trained dogs is about 37%. RECCO has found people the dogs missed because the person had reflectors. In Europe some of these people were alive. Dogs are a great tool, but they’re not perfect.
As I mentioned earlier some people don’t have RECCO reflectors or other electronic devices. RECCO sometimes finds people because the system can sometimes detect electronic devices like turned-off beacons, cell phones, radios, gps units, digital cameras, etc., (The range for these devices is very, very short, so they should never be thought of as a replacement for a RECCO reflector.) If someone doesn’t have a RECCO reflector or other electronic device, they will be missed by the RECCO detector. That’s why you also need trained dogs, too. Also, just because you have a beacon “on” does not guarantee being found. Rescuers — organized and companions — have missed buried people with transmitting beacons. That’s why we use RECCO and dogs, too. All of these devices — beacons, dogs, RECCO, probes, etc. find people. Most of the time the person is dead, but sometimes, for a few very lucky people, they are alive.
The bottom line is that avalanches don’t care how good you are (or think you are) or whether you’re in the resort, sidecountry, or backcountry, or what gear you carry. Every winter in recent years there have been experienced people killed who left behind accidentally or purposely their beacon. Interestingly, some of these same people also left RECCO reflector-equipped gear at home. My point is that having or not having reflectors did not influence their decisions. Bad decisions are bad decisions. If you (or I) was buried, you would probably want all technologies being tried AND being used at the same time. (That is how skilled and experienced rescuers operate.) I know I would.
Dale Atkins
- RECCO AB
- American Avalanche Association, president
- International Commission for Alpine Rescue, Avalanche Commission, vice president.
(@Goose, if you are a real patroller, I would appreciate if you would contact me. You can do so through the RECCO website.)
Dale Atkins,
I work with Unofficial, so I would just like to say that this article does not represent the sentiments of the entire unofficial team. This is only one contributors opinion, and this is perhaps one of the problems with free and open speech. Anyone and everyone has a voice, no matter how misinformed or trivial it is.
I would just like to say; that I totally agree with you on all aspects of your argument. Your response was professional, well thought out and filled with actual; experience, facts and statistics. Many of the comments here are based on generalized opinions.
It is unfortunate that these people are misinformed. Their expectations of Recco are unreasonable. As a contributor to unofficial, I am very happy that companies like Recco exist. I would hope that more companies and people would be involved in pushing forward in our design of new products and educational initiatives that will help us make backcountry experiences safer and more responsible.
What many of these people don’t understand is the amount of time and research that Recco and other similar products put into their research, marketing and design while pushing backcountry safety awareness.
From my point of view (someone who puts well over 100 days on snow per year, son of a ski patrol, unofficial contributer and responsible backcountry user) I support Recco and thank them for all their efforts.
Jon Conway
We need to work together to make progress, please don’t let a bunch of misinformed opinions affect your drive to make the backcountry a safer place for all to enjoy.
but dont forget to swallow
I simply will not buy clothing with the chips on them because I don’t like paying for excess features that i do not want or need.
They do have a use in avalauncher dud retrieval however.
I would first like to thank Unofficial Networks (UN), as well as some commenters like Dale Atkins for making me more knowledgeable on avalanche safety. I don’t think there is a reader out there who doesn’t respect the dedication and commitment to the field of avalanche safety and education of people like Dale Atkins. However, I think the discussion has veered away from what I interpreted as the reviewer’s main point. To Mr. Atkins, I think it is unfortunate that you have to stoop to the “attack then plug the product” style of a reply that we typically see in corporate responses to consumer comments. Especially, negative ones. This field is peppered with this style of play, and, although I don’t know the data, I would guess that there is a strong ADVANTAGE to the positive gear reviewer versus the ones that negatively speak of products (like UN’s reviewer). How many negative reviews of products aren’t met with these typical corporate responses?
Although I have not been to the International Science Show in 2010 nor did I know that the French Avalanche Assoc recommends the RECCO product, I do know that you, Mr. Atkins, have a conflict of interest, and your comments reflect your company due to the financial association your have with RECCO(regardless of the amount). Therefore as the president of the American Avalanche Association, with a tremendous amount of experience, you should have an unbiased opinion, however you don’t. This sounds like pharmaceutical companies, who send representatives to market their drugs to doctors. No one doubts the drugs (in our case, RECCO Avalanche Rescue System) work, but there is skepticism whether it should be marketed to everyone ( or in this case, should everyone “on the street” have every skiing product lined with this product. This is what I respect about UN, they represent the guy “on the street”.
Clearly, Mr, Atkins, there is an obvious goal to your comments i.e. you don’t want the RECCO name to be bashed by some uneducated or misinformed “blogger” (both of with which I disagree). And you want to educate us on the importance of ANY product that will enhance this safety. Although you attempt to set the record straight with data, which I will not attempt to say that I know, I doubt that it is statistically significant data showing efficacy of the RECCO product. I think this would be difficult, but that really is not the point here. Believe me, I don’t want to downplay AT ALL the importance of avalanche safety, but when it comes to marketing I think our reviewer, through his/her comments, has a point. That point is whether or not EVERY ski product should have RECCO Avalanche Rescue System (and I do have an issue with this product name because it is misleading as others before me have pointed out). I think this argument, along with a general concern for the marketing scheme that has ski shop salesmen/women boasting the product saves lives, is valid. THIS should be argued and discussed further. If we consider all the time and money RECCO has put into this product, there is an obvious need to have a return on investment. If not, I would say, give a receiver with every jacket or other gear with the RECCO product, so we don’t have to wait for ski patrol to get there. Perhaps we should put more effort into marketing beacons? I’m not going to argue this one either, as it distracts from having a fair discussion about the marketing and usefulness of this product to the general population. I think the reviewer attempted to do this before a classic corporate “squash the negative gear reviewer” reply came, for which I would advise you from continuing. It really leave us with a bad taste about your company regardless of your points. I hope we can learn from this and fulfill Jon Conway’s last sentence about “working together to make progress”.
Thank you
Scott
Cool story bro.
Scott,
While your argument undoubtably holds far more substance and logic than the rest, I am afraid that, along with the rest of these critical comments, your claims and accusations are greatly mistaken and misinformed.
Your first point that particularly stuck out to me was your accusation of Mr. Atkins for having a biased opinion; that he was using his response to further the marketing ploy that you so shamelessly dubbed “RECCO”. That is your first mistake. Mr. Atkins is in fact employed by RECCO, and in turn, believes in its value as an avalanche rescue tool. But may I ask, do you believe in the company / field of your occupation? I think it is safe to say that most sane individuals do. Mr. Atkins’ opinions are not only supported by over 30 years of avalanche work and avalanche rescue, but by undeniable data. An element which your argument is most certainly lacking.
Having clothing with RECCO reflectors incorporated is just one more precaution that can be taken by skiers and snowboarders to help in the event of their burial. It is true that the product is relatively new in the snow sports industry, thus proper knowledge of RECCO is seldom understood. This leads me to your second misinformed point. You compared Mr. Atkins’ response to “pharmaceutical companies, who send representatives to market their drugs to doctors.” Not only is this an unassociated analogy, but a poor one at that. As I read it, Mr. Atkins did not write what he wrote to increase sales, or influence buyers in any way, nor was it aimed to demoralize the negative reviewer. His comments were directed at misinformed critics like your self. In order to better educate them about basic facts of avalanche burials, what RECCO is, and its effectiveness in search and rescue.
It seems to me, Scott, that you not only forgot that Dale’s posts were in response to incredibly misinformed “bloggers”, but that you did not fully read either of them. Had you, you would know that RECCO is most certainly not a substitute for beacons. You claimed that “Perhaps we should put more effort into marketing beacons.” Now, while I am definitely agreeing with you; that beacons are useful and effective tools for search and rescue, there are many other factors which come into play. First, how often do you find skiers and snowboarders ‘beeping in bounds’ at commercial resorts? Not very often. The exponentially increasing number of resorts equipped with RECCO are now given another tool to locate individuals in the event of an in-bound slide. Is this an excuse to duck ropes, or ski risky terrain with out the proper knowledge and equipment? Absolutely not. Yet RECCO can help if that is the case, and can effectively speed up the process.
Second, a beacon is an excellent tool, however only if it is accompanied by several other things, including: a capable, well informed user, a probe, and a shovel. While you and your buddies may have the knowledge and equipment, a burial search can still take up to multiple hours, and then you still have to retrieve your friend from the solid mass of concrete-like avalanche debris. If there were an additional tool, which could find your friend faster, wouldn’t you be grateful for it? That is just what RECCO can help do. It does not come with a guarantee of a living body, but I would say a body is better than a missing person.
I would be happy to continue to pick out, and analyze further fallacies in your terribly misinformed reply, but I hope that you have gotten the picture.
It saddens me that you allow for a falsely assumed tone to leave a “bad taste” about a company, when you disregard the facts and have no proper knowledge of the matter to back up your own arguments.
I hope that one day you will be able to place aside your own pride and accept the advise and expertise of experienced rescue professionals like Dale Atkins. As it will most likely be thanks to people like him that save you when you get buried in an Avalanche. I can also only hope that your ability to interpret bog posts improves swiftly.
Ellie
Thank You Scott, Well Said
I think RECCO really needs to make more of an effort to define exactly what it is.
Most people seem to expect RECCO to act like a beacon. It is not. As I see it, RECCO really isn’t meant to act as a beacon at all.
Think about rescuer safety for a moment. One person gets buried in an avalanche, his two friends can’t find him, so they call in search and rescue. At this point the buried friend has a very low chance of survival, SAR may be able to respond within an hour, and if his friends don’t find him before then he is almost certainly dead. Obviously because there was a slide there is substantial avalanche danger, so we have one victim, two of his friends at risk in avalanche terrain and we’re sending in another 10-20 rescuers who are also going to be put at risk. This is where RECCO comes in handy. RECCO works quickly, and requires less people to search for the victim.
The less people exposed and the less exposure to dangerous conditions the better. RECCO is a tool that does that.
Question?: Is it true that ski patrollers must remove the RECCO responders from their clothing? I hear if anyone is around in the avy path during rescue, they cannot have a RECCO because it will interfere with the search. Is this true?
At my resort at least, Patrol shoves their pants jackets etc into a microwave to destroy the RECCO. And you are right everyone around with a RECCO could cause interference, which is all a part of proper scene management to make sure these people are away.
I am not a 100% believer in RECCO, nor do I 100% doubt its usefulness. I have RECCO, but it is no substitute for my beacon which even gets worn in bounds. I do think that ALOT of people, (locals and JOEYS) get a false sense of security with the name “Avalanche Rescue System.” I want RECCO to continue its US expansion, and in addition to their “booklet” that comes with RECCO products, include a VERY LARGE TAG saying anything to the effect “This product is NOT APPROVED for out of bounds travel. ALWAYS have a partner, beacon, shovel, and probe when outside of the resort boundaries.”
I seems the biggest problem with the Recco system other than the false security it can give gapers, is that the gun/ tool used for searching is not practical or available to to general public, therefore making Recco tabs worthless during the primary search for a buried person.
That said avalanches are far from the only cause of people becoming lost in and around ski resorts, or deep in the back country. Tree wells, glide cracks, injuries, whiteouts because of fog, or just getting lost because you are stupid, the Recco system can be employed for all of these situations and many more situations where you normally would not be wearing your avy gear. Your average Skier/Rider does not and never will own avalanche transceiver, probe, shovel and have or want the knowledge on how to use them. Transceivers run out of batteries and have short ranges making searching from a helicopter or any distance greater that 100 meters tricky or not possible.
Recco has it’s place. If it saves just one life it is worth the little amount extra the tags cost. No, chances are It will not help you dig your friend out in the time needed to save them. For now the best tools for that are first avoiding the slide all together, If that fails, you and your friends having proper rescue equipment on hand- this goes far beyond just a transceiver, probe, shovel, and the knowledge to use them plus lots of practice, because chances are there will be injuries and hypothermia to deal with, lost equipment, ect. ect.
I could see a market for RECCO in the summer months that might be better than their winter lines in terms of people saved. Take the RECCO transmitter/receiver and amp it up to 1/4 mile range or more. Put RECCO in hiking boots. Use it to find lost hikers from the air more easily.
Next time I go in the backcountry(or fall into a cravas) I will feel a lot better that my dead body will be found.
“Whoa, now you’re probably thinking, “Well, RECCO reflectors lead people to make bad/risky decisions.” Do seatbelts tempt you to drive recklessly? I think not and the same applies to RECCO reflectors.”
Google ‘Risk Homeostasis’.
I have two points to add after losing too many friends under the snow in over 40 years.
First, virtually every fatality I have been party to was either the result of poor choices (route, snow conditions, skiing alone…etc) or completely unavoidable. As it happens all too often there is sometimes one turn away from your buddy that is life or death and many of us know of incidents of avalanches on adjacent slopes catching people / even groups off guard in what they thought were safe zones. Education is the first defence and aweness is a given. Recco and / or beacons don’t save lives on their own…smart choices and practiced buddies do.
Second, I am troubled by the Recco financial model. If I had a Recco search wand in my pack I might think otherwise but (correct me if I’m wrong) they are not for sale but rather offered to professionals ~ patrol groups, guides, Heli and cat operators. The clothing and gear manufacturers pay to insert the devices in their products. Follow the money and point fingers in the right direction people. Recco makes no claims because we all in the industry accept it is a long narrow target group which is clearly not well educated.
And Recco, while I understand your point, perception is reality. Uneducated resort guests think your product will save them in an avalanche situation they have no business getting themselves into. The same can be said for a sledder with his beacon under his seat and and sidecountry tripper with an Avilung in his pack. While the debate is heated I have never heard a company claim anything but my own decision making will save my life and bring me home safe to my kids.
Think twice everyone. It’s up to you, not them.
Hi Speed Brooks
Whistler BC
Recco in my opinion is mainly for finding bodys after a rescue failed. Its just the last resort of finding the already dead. But what i think they should do is out them on skis. Cause if caught in an avalanche then the skis can be found (after the victum first) cause we all know it sucks to lose 1000 bucks on skis
Dont put RECCO on something that can be lost! It will create a false signal when/if they need to find someone. If you dont want to lose your skis suck it up look like a gaper and use pow cords, or search for it with your ski pole. Dont endanger someones life because you dont want to lose a ski.
What a bunch of TOOLS you guys are becoming. @Jake.. I realize you have been skiing for most of your life, but your 25yrs on this planet don’t even come close to the amount of experience Dale and other patrollers/avy pros who use and recommend RECCO rather than nothing at all and frankly, you have no business putting your 2 cents in writing.
As far as you other negative nancy’s go c’mon, are you really saying it’s a bad thing not having RECCO on your person, fuckin A, false security? Seriously, like the false security of skiing and airing shit you have no business being on in the first place because of your new rocker boards, like that false sense of security?
What a bunch of jackasses.
Well said Veruca, Well said!
If their diodes are worth having why don’t they sell them unattached to clothing, like they used to? If they save lives, why do I have to buy the $400 jacket that goes with it?
thats it. i’m done with readign any of your articles….take yoru hate to TGR…skiing is fun and while recco is not a substitute for training, good decision making, and experience, im psyched that my pants have one in em…you are making the same arguments against recco that idiots make about carrying a beacon, wearing a helmet, or a seatbelt. Keep your hate to yourself… We all know the program to write controversial articles to increase pageviews, but Tim Konrad, you have missed it. GET FUCKED.
Fuck you Kir, & what kind of name is KIR?
You probably had a bad childhood….
keep it real. keep getting fucked.
too bad no one has commented on such an interesting post. i wish there were more vocal members of this community…..
this all seems so simple to me…. recco offers a slightly greater chance of live rescue. why hate on it? of course theyre trying to make money, and of course people will have a false sense of security when using it. you know how many dickheads out there buy a beacon, shovel and probe and think theyre “prepared”? its always shocked me how few of us go out and get some basic medical training. ok, so you know how to use your beacon and you know how to shovel snow. great start, but what do you do when you pull your friend out of the snow and hes not breathing? wait for more help? unless you can TRULY perform a rescue on your own, then why bash a company thats making a widespread, systematic improvement to avalanche rescue and the chances of survival.
BCA sure makes you think youre better off with their beacon, but why dont we point out all the ways theyre falling short of saving lives and how much confidence they give to their customers who shouldnt have that much confidence?
take it easy everybody
As someone else pointed out already: perception is reality. Gapers / average Joe’s think that this makes them safer on snow. And act as such; making bad decisions.
What is going to make a difference to your safety on snow is your education, awareness, experience and practice.
Comparing BCA and Recco is asinine.
False sense of security on the snow is a very real thing and a few months back I read a study on the effect of skiing and riding with a helmet in terms of head injuries.
WITH A HELMET- On a percentage basis, there were MORE head injuries.
WITHOUT a helmet- There were less head injuries.
However, helmet head injuries were less severe than the non helmet injuries. The study concluded that with a helmet participants were more likely to go bigger and take risks.
I imagine the exact same study results could be applied to RECCO.
Without RECCO, more deaths.
With RECCO, less deaths, and the conclusion would come down to a false sense of security.
DOES THIS MEAN HELMETS SHOULD BE BANNED?!?!? No because if they save 1 life it is worth it.
Comparing Recco to a helment is also completely asinine.
You all are tools.
Maybe people that ski harder feel they need helmets more than less aggresive skiers. Could be selection bias.
look at all this controversy that a guy (jake) with no real avalanche rescue training, or proper research, can stir up.we all must look at what a terrible job Jake did at presenting his case, and how biased he was when he wrote that editorial about recco. Lets leave the expert talk to those who actually have a clue whats going on.
when is unofficial going to realize that this Jake fellow makes your (somewhat, and occasionally) well produced webzine lose so much credibility with his under research slag articles that take away from the real issue: Backcountry, Snow saftey and risk mitigation.
Please please please do not associate his rotten tripe articles with the well trained backcountry users who clearly do not associate with his bs. Hopefully he is a volunteer, or else your management is clueless.
have to agree with you on this one. Jake is a pile of steaming bull..
Ya know we don’t necessarily have to rip this guy to threads because he wrote a bad article. Remember this website was started by guys who led the whole GNAR push beyond squaws boundaries. It’s a place where we go for homemade pov videos and stories about Lindsey vonn going to a high school prom. Most (all?) of these guys aren’t even professionals in the ski industry… They’re just dudes writing “unofficial” articles to entertain us. Like the new weather features…. It’s just basic informative stuff, it’s not like someone is going to come here to learn meteorology
I mean, the name “unofficial” should be a good enough disclaimer that this isn’t Reuters or the associated press
I’m certain I’m not as convinced I’m right as some of the respondents here, but I have always thought of the recco system as a cadaver locator. And in a grim sense, indeed. Maybe in a place like Cham, where a bird will be launched almost instantly since there is pretty damn good cell reception in the Alps, especially if you have the magic code (Carte Neige), and a rescue team can be on your 20 in less than 20. But, alas, 20 minutes is a really long time when you’ve already turned blue and have gone to birdland.
Of the four times I’ve had people get slid and buried while skiing, none of them went all the way under. Some had transceivers, some didn’t. But in each case, a recco system would have been far enough away that it would only have aided in body retrieval. Maybe tree well situations have a longer survival time potential and if the recco system were to come in handy in a situation where a victim without a transceiver could hang in there long enough (both literally and figuratively) to be located, the recco might be useful scouring a hillside from a chopper. There was a situation on the opening day of Revelstoke in which a guy went in a tree well right where we’d been skiing. There were a lot of chopper passes made in the search, but it was days before he was recovered. Did recco play a part in that search? I don’t know, but I’ll have to ask Lammers if there was a recco receiver at play in the search.
So, after typing that, I guess my take is that, if you have the time to hang out and wait for it to show up, recco could help. If time is of the essence, I wouldn’t even give it a thought, which is why I wear a transceiver inbounds and out. If a pocket sized locator for recco had been developed, we might not be having this conversation.
Y’all have a good season. And, hey! Stay safe.
I have no problem with RECCO being a body locator/recovery tool. Why waste a lot of peoples time and a lot of other resources when some dude in a chopper could find the lost person.
* A skier/snowboarder upside down in a treewell.
* A skier lost on the other side of the mountain.
I would go as far as to say that every resort should make sure that users wear a RECCO on their ski pass or on an armband.
IMHO it is better to find and resolve the missing status of persons/victims than waste time and resources. I imagine that RECCO can do that if used by everyone.
OTOH if you use it instead of a beacon and partner, then you suck. And if you really think it replaces those, then you just dumb as an ass to start with.
What’s up mates, fastidious article and good arguments commented at this place, I am in fact enjoying by these.
Here is my blog … link building service
Right on Joe, and right on Jon Conway. Once again Jake has published a frivolous article. This kid has once again threw out some misinformed bs to infect the minds of the Sqauwlybraboy types. Get a clue and quit your sensationalism type of journalism that your known for. Unofficial Credibility would be better name for this site. It was once a cool fun site, but we’re all wasting our time on this ass.
make your own opinions on Recco based on its dumb and irresponsible marketing, not on your pre-conceived notions of jake based on a true article that states Whistler is WAY better than a gay place called Squaw Valley. You are both hungry for approval via anyone who disagrees with Jake and that shows your true colors; those of a cowardly scrotum who skis like a flaccid penis on a bad day.