The presentations of the speakers during the afternoon session demonstrated both the strengths and weaknesses of our efforts to find the answer to the riddle of the snow avalanche. On the positive side it is comforting to know that we still have the talent represented by these speakers directing their intellect and experience at this very difficult problem. On the other hand, in spite of the efforts of people such as Peter Schaerer, Ron Perla and Sverre Engen, we are really not much closer to understanding avalanches now than we were twenty years ago. Sure, some significant results have been achieved and progress has been made, but in many instances we're still arguing about the same things we were a long time ago.
Progress comes in small pieces, usually, and patience is necessary.
Peter Schaerer's talk was particularly interesting in the sense that his wish list did reflect the desires of many researchers and forecasters who study avalanches. He succeeded in pointing out that studying avalanches is a very knotty task indeed. In spite of the considerable technology at hand we still cannot, for instance, see into the middle of an avalanche to determine what is going on. The technology might actually exist to do this, but unfortunately Uncle Sam isn't going to give the snow and avalanche community the funds to go about it. Things still have to be done on a shoestring, at least here in Canada and the United States, and I suspect that will remain the situation for some time to come.