> such courses might be more successful at extending students’ mobility in avalanche terrain That's the point. It's very easy to travel through the snow witho

> such courses might be more successful at extending students’ mobility in avalanche terrain That's the point. It's very easy to travel through the snow without exposing yourself to any avalanche risk: just stay away from snow that's steep enough to avalanche. If you're going "hiking on skis", that's all you need to know. It's not quite so easy if you want to go climbing, but it isn't that hard. If an avalanche sweeps you off the mountain, your immediate problem is falling off a mountain. Being caught in an avalanche is a comparatively minor issue. So you're going to be conservative: if any kind of subtle analysis is called for, you stay in the hut, and wait until the snow is obviously stable. In climbing season, that will happen soon enough. What's tricky is going skiing. In winter, either you're willing to take some calculated risks with avalanches, or you'll be limited to pretty boring skiing. People don't do avalanche courses to be safe (you can do that without a course). They do them to take more risks, skiing in less obviously safe conditions, and get away with it. Which is all good, provided that you're honest about what you're doing. Maybe a good comparison is a pilot getting an instrument rating. The safest option will always be to stay on the ground in bad weather. The reason they'd get the rating is to travel reliably, but less safely, by flying through bad weather when the rewards justify the risks.