May 11, 2008, Lichtenburg Mtn. father/son slog
5/11/08
WA Stevens Pass
4095
2
I have been trying to introduce my son to backcountry skiing over the last several years and for some reason our trips always seem to run into weather issues. He is now age 11 and a very strong skier so I figure this year backcountry skiing will get under his skin. We are still waiting for that trip that gets him hooked, however!
With a benign though cool forecast for the Puget sound region (with a possible convergence zone for part of the day, Sunday seemed the best day (also no conflicts with baseball and we did our Mother's day thing Saturday). I figured that Lichtenburg would be just enough east of the crest to give us a partly sunny cool day to enjoy this rather easy tour. I was wrong, it turns out that Winter will just not quit this year. Not a bad day, but no real sun and constant light snow throughout the day. At the road it was snowing when we arrived at 9:30AM, and it snowed all day, with only light accumulation. Current snow depths are about 4ft. at the start, 6ft. at the hairpin and stream crossings are still no problem. 5-6 inches of fresh heavy powder at lake level. Temperatures were below freezing for the whole tour even into the afternoon. However the new snow insulated the deep slush/corn below the fresh layer which made skinning somewhat difficult.
We chose a more aggressive approach line to the lake than described in Burgdorfer. We left the road well before the first hairpin and switchbacked up past occasional barriers to a bowl just below pt. 5452. I little more climbing and a traverse north brought us to the lake in fine position. My son was a trooper. With his twin tip K2s, Fritschis, Lange racing boots and a too narrow pair of skins we had to keep a more level track and therefore lots more switchbacks than normal.
We traversed the lake to its head and then headed north to the ridge line.
Because of less than ideal skinning conditions (wet below and then the cold powder snow was now sticking to the skins for both of us) we were a bit slow. Also because the summit was obscured in clouds, we opted to head down the north slopes off the ridge on good snow. This is the first time that I had done that descent in 3 trips and in some respects I think that we got the same vertical as I have experienced from the summit. We chose moderate/steep slopes to descend. My feeling is that steeper slopes with the underlying slush would have been prone to collapse and possible avalanche. The snowpack could use a couple of clear cold nights to solidify.
Not another soul in sight the whole day. Some foot traffic from Saturday was evident.
I think under more normal Spring conditions the trip would have been more efficient and exciting for my son, but I think he really enjoyed the traverse of the lake.
I can't say that this trip hooked my son on backcountry skiing. The long road slog up and then out is a detraction in my opinion and I think I will pick a more exciting direct approach trip next time. Hopefully the weather will be more inviting.
Alan
With a benign though cool forecast for the Puget sound region (with a possible convergence zone for part of the day, Sunday seemed the best day (also no conflicts with baseball and we did our Mother's day thing Saturday). I figured that Lichtenburg would be just enough east of the crest to give us a partly sunny cool day to enjoy this rather easy tour. I was wrong, it turns out that Winter will just not quit this year. Not a bad day, but no real sun and constant light snow throughout the day. At the road it was snowing when we arrived at 9:30AM, and it snowed all day, with only light accumulation. Current snow depths are about 4ft. at the start, 6ft. at the hairpin and stream crossings are still no problem. 5-6 inches of fresh heavy powder at lake level. Temperatures were below freezing for the whole tour even into the afternoon. However the new snow insulated the deep slush/corn below the fresh layer which made skinning somewhat difficult.
We chose a more aggressive approach line to the lake than described in Burgdorfer. We left the road well before the first hairpin and switchbacked up past occasional barriers to a bowl just below pt. 5452. I little more climbing and a traverse north brought us to the lake in fine position. My son was a trooper. With his twin tip K2s, Fritschis, Lange racing boots and a too narrow pair of skins we had to keep a more level track and therefore lots more switchbacks than normal.
We traversed the lake to its head and then headed north to the ridge line.
Because of less than ideal skinning conditions (wet below and then the cold powder snow was now sticking to the skins for both of us) we were a bit slow. Also because the summit was obscured in clouds, we opted to head down the north slopes off the ridge on good snow. This is the first time that I had done that descent in 3 trips and in some respects I think that we got the same vertical as I have experienced from the summit. We chose moderate/steep slopes to descend. My feeling is that steeper slopes with the underlying slush would have been prone to collapse and possible avalanche. The snowpack could use a couple of clear cold nights to solidify.
Not another soul in sight the whole day. Some foot traffic from Saturday was evident.
I think under more normal Spring conditions the trip would have been more efficient and exciting for my son, but I think he really enjoyed the traverse of the lake.
I can't say that this trip hooked my son on backcountry skiing. The long road slog up and then out is a detraction in my opinion and I think I will pick a more exciting direct approach trip next time. Hopefully the weather will be more inviting.
Alan
author=BigSnow link=topic=10039.msg40452#msg40452 date=1210617610]
I can't say that this trip hooked my son on backcountry skiing. The long road slog up and then out is a detraction in my opinion and I think I will pick a more exciting direct approach trip next time. Hopefully the weather will be more inviting.
I did Lichtenberg on Saturday via Yodelin which is an approach I really like. You can park in the Stevens Pass employee lot and then ski under the power lines parallel to Hwy 2 and Stevens Road. Cross Nason Creek on the bridge near the old tunnel entrance and ascend the south slope. I decided to climb the southeast face which I have not done before, but getting to the south face is plenty easy with a bit of a westward traverse. From the car to the bottom of Lichtenberg proper is only about 5 minutes, the way out you have to skin up a hundred or so vertical, but it is not that bad.
The south and southeast faces on Saturday were some of the slushiest I have ever experienced. Skinning up the slush was so slippery that you had to either take a nearly flat traverse or climb directly up the fall line. I was getting ankle deep penetration most of the way up. I hit the northeast ridge just east of the eastern most of the three summits. I climbed the northeast face for the last couple hundred vertical and it was very hard snow. I wished I had ski crampons for that section which was interesting after fighting the slop on the south side. I wanted to ski the southeast face right off the eastern summit, but I was concerned about snow stability and suffering from solo ski induced timidity, so I skied the south face. The slushalanches were running the fastest I have ever seen them. It was a good ski, but wet and slushy for sure. Seeing all of the snow I sent down on the south face made me feel good about not tackling the steeper southeast face. I didn’t see a soul all day other than at a guy excavating for a new cabin on Stevens Road.
Robert,
Thanks for the info.
I think your reply illustrates something important about conditions and aspect. I think we had much better snow conditions on the "north" side of the mountain. Come to think of it, the worst of the slush where we were was on south aspects, and especially on terrain features that were concave and facing south. Even small features such as tree wells that were concave seemed to focus the solar energy and deepen the slush.
We had much more stable conditions for the descent than what you described, and the north facing aspect of the slopes preserved the new snow enough so that it ended up being the primary ski surface for the descent. When my son followed in my tracks he had a much tougher time. I quickly advised that he not follow my lines and then he enjoyed the ski down much more.
I recognize that our "winter" conditions were only for the day, since it was clear that the day before it was all slush from the foot prints and postholes on the way up.
Having done this trip several weeks earlier in the last two years I would say that there is every bit as much snow up there now as there was in mid April in those years.
Thanks for the info.
I think your reply illustrates something important about conditions and aspect. I think we had much better snow conditions on the "north" side of the mountain. Come to think of it, the worst of the slush where we were was on south aspects, and especially on terrain features that were concave and facing south. Even small features such as tree wells that were concave seemed to focus the solar energy and deepen the slush.
We had much more stable conditions for the descent than what you described, and the north facing aspect of the slopes preserved the new snow enough so that it ended up being the primary ski surface for the descent. When my son followed in my tracks he had a much tougher time. I quickly advised that he not follow my lines and then he enjoyed the ski down much more.
I recognize that our "winter" conditions were only for the day, since it was clear that the day before it was all slush from the foot prints and postholes on the way up.
Having done this trip several weeks earlier in the last two years I would say that there is every bit as much snow up there now as there was in mid April in those years.
Reply to this TR
Please login first: