I hate to continue commenting on this thread but it's comments like this that turn your posts into harassment.  You imply that the only information provided by the NWAC report was there was a slide triggered by a snowboarder.  The report stated the aspect, elevation, depth of crown, failure layer and trigger.  If you are going to continue this harassment please try to be more accurate.

Freeski, develop your own information.  If you place value in knowing all conditions in your area, start digging.  All aspects are different and constantly changing...

... and stop pestering the heli gang, they are not there to give you condition reports.

Please state the point...

No one owes you an iota of information.

It is clear in the FS information you posted earlier that the goal of the information sharing is aspirational (would) and not set in stone (will or shall).

Why "would" the operators share information with someone bashing them? 

Freeski, why do you need others observations?  Don't you play your own game?  All incidents and reports are history, and they are not necessarily predictive. 

Go ski dig your own holes if you want and get on with it...

Just to clarify. 

All of the incidents that Freeskiguy refers to in 2008 were reported to NWAC to help them with their avalanche forecasts.

The partial burial that he referred to was one guest "buried" up to his knees in the standing position.  He was hit while skiing (actually shuffling down because it was so low angle) the lower portion of an avalanche path after another party triggered it from above.  I was the guide that day and still feel that it was reasonable terrain to be skiing with the stability that we had.  Yes, it was an unstable snowpack but the likelihood of natural activity that day was very low due to the weather conditions.  It was the type of day that was reasonable to go out in if you were able to keep your slope angles low.  I believe that was the mistake the recreational party made that day.  They were looking for steeper terrain because the snow was so deep the low angled slopes were not that enjoyable to ski.  The mistake I made was assuming they were not going to tour up into that terrain. 

As far as transparency goes, NCMG and the guides that work for NCMG are going out of their way to provide snowpack and avalanche information to the public.  Avalanche observations (including skier triggered) and snowpack observations are reported to NWAC in order to help with their forecasting.  NWAC is contacted directly and snowpack information is regularly posted on NWAC snowpack information exchange.  If you look at the exchange this year every single post from the WA Pass area, which there are many, came from a guide from NCMG.  This is not a requirement of our permit but something that we do as a public service.  This is something that the guides do after a long day of work when they should be spending time with their families.  Additionally, NCMG also provides weekly snowpack and avalanche conditions updates on the local radio station to provide local backcountry skiers up-to-date information on what we are observing in the mountains. 

For me personally, freeskiguy's continued harassment is making me less inclined to share my observations with the public.  I am going to continue to share my observations because the more observations we have the better decisions we can all make as backcountry travelers.  I would encourage everyone to do the same. 
Jeff



 

Chris- Appreciate the change. Better to have your facts straight then post. Hopefully this discourse will lead to that.

Both Larry and Jeff typically post what we feel comfortable sharing to NWAC. We are always happy to discuss what we are seeing in the snowpack phone, but for liability reasons do not share our operational minutes, detailed snow reports nor incident reports.

I am not aware of any close call incident between a BC skier and the heli last year.

We do not heli-ski the Bride, so no reason to set up an LZ there.