5 Best Low Avalanche Hazard Routes

During high avalanche hazards, what are your five favorite routes to ski?

I know it might be tough to give up your favorite stash, but this might be a great place for skiers to look for a safer alternative.

Thanks

Jim

Loup Loup Ski Bowl, Methow Valley Trail  cross country system, cross county ski touring around my local non-avy terrain.

All other routes that I ski in the BC have some terrain that needs to be avoided because of avalanche concerns. It would be irresponsible of me to give these locations because I do not know the ability of the persons who would go there.

Let me clarify.  Backcountry routes.  All routes have some Avy Danger.  By your reasoning, no one should post any trip reports since you do not know the ability of the person reading the trip report.  I was hoping we would get a productive discussion going about safer alternatives - Not no risk alternatives.

Let me clarify.  Backcountry routes.  All routes have some Avy Danger.  By your reasoning, no one should post any trip reports since you do not know the ability of the person reading the trip report.  I was hoping we would get a productive discussion going about safer alternatives - Not no risk alternatives.

IMHO, no one should post their "safe" routes for when avy danger is high or extreme; the route itself often depends on very local knowledge and experienced route finding and willingness to abandon the route given signs of avy danger.

ski acres terrain park

ski acres terrain park

LOL!

This is interesting. I have to agree that even the safest routes might not be safe on a given day. For example, the Phantom slide went the valley. You could have been sitting in the maintenance parking lot that morning, a typically safe route (lol), and been killed.

During high avalanche hazards, what are your five favorite routes to ski?

I know it might be tough to give up your favorite stash, but this might be a great place for skiers to look for a safer alternative.

Thanks

Jim

During periods high avalanche hazard I will lift ski, xc ski or ride my bike. I'm definitely not the gnarliest skier -- but I've backcountry skied since '71 without injury.

Learn how to XC ski...

... it will serve you well in the long-term and perhaps improve your fitness and skills.

The obvious answer is to be on flat, <25° terrain. Personally, I find that fairly boring, and prefer steeper trees. All of these involve some degree of risk (and certainly avy gear/knowledge) on a "high danger" day, but are generally manageable choices when combined with standard good practices and terrain management. If you're not comfortable with that, there's XC skiing, as recommended above.
All of these have slid before, but I would wager that 95% of the time, it occured when the party exited the forested areas.

Kendall
Catherine
Cave Ridge
Skyline Ridge
Yodelin
Union

I'm with Randy and a few others who have posted - on a high hazard day I'll ride the lifts (often a great time for that!), xc ski somewhere that isn't exposed to potential slide paths (e.g. gold creek at Snoqualmie, as long as you don't head up toward Rampart Ridge, and as long as you stop short of where the first slide path comes down to the valley, this s/be fine on a "High" hazard day; same with XC on the sno-mo roads by Kachess Lake), do a lowland hike as a stairstepper, bike, clean the office...

I've been out on some tours with which I'm quite familiar on high hazard days, and have found it's just not fun, as we take a low angle route up, find that the snow is spooking us (duh) so we take the low angle route back down - figure 11's in and around the skin track. It's just more fun to do a rain hike or XC or ride lifts for me. I've seen a party member kick off a decent-size pocket slab in moderately steep mature trees on a Considerable hazard day so I'm not keen to roll the dice in such spots on a "high" day (read up on deaths from avies in trees - often these turn into body part recovery missions, so good luck with that air bag...), but clearly mileage varies for others. But as my mom always told me, just because the other kids are doing it...

The obvious answer is to be on flat, <25° terrain. Personally, I find that fairly boring, and prefer steeper trees. All of these involve some degree of risk (and certainly avy gear/knowledge) on a "high danger" day, but are generally manageable choices when combined with standard good practices and terrain management. If you're not comfortable with that, there's XC skiing, as recommended above.
All of these have slid before, but I would wager that 95% of the time, it occured when the party exited the forested areas.

Kendall
Catherine
Cave Ridge
Skyline Ridge
Yodelin
Union

See, how hard was that.

To the vibers--you're going to frequent a public website about easy ski touring and then be lame to people who come here and ask questions?

At the very least, tell them to go buy your favorite buddy's ski touring book. Tell them something good.

Also, I highly recommend taking an AIARE Level 1 course

And what was your constructive contribution in response to the OP? I think that sharing what we actually do on high hazard days is pretty spot-on as a response to the question posed at top.

OK, I'll post a few book suggestions - the XC ski tours 1 and 2 books by the Mountaineers, authored by Kirkendall. I don't know if they're still in print but they are surely still purchasable via online avenues even if out of print. Years of good high hazard conditions fun to be had listed in there.

I should have been more explicit in my original post. I was not asking specifically about backcountry routes during a “High” on the Avalanche Danger Rating Scale. In my mind, even “Considerable” is high avalanche danger. I was definitely not looking for “safe” routes, but “safer” routes that you might still consider enjoyable.

I should have also spent more time formulating my question since there is somewhat of a tendency for some posters to pontificate a little too much. I’m more used to having discussions with snow or ice climbers in a face to face environment where the default response is to share beta when possible. Although both ice climbs and most mountaineer routes are routinely rated for both commitment and grade in a more formal manner than backcountry skiing, they have many objective dangers just as backcountry skiing does. Route finding, Terrain Selection, Weather, Personal Experience, etc. Yet, I don’t see the same sort of condescending attitude that sometimes rears up on this site.

My question should have been posted more along these lines:

On a day when the avalanche danger is higher than you would like, what are your favorite backcountry routes to ski without resort skiing or classic cross country skiing? Maybe routes that are lower angle or are more protected due to the terrain features.

Thank you Befree 32 for posting some suggestions. I have skied some of those and was looking for more similar options on those days I don’t want to venture into more risky terrain. In response to Jim Oker’s post, I totally understand that many don’t like the “low angle boring routes” (my words, not his), but I love to tour even if we are not ripping turns on the way down. I would rather do 11’s on my tele skis in a more remote location than ski classic cross country or go on a rainy bike ride (which I do a lot of both). As Jim Oker said “but clearly mileage varies” so everyone has different priorities. And I totally agree with the sentiment of “just because the other kids are doing it…”, I just told my kids the same thing yesterday.

The discussions in many posts are enlightening, thought provoking and funny. Overall we must take the positive with the negative. Sometimes the negativity actually promotes the discussion.

Ok, with that clarification, for considerable hazard days where I'm still willing to go out (e.g. sounds like the problem is not storm slab on all aspects, which still tends to lead me and my cautious partners toward the figure 11 thing which, while still better than cleaning the office perhaps, is not as fun to me as getting the dog out for a rain hike or going for an XC ski where we can get some nice flowing kick-and-glide going; and we don't have several feet of new snow so if a slide happens the consequences will almost surely be dramatic), bfree lists a few good options that I've used (not as confident about Union, but that may just be lack of familiarity - though at minimum I'm wary of where the road starts switchbacking which is clearly a slide path). Rampart Ridge's west forested slopes, accessed from Gold Creek has some nice steep trees that can be OK on a Considerable day as long as you avoid venturing into the obvious slide path, and are watching conditions and managing terrain carefully (see ash-j's AIRE 1 suggestion). This is where I saw a partner kick off an attention-getting pocket slab on a considerable day... Radio Tower ridge behind Summit Central can be OK as well (all the same caveats and fine print apply...). Another step down the highway, similar aspects (as well as S) up high on Margaret can be OK too, though getting to them is the trick. Some guidebooks describe one approach, but this route is well protected by the aversion of sharing a route with lots of snowmobiles (and don't park in the tight spaces between their trucks/trailers unless you like having your car vandalized! and be friendly when you encounter them out there on the terrain they're sharing with you!!). There are some similar options down past Yodelin on 2.

Part of the trick is getting out there and meditating on maps and being willing to spend some days exploring instead of reaping so that you can discover your own go-to routes for such days. This can be part of the fun of the sport. [preaching]Don't expect others to just serve this all up on a platter - it's no one's responsibility to ensure that you don't venture onto overly risky routes on such days just because you haven't done your own homework![/preaching]

  I’m more used to having discussions with snow or ice climbers in a face to face environment where the default response is to share beta when possible. 

Climbers are usually true mountaineers with less to prove...their activities speak for themselves.

I've seen that skiers are often quite willing to share beta in a f2f environment as well. The sense of scarcity around easily accessed powder, along with concerns about making "safeness "claims to a sizeable anonymous audience regarding routes on which it's not hard to find trouble, leads many of us to be more cagey about providing a yellow-brick-road here on the interwebz with the rather large audience. Just look at views versus posts on this thread for some insight into what leads to this dynamic...

And what was your constructive contribution in response to the OP? I think that sharing what we actually do on high hazard days is pretty spot-on as a response to the question posed at top.

OK, I'll post a few book suggestions - the XC ski tours 1 and 2 books by the Mountaineers, authored by Kirkendall. I don't know if they're still in print but they are surely still purchasable via online avenues even if out of print. Years of good high hazard conditions fun to be had listed in there.

You're right, well I agree with a few of the previous calls (Kendall Stump, Yodelin for example)
Also I hear Hyak can be good, though I haven't actually been there and I seem to remember it sliding fairly significantly at some point in the not too distant past
Pilchuck area has some moderate terrain
Paradise 'environs,' there are some moderate slopes out there, for example eastward of the parking lot, also some mellow treed stuff in the Tatoosh valley if you stay out of the big bowls

I stand behind the AIARE 1 suggestion which is totally sincere. The latest decision making/route choice/uncertainty emphasis is perfect for someone asking these kinds of questions

You are right, AIRE 1 is very much a positive and appropriate suggestion on such a thread.

I should start by saying that I'm probably more risk tolerant than I should be but still make conservative line choices based on 20+ years of snowboarding in the same general area.  I know specific terrain features and have had good luck reading them on days that are touchy but I still consider myself to have been lucky at times.

Usually on "high" days I'm lapping the chair lift although not always within the ski area boundaries.  I trust the pro patrollers to do their jobs well. 

On "considerable" days I'll venture a little further out but usually not too far from the ski area unless the avalanche concerns are very specific to falling cornices or loose wet slides.  I feel comfortable standing on top of something when loose wet slides are the problem.  If I had to hit the skin track on a considerable day I'd probably head for Swift Creek or Artist Point and return by following the skintrack.  There is still some objective hazard in both areas that should not be ignored.

Anything less than considerable makes me feel comfortable with exploring but I still keep my guard up.

Thanks for the great suggestions so far.

I also agree an AIARE 1 course is mandatory. When I took mine many years ago, the group was a large mix of skill levels and abilities which made for less efficient learning. It also seemed to not spend nearly enough time on terrain selection and group communication.

The AIARE 2 course would certainly narrow down the skill levels and abilities, but it is pretty expensive and a huge time commitment (approx $500 and 4 full days (40 hours). Tough to do on a budget and with family time constraints, but I am sure a great experience.

We were thinking of taking the AIARE 1 course a second time - maybe with a group of known skiers. But if they stick to the standard curriculum (at least at the time I took it), it might still not focus on more advanced techniques and skills.

It would be a great idea if they had an AIARE 1.5 - same time commitment and cost as AIARE 1, but focused more for the experienced backcountry traveler. I think it would have to cover all of AIARE 1 items as a review, but add more communication, terrain selection and multi burial scenarios

Has anyone hired a private company to conduct a similar course? I really liked the instructors for my class, but I can’t remember which company conducted it. Any recommendations on AIARE 1 providers recently?

First to add to the list of low avalanche hazard tours which there are surprisingly few of due to the lack of actual low angle glades without exposure to trigger points and traps:
Red Mt-Cle Elum Lake
Roaring Ridge-East of Hyak
Lanham Lake Trees
Blewett Pass Below Diamond Head

Like everyone keeps linking back to, context tends to favor face 2 face beta exchanges.

Doing a custom AIARE L1/Touring combo class with friends can allow your group to refine their planning and decision making under the guidance of a skilled mentor, worth the time and only a little more then a AIARE L1.

This is a tough crowd that likes to express their own version of AIARE check lists and rewrite the wheel every time an accident occurs or a question like this posts. I appreciate your willingness to suffer through it to get some answers.

could you clairify your statement. Also, is the Aiare stuff just a restatement of  Tremper, Fredston,  Munter, etc or is there some new insight there. 

I was speaking to the person who originally posted a question only to receive additional criticism, opinions and essentially extraneous messages for what he was seeking.

As for the my reference to the AIARE checklists, I am not sure if you have experienced the use of the field book they developed. It serves a tool and reference so students do not have to seek their prompts for communication, info gathering and observations from multiple sources. The FB links back to lessons covered on their class to help facilitate effective info gathering to improve tour planning, clean communication to make sure everyone is involved in the decision making and remind what observations should be made for each avalanche concern.

Much of what is included extends past Tremper/Fredston/Munter to include research from the last decade from Canada, Switzerland and many other sources.

As for the my reference to the AIARE checklists, I am not sure if you have experienced the use of the field book they developed. It serves a tool and reference so students do not have to seek their prompts for communication, info gathering and observations from multiple sources. The FB links back to lessons covered on their class to help facilitate effective info gathering to improve tour planning, clean communication to make sure everyone is involved in the decision making and remind what observations should be made for each avalanche concern.

... but what if they actually want to ski..,

... and not spend all day discussing the sketchy place thy have ventured into because they have the proper certificate?

Some folks just love checklists!

Yeah, I think the community has done well in response to the OP here, as well as in responding to his/her clarification of what was meant by "high" hazard in the OP ("Considerable" rating per the standard scale). I respect both the folks who offered up a few suggestions (btw, pretty much what you'd find from scanning a book like Burgdorfer's...) as well as the folks who explained why they are uncomfortable posting what they do on "high" hazard, then modified to "Considerable" hazard, days on an open internet forum where folks with a huge range of experience will be reading. I don't see that anyone was "tough" on the OP.

... but what if they actually want to ski..,

... and not spend all day discussing the sketchy place thy have ventured into because they have the proper certificate?

Some folks just love checklists!

Only if you talk really slow......

Mattski,The op asked for beta on where to ski during 'high' hazard and was offered advice from well intentioned experienced people. I don't see the criticism and every remark offered here is opinion, including your advice on using a tour and learn format with a guide, which is exactly the extraneous advice I offered. I once gave advice to a guy who asked, over the phone where to go BC skiing  the next day. I told him about the high hazard and recommended a route that had the least amount hazard exposure and I told him about a specfic terrain feature to avoid. I told him about that   terrain feature to avoid three times during our conversation so he was clear on the matter. He said he was clear on the matter. Check. I got a call from him after his ski tour. 'I know I f@cked up' he said. He told me that he had followed a skin track up through the area that I had told him to avoid.  The group that had set the skin track  had unintentionally  triggered an avalanche above him, and it hit him in the exact spot he was told to avoid. That group helped extract him from the debris and helped him get down. That group consisted  mostly of Guides, who picked that high avy warning day, to place a skin track in the worst possible location, and  chose to ski  steep wind slab. I hope you can see why I simply refuse to give such advice for the reasons that I stated in my first post on this thread. I'm lucky, yes there is that word again, that my friend did not have to die so that I might learn a lesson.

My point exactly, a response with a criticism wrapped in good intentions. Why put 'Guides' in caps? when you were not even present? Context matters with BC travel and education so offering actual low hazard tours actually means terrain that has little to no exposure to hazards. Your tour recommendation sounds more complex than your friend was looking for.

Another point I was making is that people, especially small children and dogs do not hear negatives when used frequently such as, 'No John, don't ski that feature when you are doing X tour it is very dangerous.' Studies show John only hears,'John ski that feature...' and does not register all the negatives thus making go/no go messaging dangerous due to the habit of doing what others tell us not to do.

It has been mentioned, but I would just concur with:

Paradise, the lower areas. There is a lot of shallow stuff here, which is unlikely to slide. This makes it good for higher avalanche days, and beginning backcountry skiers. I can ski a lot of it with my skinniest skis (just point and go). But avoid the road to Paradise Lakes, which is only safe really early or under really low avalanche danger days.

Artist Point, but do it the safe way. Stay by the resort track up to the pass, then stay to the left (not too far left, obviously, but left enough to avoid the hill on your right). This means you may end up dropping down a bit, but not that much (besides, you're on skis). At that point, you have a heavenly view of one of the most photographed mountains in the world. Feel free to reassess. The view is nicer on Artist Point/Huntoon Point, but it is plenty nice right there. If you decide to keep going, take the most moderate line (and away from the steep sides).

Kendall, although be careful late in the season in heavy snow years. The upper road cuts through a steep area that can definitely slide. Staying through the trees is probably safer, but I haven't skied that way enough to say how safe.

The resorts at Snoqualmie Pass have a lot of terrain that is fairly safe. If you go midweek or at the right season, it is free. As with all of these suggestions, use proper judgement. Don't assume something is safe because some bozo on the web said it is.

I agree with the Cross Country Ski Book(s) recommendation. The dividing line between "Cross Country" and "Back Country" is pretty fuzzy. Kendall starts with a road ski, followed by back country options (a lot of them). Most of the options are in the book (as are the other ones I mentioned). The authors do a good job of assessing difficulty, overall avalanche risk as well as risky spots. As mentioned in the book, don't assume they have it all down. Not only can conditions be worse, but the terrain can change (e. g. an area may have recently been logged). But I think it is helpful for someone who has never skied the area. You should always be willing to turn back if things aren't safe, but the book(s) minimize the chances that you will have a really short day (which also minimizes the chances that you will "push your chances").

I used to ask these general questions of my BC skiing mentors. What I realize now is that its impossible to generalize and provide a menu of routes based on a single variable -- a zonal NWAC forecast. So much of where I might go on ANY hazard day depends on snowpack, temperature, wind, time of year, snow patterns/history, and NWAC or TAY reports. I'm not just worried about the hazard, I'm worried about snow quality and objectives that make it worth my time. Kendall trees can be awesome or scary, Yodelin safe or crazy, Paradise fun or shitty, depending on whats happening in that area over a number of days. What I worry about now are route criteria based on what I know about those variables I mentioned above as a starting point starting at least a few days before I go out, and I'm looking for things that confirm or deny my biases based on what I see or dig into during the tour. If its an elevated hazard I might stay to terrain with specific features at a certain aspect and elevation, and be thinking about what would make me turn around.

I just read Bill Derry's remembrance of his son Jake's death last month on Granite Mountain:

"There is no such thing as backcountry ski safety.

Jake’s beacon didn’t work because he was actually in an avalanche. In an actual avalanche beacons often don’t work because they are crushed. Jake’s beacon was crushed and also stopped working because it was ripped off his body. Beacons are designed to stop working when the straps are removed because they assume you are done skiing.

Jake’s avalung was shredded. An avalung is also useless in an avalanche because in an avalanche your lungs are compressed and you can’t breathe and because you can’t move your arms to reach it because you are trapped by snow or because your arms are broken.

The probe and the shovel are useless if the beacon doesn’t work and you don’t know where the body is. In a real avalanche, the snow is compacted and turns to ice. The search and rescue crew needed a chain saw to get Jake’s body out of the ice.

The avalanche danger on Granite Mountain is permanently extreme. The entire face is an avalanche chute and there are no trees because of that. The avalanche forecast for the day Jake died was “moderate”. That’s about as low as it ever gets in the winter. The forecast was a mistake. They later changed it to extreme. Backcountry skiers should not trust the forecasts.

Ski movies often show pictures of skiers skiing out of avalanches. These are dangerously misleading. Those skiers are just in minor snow slides or at the very edge of a slide. They are extremely lucky. Jake could ski any mountain but when the entire mountain is moving underneath you there is nothing for your skies to ski against.

There is just too much information out there and too many product advertisements that imply backcountry skiing is safe. It’s not.

Too many young men have trouble fully comprehending the dangers of backcountry skiing and there is just too much information out there that suggests it is safe."

Fair enough. We might quibble with a couple of the fine points of his facts, but no arguing with the risks on any day. RIP Jake.

Hope this helps,

JR

The avalanche danger on Granite Mountain is permanently extreme. 

I agree completely. There was a very good post on NWHikers that mentioned that Granite is not a snowshoe trip. It is, however, possible to hike up there in the winter. But if you need snowshoes, you are off route or you timed your trip wrong. You should be walking on rocks, not snow. I know that is a different audience, but it is worth mentioning. To each his own, but the risk benefit of Granite never seemed worth it to me (theoretically you could ski it on a day when it is really icy, but why bother?).

how did you draw this conclusion based upon my short story? my friend is not a child and he has a Phd. I suspect he followed the other group because the snow was deep,which is common with high avy rating days, and the skin track was in already. He may have known that commercial Guides set  the skin track and felt they knew what they were doing. That is a common  hueristic trap. But I did not ask him, and while I was at home that day, I talked with many of those who were there.   

I agree. Your description could have been really obvious and the unfortunate decision making by your friend fairly common. I could easily see someone taking the information I just provided about Artist Point and doing the same thing. Go up there, get to the pass and just follow the tracks that almost always lead really close to the side of the hill (way too close, in my opinion).

skiseattle - I've been out of town sorry for the late post. Here are some suggestions since I most often am skiing out of bounds on red/orange conditions. However, here is a warning I am considered to be shady by many folks so please use my advice with caution. I would pick these areas on the really scary days. Yodelin, Skyline Ridge, Castle area around the Tatoosh, and Crystal Bullion Basin but there are some tricks to it you got to know the most safe routse which are still not perfectly safe by any means, some of the lower angle areas up around Paradise. What you need to do is pick an area on a lower avalanche risk day and study it. Then you got to get real familiar with the nuances and terrain in the area so when a big dump comes you are ready to just go big. Even a summer look at the area is good since it gives you an idea of the ground cover. If the snow is light enough lower angle stuff can be great. If you got 25 degrees in some spread out trees with 5% density for 2k vertical I will rip that up all day!

I have to be honest I have some special favorites, but I do not give those out.

A lot of it is about timing and how much risk you want to take on. You need to still really study the weather and how the snow is coming in, the wind speeds and check those meters religiously on NWAC at the snowtel sites. The game is to put the dice to your best advantage so you come back with a big pow day and safe and alive. Your schedule has to be super flexible and you need to strike when the action is there not on your schedule. You also have to change locations based on how the stuff comes in on the system. Maybe you planned to be in Snoq area and are stuck with the more painful drive to Stevens area etc.

I have to be honest I have been damn lucky and I am no avalanche expert. A lot of folks on here probably are, but I am not one of them. If Tremper is not one, I surely know I am not. When I took my avvie course he wrote the book for it. I know I just hate avvies because they are a big PITA and can kill you.

Then when you are out there you got to be constantly testing the slopes looking for trigger points, checking for layers, see if the snow comes off with little or no adhesion and while skinning up and floating through the stuff you got to make sure you properly handle microterrain issues especially if you are solo. Convexities at any time can just end your ski career. I have another rule......wait for a cool down FLs dropping from 3k to .5 to 1.5K and snow becoming intermittent. Let the stuff settle a bit maybe you are lucky and you get about 6" of 5% laid down on the other stuff. Luckily here in the PNW you can wait a bit and things usually settle and become cohesive, but this also a disadvantage if you wait to long because the pow does not keep as well. I also love if the big dump comes in with little or no wind. If you are going to ghost ski or hat ski yep you are going to be out on days you should probably be in a ski area, those red and orange days.

Good luck and remember you are rolling dice even in the less risky areas just try and improve your odds because one mistake and you probably are dead. This is why I recommend this type of skiing for those over 50. You are on the downhill anyway. However, ask yourself when you were walking on that wet rainy low visibility day, that you opted to not go big and get some pow on a red or orange day, did a car pass, you well you were rolling dice then as well. What happens if the driver is on the cell phone not paying attention and swerves into you?

I am certain I will get a lot of negative comments but this is how I play the game.