telemark skiingbackcountry skiingPacific NorthwestWashington and Oregonweather linksThe Yuki AwardsMt. Rainier and Mt. Adams
Turns All Year
www.turns-all-year.com
  Help | Search | Login | Register
Turns All Year Trip Reports
Backcountry Skiing and Snowboarding

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
04/22/19, 03:51 PM

Become a TAY Sponsor!
 
Trip Reports Sponsor
Feathered Friends
Feathered Friends
Turns All Year Trip Reports
(1) Viewing these pages constitutes your acceptance of the Terms of Use.
(2) Disclaimer: the accuracy of information here is unknown, use at your own risk.
(3) Trip Report monthly boards: only actual trip report starts a new thread.
(4) Keep it civil and constructive - that is the norm here.
 
FOAC Snow
Info Exchange


NWAC Avalanche
Forecast
+  Turns All Year Trip Reports
|-+  2005 Backcountry Trip Reports
| |-+  December 2005 Backcountry Trip Reports
| | |-+  December 8, 2005, Snoqualmie Mountain (6,278')
:
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3]  All | Go Down Print
Author Topic: December 8, 2005, Snoqualmie Mountain (6,278')  (Read 40176 times)
Salal
Member
Offline

Posts: 213


Re: December 8, 2005, Snoqualmie Mountain (6,278')
« Reply #50 on: 12/19/05, 12:53 PM »

Good conversation....Having gone up snoqualmie several times on my own also...I can see why people do it. Accidents and avalanches can happen anywhere as we all know. Its a good thing we have the internet to help make choices a bit easier....but there will always be an "incident" factor out there no matter the conditions. Experience can help in controlling the factor but not remove it.
Logged
Paul Belitz
Member
Offline

Posts: 409


WWW
Re: December 8, 2005, Snoqualmie Mountain (6,278')
« Reply #51 on: 12/19/05, 01:16 PM »

Wow, Jim, you sure seem to be getting awfully fired up here. TAY is far more civil than most boards, but snide comments are still just that. There's no need to be so defensive.

My opinion is that if MW8888 has the skills to assess the snowpack and terrain to his satisfaction, I don't have any reason to think that his dawn patrol was unduly risky.

As for the water issue, I skied for seven hours yesterday and drank less than a quart of tea. I would not turn back from a three hour tour because I forgot my thermos of coffee.
« Last Edit: 12/19/05, 01:16 PM by pbelitz » Logged
TeleRoss
5Member
Offline

Posts: 72


Re: December 8, 2005, Snoqualmie Mountain (6,278')
« Reply #52 on: 12/19/05, 01:18 PM »

A three hour tour....A three hour tour.....
we all know how that one ended.....hahahahha
Logged
Jim Oker
TAY Moderator
Offline

Posts: 1585


Re: December 8, 2005, Snoqualmie Mountain (6,278')
« Reply #53 on: 12/19/05, 01:44 PM »

Paul - I think we agree. If he has the skills and made good judgments along the way, then no problem for him. Of course.

If you travel well w/o much water, I'm envious, as that doesn't work out as well for me. I tend to dehydrate easily (I sweat a lot, could be the extra fat layer I carry around), and am mindful of what the CO SAR guys told me about how often dehydration figured into hypothermia which factored into more acute injuries or other accidents. Plus I just feel crappy w/o hydration. I skied 4.5 hours yesterday and drank two quarts. That's me. YMMV. I ski with some folks who seem to need little water during the day. Lucky them.

As for what you read as defensiveness, I actually intended as more of an admittedly strident pitch for guys like you be a bit more respectful of folks who make different decisions from the ones you'd make (by way of contrast, I appreciated username's good questions and observations which didn't get into slamming anyone). I honestly don't feel I have anything to defend here. I'm quite comfortable with being open about my own decision process and risk bar. I look for partners who are similarly comfortable and open, even if they draw the line a bit differently. I saw that this thread was becoming an interesting opportunity to raise the question of peer pressure and subtle bullying versus open and respectful discussion of risks - important dynamics when in the field, yes?

And I'm mindful of the fact that some people (like many young guys right out of college) tend to be more aggressive on the choices (and some think they have it all figured out), but the truly cool ones are also respectful of where others draw the line. I never said MW8* was a fool, just that I'd draw the line differently for myself.
« Last Edit: 12/19/05, 04:44 PM by jim_oker » Logged
Meadow_Skipper
5Member
Offline

Posts: 23


Re: December 8, 2005, Snoqualmie Mountain (6,278')
« Reply #54 on: 12/19/05, 01:49 PM »

I'll stick to my original thoughts: a litre of coffee and a good report is excellent style and I applaud this person. The rest of this discussion is a bit too "arm-chair quarterback."
Logged
Tony_Bentley
5Member
Offline

Posts: 77


WWW
Re: December 8, 2005, Snoqualmie Mountain (6,278')
« Reply #55 on: 12/22/05, 06:16 PM »

It is coming "round midnight" and Coltrane is playing on shoutcast. Go figure.

Money see monkey do sometimes. Look at the trend of skiing in the last storm. A few friends make a skin-track after getting kicked out of Alpental and move their self propelled skiing to the face on the other side of the lot.

Conditions were excellent but began to degrade after 4 days of snow falling. Sky and Ross hit the slot and broke trail for the last thousand or so feet to get it. They never called.:-(

Everyone had a good run and hucked and hollered and will remember it well. Tracks were laid in up and down so anyone who didn't even know the terrain could've gotten in and out as long as they knew how to point their gear downhill without going out of control. MW had a good run but missed the best (since we got kicked out of Alpy).

Why do I see people getting all up in arms? Are you afraid of another fatality? Sorry, it will happen regardless of your opinions. Who cares where we draw the line? Let our actions speak clearly, rather than your opinion. Pain and suffering is inevitable


Now it is raining, I might not ski the corn at Paradise because it will be raining until next week and no one wants the rainy corn with me.

I finally read this nonsense after a friend said it was still going on tonight.

Last Saturday I watched someone with excellent form biff in the 'toosh. I wish I had my video camera for that. A little devil poked me in the side and said, "See, now you aren' t the only skier in these hills that falls on a perfectly good slope." HAHAHAHAHA

Did everyone get to see the action yet? Sorry I never posted it....

http://www.tonybentley.com/dec2.wmv

...memories while it is raining.....

Merry Christmas and I hope it snows enough to fill in some Cascades.
« Last Edit: 12/22/05, 06:18 PM by crackbolter » Logged
JimmyO
5Member
Offline

Posts: 36


Re: December 8, 2005, Snoqualmie Mountain (6,278')
« Reply #56 on: 12/23/05, 05:38 AM »

tony,  that is a fantasy video - awesome stuff!  I knew there'd be a horse somewhere under this pile of manure!

Hey, relax, only kidding. great thread!  mw888888888, sweet post that started it off, keep em coming.  love that peek inside the turn-hungry-head's internal monologue.  enjoyed most of the avy danger discussion too.  solo travel requires some real thought and measured risk assessment.

everyone who tried to be funny, you were. anyone who got all tense, just try boxers instead of briefs and don't forget to breathe...in.....out...that's it!  nice!  

gotta love anyone who posts anything inviting criticism of their actions.  Keep those adventures coming, you irreverant yet thoughtful young rascals!

JimmyO
Logged
moeglisse
5Member
Offline

Posts: 34


Re: December 8, 2005, Snoqualmie Mountain (6,278')
« Reply #57 on: 12/27/05, 04:58 AM »

Wow!
I think some people need naps.


MW....Great Photo.....Glad you were there to get the shot! Cool
Logged

going ricther
Benk
5Member
Offline

Posts: 20


Re: December 8, 2005, Snoqualmie Mountain (6,278')
« Reply #58 on: 12/27/05, 06:46 AM »

Nice post Tony!  And great video work as well.  I knew those were pretty epic conditions requiring sequential dawn partrols, and the video sure brings it back!

As for all the differing viewpoints it's good to see and discuss.

B
Logged
Bill_G
5Member
Offline

Posts: 31


Re: December 8, 2005, Snoqualmie Mountain (6,278')
« Reply #59 on: 12/28/05, 12:30 PM »

Now I know why I've stopped posting trips - a nice report, some humorous adds followed by a flurry of uninvited criticisms.  (unless the purpose of a post is to provide a target)

While Jim may have some good reasons for making a different decision if he were there - he wasn't there and the decision wasn't his to make.

Jim, when you report your future trips, I'm sure we'll be happy to hear the basis for decisions you made.  We might not even tell you that you were wrong!
Logged
Lowell_Skoog
Member
Offline

Posts: 2072


WWW
Re: December 8, 2005, Snoqualmie Mountain (6,278')
« Reply #60 on: 12/28/05, 05:55 PM »

Quote
I applaud Jim for raising the questions that were in my head as well, because it may not seem like it from my TR, but the decision to go on was a challenging one.


I think the people taking pot shots from various sides of this discussion should note that MW88888888, the original poster, has consistently expressed his appreciation of Jim Oker's safety questions. Seems like a non-issue to me.
« Last Edit: 12/28/05, 06:07 PM by Lowell_Skoog » Logged
Jim Oker
TAY Moderator
Offline

Posts: 1585


Re: December 8, 2005, Snoqualmie Mountain (6,278')
« Reply #61 on: 12/29/05, 04:49 AM »

Thanks, Lowell. I realized (after all my posts above) that:

a) Samminator was right, I needed a nap. Decaf helped.  Smiley

but

b) I'm re-learning something I found out when moving from Boston to the PNW - that I grew up working things out by sharing thoughts and debating and the culture was that this is just a way to help each other think by pushing each other a bit, but out here I've found many folks take that approach as criticism or otherwise as a negative. Lowell, username, MW8*, and a few others submitted great posts on this thread that got me thinking, which was all positive for me. This all seemed in keeping with MW8*'s theme of weighing risk in his original post (a theme I'm sure we all ponder from time to time). But alas, I'm reminded that my native style of "debate to think" doesn't work well universally (undoubtedly exacerbated by the challenge of getting tone across accurately in writing). That's cool, I can adapt. Bill_G, don't worry, if you do decide to share a piece of your outings with the community, I'll be very PNW in response. If a TR suggests a bigger discussion that seems worth having and I just can't help myself, I'll post my thoughts in the "anything but TR's" area where folks who don't like this sort of discussion can easily opt out. Bill_G - I'd love to see what you have to share, and you are certainly welcome to comment on or question any of my TRs, and I think you'll find that most TRs here are just given the text equivalent of a "high five."
« Last Edit: 12/29/05, 04:51 AM by jim_oker » Logged
Charles
Member
Offline

Posts: 1090


Re: December 8, 2005, Snoqualmie Mountain (6,278')
« Reply #62 on: 12/29/05, 06:42 AM »

It certainly does seem that on the internet it is easy for one person's discussion to be another person's criticism. I guess it takes a certain skill to contribute to an internet "discussion" in a way that minimizes the chances that it will be seen instead as "criticism". The culture of the specific forum must also come into play, and in this regard, given the "discussion" oriented nature of this forum, it would help if readers would generally give the "discussion" point of view the benefit of the doubt. There have been very few instances of blatant criticism intended solely to provoke, and these have been pretty obvious. There have been many instances of people raising a question about something in a post that have led to useful discussions.

A couple of other points. One, this forum has been set up with a minimum of rules. One of the rules, however, is that every thread in a monthly TR board must start with an actual trip report. The reasoning behind this rule is that some people will want to quickly find trip report information without wading through lots of other junk. Nobody is required read the sometimes lengthy "discussions" which sometimes follow an actual trip report in a thread (such as this one) unless they choose to do so.

Two, it is possible to post a "trip report" that simply includes snow information and nothing else. Such a trip report could still be useful to others and would not be likely to invite either substantial "discussion" or "criticism". People who visit this forum to read about snow information posted by others but who do not share their own snow information are encouraged to participate in this information sharing by posting in a style with which they are comfortable. If that style is snow information and nothing else, that's OK. If everyone here were to "take" but not "give", there would be no "here".
Logged
MW88888888
Member
Offline

Posts: 512


Re: December 8, 2005, Snoqualmie Mountain (6,278')
« Reply #63 on: 12/29/05, 12:17 PM »

Is there a prize for the most responses and views to a post?  If so, lucky me.  Couple points I'd like to make, as it seems the issues raised here touched a nerve.

1) Ron_l had it right, this post was a direct copy of an e-mail I sent to friends around the country.  Friends with whom I ski every year, around the globe and in all conditions; they know me, they know my style and my skill levels, so there was no need to expound on the details of why I did the things I did.  It was simply a day out with me, and as I hoped to express in the writing, a day with drama and intrigue.  I do not write about every day I ski (although I have a personal diary that fits the bill), only the ones that are "interesting" 

2) Why did I post the email for the world to see?  I don't know, other than to share with others what I love - the mountains - in the hopes others will do the same for me.  I do like this forum, for now, as I have become accustomed to the characters that post here as well as the myriad of peanut gallery who fling food and are obnoxious.  I'm an adult and can take a shot or two, but like it or not, if I do not like the playground, I will not return.  I think that is an important point that some should take away from this - to underscore Charles' point - there is no obligation to post here.  In fact, maybe that's why I thought it safe to post in the first place, BC skiers aren't supposed to be that obnoxious ski-area type skier, right?  They are supposed to respect each other's space and ways, and to encourage and assist their brethren when necessary.  Maybe that's asking too much, or maybe I'm too sentimental.  Who knows.  But some of the responses to this post certainly depressed me and made me question why I would want to let anyone in on my love affair with the mountains.  Their angst and frustration is just too easy to walk away from.

3) Finally, I have grown to know and respect Jim_Oker from his past contributions to this site and maybe that's why I didn't take his initial response as an attack.  His questioning the safety issue was very valid, and I knew when I posted without the background the info contained within sounded pretty sketchy.  I was glad he raised the issue b/c as they used to say on "That's Incredible" (now I date myself) - don't try this stuff at home, kids.  Maybe some details will help those still questioning the safety issues: I knew ahead of time about the planned Avy work on I-90 (hell, it was even posted on the road signs the day before); I ski very well and often; I run up mountains to train (literally) so I know my body's water intake needs (as well as the fact that open water was everywhere on Snoq that day if you looked); and although years of learning only make me understand my naiveté on snow pack analysis, I know a good day when I see one.  Bottom line, this trip was not a lark, and I'm no tourist.

So, more fodder for the masses.  

[indeed - I don't mean to sound whining, just wanted to set the record straight.]
« Last Edit: 12/30/05, 01:01 AM by MW88888888 » Logged
TeleRoss
5Member
Offline

Posts: 72


Re: December 8, 2005, Snoqualmie Mountain (6,278')
« Reply #64 on: 12/29/05, 12:38 PM »

Logged
Lowell_Skoog
Member
Offline

Posts: 2072


WWW
Re: December 8, 2005, Snoqualmie Mountain (6,278')
« Reply #65 on: 12/30/05, 03:09 AM »

MW8 and Jim: Thanks for your thoughtful posts. You've shown that you're willing to risk some exposure, not to gravity but to your peers. I respect that.

TeleRoss: If it's a race to the bottom, you're winning.  Wink
Logged
Charles
Member
Offline

Posts: 1090


Re: December 8, 2005, Snoqualmie Mountain (6,278')
« Reply #66 on: 12/31/05, 09:32 AM »

MW88888888, there is no prize other than simply the warm fuzzy feeling which I'm sure is radiating through you as you realize that, yes, you started what has turned out to likely be the most active thread ever on TAY. Congratulations? I personally hope that you will continue posting as you have been doing, adding to your established record of providing good snow information and beyond.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]  All | Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  



Login with username, password and session length

Thank you to our sponsors!
click to visit our sponsor: Feathered Friends
Feathered Friends
click to visit our sponsor: Marmot Mountain Works
Marmot Mountain Works
click to visit our sponsor: Second Ascent
Second Ascent
click to visit our sponsor: American Alpine Institute
American Alpine Institute
click to visit our sponsor: Pro Guiding Service
Pro Guiding Service
Contact turns-all-year.com

Turns All Year Trip Reports ©2001-2010 Turns All Year LLC. All Rights Reserved

The opinions expressed in posts are those of the poster and do not necessarily
reflect the opinions of Trip Reports administrators or Turns All Year LLC


Turns All Year Trip Reports | Powered by SMF 1.0.6.
© 2001-2005, Lewis Media. All Rights Reserved.