CO correct?
I am having a debate right now and want a solid source for this if it is indeed fact.
I swear Ihave heard this from a bunch of people, but maybe I am delusional.
CO correct?
I am having a debate right now and want a solid source for this if it is indeed fact.
I swear Ihave heard this from a bunch of people, but maybe I am delusional.
What is your definition of unstable?
Originally Posted by blurred
Ruby's?
123
Well thats part of the problem. How do we really define "stable"?
Take CO's Gore Range for example. It seems like 99% of those lines are unskiable in midwinter, and many are only in perfect stable condition once every 10 years or so.
I know CO has the most avalance fatalities on record, but how many of those were miners/train guys who were in the wrong place at the wrong time in the 1800s?
I've read somewhere that it was the San Juans in CO, like the Wolf Creek area. No first hand experience though, I was googling stuff about the area for a possible BC/Cat trip and ran into it. I could be wrong but I think the skier traffic there is less than other places so the most unstable snow pack doesn't necessarily claim the most victims.
colorado doesnt get enough snow to produce dangerous avalanches.
I think the reason CO has the most fatalities is because there are shitloads of people out there to trigger and get caught. I don't know any reason why the pack there would be dissimilar from other intermountain/continental packs, like in WY or MT, for example. But CO has more people.
Well, Colorado has more terrain above 12,000 feet than any similar region and correspondingly higher winds. The development of hard slabs, the deep slab instability and, persistent weak layers are more widespread than in other regions. Depth hoar development in a lot of Colorado is also more ubiquitous due to thin snowpacks and cold temperatures. But just saying Colorado has the most unstable snowpack is an inaccurate way of describing something that varies considerably in both time and space. It would be more accurate to say that the instability in Colorado has resulted in more fatalities than any other region in north America because of the combination of these factors and the large population that includes lots of people who want to play in the high alpine during winter. Seems like your argument could be decided by hair splitting whichever way it goes.
And wasn't the most fatal train-related avalanche in Washington anyway?
I boiled my thermometer, and sure enough, this spot, which purported to be two thousand feet higher than the locality of the hotel, turned out to be nine thousand feet LOWER. Thus the fact was clearly demonstrated that, ABOVE A CERTAIN POINT, THE HIGHER A POINT SEEMS TO BE, THE LOWER IT ACTUALLY IS. Our ascent itself was a great achievement, but this contribution to science was an inconceivably greater matter.
--MT--
In trying to reach a definition of stable, I'm surprised people aren't talking even at all about frequency, never mind deaths. As always, size matters, too. But data is data, trends are trends and it's up to you to make them argument worthy. I just don't buy the line of reasoning that fatalities = stability indicator
everyone has different views and opinions about "stable" i guess.
![]()
Continential snowpacks such as in most places in CO are usually considered unstable due to the thin pack/less snow and persistant weak layers such as hoar. (As stated by telep above) This results in more climax avys and less direct action ones as opposed to a maritine pack that has few to no persistant weak layers and a deep pack causing more direct action avalanches and few climax ones.
So more or less does your defination of unstable relate more to number or size?
"The idea wasnt for me, that I would be the only one that would ever do this. My idea was that everybody should be doing this. At the time nobody was, but this was something thats too much fun to pass up." -Briggs
More stoke, less shit.
I'm an avy jong, I know Utah's supposed to be fairly "safe" in relation to CO snowpacks, but less stable than maritime (I think I've got that right). Can anyone shed some light on the dangers/problems with an average Utah midwinter snowpack? And why? Just interested cuz I just got here.
The problem is that it snows so damn much.
Hmm thats kind of a tricky question. I would say that on average the CO snowpack is less stable than say a washington snowpack, but there are always 1-2 week periods thoughout the year where the wa snowpack is like death. Different reasons for the instability etc etc splitting hairs etc repeat what other people said etc.
A WA type snowpack probably gets more unstable than a CO snowpack at one given time due to more varying precipitation. However the instabilities generally don't last that long, whereas an instability in a continental snowpack can last weeks to months.
I think? So yeah pretty much what others have said -- it depends.
[QUOTE=telepariah;2504160
And wasn't the most fatal train-related avalanche in Washington anyway?[/QUOTE]
Doesn't count, since it was a century ago...
[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellington_avalanche[/ame]
Like everything out here, when it goes, it goes big. I'm just saying.
Washington (maritime) snowpack is nowhere near as "unstable" as inter-mountain snowpacks. Its just a different type of unstable... we worry about how snow layers are bonding with each other through a deep snowpack, while rocky mtn.-type snowpacks worry about how it bonds to the ground.
I guess Aaron already said all of that though.
OOOOOOOHHHH, I'm the Juggernaut, bitch!
Fatalities are a poor way to judge stability. CO's numbers are skewed due to high user numbers and easy access to high-danger areas. However, almost anyone who has studied snow science to any degree will probably agree that CO has the least stable snowpack in the country. Very cold nights (like the rest of the continental area) contrast with relatively warm days, which creates a huge amount of faceting (WY and MT tent to have much colder daytime temps). Add to that the relatively thin snowpack, which leads to more faceting, and you have a serious problem of deep slab instability.
The CO Rockies are a hugely varied place, and there are many subclimates and unique snowpacks. The central ranges (Sawatch, Tenmile, Mosquito) are arguably the least stable due to very thin snowpacks, and abnormally high winds. The San Juans are generally more stable then the central mountains, due simply to a deeper snowpack. However, the San Juans have incredibly avy-prone terrain.
The depth of a pack has a huge effect on stability. After carefully watching the Sawatch snowpack all last winter, I took a trip to the southern Elks in early March and noticed a significantly more stable scenario, mostly because the snowpack averaged 50-100cm deeper.
All snowpacks go through very unstable periods. There are days/weeks when you avoid the backcountry like the plague even in the safest maritime snowpacks. But after the cycle passes, the conditions will change and things will usually solidify. However, in CO, it is rare that the danger will ever be LOW until the spring.
CO has incredibly unstable snow conditions, due to a myriad of variables. Many of the variables are seen elsewhere, but I can't think of anywhere that combines all aspects into one, sketchy-ass situation! (Unless you want to look outside the country, in which case you see similar situations in the Eastern Canadian Rockies; ie. Banff, Lake Louise, etc.)
Skiing, whether you're in Wisconsin or the Alps, is a dumbass hick country sport that takes place in the middle of winter on a mountain at the end of a dirt road.
-Glen Plake
the high country of New Mexico has to be in the running.
well you've got unstable people lobbing artillery into unstable snow. it's alternately really cool and really scary.
Something for the lurkers, since everyone posting here probably has a good handle on the different regional snowpacks:
(Staying Alive in Avalanche Terrain)
It has a solid background and strong answers to this question, written by one one of the experts.
Oh look, the Bee Gees wrote a book.![]()
I have been in this State for 30 years and I am willing to admit that I am part of the problem.
"Happiest years of my life were earning < $8.00 and hour, collecting unemployment every spring and fall, no car, no debt and no responsibilities. 1984-1990 Park City UT"
Bookmarks