Secret stashes, exploration, solitude, and more

Guys, guys. In the words of Oscar Wilde, "life is too important to be taken seriously". Even when it comes to "secret" stashes.

Yeah, but pontificating is so much fun!

Yeah, but pontificating is so much fun!

<br><br>Apparently!

Nice discussion.<br><br>I do very much appreciate seeing trip reports with or without route descriptions. I do like to know the general area or destination and then get the maps out to work a route in my mind. Chances are I would pick a different route for many such trips.<br><br>Last year (during my time of unemployment) I was able to do many trips unaccompanied into areas both in the guidebooks and "secret". Never saw another person, what a great sense to explore as a pioneer. (at least once the highway noise is left behind Lowell's points are well taken here. I won't have that luxury this year, but I am pretty confident that if I want to find a place that is not trampled, it won't be that hard.<br><br>One point to consider. If every route done was posted and given the number of people willing to really work at this endeavor, just how full would the backcountry be? My guess is that 80% of the "BC" crowd would still end up at the popular spots with the rest scattered about several square million acres. Heck,is it not obvioius that the majority of "tele skiers" do nothing but lift service?<br><br>I do like skiing solo for that private personal experience, yet I don't hold the opinion that a group of 4 can't have a very similar experience. Being such a small community, odds are that bumping into one other small group on a route will likely find youself skiing with like minds and probably names familiar from communications such as occurs on this site (I have seen such contacts referred to countless times in the trip reports).<br><br>It is also hard to imagine that any "secret stash" has not been previously discovered considering the long history of exploration and very high population density for a relatively small mountainous region. My guess is that those areas will remain relatively untrod unless hyper advertized or published.<br><br>Alan

While I generally agree with AlpineRose that, in the Big Picture, this is a small issue, it seems apparent that in our modern society this is not a trivial matter. With people more and more concentrated in urban areas and out of touch with wild Nature, the sense of discovery and solitude which one can get in the mountains has become quite important to many. The number of contributors to this thread illustrates this, as do the continuing struggles of our National Parks and Forests to maintain mandated levels of "solitude".<br><br>I have had the opportunity to think about this discussion during my last two ski outings, which have provided some surprising contrasts. About a week ago I skied in the Baker backcountry, in a spot ridiculously close to the parking lot. Except for the first ~30 minutes of skinning in (when we were following several skiers) and then the last ~30 minutes (saw two skiers at a distance), we didn't see any other people, aside from the seven in our own party. It was nice to have our little spot to ourselves, and it was nice to not have anyone else tracking up the slopes, but the presence of others would probably not have ruined the experience. It was a great day, both for the skiing and the enjoyable companionship of the others in the party, with a surprising amount of solitude given the location.<br><br>Two days ago I tried a route new to me (Silver Peak via Twin Lakes), which I had found by studying maps, and was expecting to see neither people (it was a weekday and I was alone) nor tracks. Much to my surprise, there were tracks (several days old) for a good deal of the route I had chosen. I could have varied my route slightly and skinned up untracked snow, but rather than a blemish on my wilderness experience, I saw the tracks as an opportunity both to save energy on the climb and see what destinations others have found in the area. Following the skin track up through the forest, I realized that the presence of the tracks didn't reduce my routefinding challenges, because I had no way of knowing where the tracks would lead. I had to consult my map just as often as if there had been no tracks, and as it turned out, the tracks diverged along the way and left me with untracked snow for the last 1000' of climbing. Even though thousands of people have probably stood on top of Silver Peak, some taking the route I used, I felt plenty adventurous and alone (maybe a little too, at one point).<br><br>Given the history of the exploration of the Cascades, is it likely there is any spot which nobody has ever visited by some means, especially up higher where skiers typically go? It seems like the "pioneering" type of experience which ski_photomatt and BigSnow mention is almost always going to be an illusion, though a valuable one to many, including myself. There are ways to increase the chances of such an experience (weekdays, stashes, going for a tour instead of turns, etc), but if it doesn't always turn out that way, I'm certainly not going to let it ruin my day. Another day, another location will give me that experience.<br><br>Similarly, encountering other skiers is almost always a positive experience, as alpentalcorey points out. In fact, until Matthaeus told me about his group's recent unpleasant encounter with another group of skiers high atop a newly (guidebook) popularized destination, I don't think I had ever experienced or heard about a truly bad encounter.<br><br>(Note: the original title of this thread no longer reflects what is being discussed here, so I changed it)<br>

Wow! I must admit that this thread surprises me. I thought all this kidding about secret stashes was just that. I feel like the relic of some bygone age when Mountaineers walked the mountains and the frenzied denizens of the flats had not yet elbowed their way into the throne room. <br> <br>When I began climbing, it was with great pleasure that I could follow the Beckey route descriptions to safely climb routes that I could not pioneer. Later, when I did put up some modest new routes, it was my pleasure to share what I had learned with the mountaineering community by publishing route descriptions. This seemed in resonance with the pioneering spirit of Western Civilization, where folks revealed what they had found for the good of all, and thus could Newton stand on the shoulders of his predecessors to see farther than they had been able. I failed realize that Beckey and I were doing something terrible! <br> <br>When I found ropes and hardware too heavy to enjoy and started skiing the backcountry for turns, the same spirit seemed appropriate. Anybody reading my trip reports can easily find my secret stashes. I hope I have been able to contribute to the pleasures of folks who come to the Baker backcountry without a clue as to where to find the goods. Similarly, when I travel to new areas, I appreciate any information that saves me floundering around for a few days getting the lay of the land. If I truly want a pioneering experience, I will go where no TRs have yet been made because nobody has yet been there. Ours is a large mountain range, and there are very, very few people beyond the easily accessible parking areas. <br> <br>Last weekend, in the Baker backcountry, I spent two days doing lines that I am sure are the secret stashes of somebody. I saw no tracks other than those of my party, after 30 minutes from the parking lot. If I went back to these lines now, they would be as pristine as when I found them. The Baker backcountry provides about 17,000 acres of prime skiing within reach of a day trip from the parking lots, and the lines are renewed weekly. I find it ludicrous that anyone&#8217;s day could be ruined by a follow bc skier skiing the line that they were aiming at. Just pick the next line if yours has been done &#8211; or, better yet, ski the line anyway and compare notes with your new friend at the bottom. <br> <br>Well, ludicrous or not, I suppose it can happen. Neither overpopulation nor the bc skiing boom are going away, and, apparently, bc overcrowding is already a reality in some areas. If so, what we need to protect against is not people skiing certain little patches we think are ours, but the popularity of backcountry skiing in general. If there are ten thousand bc skiers in your area, they will find your stashes no matter how cute and vague your trip reports. Perhaps, if it our intentions to keep folks out of our secret stashes, we need to stop glorifying backcountry skiing, stop making trip reports, close down TAY, Ttips and Alpenglow, and burn the guidebooks!! <br> <br>--- or maybe we need to accept the reality that we are enjoying the tattered remnants of a disappearing wilderness and at least be can be gracious as we participate in its destruction. It is even possible that, by creating muscle powered traffic to our favorite places, we may help protect them from becoming snowmobile territory. Now, there is how a stash gets really lost! <br> <br>

I publish trip reports for destinations that are either already well known or challenging enough that they won't get overcrowded.  I refrain from publishing reports for high quality areas that are easily accessible but for some reason little known.  I regard them as personal discovery zones, not just for me but for everybody.  Does silence make me ungracious?<br><br>I've never had my day ruined by meeting another skier in the mountains, even when we met in one of my "secret" spots.  Instead, I've met new friends this way.  And I've never criticized anyone in public for posting a trip report.  I once corresponded in private with another skier about the wisdom of publicizing a certain spot he discovered and posted.  We ended up friends and have since done trips together.<br><br>If you go back to the beginning of this thread, it all got started because ski_photomatt asked for trip ideas, but added: "I'm not asking for anyone's secret stash as I know these things are carefully guarded." In my view, Matt's request was most gracious. Things went downhill when freshie (apparently) criticized another skier for posting a certain trip report.  That was not gracious.<br><br>There's a difference between refraining from posting a report for your own reasons and criticizing somebody else in public for posting a report.  The former is self-restraint; the latter is coersion.  The former does not threaten our community spirit; the latter does.

This is a great topic. I mostly choose not to post my trips. <br><br>Like many out there - my time to free-ski is usually limited and as a result I often ski in areas that have quick and easy access. Given a choice I would rather ski the "stashes" I have stumbled upon in solitude and without tracks. If I meet up with others out there it certainly doesn't ruin my day and has often resulted in meeting future ski partners - great!<br><br>Some destinations - namely narrow couloirs - are most definitely "compromised" if they are tracked out. Its kind of a bummer if you've been skinning up to that great chute you've been eyeing only to realize that someone has beat you to it and you're left skiing leftovers much like can be found at the ski area. Other places can absorb lots of folks without affecting the quality of turns to be had. <br><br>I have to admit I am a bit of a hypocrite - I enjoy reading others posts and trip reports and comparing their experiences with mine but at the same time I don't often contribute for others benefit. Sorry. I am sure I am not alone in this regard.<br><br>Interestingly, one of the skin tracks that Charles came across last Thursday below Silver Peak was probably left by me. I was there on Tuesday and had skiied a run east of Twin Lakes. A trip report describing snow quality and stream crossing details may have been useful?<br><br>Interesting point about snowmobiles tim_place - it would be a horror to lose any more terrain to the motor crowd. That would be a serious threat to all of our backcountry excursions.

Other than that one "downhill" part of this thread that Lowell referred to, I think that this has been a very useful thread if for no other reason than to get opinions out there. This might or might not modify others actions when they post, but at least many will think a little before they post.<br><br>Certainly no one is required to post detailed reports, so it seems perfectly proper to remain silent. This does seem to be a fairly gregarious group by its nature and proof by its very existence. I am sure that there are many BC skiers out there that simply choose not to participate in this site.<br><br>Also, while I can understand that some may become disappointed when someone else posts a route description of what they thought was a "secret stash", but then hasn't it already been thrown into the public domain at that point? <br><br>The hope for BC skiers is that even for the most traveled route, one decent snowfall and a little luck and you could possibly be the only person on the route for the whole day as if you were the only one in the world. Think of what happens within the rock climbing arena when some free routes get bolted! Other routes just by the nature of heavy use and cleaning are marred forever.

<br>If you go back to the beginning of this thread, it all got started because ski_photomatt asked for trip ideas, but added: "I'm not asking for anyone's secret stash as I know these things are carefully guarded." In my view, Matt's request was most gracious. Things went downhill when freshie (apparently) criticized another skier for posting a certain trip report.  That was not gracious.<br><br>There's a difference between refraining from posting a report for your own reasons and criticizing somebody else in public for posting a report.  The former is self-restraint; the latter is coersion.  The former does not threaten our community spirit; the latter does.

<br><br>Always a pleasure to read your comments, Lowell.<br><br>However, I am sure you are not suggesting that just by expressing my opinion I was being less than gracious, this is a forum for discussion after all. I was nothing but pleasant ("cute and clever" as Gregg_C put it) so perhaps you mean something I am missing.<br><br>This thread has hardly gone downhill either. Instead it has turned into a fine discussion of issues we all care about, and to me has provided much better reading than the usual endless chain of posts about "Paradise was windblown last weekend" or "why does snow stick to my binding" chatter that this board often presents.<br><br>Also, if you look up the definition (and spelling) of coercion you will find that posting "criticism" in an Internet chat room is not coercion, I am not going to coerce anyone into doing anything. Coercion involves force, and I have none of that here. And anyway, if a community's spirit were to be threatened by criticism then it is on the downslope to insignificance in my book. A community's spirit should be strengthened by criticism, at least one I want to be a part of. I am guessing no one thinks the Washington BC skiing crowd's spirit is threatened. Instead this thread has given many people a chance to weigh in on the topics that affect us all, and by getting to see other members opinions each of us will (hopefully) be more conscious about the effects of their words each time they post.<br><br>That said I agree I may have stepped on a few toes with my original post but I stand by my opinion: There is no effective difference between including explicit route descriptions in an Internet TR for a "secret" place and including vague-yet-easily-decipherable route descriptions for the same place. In the end the result is the same: everyone quickly knows where the tour is. When any motivated powder-lover with 2 minutes and a web browser can figure it out (which describes about 99% of the readership of this group) then you have to have your head in the sand to believe you have not completely disseminated your (and the people you share it with) tour. I am glad to see that my small point (on the spectrum of the secret stash discussion) has been mostly lost in this thread, since it means everyone has ended up talking about the big picture.<br><br>See you on the slopes!<br><br>

This thread has hardly gone downhill either. Instead it has turned into a fine discussion of issues we all care about...

<br><br>Thanks freshie.  I agree with pretty much everything you said.  You're right that I missed the mark on some of my comments.  This thread is interesting precisely because it has generated some controversy.<br><br>In my experience, nearly every avid backcountry skier has some places they're happy to talk about and other places they are more reserved about.  It's like anglers and their fishing holes, I suppose.  The people I've known who dismiss this issue entirely typically have some other agenda, like being a guide, a publisher, or an aspiring writer.<br><br>Controversy arises because we don't all agree on which places should be left to individual discovery.  After all, if you're reluctant to talk about these places, it's pretty hard to come to any agreement!<br><br>As for myself, I keep in the back of my mind The Guidebook I Hope Will Never Be Written.  That would be a guidebook to backcountry skiing along the North Cascades Highway.  For me, this is a perfect zone for personal discovery.  By mentioning it, I could be waving a flag in front of some aspiring author or guide.  Or, I might raise awareness that here is a Discovery Zone worth keeping that way.<br>

Lowell, You make good points, as usual. But there is always a 'but' ...<br><br>Well after the guide book of backcounty skiing along the NC highway is written, this will still be a perfect zone for personal growth. Unless done by an encyclopediest like Beckey, I suspect it will include mostly the places that are already well known. It is a big country out there.<br><br>I can forsee some possible consequences of this guidebook from Hell:<br><br>1) The war horses will be more crowded. You might run across two parties on Sahale on an April weekend, instead of one. You will have to be really early to get first tracks on centeral stripe of the Birthday tour or Silver Star. The edges and alternatives will still be good.<br><br>2) Folk who have agenda other than personal growth will be able to find slopes suitable to their needs, rather than wasting time on dead ends or getting in over their heads. The N Cascades are big enough for pioneers and non-pioneer recreationists.<br><br>3) Maybe, with a constituency, the N Cascade highway will no longer gated at Ross Dam. Currently the highway is usually cleared to Washington Pass early in March, but the gate is kept closed until the avi chutes on the E. side of the Early Winter Spires release and the Highway Dept. can open the highway. For a month you could drive to Easy Pass, Porcupine Creek, Heather pass, Cutthroat and all these other delicious skiing trailheads if only the gate was open. Ask the Dept of Highways why they do not open the road to local traffic earlier and they will tell you, 'that area lacks a constituency'. <br><br>These access issues always involve trade-offs, to be sure. It is not obvious that publicizing the goods will result in only negative consequences.

I don't mind if people get out there and enjoy my stash or if I meet other people. The more who get out there to enjoy the mountains better quarantees the mountains we love will be there for our children. I do understand that there is a limit, but I have been very few places that are overcrowded and where I've had any bad experience with the people I've met. I understand though, if I have a few hour approach for a good line that I'm not always guaranteed a powder stashed run. That doesn't bother me. If I get any skiing at all, I'm happy and there are a lot of ways down a mountain. I also believe that the effort and cost of ski mountaineering will always keep most places people free. Well, that is if you avoid the Muir hut on Saturday of course ;D...

But do you publicize all the routes you love on the internet? Accepting company is gracious and good and practical. How far does your graciousness go?<br><br>Tim - for what it's worth, I appreciate old route descriptions and guidebooks and so forth. Thanks for your efforts in that direction. <br><br>But I'll admit to some inconsistency on this topic, in that I also only am willing to publicize some of the tours I've found on my own. I'll take new folks to my "secrets," which as Charles says may be all it takes to publicize (and which are also likely other people's secrets which is fine as it's public land), but...

If people look for the goods within a close, convenient drive, and a negligible approach, it's gonna be a crapshoot. To live in an urbanized region expect anything else is ridiculous. It's just like everyone moving to the foothills because it's pretty. Soon there won't be any foothills, just a bunch of lousy subdivisions. (Soon there won't be any secret fresh, just a bunch of backcountry mogul fields.)<br><br>If you really want to get away, there's a guaranteed way to do it... bust some ass. I have also found that making the transition from looking for a few good turns to looking for a big route essentially guarantees solitude.<br><br>I'll publicize anything I do. I don't really care how many people do it. I don't like to do the same thing over and over again, so what do I care if others join the fun? Is the idea that you want this stash fresh and untracked any time for your convenience? That sounds really selfish to me.<br><br>On another note, I'd like to see someone else ski the routes I've skied and found most rewarding. For instance, a few weeks ago I skied the descent gully off the top of Chair Peak. It was an incredible little line, just wide enough to allow turns at its narrowest, and fairly steep. I reported it on cascadeclimbers.com, and one member of a climbing party of three took skis and did it himself two days later. I thought that was great. I will continue to publish such endeavours, in hopes of further stimulating such activity. I don't think I'll ever need to fight for first tracks off the top of Chair Peak.<br><br>To sum it up, this sounds like a silly game of cops and robbers to me. Well, everyone have fun playing cops and robbers... I won't care because I'll play CEO. (Robber baron with cops in pocket/Finder of ultimate stashes who reports all)<br><br>Excuse the analogies, they're poor but fun. Also feel free to flame me, I can take it. In fact, I enjoy it. Somebody dog me quick!

Flame sky, or read journal articles? hard choice...<br><br>Actually, as many of you may not yet know, Mr. Kilo is a contract employee for Riley and Meadows North LLC, the Portland-based owner of the infamous Mt. Hood Meadows Ski Resort. <br><br>Mr. Kilo was recruited, following the successful hostile takeover of Cooper Spur, by their elite Secret Enhancement of Revenue and Upgrade for Meadows (SERUM) division. While knowledge of the ultimate goals of this highly mobile and elusive division remain tightly defended by internal controls, unnamed sources from inside the organization say that eventually the entire West Coast will be systematically appraised and exploited.<br><br>Perhaps the only thing that the backcountry public can do to stop the construction of new developments such as The Meadows Chair (tm) and Mt. St. Meadows (tm) is to assemble protest bivies as a human shield to block the inevitably approaching scourge of heavy vehicles.

I don't plan to be a cop, but I don't plan to write a guidebook either. Most of the places I ski aren't big cool lines that I want to report on as some sort of "first." I'm in a league of mere mortals that doesn't do quite the BIG projects Sky and his pals are up for, so I have a little more potential company. <br><br>In any case perhaps there's an element of selfishness in only posting general conditions info rather than a clear pointer to the routes (my personal rule is around non-guidebook discoveries that aren't currently overrun, that are easy to access, and that are pretty damn near Seattle). My goal is to allow randomness to spread out impact in easy-access areas, and yes, to avoid an internet-induced circus as has happened on a few key easily-accessed routes lately. But I don't ever expect solitude, though I'm happy when I find it nearby. The N Cascades Highway is another story, but I don't think I90 is under any threat of closing down due to lack of use, nor are the sno-parks I use regularly up that way.<br><br>I feel OK about my postings, in fact much better than simply lurking here (hear that, all you especially selfish lurkers!?). It would certainly be selfish to somehow obstruct others from enjoying the same discovery I've had. Or refusing to let folks know that Snowcrummie Pass is quite often Snowquality ("hell, let 'em all think you have to travel to Paradise..."). But what about not actively publicizing a specific route? On balance I don't think that's particularly selfish. From what I read on this thread, some folks, like photomatt find such behavior downright benevolent. But I'm sure others will feel my rule violates their own sense of duty to the community. Oh well. My rule is for me only. Make your own for you!

To sum it up, this sounds like a silly game of cops and robbers to me.

<br><br>In an earlier post, I said I don't mind publishing trip reports for destinations that are either already well known or challenging enough that they won't get overcrowded.  The trips you're describing fall into the latter category.  So, in my view, the fact that you're eager to publicize everything you do adds little to this discussion.<br><br>This discussion is about the "middle trips" that are neither way out there nor well known already.  They are accessible, but for some reason little known.  In my experience (and apparently the experience of a few others who've posted here) discovering such tours on one's own is enjoyable and rewarding.  The question is whether there is any value in exercising restraint to preserve these opportunities a while longer.<br><br>You're entitled to consider this a "silly game." I suggest, however, that you don't understand where the other people in this discussion are coming from and don't seem to want to understand.<br>

Well put.

Well after the guide book of backcounty skiing along the NC highway is written, this will still be a perfect zone for personal growth.  Unless done by an encyclopediest like Beckey, I suspect it will include mostly the places that are already well known. It is a big country out there.

<br><br>Ten years ago, who'd have thought anyone could (or would want to) write an entire guidebook about backcountry skiing near Snoqualmie Pass? Fred Beckey didn't do it, and yet it changed the landscape. Imagine a similar treatment for the North Cascades highway.<br><br>

I can forsee some possible consequences of this guidebook from Hell:<br><br>1) The war horses will be more crowded... You will have to be really early to get first tracks on centeral stripe of the Birthday tour or Silver Star. The edges and alternatives will still be good.

<br><br>If that were the only consequence, maybe it wouldn't be so bad. But I doubt it. I remember the days before Silver Star was a war horse. The first few years I skied it (starting in 1979) it was not a popular tour. That was before Rainer Burgdorfer's first edition. I doubt that a more comprehensive book would affect only the war horses.<br><br>

3) Maybe, with a constituency, the N Cascade highway will no longer gated at Ross Dam...

<br><br>Again, I'm skeptical. The highway department would have to modify their procedure considerably, I think, to accommodate what you're suggesting. It's hard for me to imagine them doing it. I think they would consider recreational traffic during the clearing process a big headache. <br><br>

Lowell, <br>You're absolutely right. I was just having some fun. Too much time in the lab. I'm going skiing now,<br>Sky

Well, I for one hope that all this discussion doesn't cause people to stop writing trip reports. I really do enjoy reading them and (horror of horrors!) I've learned from them and gotten a few ideas for future trips from them as well.<br><br>I'm still of the belief that more shared knowledge can help people spread themselves out. Perhaps I'm completely naive on this one, I can accept that I guess.<br><br>I want to ask the question again: are people going to their stashes and finding them destroyed? Is it actually happening? I am still doubtful, but I guess I could be wrong. <br><br><br><br><br>

Lowell_Skoog wrote:<br>

This discussion is about the "middle trips" that are neither way out there nor well known already.  The question is whether there is any value in exercising restraint to preserve these opportunities a while longer.

<br><br>As usual, Lowell nails it squarely on the head.  It's hard to have a discussion about whether publicizing ski routes and writing guidebooks is "good" or "bad" without first defining what we mean by "good" and "bad."  This in turn asks backcountry skiers what they value and deem important.  We are making value judgments here - once these are laid out, the rest will fall into place.<br><br>So, why do you go skiing?  Do you go for exercise, to get out with your friends in the clear air, find an untracked line and indulge?  Is day of 6000 ft of yo-yo powder skiing heaven?  Sure, who doesn't love this.  But is there something more?  Something deeper?  I have a pass at Alpental - out the backcountry gate, ski one line over, point-em straight down and whoop and holler all the way to the valley floor.  But, for me, there is something missing here.  These days are grand, but they are not the ones that occupy the treasured memory spots, the ones that are remembered as the "best day of the season."  Sometimes it's about more than finding fresh lines.  There needs to be, as Lowell puts it, a personal discovery zone.  This isn't possible if an area is popular.<br><br>Backcountry skiing is growing ever more popular, the city every day encroaches on the dwindling wilderness.  Do we throw up our hands, accept it and give up?  No, we don't have to.  Mother Nature smiles broadly on backcountry skiers - she every week wipes the slate clean.  The bowls and ridges are remade pristine until they are tracked again.  It doesn't matter whether a thousand have skied there before, it looks the same to us as it did the pioneers.  We can have a similar experience.  As others have pointed out, other parties don't ruin the experience, they just change it.  Sometimes a lot.  Sometimes they enhance it too.  (And as others have also pointed out, I've yet to meet another backcountry skier I didn't like, in fact I've met partners in the backcountry, as recently as a few weeks ago).<br><br>Guidebooks certainly have their place and I use them all the time when I visit new places.  But just the same, I feel some areas should be set aside.  Others disagree.  Some feel anywhere is fair game to publicize.  That's fine, everyone is free to do as they please.  Everyone likes to share stories and photos from trips, myself included.  I post trip reports.  It builds a sense of community that can be easily lost.  But, if appropriate, I first decide if there is something innate in the experience I just had that would be compromised if there were several other parties or sets of tracks around.<br><br>Ironically, Beckey's encyclopedic description of the Cascades has preserved the out of the way places.  It's very hard to pick up the three volumes and find a hidden gem if you don't already have an idea of where to look.  The all inclusiveness also means each route is sketched, not detailed, and phrases like "obvious descent gully" become legendary.  I don't think it would be the same with the guidebook from Hell.

I thought the question was whether to exercise restraint in order to preserve these opportunities for yourself. Why else would it be repeatedly referred to as a "stash"?<br><br>If you want to put some noble motivation behind it such as preserving the sense of exploration for others, I'd suggest that there's some better word for it than stash.<br><br>For me, since the whole place is mapped, I cannot conjure up the illusion of exploration. I guess I could leave the topos at home.

I thought the question was whether to exercise restraint in order to preserve these opportunities for yourself.  Why else would it be repeatedly referred to as a "stash"?

<br><br>Good point. The challenge in a discussion like this is to keep straight the arguments of different people with slightly different points of view. It's easy to get their motivations mixed up. I've done it in this very thread. However, I never used the word "stash" to describe what I'm talking about.<br><br>

For me, since the whole place is mapped, I cannot conjure up the illusion of exploration.  I guess I could leave the topos at home.

<br><br>Maybe you cannot conjure up the illusion. Or maybe you haven't really tried.<br><br>I've done many trips--inspired by topo maps--where I eagerly anticipated what a particular basin or viewpoint or passage would be like. The great trips were characterized by delight in what I discovered.<br><br>If that's still not good enough, you could burn all your guidebooks and topo maps. People have suggested this to me in past discussions on this topic. But this suggestion overlooks the "Rue Rick Steves" effect.<br><br>You know Rick Steves--the famous travel author. There is a charming street in Paris that has been so popularized by his books and videos that it has been nicknamed "Rue Rick Steves". An adventurous traveller could, of course, studiously avoid all information produced by Rick Steves. The traveller could, on their own, rediscover this charming French street. But when they arrive, and find dozens of American tourists packing the cafes and shops, all leafing through dog-eared copies of Steves' books, it kinda spoils the illusion of discovery. The same is true of backcountry skiing. <br>

Yes Lowell, I knew you'd been careful with the terminology, given your attitude towards the phrase "getting the goods". I shouldn't have paraphrased you to make a point that was addressed to the whole group, it was just convenient.<br><br>I do know what you folks are talking about- about the public spirited goal of preserving areas of discovery. I do know that not every nook, cranny and ramp is discernable on a topo so there is some degree of exploration. I was being ornery I suppose.<br><br>It does leave the problem of the criteria of what trips to post. How do you know the place is relatively unknown for instance? Its not so bad for me though, as in winter I do dog-supported Kirkendall-Spring type tours, very flat forest tours that have fallen out of style.<br><br>Yes, you know you have an imminent problem if you head to your favorite stash and find Rick Steves there.<br> ;D

I've been following this discussion with a fair bit of interest.  Finally I see the "Snoqualmie Pass Guidebook" mentioned.<br><br>So here is a guidebook that has essentially disected a great deal of potential routes in a relatively small area.  Some are obvious, some are not obvious at all<br><br>This guidebook embraces the idea of explicitly sharing details on areas that were previously considered "unknown" or "secret".  Yet no one has disparaged it!  I don't ski in the Snoqualmie Pass Area so I don't know what affect it has had.  <br><br>Has it increased BC use? Or simply distributed the people already there?  Both? Neither?  Has it negatively or positively affected the experiences of those of you who do frequent the area?  Particular those of you who consider yourselves explorers?  How many "secret stashes" have been revealed.<br><br>If a written description of a trip took away its sense of adventure, as many of you feel it would, then there would be no sense of adventure in climbing in the PNW.  This is clearly untrue.  I'm of the belief that a book such as the Snoqualmie Pass Guide benefits both the BC community as a whole and each and every other user as well.  Big tours still have a sense of adventure and there will always be undocumented glades, couloirs, shots and faces to be skied if you push yourself a little further from the car.  Any thoughts on this specific example?<br><br>Darin

I have mixed feelings about the Snoqualmie Pass guidebook. While I think it is a good guide, fairly inspirational, and will hopefully encourage more people to explore - it has exposed some areas to more traffic (e.g. Slot couloir - which probably sees a few descents every week compared to maybe a few per year before the guidebook).<br><br>It also describes at least a few of my "secret stashes", and places that I've scoped out as potential descents. For the former, I've seen ski tracks where I never saw any before. For the latter, a lot of the spirit of adventure is lost now that a route is laid out in a guidebook.<br>On the other hand, I suppose it has shown me a few spots I wouldn't have thought to go. Overall, I'd say it has had a negative impact for me (for purely selfish reasons). But it has probably been of benefit to most skiers.<br><br>I've got no problem with people keeping their stashes secret (despite even posting TRs about them, while not revealing location - sometimes the info is still relevant for snow/avy conditions), as I do the same - and I realize this is selfish perhaps, but I don't care. I love exploring new places, but I also like being able to return to easily-accessed spots where I know there will be solitude and fresh tracks.<br><br>I also don't *quite* agree that writing a TR with a vague-but-decipherable location is akin to divulging a "stash". I think that most skiers just wish to have directions handed to them on a plate - but for some of us the mystery is part of the appeal, and if you make it sound good enough, we'll figure out where it is . So I guess either lay it out clearly, or make it *really* vague.<br><br>Someone said maps spoil the illusion of exploration. I don't think they do that much. For me they just make it easier to get a good idea of what areas are worth "exploring for myself". Probably 95% of the Cascades are "unexplored" in the sense that they aren't in a ski guidebook or otherwise well-known. This makes me happy <br>

I'll quickly share a experience about the Snoq Pass guidebook, then I need to get back to work. A few years ago, I got it in my head that it might be possible to do a ski circumnavigation of Chair Peak. No one told me about it, it was before the guide book, just idle moments looking at maps and getting creative. A year later, the guide book came out, and sure enough, it was in there. I never skied it that year, but put it at the top of the list for the following year. I watched the weather, the snowpack and decided to go for it last January. I didn't have a partner, but this was OK - I was confident in my abilities and enjoy touring alone.<br><br>Well, I started climbing up from Source Lake, found a skin track and followed it up, thinking it would save some energy. To my surprise, it led the way all the way around the peak. Was this track guidebook inspired? Who knows. It could have been put in by long time skiers who had done the route before the guidebook. It didn't ruin my experience that day, that's certain, but it did change it.<br><br>I've since mapped out tours of similar complexity near Snoq Pass that are not in the guidebook. One in particular I've been looking at for some time but haven't gotten the chance to do it yet. Maybe soon when the days get longer. I'm thankful it and tours like it aren't in the book. I haven't been doing this that long - 4 years tops - and am a late comer. But I've been thankful that there still are areas that are relatively untouched and permit even a small amount of exploration.<br><br>Like Phil, I have seen a increase in the number of skiers in places I haven't previously seen them near Snoqualmie Pass. It's hard to say whether this is a result of the guidebook or not. Perhaps I'm just more tuned into it now. The book has certainly pointed to places I hadn't thought of skiing in before and for that I'm thankful. And yes, it removes some, but not all, or even most, of the adventure of a big tour. Who knows, perhaps I'm one of those people long time skiers point at complain is ruining their 'stash.'

I haven't sampled the tours in that book broadly or frequently enough to be able to react to Darin's question. I tried a Kendall Stump variant (dropping into Comm Basin - kind of a cool tour) from the book two seasons back and saw no trace of tracks. I was on Mt Catherine recently and it felt a bit like rush hour. Not a very statistically valid sample. Clearly I'm sticking on the milder end of the tours listed (though I like the idea of heading out toward Lemah in the spring, as it looked like great ski potential and Volken's guide somehow makes it seem more do-able). <br><br>What about internet postings? What has caused the surge in use on Arrowhead (at least so I hear, never having been there)? Randomness? MtnPhil's posting to his site a few years ago? Charles' photo gallery? Something else? Are comments from TAY about Catherine being perhaps the best tour for snow conditions in the Snoqualmie area (perpetuate the myth!) a factor in the crowd I saw there?<br><br>Phil - thanks for the intellectual honesty. You're right. I'm perhaps selfish too in the same regard, and I too don't care. This doesn't feel like a truly anti-social sort of selfishness, and it's a nice side-benefit that I'm keeping Matt happier.