What is the ratio of AT to Telemark skiers?

I started backcountry skiing 6 years ago in California. There and then just about everyone Telemarked. Since it seems Telemark in the backcountry has been on a decline, and that in the PNW AT skiers outnumber Tele skiers. Do others agree that there are moe ATers than Tele'ers now in the PNW backcountry? Has it always been this way, and if not when did this happen?

I think there's just more skiers in the backcountry nowadays. I remember skiing up the Tatoosh from Narada Falls only a few years ago on a good powder day and only seeing a few skiers up there. Must have been 30 skiers up there on Sat. Didn't see the usual number of snowshoers. Maybe all the snowshoers took up AT and snowboarding.

Since AT is easier it makes sense more newbies are choosing AT. Though my own personal observations dont verify your hypothesis.

As well, many "oldies" have switched to AT from telemark because it's far easier on the more mature body. As well as safer, since AT bindings are all releasable. And how many ski guides do you know who ski on telemark gear?

I bought a pair of Ramer bindings and did my first alpine ski tour (Silverstar Mtn) in 1979. Before that I did a few gentle trips on light nordic touring gear (made for track skiing). At that time telemark skiers outnumbered alpine tourers in the Northwest. But neither group was large.<br><br>During the 1980s, the number of telemarkers grew steadily, but the number of AT skiers stayed small. For a long time, the only AT skiers I knew were Gary Brill, Jens Kieler, and my brothers. We skied in mountaineering boots because the few AT boot models that were available seemed too specialized and expensive for our mountaineering-oriented goals. I was aware of an older group of AT skiers in the Seattle area, including Joe Firey and his friends, but I never did any trips with them. Some of the gear that group used was truly unique. Chuck Loughney's home-made "Snow Star" binding was the best example.<br><br>The balance started to shift in the 1990s. I think the biggest factor that changed backcountry skiing was the introduction of more shaped and fat skis in the early to mid-1990s. That made skiing on unpacked snow much easier than it had been previously. Magazines like Couloir and Backcountry worked hard to grow the sport by attracting lift skiers. They were successful, but many of the newer backcountry skiers chose AT instead of tele. With aging knees and lighter AT gear available, some older tele skiers began switching to AT. (Many of my old tele friends have switched.)<br><br>My feeling is that today AT skiers outnumber tele skiers about 60-40 in the backcountry of the Northwest. But I could be wrong. My circle of contacts is fairly small.

I think there are also some other differences in terrain and the environment that make it a lot harder to stick with tele here than in Tahoe or the Sierras.<br><br>The Cascades are steeper gnarlier little mountains with sometimes pretty bad snow and tight flora vs. the Sierra. Skiing through PNW timber, second growth or slash and having some fun is definately esier to manage on AT unless you're a pretty darn good telemarker. Contrast that with the Sierras where tree runs are often very open - picture old Sequoias trees, no understory and trunks 50 ft apart. Its almost like skiing in the open. Plus the Sierras have a lot more moderately pitched open terrain vs. the up-and-down Cascades.<br><br>Its not the whole story but I think this has an effect. The more the terrain dictates where you must turn, the more I'd expect folks to stick with AT vs. investing in a new technique.<br><br>FYI I'm still a tele guy but every year I think about getting an AT set up just to see if I like it more. I also make a lot of alpine turns when the trees get tight. But for now I think I like my plan.