Alpental Plea

Nice to see the positive posts.  Certainly this is a tricky issue.  One of the problems is that there are very limited options at Snoqualmie Pass.  Those options get even smaller when you are looking for a quick tour.   Even if we were to concede Alpental proper, the source lake/snow lake area is extremely popular.   I keep wondering about a blasting notification system, ie. some kind of air horn signal.  Perhaps one blast at 30min. , two at 15min, and 3 at 5min.  Maybe we could get a massive siren, like the fire dept.  The condo owners would love not needing to set their alarm clocks on powder days!  Also,I really think the forest service needs to step up and be proactive about public access to our forest land at the pass.  We should have designated access points with a daily posting of avalanche bulletins.  The fact of the matter is that there are only more and more people trying to recreate at the pass.  Whilst I love Alpental, I think they need to realize that they have to share the Valley.  If they are not open on Mondays, I have a hard time believing that no-one should be able to tresspass onto their area.  While I sympathize with the plight of the ski patrol trying to keep the area safe and not kill anyone, I cannot agree with a blanket closure of the region. 

The message is a great start and I appreciate your concerns. Now as far as implementing this is nothing short of a logistical and legal nightmare. On the Apental webpage:

"The backcountry is outside the designated ski area boundary and the terrain is rugged, steep and avalanche prone at all times. For backcountry registration and current conditions, contact the Ski Patrol at the top of Edelweiss Chair lift. Beware, Alpental is a Class "A" avalanche area and avalanche beacons, probes, shovels and knowledge of the backcountry terrain are STRONGLY recommended. "

I think what you all do to keep the backcountry travel safe is a great thing. Thank you. Here is a solution that will keep you from risk of responsibility.Close the backcountry ,quit patrolling the backcounty area, and quit blasting it. This is an area that is beyond ski resort boundaries as it states on your webpage. The only people you have controll over are the ones that come to your resort and buy a ticket or a seasons pass. At the time of purchase the message is issued of avalanche safety and boundaries. This is similar to a lifeguard protected section at a beach. They watch the areas that are safe for designated swimming and the areas with swift current or undertow are posted and not patrolled by lifeguards.

The problem you face when you start avalanche controll outside of the resort boundaries is you take responsibility for everyone who enters the area. Unfortunately we live in a time when accountability rarely exists. All the victim would have to say is they never received warning. Just because you post a sign of the danger in the area does not mean people have read it,or, would say that they have read it. I think you have a good example of this when people from your area cross boundaries. This is the big dilemma.

The best way for you to minimise your risk is to rope off your boundaries and quit maintaining the area beyond. You have a responsibility that I would not want to have. Your skilled team releases avalanches. You are responsible for the outcome of that avalanche. Period! For you to post a note on "random tracks" on a website that maybe a thousand people will read is irresponsible considering the scope of this issue. You have now created a grey area for backcountry travelers. Your responsibility, in my opinion, is to lay down some boundaries on a map and inform everyone that would happen to travel into that area and that you could be releasing avalanches at any time.

As far as I can determine Alpental backcountry is on USFS land that is owned by the public. To ask the public not to travel those areas so you can maintain them for profit is a stretch. You call that area "backcountry" why not leave it as such. A sparsely inhabited rural region. If you are going to maintain backcountry you might as well make it inbounds and take responsibility for everyone who enters it.

Thanks again for all the hard work you and your crew do to make a safe product for the people that would not otherwise have a backcountry experience. I appreciate your point of view and understand it. I don't agree with it. Part of the backcountry experience is avoiding avalanches not controlling them. I wish you good luck and a reasonable solution that will benefit everyone involved.

I'm sure they would be more than happy to tow your car out of their lot. Give the guys a break, they're just trying to run a lift op ski area. I'm not sure how they'll tell the subaru's apart?

Out of "their" lot? It's Forest Service land and I'm sure there is some language in their lease to allow public access to Snow Lake..

No one is discounting the Patrol's desire to avoid a tragedy but the way they're going about it seems over the top.

Hear did say the "near Alp backcountry" which generally means everything short of Piss Pass, all of which is within the SUP (Draft Dodger's inboard).

www.fs.fed.us/r6/mbs/projects/summit-at-...ditions-Alpental.pdf

And despite the fact that the ski area is on federal land, they can indeed limit your access to it. Just like I can limit my landlord's access to my house.

To follow-up, most of the "backcountry as I refer to it is the area that is within the permit boundary, but outside the "designated" area. Outside the designated area there are none of the ropes, signs and hazards markings that guests have come to expect on maintained runs. Most of us prefer that and like to be given the responsibility to take care of ourselves and enjoy the terrain in it's mostly natural state, but the kicker is that the BC remains in the permit area and we are responsible to manage it in some fashion or another. The waiver and card system has been in place since the late 80's and works OK so I don't see it changing soon. The average alpie die hard really likes to yo-yo out into that terrain and lap back into the lifts for another go.  The actual permit area ends out somewhere on Draft Dodger Ridge but not defined other than on a map. What I call the near backcountry is the area that we control hazrd with explosives, basically out to Gun Barrel. but the ski-cut and testing progression used to open the BC (to cardholders) goes all the way out and over Piss Pass. A ski released slide can getcha just as hosed as any other. To sum up - the area for no touring is Alp itself and then the near BC out to about trash can. I can't stress enough how terrible it would be for any of us to start a slide that buried or hurt one of our own, and the patrol here are all tourers themselves so that's how it would feel. On another note, it would also be great if we could find an alternative for the many who use that valley bottom return trail to travel up-valley. I've seen too many close calls as the powder junkies are flying out on the trail that they have put in for just that reason find themselves running into a group coming upstream, sometimes with dogs and kids, and following the same trail because it's easier than breaking their own.  The Forest Service actually agrees with the ski area in both of these cases and believes as we do that is in the best intest of safety for the uses within the permitted area to be limited to the intended uses; alpine skiing and snowboarding.
Mount Snoqualmie is another huge can of worms. Back when the forest service started the artillery program to control hazard from above it was pretty rare to have anyone up there during the winter.  Now it's a rare day that there is not someone skiing or riding the Phantom or the Slot. I also would like some sort of warning system for those rare control needs following major storms.  We are planning additional awareness signs for that side of the valley and likely a snow-phone and web page will be used to advise regarding current control status (which will almost always say no control is scheduled). The fire dept won't part with their siren at this time but that would be the perfect solution in my book. Any other type of siren would likely only add to the confusion so any audible system would have to be limited to one type on the pass and most of you know how often the other one goes off.  More to follow on that subject as we get it figured out.  Thanks for the positive comments. Gib