TAY reports and avy hazard, a heuristic trap?

I originally posted this on the following thread about weekend avalanches at Mt Rainier:

www.turns-all-year.com/skiing_snowboardi...ex.php?topic=10337.0

I decided to move it here to avoid hijacking the original thread.

=============

The rash of avalanches (and close calls) at Rainier last weekend is troubling. I think it's worth reviewing the role that TAY may have played in this cycle.

A killer storm blew over Mt Rainier on Mon-Tues, June 9-10. NWAC issued a special avalanche warning on the 10th. By Thurs, June 12, the skies were clear and several glowing reports were posted about ski conditions on Mt Rainier. NWAC dropped their special avalanche warning that afternoon. From recent reports on TAY, it sounds like many skiers headed for Rainier over the weekend. Between June 14 and 16, dozens of natural and human triggered avalanches occurred on the south side of Rainier. Some close calls were described earlier in this thread.

Could it be that our ski community nearly sucker-punched itself?

I don't doubt that the ski conditions on Thurs, June 12 were as good as was reported. But things became quite dangerous by Saturday, June 14. NWAC stopped issuing regular forecasts in May, and the June 14-15 weekend hazard flew in under their radar. (You can't blame them for missing it when they're not really operating.)

I know that the June 12 trip reports influenced my trip choice for the weekend. I was originally heading east of the crest but switched to Mt Baker after I saw the favorable reports at Rainier. Baker turned out fine (the storm didn't hit there as hard as Rainier) but Rainier was another story.

I remember thinking that I shouldn't do a volcano trip on Father's day weekend after the fatal storm on June 9-10. Then I changed my mind after reading the June 12 trip reports. Was I influenced too much by a single day's reports? Maybe not, since I headed for Mt Baker instead of Mt Rainier, but I'm troubled when I think back on how strongly my plans were influenced by those reports.

Does anybody else have a similar story? Is this a subtle danger of TAY, especially when NWAC is not operating normally?

==========

Here are some related threads:

www.turns-all-year.com/skiing_snowboardi...ex.php?topic=10291.0
www.turns-all-year.com/skiing_snowboardi...ex.php?topic=10308.0
www.turns-all-year.com/skiing_snowboardi...ex.php?topic=10311.0
www.turns-all-year.com/skiing_snowboardi...ex.php?topic=10371.0

I think it was mostly my friend (who had not been reading TAY last week) who influenced me to join him for a tour up to Steamboat Prow on Sunday, but the glowing report from Wolfs and others probably influenced me a bit as I waffled between that trip or going with Silas up to ski on Kendall at the pass. The beautiful weather forecast also helped to sucker me a bit in terms of helping me opt for more of a "view tour."

I did think about the fact that we would have classic "new snow on consolidated snow" conditions, but it clearly didn't change my decision. I can't speak for others, but I do think you may be onto something. I know I felt a little better up high (where it was clearly not soggy snow) and down low (where it seemed like mostly or all older snow), but the soggier bits in the middle of the ski had me pondering my choice a little. Seeing the reports of what happened just around the corner stream in has been a tad sobering.

Thanks for the post and question Lowell.  Certainly the recent posts of good skiing conditions on the Interglacier and Mt Ruth influenced my choice for the Frying Pan this past weekend, although it was a logical choice since it is a place I often return to at this time of the year once the road opens after Memorial Day.  I found myself more concerned about the conditions once out there.  Some significant natural point releases were visible and sounds of settlement up higher on the Ohanapecosh Gl. were worrisome. I agree that glowing reports here can potentially lead one to a decision on where to go without full consideration of the hazards from recent weather. Its always helpful for those posting to include as much objective information as possible about the conditions, but in the end it is a judgement. I want to have as much information as possible and am glad to have the first hand reporting that comes from TAY. But this is a good reminder not to rely on those reports exclusively.

I am one of the guilty in posting a glowing report. Indeed, it was fantastic . . . But, I also recall that we were very wary of the warming conditions and made numerous comments to each other about the disastrous possibilities. There was one group that I believe was headed up an alternative climbing route that we could see across from Muir snowfield. I am not all that familiar with locations yet, but we could see cornices had broken loose and numerous point releases started--our statement at that time: "What are they doing over there! That is way too risky." But, alas, we did not post such thoughts or comments. It is all too easy to get suckered in to following the crowd to fantastic destinations, and to also not be the one posting--"danger, danger" in the midst of all the enthusiasm. I seem to recall several weeks ago: NWAC said, WATCH OUT!! and there was a lot of complaining afterward when the slopes remained rather benign. I guess NWAC was just a few weeks too early in their severe avalanche warning accompanying our first stretch of warm weather.

I think that there is a continuing, serious problem with folks thinking that they can judge avi conditions from day-old Internet information -- TAY or NWAC.

The conditions on Sunday in the Nisqually Basin were staggering. I could count 12-15 large slides, on all aspects. We watched a big rope team of climbers head up between two massive wet slides at 2pm, under blazing bright sun, on a slope that was identical to the slides around them. Scary.

It is certainly easy to get sucked into sweet TRs and want to do the same.