NWAC Survey What is Important to you?

I'm happy to see that other people had the same response to the idea of limiting potentially lifesaving information to paying customers.

I'm all for NWAC doing everything it can to raise money, as long as free access to the important information remains.

Paying for convenience/niceties seems like a good way to set things up. Daily e-mails or sms are things I'd seriously consider giving money for.

TAY Community,

Speaking not as a member of FOAC, but as an avid backcountry user, I have issues with the idea of charging for information, it is life saving information, period.

But, as the President of FOAC, the idea is not being considered so that anyone can get rich, rather so that the avalanche center can keep the doors open.

So if I may, I going to play devil’s advocate and suggest some reasons why there should be a fee for information and I would really like your responses to these reasons:

1. It is the only way, financially, that NWAC can maintain operations.

2. It is information that backcountry users use, and as for any service it should be paid for. You’re paying for safety, like when you buy a beacon, probe, and shovel.

What are your thoughts? And keep the suggestions coming, and if you haven't already, take the survey.

I'm an construction estimator so I'm used to calculating costs and budgets.

WA, lets get down to some number crunching.

What's your annual operating budget and needs, how much do you get from grants, the state or the Feds if anything and what is your annual shortfall.etc etc.

To determine the best answer we need to understand the money.

For example
If your annual shortfall is $250,000 and there are maybe 1000 skiers who might pay, the cost would have to be $250 per year. ( made up numbers but you get my drift).
Can you share this information so we can get some perspective on the numbers.

1.  It is the only way, financially, that NWAC can maintain operations.

2.  It is information that backcountry users use, and as for any service it should be paid for.     Your paying for safety, like when you buy a beacon, probe, and shovel.

Speaking as a relatively novice backcountry skier,

1. is a perfectly valid point. Skiing can be expensive, and we understand the concept of running out of money.
2. is also valid, but won't resonate as well. As a newb, I can tell you firsthand how painful it is to fork over dough for a beacon, probe, and shovel. I have no doubt the most educated and experienced TAY'ers won't hesitate to pay for as much potentially life-saving information as possible, but it would be foolish to assume every person heading into the backcountry acts as responsibly.

The fact is the teen that decides to take a foray out of bounds to hit that powder stash just outside resort boundaries is as much a "customer" of NWAC as he enthusiast who posts regularly on TAY. I would guess that the majority of people who travel in the backcountry do not consider themselves backcountry recreationists, but are just stepping a little outside the bounds. These people need access to information, and they aren't going to pay for it. In fact, we (collectively) need to make sure we take steps to educate them about the need to review snowpack information before leaving controlled areas.

Six months ago I'd never skied outside of resort boundaries, or at least not more than a hundred feet or so outside boundaries. I had bootpacked above lifts, and I hate to admit it, ducked ropes into closed areas. I thought frequently about going further out, but felt insecure with my level of experience and knowledge. Being the kind of geek with multiple college degrees and a habit of getting obsessed with ideas, I bought way too many books and read them all. I joined TAY, met with some mentors, and filled in those knowledge gaps. I now realize that knowing nothing about the snow, and not checking avy reports, I was foolish to take some of the runs I did thinking they were "safe."

I am in no way a typical winter recreationist, and neither are the majority of TAYers. The folks I see here are mature, experienced people who take the sport seriously. My point in this long ramble is that mature, experienced enthusiasts are a core customer set of NWAC, but they are by no means the only customer set. To deny potentially lifesaving information to an inexperienced skier thinking of taking an out-of-bounds run because he's not "serious enough" to invest the in sport is, well, extremely socially irresponsible to say the least.

1. It is the only way, financially, that NWAC can maintain operations.

2. It is information that backcountry users use, and as for any service it should be paid for. Your paying for safety, like when you buy a beacon, probe, and shovel.

I would pay. Most definitely. I feel NWAC forecasts go hand-in-hand with my backcountry 3. This 1st concern is understandable and very reasonable. TAY is going through something similar, but a lot of users use both sites, and for different purposes. I don't feel that the same solution will work for both sites though (advertising). I also worry that some of those who need the NWAC report my forego it with the added cost (in theory) and I feel this might carry a problem. Those who know they need it will make it a part of what we set aside to pay for what we do. However, I feel the possible safety concern that could come into question is worth pondering. I also feel that I would not pay for a service that has only upgraded it's words to graphics. As of now the report is thorough and just that. If there's a cost attached to NWAC, either the information gets more in depth (such as detailed reports to specific areas that are frequently visited, i.e. Crystal BC, Snoqualmie, Baker/Shuksan), or nothing changes. I would be very dissapointed if I saved money to invest in a tool that I thought to be essential, only to see it get some really fancy graphics or something.

So, after the banter, I wanted to ask if there are any possibilities of charging for a small warning/caution/info tag on clothing at REI? Backpacker's Supply? Feathered Friends? Martin Volken's place? Sports Authority? Since NWAC does the report, I would think that it would be come an inseperable accessory to gear sold that someone might take in the bc. Honestly, I bet you could almost pass it as legislature in WA.

Also, what if NWAC offered topomaps that can be downloaded and printed for a nominal fee. Topozone is now a part of that dumb trails.com or something, and a nice size topo is $10 at REI. If NWAC offered them at a better price than REI, I would think it could work well. Just some ideas.

mature, experienced enthusiasts are a core customer set of NWAC, but they are by no means the only customer set.

Is there any way to tap into or raise sled registration and Sno-Park fees to help NWAC?