It's ON!

Probably a misqoute from the press, but it seems odd that an avalanche expert would describe conditions as similar to last year. They were quite different actually.

They're not that different on the surface.  Last year, early December, there was a fairly shallow base, with the first big storm cycle dumping several feet on top of it.  The killer was the big warm-up right after that dump -- hopefully that doesn't repeat this year.

Similar potentially nasty layer about to buried, too, though this one seems to be more rain crust and last year's was hoar, if I remember right.

Yeah, I reread that several times, looking for the unifying characteristic I missed between last year and this.

The beds are, I think, discernibly different (albeit equally nasty), we're not looking at anything remotely comparable to the warming trend last year that followed heavy snowfall, (scratching my head at work).......whats the unifying characteristic here? The stoke. Early season. Buck fever, right? Let's go get some right after a moment of reflection. I found myself wondering if he was just trying to get a general warning out as a mountain safety professional more than a avy specific warning. Given the report, although they are calling considerable Sat afternoon..

There's definitely reason to be concerned, for the first time in a while.  Especially around Rainier, which seems to have a nastier base underneath this storm than Baker does -- although when I get back Sunday night I'll let you know what Baker really looks like.

I think we're at greater risk for the other warning NWAC put in the forecast...  It's going to be cold and wicked out there.  After skiing in t-shirts clear through the end of November, this could be a bit of a surprise to some folks, and I'd be shocked if we don't see exposure injuries.  It's not like we had a gradual cooling over the last two months leading to this.

The beds are, I think, discernibly different (albeit equally nasty)

That's the key, I think -- when talking to the PI or the general public, I'd imagine these forecasters aren't going to describe the differences between last year's pack and this year's, but rather that they're similar in the danger they could pose, if loaded.

Agreed though -- early season enthusiasm is probably an even bigger factor this year, given how late this first storm is rolling in. Hopefully we have no big warm-ups in the next few weeks.

Agreed though -- early season enthusiasm is probably an even bigger factor this year, given how late this first storm is rolling in.  Hopefully we have no big warm-ups in the next few weeks.

.LONG TERM...HERE IS THE LONG TERM SECTION FROM THE AFTERNOON
ISSUANCE OF THE FORECAST DISCUSSION -- LOOKS LIKE AN UNUSUALLY LONG
STRETCH OF UNUSUALLY COLD WEATHER NEXT WEEK. BOTH THE GFS AND ECMWF
KEEP A LONGWAVE TROUGH CARVED OUT OVER THE WRN U.S. WITH
NORTH-NORTHEAST FLOW ALOFT BRINGING IN REINFORCING COLD CONTINENTAL
POLAR AIR MASSES. THERE IS FAIRLY GOOD AGREEMENT WITH THE EXTENDED
MODELS IN BRINGING A SHORTWAVE DOWN THE B.C. AND PAC NW COAST ON WED
AND WED NIGHT. GIVEN THE COLD AIR MASS IN PLACE...SNOW WOULD LIKELY
RESULT DOWN TO SEA LEVEL...EXCEPT ALONG THE IMMEDIATE COAST.
HANER

What this doesn't mention is some high winds next week, that could produce loading. Still, better than 40 degrees at elevation, yes?