'Considerable' rating

The considerable rating becomes more useful the more one uses the incredible device located behind the eyes and between the ears.

Do they sell those at REI?

The comments that I really agree are the folks who regard the considerable rating as time to truly evaluate EVERYTHING.

I do a lot of solo touring with my dog, and when things hit considerable it all changes for me in terms of where I will go and what I will do. So many times I have backed down on plans.

This winter I have commented a number of times that it is all about coming back for another day. No one day of good powder skiing will ever change that for me and make me risk my life.

I have skied literally 100s of pow days in my life and feel blessed. If I never have another I would surely be sad but always know that I have experienced the best.

Considerable is serious

This winter I skied an exposed line this on a considerable day, it was solid. The next day NWAC reported avalanches at a location adjacent to the ski resort ~3 miles away from ours on the same day we skied…  it was certainly “considerable” over there one could argue the rating should have been high!

On a lighter note when once I was getting scolded by my friend for me not checking the forecast we got a good laugh when I jokingly replied what’s the big deal, how is that going to change our plans when it’s always considerable anyways?

Can't help wondering what kind of a hueristic trap this may form in your mind...

Up until this week I had a problem with "considerable". I've already expressed my concerns with it so I won't get into why I thought it was a weak rating. Earlier this week I got a change to listen to a presentation by Scott Schell and afterwards chat with him a bit about my concerns with considerable along with a few other things. He gave the best explanation of each level of warning that I have had so far and I've been through 3 consecutive years of AIARE L1 courses plus a previous similar course 14 years ago and lots of time reading the NWAC site.

His explanation of considerable and high was that the avalanche problem/concern and characteristics are usually very similar but the spatial distribution of likely start zones is different. On a considerable day avalanches are likely to start from more obvious features and on a high day a similar avalanche is likely to start from less obvious features.

I also appreciate the size prediction more now too with small being a slide up to D1.5 and large being D2. No need for medium if the line is drawn at the likelihood of injury.

I have to admit that I really like the development of the new NWAC site now that I've learned a bit more about it and have spent more time looking around. A lot of information that I was wanting is there but sometimes it's not so obvious.

I still have my concerns about complacency developing from seeing the same bulletin frequently without seeing activity in the field. I know that information is included in the snowpack discussions related to recent activity but I think it would be helpful to really push the connection between the rating and what's going on by having a more prominent link to pictures of recent activity along with what the bulletin/forecast was for that day.