- Posts: 49
- Thank you received: 0
Dec. 3, Bagley Lakes (continuation of Nov. 16....)
- hop
-
Topic Author
- User
-
No harm no foul? BS.Nope. Wasn't me. Too steep. I should have been a little more clear in my first post. On a sketchy day, that track is a poor choice. No doubt. If there was ever a good time to put in that track, last week was it. Low avy conditions and small crowds. He got away with it. No harm, no foul. Embrace the sh!tshow.
^^All the backcountry etiquette anybody needs to know right there.
-Don't avalanche yourself.
-Don't avalanche others.
-Don't put yourself in a position to be avalanched upon by others.
Everything else goes. Including post holing in the skintrack and other related first world problems.
I guess whomever put that track in must be some sort of omnipotent Snow God because I'd never be 100% sure a slope that steep would not slide/sluff/something if someone dropped in above me. Why take the risk? I guess I can use someone on that slope as an indication that it's totally stable and can drop in with impunity? If they put themselves there and they're following those three rules, then they must not be worried about #3. Shred on! :
OR, more likely, they're there because they don't know what they're doing or are just following someone's bad example. Unfortunately practice makes permanent and next genius that puts that skintrack in will probably have to embrace the sh!tshow when their bad choice gets them sluffed, sprayed, slabbed, or at a minimum verbally abused.
Furthermore, if your route-finding skills allow you to think that's an ok route when there are much safer, less strenuous alternatives (no matter how stable) then I probably don't trust your stability assessment ability either.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- zestysticks
-
- User
-
- Posts: 19
- Thank you received: 0
Now you've got it hop!! You're making real progress.
I've won't ascend under Little Alaska but I'll give you the freedom to do it if you want. It's not the convention but with so many bc users these days someone is bound to change the rules.
this whole situation reminds me of the following true story.
Son: Father how does the tribe choose names for the children?
Chief: Well my son it has long been the tradition of the elders to name a child after a sign in nature.
Son: What do you mean?
Chief: Well for example if a child is born and the father goes outside and the snow is falling he may call the child Snow Gently Falling. Or, if on the day a child is born a large avalanche comes down the mountain he will call the child Stands with an Airbag. So tell me 2 Dogs Humping why do you ask?
Son: Because I'm not sure I like the tradition.
Silly I know. But this thread should die. It's gonna start snowing...yes! We all gonna be gettin' some soon
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- hop
-
Topic Author
- User
-
- Posts: 49
- Thank you received: 0
If they put themselves there and they're following those three rules, then they must not be worried about #3. Shred on! :
Now you've got it hop!! You're making real progress.
I've won't ascend under Little Alaska but I'll give you the freedom to do it if you want. It's not the convention but with so many bc users these days someone is bound to change the rules.
I try and learn every day. Real progress, indeed. Now, do I need a transceiver if I have an airbag? That girl in Grizzly Gulch did today, but that's during Utarded snow conditions. Nobody here would be that dumb.
Sure, everyone has the freedom to ascend Little AK - just like I have the freedom to call them complete and utter morons for doing so, and now apparently now I have the OK to drop in on them. I read it here on TAY.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- rlsg
-
- User
-
- Posts: 226
- Thank you received: 0
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.