The "Seattle Skintrack" on Table Mountain

It's certainly not the safest place to go up, but in reasonably stable conditions it's not an unreasonable place to go up. I've certainly been there when the majority of people have ascended that way, and felt fine doing the same. You want another quick run, and you make a judgement call that this is quick, and safe enough for the conditions that day (maybe that wasn't the case a couple of days ago though). Normally, I'd agree going around the long way is much better - at least until you've got a feel for the conditions.

From what I recall (and looking at the photos), it's on a bit of a cone (and so less exposed than adjacent areas).

Wind and storm slabs regularly happens in this very spot. Here's a link to a post with slide pics from a couple years ago in this very spot: April fools on Table Mountain
If these clowns were ascending on April 1 they'd have gone thru the wringer.

Looking at the original pic, and the video, I disagree. They would have been off to the side of the slide path (the ascent path is on a bit of a cone, as I mentioned).

Apparently I'm not the only one thinking about backcountry travel "rules of the road".  This was posted yesterday and covers just about everything in this thread. 

backcountrymagazine.com/stories/mountain...risk-responsibility/

Philfort - where the party is at the top of their skintrack, yes, they're on the top of an extremely subtle ridge.  That being said, their skin track goes well into the slide paths of Heart Shaped Box (looker's right) and whatever that chute is called on looker's left that Jason4 brought down with him.  They were in the line of fire of the April 1 slide at least 50% of their ascent, and there is no guarantee that if either zone pulls out it won't take the other with it.  I regularly see crowns and debris linked all the way across that entire zone. 

Also, this is just one variation of ascent routes in this area.  There are often skin tracks waaay looker's right past the horn, and farther looker's left under 10 Minute Trees.  They're all sketchy, some more than others. 

Read through Graham Clark's avalanche project and notice that basically everything in the Blueberry/Table area in question is RED.

deptweb.wwu.edu/huxley/huxweb/gis/EGEO45.../Clarkg/results.htm#

However subtle your argument, publicly shamming skier's route decisions are not the most effective method to educate and inform. To add a bit of historical reference, these slopes were skinned for many years without incident. More accidents have occurred from people dropping in from the top then from getting "bombed" from above.

I spent many happy days skinning these slopes back in the day with my 210 cm karhus in stable snow. The gear and attitudes change, sometimes not for the better.

However subtle your argument, publicly shamming skier's route decisions are not the most effective method to educate and inform.  To add a bit of historical reference, these slopes were skinned for many years without incident.  More accidents have occurred from people dropping in from the top then from getting "bombed" from above.

I spent many happy days skinning these slopes back in the day with my 210 cm karhus in stable snow.  The gear and attitudes change, sometimes not for the better.

I appreciate your concern.  It would've been kind of hard to talk to that party from where I was on the top of Mt. Herman.  Pointing it out here's the best I can do. 

Given that the gear and attitudes have changed and possibly for the worse - it's a lot easier to get in over your head with all this new-fangled ski technology and there are a lot more people going out there, what do you suggest?  We're far from the good ol' days of your 210 Karhus. 

See the Backcountry Magazine link.  They cover it better than I do.   

Another sunny day, another group of people with no mountain sense. 

Hop, if you want to have a productive conversation then try not to start with a combative statement and title. There are plenty of Seattlites that are sensible and accomplished backcountry skiers.

As others have chimed in, this is not as black and white as you (and previous threads) make it seem. On a given day it may be totally inappropriate for an uptrack there, but on another day it may be appropriate. I haven't heard any compelling arguments that those slopes should be a permanent no-climb zone. If it is such a problem, then the local skiers should have a dialogue with the ski area and the national forest to determine and post an appropriate uphill policy for the bagley lakes backcountry area.

Hop, if you want to have a productive conversation then try not to start with a combative statement and title.  There are plenty of Seattlites that are sensible and accomplished backcountry skiers. 

Sorry to ruffle your feathers with my title and opening statement. The Seattle Skintrack isn't my name for it - I learned it last century from people who have been in the area far longer. I consider it one of those pet overgeneralizing terms like "a$$hole Californian" and it rolls off the tongue better than "that up track somewhere between 10 minute trees to past the horn on Table".

Clearly there are sensible and accomplished backcountry skiers from Seattle just as not all Californians are a$$holes.

As others have chimed in, this is not as black and white as you (and previous threads) make it seem.  On a given day it may be totally inappropriate for an uptrack there, but on another day it may be appropriate.  I haven't heard any compelling arguments that those slopes should be a permanent no-climb zone.  If it is such a problem, then the local skiers should have a dialogue with the ski area and the national forest to determine and post an appropriate uphill policy for the bagley lakes backcountry area. 

If it wasn't a problem then why do the people that put up the Seattle skin... I mean that up track somewhere between 10 minute trees to past the horn on Table get pissed when they get buzzed or sluffed by parties coming in from above? Since everyone's level of comfort and risk is different, your "good to skin here" is someone else's "no way".

The local skiers DO have dialogues with the ski area, at least ski patrol and the Howats. In fact, my party discussed the aforementioned skin track w/ Duncan that very morning on our way out the gate. They all think ascending in that area's insane. Still, it's not the ski area's problem.

Do you really think we need official regulations or are backcountry skiers capable of self-regulating?