The "Seattle Skintrack" on Table Mountain

I don't get what the big deal is.  That uptrack gets set all the time (albeit usually further climbers left).

Why don't you complain about traffic?  Or maybe government indecisiveness?  Oooh, I know, complain about little to no progress on climate change!


After skiing down blueberry/table it's natural to turn around and head back up.  It's the fastest way back up and if you are comfortable skiing the slope then you should be comfortable skinning the slope (where you are likely placing less stress on the snowpack).  Also, in case you are new to skinning in North America, we like to go STRAIGHT UP everything, not dink around a mile climbers left.   :

So that was you?

If you read my first post again you'll see I did complain about traffic.   : I may or may not complain about the others but if I do, it won't be in the "Weak Layers - Decision Making in Avalanche Terrain" portion of TAY.

Also, just because things get done all the time doesn't make them the right thing to do. 

FYI I'm not new to North America and not new to the region.  Many of my European friends complain about the "straight up" skin tracks that they've encountered while skiing in this region, such as going up Mt. Herman w/ zero kick turns.  Skin tracks don't bother me as long as they're not stupidly placed in the middle of the descent.     

The big deal is that the 1st rule of skiing in avalanche terrain is to minimize your exposure, so by hanging out in avalanche terrain for however long it would take to make a skin track up ~38º (you know, the prime angle for slides) terrain using about 30 kick turns makes no sense to me when you could just go around it and be out of danger.  The point you don't seem to be grasping is that you're unlikely to be the only group in the area.  Why expose yourself to someone else's cornice drop or ski cut while you skin back up?  Your "comfortable on the down = comfortable on the up" attitude might work when you're deeper out in the BC where there's nobody else around but as noted above, the Blueberry/Table area is about as urban as backcountry skiing gets. 

I guess you won't be bummed if I accidentally drop in on top of you and flush you and your skin track back down to the lake. 

Nope wasn't me. I hold that area in the same category as Muir: places I never want to go.

It just gets old hearing people whine about the same thing over and over again. That skin track does make sense in that it is more direct and saves time if set right. I never get what the big deal is. That bowl is very wide, how hard is it ski off to the side or just cross the skintrack once? It seems like that's very common many places, but a few Baker locals like to whine about it under Table.

Table and blueberry are sidecountry and a very beginner area. It's many people's first tour and IMHO it's not a place where you should rely on other parties behavior to ensure your safety. If you feel like you need to ski down the skin track someone is setting, more power to you just don't hit them.

You are right tho, I don't understand your argument: that a slope with a terrain trap at the bottom is safe to ski, but not safe to skin. That's never made any sense to me. Either you think it's safe or it's not. If it's not then why are you skiing it? Why do you choose to accept increased risk on a popular slope (that may have someone else dropping in next to you) only on the way down? That's not logic I follow. That slope is only about 600' and you can skin it direct in about 20 min or so. Depending on the day and time that may not expose you to that many skiers from above. It's a short window.

Nope wasn't me.  I hold that area in the same category as Muir:  places I never want to go.

Sweet.  That means there will only be 29,153 people there instead of 29,154 on any given day.  I assume this means you prefer to go places where there are fewer people, which might explain your "if it's safe to ski down it's safe to climb up" mentality which may hold true if there's nobody else around. 

It just gets old hearing people whine about the same thing over and over again.  That skin track does make sense in that it is more direct and saves time if set right.  I never get what the big deal is.  That bowl is very wide, how hard is it ski off to the side or just cross the skintrack once?  It seems like that's very common many places, but a few Baker locals like to whine about it under Table. 

The problem is you don't know where they are going to be coming up when you drop in, and I've seen people kick off slides there that propagate far wider than their initial start point.  I agree with you that it's the most direct route, but is it the smartest?  The safest?  NO. 

Table and blueberry are sidecountry and a very beginner area.  It's many people's first tour and IMHO it's not a place where you should rely on other parties behavior to ensure your safety.  If you feel like you need to ski down the skin track someone is setting, more power to you just don't hit them. 

Please define "sidecountry".  Just because it's next to a ski area doesn't mean it's patrolled or controlled.  It's still got complex terrain that has seen many people get in trouble due to poor judgement.

Since it is an easy access area used by all types of people from beginner to expert I feel it's important to set the right example from the get-go vs. giving people a false sense of doing it right because someone else did it before them.  And yes, in such areas I DO rely on other people's good behavior to keep me safe, just like I trust that you're not going to observe the rules of the road when you're on the road.  You can do whatever you like when you're in the middle of nowhere with nobody around but when you're in a heavily-used area you owe it to your fellow tourers to not endanger yourselves and others unnecessarily. 

You are right tho, I don't understand your argument:  that a slope with a terrain trap at the bottom is safe to ski, but not safe to skin.  That's never made any sense to me.  Either you think it's safe or it's not.  If it's not then why are you skiing it?  Why do you choose to accept increased risk on a popular slope (that may have someone else dropping in next to you) only on the way down?  That's not logic I follow.  That slope is only about 600' and you can skin it direct in about 20 min or so.  Depending on the day and time that may not expose you to that many skiers from above.  It's a short window.

You seem to know a lot about the area for someone that never wants to go there. 

IME, when I see people set a track like the one I pictured they end up lapping it numerous times.  They never top out so their entire touring day (aside from initial approach and final exit) is spent in the danger zone.  It's not just 20 minutes on the up and one minute on the down. 

Who says I'm dropping in with someone dropping in next to me?  The beauty of starting at the top is I can see who's around me and can communicate with them.  I do this all the time in this area.  I can't communicate w/ people halfway down the slope, and they certainly can't communicate with me.  They're playing Russian roulette with the odds of someone coming down on them growing the longer they stay down there.  Clearly you're more comfortable with those odds than I am because if I am going to ski something that may slide (and let's face it, everything interesting enough to want to ski is potential slide terrain) I want to be in and out as quick as possible, AND I want my partners to be in safe zones ready to respond if something goes wrong w/o being in danger themselves.  This party had about five people in it, all on slope at the same time.  ALL OF THEM were exposed ALL THE TIME.  Who's going to dig them out if something goes wrong and takes out the whole group?  You can see they're all clustered up nicely.  Wouldn't take a big slide to take them all out at once. 

Hop has it right. There is no reason for this up track but ignorance, selfishness and bad decision making. He's not whining, he's educating.

WRT to this being a beginner area, it certainly is. Not because it is beginner terrain but because it is near and visible from the lot. This is why many beginners go there. It actually is fairly avy prone terrain with complex, steep features. That is why it is very necessary to call out such mistakes so these beginners have a chance to learn how to ascend properly.

I also have a hard time with the concept that it is always safest to climb the terrain you are hoping to ski. Parties should be looking for the safest up track that gets to the goal while minimizing exposure. That safest route is clearly around, not straight up an avy path. This would be true even if Table was remote and you were the only party present.

Would you rather discover wind slabs from the ridge above or by skinning up the potential path and onto the slab?

How do you feel when your skin track is destroyed by an avalanche?

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.

There are plenty of reasons for the uptrack there which is why it keeps getting put there. That is the point.

It may not meet the approval of the "all knowing locals", but fortunately public land is there sole responsibility. The uptrack there is faster, more direct, and if you've already been down a lap and assessed conditions as stable then the risk of that slope may be viewed as acceptable. How can you not understand this? I'm not saying it's the safer, or even preferable, route, but there sure are reasons to take it.

Linking to threads on avalanches in the area is totally useless in this context. Of course that slope can and does slide. That misses the point. The point is on a given day when a party has evaluated that slope as within their acceptable level of risk, then why the heck can't they climb it direct and save the time? Just because it irks a few locals? Why are the locals dropping onto that slope unless they've deemed that slope *unlikely* to slide?

Are you really arguing that people shouldn't skin that track because you want to ski it solo when it's likely to slide? That seems like a crazy position.

There are plenty of reasons for the uptrack there which is why it keeps getting put there.  That is the point. 

People do a lot of stupid things until they learn not to do them. I consider this a pretty simple case of unaware touring parties not knowing any better, just like a child doesn't know to look both ways before they cross the street. They either learn or get squashed.

It may not meet the approval of the "all knowing locals", but fortunately public land is there sole responsibility.  The uptrack there is faster, more direct, and if you've already been down a lap and assessed conditions as stable then the risk of that slope may be viewed as acceptable.  How can you not understand this?  I'm not saying it's the safer, or even preferable, route, but there sure are reasons to take it. 

Just because your party didn't bring it all down doesn't mean the next party won't. It's apparent your level of risk acceptance and confidence in your ability to perfectly assess the conditions is FAR greater than mine.

Linking to threads on avalanches in the area is totally useless in this context.  Of course that slope can and does slide.  That misses the point.  The point is on a given day when a party has evaluated that slope as within their acceptable level of risk, then why the heck can't they climb it direct and save the time?  Just because it irks a few locals?  Why are the locals dropping onto that slope unless they've deemed that slope *unlikely* to slide? 

Conditions change and group slope assessments aren't always spot on (if everyone had it right all the time there would be no human-caused avalanche incidents). Therefore, it's prudent to minimize your exposure. Some of the people I've encountered on that skintrack have told me they've felt uneasy when people end up dropping in on them. If they're so confident, why would they feel uneasy unless they all of a sudden didn't trust their assessment when people were on top?

Are you really arguing that people shouldn't skin that track because you want to ski it solo when it's likely to slide?  That seems like a crazy position. 

???? I have no idea where you're getting this from. Where did I say I was skiing this solo when it's likely to slide?

Clearly I'm not going to change your mind so feel free to camp out in avy zones all day long and justify your actions however you want.  When it all comes crashing down on you it's your life. 

Happy new year.