Originally Posted by
Christopher3000
Because the winds at 11K' have been in the 30's, 40's, and 50's out of the W and NW for several days; because the place where they gained the ridge is east facing, not only making it directly leeward to the prevailing winds but also a likely spot for persistent weak layers to exist; because we've had over 40 inches of snow with several density changes and a freezing rain event over the last week; because our significant new snow load was seeing its first sunlight...
Superior is an awesome run, and there are a lot of days when it can be skied safely, even when it has lots of fresh snow; I think there are days when skinning to the top up the S face is ok as well--fuck Rog!--but insodoing one misses out on a classic approach up the E ridge. Of course, I would have wanted nothing to do with N facing Cardiff Peak or E facing LSB this morning. Nevertheless, it took a pretty flippant attitude toward general snow and avalanche awareness, and our particular conditions today, to go hang out on the S face of Superior for a couple hours, and to punch it all the way to the ridge, on a steep, east-facing slope at 11K', while the winds were still nuking at that elevation. I think its generally bad practice to criticize other skiers' tolerance for risk, or second guess other peoples' forecasting, but I cannot see how any sort of informed thought process about avalanches and current conditions went into approaching a huge, leeward slope, that anyone with a compass and a clue should suspect of harboring persistent weakness, from the bottom, on a day like today.
S facing LCC is probably the most popular and visible BC skiing destination in the US, and lots of ridiculous shit goes on there all the time; that the ridiculous shit usually goes unpunished by natural consequences is absorbed by a whole lot of people skiing at Alta and Snowbird, and that compounds the amount of people opting to ski up there. I think that professional avalanche forecasters are in the right to avoid explicitly criticizing avalanche victims' decisions, but the examples provided in full view of so many people in places like Superior are so influential that I think its essential to have dialogue about things we consider particularly egregious.
It cannot be said enough: a lot of people look at S facing LCC as "controlled" terrain, and for the purpose of skiing, it is nothing of the sort. It might--but only might--be a decent bet against a deep slab avalanche pulling out at your feet as you drop into the high triangle, but it means very little about whether you will get caught off guard by a wind slab that grew overnight as you wallow up toward the ridge from below, which, if it had happened to today's party on the S face, would have most likely terminally fucked them. And since I'm already pontificating about skiing and avalanches on Mt. Superior, it should be stated that Suicide chute is a giant NE facing avalanche path, and wandering up there when we're on the cusp of a large avalanche cycle makes you look like one of those snowmobilers in Logan.
