Cali exodus to UT???

I'm just curious, with the never-ending Cali drought has there been an exodus of skiers to SLC the last year or two? Are there plans for one? Has people's friends and family moved to UT from CA in significant numbers? I'm just curious on this matter. I was going to ski bum Squaw Valley next year but now I'm just going to go back to the much more reliable UT when even a "bad year" is as good as it gets for most resorts. I was really looking forward to the much better vibe and beauty of Cali but there is no point of being a ski bum without snow. Honest curiosity here, not trying to start anything.

Everyone is headed to Alpental these days.

CO has legal weed.

Basing your location decision on the drought is... I dunno. I just wouldn't do it. Every season is an open book, especially with the latest ENSO forecasts.

same speculations here in AK and PNW ......... the first to relocate might be folks not seriously tied to the cali. economy;
next, working professionals willing to roll the dice and make the move, hoping to score a job with reasonable pay;
moving is hell expensive, that should stem some of the exodus? IMO, the mass migration will be gradual; remember, 2016 is
an election year, the national economy tends to slow down while everyone waits to see who the new guy/gal will be;
seasonal ag. workers will be on the move too; if you can afford to move to AK, you probably dont need to move in the first place,
its fkn EXPENSIVE to live here....

Stay away from MT & WY it sucks here.

I have seen more ca plates in the lots the last few years here in ut, but dont notice any real influx of new residents. Coincidentally enough ca has the second largest population of Mormons after ut.

In my neighborhood, at least half of the people are "from" California. I do not think the drought had anything to do with it. Those people that I've asked have listed having kids in a place with really bad schools and traffic as their reasons,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LightRanger

Basing your location decision on the drought is... I dunno. I just wouldn't do it. Every season is an open book, especially with the latest ENSO forecasts.

---

For a ski bum I think a multi year drought is precisely the type of information you'd want to base next year plans around. It's not a secret that UT or JH have and will likely continue to offer more consistent snow/wx than Tahoe.

When the pacific blob breaks and the drought buster comes you will be driving across Nevada.

Hi FluffyLilKitten! I would proffer that instead of the overrated, overhyped, overpriced, snowless and parched western quadrant of our great continent, those who have "figured it out" have headed to the northeast and found better snow due to the cold temperatures, more consistant snowfall as well as superior snowmaking(and LOTS of water for the snowmaking systems) as well as a truly more enriching urban and mountain lifestyle. The northeast is the home of the gnarliest snowriding on the North American continent! In addition to the superior intellectual urban environments and lifestyles, you will have easy access to great mountain experiences like Killington, Vermont where the snowriding terrain is truly fabulous, the partying is unmatched anywhere(can you say "hot New Jersey Italian babes?") the snow and weather are underrated, and the setting is lush and green! If you can shred here, you can shred ANYWHERE. When you score your first Killington powder day in "Anarchy", "The Throne", "Chop Chop" or "Patsy", you will be grinning from ear to ear, I promise you! There is lift-serviced mountain biking in the summer and the autumn colors are unmacthed anywhere on the planet. I would also like to take this opportunity to formally invite you (as well as all TGR Maggots , TTip-ers, NewSchoolers, Epicureans, jongs and lurkers alike) to come join our fun-loving but responsible bunch of snowriding aficionados at http://forums.alpinezone.com/. I think most all of you will find that our seasoned moderators "keep the bar high" by maintaining a sense of order and decorum, while encouraging quality discussion about our favorite pastime. I can assure you that "newbies"'(jongs) are welcomed with open arms by our entire community(unlike here at TGR), and there is no "hazing period" or rudeness tolerated. We also have superior bandwidth and response times on our 502g superfibre network as well as a state-of-the-art virtual blade server farm with 5000 terabytes of virtual disk space for your photos, blogs etc. It may take a small amount of getting used to, as we do have reasonable standards as far as language and image posting that are strictly enforced. The registration is easy and painless, and the rules will be explained in detail during the process. I will warn you however up front that registering an ALIAS is strictly "VERBOTEN", and something we have zero-tolerance with. If you are tired of the juvenile goings-on at TGR and Newschoolers and yearn for a snowriding forum that matches your maturity level, all I can say is: "Come join the fun"!
PS here is the latest KILLINGTON SNOW REPORT :biggrin:

Typically Utah is in the same path for most of the storms that hit Tahoe, so that wouldn't exactly be my first choice of exodus. When there's a persistent ridge off the coast causing a split or a push to the North, they sometimes don't come back around until Colorado and merely graze or skip Utah, which is what happened a bunch of times the last few years. Yeah, it was better in the LCC this winter than Tahoe, but they've still been down years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AlpineZone

KILLINGTON SNOW REPORT[/I][/URL] :biggrin:

---

Are you really recommending Killington over the west? High on drugs you must be.

I wouldn't recommend Killington over just about 20 other mountains in the northeast. Ski Liberty just may be one of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grape_Ape

Are you really recommending Killington over the west? High on drugs you must be.

I wouldn't recommend Killington over just about 20 other mountains in the northeast. Ski Liberty just may be one of them.

---

It sure aint utah or tahoe, but its hardly a bad place either. Ample snowfall, ample snowmaking, pretty good grooming, and LOTS of terrain. Its pretty easy to avoid any crowds if you knnow you're way around the mtn and know how to be just ahead of the bigger crowds, by working the mtn a little. I will say for families it may be difficult as its sprawling and can be difficult to navigate for touristas. Head down the road to Pico for family ease.

Hey Greg form Alpinezone, Im going up to Mt. Shasta on May 30/31. I plan on skiing at least 5000 feet of corn oof maybe pow. Thats one run. Can I do that ANYWHERE on the east coast? Or would I have to make 500 foot runs all day till I get the 5K?

You should come with us. But, that will require two nights snow camping and lots more skiing than 5K. Do ou have anything like that in Vermont now....or ever?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TEXASS

Hey Greg form Alpinezone, Im going up to Mt. Shasta on May 30/31. I plan on skiing at least 5000 feet of corn oof maybe pow. Thats one run. Can I do that ANYWHERE on the east coast? Or would I have to make 500 foot runs all day till I get the 5K?

You should come with us. But, that will require two nights snow camping and lots more skiing than 5K. Do ou have anything like that in Vermont now....or ever?

---

Your cluelessness has reached new, and hilarious, heights

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TEXASS

Hey Greg form Alpinezone, Im going up to Mt. Shasta on May 30/31. I plan on skiing at least 5000 feet of corn oof maybe pow. Thats one run. Can I do that ANYWHERE on the east coast? Or would I have to make 500 foot runs all day till I get the 5K?

You should come with us. But, that will require two nights snow camping and lots more skiing than 5K. Do ou have anything like that in Vermont now....or ever?

---

Now, now, now...you are making this personal. New England has some bitching terrain...do not underestimate the east or eastern skiers.

My gripes about Killington are in regards to the chopped up nature of the vertical there. Also, too many tools from NJ and NYC. If I want to ski with gapers, I would stay down here. I don't need "nightlife" because at the end of my ski day, I want to rest for the next ski day.

Holy jong fest...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TEXASS

Hey Greg form Alpinezone, Im going up to Mt. Shasta on May 30/31. I plan on skiing at least 5000 feet of corn oof maybe pow. Thats one run. Can I do that ANYWHERE on the east coast? Or would I have to make 500 foot runs all day till I get the 5K?

You should come with us. But, that will require two nights snow camping and lots more skiing than 5K. Do ou have anything like that in Vermont now....or ever?

---

This

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skidog

...pretty good grooming...

---

That
is pathetic

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bromontana

For a ski bum I think a multi year drought is precisely the type of information you'd want to base next year plans around. It's not a secret that UT or JH have and will likely continue to offer more consistent snow/wx than Tahoe.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TahoeJ

Typically Utah is in the same path for most of the storms that hit Tahoe, so that wouldn't exactly be my first choice of exodus. When there's a persistent ridge off the coast causing a split or a push to the North, they sometimes don't come back around until Colorado and merely graze or skip Utah, which is what happened a bunch of times the last few years. Yeah, it was better in the LCC this winter than Tahoe, but they've still been down years.

---

J made part of my point. But the larger point was: droughts are retrospective. We have no idea what next winter's going to be like. This time last year NOAA was forecasting a moderate-to-strong El Nino. If that had materialized, the Central Sierra would have done well based on past history. Next winter is an open book. CA had a drought from 2007-2009, and then 2010 and (especially) 2011 were really awesome years. Next year may be too. I'd look at data here to make a more-informed decision: http://bestsnow.net/pwdrpct.htm

And, like I said, the current ENSO forecast looks strongly positive, which has major implications for Western US precip (e.g. lower in Jackson, higher in Mammoth and, say, Taos).

Ahh 2011. 9' of snow over 4 days.

California's inconsistency at its best.

My point is you can mitigate the risk of a non-winter by avoiding an area that really hasn't had a legit season in several years. If you're bumming you're flexible on location. Why pick the area with the most volatility in conditions?

from your source:
Many Sierra Nevada resorts are in the 350 inch range also, but with higher volatility.

Notice that the odds of 12+ inches are much higher in the Sierra Nevada than in Rockies areas with similar annual snowfall but that the probability of essentially no powder in a week is nearly 50%

whereas that risk is more than halved at Alta.

23% of weeks will have no days of 6+ inches

If you're low on funds and need to set up shop in one area, choose UT over CA every time. You won't lose a winter and you'll get a lot more powder days on average.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bromontana

My point is you can mitigate the risk of a non-winter by avoiding an area that really hasn't had a legit season in several years.

---

You missed my point. Correlation is not causation, and past performance does not dictate future results.

The stats I posted show that UT has less volatility. Sure. But the last several years in CA were merely volatility signals--data points--not future predictors. But the OP is using them as a future predictor, as are you. Based on the onthesnow stats, we could be sitting in May 2011, and UT would still be a better bet in terms of consistency. But by the OP and your logic, he/she should stick with CA because the last 2-3 seasons were huge. And then he/she would've gotten skunked as 2011-2012 was a poor season in CA. Make sense?

If you look at the ENSO forecast, you can stack the odds in your favor. Especially if you can wait another month or two for it to clear up more.

Forget trying to predict the snowfall - decide what you want. Yes, California always has longer stretches between snow than UT, and generally that snow comes in huge storms with higher moisture content. But we have about 100,000 more mountains, a much more stable snowpack, and a comparatively empty backcountry. If you want to ride lifts in better, more consistent snow, and/or share a more volatile BC snowpack with more concentrated users, pick UT. It's also cheaper.

Oh YEAH, but if you want hot NJ babes, and excellent grooming, definitely Killington.

To answer the OP's question, I think some pros and dedicated skiers have moved on to other locations, or have diversified their pass purchases (Mt Collective, etc.), but I don't think there's a mass exodus or anything. There's too much good in California, in even during 4 straight awful winters.

Greg knocking it out of the park as usual.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LightRanger

You missed my point. Correlation is not causation, and past performance does not dictate future results.

The stats I posted show that UT has less volatility. Sure. But the last several years in CA were merely volatility signals--data points--not future predictors. But the OP is using them as a future predictor, as are you. Based on the onthesnow stats, we could be sitting in May 2011, and UT would still be a better bet in terms of consistency. But by the OP and your logic, he/she should stick with CA because the last 2-3 seasons were huge. And then he/she would've gotten skunked as 2011-2012 was a poor season in CA. Make sense?

If you look at the ENSO forecast, you can stack the odds in your favor. Especially if you can wait another month or two for it to clear up more.

---

Exactly. It's like blackjack. Just because you've lost 5 straight hands doesn't mean you quadruple your bet on your next hand because you're due (card counting aside). And same deal with winning streaks.

It's exactly like blackjack only California got the deck with the jokers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LightRanger

You missed my point. Correlation is not causation, and past performance does not dictate future results.

---

Not on a YoY basis, but by using dictate you're trying to wedge the question. It's reasonable to assume ~15yr droughts every X hundred years in Tahoe. Why? Historical record. It's reasonable to assume snowfall >300in as a baseline at Alta. You can't do that in Cali because of the different climate and bigger downside in the spectrum of possible outcomes for any given year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LightRanger

The stats I posted show that UT has less volatility. Sure.

---

Right - less volatility in weather for a ski town is a good thing, especially when that low volatility is coupled with average snowfall 50% higher than the area with higher volatility. For UT this year was the worst in 80 years or so of record keeping and Alta's snowfall was still only two standard deviations off the mean (~75inch std. deviation or so for UT snowfall). That is a reasonable factor to use when deciding on a place. Feast or famine or steady Alta?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LightRanger

But the last several years in CA were merely volatility signals--data points--not future predictors. But the OP is using them as a future predictor, as are you. Based on the onthesnow stats, we could be sitting in May 2011, and UT would still be a better bet in terms of consistency. But by the OP and your logic, he/she should stick with CA because the last 2-3 seasons were huge. And then he/she would've gotten skunked as 2011-2012 was a poor season in CA. Make sense?

---

No dat not wut I sed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LightRanger

If you look at the ENSO forecast, you can stack the odds in your favor. Especially if you can wait another month or two for it to clear up more.

---

Any data on ENSO @ X = average of Y"/yr? Imo a hot ENSO at one point in time doesn't override the above issues with Tahoe.

^^^ You're still missing the point. I don't disagree with the volatility aspect. I disagree with using last year and the year before as a baseline. And you walked backed that statement by saying, "Not on a YoY basis..." which is an admission that your prior statement (and the OP's premise) is incorrect. But then below that you seem to deny making the following statement with your "No dat not what I sed" comment,:

Quote:

---

For a ski bum I think a multi year drought is precisely the type of information you'd want to base next year plans around.

---

(Bolded for emphasis.)

My point remains: look at the data, not immediate past history. The data points (from a pure snowfall consistency standpoint) toward Utah. But that is coincidental to the OP's premise. (The OP could've been asking about WA or NM and maybe we wouldn't be having this argument.) The current CA drought has nothing to do with the consistency stats (except maybe moving them a bit one way or the other). Paleoclimate records show that the current drought in CA is already the worst in 1200 years. But that has no bearing on whether it continues. That's a logical leap/implication on your part, made by cherrypicking incomplete paleoclimate records to only look at historic megadroughts. Many of those megadroughts afflicted the entire West (which I know you know), but you're leaving out how they may or may not have affected Utah to fit your argument.

I lived in Tahoe for 25 years through thick and thin. -But not as thin as it's been the last two years, obviously. I've been in the Wasatch 10 years. In my experience, the Sierra got hammered deeper and more consistently. During most winters at Tahoe we'd stop shoveling the path and simply dig a 75 foot long tunnel to the front door. So far I've seen only one season in the Wasatch where that would've been possible. Before anyone points out the obvious fact that I'm in the "dry" side of the Wasatch, I'll point out that I spend a fair amount of time in the Cottonwoods. Chasing the snow could be frustrating. Tahoe could get hammered next season, but who knows?

Ahh yeah agreed that statement's not worded very well. I don't (or didn't) mean the last year or two will be repeated in 2016, but that there's a much better chance of Tahoe throwing up a brown Christmas than alta based on physical location and historical record. The last few years are big exclamation points on the downside of relying on tahoe snowpack.

The alta historical record is where that baseline was taken, not 1 or 3 years ago. It just happens that the low baseline is about where we landed this season.

Overall though, is an exodus from CA among avid skiers warranted? Maybe. It might be warranted in UT in 20 years if things keep getting worse. Park City should be without natural snowpack by that time thanks to warmer temps. The climate is warming and the more geographic barriers you have to produce or hold snow, the better off you are. I think Utah's better protected than CA by virtue of being inland and higher elevation, but could be wrong.

Fair enough.

On your last point, check this:
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ima...gure1-2014.png
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/sci.../snowpack.html

Quote:

---

Some areas have seen increases in snowpack, primarily in the southern Sierra Nevada of California.

---

Now, that's not Tahoe. Tahoe is at 6,200 (lake level). Resorts top out at 8,500-9,900. But the High Sierra is high. A lot of resort skiing in CA is going to be in trouble (more than now). High Sierra BC skiing will remain for the foreseeable future.

Pretty sure UT is only situated somewhat better, for the reasons you mention. Best bets sixty years from now may be CO, Alberta, and, funny enough, the East Coast--with the latter based on projections/current theory that the "North American dipole pattern" (e.g. the RRR in the West and the "polar vortex"/anomalous arctic air in the East) we've seen for the last three years being a continuing trend. The best I can figure that map out is the increases and decreases are correlated with elevation, which is consistent with our understanding of the effects of climate change (warmer, but more water in the atmosphere). Of course, the sample size isn't huge, but it's at least somewhat helpful.

I think most of us are just trying to be patient knowing that the snow will come eventually... and there have definitely been some trips elsewhere in the meantime (including Utah).

Drinking more beer than usual during the winter has also been involved and I hope my mountain bike never gets used that much between December and April ever again.

Yeah it's an ugly long term forecast. I noticed the Sonora Pass thread a bit earlier this month and am somewhat versed in the Sierra layout, definitely looks like a pocket of heaven in the southern half.

edit: Sonora's central more than southern. Can't get a damn thing right in this thread

This thread has WAY overcomplicated the matter.

Is snow more consistent and predicable in UT than CA. YES

The only problem with moving to UT, is then you have to live in UT.

So the real question is, can you live in UT?

Long range weather forecasts are like magicians' mind reading, fortune tellers' predictions, and FBI profiles--enough generalized bullshit that after the fact you can always find something in the prediction that seems to fit what actually happened.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_reading

Best technique to figure out where to ski bum next season--get drunk, put on a blindfold, throw a dart at a map. Congratulations!--you'll be skiing at your best friend's eyeball.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LightRanger

J made part of my point. But the larger point was: droughts are retrospective. We have no idea what next winter's going to be like. This time last year NOAA was forecasting a moderate-to-strong El Nino. If that had materialized, the Central Sierra would have done well based on past history. Next winter is an open book. CA had a drought from 2007-2009, and then 2010 and (especially) 2011 were really awesome years. Next year may be too. I'd look at data here to make a more-informed decision: http://bestsnow.net/pwdrpct.htm

And, like I said, the current ENSO forecast looks strongly positive, which has major implications for Western US precip (e.g. lower in Jackson, higher in Mammoth and, say, Taos).

---

Lower in the Tetons? We just had a terrible year; it doesn't get much lower. But that's ok when a terrible year still gets around 300". That's the thing I think most people overlook whenever this debate gets rehashed. Lots of geographical regions get the big year (yes, Greg, even NE), some more than others. In line with this new awareness of drought, how about looking at the shitty winters instead. How many regions measure drought in terms of receiving only 250-350 inches of powder? Because, from what I've seen over 20 years, a bad year in the rest of the country means almost no ski season and water shortages. For the Tetons, the downside is usually around 300" and an absolute minimum of 4 months of good conditions, year after year. Dry year, wet year, this is still one of the coldest places in the lower 48 and its going to stay consistently more cold than the rest of the lower 48's resort areas. UT has more downside than the Tetons as it's truly bad seasons are noticably shorter, warmer and thinner than the Tetons. It's not unusual at all to see hordes of UT skiers at the Village and Targhee in December because during some dry years UT has very little going on until after the holiday season.

Well I'm planning my escape after the bills are paid and the pile of money under the mattress is big enough

But it's more of getting away from crowds while still finding good snow

I am seeing more skier traffic and tracks in Utah as well. The 10 minute tracked out phenomenon

But I did have 4 amazing days at Kirkwood three years ago when a whopper shut down the 80

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nevada29er

This thread has WAY overcomplicated the matter.

Is snow more consistent and predicable in UT than CA. YES

The only problem with moving to UT, is then you have to live in UT.

So the real question is, can you live in UT?

---

Well, according to the Hitler Wants to Ski Vail video on YouTube, they do have In n Out and the Mormons aren't so bad.

Double double animal style? Attachment 167411

Did someone actually mention grooming in this disussion????
Yeah it sucks here, please leave.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tahoe Bromide

Did someone actually mention grooming in this disussion????
Yeah it sucks here, please leave.

---

I find it reassuring that Killington is both a Jersey babe and a Greg@Alpinezone magnet. If they all went to JH and Montana, I'd really be pissed off. Note - nothing wrong with MRG, Jay Peak, Mt. Mansfield, etc., but Killington? Puh-leaze.

... Thom