powderfreak

10 minutes ago, kdxken said:

Wood smoke in the air and a Marchand beat down of the Leafs. Doesn't get much better...

Watching playoff hockey on a CAA evening feels fitting.

It doesn't mean anything in the larger context of things, but it was more of a cold season vibe than warm season.  With playoff hockey.

Definitely a deep cold looking at the mountain temps.  What's interesting is the exposed upper mountain temperatures continue to cool off faster (relatively, the delta is larger up high) than the lower elevations on the east side.  Two sites, over a mile apart at 3,600ft are showing 16F.  While two sites, at mid-slope are 7F warmer at 1K lower elevation.  That's a steep lapse rate that is common with continued CAA from the NW up there.  Low levels are harder to drop, but up high in the free air is cooling much faster.  Cold air aloft.

Looking at the mountain profile...

3,600ft... 16F

2,600ft... 23F

1,500ft... 27F

750ft... 30F

30F at MVL and 29.7F at nearest PWS.

It is cold outside.  There's still some NW wind too.

Not fake.

Cold moving south.

We are going to be at freezing in a hurry.  Walked the dog with hat and gloves, with flurries blowing by sideways, after doing it in shorts and a T-shirt yesterday.

Gotta love the 30+ degree temp changes in New England.

6 minutes ago, dendrite said:

Meanwhile it’s 60s here

Jealous.  This is miserable.  Like 30+ degrees colder than yesterday afternoon.

Windows and doors open yesterday, wet snow falling outside today.

Even BTV and MVL now reporting -SN.

Snowing at 1500ft now.  All flakes.

Flowers have to be stoked.

26 minutes ago, Skivt2 said:

 

I don’t want this to come off as discrediting anything you said as I know how powerful the feeling is when a mountain community comes together to celebrate itself.  There is nothing like it.  

But today was simply stellar at Killington.  And I’m sure at Stowe too but I’m sort of sad for the Stowe faithful that the lifts are not turning anymore   There is something so completely satisfying to have lift served skiing until, and even beyond, when the last trail is no longer top to bottom.  Like every last drop of the winter has been wrung out and used up.  We still have 5-6 weeks of lift served skiing depending on how you count the days and if the June 1st weekend happens.  The pile on top of Superstar does not seem to have really started melting yet.  Today we harvested the corn from the two night freeze up in 60 degree bluebird skies with no crowd at all. It’s hard to describe the stoke level at the big K today. The spring people are all gathering, the tailgate and house party scene is just beginning.  It is the most magical time of the year.

Hey, I’ll agree. What makes Killington special is that the others close down.  That’s what drives the economic demand.  If all the ski areas stayed open, it would dilute the market and diminish the vibe at Killington this time of year.

Part of that excitement and feeling is because of the diminished supply, which focuses the stoke into one area.  Economic principles rule all.

Stowe could operate for sure, but I’ve seen too many empty chairs to believe it is worth it.  When everyone is open this time of year, the market is diluted.  We all enjoy skinning and earning our turns too, at least the folks that like this transition season.

Most of the community is onto Mtn Biking (MTB), maybe a skin up here or there, but closing at this juncture just doesn’t illicit any outrage.  It’s time here, despite the snowpack.

2 hours ago, AstronomyEnjoyer said:

67.3° high off of a 25.2° low this morning. 42.1° is a pretty healthy swing. Finally brought out the deck furniture today - just in time to see how close I get to the 20° mark Thursday morning.

66F from 23F at the nearest PWS here on the other side of the river.

MVL ASOS was 68F from 24F, for a 44 degree diurnal swing out in the air field.

Top 10 day.

One other thing is that skiers and riders know their ski area over time and know what the number means.  This discussion came up on the lift this winter with someone who skis at one spot midweek and another on the weekends.

They told me we must be using a different ruler than a nearby hill because the same number on one report led to different skiing than that same number on another report.

But I countered that it’s just a different method and that she could already identify what each number means just by the conversation.  In her head, she already knew what the snowfall on each report meant, correlated to and how it would ski.  We discussed instead of comparing the numbers, just recognize what it means.

And that’s really what a Snow Report is for.  Be consistent however you want to do it, so people know what it “means.”

1 hour ago, J.Spin said:

The explanation makes perfect sense, and of course it’s coming from someone who is literally involved in the process. I didn’t know that Smugg’s had switched to the single site methodology, but now that you’ve confirmed that it clearly explains the change in their snowfall numbers.

From the perspective of skiers who are skiing all over the mountain at various elevations and aspects, it seems appropriate that you described it as “apples and oranges” vs. “right and wrong” or “good and bad”. A single site (hopefully an appropriately representative one) is probably more optimal for long-term record keeping and comparison, but it might be less representative in some storms vs. others than the range that was found when sampling various parts of the mountain.

Yeah I hope that came across as just apples to oranges, not good vs bad.

It’s just important to recognize when comparing both snowstorms and seasonal snowfall.  Is it a consistent spot in sort of the new version of snow reporting over the past decade or so… or is it the old school estimated range style.

Both can be or feel correct for any given storm but over time adding up the deepest snow on property will lead to a different total than the same patch of woods over a season.

That old school style is a part of northeastern ski culture too.  Out west has always been a one number one plot game for avalanche purposes, where East was always a “you can find between 8-12 inches out there” type of vibe.

I always found it more stressful to have to come up with estimates, I enjoy just showing people the readings and saying it is what it is, ha.

2 hours ago, tunafish said:

Great post, PF.  

FWIW I asked TK about Jay as their 171" seasonal total on 1/16 sounded high.  So I asked him (online) if they have a set spot or not.  

"They have three set spots.  Not sure of exact details.  But I have been following along for decades and this year some of the estimates actually seemed a little low." 

I did ask a former marketer at Jay and he didn’t know of any spots, confirmed the sort of old school crowd sourced range method between grooming, patrol, skiing around.  I did that when I started here but it’s stressful, ha.  Easier to have something tell you what it is instead of hemming and hawing “how much do you think this seems like?”

TK thinks we are low even when I show him the actual measurement lol.  Was hanging with him last weekend, love skiing with that dude, the enthusiasm is hard to beat.

Which also plays into snowfall… skiers love snow, get excited, want to be stoked and I won’t lie, I bet 90% of skiers on a powder day would over-estimate snowfall.  “Dude, that was so deep, had to be a foot and a half.”  Plot shows 13”.  Ha.

Just like we’ve seen with weather weenies, sometimes excitement gets the best of everyone and I’ll admit, without seeing it on a stake I would estimate higher too.  It’s human nature.

A plot keeps me in check.  The number of text convos we sometimes have that are like, “man it seems like so much more snow.”  “No dude, we report what’s on High Rd.  It is what it is.”  The three of us gut check each other occasionally that way throughout the season.

Thats how estimates might be 12-18” in the old school style, but turns to 13” these days.  And you see the seasonal total drop over time.  And skiers think both are correct, because they are for the most part.  It’s just different ways of doing it.

TLDR - It's sort of comparing apples to oranges depending on the snow reporting method.  Old school ranges or single site snow cam or plots.  Ski Areas around the region are sort of a mixture of both methods.

10 hours ago, J.Spin said:

As you noted, I’m sure Stowe would be right up there above 300” if snowfall measurements were taken from ridgeline/summit areas like Bolton Valley and Jay Peak are presumably doing.

I’m not sure what to make of the Smugg’s number though; they were traditionally right in line with the increasing snowfall numbers as one headed northward along the spine, but their numbers have been consistently on the low side all season relative to the other resorts in the Northern Greens. Perhaps they’ve switched to recording snowfall at mid-mountain or base elevations instead of near the summits. It wasn’t really a big season for upslope snow (December can be a big period it was relatively slow this season), so I thought that might be an issue for a west-side resort like Smugg’s, but it didn’t seem to prevent Bolton from getting roughly average snowfall, and it played out that way at our site in the valley with roughly average snowfall as well. That Smugg’s season total is still higher than anything reported from the Central Greens thus far, so that’s consistent with the usual trend.

I know this is a sensitive subject and what I'm about to say is not accusing anyone of misleading or trying to be higher or market snowfall more.  Smuggs has moved to a more controlled snow measurement with a branded measuring spot I've seen posted a few times.  I think that's what you are seeing there.  To me, Bolton stands out much more than Smuggs on that list.  Did Bolton get almost 100 more inches than MRG this winter?  Really think about that for a second.  That's 8 more feet of snow, the snow depths must've really reflected that too?

I have personally seen it happen at Stowe and truly believe it to be the case, that if you are doing the old school estimating snowfall version of Snow Reporting (just skiing around, finding a general 8 - 10 inches depending on where you are, and then always adding the higher value to the season total) you will have a noticeably larger season total over time.  It isn't wrong per se, and skiers/riders won't find it off because they are skiing sometimes in 7-8 inches and sometimes they find some turns with 10 inches of new snow.  But you are taking the deepest amount found in any storm and adding it up over time... and those deepest places aren't always in the same spot though depending on wind direction.

Look at the ski areas that have gone to a more controlled measuring... Sugarbush has their stakes and cams, so does MRG.  Smuggs looks to have pivoted to that direction from what I noticed the past couple seasons.  We've gone that way at Stowe too.  The two locations I have yet to see a consistent measuring site or some sort visual proof of like a plot or spot are Bolton and Jay.  Again, this doesn't mean they are fibbing or making things up, but just going about it the old school way.  But you'll see their numbers stay in-line with the old school numbers, which are a bit higher.

An example is for those who have ever worked in Operations, say you call Ski Patrol to ask how much snow has fallen?  You are going to get a range as an answer every single time.  Just like if you asked any skier or rider.  How much snow was there?  Oh there was 6 - 8 inches out there on the hill.  Sounds good.  And it's usually correct that the snowfall will be in that range as one skis around a mountain.  However, what if you only measured from one specific location or two specific locations?  All the sudden the place you chose to represent snowfall shows 6.5".  Now you are deciding to report 6, maybe 7 if you want to push it, but not 8 that the old school method would be.

Take Bolton... when J.Spin goes up there he usually finds the reported snowfall in his wanderings around.  But I'd be curious what that snowfall might look like if he went to the same exact location every single time.  Maybe he finds only 7" at the designated spot because the storm came with a strong east wind, but skis around in the woods on his tour at some other aspect and finds 9" or 10".  Old style would say there was 7-10" of new snow (maybe even 6 - 10 inches), but now the 7 would get recorded in the annual tally not 10.  There is a subtle difference that adds up over time when talking about dozens and dozens of snowfall reports over a season.

The larger the snowfall range I see from a ski area, the more likely I know they are going old school and estimating.  Unless it is a highly marginal elevational storm with slop and pow up high, 6-10" on a snow report is a forecast, not a snowfall measurement.  If I see "24 Hour New Snow: 8 - 14 " that's just tossing numbers out there in a windy snowstorm.  Synoptic events and even upslope won't give anywhere near that range even at elevation.  Synoptic events I've noticed are often very close between elevations and summits.  The lift is occurring in the mid-levels.  There's no reason for a large range of more than an inch or two.  But occasionally we see these big ranges on snow reports, but that's the old school snow reporting method.

No one will convince me otherwise, but there is a total snowfall difference annually between the old school estimated range method and any mountain that goes to a singular specific location that shows just one number and one number only with no adjustments.  I believe we are seeing it happen with Smuggs now too, corrects downward.  

Old school snow report ranges of snowfall does capture a mountain's snowfall well in each specific event in my opinion, but will lead to compounding overtime as it is always taking the deeper value and adding it onto itself.  As opposed to taking one number from the same exact location or two locations all season, regardless of wind direction, nuances, etc and adding that up.

11 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

Maybe because winter blew salty balls, but I’ve been enjoying April. We’ve had some nice days and it provides a path to completely forget the past winter.

It’s really nice out.

24F to 57F already before 11am.

2 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

We should also also qualify the contest.  Ha!

I mean this is the 'solar forcing' contest.   Yeah, I've witnessed more.  I actually saw a 54 F spread in January 1994.  It was a +9 F at dawn; 63 F that evening at 9pm with southerly whole gales leanin' tree tops and plumes of steam rollin' off of snow banks. 

Different beast.  

These spring diurnal wars between Earth and sun are interesting for a excruciating dweeb like myself; the Earth's will to keep it miserably cold at this time of year, gets its ass thoroughly tanned  by a boarding school nun sun. 

Those days where it’s -20F in the mountain valleys up here in the morning and raining at 34F by dinner, lol.  Those are the memorable ones.

lol, radiators mount up I guess.

24F at the neighbor’s station here near the river and country club, but 36F up the hill.

Valley bottom a good 10F colder than even a couple hundred feet up.

Looking back on yesterday's closing day, this was my social post about the awesome day the local crew had.

This large assembled crew is the heartbeat of the Mansfield ski/ride community... 

"Through all the powder days, rain storms, hurricane force wind gusts, sunny days, soft snow days, frozen granular days and everything else, today might have been one of the most memorable of the season (well, aside from that cosmic event).

The end of the season is always bittersweet. On one hand, for myself and mountain colleagues, it’s liberating to take a break after 156 days of operations. On the other hand I always know I’ll miss the Stowe Family, the stoke and the Mansfield ski & ride culture over the summer.

Despite greybird skies and chilly weather, the Stowe Family showed up in force today to celebrate another season of sliding on snow. That culminated with the grassroots 4th Annual Human Slalom. This was incredible and is getting penciled into Stowe closing day lore and tradition already.

There are too many people to tag in these photos but hats off to Matt Testa aka Matty Mansfield for leading this grassroots charge and organizing the massive human slalom down Nosedive, after everyone grabbed some gnar points with some pole whacks on the Nosedive turns.

Between the organic gatherings like the largest human slalom, the Quad top dance party, and the last chair gathering on the Octagon deck to celebrate the season, the vibes were high out there.

Today proved the ski & ride culture is strong on Mount Mansfield and every single one of us plays a role in that. I feel lucky to be a part of it and to document it throughout the winter season. Thanks to all who contribute to the vibe, this community is awesome. My heart and soul are full today."

1 hour ago, Damage In Tolland said:

80+ next week ? Yup , models showing it 

Would be nice, a week out.

50 minutes ago, Lava Rock said:

53/16. She dry out there

The 1pm ob at MVL was 40/9.

Up to 45F now but I’m going to say in the sun it does feel warmer than that.  Hoodie while active is plenty warm enough right now.

This in November would feel frigid.  Weird how the body changes throughout the year.

13 minutes ago, powderfreak said:

We were in a rut of like 220-240” seasons but 289” is more to what I believe average is, if not ever so slightly above.

Further supporting the case for average snowfall is the snow depths on hill at elevation were about as normal as it gets in the means.

One thing that stands out that skiers noticed this year is the thaws.  After each big snow and snowpack gain, it was almost immediately knocked back by a rain event.

Even with 100” after March 1st, we had two big gains and the first one was wiped out almost immediately by rain and warmth.  Without that, the snowpack would’ve gotten over 100” easily between the mid-March cycle and early April storms.

March’s 70” and April’s 31” saved the season.  March saw that 50” snowpack gain from 40” to 90”, which was super impressive and saved the season.

15 hours ago, mreaves said:

Mixing the conversation from the ski thread, 289” would be a new seasonal record at Whiteface. 

Yeah, didn’t they say their record was 2016-17 winter?  Thats also our largest since at least 2007-08…. We measured 375” in 2016-17 at the High Road plot.

I’ll try to post the last 10 years later but this winter was solidly above at least the last 3-4 seasons.  We were in a rut of like 220-240” seasons but 289” is more to what I believe average is, if not ever so slightly above.

My gut says over time High Road comes in around 275-280” average with a range of like 220”-350” as the most likely “bin.”  Could get a 2015-16 winter of 156” or a 2000-01 of like 430” on the extremes.

16 hours ago, mreaves said:

That makes sense. Driving by, it looked, to my untrained eye, pretty gnarly. It isn’t easy to get to though. I’d image being owned by the state also means it’s doesn’t always have the most up to date equipment or technology either. 

I think they have a pretty slick operation and the state has poured a bunch of money into it.   They had a decent expansion I think in the last decade or that might have been Gore?

Overall I think it’s just its location relative to population centers and while gnarly and good steep terrain, it’s just not enough to get folks to bypass all the other ski areas to get to Whiteface.

4 hours ago, Damage In Tolland said:

Does CAA and wind freeze things? 

Was this a real question if temps are 32F or lower?

Stowe closed today. For those interested, here is the measured snowfall at 3,000ft.  The 4,000 foot elevations certainly had over 300 inches but we measure at a more useful elevation instead of the absolute maximum.

Every inch of this was measured/observed and not estimated. This is what actually fell in a consistent and controlled environment on Mount Mansfield at the upper mid-slope elevation.

November - 35 inches

December - 34 inches

January - 77 inches

February - 42 inches

March - 70 inches

April - 31 inches

Season Total - 289 inches