Dashboard Regions Weather Stations Radar Alerts Glossary
Contact About
Log In

Register for an account and never miss a forecast again!

Register

Avalanche Forecast

Archived

Feb 21st, 2019–Feb 22nd, 2019

Alpine
Natural avalanches possible, human triggered probable.
Treeline
Natural avalanches possible, human triggered probable.
Below Treeline
Natural avalanches unlikely, human triggered possible.
Alpine
Natural avalanches possible, human triggered probable.
Treeline
Natural avalanches unlikely, human triggered possible.
Below Treeline
Natural avalanches unlikely, human triggered possible.

Regions

Snoqualmie Pass.

Increasing winds on Friday and a bit of new snow will form new wind slabs. You may encounter the largest and easiest to trigger slabs later in the day and at higher elevations. Even though your eyes may be drawn to the new wind slabs, don’t let the older and much larger deep persistent slab slip your mind. As more avalanche problems stack-up in the terrain, you can stay safe by avoiding open slopes greater than 35 degrees.

Discussion

Snow and Avalanche Discussion

There is a high degree of uncertainty with the Snoqualmie Pass forecast for Friday. A Puget Sound convergence zone may is expected to set-up somewhere near Snoqualmie Pass late in the day. If you find yourself under this heavy precipitation hose, you may experience locally more dangerous avalanche conditions.

It’s been a quiet few days around Snoqualmie Pass. The break in the weather has limited the avalanche activity to a few small isolated wind pillows and loose avalanches. The last major avalanches occurred last Sunday when a snowboarder was partially buried on Roaring Ridge and Alpental Patrol triggered several large avalanches during mitigation efforts. Don’t confuse this lack of activity with a safe snowpack. Snow profiles and snowpack test continue to highlight buried weak snow layers.

Even though the regional differences in the persistent/deep persistent slab, there enough similarities to make avalanche observations pertinent. On Wednesday, three skiers exited Crystal Mt ski resort traveling west towards Hwy 410. The first skier on the slope triggered a very large avalanche but was able to ski out before getting caught. Crystal Mt Ski Patrol visited the site on Thursday. The avalanche was 3 ft deep, 200 ft wide, and classified as a SS-ASu-D3-R2.5-O. 6300 ft. WSW aspect. Slope angle 36 degrees. The involved party descended to Hwy 410 without incident. Also on Wednesday, Crystal Mt Ski Patrol triggered a very large persistent slab as part of avalanche mitigation measures. This avalanche occurred on a SE aspect at 6300’.

Looking down on the crown of a skier triggered avalanche near Crystal Mt. Photo: Crystal Mt Ski Patrol

 

 

 

Snowpack Discussion

February 19th, 2019

Recap

We’re now over a week out from a major winter storm and avalanche cycle that left a string of school cancellations and avalanche near misses in its wake. As with snowfall amounts, the avalanche cycles have been similar, but not identical in all regions. The further we’re getting from the peak of the cycle, the more variation in avalanche conditions we’re seeing between regions and even within individual zones. Variable snow totals from storms this week are further adding to the range of conditions you will encounter. In some places, these storms may add stress to existing weak layers.

In the days after the natural cycle, it was obvious that you could trigger an avalanche. Large crowns were visible and you could feel and hear collapses in many zones. Managing your risk was easy. Avoid avalanche terrain. Since the natural avalanche cycle quieted down, the main concern for avalanches has focussed on the February 8th facets in regions where the weak layer is problematic.

A natural persistent slab (D2) on a north aspect at 4200 ft low in Glacier Creek drainage (Hwy 542). 02/13/19 Lee Lazzara Photo

Variability and Mixed Messages

As the time moves on and the snowpack structure changes, we’re seeing the potential for triggering avalanches change as well. The February 8th layer is rounding (strengthening) and the likelihood of triggering an avalanche on it is decreasing. So much so that the problem is trending to unlikely in some regions. Unfortunately, the consequences (size and destructive potential) remain the same if you do trigger an avalanche on this layer.

These conditions are commonly described as "low probability - high consequence" scenarios. Under these circumstances, common clues may paint a conflicting picture and snowpack tests become even more difficult to interpret (snowpack tests often don’t give us a clear “go or no-go” answer, if such a thing exists).

Q: How do we manage our risk when observations are contradictory and difficult to interpret?

A: When avalanche conditions are complicated, defer to less consequential and simpler. Prioritize obvious clues, like recent avalanches, shooting cracks, or collapses. Focus on other observations that indicate a potential to trigger avalanches. Snowpack tests are just one piece of the decision-making puzzle. Lean on them as reasons to reduce your groups' exposure to avalanche terrain. Don’t use them to justify traveling in more consequential terrain.

A natural persistent slab avalanche (D2), likely occurred on 2/12 on southwest through southeast aspects of Windy Mountain at 5,400ft in the Tye River drainage. Photo: Dan Veenhuizen.

Case Study

On the 17th I dug a profile, east of Stevens Pass on a north-northeast aspect at 4,127ft. I found the February 8th facets (0.5-1.5mm) rounding and buried 59cm from the surface. After much investigation, I found the following results at the February 8th interface: CTH (SP), ECTN28, PST 45/100 (END), 5 yellow flags (structural indicators). Later that day, about 2000 linear feet away from the profile site at the same elevation and slightly different aspect, we experienced a massive rumbling collapse.

All this crypto snow-speak means that some of the observations I made indicated that triggering an avalanche was likely, but some did not. Depending on your interpretation, some results could be argued either way. Confusing, right?

With all of this data in my field book, it was the collapse that stuck out. It was enough evidence for me to avoid slopes steeper than 35 degrees. That was a more obvious answer than all the other data I gathered and it’s the easiest to interpret. Without the collapse, I would have prioritized the test results that indicated I could have triggered a slide.

Problems

Wind Slabs

Wind Slab avalanches are the release of a cohesive layer of snow (a slab) formed by the wind. Wind typically transports snow from the upwind sides of terrain features and deposits snow on the downwind side. Wind slabs are often smooth and rounded and sometimes sound hollow, and can range from soft to hard. Wind slabs that form over a persistent weak layer (surface hoar, depth hoar, or near-surface facets) may be termed Persistent Slabs or may develop into Persistent Slabs.

Deep Persistent Slabs

Deep Persistent Slab avalanches are the release of a thick cohesive layer of hard snow (a slab), when the bond breaks between the slab and an underlying persistent weak layer deep in the snowpack. The most common persistent weak layers involved in deep, persistent slabs are depth hoar or facets surrounding a deeply buried crust. Deep Persistent Slabs are typically hard to trigger, are very destructive and dangerous due to the large mass of snow involved, and can persist for months once developed. They are often triggered from areas where the snow is shallow and weak, and are particularly difficult to forecast for and manage.