Squaw Valley USA, CA 5/29/2011 - more pictures added

tseeb

Well-known member
Squaw claimed 6 inches new at 6200 feet and a foot at 8200 which thankfully had all scheduled lifts running. I got in moderate line at KT-22 about 8:50 and the chair started loading 5 minutes later. I came down in the steeps just past the Saddle and crossed the run then came down untracked between the two Saddle alternate ends. The new snow was at least 8 inches deep. At the very top you could find the firm layer underneath, but lower down it was less wind affected and deeper. I got on uncrowded Headwall and found room for about 40 untracked turns down the middle of Sun Bowl which skied better than I have seen it all year. The exit was low and I found more untracked in the steeps skiers right of Cornice II. I also found powder turns in Spring Bowl my first couple of Headwall runs that most people were overlooking. The next time up Headwall was more crowded. I skied the Slot which was rocky on the road to the entrance and had already been skied out up high. I found room for many untracked turns on lower angle Cornice II run. 3rd and 4th time up Headwall crowds were growing, but not too bad as long as you stayed out of singles line. I was going to ski the Nose, but I saw two guys with two children ski past the closed sign and drop into North Bowl. I also went past the closed sign, but stayed along the Nose before dropping into untracked on the edge of North Bowl closest to the Nose. Since the lower steeps were getting tracked out and I was trying to let my friends catch up, I twice hiked to the top of the knoll overlooking Spring Bowl and got 10-12 totally untracked turns before hitting tracks from traversers. Since the closed sign on North Bowl were removed, I next skied that twice. The first time patrol had just taken down the signs and I got an untracked very steep line on far skiers left of North Bowl. My fifth time up the lift, the line was 7-8 minutes and growing so I moved to less steep Gold Coast where I found low angle powder. I crossed my first groomed run on my 7th run of the day. Next time up, I noticed hikers going up a cat track to the top of Emigrant. I did the 15 minute uphill bootpack and was rewarded with nearly untracked on one of the Granite Chief runs.

Shirley Lake also had 7-8 minute lines, with single line looking worse. I went out towards Solitude and found it more tracked out than I expected. I caught up with my friends from Nevada City and we went out that way twice more and found a little more untracked by going as low as possible before returning to Shirley Lake lift. My wife had a hard time getting up the mountain and finally, probably about noon, called to say she was on least-crowded Gold Coast lift so I made plans to join her. We had left the car together about 8:45 and looked into Tram as she needed to exchange voucher for ticket. The ticket line was not that short so we went to main ticket windows, where only one was open and line was worse. I thought she should return to Tram, but she stayed where she was while I headed to KT-22 since I had pass. She had a long slow line to get her ticket. The tram line had grown out of the building so she came up KT. She returned to KT base after passing very crowded Headwall and found KT line had become ridiculous. The tram was worse with lines wrapping around both the north and south sides of the building. So she took a long break waiting for lines to become somewhat reasonable. I don’t understand why Squaw did not run much higher capacity Funitel or add another lift such as Red Dog or Siberia to better handle the crowds. The only lifts running were KT and Headwall (both 1,800+ vertical hi-speed expert lifts), Gold Coast and Shirley Lake (hi-speed 6-packs, mostly intermediate) and Tram plus Links and Baileys Beach (beginner lifts that also get you between Shirley and Tram).

While my wife and I went up Gold Coast, my friends called to report line was gone at Headwall. My wife and I skied to there, went up and had excellent packed powder on Headwall Ridge Run and Cornice II before skiing to the bottom. Snow was good all the way down, although it did get wetter from above Headwall base to the bottom. I carried my wife’s skis to the car as she was not feeling very well and we had some leftover pizza and split a beer which made her feel better. It was snowing lightly at Squaw’s base so my wife took her book to one of the covered couches in the village while I skied three more runs; one KT and two Headwalls before quitting shortly before 3 pm. It was snowing moderately at the top of Headwall for my last run, which worried me since we had to go over Donner Pass and did not have 4WD or chains, but it was much warmer at the base and we did not have any problems getting home. My watch counted 17 runs and over 23K vertical with more than half untracked or very lightly tracked powder. Pictures will have to wait until I have more time and energy as I'm tired after driving 825 miles over the last four days.
 
Squaw skied really well this morning. There was a general stoke in the air, and to be getting face shots on May 29 was a memorable experience.
 
Finally adding some pictures. I will add better ones when I have more time.

I did not take the picture of the daffodil with snow or the Headwall line. They were both copied from tweets from unofficial Squaw.
 

Attachments

  • 7812ShirleyLine1137X.JPG
    7812ShirleyLine1137X.JPG
    196.5 KB · Views: 3,949
  • Headwall_5_29.jpg
    Headwall_5_29.jpg
    57.3 KB · Views: 3,941
  • 7788KTBoarderCloseX.JPG
    7788KTBoarderCloseX.JPG
    89.7 KB · Views: 3,959
  • 7785KT_SinglesLine852X.JPG
    7785KT_SinglesLine852X.JPG
    191.3 KB · Views: 3,940
  • 7786KTLine852X.JPG
    7786KTLine852X.JPG
    191.8 KB · Views: 3,944
  • SnowDaffodil.jpg
    SnowDaffodil.jpg
    45.6 KB · Views: 3,937
I posted mostly ugly line pictures last night. Following are some of the better pictures of the day. No action shots of me and wife or friends as it was mostly skied out before they caught up. It was not a day to wait and get stuck behind the crowds.
 

Attachments

  • 7821HeadwallAt245X.JPG
    7821HeadwallAt245X.JPG
    90.9 KB · Views: 3,942
  • 7820TheSlotX.JPG
    7820TheSlotX.JPG
    94.3 KB · Views: 3,938
  • 7815EmigrantFromShirleyX.JPG
    7815EmigrantFromShirleyX.JPG
    188.1 KB · Views: 3,949
  • 7811TopOfHike_FromGoldCoastChairX.JPG
    7811TopOfHike_FromGoldCoastChairX.JPG
    159.6 KB · Views: 3,933
  • 7808NorthBowlX.JPG
    7808NorthBowlX.JPG
    162.9 KB · Views: 3,929
  • 7807MyTracksX.JPG
    7807MyTracksX.JPG
    117.8 KB · Views: 3,929
  • 7805SkiersRightOfCorniceIIx.JPG
    7805SkiersRightOfCorniceIIx.JPG
    132.4 KB · Views: 3,923
  • 7802MyTracksAreTheBestX.JPG
    7802MyTracksAreTheBestX.JPG
    195.2 KB · Views: 3,928
  • 7801HeaderBoarderX.JPG
    7801HeaderBoarderX.JPG
    87 KB · Views: 3,917
  • 7798CorniceIIBoardersX.JPG
    7798CorniceIIBoardersX.JPG
    109.5 KB · Views: 3,927
  • 7797HeadwallSkierX.JPG
    7797HeadwallSkierX.JPG
    99.2 KB · Views: 3,927
  • 7791LadysDownhillX.JPG
    7791LadysDownhillX.JPG
    161.1 KB · Views: 3,931
While this might fit better in the Snowbird thread from 5/30, I'm posting it here as it's about Squaw. I complained earlier this season about Squaw's lower mountain crowding from not opening the top during and after storms and received a reply from Andy Wirth, President and CEO. I did not respond until late last week when I saw incorrect information on firsttracks and other sites saying Squaw was going to charge bronze passholders $25 to ski Memorial Day weekend and asked him and others at Squaw about it. Their web marketing person immediately e-mailed me and corrected the misinformation, and I got an out of the office from Andy.

Andy e-mailed me on Tuesday and wanted to talk so I sent him my home number and pictures of lines on KT from March and liftlines from three chairs on 5/29. He called me late this afternoon and we talked for more than 20 minutes. He said Squaw had to deal with unprecedented storms this winter and thinks they could have done better, especially on communication. He said he was out there loading chairs during some of the busy days and not out of touch as I accused him of being. He also said they had far bigger (5X) crowds Memorial Day weekend than predicted with 7X expected crowd on Sunday. I asked him if they are buying Alpine and he said no. I was impressed that he took the time to call and talk to me.
 
Useful info from tseeb, as Squaw had some of the same crowding issues as Snowbird. I have had occasional e-mail correspondence with Rusty Gregory at Mammoth as tseeb has had with Andy Wirth. Mammoth uses lodging bookings to project estimated demand/crowds. They assume skier visits from second homeowners, season passholders etc. will also rise/decline with the lodging bookings they can track. Thus Mammoth had a few weeks' notice that Memorial Day weekend was going to be big and shuffled their permanent staff to respond to it.

Snowbird's spring skiers are nearly all daytrippers so no such well-in-advance warning system exists there. We all know what drives Snowbird overcrowding: fresh powder. This can be predicted just a couple of days in advance, so Snowbird's ability to plan for crowds is more difficult than Mammoth's. I don't think impossible, when only one more lift would be such a big help. I also recall Gadzoom + tram running when I skied Snowbird 5/15/2005, not a powder day by the way. So 2 lifts rather than one out of Snowbird's base on May weekends with good conditions does not strike me as unreasonable.

In terms of planning, Squaw falls between Mammoth and Snowbird in the mix of overnight visitors and daytrippers. I read from tseeb's report Squaw being much closer to Snowbird's situation though, the new snow being by far the big reason for Squaw's crowds. I'll be interested to see Mammoth's daily numbers from snowboard247 vs. last year, maybe lower overall since Saturday this year had very nasty weather. Monday will undoubtedly be up, but some people go home early and don't ski regardless of conditions.
 
Tony Crocker":1ky345qh said:
Snowbird's spring skiers are nearly all daytrippers so no such well-in-advance warning system exists there. We all know what drives Snowbird overcrowding: fresh powder. This can be predicted just a couple of days in advance, so Snowbird's ability to plan for crowds is more difficult than Mammoth's. I don't think impossible, when only one more lift would be such a big help. I also recall Gadzoom + tram running when I skied Snowbird 5/15/2005, not a powder day by the way. So 2 lifts rather than one out of Snowbird's base on May weekends with good conditions does not strike me as unreasonable.

<yawn> Nobody cares.

Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
 
Admin":niahtack said:
Tony Crocker":niahtack said:
Snowbird's spring skiers are nearly all daytrippers so no such well-in-advance warning system exists there. We all know what drives Snowbird overcrowding: fresh powder. This can be predicted just a couple of days in advance, so Snowbird's ability to plan for crowds is more difficult than Mammoth's. I don't think impossible, when only one more lift would be such a big help. I also recall Gadzoom + tram running when I skied Snowbird 5/15/2005, not a powder day by the way. So 2 lifts rather than one out of Snowbird's base on May weekends with good conditions does not strike me as unreasonable.

<yawn> Nobody cares.
Right - as opposed to every single one of your posts, where people are lining up to create RSS feeds so they don't miss a word.

Was that really necessary?
 
Mike Bernstein":3g0x0r2y said:
Admin":3g0x0r2y said:
<yawn> Nobody cares.
Right - as opposed to every single one of your posts, where people are lining up to create RSS feeds so they don't miss a word.

Was that really necessary?

Unfortunately, yes.
 
Admin":23d9x84o said:
Mike Bernstein":23d9x84o said:
Admin":23d9x84o said:
<yawn> Nobody cares.
Right - as opposed to every single one of your posts, where people are lining up to create RSS feeds so they don't miss a word.

Was that really necessary?

Unfortunately, yes.
Trolling on your own forum, classy.

And you wonder why there's so few active users...
 
Skiace":3l91ej9q said:
Trolling on your own forum, classy.

Never said I had any class.

in [url=http://www.firsttracksonline.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=9689&start=15#p61394 said:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=9689&start=15#p61394[/url] Marc_C already previously":3l91ej9q]Oh Jebus. Look, we don't run the ski area nor do we have to defend it. If you're that freakin cranked out about it from 500 miles away, take the issue up with Snowbird management. Chances are, there are a lot of factors that affect the decision, of which you have zero knowledge.

Yet your father continues unabated.

Skiace":3l91ej9q said:
And you wonder why there's so few active users...

By that logic TGR must be nothing but crickets chirping. :lol:
 
Admin":at6usr6c said:
Skiace":at6usr6c said:
Trolling on your own forum, classy.

Never said I had any class.
I suppose that's correct, but I think it's in the best interest of your site if you did. More on this below.

Admin":at6usr6c said:
in [url=http://www.firsttracksonline.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=9689&start=15#p61394 said:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=9689&start=15#p61394[/url] Marc_C already previously":at6usr6c]Oh Jebus. Look, we don't run the ski area nor do we have to defend it. If you're that freakin cranked out about it from 500 miles away, take the issue up with Snowbird management. Chances are, there are a lot of factors that affect the decision, of which you have zero knowledge.

Yet your father continues unabated.
I don't see how Marc_C's comments there were supposed to summarily end the discussion. The discussion was prompted by a perceived difference in late-spring lift op management between Snowbird and Mammoth. Tony's post in this thread was pretty high-content. He highlighted similarities in his experience and correspondence with Mammoth management and tseeb's with Squaw's. He made some educated guesses as to how different factors (weather, customer demographics) may be responsible for the observed differences between Snowbird/Mammoth/Squaw. What is wrong with this? I think it's interesting, and I'd like to hear from others on the topic (perhaps Snowbird locals who have also had correspondence with their local management?).

His only judgement this whole time has been "Snowbird management appears to be less responsive to the desires of their client-el than Mammoth's," which he found possible explanation for in this thread. Meanwhile, you've responded with low-content posts about how much he couldn't possibly understand the decisions of Snowbird management, or how "no one cares," while offering no explanation of your own. Hell, you wouldn't even acknowledge that the Snowbird powder day in question would have been improved had Gadzoom been running.

Admin":at6usr6c said:
Skiace":at6usr6c said:
And you wonder why there's so few active users...

By that logic TGR must be nothing but crickets chirping. :lol:
TGR makes no claim to civil discourse or moderation. It is unabashed internet anarchy, take it or leave it. This appeals to (or is tolerated by) enough people to keep it going.

FTO on the other hand at least pays lip-service to structured conversation, with administrators/moderators, and a stated goal of encouraging informative TR's. You severly undermine that effort when you yourself engage in ad-hominem's and shit-posting, particularly when it's directed at one of your own moderators. Your posting style outside of TR's is almost always adversarial (as opposed to thought provoking or informative) and in my experience that is not a way to run a forum. It serves to alienate people who disagree with you and rally the rest to a similar posting style.

Obviously, you can do whatever you want, it's your forum. But if you ever want it to grow to be much more than an echo chamber of you and your friends cracking wise at a few other regulars, I suggest you consider a change in attitude.
 
Skiace":1fqb9z4d said:
I don't see how Marc_C's comments there were supposed to summarily end the discussion.

I didn't say that they were supposed to have that effect. If we could hear something a little different I'd love to continue the discussion. Frankly, though, some of us are tired of the same ol' song and dance. You need to recall that this matter been debated with Tony ad nauseum in multiple topics, along with other unsupported assumptions he has purported to be fact, yet he persists in continuing to maintain an untenable position even when presented with direct observation that contradicts his assumptions. Honestly I got tired of it and I'm not alone, hence both my yawn and Mr. C's comments quoted above.

Skiace":1fqb9z4d said:
He made some educated guesses as to how different factors (weather, customer demographics) may be responsible for the observed differences between Snowbird/Mammoth/Squaw. What is wrong with this?

Because they weren't educated at all, and when pointed out that there were other factors that he failed to take into account he persisted with his uninformed position regardless.

Skiace":1fqb9z4d said:
I think it's interesting, and I'd like to hear from others on the topic (perhaps Snowbird locals who have also had correspondence with their local management?).

On the latter I agree whole-heartedly.

Skiace":1fqb9z4d said:
His only judgement this whole time has been "Snowbird management appears to be less responsive to the desires of their client-el than Mammoth's,"

Untrue. He made judgments about:
1) Snow stability simply by comparing it to a deeper storm a month earlier and considering no other factors whatsoever, which Marc_C accurately called "shockingly clueless about avalanches and snowpack stability.";
2) Our rationale for hiking the Cirque, which he presumed to be about liftlines but in reality had nothing to do with liftlines;
3) The reason for Snowbird's delayed opening, opining that it was solely due to staffing even though staffing likely had little to nothing to do with it;
4) The rationale for not running an additional lift when what Snowbird's customers perceive as the reasons for those decisions have been pointed out to him on several occasions for the past month-plus.

Recall as well that all of the above was accomplished from 500 miles away without any direct observation on his part and without considering factors that were provided to him by those who did have direct observation. That's just plain silly.

Skiace":1fqb9z4d said:
Hell, you wouldn't even acknowledge that the Snowbird powder day in question would have been improved had Gadzoom been running.

Of course it would have! I would've gladly had Mid-Gad, Gad II, Baldy Express and Baby Thunder running, too! But those wishes don't make that either practical or possible. Running a ski resort is a business, not a charity for the powder afflicted, and the place was a freakin' ghost town Friday, Saturday and Sunday with well under 500 skiers on Saturday and Sunday and maybe a couple of hundred at most on Friday. Most of those are on season passes, so where's the justification (or the anticipation) to run an additional lift for Monday? We had fresh snow for bottomless turns on Saturday and Sunday both but that failed to bring out the skier traffic on either day. Were I running the place I wouldn't have scrambled on Sunday night to assemble an additional lift crew either.

Understand, too, that when I post here I'm not doing so as an administrator, but as a forum user just like any other. I'm human, therefore I have opinions. Voicing those opinions is not a negative, even when that opinion is being sick as hell of hearing the same old crap. If you're proposing that I stifle those opinions simply because I have a financial interest in this business, that won't happen. Likewise, Tony's moderator privileges here don't make him immune from being called out when he has an unsupportable position. And if you find my yawn of boredom to be that offensive you're more than a bit too sensitive to opinions that disagree with your own. Debate is a tool for learning, for broadening your horizons and for understanding opinions different from yours. It's not a bad thing. An essential component of debate for the purpose of learning, however, is to be capable of acknowledging when someone with a different opinion points out a fact that forces you to rethink your own position. That just hasn't happened in this case despite multiple attempts.

In that vein, though, I'll concede that in retrospect I think that Mike Bernstein's comments above were correct. My comments weren't necessary. Instead of rehashing for the umpteenth time why the Tram wasn't running, why Gadzoom couldn't run, etc. I just threw out a stupid comment. I should've just shut my mouth instead. See "human" comments above for my explanation of what came over me.
 
Wow! This is the most action I've gotten in a post I've started for a long time or maybe ever.

I should have asked Andy Wirth why Squaw did not have a contingency plan to better handle the crowds on 5/29.

There is a plea for Tahoe ski areas to be open this month.
http://www.mrablog.com/run-the-lifts-a- ... ary-jeong/
I found it from TGR
http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/show ... Executives
where they had this great picture of Squaw base from June 2 and a good example of differences in friendliness between websites.
 

Attachments

  • Squaw-Valley-USA-June-2-20111.jpg
    Squaw-Valley-USA-June-2-20111.jpg
    158.2 KB · Views: 3,770
It is interesting that no less than 4 areas (Sugar Bowl, Alpine, Squaw and Kirkwood) will be open for at least part of July 4 weekend, and none between now and then. As suggested in the MRA blog, why not have a cooperative arrangement to share expenses and open one area each weekend?
 
Tony Crocker":2sc3bogx said:
I'll be interested to see Mammoth's daily numbers from snowboard247 vs. last year

Ask and you shall recieve.

Friday May 27th 2011 Actual Skiers - 1705 Expected - 1703 Last yr Actual - 1665
Saturday May 28th 2011 Actual Skiers - 4655 Expected - 5827 Last yr Actual - 5764
Sunday May 29th 2011 Actual Skiers - 6634 Expected - 5956 Last yr Actual - 5938
Monday May 30th 2011 Actual Skiers - 4600 Expected - 3024 Last yr Actual - 2973

Actual - 17594 vs. Expected - 16510 vs Last yr Actual - 16340
 
Back
Top