or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Top 15 Snowfall Totals for 2013/14
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Top 15 Snowfall Totals for 2013/14 - Page 3

post #61 of 68
Back when I skied Mammoth they reported a range of snow depths based on low and high elevations. Do they not do that anymore?
post #62 of 68
Quote:
^^ Alpine Meadows reports the snow only 200 feet above the base?  Really?

That is where the patrol plot is located.  Since Squaw took over they report a high and low number on the website in-season.  It's a similar situation to Snowbird where the patrol site is very low on the mountain but in-season marketing naturally wants to report something better. 

 

I an the only one who makes the effort to call at the end of the season and get month by month info, usually from a patrol site.  Most of the lists you see, like the one in this thread, are just taken off the area websites at the end of the season.  Often they are the same numbers I get later, but as I posted before, some are not.

 

Mammoth base depths are generally reported as an upper and lower range.  I take the average.  I'm less concerned with precision for base depths than snowfall.  There are so many extraneous variables that affect base depths.

post #63 of 68

A little late, but here are the ACTUAL 15 leaders for 2013-2014 ski resort snowfall totals...
These are taken from each resort's snow report, on respective closing days.

1. Mt. Baker, WA - 1582 cm
2. Timberline Lodge, OR - 1379 cm
3. Mt Cain, BC - 1280 cm
4. Jackson Hole, WY - 1270 cm
5. Powder King, BC - 1243 cm
6. Grand Targhee, WY - 1219 cm
7. Loveland, CO - 1204 cm
7. Alyeska, AK - 1204 cm
9. White Pass, WA - 1181 cm
9. Mt. Bachelor, OR - 1181 cm
11. Stevens Pass, WA - 1176 cm
12. Big Sky, MT - 1168 cm
13. Breckenridge, CO - 1115 cm
14. Cottonwood Canyon - 1097 cm (1097 @ Alta & Snowbird, 1054 @ Brighton)
15. Kirkwood, CA
 - 1039 cm

I keep track of snowfall at 172 North American Resorts every year. If anyone is interested in other totals or stats, just email me.

post #64 of 68
I question whether it is "actual" unless it's from the local Snotel. It's what the resort claims they got if it's from their websites.
post #65 of 68

Valid point, sibhusky. Maybe "actual" isn't the best word of choice. What I meant was that I am very confident this list is not missing certain resorts as the original one was (and if I am, please inform me). 
Many ski hills do not have Snotel sites within their terrain, or even nearby (and none whatsoever in Canada). If you are making a list of leaders based on Snotel data, you are missing out data on many ski hills, nullifying the results.
The vast majority (nearly all) ski hills however do record snowfall totals. There will always be the chance of dishonest reporting, and if a certain total seems suspect, it can be correlated to aspects such as regional conditions, precip/temp records, first hand experience, pillow data, etc. This is still the most accepted method of reporting, and I made sure to mention that as my source in the post.
As mentioned, these are the exact amounts reported by the ski hills on closing day.

post #66 of 68
The problem is, some of these places report the whole year, 365 days, some report start to end of season, some report October to close, etc. So, it's not really comparable. Tony, at least, tries to normalize all that.
post #67 of 68

I agree with that completely. I don't think there is a single 100% correct method to come up with a list of totals, and like most data, can be manipulated to obtain certain results. I'm not trying to compete with Tony, who is definitely more knowledgeable on the subject than myself. All I'm saying is that to the best of my knowledge/ability, that is an accurate list of totals based on the resort snow reports. I stand by that assertion, and these numbers. These numbers represent snowfall recorded from the first day of recording (which does vary) until closing day (even though some continue to record afterwards, as this snow is not relevant).

post #68 of 68
Quote:
These numbers represent snowfall recorded from the first day of recording (which does vary) until closing day (even though some continue to record afterwards, as this snow is not relevant).

Of course it's relevant if you're trying to compare one area to another.  If the time periods of measurement are not the same, it's not a valid comparison.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Top 15 Snowfall Totals for 2013/14