Here’s a topic that has fueled no shortage of virtual and
real-life discussions.
This conversation might be better framed as, “Is the
Internet ruining the backcountry?”
My spin on this is going to be biased (this is after all, an
Internet blog where the content is regularly dedicated to the pursuit of
backcountry skiing adventures), and is specific to Alaska, since that’s really
all I can speak to.
Obviously, this is a very subjective debate, so I would say
the first thing that needs to be addressed is the definition of “ruined.”
 |
| The Jewel Glacier in Crow Pass has a reputation for getting skied hard in October and early-November. |
Lots of things can ruin backcountry skiing: wind, rain, no
snow, warmth, other users, other user groups, limited access, a hard night of
partying – just to name a few.
In the context of this conversation, ruined refers to the more
controllable human factor, it refers to the number of people skiing an aspect,
an area, a zone, or in general: “the quickness that said geographic feature or
region gets ‘tracked out’” – another subjective concept.
It also extends to the feeling of whether the backcountry truly
is the backcountry, or just an extension of a public park or ski resort.
If we define ruined under any of these contexts, than I
would say that, in short,
yes, the Internet is ruining the backcountry.
Hurrah! Down with the blog, the Facebook, the Instagram
(let’s get rid of Twitter, cellphones, fiber optic cable, satellites, and ah
hell, fire too [damn smoke signals have been giving away the goods for
millennia!])
In long: the Internet is ruining the backcountry, only in
the way that individually, rain, wind, or warmth ruins skiing after a mid-winter
rainy, windy, and warm storm.
If you slept through English, this is called a “metaphor,”
and the Internet is like one piece of that crappy storm.
The storm, as it is, is mammoth: it’s the explosive growth
in the popularity of backcountry skiing, both in Alaska and the Lower 48.
Also to blame in this storm are:
The ski manufacture industry.
The ski clothing manufacture industry.
Ski-related publications and video productions that have
glamorized the backcountry.
This storm has been complex, and not unlike a powerful
extra-tropical system unleashed upon an Alaska mountain range, its impacts
could appear both positive or negative, depending upon the lenses from which
they’re viewed.
A lot of good has come from this storm.
Arguably, while the backcountry may feel more like the front
country on some days, help is far closer than it has ever been before in the
event of an accident; I think that knowledge on avalanche safety among backcountry
skiers is greatly improved; snowpack monitoring is way up; access rights are
potentially better protected by a greater number of users; and while gear is
still spendy, the economy of the industry is theoretically healthy and strong,
promoting growth of ever more safe and capable equipment.
The negatives can be highlighted by no shortage of Internet
ranters and angry skiers in a crowded pullout on a sunny February morning.
In my opinion, if any one single element is to blame above
all the others for the growth in the popularity of backcountry skiing, it’s
last component: gear.
It’s lightweight, efficient gear that lets skiers and riders
from a much wider spectrum of skill levels get out of the lift line and onto
the skin track.
 |
| A line of skiers makes their way up Sunburst in December. |
There was a time when backcountry skiing meant more work,
more exposure to the elements, more suffering, and all of it was done on gear
that paled in comparison to what we use today, both on the way up and the way
down.
It’s not to say that backcountry skiing has become a total
walk in the park, we are after all still hiking up the damn hills to get the
goods instead of riding a chairlift, but when I ski with some of my wiser
friends who were doing this over three decades ago, well, I bet it’s been a
while since anyone has scraped pine tar off their bases at the top of a run in
Turnagain.
So, as such, in those days, they often skied what are now
popular locales completely alone.
That perhaps explains one component of the so-called storm,
but how about the Internet factor?
I’ll back up for a second, as some background on my
point-of-view seems relevant.
I started “backcountry” skiing with my friends when I was maybe
13.
We didn’t call it backcountry because we didn’t know there
was such a thing. We were just tired of skiing the same dozen runs at the local
ski hill, getting chased out of the closed areas by ski patrol, and didn’t have
cars or driver’s licenses to go to the bigger hills. We did the only thing
practical: hiked up into the Green Mountain National Forest in our backyard and
made our own runs.
I learned later on that people actually did this as a sport,
and even made a point of not riding lifts.
The Northeast has a few well-known backcountry locales, the
comparative Tin Cans, but in central Vermont where I grew up, if you knew of a
good hardwood glade that boasted 1,000 feet of vertical, you kept your trap
shut if you knew what was good for you. Forget catching heat on some Internet
forum, spilling the beans would have been worse than backstabbing your best
friend.
Indeed, if someone was stupid enough to go out and post GPS
coordinates of all the local stashes – both inbounds and out – that can be
found in the Northeast, it would take an Internet second before someone would offer
some choice words and/or a death threat.
 |
| One of my favorite stashes growing up, seen in December 2012. Still not saying where. |
A similar reaction can, and has been provoked for bloggers
and forum posters here in Alaska too – though I can’t say I have ever been the direct
target.
It obviously cracks me up.
I admit, there are a few areas in road-accessible Alaska
that are worth keeping “quiet” about. There are some nice areas that are even nicer
not to share or blab about. I wouldn’t call these places secrets though.
Realistically, backcountry skiing in road-accessible AK is limited
only by one’s own physical abilities and their imagination.
You can see, plan, and execute a great number of lines from
the comfort of your still-running car. A near-infinite number of others are
executable with a topographic map and some limited base knowledge.
The idea that there are secrets in these mountains, or that
they are being spilled like BBs from a jug by the keyboards of Internet
bloggers and forum posters, is right up there with tin foil hat conspiracies (there
are a lot of folks up here who wear tin foil hats, and as such, plenty of rage).
The truth is, that while someone could find motivation or
reason to ski somewhere simply because of an Internet post or picture, they
could find an equal amount of inspiration because they can see a skin track
leading to the same peak.
That’s the thrust of my comparison here with where I grew up
and AK: you can’t spot sweet hardwood glades unless maybe you’re a trained
forester, and even then, where’s your vantage point, on a road surrounded by
trees? A lot of finding good spots to ski in Vermont was either inside info, or
having the curiosity to go explore and get shut out.
Here in the AK, backcountry skiers have used the inter-webz in
an ever increasing amount to stay on top of weather and conditions in the
nearby ranges through a suite of resources, including posts by others. I myself
have absolutely used other’s posts to plan and execute descents, but that’s not
to say that I wouldn’t have done them without those resources either.
I’ve also gone and checked places out simply because there
was a skintrack there.
Just as anyone who has ever chased a worthless skintrack can
tell you though, the truth is, blogs can, if anything, be fairly unhelpful,
depending on what the blogger choses to include.
A few rad pics might make me want to check out a peak or an
area, but odds are, I will rely on my own experiences, interpretations of
conditions, and first-hand information, before I will charge off will-nill with
powder fever because some picture gave me powder fever.
In my own blog, I tend to play a balancing act. If skiing
something that is directly visible from the road, ya, there is no ambiguity:
this is where I was, and this is how it skied. For more worthy objectives, I
may actually choose to throw in a fair amount of detail. My thinking is, if
it’s was a long approach or felt like a challenge, it probably will be for
others as well. If you’ve got the motivation to skin for over 4 hours, endure
mandatory booting, or deal with a heinous exit, just to nab a line, you’re no
slouch. Additionally, if I see issues (a false summit ridge, a route that goes
through a high-hazard area, a zone known for past incidents, etc) I’d feel
guilty not calling them out.
Sometimes I land somewhere in between the two.
There really is no way to say if this approach is right or
wrong, it’s too subjective. There will be some who would argue just posting a
pic is equivalent to offering a detailed route description and topo map with a
giant “GO HERE” label. Others might find the same info insufficient or
unhelpful.
In the end, I land in the same place. The backcountry is
definitely a busier place, even in my own 7 short winters here. I don’t even
think skiing within 1-mile of the Seward Highway in Turnagain Pass or Hatcher
Pass road qualifies as backcountry skiing anymore, at least, any more than
skate skiing in the Anchorage Hillside. Good or bad, it is what it is.
That being said, I’ve skied on days where these same zones
had parking lots that were filled to capacity, and I’ve still gone the bulk of
the day without encountering a single other individual. The fact is, we live in
a place with a lot of country, and it takes a surprisingly short skin to leave it
all behind.