tahoe temps headed for 60deg on the mountain.. for 10 days..
- Thread starter hayduke
- Start date
tseeb
Well-known member
weather.com shows 53 and 54 for the highs Sunday through Friday. The sunnier spots on the mountains could melt fast, but north-facing with high altitude will stay good. They are only showing 47 at 1:25 pm while at my house (San Jose, CA 95121) is at 62 with 70 predicted for Monday. The last couple of years it has gotten warm beginning in mid-March and last year there was no snow after then.
ski-the-face
New member
this very upsetting. i was actually sweating today as it got close to 80 an hour or two ago :-({|=
ski-the-face
New member
the storms are stacking up for the sierras in feb so you will be ok
This statement of course is total crap. NO ONE HONEST HAS A CLUE, ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD, WHAT THE WEATHER WILL BE 3 WEEKS FROM NOW.
There is currently a substantial disparity in conditions between Mammoth and the rest of the Sierra.
1) Mammoth still has more upper mountain base from that November storm that was all rain at Tahoe.
2) Having been there this weekend, I can report that 80% of Mammoth has not had a melt-freeze. Some of that chalk and windpack is pretty firm, so you're going for a long ride if you make a mistake in the wrong place. But you can easily hold an edge, and good eastern skiers who are used to REAL hard snow would rip on it. They are also doing a lot of grooming and the cruisers are in excellent shape.
3) Adam skied Heavenly Jan. 3-4 and was not that impressed. There has to be a lot of marquee terrain at Squaw's lower elevation that is sketchy, hardpack or not skiable.
4) The longer the dry spell lasts, the greater the disparity in conditions will grow.
Someone flying in for a destination trip to Tahoe this week or next week, I would advise using your rental car and trying to move as much of the lodging as possible to Mammoth.
February is still too far off. One thing about the Sierra, when it does turn around it can happen in a hurry and the effect will be dramatic. If you get within a week or 10 days of your trip and the forecast over that remaining time is nothing, then try to move the trip to Mammoth.
ski-the-face
New member
my opinion. we will see...Tony Crocker":33grb4oa said:
rfarren
New member
ski-the-face":d0qhda4c said:
I've got to go with Crocker on this one. You can't really have a very good idea about the weather until about 10 days out, and most often more like 3-4 days out.
It may be warm in California but it is brutally cold on the east coast. If you want a ski vacation don't go to the sierra's go to vermont. I can guarantee it will not rain in the next 10 or so days! Of course you may have to wear eskimo clothing as the high at lake placid this friday is supposed to be -5 in town.
Honestly enjoy the warm weather and harvest some corn. There will be more snow this season. At least the odds are in favor of it.
The sun is too low/weak in January to produce corn, except maybe on direct south exposures. And those are developing coverage problems. Baldy is a classic example. It was 85F in L.A. yesterday. Baldy's south facing chair 4 is losing snow fast, yet the sheltered areas on Thunder are still in the shade and icy from the December rain.
It's pretty simple to find the best snow. Look for something that has not had a melt-freeze. That means 80% of Mammoth, maybe 50% of Kirkwood. Elsewhere in California, not so great off-trail for at least another week. Best to stick to the groomers at most places.
ski-the-face
New member
yeah, i heard it was temps today in downtown L.A. but i havent heard any more about that
tseeb
Well-known member
From SF Chronicle http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... 157RFN.DTL
High-temperature records fell like imaginary raindrops in the Bay Area on Monday, among the warmest mid-January days ever.
It's also shaping up to be one of the driest Januarys ever - if not the driest. There's been almost no rain this month, and none is in sight, the National Weather Service says.
The thermometer hit 74 in downtown San Francisco, breaking the old record for Jan. 12 of 67, set in 1948.
"We broke the records pretty much everywhere," said weather service meteorologist Brian Tentinger. "Breaking them wasn't hard. This wasn't extreme heat, but it was very abnormal for January."
The heat marks got their biggest thumping in Santa Rosa, where it was 84 degrees. The old mark of 66, set in 1967, was bested by a full 18 degrees.
The 77 degrees recorded at Oakland International Airport made it the warmest January day ever at that location. The old mark was 75, set on Jan. 8, 1962. Downtown Oakland merely set a record for the date at 76 degrees, 11 degrees better than the old mark set in 1980.
In San Rafael, it was 75, breaking the mark of 68, set in 1948. In San Jose it was 77, six degrees warmer than the old record, set in 1948.
High-temperature records fell like imaginary raindrops in the Bay Area on Monday, among the warmest mid-January days ever.
It's also shaping up to be one of the driest Januarys ever - if not the driest. There's been almost no rain this month, and none is in sight, the National Weather Service says.
The thermometer hit 74 in downtown San Francisco, breaking the old record for Jan. 12 of 67, set in 1948.
"We broke the records pretty much everywhere," said weather service meteorologist Brian Tentinger. "Breaking them wasn't hard. This wasn't extreme heat, but it was very abnormal for January."
The heat marks got their biggest thumping in Santa Rosa, where it was 84 degrees. The old mark of 66, set in 1967, was bested by a full 18 degrees.
The 77 degrees recorded at Oakland International Airport made it the warmest January day ever at that location. The old mark was 75, set on Jan. 8, 1962. Downtown Oakland merely set a record for the date at 76 degrees, 11 degrees better than the old mark set in 1980.
In San Rafael, it was 75, breaking the mark of 68, set in 1948. In San Jose it was 77, six degrees warmer than the old record, set in 1948.
It is an unusual microclimate, but it covers a long coastal area from Mendocino to Pt. Conception. The Monterey Aquarium has a good exhibit on how it works. I'm somewhat surprised that those record high temps were that low. The infamous SF fog is primarily a spring/summer phenomenon. Winter is more likely to be rain or sun.
I would reiterate that this is not a welcome weather development for Tahoe:
1) The base is just adequate. A few expert sectors like Silverado and Killebrew Canyon still didn't have enough snow to open after the December storms. This tells me that some other places are going to be sketchy soon if not already.
2) The sun is still too low to produce good corn in most places. Maybe something like Sherwood at Alpine Meadows would be good, if it has enough cover. Typically when it warms up in March, the sun is high enough for lots of corn, plus the base is usually very deep so they can afford to lose some snow without bringing out the rocks.
ski-the-face
New member
this just adds to my theory of mammoth being better
Mammoth is normally better from March onwards due to snow preservation. January/February are usually similar, with Sierra Crest areas like Sugar Bowl, Squaw, Alpine and especially Kirkwood being better for powder than Mammoth.
This year is somewhat of an anomaly. Mammoth got that big lead from early November and Tahoe has never quite caught up.
This year is somewhat of an anomaly. Mammoth got that big lead from early November and Tahoe has never quite caught up.
It will be very useful to hear how things are holding up. In particular what's not open or no longer skiable.