backedgeapproaching

So this guy strolls up today, squats and takes a nice piss on my daughter's hat she left in the yard. bastard! Got to figure out how to upload the video, pretty funny.

Just virga so far here

Just give me a minute to grab the Netscape 72hr...

Verbatim, it is still slightly better where you are than 00z Euro.

We IBM... Grasping at anything north of the Mass border.

6Z weenie form earlier, looks better north of pike:

Got out early this AM before the FROPA and squeezed in hopefully last mountain bike ride of the year. Maybe also a lawn trim..ha.

Right, that is exactly what the ALY Mets said at the event, basically they realize this is strictly volunteer and the once a day clear would just be easier for the majority of observers, but said to do the 6 hour clear if you had the ability to. Seems now they want to be in line with COOP's which are once a day and to streamline all data--snowfall wise that is. Like you mentioned, the liquid equivalent really is the important part of the snowfall data.

@J.Spin --They were discussing 6 hour clears in the main discussion thread which we have discussed many times over the years. I just checked Cocorahs and saw this paragraph below, seems like new verbiage. I know in past years on the cocorahs website it has said in black and white that 6 hour clears were OK. When I went to a cocorahs event at NWS ALY( 2018 maybe?) I asked the ALY Mets specifically and they said 6 hour clears were OK and actually encouraged if you had the time and capability to do them. Looks like they added new bolded language below saying do not clear the board. Just curious if you are still going to do clears? I have done them since I joined 4-5 years ago, although not sure how many I am actually doing in a full season. "Observers in networks such as CoCoRaHS and the NWS Cooperative Network are required to take snowfall measurements once per day. During long duration events, snowfall may be measured at shorter intervals for the purpose of submitting a Significant Weather Report or reporting to the NWS, but the snowboard should NOT be cleared! The snowboard should be cleared only after your regular 24-hour observation. Some observers, such as at airports, may be directed by their servicing NWS offices to take 6-hourly measurements. However, CoCoRaHS and U.S. Cooperative stations are to make measurements every 24 hours."

Tamarack--were you a lax bro at Hopkins in mid 60s? Seems like Hopkins is Doctors and lacrosse players.

Hopefully the Euro can restore its King status and score a coup for Monday. Like mentioned, nothing else shows this outcome.

That was a little nuke even out this way. Had 4" in 1 hour early that AM. Think it was quick 12" IIRC.

Not to mention the row of edges blocking your view while doing laps in the pool. At this point I think we can all agree the place just needs to be razed.

Oh for sure, Dorset feels like a preppy wealthy CT town, just picked up and dropped in SVT(with some VT charm). Nice spot that someone probably uses 3-4 weeks a year...would have had a great view of Dorset Hollow Ski area https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/5251_Dorset_VT_M40801-38583

Lol, yea faces pretty much due south. Snow softens up quick once your hit FEB. But yea, retention is certainly an issue without a deep base even though they are east of the spine just because of the Sun later on in the season. It would get more snow that the proposed Dorset sight, but looking at the rendering's the Dorset sight would face southwest, so they would get less snow and most likely similar or worse retention.

Super interesting read, honestly had no idea there was ever a plan for a resort there. Funny how that area of Dorset Hollow is now an enclave of some of the priciest homes in SVT.--some absurd estates located there. Got the promotion going nicely, would have been same ad if they did Mt Equinox: Looks like some locals weren't having it in 1965. Guess it was always an exclusive enclave. " Anyway, rich old blood and even some young blood are complaining about the "rape" of Dorset mountain and its tranquil beauty destroyed by ski trails scarring the landscape and "those skiers" invading their privacy.

Interesting, even in days of yore they knew the retention wasn't quite adequate

Yea, it almost seems too steep to have any slow cruiser trails, but I don't know enough about creating a ski resort, maybe it could be figured out logistically. But yea, just geographically speaking having a resort where the base is right in Manchester seems ideal on the face of it. But yea, pre snowmaking ,snow retention would be a struggle below 1500-2000ft.

Yea, living here I can tell you no chance in heck the base of auto road averages 98" at around 650ft-even though its close to the Taconic's. More in the 75"ish range. To get any real effect of the Taconic upslope you need to be a little higher and further west. I have a friend who lives around 1350ft on the east slopes of the Taconic's in Manchester and I can tell you the difference is STARK between that and say a little further east towards town in regards to snowfall. ( A sneaky good upslope spot is Shaftsbury NW of Bennington actually) One strong cutter with a south wind and dews the Taconic's snowpack get's hurt really bad though, if not wiped out depending on how much is OTG.

I guess you are meaning lower elevations---you probably know Mt Equinox goes up to almost 4K. They certainly average over 100" above 2K in the Taconic's of SVT. No one lives above 1500' in the Taconic side of SVT, so hard to get any iron clad evidence of snowfall. There are few guys I loosely know that do some back country skiing in the Taconic's west of Manchester, have no idea where exactly. You are right that the Taconic's and Mt Equinox do pretty well on W/NW somewhat blocked uplsope flow. They can block some of that moisture from getting over to the Greens and Stratton, Bromley, etc at times and can relatively clean up while those areas get less. They don't do as well with strong E/SE obviously and they also can really torch, and have really bad retention--even the high elevations you can see melt out quickly at times say compared to much lower elevations east of the Greens. Have always wondered why they never put in some type of ski area on Mt Equinox-- I mean you would have almost 3K of pretty steep vertical right down into the west side of Manchester. I'm sure there were some political wrangling's going on over the decades that had a part in it.

Looks at these massive totals here..ha. Death by a thousand cuts. 10 "events" Adding up to 6.9". Locally the SVT CO-OP at 1700' is at 8.9" and the Cocorahs guy at 1900' locally is at 12", so all elevations not seeing a ton. Just missed out on the OCT event and the coastal few days ago. 1.1" .7" 1.5" .5" .1" .5" .8" .2" .2" 1.3"

Kuchera for March 1888..ha.

Just your average run of the mill 80:1 ratios reported by JSpin...lol. That slopfest event was like 3:1 or 4:1 in a few NH spots couple days ago.

I think without question the snowiest spot in SVT is the area north of Woodford towards Glastenbury like you mentioned. That area is always lit up on radar on any type of NW uplsope flow--much more than any SVT ski area or any area in general. It's like a Woodford on steroids as it upslopes in almost any direction and there are spots 3k to almost 4k in elevation there. Problem is there is literally nothing there--no roads, houses, nothing..lol. So who knows how much really falls.

Yep, both are about equally distant to the east from the spine, so do well on E/SE flow events, but because they are removed a bit, they don't get as much W/NW upslope as say Bromley or Stratton. They still can get some in very unblocked flow and or streamers/dying lake effect. Same with Okemo, kind of fall in the Magic/Mt Snow grouping IMO. Again, The Northern Greens laugh at Southern Greens upslope, all is relative..lol.