Perhaps a distinction needs to be drawn between a "calendar-winter ascent" and a "wintry non-calendar-winter ascent". But that distinction is clumsy enough that it would probably never be used. So maybe instead we should just talk in terms of "wintry" ascents. But that would not seem to do justice to wintry ascents done in calendar-winter.

Since the four-season classification system is causing so much trouble, and since it is contrived anyway, perhaps we should take steps to do away with it altogether.

Bill Kish wrote:

Diggler wrote:Winter is very distinctly (and easily) defined. An ascent outside of this time is NOT a winter ascent.

Hmm... Merriam-Webster has a couple relevant definitions. I guess you are thinking of the astronomical definition of winter, but many places around the world ignore that one in favor of a definition more matched to the local climate.

"The colder half of the year" definition seems to be the closest match to Secor's December-April definition. Personally I think that works well for the Sierra.

from Webster (cited): "or as reckoned astronomically extending from the December solstice to the March equinox"

from Wiki (also cited): "Meteorologically, the winter solstice, being the day of the year which has fewest hours of daylight, ought to be the middle of the season, but temperature lag means that the coldest period normally follows the solstice, so the season is sometimes regarded (in the USA and England) as beginning at the solstice and ending on the following equinox[1][2]. In the Northern Hemisphere, depending on the year, this corresponds to the period between December 20 and 21 and March 20 or 21."

If one desires to attribute any significant relevance to a "winter ascent" (first or otherwise), seems like a concise definition would be logical, instead of some vague, flowery definition that is used to describe how the conditions were on the mountain. I've been on mountains when it was -10F, & been snowed on others, in the summer- 'wintry' conditions, by most people's standards. These were, however, not winter ascents.

Well the first part of that first Webster definition says "usually the months of December, January, and February", so there is ambiguity here from the start.

I understand the appeal of a crisp definition, but the problem is that winter is an 'analog process': each year Winter gradually comes and then gradually goes. And each year is different. So any attempt to define 'winter' by fixed dates is always going to have problems when it comes to describing actual conditions.

My second point is that local climate is potentially more relevant than the astronomical solstice and equinox when it comes to determining actual conditions. Modifying the definition of winter to match local climatology will at least minimize the error inherent in any fixed-date definition. This is what I believe that Secor has done.

April in the Sierra is generally still full-on winter conditions. But April is still SPRING not WINTER. Here are the conditions in JUNE the last time I went climbing in the Pals. I consider this to be SUMMER not WINTER:

as if someone really cared about FWAs in the Sierra to begin with...

Secor cites me for two first winter ascents, one in Feb and one in March. Both happened to be challenging climbs. But I've also made 'winter' ascents which were no more difficult than any other time of year. The problem here is that year to year and month to month weather and snow conditions in the Sierra Nevada range can vary tremedously. Without knowing the conditions prevailing at the time of the climb, the designation as a winter ascent is problematic.