Learn Hardcore Spanish (Spain): Por la mañana caminamos hasta el lago y vemos el valle cubierto de nieve. - In the morning we walk to the lake and see the valley covered in snow.

en la mañana – grammatically possible, but sounds unusual or marked in Spain; you might hear it more in some Latin American varieties.
de la mañana – usually used after clock times:
- a las ocho de la mañana – at eight in the morning

So for a general time like this sentence, you should learn and use por la mañana.

Does caminamos mean “we walk”, “we are walking”, or “we will walk”?

The Spanish presente can cover all of these, depending on context:

Habitual action: Por la mañana caminamos… = We (usually) walk in the morning.
Right now: In the right context, caminamos can mean “we are walking (now)”.
Near future (less likely here): With a future time expression, mañana caminamos can be “we’re walking tomorrow”.

Your sentence naturally sounds like a habit/routine: something that typically happens every morning.

English separates these meanings more strictly (we walk / we are walking / we will walk), but Spanish often uses the same present form for all of them and lets context clarify.

Why is there no nosotros before caminamos and vemos?

Spanish usually drops subject pronouns because the verb ending already shows the subject:

caminamos can only be we walk (1st person plural).
vemos can only be we see (1st person plural).

So nosotros caminamos is correct but often unnecessary unless you:

want to emphasize the subject:
- Nosotros caminamos, no ellos. – We walk, not them.
are contrasting with another subject.

In neutral sentences like this one, leaving out nosotros is more natural.

What’s the difference between caminar, andar, and ir a pie?

All can relate to walking, but they’re not identical:

caminar – specifically “to walk”, often a bit more neutral/formal:
- Por la mañana caminamos hasta el lago.
andar – can also mean “to walk”, but in Spain it’s very common with broader meanings like “to go”, “to work/run”, “to get around”:
- ¿Cómo andas? – How are you doing?
- El reloj no anda. – The watch isn’t working.
ir a pie – literally “to go on foot”, focusing on the way of traveling:
- Vamos al trabajo a pie. – We go to work on foot.

In your sentence, caminamos is the most straightforward and natural choice.

What does hasta add in caminamos hasta el lago? Could I say al lago instead?

hasta emphasizes the endpoint of the movement: “as far as / up to” the lake.

caminamos hasta el lago – we walk up to the lake (the lake is clearly the final point).
caminamos al lago – we walk to the lake (simply indicates destination).

In many contexts both are possible and would be understood similarly, but:

hasta highlights the limit or final boundary of the path.
a / al just marks destination, without that “up to” nuance.

So the original sentence slightly stresses reaching the lake as the endpoint of the walk.

Why don’t hasta and el form a contraction like al?

Only a + el and de + el contract in Spanish:

a + el → al
de + el → del

Other prepositions do not contract with el:

con el, en el, para el, sobre el, hasta el, etc.

So hasta el lago is correct and can never become hastel lago.

Why is it vemos and not miramos? Don’t both mean “to see / to look”?

They’re related but not interchangeable:

ver = to see (perceive with the eyes, often without intentional focus)
- vemos el valle – we see the valley (it is in our field of vision).
mirar = to look (at), to watch (active focus or intention)
- miramos el valle – we look at the valley / we gaze at the valley.

In a neutral description of what appears before your eyes after walking, ver is more natural: you arrive and you see the valley there.

If the idea were “we stand there and look at / contemplate the valley”, miramos el valle would fit.

What is cubierto grammatically, and why does it end in -o? Do I need está?

cubierto is the past participle of cubrir (to cover), used here as an adjective:

el valle cubierto de nieve – the valley (that is) covered with snow.

As an adjective, cubierto must agree in gender and number with the noun:

el valle cubierto (masc. sing.)
la montaña cubierta (fem. sing.)
los campos cubiertos (masc. pl.)
las calles cubiertas (fem. pl.)

So it ends in -o because valle is masculine singular.

You could also say:

…y vemos que el valle está cubierto de nieve.
…y vemos el valle, que está cubierto de nieve.

In your sentence, the verb estar is simply implied; the past participle acts directly as a describing adjective.

Why is it cubierto de nieve and not cubierto con nieve or en nieve?

With cubierto, the most idiomatic preposition in Spanish is de:

cubierto de nieve – covered with snow
cubierto de polvo – covered with dust
cubierto de manchas – covered in stains

Other options:

cubierto con nieve – possible, but less natural here; it can sound more literal or emphasize the means/tool (e.g. cubierto con una manta – covered with a blanket).
cubierto en nieve – generally sounds wrong in standard Spanish in this sense.

For physical surfaces covered by a substance (snow, dust, mud, blood, etc.), remember the pattern:
cubierto de + [substance] is the normal choice.

Can I move por la mañana to another place, like Vemos el valle cubierto de nieve por la mañana?

Yes, por la mañana is fairly flexible. All of these are possible:

Por la mañana caminamos hasta el lago y vemos el valle cubierto de nieve.
Caminamos por la mañana hasta el lago y vemos el valle cubierto de nieve.
Caminamos hasta el lago y por la mañana vemos el valle cubierto de nieve. (less natural, sounds like the morning only applies to “seeing”)
Caminamos hasta el lago y vemos por la mañana el valle cubierto de nieve. (unusual word order; not wrong, but marked)

Most natural are:

at the beginning: Por la mañana caminamos… (sets the time frame for everything), or
just after the subject/verb: Caminamos por la mañana hasta el lago…

Placing it at the start, as in your sentence, is very typical and clear.

Why do we use el lago, el valle, and la mañana with the article? Could we drop the article?

Spanish uses definite articles more often than English:

el lago – the lake
el valle – the valley
la mañana – the morning

Here, the article is natural because we’re talking about specific things in the shared context: that lake, that valley, the morning in general as a time frame.

If you drop the article:

Por la mañana caminamos hasta lago – incorrect.
Por mañana caminamos… – incorrect.

Only por la mañana works as the fixed expression; la can’t be omitted here.

In general, when referring to specific, known things (the lake we walk to, the valley we see, the morning as a period), Spanish tends to require the article where English might sometimes omit “the”.