Terrain Development and Expansion

[Mike451]

Ok, so here is the most realistic possibility for any Major terrain Expansion.

The Pod above the Inverness.


And here is another interesting possibility, that makes alot of sense.

The Area inbetween Tumbler, and Lower FIS.

(There is already a sick Movie Quality creak-bed in this area)

So, lets a get a posting :P and discuss this a bit.

I personaly would like to see a bit more terrain at Mt Ellen, as the possibilities, would amount to being some fairly notable East Coast Terrain.

[HowieT2]

Question-with the expansion in interest in off piste skiing and adventure tours is a "terrain expansion" going to be worth the investment.

[BushMogulMaster]

Question-with the expansion in interest in off piste skiing and adventure tours is a "terrain expansion" going to be worth the investment.

Yes, especially in areas like the pod above Inverness, because without a lift it takes A LOT of hiking to get into some of that terrain. I don't think any of us would suggest cutting 50 new trails and chopping the whole mountain up. Rather, add a couple lifts and some great skinny New England trails with large sections of incredible tree skiing between them.

As I've mentioned before, I'd like to see some expansion with surface lifts: inexpensive, effective, and keep the trails relatively uncrowded. How about some detachable Poma F-12s that pick you right up off the snow! :wink:

[freeheel_skier]

Can't you expand/open new area w/o lifts? Please correct me if I am wrong.
Just get off the lift and do a little hiking. Skiers do it all the time in the slack country out west (i.e. Abasin's east wall, off of the canyon's 99nine lift or peak 5 chair, Needles @ Red resort). The areas I mention are not patrolled but on the map. Some of the resorts do avy control....this doesn't mean it is part of the resort and safe....bring your gear. Here in the east I feel people want immediate satisfaction. Lifts to lifts, magic carpets, etc. Part of the draw to the tree skiing for some is the adventure of being "o.b." but they want the safety net ski patrol. Just my .02 :)

[ski_resort_observer]

Regarding the pod above Inverness. I assume you have seen the old Glen Ellen trail map from Strat's site that shows this pod. They built the lift corrider but from what I remember the state stopped Glen Ellen and the work never progressed. This pic is from 1992, today it is very overgrown, not able to see on a recent image.

http://forums.skimrv.com/albums/album14/mtellenpod.jpg

[random_ski_guy]

Can't you expand/open new area w/o lifts? Please correct me if I am wrong.
Just get off the lift and do a little hiking. Skiers do it all the time in the slack country out west (i.e. Abasin's east wall, off of the canyon's 99nine lift or peak 5 chair, Needles @ Red resort). The areas I mention are not patrolled but on the map. Some of the resorts do avy control....this doesn't mean it is part of the resort and safe....bring your gear. Here in the east I feel people want immediate satisfaction. Lifts to lifts, magic carpets, etc. Part of the draw to the tree skiing for some is the adventure of being "o.b." but they want the safety net ski patrol. Just my .02 :)

I think those of us who like to talk about new trails & new lifts just can't help ourselves. To us, day dreams about new trails is seriously fun cloud talk, thats all. Its not like we're in a position to actually wreak the havoc we talk so seriously about. If your an anti new trail guy/gal, thats kool with me when it comes to Sugarbush because the mtn really doesn't need much in the way of new trails at all anyway. What makes talking about new trails at Sugarbush so much fun is that most mountains don't have nearly the amount of natural, innate, big vertical skiing left to develop at its finger tips. At Sugarbush, you are completely surrounded by new trail opportunities.

[freeheel_skier]

Can't you expand/open new area w/o lifts? Please correct me if I am wrong.
Just get off the lift and do a little hiking. Skiers do it all the time in the slack country out west (i.e. Abasin's east wall, off of the canyon's 99nine lift or peak 5 chair, Needles @ Red resort). The areas I mention are not patrolled but on the map. Some of the resorts do avy control....this doesn't mean it is part of the resort and safe....bring your gear. Here in the east I feel people want immediate satisfaction. Lifts to lifts, magic carpets, etc. Part of the draw to the tree skiing for some is the adventure of being "o.b." but they want the safety net ski patrol. Just my .02 :)

I think those of us who like to talk about new trails & new lifts just can't help ourselves. To us, day dreams about new trails is seriously fun cloud talk, thats all. Its not like we're in a position to actually wreak the havoc we talk so seriously about. If your an anti new trail guy/gal, thats kool with me when it comes to Sugarbush because the mtn really doesn't need much in the way of new trails at all anyway. What makes talking about new trails at Sugarbush so much fun is that most mountains don't have nearly the amount of natural, innate, big vertical skiing left to develop at its finger tips. At Sugarbush, you are completely surrounded by new trail opportunities.

I like pipe dreaming too. :wink: I am not anti/pro anything. I like seeing other peoples perspective and opinions regarding trail expansion. I like comparing my thoughts with others. Every now and then I read an opinion and say wow that would be cool....sometimes I say holy crap! What is this person thinking! Often I read my own posts and say the later. :shock:

[Strat]

It's all about the free thoughts man...

Need a hippie emoticon.

[Mike451]

Well, Regarding the corridor above the Inverness, this is actualy a possibility, and the Resort has even publicly hinted that they are aware of it, and are interested in it. In addition, this terrain was Planned by Glen Ellen, it was Advertised, and they got as far as cutting the lift path. The Cut is still there, and is prety visible from German Flats Road, I allwayse thought it was for utility poles, untill I saw the stuff on Strats page. This could be some Epic terrain, really fitting to the character of Sugarbush, and is worth devoloping if possible. This terrain would literally crown Mt Ellen, and ad some significant vert to the Inverness area, and make Mt Ellen stand out even further as the Great new England MT it is. I can immagin about 4 trails or so beeing cut, a Blue to either side of the lift line with snowmaking, an extremly narrow black with natural snow as the lift line, and then a Possible Black, branching way out, and then linking into brambles. Another possibility, would be a trail that traverses over towards lower exterminator, and possibly even as far as way back, agian ridiculously narrow, like the Northway traverse. This could then bring access to some, very, very sick tree skiing in the area above the existing traverse.

Again, the area inbetween Tumbler and Lower FIS, were not talking about 20 trails here, even 2 maybe 3 trails would make great use of this area, and again, following the character not quantity doctrine, could really futher Mt Ellen as one of the great Mountains of the East Coast.

I am in favor of Trail Devolopment, but I don't care about having a larger trail count just to close the gap between what K-Mart advertises. What I would like to see, is some potentially epic terrain that is sitting dormant, be made available. This is also Sugarbush's Change, to break the standards of modern Trail Dev, (as wide as possible for tons of guns, and engineered for optimal trafic flow by a fim in Manhaten if you catch my drift) and devolop some truly great classic new england terrain, that would further enhance Sugarbush, and provide more of a reason for people to go there instead of some other hill.

[BushMogulMaster]

Well, Regarding the corridor above the Inverness, this is actualy a possibility, and the Resort has even publicly hinted that they are aware of it, and are interested in it. In addition, this terrain was Planned by Glen Ellen, it was Advertised, and they got as far as cutting the lift path. The Cut is still there, and is prety visible from German Flats Road, I allwayse thought it was for utility poles, untill I saw the stuff on Strats page. This could be some Epic terrain, really fitting to the character of Sugarbush, and is worth devoloping if possible. This terrain would literally crown Mt Ellen, and ad some significant vert to the Inverness area, and make Mt Ellen stand out even further as the Great new England MT it is. I can immagin about 4 trails or so beeing cut, a Blue to either side of the lift line with snowmaking, an extremly narrow black with natural snow as the lift line, and then a Possible Black, branching way out, and then linking into brambles. Another possibility, would be a trail that traverses over towards lower exterminator, and possibly even as far as way back, agian ridiculously narrow, like the Northway traverse. This could then bring access to some, very, very sick tree skiing in the area above the existing traverse.

Again, the area inbetween Tumbler and Lower FIS, were not talking about 20 trails here, even 2 maybe 3 trails would make great use of this area, and again, following the character not quantity doctrine, could really futher Mt Ellen as one of the great Mountains of the East Coast.

I am in favor of Trail Devolopment, but I don't care about having a larger trail count just to close the gap between what K-Mart advertises. What I would like to see, is some potentially epic terrain that is sitting dormant, be made available. This is also Sugarbush's Change, to break the standards of modern Trail Dev, (as wide as possible for tons of guns, and engineered for optimal trafic flow by a fim in Manhaten if you catch my drift) and devolop some truly great classic new england terrain, that would further enhance Sugarbush, and provide more of a reason for people to go there instead of some other hill.

Thank you, Mike451... my thoughts exactly. We don't want to up the trail count, just add some incredible new england skiing!

Also, something to bear in mind for those of you who are not into new trail expansion with lifts (there was mention of the west-style hiking, et. al.), while that may be fun for many of us, a significant portion of the New England market is the city crowd, many of whom only ski a few days a year. From my personal experience, most of these people like on-piste skiing, even when they graduate to expert terrain. Maybe not everyone is like that, but it seems to me that the larger portion of the market in this part of the country is looking for on-piste with the option of some well-cleared and marked off-piste.

[Lostone]

I still say that for those that need on-piste trails, we have many. If you want to ski areas where there aren't trails, learn to do so. They are legal, now.

There are places I used to ski for powder that are now highways. You only find powder during or immediately after the storm. People look at areas and say it would be nice to ski them. Others already are.

Don't modify the mountain for your abilities, modify your abilities for the mountain.

This doesn't apply to the area above Inverness, as it is significantly uphill, and might be greatly helped by a lift to get uphill.

That's my 2/100 of a dollar. :roll:

[BushMogulMaster]

I still say that for those that need on-piste trails, we have many. If you want to ski areas where there aren't trails, learn to do so. They are legal, now.

There are places I used to ski for powder that are now highways. You only find powder during or immediately after the storm. People look at areas and say it would be nice to ski them. Others already are.

Don't modify the mountain for your abilities, modify your abilities for the mountain.

This doesn't apply to the area above Inverness, as it is significantly uphill, and might be greatly helped by a lift to get uphill.

That's my 2/100 of a dollar. :roll:

I agree to some extent, Lostone (and of course I respect your opinion); however, bear in mind that none of us are suggesting adding any "highways" anywhere. On the contrary, in fact. And although your "modify your abilities" theory is true in some cases, not everyone who comes here to ski has the time or resources to do so. Also, this still doesn't solve the Lower FIS runout (if we're also discussing that area). I won't pretend for a minute that I have all the answers to this particular conundrum... just adding my own .02.

You're definitely right about the area above Inverness... that would simply not be feasible without a lift.

[freeheel_skier]

I still say that for those that need on-piste trails, we have many. If you want to ski areas where there aren't trails, learn to do so. They are legal, now.

There are places I used to ski for powder that are now highways. You only find powder during or immediately after the storm. People look at areas and say it would be nice to ski them. Others already are.

Don't modify the mountain for your abilities, modify your abilities for the mountain.

Couldn't agree with you more. You nailed it!

[random_ski_guy]

For the most part people in this forum are savy, thoughtful, die hard skiers. Most I think I have strong sense of self, of their skiing self and a very conscience idea of their ski beliefs. So, I think its generally a fruitless exercise to try to convince each other that their position on new trail development is in the right. I've had these debates for years with my own ski pals and nothing has come of it. Some clamor for more highways, some for more backcountry. For the most part, you're either in one camp or another (like religion or a sports team). Too bad for me that my camp doesn't have cool macho platitudes like "Don't modify the mountain for your abilities, modify your abilities for the mountain."

[Tin Woodsman]

[quote=Mike451]Well, Regarding the corridor above the Inverness, this is actualy a possibility, and the Resort has even publicly hinted that they are aware of it, and are interested in it. In addition, this terrain was Planned by Glen Ellen, it was Advertised, and they got as far as cutting the lift path. The Cut is still there, and is prety visible from German Flats Road, I allwayse thought it was for utility poles, untill I saw the stuff on Strats page. This could be some Epic terrain, really fitting to the character of Sugarbush, and is worth devoloping if possible. This terrain would literally crown Mt Ellen, and ad some significant vert to the Inverness area, and make Mt Ellen stand out even further as the Great new England MT it is. I can immagin about 4 trails or so beeing cut, a Blue to either side of the lift line with snowmaking, an extremly narrow black with natural snow as the lift line, and then a Possible Black, branching way out, and then linking into brambles. Another possibility, would be a trail that traverses over towards lower exterminator, and possibly even as far as way back, agian ridiculously narrow, like the Northway traverse. This could then bring access to some, very, very sick tree skiing in the area above the existing traverse.

Again, the area inbetween Tumbler and Lower FIS, were not talking about 20 trails here, even 2 maybe 3 trails would make great use of this area, and again, following the character not quantity doctrine, could really futher Mt Ellen as one of the great Mountains of the East Coast.

I am in favor of Trail Devolopment, but I don't care about having a larger trail count just to close the gap between what K-Mart advertises. What I would like to see, is some potentially epic terrain that is sitting dormant, be made available. This is also Sugarbush's Change, to break the standards of modern Trail Dev, (as wide as possible for tons of guns, and engineered for optimal trafic flow by a fim in Manhaten if you catch my drift) and devolop some truly great classic new england terrain, that would further enhance Sugarbush, and provide more of a reason for people to go there instead of some other hill.

Good points both. A few things to remember about this terrain. Even though would be relatively high elevation, it would have roughly the same aspect as the GH and NL pods at LP - almost due SE. With so much sun exposure, it would almost certainly need snowmaking to remain open for a large portion of the season. Combined with BMM's well taken observations with regard to what the market wants above, and it's likely that you'd need to create, at the very least, a mix of straighter and slightly wider snowmaking trails vs. classic New England style runs that many of us here love so much. Mind you, I'm not talking about a Spring Fling/Ripcord style abomination, but rather something about the width of Birdland (with hopefully a few more twists and turns :lol:). One thing to remember is that such an expansion of the snowmaking footprint would be highly unlikely unless and until SB resolves its wider snowmaking issues. As we know the system at ME is capped from the water perspective and you'd likely have to upgrade the entire system on that side of the mountain (though that is pure speculation on my part, admittedly. Not sure how you'd double the size/vertical of that area without an upgrade on the bottom half....but I digress...). As such, this expansion would likely have to wait in line behind the mooted connection of the two systems at LP and ME via the already permitted water/air pipelines through Slide Brook. That plans for this are clearly visible on Strat's fantastic site, and I'm sure the forthcoming sugarbushhistory.com. Finally, for your super bad-ass skiers and riders chomping at the bit for some new expert terrain, don't get your hopes up. The topo clearly indicates that there is very little in the way of real expert terrain up there, at least as defined in a Sugarbush context (as opposed to say, Stratton). The lone exception is a 300-400' vertical swath to the SSE of the summit of the proposed lift, down near some sort of shelter off the LT whose name escapes me right now. You can see that laid out below:

http://forums.alpinezone.com/gallery/data/571/Mount_Ellen.png

Make no mistake, the vast majority of this terrain would be prime intermediate cruising terrain, to the tune of 1100' or even 1500' if you end a trail at mid-Brambles. It owuld be fantastic though and, as Mike 451 said, it would crown Mount Ellen with fantastic terrain from all angles. This pod gets wonderful late day sun peaking over Mt. Ellen's shoulder, and would likely be a real hit b/c of its pitch and relative warmth. It is, however, at least 10 years away, IMHO. This doesn't even touch on the issue of having sufficient skier demand. My guess is that something like this would have to wait for not only the connection of the snowmaking systems, but also some sort of real estate development in the parking lot/lower flats of ME. I've never heard of such a concept in the works, but given that you have private land there, much of which remains poorly used, I can't imagine why that wouldn't be the plan assuming Clay Brook and the follow on structures are a success.

[Yard Sale]

Re:"Too bad for me that my camp doesn't have cool macho platitudes like "Don't modify the mountain for your abilities, modify your abilities for the mountain.""

A differnt interpretation might be to look at one's potential for personal growth rather than the limitations of ones ability. Skiing is a sport where one is typically looking for challenge. The challenge of beating one's prior self. Whether that challenge is met through the improvement of the technique itself or in the satisfaction one might reap by simply striving to be better and the recognition of one's own effort. Getting there is the true adventure. Whether it's skiing some tight lie in the trees or truly linking actual turns the rewards are what you make of them.

Striving for the trees is no different than any other aspect of life. It is a personal evolution.

[freeheel_skier]

For the most part people in this forum are savy, thoughtful, die hard skiers. Most I think I have strong sense of self, of their skiing self and a very conscience idea of their ski beliefs. So, I think its generally a fruitless exercise to try to convince each other that their position on new trail development is in the right. I've had these debates for years with my own ski pals and nothing has come of it. Some clamor for more highways, some for more backcountry. For the most part, you're either in one camp or another (like religion or a sports team). Too bad for me that my camp doesn't have cool macho platitudes like "Don't modify the mountain for your abilities, modify your abilities for the mountain."

Random,
I think......Lostone was referring to ob tree lines becoming highways. I'll let him speak for himself. As for "cool macho attitudes." This is a point of view, an opnion. Nothing macho about it. Like you said it is a "frutless excercise"....But it is a fun one! 8)

[BushMogulMaster]

You make some GREAT points, Tin. I can't elaborate much at the moment... I'm getting ready to upload Beta Version 1.0 of sugarbushhistory.com!

You're definitely right about the pitch of the terrain above Inverness... most is solid intermediate to upper-intermediate. What about a lift and three or four real skinny trails above Northway? Nothing major, for sure... but just a couple of fun trails. The exposure is mostly east (and slightly north) and should hold snow fairly well. The top 300-400 feet are ass-kicking steep, and the remaining 300 or so feet is still fairly steep. Certainly don't develop it all... there's a lot of good tree-skiing to be had. But just a little would be fun, IMHO. :D

I hadn't thought much about the need for snowmaking above Inverness, but it would definitely take a serious money and time investment. But hey... anything's possible, right? :wink:

[random_ski_guy]

Re:"Too bad for me that my camp doesn't have cool macho platitudes like "Don't modify the mountain for your abilities, modify your abilities for the mountain.""

A differnt interpretation might be to look at one's potential for personal growth rather than the limitations of ones ability. Skiing is a sport where one is typically looking for challenge. The challenge of beating one's prior self. Whether that challenge is met through the improvement of the technique itself or in the satisfaction one might reap by simply striving to be better and the recognition of one's own effort. Getting there is the true adventure. Whether it's skiing some tight lie in the trees or truly linking actual turns the rewards are what you make of them.

Striving for the trees is no different than any other aspect of life. It is a personal evolution.

Yard Sale, you have a great observation on the nature of skiing in general. I couldn't agree with you more. But I'm not so sure how it fits into the subject matter of pro/anti trail development though. Maybe you were moving a touch beyond that topic?

[random_ski_guy]

The Inverness pod would be a beauty. It has a beautiful fall line, beautiful forest cover, beautiful ridge top. All of it would work so well that I think it might have the potential to be the best new lift access intermediate skiing since....Perry Merrill? Actually i don't since when, but I think it might be the best new intermediate skiing in NE in twenty years (Sunday River notwithstanding). It would beat the tar out of Jackson Gore (in my opinion) or South Ridge at Okemo, Mt Snow's Sun Bowl, etc. You could have one primary trail and the balance be hammerhead, moonshine, domino like beauties.

I think you're looking at a project that is 10-20 years away. I think SB will want to focus on LP village first and Snowmaking second before they get to something like this. Tin makes an excellent point, the SE exposure is going to require snowmaking to ensure consistant use. Any snowmaking capacity expansion is going to take a long lead time from the sounds of it....and by no means is it assured.

lets keep playing with it in the long meantime. :D

[Tin Woodsman]

You make some GREAT points, Tin. I can't elaborate much at the moment... I'm getting ready to upload Beta Version 1.0 of sugarbushhistory.com!

You're definitely right about the pitch of the terrain above Inverness... most is solid intermediate to upper-intermediate. What about a lift and three or four real skinny trails above Northway? Nothing major, for sure... but just a couple of fun trails. The exposure is almost due mostly east (and slightly north) and should hold snow fairly well. The top 300-400 feet are ass-kicking steep, and the remaining 300 or so feet is still fairly steep. Certainly don't develop it all... there's a lot of good tree-skiing to be had. But just a little would be fun, IMHO. :D

I hadn't thought much about the need for snowmaking above Inverness, but it would definitely take a serious money and time investment. But hey... anything's possible, right? :wink:

Meh. Not really worth it, IMHO. Minimal vertical, and it's not like most of that terrain isn't already accessible via a good hike/skate from existing terrain. :twisted:

I think the Inverness/Stark Mtn pod is the way to go as it solidifies Mt. Ellen's place as the pre-eminent cruising mountain in Northern VT, if not the Northeast as a whole. It would also dramatically change the skiing and riding experience at ME as it would spread the traffic out and provide a dramatically enhanced ability to utilize different aspects and elevations to your advantage just like at LP. IMO, you would see a big closing of the gap in skier visits between ME and LP if this were implemented, with many of the most profitable type visitors
(cruising families from big metro areas) preferring ME.

[random_ski_guy]

For the most part people in this forum are savy, thoughtful, die hard skiers. Most I think I have strong sense of self, of their skiing self and a very conscience idea of their ski beliefs. So, I think its generally a fruitless exercise to try to convince each other that their position on new trail development is in the right. I've had these debates for years with my own ski pals and nothing has come of it. Some clamor for more highways, some for more backcountry. For the most part, you're either in one camp or another (like religion or a sports team). Too bad for me that my camp doesn't have cool macho platitudes like "Don't modify the mountain for your abilities, modify your abilities for the mountain."

Random,
I think......Lostone was referring to ob tree lines becoming highways. I'll let him speak for himself. As for "cool macho attitudes." This is a point of view, an opnion. Nothing macho about it. Like you said it is a "frutless excercise"....But it is a fun one! 8)

Richie, you modified my quote by replacing platitudes with attitudes. Reread with platitudes. :wink:

[BushMogulMaster]

Meh. Not really worth it, IMHO. Minimal vertical, and it's not like most of that terrain isn't already accessible via a good hike/skate from existing terrain. :twisted:

Remember, Tin... there are hundreds of resorts that would beg to have that 600-700' vertical! :lol: I still think it would be worth it, but that's just me. :wink:

[freeheel_skier]

I just read "Interconnected" in February's Powder. It's about connecting all seven of the central Wasatch resorts. Interesting stuff. I started thinking that it would be kinda cool if there was a way MRG and ME could be tied together. Each could share a joint lift ticket. This is just a thought, not even a reality. But is Alta & Snowbird can do it....who knows. :wink: One is skiing/boarding the other is SKIERS only. Solitude and Brighton do the same thing
I don't want to touch the skiing only policy with a ten foot pole :shock: .....so just leave that one alone. I'll probably regret bringing it up. :lol:

Anyway it was an ineresting article.

[sugarboarder]

This just in - the entire Sugarbush ridge line is now 100 feet lower due to erosion from the nice weather the past two days. That 100 feet is no longer considered vertical, but instead "horizontal" and can still be had by a swim in the Mad River.

[random_ski_guy]

Richie,

As you may know, people have been talking/dreaming about the interconnection for a number of years now. If you do some googling you can pull up some interesting stuff including hypothetical interconnection lift plans. For instance I read somewhere that at one time the state of Utah contemplated building a highway tunnel from alta to brighton to reduce the up/down canyon auto traffic. A project that is more likely to happen is the opening of the summer summit road (empire pass?) from deer valley to brighton year round. I believe the state is closer to making that a reality for the same traffic reducing reasons.

Aside from the infrastructure costs, lift revenue sharing will be a significant hurdle. Of course there will be environmental hurdles too, but I'm not so sure they are insurmountable. I think a great way to deal with environmental matters is to promise that skiing/lift operating will be limited to a certain season. Just like at Vail where the back bowls have to close by a certain date in April.

In general, I'm a big believer in utah ski real estate. I think its only a matter of time (I’m thinking 10-20 years) until they install the 3-5 lifts needed to connect all the mtns. Once they do, presto! A ton of value has been created.

[Strat]

Not sure why Tin hasn't mentioned it already, but a while ago he sent me a fake map with trail connections and also an extension of terrain in the 20th Hole/Big Basin area at MRG... pretty cool...

http://geocities.com/sugarbushhistory/images/sbn-mrg.jpg

[Lostone]

For the most part, you're either in one camp or another (like religion or a sports team).

To many I know, a sports team is like a religion. :wink:



Too bad for me that my camp doesn't have cool macho platitudes like "Don't modify the mountain for your abilities, modify your abilities for the mountain."

Make one up. Where did you think I got mine? At the cool macho platitude store? :lol:

Actually, of those who know me in real life, and there are a fair number, here, I would guess none would consider me macho, or even a ski jock. Not all would say that I was even a good skier. But all would say I was an avid skier.

Any of them that have seen me in powder would say I LOVE powder. It is that for which I ski trees.

I was just pointing out that the other side of what you are proposing is to ruin lines that people are already skiing.

You can look at only one side of a proposal, but that doesn't make it the only side that is valid. I was pointing the other side out.

[random_ski_guy]

Make one up. Where did you think I got mine? At the cool macho platitude store? :lol:

Funny. :lol:


Actually, of those who know me in real life, and there are a fair number, here, I would guess none would consider me macho, or even a ski jock. Not all would say that I was even a good skier. But all would say I was an avid skier.

Any of them that have seen me in powder would say I LOVE powder. It is that for which I ski trees.

I was just pointing out that the other side of what you are proposing is to ruin lines that people are already skiing.

You can look at only one side of a proposal, but that doesn't make it the only side that is valid. I was pointing the other side out.

Believe it or not, I hear ya. New trails will almost always ruin someone else's private stash, and for that I'm sorry :(

[freeheel_skier]

Believe it or not, I hear ya. New trails will almost always ruin someone else's private stash, and for that I'm sorry

What do you mean someone else's? :shock: It's mine! Mine! ALL MINE! :lol:

[ski_resort_observer]

Sorry for the poor resolution but apparently our area is not important enough to rate HR from Google Earth
http://forums.skimrv.com/albums/album14/InvPod.jpg




I don't know Lostone...you seemed pretty macho to me the other day when you were running the parking lot at LP. :wink:

[Strat]

Looks pretty damn good in World Wind though...

http://forums.skimrv.com/albums/NASA-World-Wind-Snapshots/North_3D.sized.png

[slatham]

My vote for ME expansion - especially for steeps - is to run a lift from half/three quarters of the way down Lower FIS to skiers right of the summit quad. This would provide huge vert and the steepest terrian on the mountain. Up top, the lift line would be longer and steeper than Black diamond. The lower section - the FIS "Bowl" - could have numerous runs down mountain from a line that would be the continuation of Rim Run (after it passes the intersection with Black Diamond, and then turns skiers left, a trail could continue straight out and trails could fall off to skiers left into the "bowl"). I sould suggest most of this terrian be be narrow or even just chutes through the trees. The only "trail" I'd suggest would be the liftline. Everything else would be trees/chutes. One aspect of this plan is it doesn't expand the "footprint" of ME too much - unlike the terrian above Inverness. And its high elevation and steep. And did I mention its steep?

[Tin Woodsman]

The one problem with your plan is that, as seen in the map below from www.sugarbushhistory.com, is that the top half of the lift/terrain would be on USFS land. Good luck getting that approved. In essence, a lift from where Lower FIS flattens out to the Glen house would accomplish the same goal while staying entirely on private land and not overloading the Summit area with to many people. Regardless, this is pure fantasy until the real estate gets sold and ME gets the skier visits to justify serious terrain expansion. Even then, I think upper Inverness (all on private land) is the first priority. And for the record, upper Inverness is pretty high elevation, running from 2550' up to 3650'. That's higher than the summit of Stark Mtn at MRG next door. The only two lifts with a higher base station at SB would be Summit and possibly Heaven's Gate.

[sugarboarder]

Anybody know where that extension of Lower FIS (past the cutoff back to ME base) used to go?

[Plowboy]

There used to be a timing shack down there on the right. Might of had something to do with the length of an FIS downhill corse. :?:

[Strat]

There used to be a timing shack down there on the right. Might of had something to do with the length of an FIS downhill corse. :?:
Yep... the shack's still down there, it just requires a bit of a hike now... trail is VERY grown in with saplings and stuff, but if you drive up to the top of the Village Rd there it's not that hard to find...

[Plowboy]

Short hike from the top of the Village Rd. I've lived here in the Glen Ellen Village since 1983. Untill recently the Village was stuck in a time warp. :lol: We still have a few original Glen Ellen skiers(owners) up here.

[smootharc]

Looks pretty damn good in World Wind though...

[smootharc]

the "hopefully forthcoming very shortly" terrain pod above Inverness ? Anyone ?

Feel free to name the chair/area, and also the, let's say, four trails coming down off it.

P.S. This absurd post is only for those who've got absolutely nothing productive to accomplish at the moment. The rest of you get back to cooking dinner, giving your significant others foot massages, or organizing your attics !

[freeheel_skier]

You forgot antiquing!

[Strat]

the "hopefully forthcoming very shortly" terrain pod above Inverness ? Anyone ?

Feel free to name the chair/area, and also the, let's say, four trails coming down off it.

P.S. This absurd post is only for those who've got absolutely nothing productive to accomplish at the moment. The rest of you get back to cooking dinner, giving your significant others foot massages, or organizing your attics !
I think some sort of connection to the Monroe Skyline would be cool... call it the Monroe Bowl/Chair...
As for productivity, well yes I should be doing homework, but oh well...

[jwt]

looks like both those areas suggested for dream expansion, and I do mean dream, are facing too much to the east and south, much like North Lynx. . . . .and we know how much snow that holds in direct sun. Only way to get the snow to hold above Inverness or lower FIS bowl is Castlerock-type trails, winding and narrow, just like the ones they don't build anymore. . . . . . . . . . . tree skiing is far more likely. . . w/o the lift part, in the near future. . .as a matter of fact, next time you are able to head to OInverness from the High Traverse and we have a base, you will see quite a bit of tracking from those of us who climb to earn our turns. . . . . . . . . . . . need snow, not expansion!

[Tin Woodsman]

looks like both those areas suggested for dream expansion, and I do mean dream, are facing too much to the east and south, much like North Lynx. . . . .and we know how much snow that holds in direct sun. Only way to get the snow to hold above Inverness or lower FIS bowl is Castlerock-type trails, winding and narrow, just like the ones they don't build anymore. . . . . . . . . . . tree skiing is far more likely. . . w/o the lift part, in the near future. . .as a matter of fact, next time you are able to head to OInverness from the High Traverse and we have a base, you will see quite a bit of tracking from those of us who climb to earn our turns. . . . . . . . . . . . need snow, not expansion!

True, but the North Lynx runs are particularly wide and exposed to sun and wind, no? I think there's a happy medium where you can cut a pod containing trails wide/straight enough to support snowmaking butremaining narrow enough to hold snow. I would tend to doubt all those trails would have snowmaking anyway, and could therefore be free to be as narrow and curvy as Win would want. Also, remember that this will be a high elevation lift - from 2550' up to 3650'. If done right, it could be open far more often than NL.

And you'll still be able to hike for your good turns down to the High Traverse, you'll just be able to start from both ends. :D

Lower FIS bowl is a little more easterly oriented, so I don't agree there.

Regardless, as you point out, this is mostly just fantasy and won't likely see the light of day in our skiing lifetimes (if you're over the age of 35).