Slidebrook

I thought I'd make a specific thread for discussion of issues surrounding Slidebrook, as there are some good posts on the subject in the Lift Ticket thread that many people might just ignore due to the thread title. I have a lot of questions, but no answers:

1) What is the nature of SB's operating permit in the Slide Brook and Lockwood Brook basins?

2) Does this permit forbid them or otherwise restrict who they pick up on German Flats with their shuttles and the number of shuttles they can use to do so?

3) What is the current status of SB's relationship with the USFS and are there prospects for an increased ski area presence in the basins (obviously w/o any discussion of lifts or formal trails)?

Would love to get the locals' info here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tin Woodsman

(2) Does this permit forbid them or otherwise restrict who they pick up on German Flats with their shuttles and the number of shuttles they can use to do so?
Would love to get the locals' info here.

---

I can only address this one. The MadBus is Valley transportation, running a posted route with posted times & stops. See www.madrivervalley.com and click on MadBus logo on left nav bar. There is a decent pull off headed south on German Flats- complete with ski racks-, but not so good heading back to Mt Ellen. There is a bit of a clumsy walk down/north of Slide Brook pick up at the Manlin Rd headed back toward Mt. Ellen. The driver will stop anywhere on the posted route IF IF IF it is safe to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tin Woodsman

I thought I'd make a specific thread for discussion of issues surrounding Slidebrook, as there are some good posts on the subject in the Lift Ticket thread that many people might just ignore due to the thread title. I have a lot of questions, but no answers:

1) What is the nature of SB's operating permit in the Slide Brook and Lockwood Brook

2) Does this permit forbid them or otherwise restrict who they pick up on German Flats with their shuttles and the number of shuttles they can use to do so?

3) What is the current status of SB's relationship with the USFS and are there prospects for an increased ski area presence in the basins (obviously w/o any discussion of lifts or formal trails)?

Would love to get the locals' info here.

---

Here is what I know though most of it is second hand info. The permit SBush has allows a certian number of skiers per day in a certain zone within a set time of year. There are regs about groups being accompanied etc. SBush stance on others going in, either in the zones or other areas of SBrock, is that they are poachers. That said, they do nothing to aggresively stop SBrock use. There have been discussions about trying to limit use.

The feel their permit applies to all of SBrock. They have stated they will charge for rescues if one is not on a "tour". There were two rescues that were not on a tour but on the tour route. I had heard they were not charged but dont know for a fact.

Having never seen any docs or being involved this is just what I hear.

Currently, the permit allows for a certain number of guided skiers and riders to access the area from the North Lynx side on specified routes. I could be wrong, but others who venture in on their own are NOT poachers, despite some people tossing that word around.

However you have left the ski area proper and are responsible for your own actions. Rescue help may be charged, but often isn't. The line usually gets drawn at negligent behavior, i.e. if someone went in with no clue, no extra clothing, no food, late in the day and needed to be evacuated after getting "lost." But even then, Patrol doesn't seem to like to charge. Regardless, personal responsibility is in full effect and that means you might be handed a bill. I don't think this is unreasonable at all. As a skier and rider, I accept and support these rules.

Official Tour takers have priority at the bus stops, but it seems silly to restrict others from using this service. These bus stops are among the most popular in the Mad River Valley. Plus, it is an easy 10 minute skin/ hike back to the North base area, if you know the correct turn off Slide Brook Road.

The USFS is just one level of oversight, the State has tremendous say as to what goes on in Slide Brook too. Sugarbush is funding and conducting a study of habitats in the area, specifically beech stands and hermit thrush territories. I've been hiking with a wildlife biologist for the past few weeks counting, cataloging, GPS'ing and marking bear-scarred trees in the Basin. What an education. We've barely scratched the bottom of the southern edge of the bowl and are close to 1000 scarred trees. However, without full benefit of this info, it is hard to say whether there will or will not be more officially maintained ski routes in Slide Brook in the future.

John

Quote:

---

The USFS is just one level of oversight, the State has tremendous say as to what goes on in Slide Brook too. Sugarbush is funding and conducting a study of habitats in the area, specifically beech stands and hermit thrush territories. I've been hiking with a wildlife biologist for the past few weeks counting, cataloging, GPS'ing and marking bear-scarred trees in the Basin. What an education. We've barely scratched the bottom of the southern edge of the bowl and are close to 1000 scarred trees. However, without full benefit of this info, it is hard to say whether there will or will not be more officially maintained ski routes in Slide Brook in the future.

---

John -

Thanks for your explanation. Who is this work being done at the behest of? The USFS or the State? And to what end? Is the goal to understand in a comprehensive manner the extent to which bears populate the Basin? Would it be simplistic to conclude that the more evidence you find of a significant population in the Basin means it is less likely that SB will be able to expand the official skiing options therein or contribute to more frequent pick-ups at the Slide Brook Rd. stop?[/quote]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tin Woodsman

Would it be simplistic to conclude that the more evidence you find of a significant population in the Basin means it is less likely that SB will be able to expand the official skiing options therein or contribute to more frequent pick-ups at the Slide Brook Rd. stop?

---

....so I have headed off into SB with my loppers to declaw all those darn bears. They are little and fuzzy like Winnie the Pooh, right ?

Did get in there on Sunday. Just under knee deep with nothing underneith. Rocks are sharp. Did take a 7" storm riped down horizontal pine out of middle Vertical Realiy. From there down was clean.

The work is being done by Sugarbush for all levels of oversight, including local, ANR, F&W, Act 250 and USFS. We were supposed to hike with John Austin, the VT F&W biologist on Friday, but he canceled because of the snow. The end result is to look at more legal lines for Sugarbush skiers and riders. The more I hike in the Basin and see the work that random folks have done, the more I think it is a good idea for Sugarbush to seek further responsibility and oversight for the area. I've been part of it from both sides, so I am not just pointing fingers.

The extent of the bear population doesn't necessarily prevent more winter access. They are sleeping and generally don't care where we slide. However, choosing where and where not to make new lines is an important part of the process. Also, some beech stands could be thinned to help more mature trees grow, while removing smaller sucker trees.

The main point is to learn as much as possible to make informed decisions.

Couldn't wait, could you Greg? Thanks for removing the blowdown. There's more where that came from. The things I've seen people skiing in already scare me. Unfrozen gully lines, stump-fests, rock gardens, etc, just side-slipped right down to bare ground. Doesn't anybody side-step and ski pack the runs in the early season anymore?

John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by atkinson

The things I've seen people skiing in already scare me. Unfrozen gully lines, stump-fests, rock gardens, etc, just side-slipped right down to bare ground. Doesn't anybody side-step and ski pack the runs in the early season anymore?

John

---

Sounds like it's time for an organized SB "army"....led by a stern, grumpy leader who rules with a dedicated malevolence (and two big fists)....

at times on this issue. I am guilty of using 'poaching' to describe people stepping into Slide Brook from lift access, without being part of a SB program. The basin may be accessed from below - skin-up/earn your turns - but the agreement/regs set up in '96 for use of the basin from SB specifically forbids entry from the basin via lifts if not part of a program. Number/limits mentioned by John are monitored through the Outback and ALC programs.

That said, we are working pro-actively to determine impacts in order to hopefully allow more use of the basin legally.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by atkinson

Couldn't wait, could you Greg? Thanks for removing the blowdown. There's more where that came from. The things I've seen people skiing in already scare me. Unfrozen gully lines, stump-fests, rock gardens, etc, just side-slipped right down to bare ground. Doesn't anybody side-step and ski pack the runs in the early season anymore?

---

John -

Again, thanks for your insights here. Granted, we are dealing with multiple levels of governmental oversight, so uncertainty is to be expected, but can you hazard a guess as to when this process is supposed to conclude? Also, what is the desired end state or next steps for SB once the review is completed?

Also, as long as we're on the subject of blowdowns, what have been your observations w/r/t damage from the October storm? I haven't seen it in the middle elevations of say 2200' - 3000', but I'm told it's somewhat prevalent up high - Hughies for instance. Thoughts?

PS - Congrats on your new role.

on a side note...is the slidebrook chair going to be running tomorrow?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim

on a side note...is the slidebrook chair going to be running tomorrow?

---

Yes, beginning tomorrow through 1/1. Have a blast!

Word is that Slidebrook will run tomorrow. 8)


Edited to add that Noski had no right jumping in before my answer. :x :lol:


.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lostone

Word is that Slidebrook will run tomorrow. 8)

---

oh really? Hadn't heard that.... :wink:

Hey Tinny,

Thanks for the congrats. I am pysched to focus on the Catamount Trail and Green Mountain backcountry skiing full-time.

October storm damage was augmented by many of the wind events we had in November too. Elevation doesn't seem to be a factor, there's random stuff down all over the place. The LT from Paradise to CR is really bad, with no room for glide on the downhills. Not that is matters too much anymore. Rumble was also shut down in spots.

Other spots that I've seen stuff down are on the main SB tour lines, although the OB crew has been working on it. Most of the maintained stuff at South was re-cleaned after the damage by Adrienne and the trail crew, so this should be good as soon as the snow is.

I haven't had time to do much venturing, so I don't know much more than that right now. With all this snow coming though, I might have some more up-to-date info soon.

John

John

bump

We need the proper cover on the Slidebrook roads for for any emergency evacuation before we can run the Slidebrook Express. This is not only our decision but must meet the Tram Authority specifications. Once it is there we will run it weekends and Holidays!

Wow, Seems like you guys are geting more oversite regarding the chairs, then Airlines get from the FAA, and NSTB.


My theory on Slidebrook, is that anybody who has any buisness taking an unguided descent, is going to be able to be responsible for themselves, and will probably be environmentally responsible for that matter. Anybody, who gets into it, and can't handle it, and is unprepared, is Stupid.

As far as the Patrol Charging for Rescues, People make honest mistakes, People Screw up, and it isn't like Slidebrook is that far in the back country, that the patrol has to take any uncessary risks to mount a search and rescue. (Slide Brook, no more than 2 miles from civ, No Avys, Easily Accessible,)
I know patrollers who play around in slidebrook off duty all the time, as well, so if they are going to charge, they should practice what they preach.


And , just the fact the terrain is OB, is going to keep most people off of it. So, as long as they don't Incourage it or Discourage it, deserving skiers will find their way to it.

If you don't want to pay for a rescue off the resort, you don't have to call for one. :roll:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike451

Wow, Seems like you guys are geting more oversite regarding the chairs, then Airlines get from the FAA, and NSTB.


My theory on Slidebrook, is that anybody who has any buisness taking an unguided descent, is going to be able to be responsible for themselves, and will probably be environmentally responsible for that matter. Anybody, who gets into it, and can't handle it, and is unprepared, is Stupid.

As far as the Patrol Charging for Rescues, People make honest mistakes, People Screw up, and it isn't like Slidebrook is that far in the back country, that the patrol has to take any uncessary risks to mount a search and rescue. (Slide Brook, no more than 2 miles from civ, No Avys, Easily Accessible,)
I know patrollers who play around in slidebrook off duty all the time, as well, so if they are going to charge, they should practice what they preach.


And , just the fact the terrain is OB, is going to keep most people off of it. So, as long as they don't Incourage it or Discourage it, deserving skiers will find their way to it.

---

Encourage...........
:D
Charge for rescues!