Gore Conditions (2018 - 2019)

10 Reasons why I know I'm a ski addict:

1.  I routinely read the NY Ski Blog all summer long.

2.  The only reason I use Instagram is to follow skiing feeds.

3.  I never put my boot bag away.

4.  I keep my skis out in my Dining Room all year long.

5.  I don't put my Christmas decorations away until mid June because I'm too busy skiing.

6.  I only listen to my ski play list, and when I do I imagine myself carving magnificent turns on my Monoski.

7.  My screen saver on my computer is comprised of 10 years or more of my best ski pics and frame grabs.

8.  For me, the first day of winter is August 1st.

9.  I'm designing my own Monoski and want to start my own ski company.

10. I keep a timer running on my phone to constantly remind me of how long I have to wait until Gore opening Day!

First Pass Deadline for ORDA is tomorrow.

Passes acquired.  

I believe they introduced a new category for 20 Something.  I don't recall seeing that last year, perhaps I'm mistaken.

Also, I like the installment option, when you buy for a family of 5-6 its a real plus.


If anyone is interested in some relaxing reading over the next few months, the 2017 amendment to the 2002 Gore Mountain Unit Managment Plan is available on the DEC web site.


It clarifies some of the discussion that took place last week about the Hudson chair "realignment" and contains a number of other interesting items.


It's obvious that NYS plans on ramping up Gore and making it a lot more than what it is today.  It will be interesting to see this unfold, to say the least.  

In my personal opinion, I still believe they should focus on exploiting what they've already created before trying to expand.  But what do I know, I'm just a ski bum.

Try this link for the DEC....sorry about that....


https://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/lands_forests_pdf/gore2018ump.pdf

Half of Cirque Glades destroyed

Say it isn't so.

So I've not had a chance to fully digest this document, its quite voluminous.  Harvey (or anyone else) if you can help shed some light it might help.

What you've posted is "2017 New Managment Actions".

What frightens me, scares the shit out of me actually, is the "Previously Approved Actions, Not Yet Constructed" plans.  Does anyone know if there is a long range strategy to implement this plan?

Brace yourself:

- Barkeater gets clear cut with a new trail that splinters off it through Boreas, also clear cut (note I say clear cut the document says it becomes a "Trail", so not sure how to achieve that without clear cutting, more or less).
- Cirque gets clear cut.
- Tahawus Glade gets clear cut
- Tahawus and Sleeping Bear are widened and no longer trails, more like slopes.
- High Pines Glade, clear cut into Topridge at the lift crossing.
- Twister Glade gets clear cut.
- Quicksilver gets straightened out.
- Ski Bowl Glade gets cut and turned into a trail, along with Hudson.
- Looks like new wide slope cut in, between Moxam and 46er, appears that JJ's Glade gets nuked.

And a whole lot more.

SO....I'm hoping that my cursory review of this is just a load of nonsense and I've just not read the documentation correctly.

BUT....I really want to know, who the brilliant minds thinking this stuff up??  I mean why would, in your wildest dreams ever, ever, ever even consider turning Barkeater into a trail?  Or for that matter any of the stuff I've outlined above???

Please don't consider me an alarmist, or a kook, I just want to be educated.

HELP!!

Oh and yes, they are showing some wood thrashing to connect Upper and Lower Steilhang

I have been tracking this since the proposal came out, wrote several letters to the DEC. This is a railroad job. They are going to destroy some great back country skiing as well as the glades mentioned. All I can hope is that it takes them beyond my remaining life to execute.

So I guess I'm not reading the document wrong and this is really the long term plan.  

I feel ill.

The Burnt Ridge Quad is 6100 feet in length with 1432 foot vertical and it opened ten years ago. It serves basically 2 trails, Sagamore, which leaves you at the lift and, Echo, which ends 1/2 mile from the lift leaving you on a cross country trail.That is the definition of an underused asset and bad management.

Look at what Hunter is doing right now with the new North Pod. A new lift, three monster trails that leave you right at the lift, plus 2 more access trails and all in one summer, not 10 years so far and who knows how much longer. Burnt Ridge should have at least 5-6 trails including at least an easy blue from the top. The good news is the Burnt Ridge HSQ will never need to be replaced since it is barely used. Maybe that was the game plan all along.

x10003q wrote

The Burnt Ridge Quad is 6100 feet in length with 1432 foot vertical and it opened ten years ago. It serves basically 2 trails, Sagamore, which leaves you at the lift and, Echo, which ends 1/2 mile from the lift leaving you on a cross country trail.That is the definition of an underused asset and bad management.

Look at what Hunter is doing right now with the new North Pod. A new lift, three monster trails that leave you right at the lift, plus 2 more access trails and all in one summer, not 10 years so far and who knows how much longer. Burnt Ridge should have at least 5-6 trails including at least an easy blue from the top. The good news is the Burnt Ridge HSQ will never need to be replaced since it is barely used. Maybe that was the game plan all along.

So you're advocating the destruction of Barkeater?

MikePom wrote

x10003q wrote

The Burnt Ridge Quad is 6100 feet in length with 1432 foot vertical and it opened ten years ago. It serves basically 2 trails, Sagamore, which leaves you at the lift and, Echo, which ends 1/2 mile from the lift leaving you on a cross country trail.That is the definition of an underused asset and bad management.

Look at what Hunter is doing right now with the new North Pod. A new lift, three monster trails that leave you right at the lift, plus 2 more access trails and all in one summer, not 10 years so far and who knows how much longer. Burnt Ridge should have at least 5-6 trails including at least an easy blue from the top. The good news is the Burnt Ridge HSQ will never need to be replaced since it is barely used. Maybe that was the game plan all along.

So you're advocating the destruction of Barkeater?

Yes. As much as I love the glade, it is low altitude and if it does not snow, Barkeater does not exist. You can not have a monster HSQ serve 2 trails for 10 years (unless you are ORDA).

Just to clarify, I do not think local Gore management is bad, they can only deal with what comes out of ORDA.

x10003q wrote

Just to clarify, I do not think local Gore management is bad, they can only deal with what comes out of ORDA.

Excuse me - who is Mr ORDA?

For once we have to consider that Sno may be right, this just adds to the pressure to make snow. It seems each year Sag gets open later and later and with crappier conditions.

Frankly I could care less- what I hate to see is for them to pop over the ridge and start usurping terrain near lower Pete Gay and Raymond Brook.

I understand the kind of thinking that says BR has to be developed. It's certainly "logical."

From those drawings it looks to me like Cirque and the Ski Bowl glades are on the block. It also looks to me like Twister Glades live on.  I don't see some of the other stuff Mike mentioned.

Much of what is on that plan has been on there since the expansion. Just because it is on the drawing doesn't mean it will happen. Barkeater was drawn as a trail on the first drawing of the expansion and I do think that will happen.

You who whine about skating Cedars?  You need to STFU, this is being done for you.

I love BR the way it is, a beautiful unique part of Gore.  Gore has a huge percentage of the great inbounds tree skiing in NY, and it looks vulnerable.

Like I said, I get it. But I don't like it.

I'm with snoloco on this one, don't blow out any more glades until you can get the ski bowl open by Christmas.

Good assessment Harvey.

I've been doing some reading, they need to gouge the trails open to hit their cap of 40 miles of trails, what the Charter allows them to max out at.

Double check the hatch patterns on the long term plan.


I'm not going to say anything else about this, other than that last year they blew snow on 46er headwall and never even opened the trail.

Its like putting an addition onto your house when the existing house is falling down.  If you can't maintain what you already have, why bother expanding?

Also, look at the utilization stats.  Over the last 10 years, with Burnt Ridge, Ski Bowl, etc. added, the numbers are fairly flat.  It's not like all this development is bringing in hordes of skiers.

Harvey wrote

I understand the kind of thinking that says BR has to be developed. It's certainly "logical."

Logical? Gore/ORDA installed a 6100 foot, multi-million $$ high speed quad with an intermediate pitch and, in their infinite wisdom,  cut only 2 trails, called them most difficult and let the decade go by without adding a true intermediate trail. The terrain on Burnt Ridge could probably even handle a green trail. But instead, they kept it an underused expert area with a built in excuse not to open it as it serves so few skiers and needs so much snowmaking to open.

Harvey wrote

From those drawings it looks to me like Cirque and the Ski Bowl glades are on the block. It also looks to me like Twister Glades live on.  I don't see some of the other stuff Mike mentioned.

Much of what is on that plan has been on there since the expansion. Just because it is on the drawing doesn't mean it will happen. Barkeater was drawn as a trail on the first drawing of the expansion and I do think that will happen.

Never forget that plans at Gore have very little meaning, especially since there is no rhyme or reason to the financing at Gore.

Harvey wrote

You who whine about skating Cedars?  You need to STFU, this is being done for you.

Wow. Can you be more obtuse? It is 7/10 of a mile hike (on a work road) from the main base to the base of the Burnt Ridge HSQ. Nothing like a big FU to snowboarders and parents with little kids. The majority of the people at Gore are not free heel, they are downhill skiers  and snowboarders. It is almost impossible to buy tele gear now and I doubt there are many people on AT gear skiing at Gore.

Harvey wrote

I love BR the way it is, a beautiful unique part of Gore.  Gore has a huge percentage of the great inbounds tree skiing in NY, and it looks vulnerable.

Burnt Ridge was always supposed to have more trails. The half-assed way Gore adds snowmaking and trails (Ruby Ridge?) is responsible for this mess.

Harvey wrote

Like I said, I get it. But I don't like it.
I'm with snoloco on this one, don't blow out any more glades until you can get the ski bowl open by Christmas.

At a properly run and financed ski area, there would be real financial decisions made to ensure an orderly expansion that includes trails, snowmaking on the trails and increased snowmaking capacity to get the water to the trails. The continued lack of snowmaking pump capacity continues to hamper snowmaking decisions.

Yes, it's logical to build more trails around a new $7m lift. I think we both agree on that.  I'm not responsible for timing of the funding.  I put logical in quotes because even though it all "makes sense" I wish it wasn't so.

Yes I think if you don't like the skate on cedars, then you should be happy they are putting in trails where glades currently exist. I don't mind the skate and I like the trees.  I'm actually ok with giving up Cirque. Of the four awesome glades on Burnt Ridge to me it is least awesome. It's hardest to keep covered.

I think we agree on snowmaking. Need more before you add more trails.

I looked up obtuse. Ouch!

The skate on Cedars is not too bad if you bother to wax your skis. The real issue over there is that your in another world, no lodge, no facilities. I think the original idea was to host races over there and get them away from trails needed for general public and for that I think it does pretty well, but that does not make a lot of financial sense.

Most likely the reason Gore has not significantly expanded its market is because they have max’d out the day skier market and N Creek doesn’t have any more lodging and no more will be built for a one season destination.

I believe they are increasing water & pump capacity by 42% (or something like that).  This should (in theory) help expand snow making, IF (thats the big if) they can hire enough trained manpower to cover additional territory.

I guess what is confusing me is improving access to Burnt Ridge.  

A skier either has to:  

A) Traverse in on Cedars.  

or

B) Cut in off Twister via Echo which is difficult most of the winter due to racing.

All the improvements they are planning will not change access.  So if they wanted to do something smart, they would cut in a new trail that tracks the topography off Tahawus and swings through Tahawus Glade, through Abenaki, Barkeater and Boreas which will land you on Sagamore just above the last headwall.

This would create a nice clean and easy skiing trail from The Saddle Lodge, straight into Burnt Ridge that would by-pass Twister and Echo, so the racers can do their thing.  Eliminate the need to use Cedars, and vastly improve the Burnt Ridge experience.

Instead of wasting all that money replacing the Hudson Chair, spend it on replacing the North Quad, which is too slow and inconsistent to support the volume it experiences.  It is a perfect candidate for a detachable quad because it will get you up to the Saddle in a hurray, and be easy for beginner and novice skiers to handle.


Since I have nothing better to do on a Sunday night, I put on my land use planner hat and mapped out a new trail, named it "Tsitsho", after the Mohawk word "Fox", because this would be a very sly way to enter Burnt Ridge.


Burnt Ridge Ridge Mountain Satellite view with new trail highlighted in red.


Burnt Ridge Mountain with new trail highlighted in red.