Jay, Burke and EB-5

raisingarizona wrote

I really like the idea of a local community run back country area.

All you would need is volunteers in the summer or maybe goats? HA! Ya, hire some goats to keep the grass down!

And a small rustic lodge at the base. A meeting area like a club, it could be a byob and bagged lunch spot. Have a wood burning stove in there to heat the joint. The whole operation could have one or two employees running it every day. I imagine a really cool spot to get together with friend and family, tell ski stories and enjoy some cold beers.

This idea is more of a city park controlled by the community, it's not a ski area built to sell 130 dollar day tickets, sell real estate, or even make any money. It's just to enjoy and hopefully when it snows to bring in some visitors that spend some money at small local mom and pop businesses. I like it for it's purity, it's the anti-resort model and I think it's really cool.

It's not about entitlement or exclusion, heck even chunky city soft teenagers with poor cardio abilities from the tri-state region would be welcome.

Holy thread drift, Batman. That said, I'm in, even if it cost $5. Look at that place in Quebec, ML wrote the TR, it is a hike-only cooperative.

Imagine this scenario at Jay, it would be like a post-apocalyptic skiing version of Waterworld, with The Smokers hangin' in the Tram Haus.

raisingarizona wrote

The numbers as you mention probably aren't huge in comparison but the industry is paying attention. It's still in it's infancy and I think with the right kind of areas to visit the numbers will continue to grow. It's obviously becoming the thing out west here. It's wild how many people want to climb but don't want to or just don't know how to travel in avalanche terrain.I also think with ski areas becoming more and more crowded and ridiculously pricey lift tickets more people are finding the climbing option to be more attractive.  

You support what I am saying with what I bolded above. These are important considerations. Skiing bc sounds good until you actually put some thought into the requirements.

I think the crowding commentary is not as common as you state. Are there a few times during the season that there might be crowding on certain trails? Yes, but I think this might be more common early in the season and during holiday periods.

The pricey lift tickets can be somewhat mitigated by pre- purchase online and/or the new "max type - multi area" season passes that can be found across the US.

raisingarizona wrote

The danger aspect is arguable. A well maintained bc area imho isn't any more or less dangerous than skiing in area. I think skiing crowded groomers with people going faster than their ability is a lot scarier than navigating the back country and much scarier than skiing some well maintained mid to low angle glades. Of course tho we all have different perspectives on what is dangerous and what is an acceptable level of risk.

I disagree that "crowded groomers" are more dangerous than bc skiing. A twisted knee when you are 5 miles out on the trail can become a major problem while a twisted knee while skiing lift served trails means you will be treated with first aid in less than 15 minutes and will be inside a heated building soon there after.

The avalanche component is a huge factor as it  takes years of study and experience to have some clue about avalanche areas and even then we see highly experienced bc skiers/boarders die in avalanches every year.




 

snoloco wrote

What would you do about the hotel that they just finished building? I never got an answer previously. If you said earlier that maintained ski runs look like a scar in nature, then why are you proposing trimming them? They'd look the same whether or not they were groomed from a distance, well unless you want to try and re-seed all the trails, which would be very expensive.

I think the planning for such a project would take a lot more than any half assed answer I could produce on the internets. I'm just a 40 year old ski bum/student, I'm not a demolitions expert but I know of buildings that have been removed manually to preserve and sell everything possible. Personally, I'm more attracted to the use of explosives. This looks so rad!

x10003q wrote

raisingarizona wrote

The numbers as you mention probably aren't huge in comparison but the industry is paying attention. It's still in it's infancy and I think with the right kind of areas to visit the numbers will continue to grow. It's obviously becoming the thing out west here. It's wild how many people want to climb but don't want to or just don't know how to travel in avalanche terrain.I also think with ski areas becoming more and more crowded and ridiculously pricey lift tickets more people are finding the climbing option to be more attractive.  

You support what I am saying with what I bolded above. These are important considerations. Skiing bc sounds good until you actually put some thought into the requirements.

I think the crowding commentary is not as common as you state. Are there a few times during the season that there might be crowding on certain trails? Yes, but I think this might be more common early in the season and during holiday periods.

The pricey lift tickets can be somewhat mitigated by pre- purchase online and/or the new "max type - multi area" season passes that can be found across the US.

raisingarizona wrote

The danger aspect is arguable. A well maintained bc area imho isn't any more or less dangerous than skiing in area. I think skiing crowded groomers with people going faster than their ability is a lot scarier than navigating the back country and much scarier than skiing some well maintained mid to low angle glades. Of course tho we all have different perspectives on what is dangerous and what is an acceptable level of risk.

I disagree that "crowded groomers" are more dangerous than bc skiing. A twisted knee when you are 5 miles out on the trail can become a major problem while a twisted knee while skiing lift served trails means you will be treated with first aid in less than 15 minutes and will be inside a heated building soon there after.

The avalanche component is a huge factor as it  takes years of study and experience to have some clue about avalanche areas and even then we see highly experienced bc skiers/boarders die in avalanches every year.

Don't twist your knee! Yup, once people are a little more on their own they should probably put a bit more thought into their behaviors!

I doubt that the avalanche danger at a regularly skier compacted area on Burke Mountain would produce much in avie activity but I don't have any experience there.

I stand by what I said, if you are educated and have lots of experience bc skiing doesn't have to be dangerous at all. Skiing around on crowded groomers though......that's just terrifying!

I think a component for such an area that would be part of discussion for creating such an area would be rescue/evac and safety measures. I'm not claiming to be able to provide any answers (sorry Sno, your engineering brain probably doesn't like that answer) but I'm sure there are possible solutions. I like to believe that if we can have a man walk on the moon we could probably come up with a way to maintain and run a city park for an earn your turns skiing experience.

Harvey wrote

There are reasons why Burke has struggled. I don't know what they are, but they do seem persistent. Any solution would have to address those issues. Hoping River will fill us in.

Burke has always been underfunded. Burke was hard to get to until the I-91 extension was completed in the late 1970s. They have always been behind the other areas in NE in terms of lifts and snowmaking. For example, Burke upgraded its summit double to a fixed grip quad in 1988 - a point where other areas had added detachable quads. There were bankruptcies in 1990 and 1999. More recent owners were better funded, but Burke still changed owners a few times in the 2000s.

Sick Bird Rider wrote

raisingarizona wrote

I really like the idea of a local community run back country area.

All you would need is volunteers in the summer or maybe goats? HA! Ya, hire some goats to keep the grass down!

And a small rustic lodge at the base. A meeting area like a club, it could be a byob and bagged lunch spot. Have a wood burning stove in there to heat the joint. The whole operation could have one or two employees running it every day. I imagine a really cool spot to get together with friend and family, tell ski stories and enjoy some cold beers.

This idea is more of a city park controlled by the community, it's not a ski area built to sell 130 dollar day tickets, sell real estate, or even make any money. It's just to enjoy and hopefully when it snows to bring in some visitors that spend some money at small local mom and pop businesses. I like it for it's purity, it's the anti-resort model and I think it's really cool.

It's not about entitlement or exclusion, heck even chunky city soft teenagers with poor cardio abilities from the tri-state region would be welcome.

Holy thread drift, Batman. That said, I'm in, even if it cost $5. Look at that place in Quebec, ML wrote the TR, it is a hike-only cooperative.

Imagine this scenario at Jay, it would be like a post-apocalyptic skiing version of Waterworld, with The Smokers hangin' in the Tram Haus.

Linky for that TR SBR?

RA - here is your place - it is in West Virginia:

http://www.whitegrass.com/

http://forum.nyskiblog.com/Timberline-WV-Oct-2012-Matt-and-Pat-s-Roadtrip-td4020638.html

http://skiequalsmc2.blogspot.com/2012/11/skiing-sandy-timberline-whitegrass-west.html

raisingarizona wrote

Linky for that TR SBR?

Spring-Bash-at-Mont-Alta

Harvey wrote

I'd like to hear Riverc0ils opinion. Can Burke be viable as a lift served resort?

I had always assumed that the problem was that there are other mountains with more natural snow closer to population centers. What is the issue?

Well, it seems to have been viable. It has continually operated throughout all of the bankruptcies and ownership changes. I guess it depends if your definition of viable includes being profitable and sustainable long term under a single owner, lol.

Burke is a much different place now than when I skied it more frequently. The HSQs and trail widening really took away a lot of the mountain's charm for me. Conditions degrade faster, there are more people on the trails, etc. I guess that could mean that it is more viable than it was before?

Goodness knows how those hotels will affect the area when they get completed.

As far as Burke's issues, I think location has always been its biggest issue. Burke is at the end of the line as far as mountains go off the interstates. Coming from Boston, you pass by all of the mid-sized areas and then Waterville, Loon, Cannon, and Bretton and you are still driving. Burke only gets 200" annually so it is no Jay and only slightly better than the White Mountain areas. Coming from I-91, same issue of passing by other areas though it could be argued that Burke is faster than to get to than some of the other north of K areas. Even if that is true on paper, it isn't true in people's minds. Burke is a nice sized area and has really great tree skiing. But it isn't a major resort that you need a few days to fully explore. You can see all of Burke in a day. Man made snow is not great, they struggle to open terrain by Christmas. So a few other issues, but location I think is the biggest. And they killed much of the special quality that made Burke worth the drive compared to other areas. But on the flip side, without a T2B HSQ, they couldn't get on the map either. So it was damned it you do, damned i you don't.

Ok. So, location, snowfall, size. 2 of those are very difficult to address.

The first is basically impossible to correct.  The second is easy to correct if you mean any kind of snow.  If you're only counting natural snow, then it's impossible to correct.  The third can be corrected through finishing these 3 expansions that haven't been done but are proposed and one I believe has been approved.

raisingarizona wrote

I read that the owner renamed Burke Q-Burke after himself? Does anyone else think that seems like sort of a douche move?

Does anyone actually call it that?

Burke locals printed up a bunch of FQ stickers a couple years ago when he cut access to mtn bike trails built by northeast kingdom trail crew on burke.  

Burke has failed repeatedly because it is in the middle of nowhere.  You have to drive past dozens of larger ski areas no matter where you are coming from.

40-60,000 thousand mtn bikers visit the burke region annually to ride the Northeast Kingdom trail system.  Burke ran the lift Friday afternoon and Sat-Sun for real mellow lift service riding.  Rolly Grail (flow trail) is a blast! It's real nice to have a lift service option in a destination mtn bike location.....

6-9 million economic impact on burke region from the mtn biking ANNUALLY!    that's big bucks for that cow town!

The Kingdom will be better off without Q  FQ!!!!!

Harvey wrote

Dropped in the link Coach.

Coach Z wrote

Big question is how much money did Bill and Q give to Bernies various campaigns.

There are some big questions, not sure this one is at the top of the list. I'm curious about what is in the emails the gov deleted.

Bernie not listed but

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/politics/2016/04/15/quiros-stenger-jay-peak-political-donations/83087476/

But yet it's probably considered the mountain biking capitol or close to that in New England.

They have something going on obviously but it's not the skiing.

I wrote this Mag article about Burke 10+ years ago (posted it here in 2010) -- interesting to see if anything's changed. In the comments are several points that are being discussed in the current thread.

raisingarizona wrote

But yet it's probably considered the mountain biking capitol or close to that in New England.

They have something going on obviously but it's not the skiing.

How many people mountain bike that seriously? Really? Not many people ski, relatively speaking, but, downhill MTB? C'mon. Ain't happening, on a large scale. Dangerous as hell. Personally, I'd build a water park and tubing hill. Really. That's a cash cow,sort of, if it's close enough for a day trip or quick overnight. But that place ain't close to anything. Sorry.

This thing has been named but doesn't have a logo yet: Kingdom Con.

Coach can spot a lyin democrat, whattaya think Z:

http://www.wcax.com/story/31755600/vt-governors-staff-emails-in-the-spotlight-after-alleged-kingdom-con

Can't stand Shumlin.  Vermont Govs run every two years so this bozo is on the local news every fricking day