The tree skiing dilemma

all those photos are from thunder ridge?  c'mon man

skimore wrote

I'm pretty sure this one is Mt Peter.

But I call BS on skimore. He knows darn well he photoshopped out the orange netting.

Looks like the Notch to me^^^^^

Also just came up with a cool idea.  How about instead of tree skiing, we have orange net skiing.  Take a wide open trail and put a maze of orange netting going down it.  If you crash, you just go into the netting and the turns keep you going nice and slow to be safe.

snoloco wrote

Or maybe it's Mountain Creek.

Also just came up with a cool idea.  How about instead of tree skiing, we have orange net skiing.  Take a wide open trail and put a maze of orange netting going down it.  If you crash, you just go into the netting and the turns keep you going nice and slow to be safe.

Its about time you skiers come up with some innovative new features after robbing snowboarding of everything cool and fun! I'm all about the maze riding, although yesterday I went under some nets to avoid travelling uphill...

Ok number

1) Tree skiing as soon as it gets opened up enough so you can start going fast becomes very dangerous. If you want to take that risk then it's up to you. This is common sense. 99% of tree skiing in EC is really tight with underbrush/small trees. Ski areas in the east do limited/sometime non existent thinning/cleaning up of trees. I'm guessing they do this probably because they are afraid of lawsuits. Look at the ridiculously tight trees at mt snow as an example. It would be pretty easy to thin them out. Tree skiing is a different type of skiing than trails just like moguls are different. Moguls can't compare to softness of pow falling on top of a freshly groomed slope. You can't compare them.


Ok time to address the elephant in the room.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NUMBER ONE reason skiing powder at most ski areas in the east SUCKS compared to out west is because of grooming powder flat
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's why everyone is talking about "the woods" because there's basically no powder on the trails. Skiing powder on the trails is extacy. It's why people fly out west. And if you love wood skiing, you could always ski the trails with pow and THEN hit the woods. Double the fun.

Everyone knows okemo/stratton/wachusett groom everything flat, but let's look at the only other major resort in southern vermont, mt snow.

MT snow has NO "powder" groom schedule. They don't adjust when it snows overnight. It's business as usual.  If I was in charge, I would cancel the overnight groom on powder days except on green trails. They do this because some of  their ec clientelle(nyc/nj people who don't know what to do with powder and complain. Lots of people like pow though and have to speak up.  They start their groom on north face and finish on sunbrook. Going north to south.  THIS is the normal oprating procedure. You might get lucky and get some more pow, but it's a fluke if it  happens.

ON trails that do NOT have moguls......They left only 2  trails on the north face ungroomed. Then after that basically almost everything is groomed on the mountain. Only a few trails without moguls are left untouched. Even in the snow report where it says a trail was groomed, it usually was groomed earlier and then snow fell over the cord so ....


!!!Don't confuse a few inches covering on top of cord that fell in between when they finished grooming and then opened as being true powder.

The fact is you can't get any deep powder on trails without moguls except for maybe 2 or 3  trails out of 80. That's a complete joke when you're talking about a mountain that large with that huge of a crowd. Now if JUST mount snow did this then of course no big deal. But it's not just mt snow. It's almost all major resorts of southern/central Vermont that grooms out the entire mountain every night. Northern Vermont I'm not really familiar with their grooming patters. Maybe it's much better.

Now compare mt snow to berkshire east(A MUCH smaller area) and Beast left basically almost the whole mountain with fresh snow. They generally just groom the greens.

There's simply VERY FEW option for skiing powder in southern and central new england regardless of how much snow fell.  

I'll list them here for hills that leave the majority ungroomed on a powder day in southern/central new england(south central VT, MA/NH):
Ski sundown
Catamount(this won't last with condos being built)
berkshire east
Magic(doesn't groom EVER which sucks and lacks snowmaking. Also some trails from summit too steep for intermediate powder skiers, BUT THAT's great for experts who want a challenge!)
Crotched in NH I've heard leaves fresh, but I've never been there to confirm

That's it folks. That's pathetic. All the major big hills groom almost all powder flat which is blasphemy.

Hell even some mole hills which I didn't mention above in the northeast leave a few trails ungroomed on a powder day. Which is great! But they're not major resorts.

A few trails at a mole hill is far different than a place like mt snow. If mt snow leaves a few ungroomed, they get tracked out in 5 seconds. It's a huge place.

If you get a foot of snow at mt snow expect to be skiing just a few inches of pow at best on most trails. The few(we're talking 2 trails out of 85) on the north face that are left totally untouched will be tracked out in a heartbeat. The other few(maybe around 5  will be tracked out in a heartbeat)

To have a good powder day at a major resort like mt snow, you'd need them to leave almost EVERY SINGLE blue/black trail ungroomed. Would that not be epic?

That has to be Hickory, I think I see my p tex over there from Saturday.

I have skied Gore on a number of powder days and can't recall anything being groomed.

evergreen wrote

That has to be Hickory, I think I see my p tex over there from Saturday.

 Yep, two feet is not enough to thoroughly cover that rock pile. Should be pretty sweet this weekend, did they get another foot out of this latest storm?

evergreen wrote

That has to be Hickory, I think I see my p tex over there from Saturday.

Already been through two sticks this season.

East vs West:  

Western tree skiing reminds me of skiing western bumps (if other skiers have been through the trees) or even skiing steep powder slopes of the same degree on untouched.    The joy of trees out west is the scenery or untouched powder, not the adrenelin of skiing "the trees".  If you can't make turns between those widely spaced western trees (generally) then you better get a lesson, fast, because you cannot turn, at all.    

Eastern trees.    From what I would call "green circle" trees on Twister at Gore, to "black" marked runs to "triple black" unmarked runs, you better be able to turn those sticks (boards) or get ready to treat cuts/bruises. Green and blue trees have some scenery, but Hey, its eastern mountain scenery, enough said.   Once out of the green/blue tree runs, the scenery is mostly tight trees and snow, you have seen that before.   You are in those trees for the trees/rocks and the adrenelin rush you are getting from the focus of mind and body.    Turn or hurt.   Pick the right path, or hurt.  Yeah...sometimes the fresh snow is the reason too.    But for me, its the eastern tree adrenelin that causes me to ski eastern trees.   As I type this, I am trying to recall if I ever got the same rush out west.    The best memories of adrenelin out west in trees is from either the steepness of the slope, the idea  cliff band is looming, or getting lost.  Never the trees, though I was in them.              

Good point.

And thanks to all for the replies.  I didn't realize there was this much decent tree skiing around here.  A lot of it may simply be my inability to ski what is available.

riverc0il wrote

Fact is that all ski areas need to maintain their glades or else the trees would grow back and blow downs would trip up skiers.

gore please take note . since a noted local is no longer maintaining things ,the mt. needs to maintain the "new" glades they have put on the map.

onscott wrote

Instead of continuing the "Plattekill" thread I thought I would start one focused on PowAss's main concern...that tree skiing in the east is lame.  If you cut through the banter I think his point is that moving slo-mo through the woods, while fun at times, does not equal the thrill of western tree skiing.  I've done both and have to admit that it feels more like real skiing out there...not so much here.  Granted, out west you are skiing through sparsely populated firs - hit one and you probably won't get hurt (as long as you don't fall into a tree well).

That said, I have been in the trees at MRG and felt it was almost safe to actually ski in them.  There are other spots in the east but they are few and far between (at least from what I have found).  Maybe my level of skiing (adv. int.) keeps me from enjoying the good stuff.

Might part of the problem be that most areas do not make their gladed areas truly skiable? Other than MRG do areas actively manage their glades?  How about Plattekill?  Do they allow volunteers to trim underbrush and trees in certain areas?  It's one thing if you know the woods at a particular area intimately but another if you are a casual visitor.

As far as back country is concerned, could it be that most public (state) lands make it impossible (illegal) to ski?  In NY, for example, a tree in the woods is considered more precious than life itself; anyone involved in unauthorized clearing is subject to criminal charges.  Think about hiking mountain peaks - when I was a kid (70's) you could hike a peak in the Catskills and actually have views from the top.  Now, you get to many peaks and see...trees.

On a snow cat skiing day out west last year the guides were telling us that they spend many days in the summer performing some "chainsaw lovin'" on many of the areas that we were skiing.  Take a look at this pic - now THAT's tree skiing!

Do we simply need better management of the back country?

Belated, but welcome to the forum onscott.

Real skiing is relative. People have been nordic skiing for thousands of years and alpine skiing is probably less than 100 years old. Which is real? Depends on your perspective I think.  To call one kind of skiing (or riding) real seems subjective.

Personally I also think that faster isn't necessarily more fun.

I'm guessing that most mountains that put glades on the map, do some maintenance.  

With regard to Plattekill, NYSB has been very involved, in some ways leading this effort. Google "Plattekill Work Day" and you'll probably find some information on what we've done. ML has really spearheaded an effort to make the mountain full boundary to boundary skiing. I'm guessing that the job is 20% complete.

With regard to making the backcountry more accessible to skiers, there is an ongoing effort to recognize the growth of backcountry skiing and incorporate it into the State Land Management Plan (SLMP).

I started late in life and skied for several years without going into the trees. On day, after a sweet dump in the Adks, I watched little kids skiing bumps below the lift and thought ... if they can do it, so can I. I like flying through low angle glades, but also enjoy a slow methodical bump bump bump through steeper lines. Maybe it's my nordic background. There is joy (for me) in thinking things through and solving problems at my own rate.

One other point about the "tightness" of trees. IMO one big part of the appeal is snow quality. Obviously there is less or no manmade made. But there is also less traffic.  Once trees are so widely spaced that anyone can ski it, that "advantage" is gone.

every glade skier should do summer and fall clean up duty. it's easy and fun cleaning up blow down. due to the low snow fall at gore , glades require extra work to remain skiable.

i spent my weekend, once power worked, on empire, and glades off of empire, north way, upper mac, and also on cloudspin....my friend Jerry told me it was opened....he lied

Harvey wrote

 IMO one big part of the appeal is snow quality. Obviously there is less or no manmade made. But there is also less traffic.  Once trees are so widely spaced that anyone can ski it, that "advantage" is gone.

Bingo!  Most major EC areas groom almost everything on trails that don't have moguls anyway so you're not left with much anyway.That's why people are stuck with trees.

Harvey, or someone, please tell me a ski area in vermont with over 1000 foot vertical that leaves powder on EVERYTHING except for greens on a powder day?

 This isn't to prove a point. I WANT TO FIND A PLACE TO STAY OVERNIGHT FOR A POWDER DAY MIDWEEK. If someone could help I'd appreciate it.

 A place that has a few wide trails and usually GROOMS on non powder days so it's not all chopped up crap under the powder? If you look at a place like magic/mrg they basically leave things icy and bumped up and never groom. They call it "natural", but honestly there's nothing natural about it. It's been slammed and turned into icy bumps and ruts by man.Natural snow is untouched by man. Hike up a mountain out west after it's been dumping for a week and you'll get great UNTOUCHED powder that is bottomless. Not scratching on ice and bumps.

I want to find a place that has a "powder groom" schedule. A place that normally grooms most everything, but then sends the groomers home on an overnight powder dump. There seems to be ZERO options in southern vermont. Mt snow, okemo, stratton groom almost everything that isn't moguls. Jay peak is no good for trails. Stowe is mostly groomed on a powder day right? Sugarbush doesn't groom many of it's trails on non powder days(according to it's trail map) so it's bumpy/icy under the pow.

Any suggestions for a western type powder experience here in vermont?

A little unknown area called MAD RIVER GLEN..you might have heard of it..

The OP is an early candidate for "2015 Least informed OP" award.

PowderAssassin wrote

Any suggestions for a western type powder experience here in vermont?

Come ski with me sometime.  Ill show you where the powders at.