NY Skiing, an observation I've long held

[Puck it]

I thought it faced northeast?

East facing, maybe ENE but that is it.

 

[x10003q]

Hoffman Mtn was voted down in 1967 despite lots of local support. It would have been the third major NYS ski area in the Adirondack Park.
Hoffman is about 5 miles north of Schroon Lake just west of the Northway. It has potential for 2500 vertical feet with plenty of north facing slopes. It is way less funky than Gore.

 

[ScottySkis]

Hoffman Mtn was voted down in 1967 despite lots of local support. It would have been the third major NYS ski area in the Adirondack Park.
Hoffman is about 5 miles north of Schroon Lake just west of the Northway. It has potential for 2500 vertical feet with plenty of north facing slopes. It is way less funky than Gore.

We should send NY governor Combo I petition to get it open now.

 

[Nick]

Haha ... Combo....

Sent from my SCH-I545 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[ScottySkis]

Haha ... Combo....

Sent from my SCH-I545 using AlpineZone mobile app

Phone changed it but I knew it would.

 

[Warp Daddy]

East facing, maybe ENE but that is it.

.

Yeah early St Lawrence University Ski Coach James "Doc " Littlejohn made these observations when it was being built . Apparently then Gov Averill Harriman a skier and former Union Pacific mogul,who was also very instrumental in getting SUN Valley idaho going was pushing to get this done in a rush to push NY skiing .

Thus they opted for the current layout to EXPEDITE the opening and contain cost . Apparently building on the lake side in DOCS opinion anyway would have produced better venues but would have run BOTH the cost up AND required more construction time thus delaying Harriman's goal . This is the urban legend anyway :wink:

 

[abc]

I'm not following you. My initial thought behind this years old thread was that in NYS, only a small fraction of it's vast mountainous terrain has been developed into ski areas compared to VT.

Well, I got your point. And my counter point being that's really not such a bad thing. It left the area for non-resort skiers to enjoy.

Let me go into a bit more detail.

- Southern VT is only 4 hrs from NYC, 3 hrs from Boston. Southern Adirondack is also 4 hrs from NYC and nearly 5 hrs from Boston. Except there're no big mountain in southern Adirondack.

- Central VT is 4-5 hrs from NYC and 3-4 hrs from Boston. Northern VT 5-6 hrs from NYC and 4 hr from Boston. The high peak region of the 'Dack is 5-6 hrs from NYC and god known how many hours from Boston.

Basically, the 'dack always lose in drive time whether you're from NYC or Boston! Snowfall-wise, the 'dack can't compete with northern VT but has longer drive than southern/central VT.

Simply put, the ADK is at a competitive disadvantage against VT. I think it's a good thing no ski resort had been developed except the one that were build for the Olympic. It probably wouldn't have survived had they build more.

(Look at Gore. Who goes there but mostly upper Hudson Valley locals? Sure, I go there sometimes and a few people I know do. We go there because...it's uncrowded! Great for us but not so great for the bottomline of the operator! Certainly not a good indicator to build more of them)

Another example is Maine. It's not protected, not like the ADK park. But still you don't see large number of ski resorts dotting the landscape. Why? Because it's too far from population center! Only those bc travellers seeking solitude make the long track up there, and be rewarded with...unbroken wilderness!

The same draw of the Adirondack Park for non-resort skiers, to escape from the population madness.

Would a couple (and I mean just a couple) major ski areas in the Catskills and the Dacks really screw up the "forever wild" experience in those areas? I personally don't think so.

There ARE already several ski areas in the Cats. Snow was not entirely reliable and they're not exactly thriving. (though fortunately not exactly starving either). I don't believe there's enough demand for more areas in the Cats either.

Given the remote location (removed from population center) of the 'dacks, I have serious doubts more ski areas up there will do well at all. At worst, it simply thin out the skier traffic to Gore/WF.

It's less about preserving the "forever wild" experience at all cost. But I see relatively few benefit additional ski 'resorts' could bring.

The struggling economies I've visited in those areas certainly could use the help as well.

We need to be VERY careful on that! There're plenty of examples in other wilderness that got trampled in the name of "developing tourism", only to have so few tourists visit it were unsustainable. The environment were left scared and in some cases the taxpayer left to mop up the mess. The Dack would be a prime candidate for such a fate. Fortunately, it's "protected" from our own stupidity.

Personal, I believe that it makes more economic sense to cluster the development in area that are best suited for high traffic tourism. VT already has the roads, lodging and other infrastructure. And it has the highest amount of snowfall in the whole northeast. That's where it would be more profitable to build high volume ski "resorts".

Instead of building more roads that only serve a small skier traffic to ADK or the Great North Woods of Maine. Leave those areas to people who want to experience wilderness and are willing to endure the long travel and somewhat spartan infrastructures.

Let's not create "tourism sprawl" in wilderness area as we did with urban sprawl in large tract of suburban around cities!

(sorry, didn't mean to write such a long thesis)

 

[BenedictGomez]

(sorry, didn't mean to write such a long thesis)

I agree with pretty much everything you said, except for your belief that a 2nd ski resort way up in the DAX wouldnt likely be profitable.

The terrain would be fantastic, it's close enough to NYC to survive on that alone, and even with all the negatives Whiteface has going for it, it still gets enough skier traffic and revenue to be profitable each year (unlike Belleayre), even though it's an inefficiently high-cost government-run facility. A 2nd ski resort up there, privately run, would likely thrive, IMO.

 

[x10003q]

Well, I got your point. And my counter point being that's really not such a bad thing. It left the area for non-resort skiers to enjoy.

Let me go into a bit more detail.

- Southern VT is only 4 hrs from NYC, 3 hrs from Boston. Southern Adirondack is also 4 hrs from NYC and nearly 5 hrs from Boston. Except there're no big mountain in southern Adirondack.

- Central VT is 4-5 hrs from NYC and 3-4 hrs from Boston. Northern VT 5-6 hrs from NYC and 4 hr from Boston. The high peak region of the 'Dack is 5-6 hrs from NYC and god known how many hours from Boston.

Basically, the 'dack always lose in drive time whether you're from NYC or Boston! Snowfall-wise, the 'dack can't compete with northern VT but has longer drive than southern/central VT.

Simply put, the ADK is at a competitive disadvantage against VT. I think it's a good thing no ski resort had been developed except the one that were build for the Olympic. It probably wouldn't have survived had they build more.

(Look at Gore. Who goes there but mostly upper Hudson Valley locals? Sure, I go there sometimes and a few people I know do. We go there because...it's uncrowded! Great for us but not so great for the bottomline of the operator! Certainly not a good indicator to build more of them)

Another example is Maine. It's not protected, not like the ADK park. But still you don't see large number of ski resorts dotting the landscape. Why? Because it's too far from population center! Only those bc travellers seeking solitude make the long track up there, and be rewarded with...unbroken wilderness!

The same draw of the Adirondack Park for non-resort skiers, to escape from the population madness.


There ARE already several ski areas in the Cats. Snow was not entirely reliable and they're not exactly thriving. (though fortunately not exactly starving either). I don't believe there's enough demand for more areas in the Cats either.

Given the remote location (removed from population center) of the 'dacks, I have serious doubts more ski areas up there will do well at all. At worst, it simply thin out the skier traffic to Gore/WF.

It's less about preserving the "forever wild" experience at all cost. But I see relatively few benefit additional ski 'resorts' could bring.


We need to be VERY careful on that! There're plenty of examples in other wilderness that got trampled in the name of "developing tourism", only to have so few tourists visit it were unsustainable. The environment were left scared and in some cases the taxpayer left to mop up the mess. The Dack would be a prime candidate for such a fate. Fortunately, it's "protected" from our own stupidity.

Personal, I believe that it makes more economic sense to cluster the development in area that are best suited for high traffic tourism. VT already has the roads, lodging and other infrastructure. And it has the highest amount of snowfall in the whole northeast. That's where it would be more profitable to build high volume ski "resorts".

Instead of building more roads that only serve a small skier traffic to ADK or the Great North Woods of Maine. Leave those areas to people who want to experience wilderness and are willing to endure the long travel and somewhat spartan infrastructures.

Let's not create "tourism sprawl" in wilderness area as we did with urban sprawl in large tract of suburban around cities!

(sorry, didn't mean to write such a long thesis)

You have no idea what you are talking about.

I get to Gore from NJ (you know, the state across the Hudson from NYC) in a little over 3 hours and S VT takes almost 4. The idea that you think the Adirondacks are "remote" like Maine is laughable. Did you forget about the Montreal metro area (population 3.8 million)? It is 2 hours to Lake Placid. How about Toronto (5.5 million)? Toronto is 5.5 hours from Lake Placid. How about NYC? Lake Placid is 4:45 and Gore is 3:50. There are 30 million people within 5 hours of the Adirondacks. Boston metro is 4.4 million. That is why Maine is so empty.

If Gore did not have the ORDA/NYS anchor around its neck since the early 1980s it would have developed to its current size 20 years ago. The plans existed 30 years ago. ORDA is another word for Lake Placid First. The majority of the ORDA board members are connected to Lake Placid and its well being. Gore directly competes with Whiteface.

Hoffman Mtn (that I mentioned earlier in this thread) is right next to the Northway about 10 miles north of exit 28 - Schroon Lake. Hardly remote or hard to get to. Having a couple thousand acres (out of 6 million acres in the Adirondack Park) for another ski area would only enhance the Park. Having another ski area might have drawn more skiers to the area and increased usage at both Gore and Whiteface.

Try to remember that around 130,000 people live in the Park. They need places to earn a living in the highly controlled Park. There are plenty of roads and towns in the Park. Maybe you need to visit the Park and see for yourself before you offer "advice" about "developing tourism".

 

[abc]

You have no idea what you are talking about.

And you talk like you're the only one who had visited there.

I used to have my own place up in Lake Placid! I drove the NYC to Whiteface probably 10 times more often than you do. Your drive time example is for starting 5am in the morning in the middle of the week!

You need to take your own advice:

Maybe you need to visit the Park and see for yourself before you offer "advice" about "developing tourism".:roll:

 

[Mapnut]

My favorite "dream mountain" close to the Northway is Macomb, just a little north of Hoffman, 4390 ft. and I'd get 2,700" vertical. Anybody know if the eastern ranges of the Adirondacks get decent snowfall?

 

[St. Bear]

I think it's safe to assume that there are probably a good reasons why nothing more ever got built.

 

[AdironRider]

I think it's safe to assume that there are probably a good reasons why nothing more ever got built.

The Adirondack Park Commission?

The only reason is they were never allowed.

 

[BenedictGomez]

I think it's safe to assume that there are probably a good reasons why nothing more ever got built.

Yes, left-wing politicos beholden to environmental extremists.

 

[Edd]

Yes, left-wing politicos beholden to environmental extremists.

Hey, I've wondered, are you in the business of politics? It comes up a lot in your posts.


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone

 

[Domeskier]

Hey, I've wondered, are you in the business of politics? It comes up a lot in your posts.


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone

You will learn the answer to your question tomorrow morning when you head out for the slopes only to find all of the streets of Newmarket, NH shut down for a traffic study.

 

[Edd]

You will learn the answer to your question tomorrow morning when you head out for the slopes only to find all of the streets of Newmarket, NH shut down for a traffic study.

Well, if Bene is involved in that I will be sooo angry with him.


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone

 

[skifree]

You will learn the answer to your question tomorrow morning when you head out for the slopes only to find all of the streets of Newmarket, NH shut down for a traffic study.

Funny

 

[BenedictGomez]

Hey, I've wondered, are you in the business of politics? It comes up a lot in your posts.

I'm in the business of answering posts truthfully.

Environmental extremism and political money/power are the reason why you cant so much as step on a blade of grass there. I would file that one under, "things most people regardless of political ideology commonly understand".

 

[Edd]

I'm in the business of answering posts truthfully.

Environmental extremism and political money/power are the reason why you cant so much as step on a blade of grass there. I would file that one under, "things most people regardless of political ideology commonly understand".

No traffic study for you then, I assume? Domeskier is such a liar.