• Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!

    You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!

Big resort coming to BC

ironhippy

Member
Joined
May 16, 2014
Messages
408
Points
18
Location
NB Canda
this seems to have more support than the proposed jumbo glacier resort (which finally stopped development last year)

It'll be interesting to see, the real question is does north america (and BC in particular) need another mega resort? Why would people travel there rather than Revelstoke or Whistler or Park City.. etc.

Either way, I'd like to ski there in a few years, but not sure I will.
 

Jully

Active member
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Messages
2,487
Points
38
Location
Boston, MA
this seems to have more support than the proposed jumbo glacier resort (which finally stopped development last year)

It'll be interesting to see, the real question is does north america (and BC in particular) need another mega resort? Why would people travel there rather than Revelstoke or Whistler or Park City.. etc.

Either way, I'd like to ski there in a few years, but not sure I will.

I think I saw something like 4,500 ft vertical proposed for next winter. Will be interesting if that happens. As for the competition aspect, I think it is a wait and see. Valemount will eventually offer year round skiing, something others do not have at this time.

Definitely a good thing that Jumbo Glacier is dead. It had way too much opposition. Valemount is the path of significantly less resistance!

I wonder, with so many areas now becoming larger and larger names in BC if it actually helps the area overall. I feel like BC has become better known as a ski vacation spot where it wasn't known that way (outside of Banff kind of) 10 or 15 years ago because of all the resorts expanding.
 

raisingarizona

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 19, 2014
Messages
1,054
Points
83
Does not appeal to me having the large majority of the ski area above tree line.

Check it out on google earth. It looks to me that 75% of the terrain accessed from the lifts is below tree line. One of the pods is around 3k of vertical below treeline. If you don't like skiing in the alpine you probably don't have big enough skis. Go faster, ski bigger, it's fun.

With global weirding and 6800 to 7k of vert I think this place might fly. Hopefully it doesn't sink like KH and Revelstoke before it really gets to shine. IF it's done right I think it could force reasonable options for traveling to there, maybe?
 
Last edited:

dlague

Active member
Joined
Nov 7, 2012
Messages
8,792
Points
36
Location
CS, Colorado
Does not appeal to me having the large majority of the ski area above tree line.

Everyone has their preferences. I thought I would not like open bowls but skied glaciers in Europe, skied the back bowls of Lake Louise and the open space of Sunshine Village then to top things off now here in CO and I have grown to really enjoy it!

So you are one less person they will not have to worry about! :beer:

I will say the remoteness is not very appealing. $$$$
 

abc

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
5,810
Points
113
Location
Lower Hudson Valley
Everyone has their preferences. I thought I would not like open bowls but skied glaciers in Europe, skied the back bowls of Lake Louise and the open space of Sunshine Village then to top things off now here in CO and I have grown to really enjoy it!
That's what I LIKE about western mountains! Almost all of my (previous) trip out west were to mountains that has open bowl skiing. Up until a few years ago, I skipped right over ANY western mountain that doesn't have some alpine sector skiing!

I figured I can ski trees in the east anyway. I want to ski something different if I'm travelling. But so far, almost all of the western mountain I've been to have substantial below treeline skiing (when we're talking about "BIG" mountains out west, a 25% terrain is A LOT of terrain!!!)
 

ForcedHotWater

New member
Joined
Apr 24, 2017
Messages
53
Points
0
Check it out on google earth. It looks to me that 75% of the terrain accessed from the lifts is below tree line. One of the pods is around 3k of vertical below treeline. If you don't like skiing in the alpine you probably don't have big enough skis. Go faster, ski bigger, it's fun.

With global weirding and 6800 to 7k of vert I think this place might fly. Hopefully it doesn't sink like KH and Revelstoke before it really gets to shine. IF it's done right I think it could force reasonable options for traveling to there, maybe?

raising arizona was a classic. Nicholas Cage character: "Do these balloons blow up into funny shapes?" Old dude: "Not unless round's funny."
 

dlague

Active member
Joined
Nov 7, 2012
Messages
8,792
Points
36
Location
CS, Colorado
That's what I LIKE about western mountains! Almost all of my (previous) trip out west were to mountains that has open bowl skiing. Up until a few years ago, I skipped right over ANY western mountain that doesn't have some alpine sector skiing!

I figured I can ski trees in the east anyway. I want to ski something different if I'm travelling. But so far, almost all of the western mountain I've been to have substantial below treeline skiing (when we're talking about "BIG" mountains out west, a 25% terrain is A LOT of terrain!!!)

Spot on!
 
Top