• 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!

Does the West use bigger rulers?

deadheadskier

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
28,767
Points
113
Location
Southeast NH
cropped-IMG_4745-scaled-1.jpeg


This caught my eye from an article in Unofficial Networks regarding Monarch's pictured expansion.

Does that look like 377 acres? Apparently including trees that is what the claim is for the expansion.
Loon claims 403 total skiable acres. Hard to imagine that area pictured is almost as much as all of Loon
 

AdironRider

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 27, 2005
Messages
3,747
Points
83
Most western areas claim acreage on a boundary to boundary basis, which is legit as virtually all of those woods are actually skiable naturally and without high levels of maintenance / pruning. That is not the case on the East Coast.
 

KustyTheKlown

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 1, 2013
Messages
6,112
Points
113
Location
Brooklyn
is that a green carved across seven fall line trails?

it may be a skiable route that is marked but i assume it exists more as a work/maintenance road to get shit to the top

could also be to offer a bail out if those trails are left to get bumped up.
 

deadheadskier

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
28,767
Points
113
Location
Southeast NH
Most western areas claim acreage on a boundary to boundary basis, which is legit as virtually all of those woods are actually skiable naturally and without high levels of maintenance / pruning. That is not the case on the East Coast.

I get that, but still question if some places take liberties in advertising more acres than actually exist.

It's nothing I particularly care about when choosing a ski destination. I just opened that article and saw the picture and was surprised how small their "massive" 377 acre expansion looked.
 

AdironRider

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 27, 2005
Messages
3,747
Points
83
I get that, but still question if some places take liberties in advertising more acres than actually exist.

It's nothing I particularly care about when choosing a ski destination. I just opened that article and saw the picture and was surprised how small their "massive" 377 acre expansion looked.

I mean 377 acres is only basically half a square mile give or take, and given the perspective of that photo I’d believe it.
 

RH29

Active member
Joined
Nov 23, 2021
Messages
346
Points
43
My very generous accounting (using Google Earth's measure tool) puts the entire area, including the graded expanse on each side, at a total of just under 300 acres.
 

jaytrem

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
2,221
Points
113
I get over 360 acres monarch.jpgwith a generous measurement. Whatever it is, I'd like to get back there. Cool little mountain, oops, I mean big.
 
Top