Saddleback

[AdironRider]

This also stuns me. I would also think that having it operating would mean the loss of less money.

Perhaps a local can offer a different POV, but honestly I am pretty disappointed with the Berry Family. If I were a condo owner or a homeowner in the area, I would be ripshit. To play chicken with the state and then to burn two years courting a pretty shady buyer (at best) looks pretty selfish in my opinion. I believe that part of their investment in Saddleback was to help the area. But I also believe, and understand, that they would want to get their money back and then some. Letting it sit empty for now almost three seasons killed off a lot of goodwill and business that will be very, very hard to get back.

Is it really the Berry's responsibility to spend all their money just to support the locals? They aren't getting rich here, if anything they have taken a massive hit themselves.

No one wishes/wished Saddleback to to fail. It isn't like they just sat on it all those years. If you were the Berry's would you keep throwing millions of dollars at the place as a form of charity?

I probably would, but I'd also make it my own private fiefdom if I was spending that money.

Its a snowmobile and fishing town first anyways. You don't hear people bitching on forums about the small engine dealers and such doing their part. Those guys make a killing in Maine, with actual profits.

 

[delco714]

Resort rankings are somewhat subjective. From your list I rank Saddleback above Whiteface, Sunday River, Smuggs... for different reasons.

I give it a tie with Mad River Glen. I personally prefer it to Sugarbush and Stowe. Cannon and Wildcat I can't speak for very well.

Sugarloaf might be #1 in the East from my point of view -- but I can't see myself ever visiting Sugarloaf without Saddleback as well (assuming open). It's that good. In fact the closure of Saddleback has made it a lot less likely I will go to Sugarloaf any time soon.

If you want to say Top 15, I'm fine with that. No top 15 resort should be shuttered without the ski community doing whatever they can to prevent.

My position is weak. All I can do is express that Saddleback is, in my experience, on the level of something like Smuggs + MRG. Imagine how upset we'd be if either of those areas had to close.

I'm fine with states funding, subsidizing or even running ski resorts. I'm confused why socialist Vermont doesn't do this when it's their only cash cow and all their coin calves depend on it. These are national recreational treasures.

I don't like sugarloaf..I had a cabin for 3 years up there. Saddleback is superior for reasons touched upon a few times. Somewhat objective somewhat subjective. Sadly I only went out of the way to visit Saddleback twice. Loved it.

 

[thetrailboss]

https://vtskiandride.com/saddleback-resort-scandal/


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone

 

[raisingarizona]

a lot of posters in here say how much they liked it but have only been there once or twice in the last X amount (one was like 20) of years. Maybe it just wasn’t meant to be?

 

[Whitey]

I’m no finance guy, and even further from a real estate expert. But I have a really bad feeling about this one. I’d hate to see SB close because I have skied there several times and even rented a house up there a couple of seasons ago (just for a 1 week trip). I really love the area. But there are so many things that don’t seem to work for this.

The only way it’s viable is if they can increase the # of skier visits. Some have said the replacing the Rangeley double isn’t necessary. I couldn’t disagree more. Yes, you can get around it but that’s only if you want to ski off of the Kennebago quad. That’s the part of the mtn that interest me too, but I am an expert skier. The key to increasing skier visits is getting the beginner and intermediate skiers to ski your mountain. The Kennebago quad and the T-bar don’t do much for that skier group. Additionally, it’s not just about how long the lift lines are for the Rangeley – it’s also a lot about how long the ride is. Good god it is that a long, slow, and usually very cold, ride. It's even worse after standing in line for 10-15 min. Also you have to throw in the bad publicity that SL has gotten for the safety of older lifts in Maine, yikes - it's a 51 yr old lift. I’m no expert, but I think that if your goal is increasing skier visits – the Rangeley double is a deal-breaker.

The other part to increase skier visits you’d have to do more with the base area. The lodge is fine, actually very nice. But there’s not much else. That’s more $.

At a time when skier visits are either plateaued or only marginally increasing – where are the add’l visits going to come from? It’s too far from any major population centers. So, to me, the only way they could increase visits significantly would be to take skiers away from SR and SL. How does SB compete with those areas with all they have for amenities, lodging, and familiarity? Even if they somehow find the $ to follow the “own the real estate, use the improved ski area to attract buyers/renters, make $ off of the real estate” plan that others have used – are there really enough people that they could pull in or steal from SL & SR to for that to work?

So, not much chance of a new chair, unlikely to have or find the $ to improve base area and lodging, and I can’t see how they can steal skiers from SR & SL w/out those first two improvements. About their only chance is to find deep pockets person/company that would be willing to lose money on the resort. I think that person/company is standing next to a unicorn.

And throw in that there potentially a new "major resort" coming up with the Balsams, more competition for skier visits.

I think I will shed a tear when I read the “Saddleback” page on NELSAP in a few years. I wish I didn't think that but can't seem to escape that conclusion.

I posted the above almost 3 yrs ago in this thread. Amazing how little has changed. About the only thing I missed was saying that the only chance was for a person/company willing to lose money on it or "a business looking to abuse/defraud the EB-5 program as a means of financing the loses & generating income." In my defense, this post was before the Burke/Jay fiasco and that came to light.

 

[sull1102]

a lot of posters in here say how much they liked it but have only been there once or twice in the last X amount (one was like 20) of years. Maybe it just wasn’t meant to be?

Just too far away and too many options closer. If you didn't have a Sugarloaf or Sunday River never exploded into the mega resort it is today maybe they stand a chance. It's tough though with virtually no shot at getting NYC metro area skiers or even Jay's fallback of Montreal skiers through the door.

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[J.Spin]

I always enjoy reading the discussions here at AlpineZone, and while I typically don’t have much to contribute to most of the threads, when I saw the touring conversation, I figured I could weigh in with some helpful perspective. I’ve skied/toured Mt. Washington numerous times, and as a Northern Vermont local I have very extensive experience ski touring in this area. I know AlpineZone isn’t typically a hotbed of ski touring/backcountrydiscussion, at least that’s the way it feels to me based on the fact that there isn’t a backcountry subforum, and every time I stop in I see that the Backcountry Ski Conditions Resources thread is barely used (the last post is over ayear ago). Still, it seems like some backcountry thoughts are relevant to the discussion here.

Now there may be some logistical differences for folks in Southern New England or southern parts of the Northeastern U.S., but from the experiences of this NVT local, folks like raisingarizona and Jully are right on track. This is my opinion of course, but relatively speaking, Mt. Washington is a horrible place for winter ski touring for most people. By and large, the point of going to Mt. Washington for backcountry skiing is for above tree line terrain. This can be great any time of year, but when it comes to winter skiing, 99% of skiers should be going elsewhere. The approaches to the alpine terrain are relatively long, the weather is typically harsh and often borderline deadly, the skills required to be out there safely are numerous, the actual skiable area is relatively small, and the snow quality is often horrible due to the winds. Can accomplished skiers have some fantastic days up there, absolutely, but most of the above tree line terrain up there in winter is ridiculous in terms of difficulty. If you want the ultimate challenging winter ski experience, or have the need to be “out there on the edge” in the (somewhat) isolated wilderness, then it might be the right place, but the vast, vast majority of skiers looking to do some backcountry/earned turns skiing inthe Northeast are simply doing themselves a disservice if they are focusing on the above tree line terrain in the Whites or similar harsh alpine environments.

The Whites and other above tree line areas here in the Northeast can offer up some awesome backcountryskiing in the spring, but they’re really not what makes the winter backcountry skiing around here in the Northeast special. Numerous mountain areas in the western U.S. and other places around the globe have that sort of above tree line skiing in spades, often with lift access, or with better snow conditions because you’re not skiing literally on the roof of the region where the most ridiculous weather is constantly battering everything. I lived in the Rockies for several years and have a good deal of experience with the lift-served and backcountry offerings there.

Here in the Northeast it’s our below tree line skiing that makes for the day in day out quintessential backcountry experience. Now I know that people go backcountry skiing for various reasons: quiet and solitude, communing with the natural environment, fitness, challenge, etc. I love all those aspects, but there’s little doubt that one HUGE factor drives most skier’s interest in the activity: fresh powder. I know few people who don’t prioritize powder as part of their typical backcountry ski outings in the winter, and for the best powder skiing you want accessible, appropriately-pitched, sufficiently open (with respect to vegetation), wind-protected terrain. That’s why the below tree line backcountry terrain, and most pertinent to this Saddleback discussion, potentially available trails at ski areas, are such a valuable asset.

Not all areas in the Northeast have the necessary forest composition, terrain, and natural snowfall to support lots of excellent below tree line backcountry skiing, but I know that much of Vermont (especially the farther north you go when it comes to snowfall) does. I can’t speak for the region as a whole, but similar to what raisingarizona alluded to, the uphill market here in Vermont, especially CVT/NVT feels like it’s exploding relative to where it was a decade or two ago. This is well recognized by the Vermont Ski Areas, since a majority of them now have uphill travel policies to accommodate interested skiers. Some are more accommodating than others, but overall it’s definitely a popular activity among those willing to earn turns. For many of us it’s simply part of the daily routine – if fresh snow fell, stop by your local resort before work and get some pristine powder turns. Just as notable though are the appearance of purpose-built backcountry areas like the Brandon Gap Backcountry Recreation Area that the Rochester/Randolph Area Sport Trail Alliance (a.k.a. RASTA) has created at Brandon Gap. It had been on my list of places to visit for at least a couple of years, and I finally made in down this past March (trip report link). Having over 20 years of backcountry/sidecountry skiing experience here in Vermont, I can say that what they’ve put together there is really first rate. If you’re looking to get into backcountry skiing and want to see what this type of terrain is all about, I highly recommend checking out what RASTA has done at Brandon Gap. I’ve only skied a small subset of their terrain thus far, but if you’re comfortable skiing powder in black diamond trees at the typical resorts around here, you’ll be plenty comfortable on the terrain there. Obviously it’s best to pick an appropriate day with respect to snow conditions, and choose terrain of appropriate pitch for the available depth of the powder for the best experience, but do that and it will be hard to remain unimpressed. Another great option I’d recommend would be the Bolton Valley Backcountry Network – it offers extremely easy access since it’s part of the resort, although one does have to buy a Nordic day pass. Unlike the long approaches, logistics, and major commitments required for ski touring in the alpine areas of the Whites, Katahdin, etc. you literally step out of your car at these spots and can be in the good ski terrain in moments.

So with that discussion, back to the conversation at hand, which was the potential of Saddleback as an area for earned turns. I’ll make just a few comments. I’ve never skied Saddleback (but interestingly I have skied both Sugarloaf and Sunday River, conspicuously in line with some trends discussed here) but it sounds like there is some decent terrain and snow, based on things I’ve seen previously in this thread. I’m suspicious of whether it could actually be run as an “earned turns” area in a “for profit” model. I’m not sure if that approach would work well anywhere yet. Folks earning their turns typically aren’t interested in paying much to do that activity when there are so many free options out there. A non-profit or co-op model is probably much more realistic, but Saddleback would have to do something unique because of its location. I’ve wanted to get over to Saddleback for either lift-served or earned turns for a while, but I’ve simply never done it yet. It really hasn’t happened because it’s going to require at least a few hours of travel, and it means leaving so many great options here in VT that are just a few minutes away. I think Saddleback would have to come up with a special experience that people can’t get in similar locations to lure people from over here in Vermont, but perhaps for folks coming from the east and south it’s not quite as daunting. I would definitely pay at least a nominal fee for the type of experiences I’ve had at the Brandon Gap Backcountry Recreation Area, and Bolton Valley Backcountry Network, but I’m not sure how many people are at that point… yet.

I will say I was very surprised to hear Gregnye comment on how the Mt. Washington backcountry ski experience was so vastly superior to earning turns at any resort, and agree with raisingarizona’s surprise. I think that that’s absolutely backwards. From a “wilderness” perspective Gregnye is probably correct, and for a spring skiing experience as well, but from a typical winter-long ski season perspective, you’re going to have a better “ski” experience hiking at a resort after a storm almost every time. It’s possible that Gregnye is part of that sub 1% of skiers for whom Mt. Washington alpine is going to be the optimal/safe environment to get what they’re looking for, but if he’s only been into AT for a couple of years, there are probably more efficient options for quality, safe backcountry/earned turns. If I was goingto visit Mt. Washington for a winter experience, I’d be much more likely to simply hike than ski. Just based on observations and experiences over the years, if I was to make daily winter trips up to Hojos, after assessing snow safety, winds, temperatures, and the quality of the potential powder conditions, I’d probably be simply heading back down the Sherburne Trail 9 times out of 10, at which point I’d be far better served by just heading to a resort and getting in a lap before the lifts spin, or heading to a below tree line backcountry area. These areas will have a lot more terrain options than just the Sherburne for aspect selection, wind effects, etc.

I'm pretty new to the AT scene (I've only been doing it for 2 years) so technically I could be considered part of the people who decided to do it since it became "cool".

Around here everyone I know who tours heads up to Mt. Washington. And the parking there is very crowded.

Are you talking specifically about the spring ski season? If that’s the case then I can sort of see it, but for most of the season it’s really the place NOT to be.

Once you have a ton of time and experience with touring I've personally found that it's snow quality that I'm looking for so often during and after a windy storm event you head for protected areas and trees.

J.Spin points to nose.

 

[sull1102]

The touring world is definitely growing leaps and bounds down here in S VT as well. I know Prospect Mtn right on Rt. 9 outside Bennington seemed to have a lot more downhill traffic this year than the past three at least judging by my observations passing by on the way the Sneaux. I know in Western MA there's a pretty healthy community around Greylock and the Thunderbolt Trail.

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[cdskier]

Not all areas in the Northeast have the necessary forest composition, terrain, and natural snowfall to support lots of excellent below tree line backcountry skiing, but I know that much of Vermont (especially the farther north you go when it comes to snowfall) does. I can’t speak for the region as a whole, but similar to what raisingarizona alluded to, the uphill market here in Vermont, especially CVT/NVT feels like it’s exploding relative to where it was a decade or two ago. This is well recognized by the Vermont Ski Areas, since a majority of them now have uphill travel policies to accommodate interested skiers. Some are more accommodating than others, but overall it’s definitely a popular activity among those willing to earn turns. For many of us it’s simply part of the daily routine – if fresh snow fell, stop by your local resort before work and get some pristine powder turns. Just as notable though are the appearance of purpose-built backcountry areas like the Brandon Gap Backcountry Recreation Area that the Rochester/Randolph Area Sport Trail Alliance (a.k.a. RASTA) has created at Brandon Gap. It had been on my list of places to visit for at least a couple of years, and I finally made in down this past March (trip report link). Having over 20 years of backcountry/sidecountry skiing experience here in Vermont, I can say that what they’ve put together there is really first rate. If you’re looking to get into backcountry skiing and want to see what this type of terrain is all about, I highly recommend checking out what RASTA has done at Brandon Gap. I’ve only skied a small subset of their terrain thus far, but if you’re comfortable skiing powder in black diamond trees at the typical resorts around here, you’ll be plenty comfortable on the terrain there. Obviously it’s best to pick an appropriate day with respect to snow conditions, and choose terrain of appropriate pitch for the available depth of the powder for the best experience, but do that and it will be hard to remain unimpressed. Another great option I’d recommend would be the Bolton Valley Backcountry Network – it offers extremely easy access since it’s part of the resort, although one does have to buy a Nordic day pass. Unlike the long approaches, logistics, and major commitments required for ski touring in the alpine areas of the Whites, Katahdin, etc. you literally step out of your car at these spots and can be in the good ski terrain in moments.

I drive up and over the Brandon Gap nearly every weekend in the winter. There were definitely several times this year that the parking lots were packed with people doing some backcountry on those new trails. Clearly they must be doing something right there to become so popular so quickly.

That said, I think you're also right that it might be challenging to run a "for profit" area using this model at least at this stage of the game.

 

[Cat in January]

I took gregnye comments as jest and had me wondering if he might possibly be a Greg I know.

 

[raisingarizona]

I took gregnye comments as jest and had me wondering if he might possibly be a Greg I know.

And I’ve been really bored since most of our forests are closed right now due to the extreme fire danger.

I agree on the for profit touring area would probably be a bust but.....make it like a club with a unique and special community feel and you might just get enough people there, involved and donating to keep the place skiing good.

 

[gregnye]

I always enjoy reading the discussions here at AlpineZone, and while I typically don’t have much to contribute to most of the threads, when I saw the touring conversation, I figured I could weigh in with some helpful perspective. I’ve skied/toured Mt. Washington numerous times, and as a Northern Vermont local I have very extensive experience ski touring in this area.

J.Spin points to nose.

Yeah Alpinezone doesn't seem to talk about touring that much. As it is most people on here seem to be hesitant on sharing their secret tree runs and etc.

The touring community is nice in person, but is often hostile online. Just see the Backcountry Touring in the Northeast Facebook group for a perfect example of a drama session.

Same thing here: people here somehow find it offensive that my friends and I find Mt. Washington as really the only thing worthwhile to backcountry ski in New England. That's just our opinion. It's not a fact. However most of the people I tour with would rather ski the woods than hike up a ski resort (whether operational or not).

And I find that it's crowded at Mt. Washington--even midwinter! (Now some cars are ice climbers but still).

And yes, we've checked out a few of the places you listed. And honestly (no sarcasm) thank you for listing ones I've never even heard of.

I also 100% agree with you that a backcountry-only resort wouldn't make any money. Touring people are very thrifty and do not like to spend money to ski, otherwise they'd just go to a resort. I for one would not pay to go touring (unless it's particularly spectacular--think like the rocky mountains)

 

[gregnye]

I took gregnye comments as jest and had me wondering if he might possibly be a Greg I know.

See my reply above to J.Spin about how online discussion in the touring community often seems hostile for no real reason. I didn't mean to offend and am probably not a Greg you know.

Long story short: I just really don't see how Saddleback could work as a backcountry destination. There's just so much better stuff elsewhere and it's not above the treeline to make it a destination.

 

[sull1102]

Not sure I think a touring only barebones place can work, but think about other "extreme" sports. The Highland guys took a massive risk opening a downhill mtb only area at a closed ski area years and years before the scene became what it is and the size it is today and now they're a leader in the industry. Then there's the business model of Prospect. They run it as a cross country area and an excellent one at that, they just hosted a major national competition this season, but the owner has always mowed the old NELSAPPED alpine trails and they'll sell you a ticket for cheap and you can then hike up all day. That seems to work almost exactly as you guys are talking about, a bare bones ish/mom and pop type operation with low overhead for touring with the side benefit of cross country crowds coming in to support the place too.

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[Cat in January]

Cool Greg

I don't think Saddleback can make it as an uphill touring center business. Too many days when no money would be made.

What I think could work is if the mountain part of the property was broken away from the main property and held in trust. Allowances would be made for maintaining the glades and trails. Volunteers would do this work over the summer. In winter the mountain could be accessed by skiers, snowshoers without charge. Ideally a non-profit would be formed to oversee the work and use of the mountain. From the work I have seen the mountain bike community do and the passion the bc skiing community has (good amount of overlap here in Maine) I think this is a viable option.

The vision for what would become of the lodge is beyond me. It will sell for pennies on the dollar, but there must be a way it can turn a profit.

 

[AdironRider]

Cool Greg

I don't think Saddleback can make it as an uphill touring center business. Too many days when no money would be made.

What I think could work is if the mountain part of the property was broken away from the main property and held in trust. Allowances would be made for maintaining the glades and trails. Volunteers would do this work over the summer. In winter the mountain could be accessed by skiers, snowshoers without charge. Ideally a non-profit would be formed to oversee the work and use of the mountain. From the work I have seen the mountain bike community do and the passion the bc skiing community has (good amount of overlap here in Maine) I think this is a viable option.

The vision for what would become of the lodge is beyond me. It will sell for pennies on the dollar, but there must be a way it can turn a profit.

Viable? You are asking the Berry's to just hand over their land to a trust so you can go bc skiing a couple days a year?

Good luck with that.

 

[Cat in January]

There was a land trust involved when the Saddleback Foundation was trying to raise funds for the land. They were going to throw in. Land has little value for timber harvesting. House lots could be made up the mountain, but the logistics are steep.

This is all predicated on the mountain asserts being broken up.

Does not seem so far fetched to me.

 

[AdironRider]

There was a land trust involved when the Saddleback Foundation was trying to raise funds for the land. They were going to throw in. Land has little value for timber harvesting. House lots could be made up the mountain, but the logistics are steep.

This is all predicated on the mountain asserts being broken up.

Does not seem so far fetched to me.

Little value? At 2k (going rate currently) per acre the Berry's Saddleback holdings have a timber value of over 16 million, just in the trees.

They aren't going to get their 40 million back, but they aren't just going to give it away because you think it is a shame you can't ski there anymore.

 

[Cat in January]

Good luck getting that for the wood between 2k and 4k elevation. The mountain is a small part of their land holding at Saddleback

 

[raisingarizona]

I love the idea of a place like Cat described above. If I lived in the Boston area I’d love to have property near a mountain like that.

Maybe it’s never gonna happen for Saddleback but I think that sort of thing is gaining popularity, especially with the high price of ski passes and everything else that goes with the sport.

I had a random thought earlier today, would Sugarloaf be interested in saddleback? They aren’t too far apart are they?