Snowfields at the 'Loaf

[ozskier]

Sugarloaf isn't above tree line.

True - forest fires(right?)- but from what I've heard it's a cool experince and the feeling lends itself to an alpine experience.

Fire. No dirt left to grow anything. Extreme winds & weather. Not the most friendly environment.
Same thing happened at Sunday River to White Cap. Just not to that extent.

As a matter of fact, those "snowfields" used to be a marked item on the trail map. Enlarge the image above and check out #17. Bim's Whim and the White Cap snowfields.

And just to keep things on topic. Here's a pic of boogerloaf.

 

[awf170]

Sugarloaf isn't above tree line.

True - forest fires(right?)

Ya heres a thread about it from a few months ago
http://forums.alpinezone.com/viewtopic.php?t=4448&highlight=sugarloaf+snowfields

 

[Birdman829]

I'm gonna have to go ahead and disagree with the argument that the snowfields aren't above the treeline. According to this article the tree line in New Hampshire is 4000 feet (Sugarloaf's summit is 4237). Since Sugarloaf is farther north than 95% of New Hampshire that figure would get a little lower. Add in the fact that it faces north and you're looking at a few hundred feet of above treeline.

 

[takeahike46er]

It probably is above treeline, officially; however, the fire certainly contributed to the lack of vegetation around the summit.

According to this article the tree line in New Hampshire is 4000 feet (Sugarloaf's summit is 4237). Since Sugarloaf is farther north than 95% of New Hampshire that figure would get a little lower.

Aside from latitude, treeline can vary by localized weather, soil composition, and slope face. It may be higher or lower depending on these factors. It can vary from peak to peak, region to region. That figure is a generalization and is far from reality.

 

[awf170]

I'm gonna have to go ahead and disagree with the argument that the snowfields aren't above the treeline. According to this article the tree line in New Hampshire is 4000 feet (Sugarloaf's summit is 4237). Since Sugarloaf is farther north than 95% of New Hampshire that figure would get a little lower. Add in the fact that it faces north and you're looking at a few hundred feet of above treeline.

ya but there are also mountains in new hampshire that are over 4000 ft and have treed summits. Actually I think most summits in New England with a summit in the low 4000 ft range arent above treeline and if they are it is usually because of there being some much rock that nothing can grow there

 

[sledhaulingmedic]

I'm gonna have to go ahead and disagree with the argument that the snowfields aren't above the treeline. According to this article the tree line in New Hampshire is 4000 feet (Sugarloaf's summit is 4237). Since Sugarloaf is farther north than 95% of New Hampshire that figure would get a little lower. Add in the fact that it faces north and you're looking at a few hundred feet of above treeline.

Many exposed summits above 4000' are above tree line, but...

Hermit lake is at 4000'

Owl's head is at 4000'

The Hancocks

Wildcat

On the flip side, Monadnock has a bare summit and is well under 4000', however there were a series of well documented fires to kill Wolves and Coyotes in the 19th century.

Saddleback is similar elevation, exposure and latitude and is not above treeline. The vegatation at the summit is small krumholtz (sp?).

All of that and $4 can get you a cup of coffee at Stratton. The snowfields, regardsless of how created, are part of what make the 'loaf unique. It is one of my favorite Eastern resorts. It's a haul, but always worth it.

 

[NHpowderhound]

Mt. Chocorua is 3475',well below "treeline", and has one of the most reckognizable bare summits in all of New England. Take a night and sleep at Gray Knob Cabin which is about 4300' in elevation and you'll find trees taller than any of us. Krumoltz will grow in the 5000' range and they are trees. So like takeahike46er wrote

Aside from latitude, treeline can vary by localized weather, soil composition, and slope face. It may be higher or lower depending on these factors. It can vary from peak to peak, region to region. That figure is a generalization and is far from reality.

I find that treeline is closer to 4500+' in the Whites.
((*
*))NHPH

 

[Skierman]

When I went to the loaf, I was pretty imtimidated by the snowfields, being 13 and all, but on the last day, as the last trail of the day, I did them, well White Nitro. I barely remember how steep they were, but they were steep, and there was so much powder it was great. The snowfriends are definitely worth it, their amazing.

 

[K2Trav]

The Snowfields can be some of the most incredible skiing to be found if you know how to ski it. It is definetly worth hitting it more than once. March is definetly the most likely time to be able to ski the fields. It is usually skiable around the begining of January but doesnt have enough snow to open to high trafffic until march.

The Best part of the front face is east of Powder Keg, it looks really sketchy most of the time, but if you know where to go you can find some incredible powder

http://www.k2trav.com

 

[Marc]

When I went to the loaf, I was pretty imtimidated by the snowfields, being 13 and all, but on the last day, as the last trail of the day, I did them, well White Nitro. I barely remember how steep they were, but they were steep, and there was so much powder it was great. The snowfriends are definitely worth it, their amazing.

Snowfirends eh? Like... ski bunnies? I'd definitely go more than once if they were included in the deal.



:beer:

 

[subdude]

Great to be back posting at the Zone. I hope everyone's getting the itch.

Haven't skied the Loaf since 97 God do I miss that place. My best experience being in 95 on Feb 5th I remember it like it was yesterday. 34" of powder in a 24hr time span grabbing "First Tracks" on Sunday morning at 8am. Pure Bliss.

 

[Greg]

Great to be back posting at the Zone. I hope everyone's getting the itch.

Where were you? We were scratching all summer!

 

[subdude]

Great to be back posting at the Zone. I hope everyone's getting the itch.

Where were you? We were scratching all summer!

Well my season ended early last year when I blew out my ACL in my left knee. I had recontructive surgery in April so I spent all summer rehabbing it and i'm still working out with strength conditioning on the leg I WILL be ready for the upcoming season. Still no excuse for not coming in here and posting and i'll admit my guilt for not doing that. :lol:

 

[smootharc]

You mean you wasted time this summer rehabbing....

Well my season ended early last year when I blew out my ACL in my left knee. I had recontructive surgery in April so I spent all summer rehabbing it and i'm still working out with strength conditioning on the leg I WILL be ready for the upcoming season.

....when you could have been vegging at your computer, posting away with us ? Shame on you ! Rework your priorities !

:dunce:

P.S. Hope the rehab goes well....tough break....and with all injuries there's that pesky mental rehab/confidence thing, too. Good luck with this season's turns.

 

[Greg]

Probably the best skiing in New England just horrible lift system.

awful lift system

SRO made a very interesting observation in his post here. Wouldn't the character of da Loaf change a bit if a bunch of high speed lifts were installed? :idea:

I actually think the mountain is pretty easy to get around since it's just one big peak. Sure spillway is slow, but for some reason when I'm at the mighty Sugarloaf, I don't seem to mind the slow lifts...

 

[bigbog]

.......

I hear that a lot Greg...and there is ALWAYS a long line at the base of the Spillway/Sluice lift, ALWAYS...yet I still hear people who've come over from skiing MRG..etc..still hanging onto that slow lift = less congestion...mainly from the crowded RESORTS where you can't run & hide on other trails...like you can at both Sugarloaf & the River.
That popular belief that everybody both skis at the pace of the chairlift...and possess no more mental capacity to choose where & when to descend...than the original "Planet of the Apes" script's "Landon" character(post experimental brain surgery):roll: :roll:
My $.01 guess is that it's skiers who ski the same bunch of trails(if not one trail) over and over and over again that make the stink about fast lifts creating congestion... :-?

 

[loafer89]

I think that the lift system at Sugarloaf is JUST FINE. Having some sort of lift back where the gondola was would be a big +, but I am just dreaming.

I agree with bigbog that there are lines at Double Runner/Spillway, but they have never been longer than 10 minutes in my experiences at Sugarloaf.

As for skiing the same trails over again, I am guilty of doing that on the Superquad, as I like all of them. I just dislike how most of them merge onto Candyside, that trail gets trashed really quickly.

 

[bigbog]

I think that the lift system at Sugarloaf is JUST FINE.........but they have never been longer than 10 minutes in my experiences at Sugarloaf.

I have to admit...this is true!...10min and you're off...at ~2mph!!! I am reallllly itchin' to get out there....

....As for skiing the same trails over again, I am guilty of doing that on the Superquad, as I like all of them. I just dislike how most of them merge onto Candyside, that trail gets trashed really quickly.

...But the SuperQuad services several entrances to a multitude of trails loafer89. I just don't ever want to see things become like the vision of America's superhighways was in the 30s-50s. The "Once you get on.....you'll leave the driving to some type of speed management machine"... It's the antithesis of what skiing means ....to many.

 

[mattchuck2]

Am I the only one here who's skied the backside snowfields?

Backside snowfields are great! Short, but if you catch it right . .. and by right I mean 10+ inches . . . it's some of the best Quick Hit skiing in the east. To disregard Sugarloaf if the snowfields aren't open, however, is ridiculous. The Mountain's best aspects are the wind loaded glades and bombing cruisers.

As far as the lift system, the only time it's an issue are on really windy days (when it's probably better to avoid the mountain all together) and on really crowded days (again, why go?).

If you must go on a windy day (which I did a few times after epic dumps) the Spillway to T-bar is a fine way to get up high. Also, if you hike for about 10 mins, you can even reach the King Pine Area when no one else is there for freshies. THAT'S good Sugaloafing.

- Matt

 

[awf170]

Am I the only one here who's skied the backside snowfields?

No I have, I have a post about them on the first page

Backside snowfields are great! Short, but if you catch it right . .. and by right I mean 10+ inches . . . it's some of the best Quick Hit skiing in the east.

Ya, but 4 out 5 seasons they are horrible because there isnt enough snow. I skiied this year in mid-march after a ton of snow and they were so bad a had to sidestep the whole lower headwall area because I didnt want to destoy my skis.

To disregard Sugarloaf if the snowfields aren't open, however, is ridiculous. The Mountain's best aspects are the wind loaded glades and bombing cruisers.

Ya the glades are awsome. I hate the cruisers though, there all like giant tilted parking lots(10 points to whoever knows where that is from)