sugarloaf above treeline

[amf]

now when you say above treeline,is it truly treeline, or has the top of the mountain just been clearcut and they maintain that? Cant think of anything in the east being above treeline...

Tuckerman?

 

[thetrailboss]

Love that classic shot of Sugarloaf...it has served as my desktop a good many times....

 

[thetrailboss]

...and just a comment about treelines in the east. There are many mountains that have tree line lower than 5,000 feet. It is not just elevation that matters: it is exposure, wind direction, weather, climate, etc. For example, Moosilauke has above tree line stuff at 4,800 feet. Lafayette's treeline, IIRC is just above 4,500 feet or so on the western side, etc.

 

[jerryg]

now when you say above treeline,is it truly treeline, or has the top of the mountain just been clearcut and they maintain that? Cant think of anything in the east being above treeline...

See my above post where I provide the insight regarding a forest fire a long time ago and the inability for trees to regrow due to lack of needed oxygen and harsh weather. Sugarloaf does NOT maintain the snowfields. They remain the way they have been since before it was a ski area.

You are correct about eastern resorts, the only one close to having an elevation at the treeline is Stowe and it is still below.

 

[jerryg]

...and just a comment about treelines in the east. There are many mountains that have tree line lower than 5,000 feet. It is not just elevation that matters: it is exposure, wind direction, weather, climate, etc. For example, Moosilauke has above tree line stuff at 4,800 feet. Lafayette's treeline, IIRC is just above 4,500 feet or so on the western side, etc.

I agree and think I put the reasoning for the treeline being what it is. I initially thought SL's treeline was what is naturally, but got a lesson from Skip King...

 

[thetrailboss]

I agree and think I put the reasoning for the treeline being what it is. I initially thought SL's treeline was what is naturally, but got a lesson from Skip King...

Right on. The fire was the reason why Sugarloaf has such a low tree line...at least according to John Christie:

 

[Greg]

Bunch of snowfield pics here:

http://www.k2trav.com/2005/pics/backside.html
http://www.k2trav.com/2005/pics/frontface.html

 

[SkiDork]

I forgot about tucks. Thx

 

[Marc]

I forgot about tucks. Thx

Whites, higher greens, katahdin... and the Chic Chocs.

This was most def. above tree line... lift served by our legs though-

 

[Edd]

I make it there a few times every year. Love it; but watch the weather if you go. The winds in particular. If strong winds are forecasted, I recommend you go somewhere else. Lifts will close and life will suck. Pick the right days, and the Loaf can deliver the best skiing in the East. It skis even bigger than it looks.

 

[Marc]

 

[tipsdown]

See my above post where I provide the insight regarding a forest fire a long time ago and the inability for trees to regrow due to lack of needed oxygen and harsh weather. Sugarloaf does NOT maintain the snowfields. They remain the way they have been since before it was a ski area.

You are correct about eastern resorts, the only one close to having an elevation at the treeline is Stowe and it is still below.

Another mountain that comes to mind is Saddleback. By Eastern standards, I would definitely consider what they have snowfields. My understanding is that as they grow, they'll be "cleaned up" so they are more defined. I skied them in February last year and the snow was amazing. It's about a 5 minute longer hike than Sugarloaf, but as additional lefts go in along the long ridge, that could change.

But the difference between Sugarloaf and Saddleback is that 1) the treeline is lower at on one side of Sugarloaf due to the fire 2) Saddleback hasn't really marketed them (along with the rest of the resort in general) because they need a little maintenance in order to market them.

Does anyone know the history to why Saddleback is above tree line?? In terms of elevation, it's only about 100 ft. less than Sugarloaf.

 

[billski]

Here is a link to pictures from 4/17/2008. an epic spring day at the Loaf.
http://sports.webshots.com/album/563970253HduoKe

umm, does this guy ski with legs?

 

[deadheadskier]

Right on. The fire was the reason why Sugarloaf has such a low tree line...at least according to John Christie:

Same with Monadnock in NH

 

[thetrailboss]

Pick the right days, and the Loaf can deliver the best skiing in the East. It skis even bigger than it looks.

+ 1.

 

[bigbog]

..snowfields

The upper mountain, both frontside & back...is fun, but as mentioned...it isn't maintained...thus needs sufficient time/accumulation to hide the small rocks inherent to the higher terrain. Usually have to wait till February or so for accumulation...but you never know! ..last season...got out on top a little...late December..(don't remembr if it was open or not..;-))
Usually takes a while cause of the frequent wind at the top, but was ~6 or less windy days that I encountered last season.

 

[awf170]

I forgot about tucks. Thx

Or the other 30 or so mountains in New England that are above treeline.

Out west or in New England, you decide.