Truth in Snow Reporting: Mount Snow

[riverc0il]

Faster response time by patrol is complete hogwash. Which is faster: Tower 13 or halfway down liftline. NEITHER patrol still needs to ski the same distance down from either the top of the lift or a patrol shack to get to the victim.

Your analogy to interstate highway does not equate because you can reverse direction on an interstate highway if you are a cop by using a cut back. And if you are a cop off the highway, you need to know whether to go north or south. You can't pick up or down directions in skiing. We have an actual ski patrol member above stating that upper/lower doesn't matter. Its all about trail count.

I don't think big vertical mountains like Sugarbush are as much of a problem. When a trail reaches a major merger with lots of splits, I think a new trail name (or upper/lower if it must be done) are appropriate. Cannon and Wildcat both use upper, middle, and lower designations for continuous trails that merge and break off. I find this acceptable practice and this would help patrol as a patrol could be mid-mountain and be able to make it to a 'lower' trail. Not to mention it is just easier for guests to remember. At a place like Cannon, Upper, Middle, and Lower Cannon are all very distinct. But again, that is 2k vert of "trail" with two major merger locations in which multiple trails split off. We aren't talking Superstar Headwall, Upper Superstar, Middle Superstar, Lower Superstar here.

 

[mtsnowfish]

Agree. Ideally everyone would report all 3. I don't see any reason for Mount Snow to only report on acreage, unless they believe that gives them an advantage over their comptetition. It's kind of annoying, actually, to not have an idea of percentage of runs and the distance involved. I would prefer to see (open trails / total trails) plus open miles of terrain instead of just acreage, which is not a real useful statistic to see by itself.

I bet Snowshed has a lot of acres, but I'd be pissed if I showed up for '25 acres of skiing and riding' and that's all there was open.

This is a great thread that I've been reading the past few days.

A couple things - Mount Snow does report the # of trails it has open daily on the mini-report on the homepage and through SnoCountry etc. It's just not our primary number. We also report a little differently on acres/miles than most. Patrol will give us a rough estimate of the % of a trail being open. For exmaple: SnowDance - monster trail here that 4 days ago was open edge to edge. After the warm temps we're now at about 50% acres available but the trail is still open just not edge to edge. So the trail is listed as open, counted in trail counts, but the acreage will reflect the amount of skiable acres on the trail that are open.

Our change from 107 to 80 or from trail counts to acres open was for any Marketing purposes but rather for more of a simplified report and to make a cleaner map. Mount Snow is not a confusing network of trails but with 107 different color lines, names, and lifts going all over it could look as so.

Most of the trails that were deleted from the count were traversing trails not necessarily upper & lower as Exhibition & Canyon were the only two here that had such designations. Trails like Gunsmoke and Pyrite were eliminated completely, small trails that didn't bring you anywhere different than the trail you were just on. We also combined trails and looked at how they were designated.

Example - We used to report that Ridge/Meadow as open. Meadow was a green trail below Ridge that was a blue but only accessed via a Blue Trails like South Bowl, Ridge, Uncles etc. So is that really beginner terrain if you can only access it via a blue trail? We'd argue no. While the terrain was rather easy for a beginner to get there they'd need to traverse uphill off of Long John. What beginner is going to do that? Meadow was deleted and terrain was absorbed into Ridge that now goes all the way down to the lower mountain and is a blue trail.

Other trails were also renamed due to location. Standard was renamed to Canyon as it goes along the Canyon Chair Lift and our friends up at Stratton also have a major trail of the same name. (There is one marketing reason )

In regards to the Patrol the comment about having more names will absolutely make it easier for patrol to pinpoint the exact location of a injury. At most mountains though people on the mountain carrying a radio should be able to pinpoint the location to Patrol quite easily. Mount Snow we always call in codes by trail name, intersecting trail, if a lift is present the tower # and any other significant names/landmarks. Many who carry a radio here are seasoned veterans who will know areas like "Hot Shot Corner, S Turns and the Black Hole" which aren't on the map but known throughout on mountain staff.

Anyways great thread and Happy New Year to All AZers

 

[SIKSKIER]

Agree with you Riv on Cannon being able to use upper and lower designations but I really disagree with their trail count starting last year.They added so many rediculous trail sections to their trail count like Skate away and Lakeside.Here's the worst for me though,we now have 2 Gemlins,2 Lower Cannons,and 2 Turnpikes on the trail report and count.Who does that?

 

[jaywbigred]

Agree. Ideally everyone would report all 3. I don't see any reason for Mount Snow to only report on acreage, unless they believe that gives them an advantage over their comptetition. It's kind of annoying, actually, to not have an idea of percentage of runs and the distance involved. I would prefer to see (open trails / total trails) plus open miles of terrain instead of just acreage, which is not a real useful statistic to see by itself.

I bet Snowshed has a lot of acres, but I'd be pissed if I showed up for '25 acres of skiing and riding' and that's all there was open.

Did you even bother to look at the Mt. Snow snow report before posting this?

http://mountsnow.com/the-mountain/snow-report/

While mileage is not reported, trails open is clearly reported. Also, they give you a full list of each trail with information about whether it is open, whether its been groomed, and whether it has had snowmaking. So your Snowshed example would never happen.

 

[ta&idaho]

A good Eastern report should list:
(a) which trails are open
(b) which trails have been groomed
(c) which trails have bumps
(d) how much natural snow has fallen: (i) since closing; (ii) in the last 48 hours
(e) the fact that non-snow precip fell since the last significant snowfall or snowmaking
(f) on the mountain conditions, especially wind that may imperil operations and temp if above freezing

Three comments:
-As long as you list a, b, and c accurately, I don't care how finely you slice up your trail count or what measure you try to use for percentage open.
-If you tell me most of the above, I don't care what oxymoronic term you use to describe the snow (MGPP, I'm looking at you).
-I love you when you tell me d, but e is often more important. Don't try and play up old d if you have more recent e.

A good Western report should list:
(a) how much natural snow has fallen (i) since closing; (ii) in the last 48 hours
(b) what terrain is closed
(c) on the mountain conditions, especially wind that may imperil operations

Ah, the simplicity...

 

[UVSHTSTRM]

Did you even bother to look at the Mt. Snow snow report before posting this?

http://mountsnow.com/the-mountain/snow-report/

While mileage is not reported, trails open is clearly reported. Also, they give you a full list of each trail with information about whether it is open, whether its been groomed, and whether it has had snowmaking. So your Snowshed example would never happen.

So I as I thought this whole Topic is stupid. Actually, one could argue that Mt Snow is the least truthful. As you mention they do not mention mileage, while nearly every other resort I frequent posts miles, trails and acreage! Also as far as splitting up trails into several different sections, I really don't have a problem with it. Anybody with a brain and who ski's all difficulty levels knows what to expect. And those who don't are being done a favor by the resort clearly stating that all parts to a trail are not green or blue. Again sort of truthful in respect to somebody who is not ready to handle the steep beginnings of a trail.

 

[jaywbigred]

So I as I thought this whole Topic is stupid. Actually, one could argue that Mt Snow is the least truthful. As you mention they do not mention mileage, while nearly every other resort I frequent posts miles, trails and acreage! Also as far as splitting up trails into several different sections, I really don't have a problem with it. Anybody with a brain and who ski's all difficulty levels knows what to expect. And those who don't are being done a favor by the resort clearly stating that all parts to a trail are not green or blue. Again sort of truthful in respect to somebody who is not ready to handle the steep beginnings of a trail.

This topic is not stupid. Obviously people care about it and it is important to the industry. Sure, you could argue that Mt. Snow is the "least truthful", but it would be a weak argument. Reducing their trail count and posting their "Truth in Snowreporting" credo, which I can vouch that they follow in all their reports (they tell its raining when its raining, they tell you its icy when its icy, and so forth) earns them kudos, in my book, above most other mountains whose snow reports and trail counts I have followed, at my own peril.

 

[Trigger]

Anyone think that MT.Snow will be making snow this week? I wanna go skiing fir or sat but im concerned with all the warm weather we have had

 

[ta&idaho]

Anyone think that MT.Snow will be making snow this week? I wanna go skiing fir or sat but im concerned with all the warm weather we have had

From the report itself:

Let me clue you in on our snowmaking plan for the next few days:

Monday daytime: Canyon, Long John, the Gulch, Nitro and Titanium

Monday night into Tuesday: Chute, Ridge, Exhibition, Lodge, Charlie’s Chase, Inferno and Prospector

Tuesday night into Wednesday: Thanks Walt, Snowdance, River Run, and Ridge

Wednesday night into Thursday: South Bowl, Yard Sale, Season’s Pass, Milky Way, Beartrap, and Free Fall

 

[UVSHTSTRM]

This topic is not stupid. Obviously people care about it and it is important to the industry. Sure, you could argue that Mt. Snow is the "least truthful", but it would be a weak argument. Reducing their trail count and posting their "Truth in Snowreporting" credo, which I can vouch that they follow in all their reports (they tell its raining when its raining, they tell you its icy when its icy, and so forth) earns them kudos, in my book, above most other mountains whose snow reports and trail counts I have followed, at my own peril.

Yes, maybe stupid was a bit stupid, but you get my point. Also in this day and age of iphones, twitter, facebook, etc I think most places reports in regards to rain vs snow is pretty accurate, wind holds, etc. In my opinion I think a place like Sugarloaf, Killington, and Jay Peak who face a real gammit (sp) of weather within one storm do a very good job the day of and the day after the storm of reporting the conditions. Killington has gotten very good and many kzoners and people who frequent Killington will even say the mountain actually under reports snow totals. Killington also sees many different weather climates within one resort. Bear could be soft and carvable while, K1 area could be hard as a rock. I have also seen cases where Bear is snowing and up top of K1 is misty rain. Generally they report this if possible (things change at a moments notice). Bottom line, I really don't think what Mt Snow does is all that original, they just promote it more.

 

[4aprice]

Regarding kmarts trail count going from 107 to 200, didn't that happen when kmart acquired Pico? I realize that Pico does not have 93 trails but I think that would account for a big chunk of the increase. Same as Mt Snow when it acquired Corinthia

I too had alot of respect for Stowe for sticking to their 48 trails for so long, I checked their new trail map recently and several trails had five diferent names but as mentioned most resorts have done this but maybe not to this extent.

I think Killington did that before the Pico came on board. It was the winter of 88-89 or 89-90. They added Upper's, lowers and Middles etc . I just remember having a good laugh over it.

Alex

Lake Hopatcong, NJ

 

[jaywbigred]

Yes, maybe stupid was a bit stupid, but you get my point. Also in this day and age of iphones, twitter, facebook, etc I think most places reports in regards to rain vs snow is pretty accurate, wind holds, etc. In my opinion I think a place like Sugarloaf, Killington, and Jay Peak who face a real gammit (sp) of weather within one storm do a very good job the day of and the day after the storm of reporting the conditions. Killington has gotten very good and many kzoners and people who frequent Killington will even say the mountain actually under reports snow totals. Killington also sees many different weather climates within one resort. Bear could be soft and carvable while, K1 area could be hard as a rock. I have also seen cases where Bear is snowing and up top of K1 is misty rain. Generally they report this if possible (things change at a moments notice). Bottom line, I really don't think what Mt Snow does is all that original, they just promote it more.

Killington earns no points with me bc of their trail count. Any mountain with multiple faces or peaks has the same issues they have (Mt. Snow and Sugarbush are good examples). But to me, to state a credo like Mt. Snow's and then back it up with something real and tangible like reducing trail count is laudable, and I think that was the OP's original point.

 

[riverc0il]

Agree with you Riv on Cannon being able to use upper and lower designations but I really disagree with their trail count starting last year.They added so many rediculous trail sections to their trail count like Skate away and Lakeside.Here's the worst for me though,we now have 2 Gemlins,2 Lower Cannons,and 2 Turnpikes on the trail report and count.Who does that?

We don't disagree at all. I have been calling Cannon out for adding stupid trail inflation counts for about half a dozen years... since they added "Short Fuze" which was originally something like Lower Hardscrabble Headwall or something like that. I was only giving props to Cannon on accuracy in snow reporting... definitely NOT truth in reporting regarding identifying open terrain in a meaningful way. Cannon could take a lesson from Mount Snow in that regard.

:uzi::uzi::uzi:

 

[UVSHTSTRM]

Killington earns no points with me bc of their trail count. Any mountain with multiple faces or peaks has the same issues they have (Mt. Snow and Sugarbush are good examples). But to me, to state a credo like Mt. Snow's and then back it up with something real and tangible like reducing trail count is laudable, and I think that was the OP's original point.

Why do you worry about trail count? You have the same data available from Killington as Mt Snow offers. If you want to go by acreage go by acreage, if you want to go by miles go by miles, if you want trail count divide by three (hehe). Killington offers all three of those as do most other resorts. And yes the OP did mention trail count, but my response was to you regarding the rain vs snow reporting.

 

[threecy]

It's a shame if someone picks a place to ski merely based upon trail count.

As a skier, I'd rather see surface conditions and a map of what's open, rather than a trail count (inflated or not).

 

[UVSHTSTRM]

It's a shame if someone picks a place to ski merely based upon trail count.

As a skier, I'd rather see surface conditions and a map of what's open, rather than a trail count (inflated or not).

Agreed!

 

[Newpylong]

Yes, maybe stupid was a bit stupid, but you get my point. Also in this day and age of iphones, twitter, facebook, etc I think most places reports in regards to rain vs snow is pretty accurate, wind holds, etc. In my opinion I think a place like Sugarloaf, Killington, and Jay Peak who face a real gammit (sp) of weather within one storm do a very good job the day of and the day after the storm of reporting the conditions. Killington has gotten very good and many kzoners and people who frequent Killington will even say the mountain actually under reports snow totals. Killington also sees many different weather climates within one resort. Bear could be soft and carvable while, K1 area could be hard as a rock. I have also seen cases where Bear is snowing and up top of K1 is misty rain. Generally they report this if possible (things change at a moments notice). Bottom line, I really don't think what Mt Snow does is all that original, they just promote it more.

They were the first to report acres and they were the first I can remember that actually reduced their trail count by a significant amount... you might not think it's original anymore because others are following suit with some of this... Just saying... I don't think it's an out of this world change but in a world of BS Marketing I think it's a step in the right direction. Oh yeah, when it's raining and sh!tty up there, they literally say it right in the snow report.

 

[riverc0il]

It's a shame if someone picks a place to ski merely based upon trail count.

As a skier, I'd rather see surface conditions and a map of what's open, rather than a trail count (inflated or not).

Its a shame, but it happens all the time.

Personally, I am more concerned about 'what' is open rather than 'how much' is open or what percentage is open. Thus the map of what's open is a great option. I like reports that have both a trail by trail check list and a map showing you what is open to visualize. For mountains that I know well, a list is fine. For mountains I am not very familiar with, a map really helps out.

Lots of great points in this thread. I like the idea of reporting lots of different ways.... acres, miles, trail numbers, etc. Get it all out there. The problem becomes inconsistency when some resorts post boundary to boundary numbers. There isn't a single ski area in the east that has much more than 2/3 boundary to boundary skiable. Even Jay has significant stretches of completely unskiable soft wood and flat terrain without lines.

 

[kcyanks1]

While my initial reaction to the inflated trail counts is that I don't like it, I think that, in the end, it leads to more useful info. When one trail has 3 names (upper/middle/lower), the ski areas generally list the three parts of the trail separately on the report and tell you whether each part is open/closed. That's much better than an "open" or, as Stowe did (and does), a "partial" open for an entire trail. I don't want to think I trail I want to ski is open only to find out it's the runout at the bottom. Of course, a ski area can count upper/middle/lower as one trail but still break it out in their open/closed reports -- I've just never seen that done. The inflated trail counts and detailed open/closed reports seem to go hand-in-hand. If that's the case, I'll take the inflated trails and detailed report any day. As Steve said, I'm much more concerned with what is open than how much...though 100% is a good sign that the trails (and woods) are in good shape

 

[riverc0il]

Of course, a ski area can count upper/middle/lower as one trail but still break it out in their open/closed reports -- I've just never seen that done.

You must not ski Wildcat much if ever. :roll: Though often they just list an entire trail as open even if its just a small portion of the trail, a partial listing would be much more helpful. I guess then it becomes splitting hairs regarding how much of a portion of trail needs to be accessible before it is listed as open. Many areas show open even it is only a 50-100 foot long patch of snow connecting two other trails together.

:smash: