Are there uncrowded ski areas with on-site lodging?

Resort and backcountry skiing and snowboarding in the western US and Canada, including our famous reader-submitted No-Bull Snow Reports.

Re: Are there uncrowded ski areas with on-site lodging?

Postby sierra_cement » Wed Nov 13, 2019 9:12 am

jamesdeluxe wrote:
sierra_cement wrote:I think SLC is the most accessible airport for West Coast skiers, all things considered. I usually find prices to SLC much cheaper than DEN. Of course, that will be reverse for East Coast folks.

Not necessarily true -- ECers like yours truly have been taking nonstops to SLC for years and the prices are usually no more than to Denver. Throughout the 00s, I took the 7 am Delta flight to SLC, was on a lift by 11 am, and skied until 1:30 pm on departure day before catching a 4 pm flight back. That's similar to how it works for me when going to the Alps -- no loss of ski time due to air travel if you're so inclined -- particularly to Zurich, which has a 5 pm nonstop back to EWR.

For a long stretch, there was also a great program, Quick Start, that allowed you to use your boarding pass from any airline's incoming flight to get a same-day free lift ticket at the three Park City areas. Most people used it at Deer Valley (many claimed it was worth going there for the turkey chili alone); however, I also went to The Canyons a number of times. A recurring takeaway was how much better conditions were on the Wasatch front side than the back side but hey, don't argue with free. Quick Start was discontinued several years back.


So you are saying that SLC airport maybe just as convenient to ECers like DEN in reality if not in perception. I hope the perception continues to be that DEN is cheaper than SLC :)
sierra_cement
 
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 2:01 pm
Location: San Jose

Re: Are there uncrowded ski areas with on-site lodging?

Postby jamesdeluxe » Wed Nov 13, 2019 9:23 am

sierra_cement wrote:So you are saying that SLC airport may be just as convenient to ECers like DEN in reality if not in perception. I hope the perception continues to be that DEN is cheaper than SLC :)

More convenient in reality and people from the NYC/NJ/CT region have been taking advantage of it for many years. As mentioned above, SLC's rental cars are right at the terminal while DEN's are a ten-minute shuttle bus ride (especially unpleasant with ski equipment/no idea why they didn't consider building out the airport subway to reach the rental car areas). The closest ski area to DEN airport is Loveland at 90-ish minutes with the likelihood of traffic jams as you cross through the metro area. SLC airport to the Cottonwoods or Park City is approximately 40 minutes.
User avatar
jamesdeluxe
 
Posts: 3637
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 3:19 pm
Location: South Orange, NJ + Denver, CO

Re: Are there uncrowded ski areas with on-site lodging?

Postby Tony Crocker » Wed Nov 13, 2019 12:40 pm

sbooker wrote:Sun Valley is an easy drive from SLC in my experience.

It may be easy in terms of being mostly Interstate and no mountain passes, but it's still 5 hours. Long drives are routine in sparsely populated Australia. :lol: But evidence is overwhelming that most vacationing American skiers find that length of drive from the gateway airport to a ski resort a significant deterrent.

sierra_cement wrote:Google says Sun Valley is a 2.5-hour drive from Boise. Beaver Creek is similar. I haven't done the Sun Valley drive so I don't know if it is a difficult one. My hypothesis is we can reach Sun Valley cheaper and faster than Beaver Creek. Same with Schweitzer.

I get closer to 3 hours for that drive. It is qualitatively not that difficult in terms of high passes and snow, though it is not Interstate and most one-week vacationers resist that length of drive. Mammoth has never been able to attract eastern skiers flying into Reno facing a similar drive. This led to the problematic development of the Mammoth airport.

Schweitzer is closer to Spokane than Sun Valley is to Boise. A flight to Spokane from here is probably as cheap as to Denver but it would not be a direct flight so travel time home to resort may not be less vs. Beaver Creek. I haven't flown to Boise since 1983 but it's similar size to Spokane and served by Southwest so I'd assume comparable.

sbooker wrote:Also flying into Hailey is subsidized by the resort I believe so reasonable flight costs are available.
Lots of remote resorts subsidize their flights, including Jackson and Mammoth. That improves accessibility but rarely are these flights as cheap as DEN, SLC or medium sized cities serviced by Southwest like Spokane. Skiers like the convenience of ASE and EGE but I never hear people say these flights are bargains.

jamesdeluxe wrote:
sierra_cement wrote:So you are saying that SLC airport may be just as convenient to ECers like DEN in reality if not in perception. I hope the perception continues to be that DEN is cheaper than SLC :)

More convenient in reality and people from the NYC/NJ/CT region have been taking advantage of it for many years.

You're preaching to the choir with me about SLC vs. Denver. But via e-mail correspondence and on other forums there is a strong majority opinion from points east that DEN is cheaper with more convenient flights than SLC. My guess is that NYC is the exception to the East Coast rule in terms of travel to SLC as I suspect it is also in with respect to Geneva and Zurich.

Zrankings access scores are similar for Loveland/A-Basin as for the the Wasatch resorts due to the convenience factor of SLC offset by the greater number of flights to DEN. But the access scores for Aspen are just as high due to decent number of flights and extreme proximity of the resort to ASE. I think that's not right because of cost and would rate Aspen lower, but I'm inclined to go along with the near equal ratings resorts 45 minutes from SLC v. those 2 hours from DEN.

Air travel is one of the few examples of where living in a big metropolis is more convenient. This works in my favor traveling to Asia and to some extent the South Pacific. And it's easy to get direct flights to major European capitals from LAX. But evidently Geneva and Zurich aren't major enough in that regard.

The bottom line is that it falls to the individual skier how to balance:
1) Schedule convenience vs. work/family obligations
2) Minimizing home-to-resort travel time
3) Cost. Avoiding the cost of a rental car or long distance transfer can be an offset to the higher cost of flying into a resort airport.
http://bestsnow.net
Ski Records
Season length: 21 months, Nov. 29, 2010 - July 2, 2012
Days in one year: 80 from Nov. 29, 2010 - Nov. 17, 2011
Season vertical: 1,610K in 2016-17
Season powder: 291K in 2011-12
User avatar
Tony Crocker
 
Posts: 10496
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:37 am
Location: Avatar: Charlotte Bay, Antarctica 2011
Location: Glendale, California

Re: Are there uncrowded ski areas with on-site lodging?

Postby sierra_cement » Wed Nov 13, 2019 2:31 pm

Tony Crocker wrote:
I get closer to 3 hours for that drive. It is qualitatively not that difficult in terms of high passes and snow, though it is not Interstate and most one-week vacationers resist that length of drive. Mammoth has never been able to attract eastern skiers flying into Reno facing a similar drive. This led to the problematic development of the Mammoth airport.

I haven't been to Mammoth, so I'm curious if Mammoth offers any advantage to the the fly-in folks compared to other ski areas. Is the lodging affordable like SLC? Is it uncrowded during the week like the interior NW areas we are discussing here? Does Mammoth offer enough of an advantage over Tahoe for people to consider the extra drive?

Or in case of people flying in, what is the advantage of Mammoth over Bachelor. Both require 3 hour drive from a medium sized airport. For someone like me, if I'm going to drive 7-8 hours, why not drive to Mt. Bachelor instead?

Mt. Bachelor doesn't have onsite lodging, so Mammoth has that advantage.

I'm also curious how many destination skiers go to Tahoe. All the people I have talked to on lifts were within driving distance. Because of mostly local clientele, my hypothesis is Tahoe resorts are not that crowded during the week. I will personally find out this season, but I am interested to know if there is data.


The bottom line is that it falls to the individual skier how to balance:
1) Schedule convenience vs. work/family obligations
2) Minimizing home-to-resort travel time
3) Cost. Avoiding the cost of a rental car or long distance transfer can be an offset to the higher cost of flying into a resort airport.


Agreed. I'm the book-in-advance type of person to keep costs under control with flights using miles. I won't be able to ski outside school holidays from 2021, so my goal is to figure out many of the variables involved in advance so I can match a ski resort for the appropriate timeframe.
sierra_cement
 
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 2:01 pm
Location: San Jose

Re: Are there uncrowded ski areas with on-site lodging?

Postby Sbooker » Wed Nov 13, 2019 4:44 pm

sierra_cement wrote:
Tony Crocker wrote:
I get closer to 3 hours for that drive. It is qualitatively not that difficult in terms of high passes and snow, though it is not Interstate and most one-week vacationers resist that length of drive. Mammoth has never been able to attract eastern skiers flying into Reno facing a similar drive. This led to the problematic development of the Mammoth airport.

I haven't been to Mammoth, so I'm curious if Mammoth offers any advantage to the the fly-in folks compared to other ski areas. Is the lodging affordable like SLC? Is it uncrowded during the week like the interior NW areas we are discussing here? Does Mammoth offer enough of an advantage over Tahoe for people to consider the extra drive?

Or in case of people flying in, what is the advantage of Mammoth over Bachelor. Both require 3 hour drive from a medium sized airport. For someone like me, if I'm going to drive 7-8 hours, why not drive to Mt. Bachelor instead?

Mt. Bachelor doesn't have onsite lodging, so Mammoth has that advantage.

I'm also curious how many destination skiers go to Tahoe. All the people I have talked to on lifts were within driving distance. Because of mostly local clientele, my hypothesis is Tahoe resorts are not that crowded during the week. I will personally find out this season, but I am interested to know if there is data.


The bottom line is that it falls to the individual skier how to balance:
1) Schedule convenience vs. work/family obligations
2) Minimizing home-to-resort travel time
3) Cost. Avoiding the cost of a rental car or long distance transfer can be an offset to the higher cost of flying into a resort airport.


Agreed. I'm the book-in-advance type of person to keep costs under control with flights using miles. I won't be able to ski outside school holidays from 2021, so my goal is to figure out many of the variables involved in advance so I can match a ski resort for the appropriate timeframe.


You really must get to Mammoth. I'm sure everyone would agree it's a great all round ski hill. Something for everyone and oodles of terrain for intermediates.
The extra distance from Tahoe is no big deal. The drive is incredibly scenic and whilst the passes can be snowy the roads are very good. As far as lodging is concerned there is a good range from budget to luxury. In my experience it's not as cheap as SLC lodging but it's far more convenient because there is less travel required between the town and hill. There's a bus system that links to almost everywhere.
Oh to live in the continent of North America or Europe where quality skiing doesn't involve an expensive 10-20 hour flight. Make the most of your situation!
Sbooker
 
Posts: 198
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2018 5:29 pm
Location: Brisbane Australia
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: Are there uncrowded ski areas with on-site lodging?

Postby Tony Crocker » Wed Nov 13, 2019 7:21 pm

sierra_cement wrote:I haven't been to Mammoth, so I'm curious if Mammoth offers any advantage to the the fly-in folks compared to other ski areas. Is the lodging affordable like SLC?

No. Hotels are few and not a great value. Lodging is mostly condos, reasonable for a big group but so-so for a couple or family. And very little of the lodging is on the hill, though the drive is short and there is decent free bus service from town to the hill as an alternative.

sierra_cement wrote:Is it uncrowded during the week like the interior NW areas we are discussing here?

Not THAT uncrowded, but compared to major resorts in Utah, Colorado or Tahoe, yes. The lift system is built to handle weekend crowds, so lift lines are short to non existent midweek unless the weather is bad and shuts down a lot of them. The caveat with that many lifts is that the new snow gets hammered fast on big powder days.

sierra_cement wrote:Does Mammoth offer enough of an advantage over Tahoe for people to consider the extra drive?

Yes, when there's a major difference in conditions. There are three scenarios here:
1) Early season if the first storms were mostly rain at Tahoe but snow at Mammoth.
2) Sustained mid-season drought when the surfaces will melt/freeze at Tahoe but remain packed powder over half or more of Mammoth.
The 2012-13 and 2017-18 seasons were a combination of 1) and 2) for several months.
3) Better spring snow preservation from mid-March onwards with the disparity growing by the week in the absence of significant new snow.

sierra_cement wrote:Or in case of people flying in, what is the advantage of Mammoth over Bachelor. Both require 3 hour drive from a medium sized airport. For someone like me, if I'm going to drive 7-8 hours, why not drive to Mt. Bachelor instead? Mt. Bachelor doesn't have onsite lodging, so Mammoth has that advantage.

In your case Bachelor is better for now. Mammoth's big advantage over Bachelor is much more advanced/expert terrain. Bachelor is way cheaper for lodging, lift tickets if you don't have Ikon. The drive up the hill is 25 minutes vs. 10 but it's a straight and easy drive. Both places are vulnerable to wind/weather shutdowns, but Bachelor is worse in that regard. That's why I think Bachelor skews even more to spring than Mammoth.

sierra_cement wrote:I'm also curious how many destination skiers go to Tahoe.

Kottke 2016-17 said 19% of California skier visits were from out of state. When you consider that number is about 10% for Mammoth and essentially zero for SoCal, it's surely in the 25% range for Tahoe overall and probably much more for high visibility areas like Heavenly.
http://bestsnow.net
Ski Records
Season length: 21 months, Nov. 29, 2010 - July 2, 2012
Days in one year: 80 from Nov. 29, 2010 - Nov. 17, 2011
Season vertical: 1,610K in 2016-17
Season powder: 291K in 2011-12
User avatar
Tony Crocker
 
Posts: 10496
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:37 am
Location: Avatar: Charlotte Bay, Antarctica 2011
Location: Glendale, California

Re: Are there uncrowded ski areas with on-site lodging?

Postby snowave » Wed Nov 13, 2019 7:39 pm

Sbooker wrote:
sierra_cement wrote:I know easy access and crowds are highly correlated. So I'm glad to read thoughts about access from the perspective of others.

I have been to DEN a few times. I dislike Denver because it is a very large airport, requires a train within the airport, then another long shuttle to rental cars, and you drive through the whole city to go to the mountains and the road to the mountains involves a difficult drive. I think SLC is the most accessible airport for West Coast skiers, all things considered. I usually find prices to SLC much cheaper than DEN. Of course, that will be reverse for East Coast folks. No wonder most ski areas in CO are crowded.

My observation based on limited data for those small airports is that they tend to have very expensive flights. I have occasionally checked and I've never found affordable flights to EGE, ASE, BZN, MTJ, JAC and a few others. Spokane and Boise are available with Southwest and that improves their accessibility score. I could have booked a President's day flight to Spokane for ~$200 round trip with Southwest, but decided to skip as we are going to ski the whole week after that.

Google says Sun Valley is a 2.5-hour drive from Boise. Beaver Creek is similar. I haven't done the Sun Valley drive so I don't know if it is a difficult one. My hypothesis is we can reach Sun Valley cheaper and faster than Beaver Creek. Same with Schweitzer.

It's fun to discuss these things. Let's see how many ski areas we can cross off. I will aim for 2-3 new areas per ski season.


Sun Valley is an easy drive from SLC in my experience.
The difference between crowds coming from the nearest major population centre to Beaver Creek and Sun Valley is Denver has about 3 million inhabitants and Boise has about 300000.
Also flying into Hailey is subsidized by the resort I believe so reasonable flight costs are available.


Boise is actually approaching 1 million for the entire statistical area. Still a far cry from Denver/Front Range, but it continues growing rapidly. That could be a plus for in the future if more airlines come in. I've never been to Sun Valley, so can't comment on the drive. However, I know its very pricey to stay there, especially if you are used to using hotel points, etc as there are not really any "chains" that I'm aware of.

If minimal crowds are really a focus, I'd consider some of the places that may be a little tougher to access. In the end, that may balance itself out, with the exception of Telluride and maybe Sun Valley.

Personally, I don't think you can go wrong with Big Sky for this trip. Bozeman is a little pricer/difficult to get to, but the rewards for a big ski area that has everything and moderate to low crowds would offset that IMO.
Sno..
snowave
 
Posts: 428
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 6:50 pm
Location: McCall, ID

Re: Are there uncrowded ski areas with on-site lodging?

Postby jamesdeluxe » Thu Nov 14, 2019 6:29 am

Tony Crocker wrote:I haven't flown to Boise since 1983 but it's similar size to Spokane and served by Southwest so I'd assume comparable.

A recent article from the LA Times about Boise -- I assume that from time to time many places throughout the intermountain west (Bend, Oregon for example) have periods like these where CA transplants are viewed by locals as invaders. FYI about the origin of the name: Boisé in French (pronounced Bwah ZAY) means "wooded/forested."
https://www.latimes.com/california/stor ... h-in-boise

Interesting that Southwest flies nonstops from Spokane to Sacramento, San Francisco, and San Diego, but to none of the LA region airports. About ten days ago, the airline ended all service at my home airport EWR and consolidated its NYC operations at LGA. For the moment, only United flies between EWR and Denver. Frontier will start service in March.
User avatar
jamesdeluxe
 
Posts: 3637
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 3:19 pm
Location: South Orange, NJ + Denver, CO

Re: Are there uncrowded ski areas with on-site lodging?

Postby EMSC » Thu Nov 14, 2019 11:27 am

jamesdeluxe wrote:For the moment, only United flies between EWR and Denver. Frontier will start service in March.


Interestingly, while I've been through EWR a bunch, I've never left the airport. I've heard it's pretty terrible on the other side of security. Which contrasts with the interior where at least terminal C has been fully renovated and is fairly nice and easy to use - though pricey as heck for food (that terminal is where most of United's flights are. I'm sure it's a shock to everyone I have had status on United a bunch given their Denver hub).

As to Frontier, it's cheap, they mostly get you there; but EWR to DEN is about the max flight distance I would ever do on one of their planes. After 3-3.5 hours I can't handle their horrible seats. But if you need a cheap, quick fix for skiing it might work out OK.
User avatar
EMSC
 
Posts: 2192
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 6:54 pm
Location: Front Range of Colorado

Re: Are there uncrowded ski areas with on-site lodging?

Postby jamesdeluxe » Thu Nov 14, 2019 11:57 am

EMSC wrote:Interestingly, while I've been through EWR a bunch, I've never left the airport. I've heard it's pretty terrible on the other side of security. Which contrasts with the interior where at least terminal C has been fully renovated and is fairly nice and easy to use - though pricey as heck for food (that terminal is where most of United's flights are. I'm sure it's a shock to everyone I have had status on United a bunch given their Denver hub).

Yes, Terminal C is quite nice after the renovation. With a United Mastercard, you get 20% off restaurants there, which takes some of the sting out of the bill; however, I didn't find it hideously expensive.

EMSC wrote:Interestingly, while I've been through EWR a bunch, I've never left the airport. I've heard it's pretty terrible on the other side of security.

From the "those in glass houses" folder :-({|= -- based on my trip through there six weeks ago, DIA ain't looking too great either. The entire security area is still torn apart. I'm flying to Denver on Monday and will report back. Hopefully, they've made some progress.

EMSC wrote:As to Frontier, it's cheap, they mostly get you there; but EWR to DEN is about the max flight distance I would ever do on one of their planes. After 3-3.5 hours I can't handle their horrible seats. But if you need a cheap, quick fix for skiing it might work out OK.

I flew Frontier in the 80s, when it was kinda like a Denver-based version of Continental. I haven't tried them since the transformation into a cheapskate/zero-frills carrier. Since I'm a United flier, I'm looking forward to Frontier's arrival at EWR purely because it'll provide competition and push down fares to Denver and Florida.
User avatar
jamesdeluxe
 
Posts: 3637
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 3:19 pm
Location: South Orange, NJ + Denver, CO

Re: Are there uncrowded ski areas with on-site lodging?

Postby sierra_cement » Sat Nov 16, 2019 4:54 am

jamesdeluxe wrote:About ten days ago, the airline ended all service at my home airport EWR and consolidated its NYC operations at LGA. For the moment, only United flies between EWR and Denver. Frontier will start service in March.


I'm sorry for your loss. Frontier also flies to San Jose but their timings and prices to DEN were never any good for my dates.

Far better to redeem Southwest points with their free bags and liberal cancellation policy. Once I forgot to cancel a ticket and I called to get the taxes back, they even refunded the points. I've kinda come to a conclusion it's best to stick to Southwest for my ski trips. It helps that they have a lot of service to ski airports from SJC: DEN, SLC, RNO, BOI, GEG, SEA, PDX.
sierra_cement
 
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 2:01 pm
Location: San Jose

Re: Are there uncrowded ski areas with on-site lodging?

Postby sierra_cement » Mon Dec 02, 2019 12:28 pm

Tony Crocker wrote:
sierra_cement wrote:Does Mammoth offer enough of an advantage over Tahoe for people to consider the extra drive?

Yes, when there's a major difference in conditions. There are three scenarios here:
1) Early season if the first storms were mostly rain at Tahoe but snow at Mammoth.
The 2012-13 and 2017-18 seasons were a combination of 1) and 2) for several months.

It seems like this situation is happening right now and Mammoth would be a better choice for a trip next week than Tahoe.
sierra_cement
 
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 2:01 pm
Location: San Jose

Re: Are there uncrowded ski areas with on-site lodging?

Postby Tony Crocker » Wed Dec 04, 2019 2:15 pm

There have been 2 substantial Sierra storms with one more coming this weekend. Only the second storm had any rain and that one mostly below 7,500 feet. So Tahoe is much better off than at this time in 2012 or 2017.

That said we are driving to Tahoe from the Bay Area and Squaw has yet to open any upper terrain. They are doing control work aiming for this weekend but of course the next storm will further delay that opening.

I would expect upper Squaw to be good a week from now when we get a longer break in the weather. But we are skiing just tomorrow before moving on to Mammoth so Mt. Rose seems the right call for that.

Kirkwood should also be good though the logistics for us tomorrow would be a hassle. Currently Cornice is open at Kirkwood but Wall and Sunrise are not. Surely those will be open a week from now and I would guess Tseeb will provide a first hand report soon thereafter.

We will run into that weather at Mammoth. But lots of mid and lower chairs are open and full expansion to Canyon/Eagle is announced for Saturday.
http://bestsnow.net
Ski Records
Season length: 21 months, Nov. 29, 2010 - July 2, 2012
Days in one year: 80 from Nov. 29, 2010 - Nov. 17, 2011
Season vertical: 1,610K in 2016-17
Season powder: 291K in 2011-12
User avatar
Tony Crocker
 
Posts: 10496
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:37 am
Location: Avatar: Charlotte Bay, Antarctica 2011
Location: Glendale, California

Re: Are there uncrowded ski areas with on-site lodging?

Postby EMSC » Wed Dec 04, 2019 9:43 pm

jamesdeluxe wrote:
EMSC wrote:Interestingly, while I've been through EWR a bunch, I've never left the airport. I've heard it's pretty terrible on the other side of security.

From the "those in glass houses" folder :-({|= -- based on my trip through there six weeks ago, DIA ain't looking too great either. The entire security area is still torn apart. I'm flying to Denver on Monday and will report back. Hopefully, they've made some progress.


Somehow forget about this thread.

The answer is DIA's terminal will be horrible for a couple more years. The CEO of DIA ought to be fired but clearly has some sort of blackmail on the Denver City Council. DIA hired a contractor who ripped it apart, then due to DIA demand to change an extra ~$300M+ of change orders that they didn't actually want to pay for, the contractor and DIA went at each other, blah, blah blah. Now the contractor is fired, the 'settlement' to them will probably be $200M and the whole project is delayed by 6-12 months. Based on articles in the paper it's pretty clear it's DIA's fault, not the contractors.
User avatar
EMSC
 
Posts: 2192
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 6:54 pm
Location: Front Range of Colorado

Re: Are there uncrowded ski areas with on-site lodging?

Postby jamesdeluxe » Thu Dec 05, 2019 5:30 am

EMSC wrote:The answer is DIA's terminal will be horrible for a couple more years. The CEO of DIA ought to be fired but clearly has some sort of blackmail on the Denver City Council. DIA hired a contractor who ripped it apart, then due to DIA demand to change an extra ~$300M+ of change orders that they didn't actually want to pay for, the contractor and DIA went at each other, blah, blah blah.

Hah, sounds exactly like something that would happen at any one of the three NYC airports run by everyone's favorite punching bag, the Port Authority. Oddly enough, massive renovations/rebuilds of terminals at LGA, EWR, and JFK over the last five years have not been sullied by stories like the one at DIA, at least none that I'm aware of. With my new job based partially out of Denver, I'll be seeing plenty of the DIA main terminal. Thankfully, Global Entry minimizes time spent in the security queue.
User avatar
jamesdeluxe
 
Posts: 3637
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 3:19 pm
Location: South Orange, NJ + Denver, CO

Previous

Return to Western North America

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 17 guests


All content herein copyright © 1999-2017 First Tracks!! Online Media

Forums Terms & Conditions of Use