Cannon Could Go Private

ouch. i speak of my own experience, and i will concede my experiences there are far less than your own. i would say i have seen taft left natural about half the time i have skied cannon. obviously less than your experience. but what i have seen is taft left to grow bumps after natural snow but groomed out flat when it has gotten scraped, wind blown, and exposed rocks. i haven't been skiing there for 25 years, i can admit that my experiences vastly different than other people's.

citing this year as an example of average is not exactly a fair arguement. this is perhaps one of the worst calendar winters in my lifetime (27 y/o). if i wasn't still recovering from a broken elbow, i would be pointing my skis towards northern VT not cannon because you are right, cannon has nothing for natural snow worth skiing right now. i know that and i haven' skied there all season.

i did not mean to suggest that natural bumps only form on natural snow but rather that there is a special element to skiing a trail that is all natural snow. i am willing to wait for good natural snow to enjoy such trails as we have discussed that do not have snow making. i think it makes those trails special. even if you have to wait until march to have middle hard open and the bumps under zoomer lift worth skiing, it makes it that much better when you get to ski them. i will admit i am guilty of not caring about my bases when the turns are nice, so i am less likely to notice the thin cover to be quite frank.

i stand vehemently against expanding snow making encrouching on the few natural snow trails left in new england, and most especially at cannon. so few trails are left to mother nature's hand. if we are going to argue for more and better bumps at cannon, snow making has nothing to do with the matter. why don't we argue for some seeded bumps down skiers right of rocket or garys? the bumps on those trails are generally pretty ugly and grow more ragged than even i prefer. or we could argue for avalanche or some of the banshee trails being allowed to bump edge to edge and perhaps seeded (banshee would be an excellent low angle blue square learning bumper). i think improved bumps at cannon can come without the cost of more snowmaking (in both senses of the word cost in my opinion). i would suspect a big corporate leaser would want less bumps, not more bumps, at cannon regardless of increased snow making or not.
 
riverc0il":14ca6ba5 said:
i did not mean to suggest that natural bumps only form on natural snow but rather that there is a special element to skiing a trail that is all natural snow. i am willing to wait for good natural snow to enjoy such trails as we have discussed that do not have snow making. i think it makes those trails special. even if you have to wait until march to have middle hard open and the bumps under zoomer lift worth skiing, it makes it that much better when you get to ski them. i will admit i am guilty of not caring about my bases when the turns are nice, so i am less likely to notice the thin cover to be quite frank.

Exactly even if there only open half the year, and are pretty rocky, atleast there soft. If you make snow on those trails then they will be more tame, less fun and a lot more icy. IMO trails that aren't groomed should not have snowmaking.
 
river, i'm not trying to pile on but your getting killed here. my question to you is a simple one... would the racers at cannon ever be forced to ski on race trails ( for even one day ) that have the current comparable surface conditions of cannon's current " bumps runs "... ? please steve, answer that question. of course they wouldn't. you know it , i know it and certainly no one knows it better than dipiro. i'm not saying privatization is the total answer either. but the silly argument of " natural bumps" cannot be won. WE DON'T GET ENOUGH SNOW IN THE EAST. THAT ARGUMENT IS A JOKE AND ANYONE WHO ADVOCATES IT IS NOT A REAL SERIOUS FAN OF BUMP SKIING ON A REGULAR BASIS... this year ( and frankly the last 3 seasons ) prove that beyond a doubt. where do you think we are here , out in mammoth getting 500 inches of snow each season?
 
I dont think Riv is getting killed. As a matter of fact I think he has some excellent points, like other folks in here too. I agree that the snowmaking on the front could have included the sides or at least 3/4 and not just a strip down the middle. But I also agree that it's often worth the wait to ski on trails with no snowmaking. It is a shame that the Freestyle crew is forced to go to Loon or WV. I too see no reson why a more dedicated mougul trail cant be brought to reality. There is no reason why half or even a quarter of Gary, Rocket,Zoomer(preferably), Avalanche or Paulie's couldnt be designated for bumpers and a pipe or park. But just like compromises need to be made to accomodate racers and bumpers, compromises should be made to accomodate those that enjoy natural snow trails and the conditions they present, even if it's crap sometimes.
I skied the sides of Zoomer and Paulies last friday 2/10 when I met Dan and JimG. They were challenging but still skiable. Technichle I guess you could say. I diddnt ski it T2B but I enjoyed the challenge it presented for the sections I did ski.
Let's say Cannon did have a strip of dedicated bumps on Zoomer that was laid down on a carpet of manmade this year. What kind of condition would they have been in for the majority of the season? My opinion is that they would have been largely unskiable to the majority of skiers. Even for experts. Kind of like the natural trails this year :lol: .
Let's hug and go ski Powder and Bumps at Jay cuz they have both!
((*
*))NHPH
 

Attachments

  • IM000896.JPG
    IM000896.JPG
    58.3 KB · Views: 7,137
of course they wouldn't. FSC is a race club not a freestyle club so i fail to see the point here. if cannon had a freestyle team, they probably would put in the effort to setup a decent maintained bump run. i think this is comparing apples to oranges. the bumps at cannon aren't there for a dedicated freestyle team much the way gary's is primarily a race trail. should there be a dedicated and maintained seeded bump trail? hells yea! but that is not the issue we are debating here as i previously mentioned.

i guess my arguement is a joke and i am not a serious bump skier. i can accept that, i seem to bump heads with all the serious bump skiers on the board from time to time. i am a serious natural snow all mountain skier and i accept as a condition of living in the east that you gotta wait sometimes to get the goods. it is frustrating. i can understand 'serious bump skiers' wanting bumps all season in good form. i prefer a different environment for my bumps and don't see the need to demand snow making on interesting natural snow trails that would loose their character with increased snow making efforts (speaking in general here for the record). you can disagree with my point, but i fail to see how you could dismiss it out of hand.

getting back on topic, that is my main point with the current state of mittersill. forget the snow making debat, my biggest contention with developing that gem is you don't see areas like that any more. they are a rare and dieing bread and something special to those of use that treasure those experiences.

nice pic, NHPH. i have not yet dismissed the possibility of returning to the location of my accident this season and getting the best that jay has to offer.
 
well I'm coning to this discussion a little late. I'm glad though, because it probably saved me a whole bunch of typing. Rivercoil has saved me that effort, since I am 100% in agreement with him. Like RC I admit I will never log the Cannon days or the bump days that Dan D. does. However, I am a lifelong Cannon skier. About 80% of my days per year are at Cannon.

Somehow the conversation has shifted from the pros and cons of privitization to the unwinnable and circular discussion of bumps (tends to go that way when Joegm is involved). I'll keep my point abouot bumps very brief because I readily admit that I'm "NOT A REAL SERIOUS FAN OF BUMP SKIING ON A REGULAR BASIS". Like RC, NHPH, and most others on this board, I'm a real serious fan of skiing a variety of New England condtions. I love the powder when I can get it, I love the bumps when they are soft and natural, I love the trees when the hold secret stashes, I love the groomers when I'm the first one on them, hell I even love the ice when I can rip past a few folks cowering in fear.

For all these reasons I love Cannon. I also love the fact that I never wait ina lift line, I can ride the Tram on frigid days, I can always find a price deal, the people are friendly, the backcountry access, the variety, the ease of access from the highway, on and on and on......

Privitization may improve snowmaking, trail maintenance, services, events, etc. But the bottomline is I already get eveything I want out of the place. If the price goes up or the crowds increase, I will have lost something. It's a tough and selfish arguement. It's like your favorite local band...You want everyone to appreciate them adn you want them to succeed, bu then you're pissed when they make it because now you have to see them at Madison Sqaure Garden. They must have "sold out". Call it selfish, but if Cannon was my favorite local band I'd hope they never made and I'll keep seeing hem at the uncrowded little bar.
 
Steve you are just not getting it... has cannon blown as much artificial snow in this pathetic snow year on their non seeded- but technically what they consider their ? bump trails ? as they have on their regular groomed out trails and their ? race trail.. no, they have not. And it?s not just cannon?.forget the seeded aspect for a moment?.my point to you was , the non mogul trail(s), (which happen to be conducive to racing) are maintained much more than the ?bump trails? ( which are essentially given NOTHING)..whether they are natural or not .. seeded or not. Why the hell should it take a private freestyle team WHICH IS IN MOST CASES ONLY FOR KIDS in order for the public to have access to any sort of decent mogul trail?..are you going to sit there and say that the current surface conditions of cannon?s ? mogul trail(s)? ( again, either naturally formed or seeded ) are in as good condition as their non-mogul trails? Of course they are not because there has been a decision made to not put any resources like snowmaking and terrain management into doing so. How can you argue with a guy like dipiro who actually worked there for all those years and knows exactly what the operating mentality is. Why should one have to be, as you say, ? a serious bump skier? to have decent bump terrain to ski. Cannon, and all the other places who set up nastar courses for the general public to go into and recreationally ski gates, don?t require those people to be ?serious racers?. my friends and i have had crap to ski for 9 out of the 12 weeks of the season so far ... but all the race trails and non bump regular groomed trails have been blown on, gated up, groomed out and maintained every single freaking day , no problem, for at least 10 out of the 12... The hypocrisy on this issue is astounding. 1 freaking trail? 1 /2 half THE SIDE of one trail.. with some snowmaking and some bumps? WHY IS THAT SUCH A PROBLEM?
 
As far as the kids in the FSC goes, if they see bumps, jumps, jibs, and pipes, they are kids and wont be able to keep themselves away. It's the race coaches that will try and stop them cuz they know it's more fun and they'll be out of a job :lol: !
((*
*))NHPH
 
I just dont think this particular season has been kind to eighther side of this debate. The warm January, lots of r@!n, lac of natural snow, and a few nasty freeze thaw freeze cycles have made it difficult to dedicate rescources to maintaining a dedicated bump course. It's much easier and costs alot less money to have a groomer make three sweeps over a 10-30" base in mid-february and setup a few gates than it is to seed a bump course. I just dont see what snow they would have to work with?
I dont care for the racers but I understand where the mountain's bread and butter are coming from today. Not that it cant change but reality is that's how it is right now. Unfortunatly, Cannon makes a significant amount of money from the FSC and they will bow to thier pressures. And it will stay that way until someone is willing to spend more.
((*
*))NHPH
 
So, Rivercoil, to put the whole mogul issue aside and follow your logic.... Would you like to see Cannon without snowmaking all together, like Mittersill? ...because you think it's worth your while to wait for those natural snow days? I'm guessing you'd answer "no" to this. So, which trails should be left without snowmaking? Or with partial man-made cover, like Zoomer? How would you choose the trails to be left unskiable for most of the season?

Today, Zoomer had a strip of man made snow down the middle. Most of the skier's right (~75 ft. out from the woods) was unskiable and posted with "thin cover" signs. Most of the skiers left, also, was the same. So, about 1/3 of the Zoomer acreage was unusable, as it frequently is, because the mountain doesn't completely cover the trail with snow.

"Ouch" you wrote in your reply to me. HD could have said the same to your calling him "ignorant." His taking issue with Cannon's routinely neglecting to thoroughly cover trails like Zoomer and Avalanche is, however, a perfectly reasonable and logical critique of the place that certainly didn't warrant your insult.

-Dan D.
 
Dan DiPiro":3ovoakfe said:
So, Rivercoil, to put the whole mogul issue aside and follow your logic.... Would you like to see Cannon without snowmaking all together, like Mittersill? ...because you think it's worth your while to wait for those natural snow days? I'm guessing you'd answer "no" to this. So, which trails should be left without snowmaking? Or with partial man-made cover, like Zoomer? How would you choose the trails to be left unskiable for most of the season?.

That would actually be pretty awsome. Have a little snowmaking on the easier trails, windblown trails, and around the base and your all set. IMO blacks and doubleblacks should not be groomed or have snowmaking(Well before anyone says something, yes I know there are exceptions, you need atleast a few steep crusiers and you need a race trail, but overall "expert" terrian should be natural)
 
How often are these natural trails at Cannon in decent shape? My impression after reading years of FTO reports is not very often. I think this option is viable at MRG and Castlerock because those areas get about 50% more snow than Cannon (and possibly less wind?).

Whether a new operator can be found who would expand snowmaking without homogenizing trail design I don't know, but that would be the most desirable option IMHO. And the snowmaking needs to be state-of-the-art, given the challenges of Cannon's terrain.
 
And it?s not just cannon?.forget the seeded aspect for a moment?.my point to you was , the non mogul trail(s), (which happen to be conducive to racing) are maintained much more than the ?bump trails? ( which are essentially given NOTHING)..whether they are natural or not .. seeded or not.
amen, i don't want the 'bump trails' to be maintained. though i am all for a seeded bump trail, for my own personal use, i enjoy cannon's natural aspects.
 
Dan DiPiro":2s67mutu said:
So, Rivercoil, to put the whole mogul issue aside and follow your logic.... Would you like to see Cannon without snowmaking all together, like Mittersill? ...because you think it's worth your while to wait for those natural snow days? I'm guessing you'd answer "no" to this. So, which trails should be left without snowmaking? Or with partial man-made cover, like Zoomer? How would you choose the trails to be left unskiable for most of the season?
you are right, i would answer no. the mountain has to open and have man made on the main routes for sure. no mountain in new england except MRG could survive without snow making the main routes. personally, i think cannon's current state of snow making is fine. they need a little more on some aspects, but i have no beef with their current snow making. partial cover on zoomer and avalanche work fine, the natural snow bumps on these two trails i enjoy tremendously. especially skiers right on avi.

regarding today at cannon, i would like to mention again using this season as a measurement is not appropriate. normally, cannon would be near or at 100% by this time of the year. at least everything but the glades and tramline have been open by late february. this season is off the mark by a long shot.

"Ouch" you wrote in your reply to me. HD could have said the same to your calling him "ignorant." His taking issue with Cannon's routinely neglecting to thoroughly cover trails like Zoomer and Avalanche is, however, a perfectly reasonable and logical critique of the place that certainly didn't warrant your insult.
you have a good point. HD, you did not deserve a highly emotional and name calling response and you have my apologies. however, i stand by the facts of the arguement though that cannon DOES have dedicated bump trails in the hards and paulie's, other trails i conceed are sometimes groomed but often left to bump.
 
Tony Crocker":41nuw9v1 said:
How often are these natural trails at Cannon in decent shape? My impression after reading years of FTO reports is not very often. I think this option is viable at MRG and Castlerock because those areas get about 50% more snow than Cannon (and possibly less wind?).
tony, your impressions are good. the natural snow trails at cannon proper take a lot of snow to get into decent shape and as you mentioned, the northern greens get a lot more snow. decent shape requires a good base followed by recent snowfall, more often than not, you get one or the other at cannon but not both. but when you have both, it is just about as good as any where else. the trails at mitt are a bit more protected and get less traffic so in decent shape slightly more, but you gotta deal with lack of maintainence. not a bad thing in some skiers' opinions.

the question remains in regards to the lease option: would a company or corporation leasing out cannon find that the mountain had long term prospects to make enough profit to justify a brand new snow making system? especially if you increase the size of the moutain by ~25+% by adding mitt. without real estate aside from the mittersill resort (would they sell with a revitalized mittersill? i doubt it.), would a lease be a viable business option? even if they bought out mittersill resort, i don't think that would be enough. not without jacking prices. i'd rather hike mitt all day than spend ASC dollars for a lift ticket to cannon, quite frankly.
 
Tony Crocker":1wknwnih said:
How often are these natural trails at Cannon in decent shape? My impression after reading years of FTO reports is not very often. I think this option is viable at MRG and Castlerock because those areas get about 50% more snow than Cannon (and possibly less wind?)....

Thank you, Tony, for pointing to the heart of the matter. Cannon's natural-snow trails, during any season, not just this particularly bad season, are often closed. When they are open, they are often rocky.

For those skiers who don't ski Cannon day in and day out, but who pick and choose their ski area for any given day (and end up at Cannon for just a fraction of the year, as Rivercoil does), Cannon's good-natural-snow days are special, and Cannon's bad-natural-snow days can be avoided with trips to Stowe, Jay, etc.

Meanwhile, Cannon passholders, instructors, ski patrol and other regulars have to wait out the bad-natural-snow days on trails that are either not the mountain's most challenging or are not completely covered with snow.

This bad-snow year only drives the point home. The sides of Zoomer are often unskiable (as they are right now) or rocky (skiable only to those who can afford to ruin their equipment).

I'm not certain that privatization would cure these problems, but if privatization meant that all of Cannon's trails would be covered with a nice thick layer of good man made snow (by the way, I also believe, HD, that Cannon has a tendency to make especially icy snow), I'd say "go, privatization!" Skiing natural snow is nice, but I'd rather be able to ski most of the mountain most of the season than spend the season waiting for snow and ruining my skis on rocks.

And here's another point: Cannon's natural-snow / back-country fans will always have their big network of non-Mittersill woodchuck trails. Those trails wouldn't go anywhere, even if Mittersill were brought back into operation.

-Dan DiPiro
 
(and end up at Cannon for just a fraction of the year, as Rivercoil does)
nearly 50% of my 28 lift serviced days last year were at cannon. not quite a fraction. same approximately 50% for the last few years. i can see your point if you worked there or were a season pass holder (especially on a year like this one). but pass holders and workers at almost any mountain must contend with bad weather seasons.
 
WOOF,

Quite a thread, haven't been around to read as I have been, um... skiing. PS There is still a lot of snow in the backcountry of the greens.

As someone who vehemently loves cannon, I'll put it this way.

Yes, I agree I'd love to see some more maintence to the entire place, make it fun even when there is no natural snow to be found. Sure, I'd love some man-made snow bumps in lieu of anything else. It would make life easier for people like D.Diprio who ski there everyday.

However, I believe that if a private entity were to lease cannon, they would not be doing it to improve conditions they would be doing it to set up realestate at mittersill The real money in the place would be to expand Mittersill and build a big base over there. I CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO SEE THIS HAPPEN. I would much rather forfeit the perfect man-made snow, and all the other positives others have addressed. Suck it up get some base damage, and never ever put another lift up on Mitt again, ski it the way it is.

Sure change isn't always a bad thing, but in this case I think it is.

-Porter
 
amen, i don't want the 'bump trails' to be maintained. though i am all for a seeded bump trail, for my own personal use, i enjoy cannon's natural aspects.
[/QUOTE]
the only possible reason for your statement that you don't want a maintained bump trail , is becasue you obviously don't have a general passion to ski bumps every time you ski. that's fine. but those of us who do , we have just as much right to ski decent bumps just about everytime we ski , as do those who have every right and expectation to ski groomers and carpet every time they ski. the technology is there to do this. any excuse is just that , an excuse... lack of snow is baloney. i see more snow in the loon mtn park right now than anywhere on the hill. why, becasue they made a choice to put it there. i see ski areas plowing thousands of dollars every single night ( in labor and snowmaking ) into maintaining their parks and pipes and cruiser runs and race trails. i see them putting nothing into their " mogul " runs(s) ... see here's the problem with this.. bumps are viewed by too many people ( like steve ) as " conditional " or when conditions allow. llike skiing the trees or skiing powder... that's baloney in today's modern era. if people can expect to have groomed carpet 100% of time they ski, if racers can reasonably expect skiable race courses just about every time they ski, is it so outrageous for bumpers to be able to expect at least one ( seeded , man made - whatever dumb label one wants to put on it ) skiable bump line 80 to 90% of the time they ski.? of course it's not. and it's total bs to suggest anything else. i'm sick and tired ( especially in the obviously awful year we are having now ) of having to go to the hill and beg for decent terrain. it's thinking like yours that contributes to this nonsense
 
and another thing- for all the nonsensical clowns who say bumps should be all natural all the time: that thinking more than likely would have resulted in the cancellation of the olympic mogul competition in this years olympics. BRILLIANT :evil:
IT'S OK TO MAINTAIN RACE COURSES BUT IT'S NOT OK TO MAINTAIN BUMP COURSES...YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME :evil: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
 
Back
Top