Jiminy Peak Eliminates Glades

[Admin]

This story in today's Ski News section at FTO contained the following excerpt:

Jiminy Peak's management made a decision was made to clear out most of the trees on Riptide and Willie's Gulch and add snowmaking to create a new top to bottom intermediate route on the west side of the mountain. While tree skiers may lament the decision, the mountain staff rationalizes that lean snow depths at times in the Berkshires meant that they could only open these glades for a very small part of the season.

What do you think about this decision. I understand the difficulties of keeping gladed terrain when you're working with Berkshire snowfall amounts (the SkiTown database lists claimed average annual snowfall at 100 inches), but were they better off keeping the gladed trails to maintain a greater diversity of terrain offerings? Or was it a wise decision to add another top-to-bottom intermediate run with snowmaking, thereby using that part of the hill to provide the greatest good to the majority of skiers and riders?

Feel free to vote in the poll, above, and explain your views and/or provide your commentary by posting a new reply to this topic. I'm curious to hear what you folks think.

 

[JimG.]

I'm selfish, so selfish that even though I don't ski there, I think they should have left the gladed terrain alone. I know the business rational of adding or modifying terrain to serve the good of the greatest number of skiers, but there are other issues at play too. Where will the skiers who utilized those glades ski? In the neighboring woods of course! Problem is, those well cleared glades are the best place to learn how to ski trees, not unmaintained wooded areas where alot of us like to play. While clearly marked area boundaries will be the stated solution, all it is gonna take is one liability situation to arise and all of that added profit they get from eliminating the glades will disappear, even if the case is frivolous and unwinnable.

 

[riverc0il]

i voted no to destroying the glades. this is yet one more case of ski area homoginization in which every trail and every ski area skis much the same. i cry foul every time ski areas remove something unique and challenging to make way for more of the same. while intermediate groomers sometimes vary in character, few stand out in my mind whereas i can name and visualized most glades i've been in (perhaps due to the lower amount of them, heh!). said glades i've been in always seem to have a unique character and feel to them between slope of land (not graded like ski slopes), tree type/shape/size/color/etc, curves, quality of snow (varies, but still), openness, etc.

removal of glades (especially at very busy ski areas such as this) presents another interesting dynamic to the industry itself. it is one more reinforcement telling people "no need to challenge yourself folks! stay on the groomers and learn to carve, that's all you need to know." granted there's no shortage of great all mountain skiers that can ski any where any time, but i think it's sad the industry prefers people not challenge themselves too much (less liability risk, right? :x ).

considering i don't even ski jiminy, it would be much easier for me to say "who cares" as it's no loss to me personally. but i feel it's a loss to the skier community in general whenever such a trail transition happens as is the trend throughout the industry. JimG has a great point that the thrill seakers will still duck into the woods, but rather the unmaintained ones which is more risk than a well maintained glade.

the arguement for the trail switch is a solid and legitiment one. it would make sense to offer the most terrain to the greatest population for the greatest amount of time. but at what cost to we pander to the lowest common denomenator? much like society in general is losing much of it's culture and identity in a rush to the bottom, the ski world continues to lose interesting trails and lots of character in this pandering to the bottom effort. if this was a needed expansion to ensure financial profitability, i would be more open to such a move. but this seems motivated as an advertising gimick (two more trails that now YOU can ski without learning to ski better!) to drive skier visits, not due to a slumping profit margin. i am sure a cost/benefit analysis was performed and they think they can increase skier visits enough to justify the expense of bulldozing, grading, and snowmaking two new trails. in regards to lean amounts of snow and the glades not being open often, cannon had two or three glades that never opened last season too. lean snow years effect glades throughout new england, not just massachusetts. most ski areas in general seem to have trees roped more often than not, so i don't buy that as a reason.

 

[Anonymous]

i wish the passionate and well articulated arguments defending the blue squared glades at jiminy and not bowing down to the maximizing of the commercialized terrain approach that the hill seems to have taken, would also be argued for moguls...hypocrisy? that might be too harsh... inconsistent? most defintely!!!!!! :roll:

 

[Admin]

Actually, joegm, take a look at the news story linked from my original post. I thought of you as I edited the story, for they have also committed to allowing one advanced run to remain wall-to-wall moguls all season with new snowmaking towers to dress up the bumps after a thaw/freeze rather than mow them down, and also to add machine-made moguls on an intermediate trail to allow folks to hone their bump skills. Both are rare moves in that neck of the woods.

 

[riverc0il]

i wish the passionate and well articulated arguments defending the blue squared glades at jiminy and not bowing down to the maximizing of the commercialized terrain approach that the hill seems to have taken, would also be argued for moguls...hypocrisy? that might be too harsh... inconsistent? most defintely!!!!!! :roll:

as a lover of bumps of all kinds, i have argued passionately for blue square bumpers as well on this forum. too bad we don't have archieves or i could pull up several threads. two or three years ago in my no bull reports, i was railing against cannon for bull bozing bumps while also supporting the idea of more blue square bumpers/half and half trails. there is nothing inconsistant in my agruement, from my post above i quote:

"this is yet one more case of ski area homoginization in which every trail and every ski area skis much the same. i cry foul every time ski areas remove something unique and challenging to make way for more of the same."

perhaps i should have included a clause that this includes moguls and natural snow trails of all kinds, but i figured that might be self evident. the topic wasn't in reference to moguls, so i did not stray there. but if you want a strong passionate and well articulated argument for making more moguls, you can count me in as a strong proponent.

 

[Chromer]

Jiminy is running behind the times. The trend in the northeast for the past few years has been to ADD gladed terrain (generally thinning-out lines that the locals had been skiing for years), not mow 'em into cruisers.

 

[JimG.]

I'm with you...I've always argued for MORE bumps, I just haven't been part of this forum for long. Bumps are where I spend just about all of my time when the opportunity for fresh tracks isn't available.

 

[AlpineZone]

I ski Jiminy a few times each season and rarely do I see the Riptide and Willie's Gulch glades open. I can see why the mountain would axe them in favor of more intermediate terrain. Probably not a favorable decision among the more "hard core" skiers, but I don't think that's the type of clientele Jiminy is trying to cater to. Some have even referred to Jiminy as "Stratton South". We discussed this earlier this summer on the AZ board and here's a thought I mentioned there. It would be interesting to see what folks here think about this:

I understand that the appeal of tree skiing as a natural skiing experience, but I wonder if any ski areas have considered snowmaking in or near gladed areas? Kind of defeats the purpose, I know, and they probably would need to clear them enough to allow a groomer between the trees to spread out the snow, but it might be a way to get a base down that will support natural snow longer. Kind of a synthetic approach to tree skiing, but it might work for areas like Jiminy that don't receive huge amounts of natural snowfall. From an operations standpoint, I'm sure it would be a nightmare to get a groomer in and around trees, but it would certainly add some variety to an otherwise wide open run.

Whatever your take on the glades, I do commend Jiminy for planning to have more bumps, including the manmade ones on Grand Slam. Loon has a policy of bumps from every lift (many of the fields are manmade) and that's a policy I would like to see other mountain adopt. Jiminy usually lets the skier's right of North Glade and the Foxes bump up, but it'll be nice to have other options for mogul runs.

 

[JimG.]

It is a great idea, but it would be very difficult to convince most ski areas to blow snow in the woods. Most won't even turn the guns on if the prevailing winds are blowing in the wrong direction (i.e. into the woods). Also, natural snow tends to ice up a bit less than manmade; you mentioned the problem of getting groomers into the woods, and without them the manmade snow there would eventually turn to boilerplate. OK to deal with on a trail, most likely treacherous and no fun in tight trees.

 

[Anonymous]

These decisions are best made on a case-by-case basis. If the snow reliability was really marginal, it may have been a correct decision. At Big Bear's Bear Mt. there are two widely separated ridgelines with a lift and run or two along the spine of each. There are a couple hundred acres of naturally gladed terrain in between, but with 6 feet annual natural snowfall they are seldom skiable. And when they are, the comparable glades at Baldy have twice as much snow, not to mention less than half the drive time to the resort. So it would enhance Bear's variety and traffic flow greatly to get lifts and snowmaking into this area. FYI it's been held up by changing managements and environmental permittting.

The comment above that the trend is to more high-end terrain is absolutely true in the West. Everyone notices how the shaped/fat ski revolution has allowed more skiers to ski the ungroomed, especially on powder days.

 

[NHpowderhound]

Blowing snow in the woods would be unpractical IMO.To have enough snow made would mean clearing to the point where it wouldnt be a glade anymore.However,Jay has the Bushwacker Glade which is rated intermediate,but has a winding "trail" that goes trhough it that can cater to borderline begginer/intermediate skiers.It is really quite remarkable.The trim radius around the trees in there is around 10 feet+- but like I said it has a committed,bonified trail that winds through it.

Should Jiminy eliminate the glade?Well,having never skied there I truly dont know.What I do know is that as an expert/glade skier I dont plan on skiing Jiminy Peak.Even if it was close.I drive past a dozen or more ski areas with glades that would be closer just to ski a mountain that suits my ability and desire for glade skiing.

I am sad to see any hill abandon a glade or trail but if it means the survival of the mountain then it needs to be done.
((*
*))NHPH

 

[joegm]

marc, u had the story first!!!! i see that jiminy is now advertising on the site and they are talking about the new bump runs.. that's quite a change from the past for sure