New Boundry Markings?

[Lbtchnlgs]

Are those things new or have they been around? I can't decide whether I have seen them before or they are new.

Also Wed morning I noticed a posting about skiing out of bounds and how it gets cold at night: This makes me think they markings are new because somebody got lost?

[megatron]

The signs are new, and if you are caught beyond them, you will get your pass pulled. The signs are the direct result of a male ski instructor and his female companion getting lost on the night of 2/16. They were trying to reach another friends home in the Chatiemac Club by skiing off of Chatiemac towards the west. What these people did not take into account, was that it was 3:30 when they left the trail, they had no safety equipment or skins, and bottom line is they had no clue of where they were going!!!
Get this, he must do "public service" education regarding not skiing OB, he was not terminated. :shock:


http://www.postimage.org/aVF4xIS.jpg (http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVF4xIS)

[St. Jerry]

The signs are new, and if you are caught beyond them, you will get your pass pulled. The signs are the direct result of a male ski instructor and his female companion getting lost on the night of 2/16. They were trying to reach another friends home in the Chatiemac Club by skiing off of Chatiemac towards the west. What these people did not take into account, was that it was 3:30 when they left the trail, they had no safety equipment or skins, and bottom line is they had no clue of where they were going!!!

http://www.postimage.org/aVF4xIS.jpg (http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVF4xIS)

Sounds like Darwinism dosen't alway work.

[skiguy14]

i was in the chatty glades and saw the sp putting them up....i asked if somebody died or got lost and they said almost.....and that this wasn't the 1st time...

[SKIdds]

Also Wed morning I noticed a posting about skiing out of bounds and how it gets cold at night.
Curious thing about those signs posted in the lodge and elsewhere. It says that Gore has numerous marked glades and three designated backcountry areas. What are those designated backcountry areas? I did see the posted signs in a couple of areas around the mountain indicating it was the ski area boundry. One of those was by the entry to what I'll call the Chatiemac backcountry, which was roped (and was sweet yesterday).

Maybe the designated baccountry areas are something different, but if those designated backcountry areas are places like the OB area off Chatty, it would seem the mountain has made those official in some way (hence the "designated"), and therefore skiable. I suppose they would only be skiable if the rope was down, but will it ever be down? It wasn't yesterday at about 12:30.

[Lbtchnlgs]

I know people make mistakes, but this really bites for everyone else. Chati glades were always nice because of the large area you had to pick from, especially if you are not aware of other entries, now they have reduced it to a small glade

[megatron]

Also Wed morning I noticed a posting about skiing out of bounds and how it gets cold at night.
Curious thing about those signs posted in the lodge and elsewhere. It says that Gore has numerous marked glades and three designated backcountry areas. What are those designated backcountry areas? I did see the posted signs in a couple of areas around the mountain indicating it was the ski area boundry. One of those was by the entry to what I'll call the Chatiemac backcountry, which was roped (and was sweet yesterday).

Maybe the designated baccountry areas are something different, but if those designated backcountry areas are places like the OB area off Chatty, it would seem the mountain has made those official in some way (hence the "designated"), and therefore skiable. I suppose they would only be skiable if the rope was down, but will it ever be down? It wasn't yesterday at about 12:30.

The designated backcountry areas do not exist anymore. They originally included the Burnt Ridge Loop, Twister/Tahawus Glades, and Chatiemac/Straightbrook glades.


http://www.postimage.org/aVK6BjS.jpg (http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVK6BjS)

[SKIdds]

So the signs in the base lodge that Lb referred to about skiing out of bounds and how cold it gets at night aren't new?

[megatron]

So the signs in the base lodge that Lb referred to about skiing out of bounds and how cold it gets at night aren't new?

All of the signs are new. Gore put up the boundary signs as a CYA move.





http://www.postimage.org/aVK6BjS.jpg (http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVK6BjS)

[SKIdds]

OK, but if the signs in the base lodge are also new......they, as of yesterday, indicate that Gore has three designated backcountry areas. If Gore considers all OB backcountry areas as off limits, they certainly shouldn't claim them as designated parts of the resort in posted signs and materials. In fact, you would think that such a sign should indicate that skiing beyond area boundaries was forbidden, rather than claiming to have designated areas. I didn't take a picture of the signs in the base lodge, but I don't believe they indicated that the "three designated backcountry areas" were off limits (but I could be wrong), they just talked about the risks involved (how cold it gets, yad, yada, yada).

I guess I'm a little confused as to whether you can ski something like the Chatiemac backcountry without getting into hot water. No, you can never duck a rope, lest you get your ticket pulled (if you get caught). But if the rope isn't up, the current signs indicating the boundary let's you know you are going outside the posted limits of the resort, but I don't think they say "YOU CAN NOT GO HERE". Which, if they don't say that and Gore currently claims these to be "designated" areas, gets back to the question of whether the rope will ever be dropped, but if you want to claim to have them it would be silly to never have them skied.

But here is what I saw yesterday, and seem to be taking away from the conversation.

1. Gore now has posted, at certain locations on mountain, signs that indicate the ski area boundary. I don't recall that those signs said anything about your ticket being pulled if you went beyond said sign.

2. Gore currently has posted in the base lodge numerous signs that indicate that the resort has three designated backcountry areas, in addition to numerous glades. These signs seem to be intended to highlight the risks of skiing in such areas.

Maybe someone can post a picture of both of these signs to show whether they state that skiing beyond the boundary or in the three designated areas will result in having your ticket pulled. Otherwise, notwithstanding the rope issue, these facts wouldn't support that these areas are strictly off limits.

Actually, I hadn't been to Gore in more than 20 years and we had a blast yesterday. I will be back, and I just want to know where I can ski. I'll post some pics tonight from our day trip.

[megatron]

OK, but if the signs in the base lodge are also new......they, as of yesterday, indicate that Gore has three designated backcountry areas. If Gore considers all OB backcountry areas as off limits, they certainly shouldn't claim them as designated parts of the resort in posted signs and materials. In fact, you would think that such a sign should indicate that skiing beyond area boundaries was forbidden, rather than claiming to have designated areas. I didn't take a picture of the signs in the base lodge, but I don't believe they indicated that the "three designated backcountry areas" were off limits (but I could be wrong), they just talked about the risks involved (how cold it gets, yad, yada, yada).

I guess I'm a little confused as to whether you can ski something like the Chatiemac backcountry without getting into hot water. No, you can never duck a rope, lest you get your ticket pulled (if you get caught). But if the rope isn't up, the current signs indicating the boundary let's you know you are going outside the posted limits of the resort, but I don't think they say "YOU CAN NOT GO HERE". Which, if they don't say that and Gore currently claims these to be "designated" areas, gets back to the question of whether the rope will ever be dropped, but if you want to claim to have them it would be silly to never have them skied.

But here is what I saw yesterday, and seem to be taking away from the conversation.

1. Gore now has posted, at certain locations on mountain, signs that indicate the ski area boundary. I don't recall that those signs said anything about your ticket being pulled if you went beyond said sign.

2. Gore currently has posted in the base lodge numerous signs that indicate that the resort has three designated backcountry areas, in addition to numerous glades. These signs seem to be intended to highlight the risks of skiing in such areas.

Maybe someone can post a picture of both of these signs to show whether they state that skiing beyond the boundary or in the three designated areas will result in having your ticket pulled. Otherwise, notwithstanding the rope issue, these facts wouldn't support that these areas are strictly off limits.

Actually, I hadn't been to Gore in more than 20 years and we had a blast yesterday. I will be back, and I just want to know where I can ski. I'll post some pics tonight from our day trip.

Call 518-251-2411 and ask to speak with the mountain manager. He would be happy to explain the "new policy" and while your at let him know what a great time you had, where you skied, and most of all all that you will definitely be back :D :D
Hope that helps!


http://www.postimage.org/aVLlhc9.jpg (http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVLlhc9)

[adksara]

Hmmm... but isn't Gore on state lands? Some areas are bordered by private lands are are therefore in my mind off limiits unless you talk to the owner about skiing through. But don't we have access to all state lands??? That whole 'paying taxes and setting aside wilderness for the enjoyment' of generations nonsense.

I'm wondering where 'GORE' ends and regular state backwoods starts - Gore can restrict trails and such where they have a boundary, but where is that?

ADKSara

By the way - the woods elsewhere that aren't roped off are BEAUTIFUL!!!!!!!

:D

[SKIdds]

Call 518-251-2411 and ask to speak with the mountain manager. He would be happy to explain the "new policy" and while your at let him know what a great time you had, where you skied, and most of all all that you will definitely be back.
Already did that, including the part about telling him where we skied and what a good time we had. Actually, I'm not sure who it was I spoke to but he indicated that backcountry areas were no longer designated on the trail map (did they used to be on the trail map last year?) and that there were no longer designated backcountry areas where skiing was permitted. He said if it isn't on the trail map you shouldn't ski it. He was going to look into the signs that currently hang in the base lodge that address the designated backcountry areas and make sure there was no information in them that conflicted with current policy.

Interesting that he should say "if it isn't on the map you shouldn't ski it". Yesterday we found a couple of well travelled glades and asked some of the people in them which glades they were, and they had a name...........but they must of been unofficial names as they weren't on the map.

While it is difficult for a mountain to maintain, espcially one that is state run, I love the idea of an open boundry policy, and an anything goes (within reason) policy within bounds as well.

[takeahike46er]

Interesting that he should say "if it isn't on the map you shouldn't ski it".

He's just trying to keep people out of his stashes. :wink:

Seriously though, Gore has some great glades, many of which are not on the map. While Gore does not actively promote an open boundary, there is enough skiing off-piste that it can feel like an open boundary at times.

[skiguy14]

gore should make a policy similar to the vt mountains.....you can ski anywherre inbounds as long as you enter and exit from an OPEN trail....

[takeahike46er]

I agree that Gore should adopt an open boundary policy-- if it's possible. There are a lot of hardwoods on the mountain that are easily skied with little or no maintenance. Some have put forth the notion that liability is the reason that the state areas haven't adopted an open boundary. I'm not so sure about that. I suspect it might have to do with environmental impact combined with limitations put in place when the ski areas were created.

[megatron]

I agree that Gore should adopt an open boundary policy-- if it's possible. There are a lot of hardwoods on the mountain that are easily skied with little or no maintenance. Some have put forth the notion that liability is the reason that the state areas haven't adopted an open boundary. I'm not so sure about that. I suspect it might have to do with environmental impact combined with limitations put in place when the ski areas were created.

It has everything thing to do with Article 18 of NYS skiing laws. it puts the OB liability on the ski areas. Whereas VT, has a legal policy that states that individuals ski at their own risk.
That is why you will be charged to be rescued in Vermont, and no charge, but possibly arrested for going OB in NY.

I am done with this thread

:evil:


http://www.postimage.org/aVQOTRA.jpg (http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVQOTRA)

[takeahike46er]

There are skiing laws? :lol:

Kidding.

Never realized that was the official policy. That is ridiculous. Obviously, Vermont has a more logical policy because it holds individuals accountable for their risk-taking.

[takeahike46er]

Just read the full Article 18. Here is what relates to boundaries and responsibilities:

18-105. Duties of Skiers
All skiers shall have the following duties:
1. Not to ski in any area not designated for skiing;

8-103. Duties of Ski Area Operators
Every ski area operator shall have the following duties:
14. To have present at all times when skiing activity is in progress, individuals properly and appropriately trained for the safe operation of on-slope vehicle; trail maintenance equipment; tramways; tramway evacuations; implementation of the reckless skier policy; first aid and outdoor rescue



If there was an open boundary, then the mountain would be responsible for first aid and outdoor rescue for those areas as well? That's what I am concluding.

[skimore]

Also Wed morning I noticed a posting about skiing out of bounds and how it gets cold at night.
Curious thing about those signs posted in the lodge and elsewhere. It says that Gore has numerous marked glades and three designated backcountry areas. What are those designated backcountry areas? I did see the posted signs in a couple of areas around the mountain indicating it was the ski area boundry. One of those was by the entry to what I'll call the Chatiemac backcountry, which was roped (and was sweet yesterday).

Maybe the designated baccountry areas are something different, but if those designated backcountry areas are places like the OB area off Chatty, it would seem the mountain has made those official in some way (hence the "designated"), and therefore skiable. I suppose they would only be skiable if the rope was down, but will it ever be down? It wasn't yesterday at about 12:30.

The designated backcountry areas do not exist anymore. They originally included the Burnt Ridge Loop, Twister/Tahawus Glades, and Chatiemac/Straightbrook glades.


http://www.postimage.org/aVK6BjS.jpg (http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVK6BjS)

They already ruined the Burnt Ridge area clear cutting a bunch of lame trails anyway

[Harvey44]

http://www.postimage.org/aV1nM9yr.jpg (http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aV1nM9yr)

[St. Jerry]

Also Wed morning I noticed a posting about skiing out of bounds and how it gets cold at night.
Curious thing about those signs posted in the lodge and elsewhere. It says that Gore has numerous marked glades and three designated backcountry areas. What are those designated backcountry areas? I did see the posted signs in a couple of areas around the mountain indicating it was the ski area boundry. One of those was by the entry to what I'll call the Chatiemac backcountry, which was roped (and was sweet yesterday).

Maybe the designated baccountry areas are something different, but if those designated backcountry areas are places like the OB area off Chatty, it would seem the mountain has made those official in some way (hence the "designated"), and therefore skiable. I suppose they would only be skiable if the rope was down, but will it ever be down? It wasn't yesterday at about 12:30.

The designated backcountry areas do not exist anymore. They originally included the Burnt Ridge Loop, Twister/Tahawus Glades, and Chatiemac/Straightbrook glades.


http://www.postimage.org/aVK6BjS.jpg (http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVK6BjS)

They already ruined the Burnt Ridge area clear cutting a bunch of lame trails anyway'

Yea, I came across that while skiing Twister Glades. One of the best trails at Gore now ruined.

[highpeaksdrifter]

Also Wed morning I noticed a posting about skiing out of bounds and how it gets cold at night.
Curious thing about those signs posted in the lodge and elsewhere. It says that Gore has numerous marked glades and three designated backcountry areas. What are those designated backcountry areas? I did see the posted signs in a couple of areas around the mountain indicating it was the ski area boundry. One of those was by the entry to what I'll call the Chatiemac backcountry, which was roped (and was sweet yesterday).

Maybe the designated baccountry areas are something different, but if those designated backcountry areas are places like the OB area off Chatty, it would seem the mountain has made those official in some way (hence the "designated"), and therefore skiable. I suppose they would only be skiable if the rope was down, but will it ever be down? It wasn't yesterday at about 12:30.

The designated backcountry areas do not exist anymore. They originally included the Burnt Ridge Loop, Twister/Tahawus Glades, and Chatiemac/Straightbrook glades.


http://www.postimage.org/aVK6BjS.jpg (http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVK6BjS)

They already ruined the Burnt Ridge area clear cutting a bunch of lame trails anyway

The Gore web site says this about them:

BURNT RIDGE MOUNTAIN
Slated to open December 2008, one of the best pods of terrain yet...Burnt Ridge. We'll be developing five new trails, totaling approximately six miles. This new terrain will increase our vertical drop to 2,300 feet and add about 60 acres of skiing, with a blend of intermediate and expert terrain serviced by a high-speed quad.

What are they going to be like?

[Harvey44]

One of them should be pretty good at least. Looks like the one that follows the ridge is steeper than showcase on average with some steeper drops and a few turns to ad interest. Would love to hear the opinions of others who have studied the topo.

[skimore]

One of them should be pretty good at least. Looks like the one that follows the ridge is steeper than showcase on average with some steeper drops and a few turns to ad interest. Would love to hear the opinions of others who have studied the topo.

no topo studying needed.....seen it many times....all they have done is create a bunch of the same old shit they all ready have...a bunch of intermediate blue trails...they had an area designated "backcountry" and they clear cut it....would have been better off glading it or leaving it alone....are they that out of touch and don't see the trend of people tree skiing and looking for an offpiste experience

and Harv....no trail over there warrants an <> rating

[skimore]

and while I'm ranting.....what about the conditions report on the website....what a joke...you get snow for the last 7 days and sometimes 24hrs....check some other sites...they'll give details on what fell and when

[Harvey44]

I'll give you that about the site:

What has been groomed?

Update the site by 6am or at least by the time the mountain opens. So you can make a decision about buying a ticket or driving. One time I admit I wasn't paying attention too closely...the site and a ski pat told me the Cave was open...I was zooming down Ruby...almost lost my head on the rope.

Snowmaking last 48 hours? What trails?

Also...for 2 days after the rain started falling this week the site still said come on up for the best conditions of the year.

As far as the trails go...that is driven by the real estate.

I tell myself...if Gore was Killington....it would be Killington.

[megatron]

Gore sends out the trail reports at 4pm the day before!! Emily and Kurt must a have a crystal ball of there own :roll: Gore also does not update the trail report throughout the day, like yesterday when everything was bulletproof in the morning, and sweet cream later on. :D
Gore is also dead against having a webcam. Reasoning: we do not want people to see when the conditions are bad
:shock: . I am not making this up!


http://www.postimage.org/Pq2rhosJ.jpg (http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=Pq2rhosJ)

[St. Jerry]

One of them should be pretty good at least. Looks like the one that follows the ridge is steeper than showcase on average with some steeper drops and a few turns to ad interest. Would love to hear the opinions of others who have studied the topo.

no topo studying needed.....seen it many times....all they have done is create a bunch of the same old s*** they all ready have...a bunch of intermediate blue trails...they had an area designated "backcountry" and they clear cut it....would have been better off glading it or leaving it alone....are they that out of touch and don't see the trend of people tree skiing and looking for an offpiste experience

and Harv....no trail over there warrants an <> rating

What he said.

[Lbtchnlgs]

I took 1st gondi up with a guy on Wed who was told to "take this map" to see what has been groomed and what has not, by a staff member.

The map was from the day before.

[Lbtchnlgs]

I took 1st gondi up with a guy on Wed (whatever the last powder day was) who was told to "take this map" to see what has been groomed, by a staff member.

The map was from the day before. :lol:

[twinplanx]

While I was showing some friends around Gore back in March we got a little to close to the new signs in Chaittimac. When we got to the trail at the bottom a ski patrol "dude" really wanted to speak to us. I tried to ignore him, but my buddies where taking there sweet time anyway so I spoke w/ him. I figured he'd read us the riot act. And he did, sorta but no threats where made. I think he just wanted to see where our heads where at and let us know that those areas are not patrolled(swept). If this is in fact there policy,(?) I have to give props to Gore...