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.

takeahike46er wrote:

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

There are skiing laws?

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.

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.

megatron wrote:

SKIdds wrote: Quote: 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.

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

skimore wrote:

megatron wrote: SKIdds wrote: Quote: 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. 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.

skimore wrote:

megatron wrote: SKIdds wrote: Quote: 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. 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?

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.

Harvey44 wrote:

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

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

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.

Gore sends out the trail reports at 4pm the day before!! Emily and Kurt must a have a crystal ball of there own 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.
Gore is also dead against having a webcam. Reasoning: we do not want people to see when the conditions are bad
. I am not making this up!

skimore wrote:

Harvey44 wrote: 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.

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.