Cannon Expansion

[Jay$]

I know this has been discussed here and there... looks like there is a meeting this week to discuss the land swap


http://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/local/BO73492/

[skibumnh]

Never gonna happen.













I hope.

[Phishing]

Cannon's real issue is the lack of snowmaking. ie natural snow. I don't think opening the sill will help solve this problem. This will just push 'hikers" out to the other nearby slack country areas. I thought this swap was a done deal. This could be the last year of official unofficial access.

[RR]

The original planners wanted to put the Tram on Moosilauke. Then, after that did't fly, Sel Hanna told them where to put the ski area for the best snow....

A case of two-out-of-three going unheard...

[skibumnh]

And Sel was right. If you've skiied any protected western slopes off of cannon, then you know what he was talking about. There is no lack of natural snow on cannon, you just have to know where to find it. I found myself in a 45 degree birch glade in waist deep sloughing snow in early January this year (that was after the christmas rain). One of the best pitches I have ever skied on the east coast, and its tucked away at Cannon far from any snowmaking pipe's reach.

Edit: On a side note, Ill step out in defense of Cannon's on-trail snowmaking and grooming. It has greatly improved over the past five years, with the current season being the best. They have bounced back from rain and warm conditions better than ever. Avalanche has been in great shape since they started winch grooming it, and classic skating rink trails like profile are holding edgeable snow late into the day. Next time your at Cannon, take a run down Tramway at 3:00pm and tell me there is main thoroughfare run in better condition at any other peak in NH that late in the day. Its old Cannon rep that continues to perpetuate the misconception of bad snow there, and frankly I don't mind - more for the rest of us.

[Phishing]

I don't typically ski Cannon anymore on "those days" so I may have been a bit off base. Even when I am there I don't ski the resort proper. Cannon and Wildcat, for that matter, have the cold and icy reputaion. They need to attract gapers and gaper fams away from Loon, Waterville, and Attitash which is a challenge. Grooming and snowmaking do that.

Will marketing Mittersill increase their revenue base without alienating their core following? I personally think this is the biggest mistake they could possibly make.

[Cliff]

Next time your at Cannon, take a run down Tramway at 3:00pm and tell me there is main thoroughfare run in better condition at any other peak in NH that late in the day. You are right there. The last time I was up there I hit Tramway around 3:30 and I couldnt believe how nice it still was. I really hope they leave Mittersill closed. I like it the way it is now having to earn your own turns over there. Even though the hike is short so you are not really earning them but its busy enough without making it part of the resort. But in Cannon's defense I can see why there trying to do it since all they have to do is put up a new chair and trim out some of the trails and they add a lot more terrain to the mountain.

[RR]

Hard to know what to say...Mitti is a joy as it is, but one thing Cannon lacks is a network of classically narrow trails as many of the old Mitti trails were, back in the day. Those old trails held snow and their inclusion would take the pressure off Cannon proper, making the improved conditions (I noticed that too) even more durable.

Avoiding detachable hi-speed lifts, leaving glades fairly tight and staying with the narrow trail profiles would be keys to preserving the assest base and returning costs w/o spoiling a classic. If they proceed as I mentioned, there will be a short period of "shiny new toy", but then the use patterns will settle. It will not be too long before even the opposition conceeds that it worked out well and the combined resort gains value.

Then again, I will not bet the house that the lifts, glades and trails will be allowed to remain as value based. Much as always seems to happen with the Goden Geese, all three will probably be optimized for maximizing traffic....which will summarily kill the value of the acquisition.

[skibumnh]

They need to attract gapers and gaper fams away from Loon, Waterville, and Attitash which is a challenge. Grooming and snowmaking do that.

Will marketing Mittersill increase their revenue base without alienating their core following? I personally think this is the biggest mistake they could possibly make.

I disagree with your first comment about HAVING to attract gapers to sell tickets. Take a look at Jay - A core ski area with a shoestring marketing budget that identified their demo (freeride skiers and riders who want powder and unconventional terrain) and focused their campaign to suit them. IMO its been an overwhelming success up there. I was up there last Presidents Day weekend, 4-6 hours from Boston and NYC and I experienced a Saturday sellout, resulting in me scoring an insufferable 6 runs in 6 hours, so I think the cats out of the bag. You can sell lift tickets without appealing to the average joe. Furthermore, you dont need to attract gapers to a hill like Cannon. I enjoy skiing Cannon because I know that Im going to be sharing the hill with some of the best skiers in the region. Those skiers are a product of their environment. I have an admittedly elitist attitude about it, but I'm ok with that.

To your second point, yes I believe it will attract more average skiers. What is it about Cannon that makes it less appealing to the average skier? Its often windy, its cold and its steep. What does Mittersill bring to the table? Mellower, wind protected terrain at the expense of alienating the core group of skiers that keep that mountain alive. If they were to do it right, they would take the land, open the gates officially, and not do a thing to it. They would tailor a marketing campaign to that demographic and start riding the coat tails of an explosive backcountry skiing and riding industry. Screw this cannonista bullsh*t.

[riverc0il]

I disagree with your first comment about HAVING to attract gapers to sell tickets. Take a look at Jay -
One of the big differences between Cannon and Jay is that Cannon is state run. So in that sense, Cannon does have to do its best to attract all levels of skiers and most especially those learning and lower skill level families. There is a big push on that mountain to break away from the "skier's mountain" mentality and welcome families. I think this is a good thing.

Cannon is missing solid lower to upper intermediate terrain that retains good conditions and is wind protected. The Mittersill expansion is a no brainer for Cannon management because it will give lower level skiers a ton more terrain that is wind protected and less scraped down/wind blown. I don't like it one bit, but I can see their angle on the whole issue.

If they were to do it right, they would take the land, open the gates officially, and not do a thing to it. They would tailor a marketing campaign to that demographic and start riding the coat tails of an explosive backcountry skiing and riding industry. Screw this cannonista bullsh*t.
They would not need the land swap if they just wanted to market Mitt as hike to expert terrain. The gates already are open unofficially. Cannon could easily market the access to Mitt just like Jay once marketed the access to Big Jay (before this season, of course) which is public land. If they go through with the land swap, it will clearly be for expansion and adding a lift. And I for one say for shame. They have a unique area on the mountain, something special that adds something to Cannon. Adding a lift will indeed be beneficial for lower skill level sliders and families (and for sure real estate development... if you are into that sort of thing) but will be a big loss for those that prefer some adventure and skiing a little bit more on the wild side. Not that Cannon will not still have other wild options, but Mitt is a wild option that even families can enjoy.

[surf88]

If this goes through there definetly will be more traffic on Tuckerbrook.:(

[BladeGirl]

Cannon gets more natural snow than many of its neighbors. And as for attracting more folks from Loon et al, well...Cannon sucks. Cold and icy. Yep, stay away. Don't bother. Not worth your while. Those in-bound runs are so not worth it. And if you DO go, don't even THINK about Mitti et al, as those places suck even MORE!:p

-BG

[Luddite]

To your second point, yes I believe it will attract more average skiers. What is it about Cannon that makes it less appealing to the average skier? Its often windy, its cold and its steep. What does Mittersill bring to the table? Mellower, wind protected terrain at the expense of alienating the core group of skiers that keep that mountain alive. If they were to do it right, they would take the land, open the gates officially, and not do a thing to it. They would tailor a marketing campaign to that demographic and start riding the coat tails of an explosive backcountry skiing and riding industry. Screw this cannonista bullsh*t.
Interesting thread. I skied Cannon this past weekend for the first time in a bout 30 years or so. The cold/ice rep (and reality) of the old days kept me away. I took my 12 year old up with me Sunday. It was cold as hell, really icy and windy as hell :) We found some snow in an easy glade, but this was not what will keep me from going back. I don't agree that Cannon needs more gapers - from what I saw they have plenty. Granted it's the first day of Mass. school vacation, but I was pretty appauled by crowd behavior there. I won't type the multiple examples of what I consider to be incredibly rude behavior I saw, and I will readily admit that different people have different views of what acceptable behavior is. My tolerance level is probably reflective of a person who chooses to live in less crowded areas and to ski in the woods and at small "family" areas. As such I stopped skiing the "Ski 93" urban corridor long ago. My son, who has been raised in Me and NH and has only been to a mall a few times in his 12 years was horrified, which I found a little amusing.
As far as expansion, it seems to me that ski area developers too often have an inner need to "improve" stuff. I would rather they leave what exists alone and not "genericize" the rest, but that's just me....

[skibumm100]

I have only skied Cannon a few times and I don't think there will be a danger of it becoming an overly popular destination resort because of the base facilities. A lot of people (read "gapers") judge the quality of a ski area by the quality of the lodge, cafeteria, etc. That's where they spend a good amount of time when they go skiing because they don't come prepared. Cannon's base facilities don't bother me because I don't spend time in there but they are getting long in the tooth. Sunapee's lodge is much more "gaper-friendly". Can't say about Loon because I've never been there. Cannon does attract some extra business because, frankly, it's cheap. That's one of the reasons I've skied there. That, and I like the terrain. Wildcat falls into the same boat. I don't think opening Mittersill will attract that many more visitors unless there is an expanded base facility to go along with it. Just my 0.02, adjusted for inflation.

[surfsnowywaves]

Interesting note about the Tuckerbrook Trail...

According to this article in the Federal Register dated to April 1999, "the
State desires a Special Use Permit for the operation and maintenance of
the Tucker Brook Trail, within its existing footprint." The state wants to be able to maintain it because it holds historic importance, but they wish to have "no additional access or ski lifts" for the trail.

Link to article (http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-IMPACT/1999/April/Day-19/i9665.htm)

So apparently, they do wish to take control of this, as well. This could have interesting implications for the trail...better maintenance, more publicity...


Also, in response to what others have said, the acquisition seems to be in favor of more intermediate terrain for the resort. One thing mentioned in the article is that if the expansion occurred only on land the state currently owned, that the terrain opened up would only be of the "advanced/expert" ability level, and that full expansion to the top is necessary for full intermediate development. Sadly, I imagine that intermediate terrain entails wide trails and high speed lifts...because face it, in these times, slow lifts aren't quite appreciated any more. I feel that the mentality of the upper middle class (read=skiers) has gone more towards quantity than quality, which disappoints me. High speed lifts mean more runs, yeah, sure...but the quality of those runs goes down drastically.

[boardman]

This story was mentioned on Boston's public radio station, WGBH, this morning.

I disagree with those who don't think Cannon will get crowded. I "discovered" it this year after being a Killington season pass holder for a few years, after they jacked prices up. I've since turned a few friends onto the place as well, and they love it. Its proximity to Boston, and the fact that it's a straight shot on I-93, and located right off the exit, will make it very attractive to a lot of people should they "upgrade" the facilities with this expansion. I would be very unhappy to see that happen, but it's a near certainty that it will. With densely populated urban centers located so close, it's only a matter of time.

[skibumm100]

Boardman,

Glad you discovered Cannon! It's a fun mountain. But it's still exactly where it was before, no closer. They've been advertising on local radio since I moved here seven years ago. It still doesn't have the cache of Loon or Sunday River down south. K-mart is a pretty good hike from Boston and it's cool you don't have to drive so far anymore. As long as they don't do a big base area upgrade, I believe it will remain less popular than some of the other resorts in the area. I am saying this with my fingers and toes crossed.:D Again, JMHO.

[boardman]

Become a big fan of Wildcat as well. Basically been choosing between Cannon and Wildcat all season based on who's gotten more snow right before I go. Lately, it's been Wildcat. But I had a few spectacular days at Cannon in December.

[skibumm100]

I just went to Wildcat two weeks ago and it was awesome! Great snow and a great mountain. I hadn't been there in about five years. I told my kids we'd go this year if they got a good snowfall and we hit it pretty good. Looking forward to skiing it again this year.

Back to Cannon for a minute....I have never skied Mittersill but I pulled it up on Google Earth today and it looks like about 3/8 of a mile hike until you get some pitch. Is that close to reality or is the hike longer or shorter. I would guess it's a little longer in fresh snow and shorter if there's tracks. The walk back to Cannon base at the bottom looks like about 1/2 mile. I would love to take a run or two over there if there's some fresh snow or tasty leftovers. I'm not averse to hiking a bit for good skiing. I don't consider myself a BC skier and I don't have AT gear but it looks like a pretty easy hike for some good turns. The forecast isn't looking too bad for this weekend.

[surf88]

because face it, in these times, slow lifts aren't quite appreciated any more. I feel that the mentality of the upper middle class (read=skiers) has gone more towards quantity than quality, which disappoints me. High speed lifts mean more runs, yeah, sure...but the quality of those runs goes down drastically.
Rep. Well put. I love cannon mostly based on nostalgia. 2 for $20 Tuesday and thursdays were the majority of my dates my senior year. I was really sad to see the peabody double with the mid station go, I had a lot of good memories on that lift. And I was also sad to see just how much faster everything gets skiied off now. I personally would rather have less run on better conditions. The best recent addition to the mountain IMO is the kinsman glade. But you got to hit it early, because theres not a whole lot of lines through it and it gets tracked out quickly.

[riverc0il]

So apparently, they do wish to take control of this, as well. This could have interesting implications for the trail...better maintenance, more publicity...
The trail is already well maintained, I doubt maintenance could be much more improved than it already is. Since the trail is in Goodman's book and well known in the BC community, I doubt it would get too much more publicity either. Would be nice if they addressed the parking issue though, a public trail head would be welcomed. Might be interesting to see if expansion increases or decreases traffic. Quicker hike up from Cannon side I would imagine but who is going to hike up with Mittersill lift serviced? I would suspect fewer regular skiers not "in the BC know" would know that there was even a trail up there. Whereas now, every skier that passes that trail takes a look down and wonders.

[skibumnh]

Would be nice if they addressed the parking issue though, a public trail head would be welcomed.

What you don't like the mad rush to get back to your car before they tow it out of the plow turnaround? :D

I guess TB is primetime at this point. You hear people talking about it on the tram and in the lift lines a lot. Anyone who skis at Cannon knows of it, but the addition of a new lift on mittersill will introduce it to all the non-regulars. I guess I could see it evolve into something like the Wildcat Valley Trail - out in the open, as accessible as any other trail on the mountain but with posted with some sort of disclaimer regarding the walk back.

[stoneman]

I'm thinking the one thing that would absolutely guarantee the final ruination of the TB would be an "improvement" of the parking situation. As others have said, it isn't exacly a state secret. So in our collective worst nightmare of a Cannon expansion the only thing that will keep the great unwashed masses from hitting that trail is the thought that they may have to schlepp all the way back up to the ski area - maybe.

[RR]

... it looks like about 3/8 of a mile hike until you get some pitch. Is that close to reality or is the hike longer or shorter. ....The walk back to Cannon base at the bottom looks like about 1/2 mile. .... I don't have AT gear but it looks like a pretty easy hike for some good turns.....It's a lot less if you can catch a long enough gap, straightline the approach and hold speed ALAP. Sometimes it works out to as little as 150 yards of walking, but the undulations have to be flown at some peril for that.

The Burger guy sets up at the high point sometimes, when the weather is especially fine.

If you take Barron's Run it's easy to ski back to Peabody Quad, no walking at all. There is a lower cut through that will get you to the bunny hill.

If you take the Center or skiers left from the top you have to start cutting back (skiers right) at around 500 vert or there will be some walking. But unless you are first on a powder day, it is easy to see where the most tracks go and follow them.

[RR]

...I would suspect fewer regular skiers not "in the BC know" would know that there was even a trail up there. Whereas now, every skier that passes that trail takes a look down and wonders.I would say it's a great deal fewer than "every" skier. Right about there the Taft Slalom Trail is narrow and the attention is focussed on the business at hand.

An amazing number of Mitti Regulars still don't know where it starts....well, amazing to me, as the T-brook is an historic treasure imo.

[skibumm100]

It's a lot less if you can catch a long enough gap, straightline the approach and hold speed ALAP. Sometimes it works out to as little as 150 yards of walking, but the undulations have to be flown at some peril for that.

The Burger guy sets up at the high point sometimes, when the weather is especially fine.

If you take Barron's Run it's easy to ski back to Peabody Quad, no walking at all. There is a lower cut through that will get you to the bunny hill.

If you take the Center or skiers left from the top you have to start cutting back (skiers right) at around 500 vert or there will be some walking. But unless you are first on a powder day, it is easy to see where the most tracks go and follow them.

Thanks RR! It's amazing how well it all shows up on Google Earth. NASA Worldwind doesn't bring up the satellite definition that Google does but on Worldwind I can overlay the USGS topo so you can see the countour better. Wasn't sure what it was like in real life. I'll take a run down it next time I'm at Cannon. Don't worry, I'll leave some for you guys!

Gregg

[PWDR8S]

Mmmmmm.... about this Mittersill stuff. I can see it would be great for the family guy(Dad and Teenagers) who in sacrifice to pleasing his family goes to Loonieville, or Wateredownville instead of hitting the challenging slopes of Cannon should the expansion proceed. I've heard many a humble mumbling about not feeling challenged while skiing with the family. Should the troublesome prospect occur, then more families would hit Cannon/Mitt and revenues would increase fo rthe state resort.

I can see the benefits on both sides yet I would be sad as well if this were to pan out. After sooo many years of skiing Cannon, I have yet try and slide Tuck~er~nook.

[RR]

...I have yet try and slide Tuck~er~nook.....best done on a powder day, anything over six inches will be fine. On your AT gear you can easily get back to the Mitti via the x-c trails and a mild bushwhack. Saves all the extra driving around in the old gas hog.

[redwagon29]

I've skiied Cannon several times since I started skiing around the age of 12. My uncle would always take me up and he loved the Cannon and Wildcat. So he basically got me hooked on it. I remember sitting in the summit lodge around 930-10 seeing if anyone was hiking up to Mittersill yet, and after we saw a few people up there we knew the snow was good to go. On some days you just see this line of people probably 40-50 long heading up that way. I think its nostalgic. Countless people had carved their names in the lift over there before it got knocked/torn down. As much as I liked the idea of expanding over there for more terrain, is it really necessary? I got to speak to the new president of the mountain this winter at the Ski Expo in Boston and he made it sound like a done deal. For those of you who mentioned keeping the land as it is (in Fed hands) and advertising it, they can not do that for liability reasons. Plain and simple, it is not their terrain so they can not advertise it as theirs.

A lot of the reasons why my family and I enjoy Cannon and Wildcat is because of its location. People regard it as tough, harsh, steep. That's the thrill of it all when at the end of the day you can say you accomplished a phenominal mountain. And I also agree that their grooming has gotten much better in the recent few years. I don't want another Bretton Woods or Killington or I would go there. It's nice being able to go back to the same base lodge no matter what trail you ski. Just my two cents.

[riverc0il]

I'm thinking the one thing that would absolutely guarantee the final ruination of the TB would be an "improvement" of the parking situation. As others have said, it isn't exacly a state secret. So in our collective worst nightmare of a Cannon expansion the only thing that will keep the great unwashed masses from hitting that trail is the thought that they may have to schlepp all the way back up to the ski area - maybe.
Why would having more people on TB be such a problem? Perhaps instead of developing a great BC skiing culture that highlights historic trails like the Tuckerbrook, Taft, Thunderbolt, Bruce, Sherburne, etc. we should push for hush hush treatment and reduced access? My opinion on the matter is the more officially sanctioned and accessable backcountry terrain we can promote, the better. We certainly do not yet have enough such treasures and hoarding them does little to increase access.

[RR]

...We certainly do not yet have enough such treasures and hoarding them does little to increase access.On the other hand, some things not yet classic are not ready to be promoted. On that other, other hand, great classics are in danger of being lost.

Clearly great minds must drink to gether to consider solutions to this problem :D

[surfsnowywaves]

On the other hand, some things not yet classic are not ready to be promoted. On that other, other hand, great classics are in danger of being lost.

Clearly great minds must drink to gether to consider solutions to this problem :D

This sort of discussion reminds me of a certain backcountry ski group that some folks believe should be formed....

[skibumm100]

SSW,

:D :D ....except there was clearly not enough drinking at the last gathering....and much gnashing of teeth.;)

[skibumnh]

Why would having more people on TB be such a problem?

Umm, fewer runs with fresh pow... Is this is trick question? I think one of the big draws to the BC (rather slack country in this instance) is isolation, escape from the crowds. I think every BC skier is looking for this (I know I am). TB is not the type of trail that will survive being crowded in its current state. If TB was popularized then I would bet it would see even more traffic than Sherburne, a much wider and more maintained trail. So you say its a historic trail which means the goal is to preserve it in its present state at any cost. With this in mind, its not going to get any wider and to prevent premature erosion and destruction of the trail, history tells us that the powers that be will then commence with timely trail closures, only allowing traffic in optimal conditions, or perhaps not at all.

Look at Big Jay, even the Sherburne as part of its maintenance regiment has restricted traffic when conditions necessitate it.

So IMO, when it comes to BC access, more is less.

[riverc0il]

I haven't had a ton of experience with the TB, but skiing up the TB just a day or two after a storm did not reveal many left over untracked lines. TB is not exactly lightly traveled from what I have seen. Classic trails are not about fresh pow, IMO. Though that is nice, I look for fresh pow in the woods. Never consider looking for fresh pow on the Sherbie... and I doubt TB would ever, no matter what circumstances, see more traffic than the Sherbie does. We will have to agree to disagree on that issue, I think. Big Jay has nothing to do with this issue though, that restriction was due to the swath cut over the summer, not over usage of Big Jay. Sherburne closing certain parts of the trail is a fine idea, especially considering the traffic it gets. If getting more people involved with touring and backcountry means a few less powder lines on the classic trails and closures to prevent errosion, I am all for it. The more people in this activity the better, lest with horde it to ourselves rather than see the sport from the perspective of when we first entered it ourselves.

[skibumnh]

I doubt TB would ever, no matter what circumstances, see more traffic than the Sherbie does. We will have to agree to disagree on that issue, I think. Big Jay has nothing to do with this issue though, that restriction was due to the swath cut over the summer, not over usage of Big Jay.

My thought process this... We have speculated thus far that Cannon will likely install a high speed lift at Mittersill that will result in increased visibility of TB. The TB and Sherb skiing season are virtually the same, but the TB now has a lift dropping people off at it at a rate at say 1000 per hour (conservative) for 6 hours a day for the duration of that season, where as up the road people are still earning their turns on the sherb, and only a select few will score 2 runs in a day. Not to mention in sherburne high season, closures are usually already in effect (little head wall, and lower portions are closed by early April in recent years).

I scored pow turns on TB on a Saturday - days after a storm earlier this season.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2318/2174919297_b842076c44.jpg

As for Big Jay, I understand the circumstances are different, but the solution would be similar which was the point I was trying to make - closing access to a BC trail from a resort to prevent further damage and to allow for regrowth the natural repair of that area.

And San Diego is German for Whales ******.

[P-HUG]

Just wondering but would they put a chairlift up as high as the start of the TB or would it top out near the old lift tower/shack are now?
If the lift didn't go that high, then I think the TB would be in no danger of being overrun. That being said, I would feel alot better about lifts on Mitzo if they did only go to where they currently did and not to the Mitzo summit proper. Saves the Taft and TB IMO.

BTW, great thread. I have strong feelings about Cannon myself, it is probably my favorite EC mountain, b/c of the easy side-country, etc. And also 2 fer tues and thursdays and NH resident Wednesdays. Never ski there on weekends or holidays though.

Hope to see some you there next storm cycle

[RR]

Just wondering but would they put a chairlift up as high as the start of the TB or would it top out near the old lift tower/shack are now?...Hope to see some you there next storm cycleThe old lift had some controversy with it, I'll be looking into that.

I suspect that it stopped where it did due to a problem unrelated to skiing or potential wind hold issues. Nevertheless, a modern era fixed lift stopping at the current top station would be only slightly affected or even unaffected by the winds causing the frequent wind holds on the Tram.

A fixed lift such as I mentioned would see skier traffic well dispersed across the upper terrain. It would have an impact on the T-brook, use would go up. I'm guessing that a 10-15% increase in traffic would be the likely result.

A detatchable running at an average pace would bump that another 3-5%.

As it stands now the only real problem for the T-Brook would be improved exit facilities. A parking area would increase the current traffic by at least 15%. A shuttle would make it a busy trail.

Combining the lift and improved exit facilities? The T-brook changes status completely. From that point, the Coppermine becomes the new T-Brook. Maintained by the interested few and enjoyed by many.

Life goes on.

[stoneman]

I can respect your possition rivercOil. But in the hypothetical world we're talking about, the TBrook becomes lift serve, which means it is basically no different from any other lift serv trail on the mountain. To say that would develop some sort of B/C culture is, i think silly. I havn't seen anyone here advocate for keeping this particular trail a secret( that would be a neat trick though), or reduce access to it. I think most of us just don't want it to degenerate any more than it already has.

[surf88]

The NH Union Mis-Leader has an article today, about the project being held up by the Bicknell's Thrush. (They don't have the article on there website yet for me to link it.) But according to the article the 100 acre summit area would have to remain unchanged, and that the lift will not be going any higher than the old Mitty lift. Thats good news because I'm pretty sure that at least 98% of americans are to lazy to walk any higher than the lift will take them.

[P-HUG]

But according to the article the 100 acre summit area would have to remain unchanged, and that the lift will not be going any higher than the old Mitty lift. Thats good news because I'm pretty sure that at least 98% of americans are to lazy to walk any higher than the lift will take them.

I could live with that

[PWDR8S]

Hooray for Bicknell's Thrush! http://www.techsourceconsultants.com/coppermine/albums/userpics/10020/finger_dance.gif http://www.techsourceconsultants.com/coppermine/albums/userpics/10020/jumpin.gif http://timefortuckerman.com/photopost/data/774/1659woohoo.gif http://timefortuckerman.com/photopost/data/774/1659applause.gif

[BladeGirl]

Hooray for Bicknell's Tush!
:eek: :bum: :eek:

;) BG

[skibumm100]

Before we cheer Mr. Bicknell's Thrush keep in mind he's the same character (partly) involved in the Big Jay closure. Big Jay is also "prime Bicknell's Thrush habitat". That was one of the environmental reasons why they want it "protected", besides erosion and other issues. Even though he doesn't hang out up here during skiing season. Apparently he's not as rare as first believed.....just find primo BC/Slack Country skiing and there he is...Mr. Bicknell Thrush.:D Let's hope he thrives so more habitat doesn't get "protected" to the point of being closed to access. Obviously the other "characters" involved in the Big Jay closure were two locals with chainsaws. :mad:

[riverc0il]

Just wondering but would they put a chairlift up as high as the start of the TB or would it top out near the old lift tower/shack are now?
I do not have a copy of the plans posted to FTO (perhaps they are still over their... Chips' Arm Chair Analysis or something like that), but I recall that the unload station proposed would be higher than the current unload station of the old double but below the TB, people would definitely need to hike up and car spot. Compared to the Sherbie on which everyone that hikes up to Tuckerman must come down the Sherbie, only people that spot cars or are willing to skin back go down to Tuckerbrook Road.

[pallen]

Manchester Union Leader has an interview by Bald, head of NH economic development about Cannon/Mittersil.
see here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23443503

Cant believe they're thinking of a rope tow on Taft to get folks over to Mitt. Wonder how many wannaBees will get hurt over there if they do it.

(and yes, I noticed how the first sentence reads if you drop the comma :D )

[RR]

Sure, that's the up front question. I too, asked it as I read your post.

Then I thought about it some more and I get their point. Two way traffic would be a disaster!

The option to a tow would be to have a seperate, second strand of the Taft. One way only, down from Mt. Jackson with merge onto Hardscrabble that can't be accessed by straightaway traffic on Taft

Sure it makes no sense for folks on Mitti Terrain to....but, what if they decide they have ripped it up enough and they have to meet someone at the Profile Chair?

[davidhowland14]

the same thing that happens if you're at Jackson Gore and you decide you want to meet someone over at the main summit area. You ski down, ride the lift up, and then ski the traverse over. I've stayed out of this topic b/c I don't really know the situation or the terrain, but IMO, a rope tow would not be the best utilization of the situation.

[P-HUG]

Bald said according to the study, Cannon has both problems - fewer visitors and less revenue per visitor than private ski areas.

Last I checked the former was not a problem for me :rolleyes:

[boardman]

Bald said according to the study, Cannon has both problems - fewer visitors and less revenue per visitor than private ski areas.

Last I checked the former was not a problem for me :rolleyes:

Or me!! That's the allure of the place! Keep it real!

[surfsnowywaves]

Or me!! That's the allure of the place! Keep it real!

Yeah, it's not a problem for us. But we're not the ones looking at the finance books asking "Is this worth it for us to do?"

[BladeGirl]

Bald said according to the study, Cannon has both problems - fewer visitors and less revenue per visitor than private ski areas.

Last I checked the former was not a problem for me :rolleyes:

Neither one is a problem. Raising the ticket price would just make the sport that much less affordable. How much revenue is enough? They cover their costs, pay their staff and make some (unknown to me) amount of profit. Why does that profit need to be pushed to its largest possible amount? There is no private investor here that might go under. Next the states will start charging $$$ to visit state park/forest land. These state-owned resources are held as a public benefit.

My $0.02
-BG

[RR]

Right On BG!

Most reputable!

[PWDR8S]

Neither one is a problem. Raising the ticket price would just make the sport that much less affordable. How much revenue is enough? They cover their costs, pay their staff and make some (unknown to me) amount of profit. Why does that profit need to be pushed to its largest possible amount? There is no private investor here that might go under. Next the states will start charging $$$ to visit state park/forest land. These state-owned resources are held as a public benefit.

My $0.02
-BG

I thnk they've already started that..... ie - going up Kearsarge from Winslow State Park side or the Rollins Park side(Warner) ..... They have gates and respective gatekeepers. And I thought parks were already paid for and and free? I can understand needing funds for maintaining access roads and picnic areas but to pay for staffing to collect seems like overkill.

[brakeformoose]

I only read the T4T forums every once in a while and I rarely post but after seeing this topic I have been motivated to reply.

I ski Cannon 40-50 days a season as a ski instructor and from our view the expansion to Mittersill needs to happen. As it is now Mittersill shouldn't even be called slack-country. Everyone knows about it and a 5 minute hike does not make it slack-country. The expansion to Mittersill was included in the master plan ten years ago that also gave Cannon the Peabody Quad and a new septic system. Mittersill is suppose to be the last phase of the master plan, but as of now there is no guarantee of a new lift in place by next season. When the new lift is put in place it will most likely be put exactly where the old double was and will not go higher up to the start of the TB. The TB will see very little increase in the amount of skiers since there will never be direct access back to the lifts. The lift on Taft will most likely not happen since there is no money for it and you can already get to the base of Mittersill from the current trails. Cannon will always have the stigma of being cold, windy, and icy even though I have skied all over New England and have experienced those everywhere. Mittersill is not going make people think there is less ice or wind.

Marketing mittersill may alienate some of the mountains core following and push some people away but the core following was not big enough to keep the mountain afloat like at Jay. The new GM understands the type of people who ski at Cannon but he also realizes that the mountain needs to bring in revenue. This is his first year as GM and it is also the first year in 5+ years that Cannon will finish the season with a profit. Mother nature does deserve some credit but the GM has also expanded snowmaking and bought a brand new winch cat to improve conditions. He did raise the ticket price and season pass price but they are still cheaper than anyone else around.

[RR]

Quibble I shall not; well put. Thanks for keeping it real!

[Bannick]

A little off topic but.... is Cannon Haunted?
I have never been to Cannon but the last two nights I have had dreams that I was riding there and ended up having to fight off demons and ghosts in the woods. Even got to shoot the head off a zombie with a helmet mounted shotgun last night.

Just checking.

[elwood]

A little off topic but.... is Cannon Haunted?



Yes. Yes it is.

[BladeGirl]

:hijack:

OK, actually I *am* hijacking a bit here, but speaking of zombies, we just watched "Fido" last night and it was frickin' brilliant. For those who have not seen it (and I am not giving anything away here), a big corporation figured out a way to contain zombie's hunger for flesh thereby making them into useful members of society (read slaves). Wouldn't they make good lifties?;)

-BG

[skibumnh]

I only read the T4T forums every once in a while and I rarely post but after seeing this topic I have been motivated to reply.

I ski Cannon 40-50 days a season as a ski instructor and from our view the expansion to Mittersill needs to happen. As it is now Mittersill shouldn't even be called slack-country. Everyone knows about it and a 5 minute hike does not make it slack-country. The expansion to Mittersill was included in the master plan ten years ago that also gave Cannon the Peabody Quad and a new septic system. Mittersill is suppose to be the last phase of the master plan, but as of now there is no guarantee of a new lift in place by next season. When the new lift is put in place it will most likely be put exactly where the old double was and will not go higher up to the start of the TB. The TB will see very little increase in the amount of skiers since there will never be direct access back to the lifts. The lift on Taft will most likely not happen since there is no money for it and you can already get to the base of Mittersill from the current trails. Cannon will always have the stigma of being cold, windy, and icy even though I have skied all over New England and have experienced those everywhere. Mittersill is not going make people think there is less ice or wind.

Marketing mittersill may alienate some of the mountains core following and push some people away but the core following was not big enough to keep the mountain afloat like at Jay. The new GM understands the type of people who ski at Cannon but he also realizes that the mountain needs to bring in revenue. This is his first year as GM and it is also the first year in 5+ years that Cannon will finish the season with a profit. Mother nature does deserve some credit but the GM has also expanded snowmaking and bought a brand new winch cat to improve conditions. He did raise the ticket price and season pass price but they are still cheaper than anyone else around.

Thanks for the insight into the situation. Aside from the corny marketing campaign, I have to give the new GM some credit. The new winch cat has done wonders for the condition of steeper trails like avalanche, and as I have said before, day to day conditions continue to improve and dispel the now myth that cannon is a skating rink. Maybe side-country is a better term for Mittersill in its current state. If the plan plays out as you have described, then I think nothing is f*cked here, dude.

[brakeformoose]

Calling the marketing campaign corny is an understatement. Cannonista is not a term created by anyone that works at Cannon. I believe it was created by a company that Cannon hires to do marketing. Oh well, everyone will just have to live with it for a couple of years and then they will come up with something else. Hopefully they will learn from their mistakes and go back to calling people Cannoneers.

[triyoda]

[QUOTE=skibumnh;106231]I disagree with your first comment about HAVING to attract gapers to sell tickets. Take a look at Jay - A core ski area with a shoestring marketing budget that identified their demo (freeride skiers and riders who want powder and unconventional terrain) and focused their campaign to suit them. IMO its been an overwhelming success up there. I was up there last Presidents Day weekend, 4-6 hours from Boston and NYC and I experienced a Saturday sellout, resulting in me scoring an insufferable 6 runs in 6 hours, so I think the cats out of the bag.


It is only about 2 hours from Montreal and a lot cheaper than Mt. Tremblant. Seemed like mostly canucks when I was up there in January. Wish it was not so far.