Mt. Ellen (VT) Sugarbush ski trail walking?

[Tramper Al]

Hi,

I'm just in the planning stages of a little winter walk up Mt. Ellen, and I just want to consider all options and 'escape' routes.

If I were to find myself at the summit of Mt. Ellen right around the time that the ski day was wrapping up (say 4-5 pm or so), might it be feasible to consider a headlamp descent by ski trail? I am sure there will be the odd ski patrol person and groomer / snowcat out and about. Does anyone have any knowlege of Sugarbush's attitute towards tolerating the occasional hiker on a ski trail?

I'm just asking . . .

 

[spencer]

Tramper,

you should be fine. I did Abraham that way a couple years ago. I tried to carry my skis with me but I got stopped by a patrol. They wouldn't let me take them up with me, but they said it was fine to hike up as long as I stayed to the side.

Of course I got a lot of dumb looks. After I hit ABraham, I hung out near the top of the lift (this is all at Sugrabush South, the other half from where you'll be, but I presume it's the same) and had a snack from the grill the patrollers had going. Then I waited for the lifts to close and glissaded the entire way down on my backside. It was a hell of a ride and I used my poles (collapsed) llike an axe to steer.

I highly recommend it if you can't bring skis with you!

spencer

 

[Frodo]

Last winter, myself and 2 friends went up Ellen just before they opened. We walked right up the sides of the ski slopes with workers all about and nobody said a thing to us.

From Ellen we went along the ridge to Abraham, then took the packed ski slopes down in the middle of the day (we stayed along the sides, and occasionaly went thru the woods). Ski patrol went right by us without a comment. I tend to think that as long as your not getting in the way or postholing the groomed trails, they don't care that you are out there.

I also agree with Spencer, your best bet would be to time it so you are coming down after the lifts are closed, then you can do some major butt-sliding! Yee-hah!!!!

 

[trailbiscuit]

Ski resort mucky-mucks tend to look down on these practices. Liability and whatnot. But if they're not looking you should be able to go right ahead. It sounds like a load of fun to me. I've been known to wander around ski slopes past closing and the groomers and snowmakers never say a word.

Spencer - I'm surprised that a patrol type would stop you. Usually the friendliest types on the mountain. Must have been a volunteer patroller or short timer on a weekend.

 

[Tramper Al]

Why I asked

Ski resort mucky-mucks tend to look down on these practices.

I wouldn't generalize, as this really varies quite a bit from place to place. That's why I really appreciate the first hand reports from Spencer and Frodo.

The best known ski trail walk in our area is perhaps Polecat at Wildcat, but I believe ski trails are also frequently used at Sugarloaf and Saddleback (but a new owner this year). This is not so at Cannon, Killington, or Washington (ski trail being the auto road), I believe. I'm not sure about Waterville.

 

[David Metsky]

I'm not sure about Waterville.

Ski patrol came by while I was walking down the upper trails at Waterville. They just asked how the hike was and went on their way.

-dave-

 

[MadRiver]

I’m a season pass holder at Waterville Valley and see snowshoers hiking up the trail all the time. There is a spot on the Mt. Tecumseh Trail that comes out very close to the loading area of the Northside chair. I believe they would prefer that you ascend along the sides of Tippecanoe and not Periphery, which is very narrow.

 

[TCD]

Speaking as a Ski Patroller, I'd like to add a few thoughts to this thread.

>We do indeed try to be "the friendliest types on the mountain." There should be no artificial distinction, however, between "volunteer" Patrollers and Paid Patrollers. All have the same training, and enforce the same policies, which are set by ski area management, not by the Patrol.

>In the case where someone was stopped from carrying skis up the mountain, the area policy may provide that the "skiing" experience at the area is reserved for paying customers. There is also the issue of assuring that the area is free of skiers before it is closed to customers, and before the night activities (snowmaking and grooming) begin.

>Our first responsibility is the safety of employees and guests. This is the reason that walkers, whether they be hikers walking up or skiers who no longer wish to ski, are asked to stay to the edge of the trail. It's just about impossible to posthole on a packed ski trail, but it's very easy to get hit by another skier if you are walking out in the trail.

>The "odd grooming machine out and about" can be a major issue, and is one of the many reasons why the slopes and trails need to be free of unexpected pedestrians prior to the evening. People have been killed by colliding with grooming machines. People have also been killed by being in other places where they were not supposed to be at a ski area, andd getting chewed up by equipment (two campers were killed in their "snowcave" recently, which they had built in a parking lot snowbank at a ski area. There was snow overnight, and the area plowed the lot, with no knowledge there might be people inside the snowbank.

The long and the short of it is that ski areas are not "wilderness", and it's not generally safe for stray unaccounted for people to be in the working area. If you plan to enter a ski area (especially during the winter, but really anytime) you should have the permission of area management.

Ski areas are a resource, but like any resource, they should be used safely, with an understanding of the things that may be going on in the area.

TCD

 

[Tramper Al]

OK, but . . .

Speaking as a Ski Patroller, I'd like to add a few thoughts to this thread.

While you are clearly raining on my parade, I do appreciate your input here. Safety first.

It turns out I'm not really one of those reckless sled-down-the-mountain types. And I'm happy to check in with the 'patrol at the top prior to heading down. Perhaps I will aim to descend before dark, if feasible.

Is there any chance, however, that your fellow patrollers might insist with authority on giving me a ride down to the base in one of their snowcats or another motorized vehicle? Other that waking up in a snow cave in the parking lot, that's about the most depressing outcome for this trip that I can readily imagine.

 

[spencer]

My understanding is that the biggest factor regarding use limitations is whether the ski area is on public land or not. Sugarbush is on USFS land, is it not? Wildcat, Cannon, and Waterville Valley are on public land, too.

Killington and other are not.

My thought was that ski areas on public land cannot refuse access to hikers. They can however, not allow me to take my skis up with me b/c I'm infringing on their rights of the economic lease they have

Anyway, the patroller was very friendly. He just told me I couldn't take my skis up with me. I then went to talk to the head of the patroller program and he told me the same thing.

btw, I've used the trails on Cannon too. It wasn't ski season although there was plenty of snow for sliding...

spencer

 

[el-bagr]

To the extent that a ski area is on National Forest land, they must be permitted (i.e. licensed) by the federal government. This is accomplished through a Ski Area Special Use Permit (Form FS-2700-5b). This document sets forth the conditions under which the ski area may operate on public land.

The Permit typically states that the ski area's use of the public land is not exclusive of other entities' uses. Section I(E), "Nonexclusive Use", provides: "This permit is not exclusive." Moreover, Section I(F) provides, "Except for any restrictions as the holder and the authorized officer may agree to be necessary to protect the installation and operation of authorized structures and developments, the lands and waters covered by this permit shall remain open to the public for all lawful purposes."

Thus when it comes to a ski area on National Forest Service land, unless they have an unusual permit, you should generally have a legal right to use the land in a non-interfering way.

 

[trailbiscuit]

There should be no artificial distinction, however, between "volunteer" Patrollers and Paid Patrollers. All have the same training, and enforce the same policies, which are set by ski area management, not by the Patrol.TCD

Bad generalization on my part. I've run into some volunteer/weekend only patrollers that have an unfriendly, rent-a-cop attitude. Very few though.

Either way, those folks are out there for your safety and safety would be the reason that "non-lift ticket holding" people would potentially not be welcomed on the mountain.

 

[Waumbek]

My understanding is that the biggest factor regarding use limitations is whether the ski area is on public land or not. Sugarbush is on USFS land, is it not? Wildcat, Cannon, and Waterville Valley are on public land, too.

Killington and other are not.

My thought was that ski areas on public land cannot refuse access to hikers. They can however, not allow me to take my skis up with me b/c I'm infringing on their rights of the economic lease they have

Anyway, the patroller was very friendly. He just told me I couldn't take my skis up with me. I then went to talk to the head of the patroller program and he told me the same thing.

btw, I've used the trails on Cannon too. It wasn't ski season although there was plenty of snow for sliding...

spencer

You were lucky that day, Spencer. Cannon trails, on state land in Franconia Notch State Park, are posted with very small "no hiking" signs over by the new high speed quad. I have seen some Cannon staff wave and smile at hikers on the ski trail in summer, and I' ve seen others go ballistic.

 

[Basurablanca]

For some reason, I have had two experiences relating to this at Sugarbush. Last January I was out on what was to be an overnight on the LT. It was very cold and windy and we'd gotten pretty chilled (me especially, I had to 'answer the call of nature' just over the summit of Abraham, it wasn't a pleasant experience - but that's another thread!). As we came over the rise to the top of Lincoln Peak, the ski trails were too much for us to resist (we were on tele skis). We skied down hitched a ride and car camped. No one gave us any trouble but we were on skis. It was kind of surreal being in the lodge with a huge pack, etc.
The second time we skinned up the Jerusalem trail to the shelter on the Long Trail (name escapes me at present). Since we were early we dropped our packs and skied along the ridge to Sugarbush North where we skinned up to the peak (of Mt. Ellen, I think?). As it was closing time, the ski patrol were making their way down as we arrived at the top. They politely told us to get lost (insisted that we ski down in front of them to the LT junction).
I can see the reason that they had to do that, but what if we had been continuing along the LT? I think the LT and the ski trails correspond for some distance (but I could be mistaken).
Anyway, both times there were no negative interactions or consequences.

Good luck!

 

[TCD]

Tramper,

I'm not really trying to rain on the parade. I think everyone here is pretty much on the same page, and it's a good discussion! Interesting issues arise whenever there are multiple users and priorities.

In answer to your question, it is possible that the Patrol might insist on giving you a ride down. When the Patrol is conducting "sweep" at the end of the day, their purpose is to assure, as thoroughly as possible, that everyone is off the mountain. An axiom of sweep is "Never ski ahead of the guests." In other words, insist that people go down the mountain ahead of sweep. It's common for sweep to encounter a straggler, let's say a walker or very slow skier at the end of the day. In that event, those people are often asked to ride down on a snowmobile, so that sweep can be completed and the work of the area continued.

Of course a hiker is a somewhat different situation, but that's a hard distinction to make. If I encountered that at my area, I would probably radio a supervisor and ask for direction.

TCD

 

[bobandgeri]

The ski patrol warming huts are at Sugarbush are even left unlocked at night - hikers are welcome to use them - even sleep in them overnight. For the past several years it is the only mountain we have skied at (free lift tickets :>) and see people snowshoeing up the side of the trails all the time.

 

[Tramper Al]

Thanks!

Thanks everyone. It sounds like we're in for fun on the mountain!

 

[el-bagr]

Roy, under 36 CFR 251.51, "Ski area" is defined as

a site and attendant facilities expressly developed to accommodate alpine or nordic skiing and from which the preponderance of revenue is generated by the sale of lift tickets and fees for ski rentals, for skiing instruction and trail passes for the use of permittee-maintained ski trails. A ski area may also include ancillary facilities directly related to the operation and support of skiing activities.

Thus XC ski areas are treated no differently than alpine ski areas under this regulation.

See generally this law review article -- doesn't discuss the non-exclusive nature, but does talk about the history. (Note that you can click "no" on the spyware-type popup when you view this.)

See also 16 USC 497b, the federal ski-area permit act.

 

[Remix]

In the mid 80's, Sugarbush used to offer season passes to Vermont residents at a significant discount. They had to abolish this program (or offer it to residents of any state) because they were on federal land.

I am really surprised that ski patrol would allow hikers to walk up the edge of trails. Although its been a long time since I have ski'd there, I remember myself and lots of others trying to stick to the edge of the trail because the rest of it had been scraped off.