The 2020-2021 Ski season thread

[PowderBeard]

1 hour ago, LongBeachSurfFreak said:

 It’s also a great snow spot as it always seems to upslope well by SVT standards. 

 

 Funnels down Rt. 30 then between Equinox and Dorset and hits it?

 https://en-us.topographic-map.com/maps/o7cg/Winhall/

[backedgeapproaching]

2 hours ago, LongBeachSurfFreak said:

Awesome! I love that place. The top of the lift has some incredible views of the Southern Greens. It’s also a great snow spot as it always seems to upslope well by SVT standards. I hike and ride it several times a winter. 
 

Yea, I've done it a few times in winter and some summer hikes also.  Your spot on about the snow, its pretty close to the crest of the Greens even though it doesn't have the elevation of a Stratton or Bromley, it does really well upslope wise(again relatively speaking to SVT metrics)The snowpack always seems pretty substantial for being in the 2k-2500' range.  

[backedgeapproaching]

1 hour ago, PowderBeard said:

 Funnels down Rt. 30 then between Equinox and Dorset and hits it?

 https://en-us.topographic-map.com/maps/o7cg/Winhall/

I know on the surface it seems like that would makes sense funneling down the valley ala I-89 and JSpin on NW winds, but I honestly haven't noticed that funneling effect at all here.  If that was the case Manchester would get a lot more snow than they do, as  they would also benefit from it. I have thought about that exact funneling your mentioning and really just haven't noticed it on radar or in real time obs.  I think its more the fact that the Greens rise up quickly there and Snow Valley is close to top of the ridgeline.

 

[HIPPYVALLEY]

12 hours ago, ORH_wxman said:

Megan and I stayed at the evergreen inn a couple times before we had kids when we were doing “budget” Sunday River trips. 

That place is hilarious. They haven’t changed anything inside since they built the place around 1970. The decor is straight out of that era. Also, when we pulled up, there was always like milk and beer in the snow outside staying cold, lol. Always tons of snow mobiles chained up to the trees out back since the trails have access right to the inn. 

When I chatted with the owner, he told me how it’s mostly snow mobilers but that they do get some skiers like us too that make the 25-30 min trip to SR or Mt Abram. 

 

Oh’ man that’s just like Judson’s ski dorm up at Sugarloaf used to be.  I had many entertaining nights at their bar with the locals.  Mainers know how to get their drink on. 
Storing food in the snow is old school ski tradition.  My brother used to have a house on the Carrabassett River and his dogs would disappear and run down the river when it was frozen and come back with all sorts of goodies from the condos upstream.  

[tamarack]

14 hours ago, backedgeapproaching said:

The real estate company my wife works for is selling the land for one of the lost SVT spots- Snow Valley in Winhall.

Can be yours for a cool $5 mil..

90 Snow Valley Rd, Winhall, VT, 05340 | realtor.com®

 

A bit rich for me.  However, this brought back memories of when I was asst scoutmaster for our troop in NNJ, and we had the scouts up to Snow Valley in 1970 and 1971.  Steeplechase was the fun slope, lots of room to play in though the constant side slope on the upper half added some challenge.  Did not do the jump but somewhere have pics of one of the scouts launching then landing - poorly though unhurt.  Was a bit sad when it closed, but with Bromley looming to the north and Magic/Stratton also nearby, it was in a tough spot.
Had fun with that site, though I noted that Eaton Mountain in Skowhegan wasn't listed, nor was Craigmeur in New Jersey.  The latter had only about 270' vertical and only natural snow back around 1970 but the trails were as smooth as a golf fairway so it didn't take much snow to be skiable.  It was one of the few areas with the lodge at the summit.  Saw some of Enchanted some years back when we looked for a workable trail route up Coburn Mt - the firewarden trail went straight up the fall line (and thru the ski area) and so was unsuitable for heavy use due to the inevitable trail wear and subsequent erosion.  It's been widened a bit by the snowmobile folks and is advertised as the highest groomed trail in Maine.  The ski area was actually on Johnson Mt Twp as they probably couldn't get permission to extend to the summit thru the state public lot on Upper Enchanted Twp - would've added 5-600' vertical.  (Probably wouldn't have mattered - the place was in the middle of nowhere with zero related infrastructure nearby, thus a poor prospect.) 

[MRVexpat]

12 hours ago, bwt3650 said:

With Killington doing the math on the vert and Jay peak doing the snow measurements. it would be quite a place..

Haha I personally think Killington's marketing takes the cake when it comes to over-inflating #s. In terms of Jay Peak, when you look at South to North #s in VT, it isn't that far fetched that Jay Peak might avg 350" a year when Sugarbush > Bolton > Stowe axis is 250" > 300" > 314" respectively. Sure Jay has a reputation of over-reporting but I don't think its all that egregious, as that area does without a doubt get the most snow of any resort in New England. Killington on the other hand does claim the same 250" average as Sugarbush while being 40+ miles south as the crow flies. Do they avg more synoptic snow? Maybe, but that has to be a wash over the long term and they likely only get 50 and 25% of the upslope that Sugarbush and Stowe get respectively. 

In my four years working at Sugarbush (maybe I'm biased? lol) and three since, I've noticed that they tend to report a bunch of snow early in the year and then we've caught up and surpassed them in the later months. For example they are already reporting 46" inches on the season while areas south are in the teens and single digits while Sugarbush/MRG is in the 20s and only Stowe and Jay are 40"+. I wouldn't be surprised if their marketing angle is to hype up the SNE and NY/NJ crowd with higher snowfall totals in order to tap into that early season demand. That, or their snowmaking system is so powerful that they aren't able to discern between what is falling from the sky vs. what they are generating themselves haha. 

 

[PowderBeard]

1 hour ago, backedgeapproaching said:

I know on the surface it seems like that would makes sense funneling down the valley ala I-89 and JSpin on NW winds, but I honestly haven't noticed that funneling effect at all here.  If that was the case Manchester would get a lot more snow than they do, as  they would also benefit from it. I have thought about that exact funneling your mentioning and really just haven't noticed it on radar or in real time obs.  I think its more the fact that the Greens rise up quickly there and Snow Valley is close to top of the ridgeline.

 

Interesting. I wish I had kept data because that SVT area is confusing. The saying I have always heard from locals is if Mt. Snow does well, so does Magic. 

[PowderBeard]

10 minutes ago, MRVexpat said:

Killington on the other hand does claim the same 250" average as Sugarbush while being 40+ miles south as the crow flies. Do they avg more synoptic snow? Maybe, but that has to be a wash over the long term and they likely only get 50 and 25% of the upslope that Sugarbush and Stowe get respectively. 

 

 

LOL, there was a recent thread on K-Zone about this and Mike S. come on to respond. They were reporting multiple 2-3" events over the course of a week and Superstar Headwall was grass. One day they reported like 4-5" and it looked like Superstar had a dusting on the cam.

[backedgeapproaching]

19 minutes ago, PowderBeard said:

Interesting. I wish I had kept data because that SVT area is confusing. The saying I have always heard from locals is if Mt. Snow does well, so does Magic. 

Yep, both are about equally distant to the east from the spine, so do well on E/SE flow events, but because they are removed a bit, they don't get as much W/NW upslope as say Bromley or Stratton. They still can get some in very unblocked flow and or streamers/dying lake effect.  Same with Okemo, kind of fall in the Magic/Mt Snow grouping IMO.

Again, The Northern Greens laugh at Southern Greens upslope, all is relative..lol.  

[ChasingFlakes]

Anyone have any insight into activating a college epic pass?  I purchased it in Oct, but did not realize you need to be enrolled for both fall and spring semesters in order to recieve the college discount.  I graduate this December and have yet to visit an epic pass mountain.  I should have read the fine print more finely, I tried looking but must have missed this point.

Am I SOL and have to cough up another 200 at the tix window or can I still get a cash refund (not credit)?  I assume they want you signed into the school portal and not just show a screenshot of your schedule.  I am good at photoshop. Just unsure of the process as this is my first time purchasing a pass and I dislike all the hoops I need to jump through so far.  I feel trapped in vail hell but would like to be able to go to Stowe this year.  Thanks in advance.  

[NW_of_GYX]

Hit up the river this morning for first time since weekends storm. Seems like they got 10-12" above 1500 ft, enough for the crazies to risk core shots and acl's by poaching the unopened terrain. We've been spoiled the past few years early season and the lack of open terrain is noticeable. Was also really busy. River definitely needs terrain to spread the crowds out but this felt like more than that. Barker and south ridge lots were both full by 9 am. As a spoiled midweek skier this was my greatest fear for this COVID season....oh well, great to be sliding on snow regardless

[powderfreak]

4 hours ago, ChasingFlakes said:

Anyone have any insight into activating a college epic pass?  I purchased it in Oct, but did not realize you need to be enrolled for both fall and spring semesters in order to recieve the college discount.  I graduate this December and have yet to visit an epic pass mountain.  I should have read the fine print more finely, I tried looking but must have missed this point.

Am I SOL and have to cough up another 200 at the tix window or can I still get a cash refund (not credit)?  I assume they want you signed into the school portal and not just show a screenshot of your schedule.  I am good at photoshop. Just unsure of the process as this is my first time purchasing a pass and I dislike all the hoops I need to jump through so far.  I feel trapped in vail hell but would like to be able to go to Stowe this year.  Thanks in advance.  

No idea, your best bet is to call and often just calling one of the resorts can clear it up quicker than calling headquarters out in Colorado.

College passes are always the hardest but in the past (even when I was in college) the ski areas wanted a letter from the registrars office with official school emblem/seal on it showing enrollment.  The same proof you needed for a lot of stuff related to college student discounts as I remember it.  UVM had an office when I went specifically for that stuff so people could get their proof for the ski areas lol.

[powderfreak]

5 hours ago, MRVexpat said:

Haha I personally think Killington's marketing takes the cake when it comes to over-inflating #s. In terms of Jay Peak, when you look at South to North #s in VT, it isn't that far fetched that Jay Peak might avg 350" a year when Sugarbush > Bolton > Stowe axis is 250" > 300" > 314" respectively. Sure Jay has a reputation of over-reporting but I don't think its all that egregious, as that area does without a doubt get the most snow of any resort in New England. Killington on the other hand does claim the same 250" average as Sugarbush while being 40+ miles south as the crow flies. Do they avg more synoptic snow? Maybe, but that has to be a wash over the long term and they likely only get 50 and 25% of the upslope that Sugarbush and Stowe get respectively. 

In my four years working at Sugarbush (maybe I'm biased? lol) and three since, I've noticed that they tend to report a bunch of snow early in the year and then we've caught up and surpassed them in the later months. For example they are already reporting 46" inches on the season while areas south are in the teens and single digits while Sugarbush/MRG is in the 20s and only Stowe and Jay are 40"+. I wouldn't be surprised if their marketing angle is to hype up the SNE and NY/NJ crowd with higher snowfall totals in order to tap into that early season demand. That, or their snowmaking system is so powerful that they aren't able to discern between what is falling from the sky vs. what they are generating themselves haha. 

 

Ha it’s funny you mention this as Killington has been getting hammered in online and social circles for their measuring or lack thereof.  The other day when they reported 8” it was more than anyone and on the Live cams there was like grass showing everywhere and people who skied said there was like 3-4” in the woods up high lol.

Killington’s numbers have been starting to stand out but I’d be curious on Jen’s take there.  She skis it daily.  But at times they’ve been higher than Stowe and Jay in seasonal totals.  The unopened mountains like Sugarbush/Bolton/Smuggs probably miss some snowfall as it’s hard to get upper mountain reports.  We are lucky with a decent snow cam and I also get up a lot for early season snowfall to verify at the Stake and on hill.

I agree with everything you said.  Jay definitely gets the most and I try to explain to skiers who don’t believe it that on the most basic level, snowfall increases as you head north in New England, all else equal.  Jay maximizes orographic lift too.  And then when people are like “I don’t believe they would get 50-75” more than Stowe and Smuggs!”  I usually answer, but you accept that Stowe and Smuggs can at times get 50-75” more than Sugarbush/MRG?

IMO once averages sort themselves out long term, there’s a clear stepwise increase from SB/MRG to Bolton/Stowe/Smuggs... followed by another clear step up to Jay.

I do also fully believe Sugarbush should average a clear step up from Killington.  Just like Killington should be clearly more than Mt Snow.

 

[radarman]

43 minutes ago, powderfreak said:

Ha it’s funny you mention this as Killington has been getting hammered in online and social circles for their measuring or lack thereof.  The other day when they reported 8” it was more than anyone and on the Live cams there was like grass showing everywhere and people who skied said there was like 3-4” in the woods up high lol.

Killington’s numbers have been starting to stand out but I’d be curious on Jen’s take there.  She skis it daily.  But at times they’ve been higher than Stowe and Jay in seasonal totals.  The unopened mountains like Sugarbush/Bolton/Smuggs probably miss some snowfall as it’s hard to get upper mountain reports.  We are lucky with a decent snow cam and I also get up a lot for early season snowfall to verify at the Stake and on hill.

I agree with everything you said.  Jay definitely gets the most and I try to explain to skiers who don’t believe it that on the most basic level, snowfall increases as you head north in New England, all else equal.  Jay maximizes orographic lift too.  And then when people are like “I don’t believe they would get 50-75” more than Stowe and Smuggs!”  I usually answer, but you accept that Stowe and Smuggs can at times get 50-75” more than Sugarbush/MRG?

IMO once averages sort themselves out long term, there’s a clear stepwise increase from SB/MRG to Bolton/Stowe/Smuggs... followed by another clear step up to Jay.

I do also fully believe Sugarbush should average a clear step up from Killington.  Just like Killington should be clearly more than Mt Snow.

Mostly agree but that last part I'm actually not totally sure about... Mt Snow often does better than KMart on coastals, and it's pretty rare that the R/S line hangs up between them. And for orographic snows I'm not sure the S Greens are notably different on average than Killington (are the C Greens a thing?).  The height of the mountain helps a bit, but the relative narrowness of the spine there may hurt some.  You are certainly the expert on upslope and I will defer.

[MRVexpat]

32 minutes ago, powderfreak said:

 The unopened mountains like Sugarbush/Bolton/Smuggs probably miss some snowfall as it’s hard to get upper mountain reports.  We are lucky with a decent snow cam and I also get up a lot for early season snowfall to verify at the Stake and on hill.

 

 

I will say that in following Sugarbush's #s pretty closely, the mtn ops team does a pretty good job of clearing that snow stake even during pre-season. Hammond would always be on top of his team about reporting strictly based on what the snow stake reads, which is understandable given the headaches we endured fine-tuning that thing. Its still not perfect (I imagine your setup is better for a number of reasons) but the added bonus there is that nobody can reasonably second guess snowfall at the 'bush. What you see is what gets reported. 

[radarman]

Sugarbush confirmed opening on the 10th today

[MRVexpat]

26 minutes ago, radarman said:

Mostly agree but that last part I'm actually not totally sure about... Mt Snow often does better than KMart on coastals, and it's pretty rare that the R/S line hangs up between them. And for orographic snows I'm not sure the S Greens are notably different on average than Killington (are the C Greens a thing?).  The height of the mountain helps a bit, but the relative narrowness of the spine there may hurt some.  You are certainly the expert on upslope and I will defer.

I mean I still think there is a notion of north to south decrease in upslope snow, it may just be a question of diminishing difference as you head south. Strictly anecdotally speaking, if Jay is the high water mark in orographic snows, I imagine Stowe/Smuggs get 80-90% of that, Sugarbush/MRG 45-55%, Killington 25% and areas south of there roughly 15-20% of Jay's total. Of course this is broad brushed and can differ season by season and I'm also sure that among the So VT resorts, distance from the spine plays a part but generally speaking this is always how I've thought of it/observed. 

[J.Spin]

36 minutes ago, radarman said:

...are the C Greens a thing?

The Central Greens are most definitely a defined geographical/geological area, per Peakbagger.com:

http://www.peakbagger.com/range.aspx?rid=16131

In terms of their defining geology/geography, I know they are marked on the north end by the Winooski Valley; I’m keenly aware of this because we live right near the dividing line between the Central/Northern Greens sub-ranges.  We’re just a bit north of the Winooski River, so our house is at the very southern end of the Northern Greens, and the Central Greens are across the valley.  I’ve heard the Winooski Valley is a very notable geological feature because it is the most prominent east/west cut through the wall of the Green Mountains.  I heard something at one point about how that was very significant, perhaps from PF, but it could have been somewhere else that I picked that up.  On the southern end, I’m not as familiar with the geological feature dividing the Central Greens from the Southern Greens, but it looks like the valley encompassing Vermont Route 103 is a major component of the demarcation.  Killington Peak is definitely the highest peak in the sub-range, so it’s certainly important in that regard, although as you can see, it’s near the southern end:

[radarman]

26 minutes ago, MRVexpat said:

I mean I still think there is a notion of north to south decrease in upslope snow, it may just be a question of diminishing difference as you head south. Strictly anecdotally speaking, if Jay is the high water mark in orographic snows, I imagine Stowe/Smuggs get 80-90% of that, Sugarbush/MRG 45-55%, Killington 25% and areas south of there roughly 15-20% of Jay's total. Of course this is broad brushed and can differ season by season and I'm also sure that among the So VT resorts, distance from the spine plays a part but generally speaking this is always how I've thought of it/observed. 

Again, we have plenty of experts on this here, and you may well be one of them... so take with a grain of salt... but I've always felt that where Jay cleans up is on the lingering N/NE flow from bombing coastals in N Brunswick, etc., throwing back moisture across SE QC and the extended St Lawrence valley and they being the first beneficiary of orography.  Whereas the more typical W/NW flow is fairly evenly distributed, perhaps with Mansfield even outdoing them.  And SB/MRG can occasionally score big on streamers especially, but for most upslope events they certainly average less than those others further north.  

Even if I grant that Killington may do better than further S on westerly flow just purely based on relief, I've always kind of considered them between typical storm track paradigms, whereby they're a little too far removed from clippers and coastals that get the Berks and S Greens, and don't benefit from the seemingly daily snows that the big boys get.   With temps closer to the former and moisture closer to the latter. 

[J.Spin]

1 hour ago, radarman said:

Mostly agree but that last part I'm actually not totally sure about... Mt Snow pretty often does better than KMart on coastals, and it's pretty rare that the R/S line hangs up between them. And for orographic snows I'm not sure the S Greens are notably different on average than Killington (are the C Greens a thing?).  The height of the mountain helps a bit, but the relative narrowness of the spine there may hurt some.

You’re on this forum, so you obviously know a lot about the actual snowfall trends up and down the spine, but you bring up a great point about the snowfall from coastal storms.  There are actually a lot of folks out there (we’re talking very casual skiers/snowstorm watchers) who have the impression that the resorts in the Southern Greens actually get the most annual snowfall of anywhere in the state.  This is because, as you note, they can often do quite well with respect to accumulations from notable coastal storms.  I assume that if these are storms affecting the big coastal cities, they garner the most attention, and people may pay attention and get wind of the associated ski resort accumulations.

But the actual annual snowfall numbers up and down the ski areas of the Green Mountains (see below) tell the real story and point out how ironic that is.  I can only assume that the effects of the prominent coastal storms are so infrequent that they are vastly outweighed by 1) the greater frequency/impacts of storms to the north, 2) the far greater upslope enhancement in the mountains to the north, and 3) the latitude effects with respect to occasions when the rain/snow line for storms is in these latitudes.  It’s probably a fun discussion to try to figure out what percentages each of these factors play in the snowfall increases heading north, and of course there may be other factors as well.

I’ve pasted below the list of north to south annual snowfall numbers I have on the Ski Areas Page at my website.  I’ve kind of kept these where they were when I put the page together for the most part, so they’re not all perfectly representative of the most recent years, but the trend is incredibly obvious.  I just checked Mount Snow’s most recent reported annual snowfall average to compare to what I had, and their website has an average annual snowfall of 156” vs the 158” I’ve got on my site, so that’s pretty darned consistent over whatever period it’s been since I updated the page.

You can imagine how strange it must appear to people who think SVT gets the most snow to learn that Jay Peak has an annual snowfall average of well more than double what Mount Snow gets.  It just speaks to the fact that there must be a lot of systems that are either not affecting that area, or delivering rain/mixed precipitation there.

Even for someone who follows the winter weather in Vermont very closely (and makes an effort to post ski area snowfall totals up and down the spine of the Greens for every notable system), it’s still startling how much the snowfall drops off down there.  But the numbers are the numbers, and there just must be a lot of lean snowfall times that far south.  It's not like a ski area to downplay or “underreport” their snowfall (unless you have someone like PF being extra cautious to ensure no over-reporting), so you have to assume they’re counting all the snow there is to count.

I will say that as I run through the snow reports for the Vermont ski areas after each storm, I notice that in general the Southern Vermont Ski Areas don’t seem to take their snowfall measurement as seriously as the resorts up north do.  I don’t mean to say they’re inaccurate or anything, it’s just that they don’t care about it too much.  When I go to their websites for putting together storm snowfall numbers, their snowfall reports are often much harder to find, or buried deeper in the website.  I think it’s because relatively speaking, supplying reliable manmade snow is a much bigger part of their marketing strategy vs. capitalizing on natural snow.  They definitely feature their snow reports more prominently after a notable storm (such as with a headline or headline link on their websites), but for every day reporting, the placement of their snow report within the website definitely comes across as “Whatever, here’s the snow report if you really want to check it out.”

Jay Peak (355″)
Burke (217″)
Smuggler’s Notch (320″)
Stowe (333″)
Bolton Valley (312″)
Mad River Glen (228″)
Sugarbush (250″)
Middlebury (200″)
Pico (250″)
Killington (250″)
Okemo (200″)
Bromley (145″)
Magic Mountain (145″)
Stratton (180″)
Mount Snow (158″)

[HoarfrostHubb]

Any idea why Burke comes in relatively low?   Elevation? Orientation?

[bch2014]

One thing that I think Mt. Snow does do very well at considering its southern location is retention, especially on the North Face. Lots of those trails hold snow forever-They're also generally pretty narrow so don't get as windblown as some of the stuff at Killington.

[radarman]

20 minutes ago, J.Spin said:

Jay Peak (355″)
Burke (217″)
Smuggler’s Notch (320″)
Stowe (333″)
Bolton Valley (312″)
Mad River Glen (228″)
Sugarbush (250″)
Middlebury (200″)
Pico (250″)
Killington (250″)
Okemo (200″)
Bromley (145″)
Magic Mountain (145″)
Stratton (180″)
Mount Snow (158″)

Nice post as usual.  If some objective truth were available I'd be shocked if KMart gets 100 more inches than Mt Snow.  I mean when folks talk about Killington posting 8" with bare grass showing, that's a non-negligible amount of inflation.   Or maybe as you said the southern areas just don't care as much or aren't clearing their boards every hour.  Over the course of a few seasons I'd be interested to identify all these events where Killington is cleaning up and Mt Snow isn't, to the tune of 90 something inches annually, which is the difference basically between MBY and YBY. 

[J.Spin]

36 minutes ago, radarman said:

Even if I grant that Killington may do better than further S on westerly flow just purely based on relief, I've always kind of considered them between typical storm track paradigms, whereby they're a little too far removed from clippers and coastals that get the Berks and S Greens, and don't benefit from the seemingly daily snows that the big boys get.   With temps closer to the former and moisture closer to the latter. 

I think the issue here, at least in part, lies with something I brought up in my post above.  The more I think about, the more I wonder how much (i.e. what percentage of annual snowfall) big coastal storms actually play into the snowfall numbers for the Vermont ski areas.  This is where it would be good to bring in some of the meteorologists who know seasonal averages for those types of storms.  I’m wondering if the past decade’s run of (more frequent?) big coastal storms has warped our perspective on how often they really occur.  It takes a lot of things to line up just right to get one of those big coastal systems, and even more to get one that significantly affects a certain area, so is the real average on those more than once or twice a season?  Even if a spot gets two solid hits from coastal storms a season, and each one is a healthy two feet of snow, that’s still a pretty minor component of the annual snowfall, even for a place with an annual snowfall average like Mount Snow.  Those big storms get the attention, so perhaps why they’re thought to have such an impact?  It’s not as if heading southward along the spine of the Greens we find that the big snowfall numbers up north experience some sort of dip in the central areas, and then rise again as one gets into the southern area where potential coastal systems have greater effects; the numbers just continue to drop as one heads south.  If the “coastal” storm track doesn’t really contribute much to the overall annual snowfall averages, there might not really be any sort of in between area.

[J.Spin]

17 minutes ago, HoarfrostHubb said:

Any idea why Burke comes in relatively low?   Elevation? Orientation?

Oh, I meant that add that in my post.  My list is made north to south with respect to latitude, so when you see deviations in the snowfall trend from north to south, they are typically because of areas that are well off the spine (such as Burke, which is far to the east) or have lower summit elevations, like Middlebury.  At least that’s what I’ve seen with respect to the deviations; the general trend in annual snowfall from north to south if you stick to the spine at fairly similar elevations is amazingly consistent.  The deviations from that trend because of longitude definitely show the importance of being on the spine with respect to getting optimal snowfall.  Ascutney, which is no longer operating as a typical lift-served resort so it’s not on my list of major resorts, was another great example of that – it’s annual snowfall was notably less for its latitude because it was well east of the spine.

It may have been in the NNE thread when we talked about it, but I also have a list of Vermont’s smaller ski areas on my Ski Areas Page, and that one is also done north to south with respect to latitude.  You can see on that list that there’s really not obvious trend with respect to annual snowfall.  Those areas are really scattered around from east to west, and elevations probably vary a lot as well, so that would also destroy any obvious latitudinal snowfall trends.

Hard’ack (82″)
Pete’s Tow (99″)
Lyndon Outing Club (103″)
Chapman Hill (79″)
Cochran’s (88”)
Cosmic Hill (104″)
Northeast Slopes (91″)
Pine Mountain (65″)
Harrington Hill (87″)
Twin Farms (82″)
Suicide Six (80″)
Ski Quechee (90″)
Bear Creek (150″)
Ascutney Outdoors (175″)
Timber Ridge (145″)
Bellows Falls (56″)
Hermitage (150″)
Living Memorial (56″)

[radarman]

26 minutes ago, J.Spin said:

I think the issue here, at least in part, lies with something I brought up in my post above.  The more I think about, the more I wonder how much (i.e. what percentage of annual snowfall) big coastal storms actually play into the snowfall numbers for the Vermont ski areas.  This is where it would be good to bring in some of the meteorologists who know seasonal averages for those types of storms.  I’m wondering if the past decade’s run of (more frequent?) big coastal storms has warped our perspective on how often they really occur.  It takes a lot of things to line up just right to get one of those big coastal systems, and even more to get one that significantly affects a certain area, so is the real average on those more than once or twice a season?  Even if a spot gets two solid hits from coastal storms a season, and each one is a healthy two feet of snow, that’s still a pretty minor component of the annual snowfall, even for a place with an annual snowfall average like Mount Snow.  Those big storms get the attention, so perhaps why they’re thought to have such an impact?  It’s not as if heading southward along the spine of the Greens we find that the big snowfall numbers up north experience some sort of dip in the central areas, and then rise again as one gets into the southern area where potential coastal systems have greater effects; the numbers just continue to drop as one heads south.  If the “coastal” storm track doesn’t really contribute much to the overall annual snowfall averages, there might not really be any sort of in between area.

Well, even here we get a pretty substantial percentage of our snow nickel and diming from northern stream shortwaves and on the front side of cutters/SWFEs... ie. not pure coastals.    I'd be inclined to suppose that Killington incrementally scores with the CAD events based on latitude, but we know also that the west side of the mountains are prone to torching and they're tickling that edge pretty good, whereas Mt Snow has some buffer.   At any rate, I don't entirely mean big nor'easter type events, which as you say likely don't contribute hugely on a percentage basis, but also your standard fare March clipper that blows up under LI, quick hitter anafrontal waves, waves on cold fronts hung up offshore, etc.  Basically everything synoptic with the Atlantic as the primary moisture source.

[radarman]

Just now, J.Spin said:

Ascutney Outdoors (175″)

I mean, I think this says it all about reporting nuances.  Close to zero percent chance Mt Snow gets less than Ascutney.  I'm always fine with throwing caution flags when it comes to personal anecdotes, but I feel pretty good about anecdotally coming to that conclusion. 

[LaGrangewx]

One thing to consider is where the resorts are measuring snowfall. I know for a fact Killington used to mention on there website that they were listing summit snowfall totals as their average, which definitely can be misrepresentative of the resort as a whole especially as big as Killington is.

I just looked at their website and their 10 year average is around 215" at the summit and that is excluding the abysmal 2015-2016 season. 

[PhineasC]

Hope we see more widespread openings by the end of the month. I know most of you are hardcore skiers dropping out of helicopters and the like, but my younger kids are just starting out and they need some beginner terrain for low-speed learning. LOL

[MRVexpat]

16 minutes ago, LaGrangewx said:

I just looked at their website and their 10 year average is around 215" at the summit and that is excluding the abysmal 2015-2016 season. 

215" seems much more reasonable for a long term average