MEADOWS BLOG

A bit of thinning in Jack's Woods would be great. I feel that minimal thinning would do wonders for Meadows and for all the tree dogs out there that enjoy tree riding. With more opened tree areas would come more dispersment of people on the crowded days as well. Lets see it happen next season!

I have been riding threw the trees now for years. The areas such as Jacks Woods sometimes prove to be a challenge in these tight spaces. If it will help the environment and provide better tree riding why not glade some of these spots.

I have been riding in jacks wood for years and think it's fun just how it is. The dense trees keep the snow fresh in the woods and create hidden pockets and secret spots. Please leave Jacks Woods alone.

Tree thinning would be great at Meadows. I don't know if Jack's Woods is the right place for thinning though. Personally I think the natural terrain in there is what makes it great. I do believe HRM and Mt. Hood Express could be thinned out. Especially Skiers right on HRM.

Jack's Woods is one of the few great places left at Meadows. And the reason it's great is because it's advanced terrain. It is already plenty thin to ski or snowboard. If you thin out Jack's Woods, it will turn even more of Meadows into intermediate terrain (and there is plenty of that already at Meadows).

Yes, I know that if Cascade is open, then there is some advanced terrain at Meadows. But Cascade is never open!

Dave's reply: Regarding Cascade, that will be the subject of a future blog. Regarding Jack's Woods, there is no way Jack's Woods would ever be turned into intermediate terrain - its too steep - but there are many acres that are completely un-skiable due to tree density. The purpose is not to clear cut or ruin the area for advanced riders who love tree skiing, its to just thin it enough to get some nice lines, and trim up some of the lower branches.

Wow, after the last blog I thought I would not be amazed like that again... now I hear you want to chop Jack's Woods? You must be kidding! Lightly treed skiing can be had all over the place... I spent the entire day yesterday doing exactly that!

The trees off HRM (Woodland Wisdom area) are perfect for cruising. Middle Fork has some great stashes, as does the area between North Canyon and Ram's Head... and when the top of the mountain is open there is tons of ungroomed cruising off Vista. And still more off Shooting Star.

Jack's Woods contains many great features, not the least of which is the tighter spacing of the trees, which, as Michael M stated, keeps the snow nice. There is a reason this area has discernable entrance points and is marked as EXPERT terrain. Plenty of Heather is already wide open... please, please leave this area alone! It's as close as Meadows gets to an expert backcountry run.

Dave's reply: I certainly appreciate your opinion and comments, thank you for participating. My opinion happens to differ though. I don't believe Meadows has enough good tree skiing compared to some other resorts I've enjoyed and considering the number of forested acres that are too tight to access. The detailed maps along with knowledge of the areas show large blocks of forested areas are too tight to ski or snowboard.

I think that thining Jacks woods is a bad idea. This run is steep enough that it doesnt need thining. But runs off on hrm are flat and could deffently use thining. This would then turn into a lift like Black Forest at bigwhite. They have some itermedite glades and cruisers and is one of my favorite lifts. So leave Jacks Woods alone it is already the best run, and thin out places like hrm.

As Dave mentioned, Some thinning would`nt hurt with regard to fire danger either. If it all goes up in a catastrophic wildfire, all your opininions become moot. Almost every Forest Service biologist out there will agree that most of our forests have become too dense to support healthy tree populations. After 40 plus years of "put out every fire" fire supression policies, we are one lightning strike away from a fire that causes total destruction. From a rider standpoint, I would like to see more tree runs that cut through these stands. A few areas of thinning to make great runs does not equate to clear cutting.

Please leave Jack's Woods as it is. I agree with some limited thinning at Meadows, but NOT in Jacks's Woods. The Heather chair has already increased traffic in the Canyon enough. Jack's is one of the last remaining powder stashes and it's great just like it is.
There are other areas that are better suited to thinning. Some of the best "steeps" off of the Hood River chair are barely skiable due to the thick trees and brush. How about opening them up instead?
I'd also like to see more done to utilize the "backcountry" area around God's Wall. It would be nice to have some gladed "runs" cut so that area could be opened whenever Heather is open for those of us who don't mind the short runout/hike.

Please, please, please leave Jacks Woods alone. It is perfect exactly how it is. The spacing is ideal for skiing with speed and the snow is phenomenal exactly because the spacing keeps it that way. It's currently the only way to avoid the hordes on the weekends. Please leave this last bit of quality skiing alone. It's one of the reasons I get the season pass.

As for HRM, I like it as it is too, but if you really have to mess with the trees, start here. I'm not really buying the environmental angle.

As stated many times above the main concern I am seeing is that more people would have access to Jack's! This would be VERY bad!! Mt. Bachelor has already ruined the Outback for tree skiing, now please learn from their mistakes. Please keep an area available to the experts only. Now if you want to cut away brush in the summer feel free, but don't touch any of the trees.

I love tree riding and I've found that it's pretty limited on Hood. When we go down to Tahoe, that's the first place I head for. Even Bachelor has better tree lines than Hood. It's not like Dave wants to clearcut the East side of the mountain. From a snowboarders perspective, tree lines that aren't so dense are WAY better. It also offers stumps to pop off of, and downed trees to slide. I am all for it.

Thanks for keeping us informed Dave.

Mike

I'll respond from an intermediate skier's perspective. My son dragged me into the trees for the 1st time last week and now I’m hooked. All of the fresh powder this past week made it seem almost ‘safe’ – lots of soft stuff to fall on. Except for those pesky trees! A little trimming along the intermediate slopes would get more people into the woods and reduce the feeling that the groomed runs are too short compared to riding back up (the rat in a maze feeling?). It is nice to get away from the crowds a bit in the trees too. I did find myself on a treed expert slope. I practiced walking up and down a wall of snow while some boarders just cruised on by me. I still had a great time in there. Sounds like the expert skier / boarders don’t need thinning. I'm all for making the treed areas a bit more accessible.

Yodel! I'd love to see those runs thinned out.

Great timing. Yeterday I was discussing this same point with my 14 yr old son while riding lifts. He is now able to ski the tres with me and has become an avid tree boy. He has never skied real glade runs, but came to the same conclusion as those of us who have. This is a "win-win" for the environment and us humans. Not just the winter visitors, but the summer visiters as well. We are also avid huckleberry fans. Thin them all.

Dave, Great news! I would love to see some specific areas opened up for gladed skiing. You're right, some of the best skiing in the country is "The Shadows" at Steamboat or the areas off of Bell. Certainly, clearing large portions of trees is unnecessary, but just opening them up enough to safely cruise the woods would be awesome. And I would start with areas that are accessible when the upper parts of the mountain are closed-like between Stadium and Lady Slipper, Breezeway and North Canyon, Middle Fork and North Canyon and large parts of HRM. Many days when the weather doesn't allow the upper mountain to open, this would help to lighten the traffic on the main runs tremendously. And though I often sneak into these areas, many of the lines run into unskiable thickets of trees. Now, to only get it past all the folks who don't understand forest management.

While you're at it, how about cutting the saplings and young trees on the many cut runs so that even with low snow, they aren't sticking out and posing a danger to us?

I am all for thinning some of the tree runs at meadows...i think that it would be a positive move for both the forest and us skiers.

Thank you

What's great about dense tree lines in Jack's Woods is that it's a puzzle that the expert skier or snowboarder will find a way through. Weeks after the last big snowstorm you can find great and deep powder that others thought the trees were too thick to access. Perhaps the maps Dave has show that the areas are "too tight to ski," but that's what keeps the snow so good for so long. You have to be more creative, but you can still make it through dense areas. Sure it's not as fun for 14 yr old intermediate skiers/boarders or their dad who just got into the trees for the first time, but you could thin some place else for them.

No one oppossing cutting in Jacks Woods thinks it would be a bad idea to thin trees elsewhere. I certainly agree that there are lots of places where thinning would be great. Unfortunately, Dave's mind is obviously made up, but trust me, you'll be ruining one of the greatest features at any ski resort in the nation. If you thin Jacks Woods, it will be tracked out in hours just like the rest of the mountain and heather chair will be swamped. The argument that you've been to other resorts and YOU like the glades there better isn't really valid. We've all been to other resorts; even in Colorado. I can tell you from experience that Jack's Woods is unique. Again I'll make my plea, please leave Jack's Woods out of it.

"Thinning" is vague word with nefarious meaning these days. I think the lighter sense of the word might make sense around Express and some of HRM, but Jack's Woods? no freakin' way. It's a gem the way it is and one of the few, maybe only, pieces of challenging terrain at meadows, unless of course the terrain past the heather chair indicated on the ski map is actually opened for skiing. Who has seen Yoda's wall?

I'm totally for the tree thining. On a side note check your history, the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs have not been around for 40,000 years....

Dave's reply: Thanks for your input. I think CTWS will disagree with you. One of their Chief's told me that directly.

Dave: When I first read your blog I was excited about the prospects of easier access to expert terrain in Jack's Woods. After considering for a while I've changed my mind. Please leave that area untouched with the exception of maintaining healthy forestry practices. I'm concerned that the 'thinning' that will take place will benefit skiers/riders more than the ecosystem. As a student of biology and an evid snowboarder I'm torn- but I must say that I'm most concerned with the natural landscape. How can environmentally conscious skiers/riders be assured that the landscape will not be damaged instead of improved? I would be very interested in an open forum for discussing the process that would be implemented if tree thinning were to occur.

Yes, more tree skiing would be great at Meadows, especially in the HRM area.

Thinning Jack's would be like building moguls off Daisy Chair - Bad Idea.

Why don't you spend the summer months clearing the existing trails of wood & brush so it takes less snow to open next year - Good Idea.

Thanks, Dave, for asking for our input. In these days of Corporate Profitism, it would have been easy to proceed in the name of the almighty dollar. But it seems that you really want our 2 cents...So here is mine:
As pointed out by just about everyone's response, Jack's Woods is just fine as is. I've been skiing there for the last 15 years and have seen the increase in people accessing it. Although it still gets beat up, it's great knowing that the powder will at least last into the afternoon. Keep the traffic to a minimum and leave it alone.
As for other thinning, GREAT idea. There plenty of other areas that would benefit more of the riding public, such as HRM, down slope of Roach bowl (both left and right) and between Middle Fork and the lower face of Blue. These areas would be able to serve intermediates who are just learning to ski the trees as well as the experts who are always searching for the 'goods'. Good for the environment and for us riders. How rare is that: A win-Win situation for everyone!

I'm a salmon habitat person, skiing and salmon fishing being the twin altars I worship at.

The Hood snowpack is our salmon water.

Sooo...any tree thinning that the foresters and salmon biologists say will enhance the Mt.Hood salmon habitat and create glade skiing would be fine. Key being the salmon habitat science driving the decisions which should also get the tribe's support and forest service approval.

Please leave Jack's Woods alone. Since you already don't allow any true backcountry riding anywhere on the mountain, you should at least leave us the few small stashes of advanced off-trail areas within the boundaries that are left. I don't agree that there are many acres that are "un-skiable". I've boarded through almost all of Jack's Woods, and find it just fine. Please consider instead opening up access to Yoda and God's Wall more often. We're really hurting for more backcountry here.

Being one of several people that use t. Hood Meadows year round, in the winter as my source of employment and for great skiing, and during the summer as an avid hunter I think some thinning would do wonders for both worlds. After spending extensive hours and days hunting the ski area I have found that one of my favorite places to ski is also a great place to find elk and deer. Thinning it would make it easier to access both during the winter and the summer. Jacks woods is a good place to start. Also there are several places that are out of bounds for skiing but with a little thinning could open up more terrain that hasnt been seen except by back country skiiers and hunters and hikers in the summer. For example areas west and northwest of Elk and Yoda.

Negatory good buddy. More people in the woods = bad. There are already to many people pushing the good snow down the hill. The woods keep the traffic down.

Doing some thinning on many of the trails on HRM would do wonders. That would create some intermediate tree terrain that would be enjoyable for lots of intermediate skiers. However, since the advanced skiers are the ones who ski Jack's woods now, and are already happy with how it is, and the intermediate skiers would have new tree terrain to ski on HRM, why thin it? It seems pointless to me, with so many of the people who ski Jack's Woods opposing that decision.

Sounds like a good idea. DO it where the double black diamond runs are such as Yoda and that Elk something or another run. THat would be sweet dude. Peace out homie

I vote a big no against tree thinning at Meadows in the amazing forested areas such as Jack's Woods, Elk, Yoda, or even elsewhere (there are fine tree stashes ALL over Meadows......i find all the tree covered areas to be completely skiable and fine as-is when the snow coverage is high, as it is now.....

my opinion is that those that can't manage to ski the tree covered areas the way they currently are shouldn't be skiing in those areas in the first place.......

i agree wholeheartedly with Chris and Bryan S. please PLEASE leave Jack's Woods et al. as-is.

"I certainly appreciate your opinion and comments, thank you for participating. My opinion happens to differ though. I don't believe Meadows has enough good tree skiing compared to some other resorts I've enjoyed and considering the number of forested acres that are too tight to access. The detailed maps along with knowledge of the areas show large blocks of forested areas are too tight to ski or snowboard. "-Dave

Sounds like you don't really want our feedback and you have made up your mind. Sad. I don't know where the "acres of unskiiable" terrain is in Jacks woods as I have skied pretty much the entire woods from Half moon to the Heather chair. Maybe the very bottom of the runs get funnled back onto the run out but I don't think thinning will do much other than make it easier and more popular. And after the entire woods got skied out in an afternoon yesterday, thinning will only make it worse. What keeps me skiing at Meadows is knowing there are stashes of fresh I can get to if I work just a bit harder than the next guy, once you make it all so easy to ski it will get skied out that much faster. If you are a halfway decent skier you can ski all of Jack's woods, no thinning rquired. For the rest of you just pretend all those mobs of people on the groomers are trees and then you'll have your thinned glades!

I disagree with "Mav" completely. If Jack's Woods, Elk, Yoda, etc. were to be thinned it would benifit the whole world. There would be more beautiful huckleberries, and, if there was to be a fire it wouldn't destroy all of the world including East Asia (and "Mav's" house). If that area was to be opened up more people would go in there, therefor removing some of the people from the other runs... making all of Mt. Hood Meadows less crowded. It all comes down to a simple equation...
(Jack's Woods + Elk + Yoda)+ thinned out trees = sweet
Anyways snowboarders can not usually carve as quickly as skiers so they need a little more room in the trees. Don't be discriminating on them snowboarders! Straight up! Fo shizzle

This has now become ridiculous.

Please work on your present open trails to remove debris during the summer months, so you can open with a 20" base next year!

I love the last comment on discriminating against snowboarders - Ya Right! Snow parks just for snowboarders, jumps, etc...Oh what a world it was w/o any crazy sb's on the mountain, when beginners might not get run into.

I had been thinking about the tree problem at meadows for a while. Not so much the large grown trees, but the smaller new growth, the fallen logs, and the old tree stumps. Some might feel that removing some trees, might open the doors to clear cutting, but that’s not going to happen, trees are what make "tree runs". The fact that the mountainside has gone without any logs being removed or a fire worries me, something needs to be done.

The benefits of human burning can be seen in our own backyard, the Willamette valley, with field burning. Grass seed fields are burnt by farmers to reduce pesticide and herbicide use. Cattle farmers in the plain states burn grazing land to increase natural grass growth and produce heavier cows. But the fact that because of government limitations, farmers can't burn as many fields as before, the effects can be seen in the increased rodent population and herbicide use.

By thinning the trees and having controlled burns on a regular basis, meadows will continue to produce world class skiing.
-zach-

After skiing through Jack's Woods for the first time this last sunday the 8th during ideal conditions, one thing became very clear: As far as tree skiing goes, I couldn't believe how much speed you could comfortably carry through there! If it's too tight for your comfort level, choose a different line next time (there are PLENTY) or work on your technique elsewhere. I had read the blogs prior to ever realizing where J's woods actually was and absolutely expected an exponentially tighter experience based on all the hullabaloo. Seriously, you could fit Tanya Harding's trailer thru half the lines in there...
From the skewed point of view of a self-proclaimed competent skier and ex-pro patroller here's my 2 cents: There's no need to fuss with Jack's Woods. Not for environmental reasons. (c'mon people have you seriously forgotten that you're within the boundries of an established ski resort bound by pre-existing environmental laws and regulations AND that the percentage of trees likely proposed to be removed would do absolutely squat to alter the current health and/or species distribution of said area...?) And not because it would invite people that, because of their skill, shouldn't be in there. (they're already there despite the clearly posted double blacks at the gate) There's no need to fuss with Jack's Woods because it is already a world class tree skiing experience! Thanks.

Dave,
Thanks for doin' a great job managing Mt. Hood Meadows.
Tree thinning is a wonderful idea. It's good for the forest and would make skiing/boarding in the trees easier and safer.

Thanks,
Gary from Banks Oregon

Dave, thanks for the opportunity to help shape the future of MHM. I read each entry and comment and now it is time to respond. Consensus has it, no thinning of Jacks Woods. What winter benefit is to be gained when you thin an area of the mountain that didn't even open last year, or opens much later in the season! Perform thinning in stages, starting with the most obvious, areas OPEN when snowpack is low. Between MH Express and Yellow, MH Express and Daisy and certainly the majority of HRM which becomes a tangled mass of branches after 5 to 6 feet of snow. Once the first stage is done, elicit more comments. You never know when a gem will appear on your blog!!

Leave the backcountry alone...Hence the name backcountry. Just get it open sooner.

Dave's reply: Regarding Jack's Woods, I wouldn't call it a consensus. But its good to clarify that I never thought we would thin where the trees are already spaced just right - and we all know where that is. But, there are areas that are a bit tight, especially near the bottom, and there are some branches that could be removed - basically just some minor summer work. In other areas such as HRM (for example), the trees are so thick there are few lines at all in some very large blocks.

Although I'm not sure where the "jacks woods" run is, I do wish I knew. From what been said it seems like an awsome run. But from what I've seen on a majority of the "tree areas" at meadows it seems like the spacing could be improved. I'm not talking about the runs, like jacks woods, which seem to get plenty of traffic. I talking about those tree areas you don't dare enter.
-zach-

More rideable treed areas would be GRAND! As far as Jacks Woods, I love that area, it's where I'll spend most of my day if Heather is open, but there are only a few lines to be had, mainly down the shoots. I can't imagine that openning up some of the entirely blocked areas would in anyway detract from Jack's appeal to the advanced rider. And it wouldn't make it more crowded, if anything it would allow those of us who like the steep deep woods to spread out a little more, keeping it less tracked up on busy days. Jack's is not ridden by intermediates for a lot of reason's (difficult to access, really steep, annoying lift proccess;), openning up some of the extremely tight areas would not attract a bunch of novice/intermediates. If all of Jack's was like the current skiiable areas of Jack's I can't imagine anyone would complain, not even those purists above... As long as you can do it so it still stays protected from the wind, keeping the snow fresh and yummy I say GO FOR IT!!! Oh, and anywhere else you want to open up some gladed areas would be fantastic!

Thanks for continuing to make Meadows rock!

Dave,
Since this blog was originally posted, I've had two opportunities to explore the gated "private reserve" area around Elk and Yoda. I would say leave this area as it is also. The trees are nicely spaced already, and there are enough hazards in there (cliffs, steeps, and creeks) that it could never become the gladed paradise that you are envisioning. Thanks for getting it open, but the last thing you want to do is send more intermediate skiers/boarders through there.

Hey, thanks for giving us the opportunity to share our opinions, I really appreciate it. However, Jack's woods WAS a wonderful place to ride until it was made popular by this blog. I've never seen so many people in there as I saw this weekend. Also, a good majority of those people were in fact not expert riders, as you would like to suggest, but obviously intermediate riders cutting up all the good snow by snow-plowing down. This is direct proof that thinning this area would lead to even more novice riders taking over one of the last few portions of the mountain that are not already over populated. There's certainly areas on HRM that could benefit from some intelligent thinning. Thanks!

Regardless of the thinning that does or does not take place, the fact remains that ALOT of people go to Meadows. There is no way that a blog is going to ruin your favorite tree run by overpopularizing it. If there is enough concern about your favortie spot being overcrowded, why not focus your energy towards asking Dave about expanding skiable terrain? If thinning the trees will increase the rideability of the terrain as well as improve the mountain environment, all that's left is a few complaints about a favorite spot being disclosed. The "damage" is done, you can't undo a discussion, so why not make your time at Meadows better?

Heather canyon lost it's backcountry feel when the Heather canyon lift was installed, the old HRM cahir. When skiing Heather required a 1 & 1/2 mile runout, it was a unique experience and skied by few. Now heather canyon has moguls!

PLEASE DON'T RUIN HEATHER CANYON ANY MORE WITH "THINNING"!!!!!

Thinng is a corporate word for clear cutting! Remember it's OUR forest not MT. Hood Meadows.

Mike, ex-HRM lift op and 26 year skier of Meadows

Dave's reply: Thinning is a corporate word for clear cutting? I think not.

Should "thinning" to produce more gladed and treed runs be implemented? Yes. By doing so, the accessible terrain is increased while the actual acreage of the management area is not. MHM has 15% green, 50% blue and 35% black terrain. At the moment, there are few opportunities for intermediate mountain users to have a tree skiing/riding experience since most of the "blue" runs are wide open on Cascade Express or established trails in North Canyon, South canyon and Hood River Meadows area. Advanced and Expert mountain users have many more opportunities to experience "wooded tree skiing" by the very nature of their skill set, even though only 35% of the permit area is "black", of which most lies in Heather Canyon, aside from the Bowls, O-ring, Rock Garden. Thinning areas in Heather Canyon inclusive of Jack's Woods and PR is not the best answer to meet the needs of "gladed tree skiing" for most mountain users, as doing so potentially increases the number of under-skilled users entering this terrain. Thinning areas that are conducive to "intermediate tree skiing" and in areas that are more accessible due to their very nature is is a better use of resources. I feel the following areas would benefit the most users from a thinning and/or log debris removal program. NORTH CANYON SIDE: area between North canyon and Middlefork, area between Roach bowl and North Canyon, area between North Canyon and Ram's Head, area between Stadium and Lady's Slipper, area between Discovery and Inner Limits. SOUTH CANYON SIDE: area between Chunky Swirly and Cry Baby, area between SCUD and Daisy Bowl, area between Waterfall and Old Waterfall. BOWL AREA: area between Powder Keg and Jacob's Ladder, area between Upper Breezeway and Jacob's Ladder. HRM AREA: all of the treed areas between Knickinick and Breakaway. Exploring thinning options in the permit area that is consistently open and accessible would be a better option than encouraging underskilled users to enter "expert terrain" through a thinning of Jack's Woods. Thanks for having this Blog for a useful exchange of ideas and opinions.

Dave's reply: I appreciate the specificity of your comment. Of your list, where would the first few areas be that you think should be gladed?

I think that this sounds like a great idea. I love tree riding but find that sometimes it can be a bit hairy in the deep powder or on really fast snow days because the trees are so tight that it can be hard to manuver. I'm absolutly in favor of this if it is done in a minimal manner, I still like somet tight trees and also feel that this is a place to go when the rest of the mountain is over crowded. My only concern is making more inviting people who possibly lack the skills to manuver through such areas. But all in all I think it's a great idea

If Jack’s Woods is cut, the snow will never ever again be that light in there. It will be like Two Bowl which is at the same angle but higher up the mountain. Since Jack’s Woods is almost the lowest altitude skiing that there is at Meadows you might think it would have wet sucky snow. Why doesn’t it? Today (Jan 18th) was a good case in point. The trees kept the sun and wind off Jack’s snow. The snow was light as cold smoke and blew over our shoulders on most turns. The sun and wind hammered everything to skiers left, including nearby Half Mood Bowl. Those runs skied like packing material. Don’t forget, even thigh deep powder is easier to turn in than packing foam. If it is too tight for you in there then you are not proficient enough! There is tons of terrain at Meadows to learn on, and when you get good, it’s either Jack’s (as it is now) or you head to Crystal Mountain WA. The riders who don’t complain that Jack’s is too tight have earned a place to use their skills. Look how many lessons Meadows sells, but when you get good, they want to make DummyLand out of the best they can offer! There are very few challenges at Meadows for advanced snowboarders and skiers, and Jack’s is the Crown Jewel. Why not celebrate it instead of sawing off the trees and branches thereby loading the forest floor with flammable debris? Meadows is not allowed to remove the cuttings under their permit. Why not have a few photos of people Ripping in there on the website? Magazine coverage could make Meadows famous with what is in there. I saw how wide open many of those shots are today because I stopped on purpose to see it from a standstill. There is no need to cut, just adjust your line a bit because it isn’t really very tight and the snow-loaded branches are good padding if you ever blow it. Remember, if Jack’s Woods is cut, the snow will never ever again be that light in there. Later, Keep the faith.

Dave's reply: Our permit doesn't say anything about removing or leaving cuttings. Those details are addressed in a site specific project proposal. Sometimes woody debris is left, sometimes it is removed. It depends on several factors specific to the project.

I support the idea of thinning certain areas to create more skiable terrain within the Meadows permit area.

Generally, North-facing areas would be the best areas to thin, as other exposures aren't as kind to the snow. Unfortunately, there aren't many North-facing areas at Meadows... except for Jack's Woods. That aside, here is my list of areas that I feel would benefit from thinning:

1) Jack's Woods... but only one "swath". Jack's Woods in not a small area, and only one narrow swath of thinning won't spoil the rest of the area for those who like it the way it is now.
2) Hood River Meadows area between Kinnickinick and Wy'East and from Outrigger to the HRM Skiway.
3) Both sides of Middle Fork, and between Breezway and Powder Keg.
4) Create the "Shooting Star Glades"... by thinning the area adjacent to Mercury from the Ridge down towards the Vanguard canyon.

Thanks for offering this forum for ideas and discussion.

After weeks of re-thinking and many amazing rides through Jack's Woods I have changed my argument. Screw thinning Jack's Woods, it was the sweetes run of my life... how it is! If you thin the trees you won't be making it much better for speed and stuff because it is so dang steep you'd die if you went any faster than the trees currently enable you to go. I still think Mav sucks though. But the trees are fine and if you aren't good enough to ride there how it is... stay the heck out! Peace out fools

I really don't understand the people like "Poops McGee" who get on these blogs and say stupid and ignorant things. People like that really give snowboarders a bad name. However, I do agree with his latest comment. Jack's Woods is a great place to ride the way it is. Glading that area would take away from the mysterious pow stashed area that is Jack's Woods. Don't glade Jack's Woods! You would end up making a lot more people mad than happy. I do think other places would benefit from glading though, such as the area above Mitchell Creek and Lower Vista Ridge and all of the other places mentioned in earlier posts. You could expand your boundry line and make a gladed paradise of your dreams in that area. Thank you for creating these blogs, they are very informative as well as controversial. Next blog topic: Lodging at the mountain...

YES, YES, YES! Please do it! Thin the trees. What are those people upset about re. Jack Woods? Only relatively small portions of it are skiable now. What is the point of having a forest so thick it is unskiable. I think some people misunderstood, thinking that the few openings in Jack Woods would be made into clearcut trails. Not so. The whole point is to open up other parts of the forest that are simply too thick to be skiable now.

Thining trees is simply the flip side of planting some trees where there aren't any. Both methods will produce the same result: to give us some obstacles to turn around. Anything is better than a clear-cut.

The idea of thining is right in line with the "Vision for the 21st Century" proposed at: www.mthigh.org/Vision.htm. The whole idea is to provide a "terrain park" for turning, rather than just jumping. A properly thinned forest is a great "terrain park" of this kind.

Dave,

I am a solid intermediate skier. I cannot yet do well in deep powder or thick trees. But I am working on that. So basically, I have never even been near Jack's Woods. But I still oppose any thinning of it.

As of my comment here, to my best count we are looking at 25 comments saying NO, and 23 comments saying YES. Sure, people could be duplicating comments under false names and whatnot, so this is not scientific.

But it does show that it remains to be split. What I have observed is that most of the comments saying NO seem to be from the advanced skiiers who already ski ther, and most of the comments saying YES seem to be from people who either don't ski there or tried and it was too hard.

My answer is this: Don't thin Jack's Woods. If the intermediate people want to ski there - they should get better. They should take lessons or spend more time on the mountain.

People can ALWAYS improve their skills. But ADVANCED riders cannot "create" advanced terrain. If you make the terrain easier for the intermediates - you take it away from the advanced. If you keep it advanced, you give incentive for the intermediates to improve.

Additionally, I find your responses to be inconsiderate of the fact that we spend a lot of money at Meadows. You seem to like to say "I don't care what your opinion is because I am the boss." It doesn't read well to me, when I spend so much money just to get to Meadows in the first place. Please try and respect your customers a tad more, at least in public. Or - if you plan on ignoring our opinions, don't ask for them.

Thank you.

Dave's reply: I'm sorry you feel that my responses are not considerate of our customers. That is certainly not intended when I compose a blog or post replies. I do appreciate everyone who visits Mt. Hood Meadows as well as our employees who work very hard. The issues I've raised in this blog are sometimes controversial and emotionally charged. I'm trying to be very straight with information and replies. I, like everyone, are looking at all sides of every issue. This blog has been a great way for me to share some inside information about why we do what we do and also get some pretty direct feedback from our customers. In all honesty (you may perceive this as "not caring" which is not the case) I'm looking at the substantive comments not necessarily counting votes as a mandate. For example, regarding tree skiing, only 52 people have posted a comment - but my software shows that so far almost 2,000 individual people have read this particular blog. As you say, the "votes" are pretty even also. Many comments people posted focused solely on Jack's Woods - without much discussion on the other areas within the ski areas. That also tells me quite a bit about the passion for Jack's Woods. So, what I really try to do is understand the messages that people are communicating and factor that in with the many other variables. Creating this blog has it's risks but its an unbelievable two-way communication tool. Thanks for your comments, I do appreciate it.

I'd love to see Jack's Woods left as-is, and would also love to see a lot of thinning/glading in the other areas mentioned.

This would leave Jack's an expert area, and still provide a lot more area to ski within the main ski area.

When Cascade isn't open, the rest of the runs on the mtn can get crowded with all the people those fast lifts put on the slopes. More accessible tree skiing areas could improve safety and the ski experience in general by reducing on-slope crowding!

In a nutshell, leave Jack's Woods as it is, and thin everywhere else you can. Leave the expert off-piste exactly that, and open up more of what is already intermediate terrain elsewhere to relieve crowding.

Pretty simple.....

Mount Hood Meadows would benefit greatly from tree thining. That is pretty hard to argue. Anyone that thinks it would not be a good thing is close minded. Before you say it, I am an expert skiier\boarder, and have been skiing the trees for decades. It's where I like to be. Yes, I can get through the thickest of tree patches, but it's not as good as if there was slightly more room.

Where this needs to occur is the obvious debate. Trusting Meadows to do the right thing is certainly a major leap of faith. They proven over the years that they don't always hit the mark. There are areas down low that could benefit from a conservative program of thining in Jack's woods. It's not necessary however. Resources would be better invested in areas such as the Middle Fork area. Hood River Meadows has many areas that need thinning.

Actually, I could go on, but there has already been enough attention to nice stashes like Jack's Woods. I bet that there are many that have not been there, and recently have gone because of this thread...Let's just stop talking about where, and start emphasizing conservative cutting...Gosh, I hear there are some sweet tree runs over on Buttercup, get over there and tear it up...

:O

I agree with many that Jack's Woods shouold be left alone. Mt. Hood has tons of great tree skiing. Jacks Woods isn't even that dense. Trees keep pow pow fresh and hidden. I say let the already existing gleades get tracked out and keep some steep, deep, pow.

Do not ruin Jacks Woods by thinning the trees. The reason is is good is because only those that can ski it go there. Do not make it just like every other run on the mountain. If you can't ski it you don't belong there.

Yes Please! After spending several years skiing at Heavenly in California, I feel that good trees are one thing that is definitely missing from Meadows.

It would great to be able to pop into the trees on any run, go anywhere through the trees, and then pop out anywhere. Or even take an entire run in the trees.

However, most of the tree areas at Meadows are too thick with underbrush and end up funneling people into the same tracks.

Anyway, some areas I'd love to see thinned are

Jacks' Woods
Between Kinnekineck and Breakaway
Between Middle Fork and Lady Finger

If you cleared Jack's Woods even marginally, it would be some fantastic skiing.

Also, I'm not sure it's named, but the skiier's right side of accordian bowl, if thinned, would be ridiculous fun

Thinning Jacks Woods? I think there are many better areas to thin or expand to. The tight high consequence tree lines in JW are what make that run the sickest. So keep the thinning to the places where its actually needed and will be utilized, otherwise look between the trees not at them!

dont thin jacks. it helps keep the gapers out.

thin the right of HRM and let people learn how to ski trees first

Thinning the tree's is a great idea. Thin where ever possible.

Thinning would make Meadows rock even more than it already does. I just got back and must say, I tried to go start my own little trials through some trees and ended up in some tight spots. Thinning would mean less hiking. Hooray for thinning

I think that you probably know more about this than most people who have lended their advice. It's your job to know. Good luck with your decision and enjoy the terrain whatever the outcome is.

If Meadows thinned the trees, that would be so awesome. I dont know about the rest of you, but i love tree skiing and i would love to see meadows improve it. Having said that, if they were to thin the trees think of all the unwanted attention snowboarders would bring, and how bad the snow in the trees would get. All in all i think meadows should definatly do some thinning.

Thinning in jacks woods would be a mistake - it would make an otherwise great ski experience into a mediocre one. The trees in lower heather are just right for expereinced skiers and meadows offers limited terrain for experienced folks - to thin the trees would water down the skiing there and reduce the level of the experience for experienced skiers. If i could suggest a place to thin it would be on hrm - the various tree islands and border areas along runs in hrm could make for great skiing for a wide range of ski abilities without detracting from the limited expert terrain that meadows has to offer.
Thinning in jacks woods and the surrounding area would simply be another reason not ski at meadows, please leave the jacks woods region alone and focus on enhancing other tree areas around the mountain that will not reduce what little advanced terrain you have.
david - hood river

First of all, I'd like to say thanks for the forum to discuss something like this. Its pretty cool to be included in some way with a desicion that would affect our mountain.

Thinning would be a great idea in a few areas, but leave those trees in jacks woods alone for sure!!!

Its very true that the # and volume of trees in that particular area is the reason the snow stays so protected over there.

Some thinning in the trees off of and around HRM would be good, there were some other good ares proposed earlier too.

I learned to ride powder in Michigan, where the bush/sapling/tree/weed ratio was pretty even, THOSE are some tight tree runs. THe Northwest's big pines and firs are a delight compared to back then...

I would like to throw in my vote for some tree thinning at MHM. I'll leave it up to you guys who work there to decide where it would work best, but I've long thought that the tree skiing would be excellent in some of the steeper terrain if only the trees were just a little thinner. I'm an Oregon native living in Colorado, and my local ski area (Winter Park/Mary Jane) thinned some trees on some of the steepest terrain on Mary Jane last summer. I was worried it would ruin the natural feel of the areas, but instead it has improved those areas immensely. And most of the trees were affected by the pine beetle infestation Colo. is experiencing due to fire controls, so I think this will also be a good environmental move as well. I hope you guys get approval to do some thinning there, and I personnaly would like to see it done in the bowl areas on the right side of MH Express chair (looking uphill) and the area that I think is called "God's Wall" off of the HRM lift.

I have been riding the glade at MHM for 5 years now and I think that the challenge of thicker trees is one that must be maintained it serves so that not everybody of every skill level can just hop in the woods. I thinning is to happen It should be done minimally and not everywhere, Jacks woods, mabey hood express but none in HRM. The idea that Dave brought up about "controlled burns" sickens me, healthy forests need brush and undergrowth, killing the smaller plants and trees with fire would hurt our glade experiance and hurt the forest. so remember, as with anything, MODERATION.

More gladed runs would be the best thing that Meadows could do (okay, well aside from lowering prices and decreasing lift lines, but I digress). I agree with the many that say leave Jacks Woods alone. The challenge and mystique give it its character and we don't need more traffic there. However, aside from Jacks, PLEASE get us some gladed areas that are optimized for us tree hounds. There is nothing better than floating through powder stashes zipping in and out of trees enjoying the silent and solitude. I'll ride in gladed all day if I can!

I certainly agree on the lack of good tree runs at Meadows, but I have to side with most of the other commenters and say PLEASE LEAVE JACK'S WOODS ALONE! I see it as some of the best tree riding on the mountain. Its a bit tight in some spots but should be left as it is to keep that fresh snow available. Its certainly not un-skiable by any means. There are many other areas of the mountain that could be thinned out for great tree runs but lets leave Jack's Woods as it is. If it isnt broke, dont fix it! There is certainly potential off of HRM and in a few areas to the skiers left underneath the Mt. Hood Express chair.

I know that folks on both sides of the Jack's Woods issue are well-meaning, but having finally developed the skills to enjoy the trees there, I have to say *please* don't thin Jack's Woods! This area seems to provide the ideal combination of terrain and obstacles on the mountain, and to thin it would be a waste of what nature has provided. There are most certainly no too many trees here - I am a first-year snowboarder, and even I could find some wonderful lines through Jack's Woods. Thinning this area would make it less desirable, and would increase the traffic flow as well, making what is now a wonderful little corner of Meadows into just another glade. I say keep Jack's as it is, and if thinning is needed, do it elsewhere. I, for one, think Meadows has already reached a very healthy balance of treed and cleared areas, and that any thinning should be approached with extreme caution. Bottom line? Please don't thin Jack's Woods!

I hope you reconsider. Sounds like a couple of intermediate skiers/boarders have sent letters asking you to thin so they don't have to get better at their sport and still do Jack's. Have you been back there when it's been open? There is no need to make it more accessible. I've been in line waiting for the chair that went all the way back to the ramp (for lack of a better name). I love boarding it just as it is. Even if you were to make it "more accessible" it would still be a poor idea as the lift out just can't handle more people.

I have seen some people talk about thinning on Meadows. I think mostly everything that is open to tree skiing is perfect. That is why I go to Meadows. Any thinning would be too much to places like Jack's Woods, or off of MHM. People that are begginners that want thinned out trees should not be going into the trees untill they have better skills. They are dangerous. That is why I think you should keep them the way they are. Thinner trees will make beginners think they are safer. Please no thinning