Monarch April 4 and 5, 2009

[itbeme]

The original plan was to ski Crested Butte on Sunday, but on Saturday night we ran into someone who had just returned from Crested Butte and she told us it was a little slushy. Figuring Saturday’s slush would be Sunday’s crud (I get enough of that in the Mid-Atlantic), we decided to hit Monarch as it sits higher. Besides, we had come over Monarch Pass Saturday afternoon and pulled into Monarch to take a look. It was snowing moderately and it looked like there were several inches of new snow. While it wasn’t a huge dump, and it wasn’t the best fluff and was a bit wind driven, for my purposes and skill level, it was just fine. I could jump off a groomer for a short run through some powder and get right back to the trail. It’s a small resort and it got tracked up pretty quickly, but I was able to find a few short untracked runs that no one else bothered with. I noticed a few people hiking up to Mirkwood. Geno’s Meadows was a popular area.

Cold temps and snow showers all Sunday afternoon helped keep snow quality still very good Monday. Chopped up but still fluffy. Took a short run through Geno’s woods and discovered, after I took a dive, that the snow was quite deep and fluffy in there—I have little experience getting skis back on in deep powder. Anyway, we enjoyed our two days at Monarch. The old two-person lifts didn’t bother us as the runs are short and they keep them going pretty fast. Even on Sunday with the new snow there were rarely more than a few people in line.

Photos were taken in the morning as it snowed (lightly) all afternoon.

 

[itbeme]

Actually, it was April 5th and 6th.

 

[jamesdeluxe]

I liked Monarch... more fun than its vertical would lead you to believe.

 

[Harvey]

Beautiful photos. Looks like a good call and a great day.

 

[rfarren]

I liked Monarch... more fun than its vertical would lead you to believe.

What mountains would you say are comparable to Monarch?

BTW nice photos. Looks like fun.

 

[Tony Crocker]

What mountains would you say are comparable to Monarch?

The pictures are quite accurate in impression. Vertical is a modest 1,160. Wolf Creek is an obvious comparison; I skied both on consecutive days on the way to Crested Butte in 2001, also at the beginning of April. Monarch claims 800 acres vs. 1600 at Wolf Creek; Gut reaction is they are much closer than that in usable ski terrain. Both are primarily intermediate in pitch. Monarch has more consistent fall lines vs. more flat spots/benches at Wolf Creek. Most would rate Monarch terrain better overall I think. Trees go to the top of Monarch, though I recall there's some decent spacing. Wolf Creek has a substantial advantage in snowfall and a moderate advantage in preservation from more north exposure.

Both of these are examples of "small" western areas with usable ski acreage comparable to "big" eastern areas.

That's probably not the answer rfarren was looking for, but there are not a lot of Rockies areas in that ~1,000+ vertical range that I or most destination skiers (except our Scottish friend q) have visited. Brian Head: not as good as either Wolf Creek or Monarch IMHO. Snow King: A bit steeper but usually much worse snow. Both smaller than Wolf Creek/Monarch in usable ski terrain IMHO. Santa Fe has more vertical but acreage and overall ambience is similar (high, trees to the top, mostly intermediate).

 

[jamesdeluxe]

there are not a lot of Rockies areas in that ~1,000+ vertical range that I or most destination skiers (except our Scottish friend q) have visited. Brian Head: not as good as either Wolf Creek or Monarch IMHO. Snow King: A bit steeper but usually much worse snow. Both smaller than Wolf Creek/Monarch in usable ski terrain IMHO. Santa Fe has more vertical but acreage and overall ambience is similar (high, trees to the top, mostly intermediate).

I'm having a tough time coming up with a similar western hill too, but I agree, Santa Fe is probably the closest overall. Pajarito, NM is 1,200 verts, but topographically a different kettle of fish. I haven't been to Eldora (1,400 verts?) in 25 years... EMSC, how does it compare in trail layout to Monarch? Q would have to weigh in on places like Discovery or Maverick, MT.

As mentioned a year ago, just looking at the map (bottom of the linked thread), you'd think it could be skied out in two hours, but it's wider than you'd guess. With the fresh snow on the two days I was there, I didn't get bored. And that was without even making it to Mirkwood or the cat skiing:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6553

 

[Geoff]

I'm having a tough time coming up with a similar western hill too, but I agree, Santa Fe is probably the closest overall. Pajarito, NM is 1,200 verts, but topographically a different kettle of fish. I haven't been to Eldora (1,400 verts?) in 25 years... EMSC, how does it compare in trail layout to Monarch?

In terms of layout, Eldora sprawls along the ridge line much like Wolf Creek. Monarch is more of a compact bowl. At Monarch, you have three distinct trail pods that fan out from the base area. The above shot is taken fairly close to the looker's left boundary at Monarch. You can see the looker's right trail pod and the sidecountry to the right of that lift.

Some of the terrain at Monarch is comparable to the Challenge Mountain original part of Eldora where you have relatively narrow cut trail skiing. There's one narrow twisty one called No Name that feels like New England. Some of it is more open meadow. You also have a modest walk to some fairly challenging sidecountry. If you have an altimeter watch and think the amount of vertical you get on your trip is important, this isn't your place. If you're an adrenaline junkie looking to scare yourself, this isn't your place.

Monarch is one of my favorite ski areas. I've logged 8 days there over the years. I'm totally OK with eastern amounts of vertical if it's on entertaining terrain with very light skier traffic. The first time I skied there, I drove over for a day in the middle of a Crested Butte trip. I found myself skiing medium pitch lightly bumped terrain two days after a 10" snowfall where there were tracks in the troughs and nothing but pole plant marks on the tops of the bumps. The parking lot was full of white baptist church vans with Texas plates towing enclosed gear trailers. Lots of people skiing the groomed wrap-around trails on rental gear wearing carhartt overalls and Texas Longhorns starter jackets. Most of the customers completely ignoring 90% of the terrain. Jeez. I'm coming back! I've been back twice since and experienced pretty much the same thing for conditions and customer base. Nice friendly bar with good food in the base lodge. Salida, 20 minutes down the hill, is a nice little town. ...way better than Wolf Creek's Pagosa Springs. There is nothing in the base area other than the smallish base lodge. The nearest hotel is about 3 miles down the hill. A 1960's cinderblock gulag that was pretty beat up when I poked my nose in but had just changed owners so it may have upgraded over the last 3 years. I've stayed at some nice little 1 bedroom chalet-style luxury cottages called River Suites halfway between the ski area and Salida at a reduced rate in January. I've also stayed at a B&B in town whose name escapes me. Salida is a typical Colorado new age escapist town that is busier in the summer. If you need a herbalist or a shaman, you're in the right place. Really laid back. A few decent restaurants. Locals in the bars instead of the beautiful people you'd find at a destination resort.

 

[jamesdeluxe]

The parking lot was full of white baptist church vans with Texas plates towing enclosed gear trailers. Lots of people skiing the groomed wrap-around trails on rental gear wearing carhartt overalls and Texas Longhorns starter jackets. Most of the customers completely ignoring 90% of the terrain. Jeez. I'm coming back!

Pretty much my experience and the exact opposite of Crested Butte in virtually every category both + and -. In addition to the calf-deep powder off-trail, I remember a lot of nice bump runs. Also (very out of place for a non-corporate ski area), the bar/restaurant had some of the best sandwiches ever.

Definitely my kind of place.

 

[EMSC]

Wow. Thanks Geoff. Great description of the place and comparison to Eldora. Comparison to the front side of Eldora is very apt as it is also ~1,200' verts (backside of Eldora is up around 1,600' of vert).

My only add is that Monarch gets much more snow than Eldora (I think they average ~350" if I recall? vs only 200" at Eldora).

Totally different layout and clientele but you could compare it to Ski Cooper as well. I suspect very few folks have ever been there though and frankly Ski Cooper is much flatter; though very similar vert, very few people, only a base lodge anywhere near it, runs a cat ski operation on the next ridge line, etc... But mostly Leadville locals, not Texans. I think Cooper is a touch less acreage as well (ski area portion anyway, Cat ski has more than Monarch). Another comparison could be Sol Vista for vert and lack of crowds, but that is more a high end housing project and gets poor snowfall.

 

[Tony Crocker]

I think they average ~350" if I recall?

The correct number is 281. http://bestsnow.net/swconet.htm. Nonetheless I have no doubt Monarch is a powder stash due to terrain and clientele described in the reports above.

With regard to snow claims, I would remind all of the discussion JSpin and I had about the Montana areas. Once you've been around some your eyes and your skis will give you a good feel for how much snow places get, particularly comparing areas you ski on the same trip. Skiing Wolf Creek and Monarch on consecutive days the difference in snowpack was obvious. The Wolf Creek microclimate is quite dramatic as you drive up that pass from either side. The snowpack goes from scraps by the side of the road to 8+ feet within a very short distance.

I'm totally OK with eastern amounts of vertical if it's on entertaining terrain with very light skier traffic.

Yes, 1,000 at a time is plenty if the terrain is decent. Mt. Baldy being Exhibit A. Lutsen's 800 continuous is of low intermediate pitch. Its other main chair has moderately steep pitches of 300 or so, sort of like the Wall at Snow Summit. If Mt. Bohemia's ~900 is consistently steep, I'm easily persuaded that it would be worthwhile and interesting skiing. Too bad NASJA didn't offer us a pre or post trip there.

 

[itbeme]

Yes, another thing I liked about Monarch is that there is nothing more to do than ski/ride. Although it does boast a Starbucks. Being able to park at the base and get to the chairlifts without walking through a "village" is nice.

 

[ChrisC]

The "Mountain Pass" resort is almost a generic development in ski country. They are not very unique. Kinda typical. Weather/snow quality is the distinction.

Characteristics:
1. Generally off a major E-W Highway (since NA mountains run N-S)
2. Less Vertical than average (<2000 ft) since base in high
3. High Snowfall compared to surrounding resorts
4. Minimal Base area development (due to high base elevation, tough topography, restrictions, etc)
5. Primarily Day Areas

Examples:

Stevens Pass
Alpental
Snoqualmie
White Pass
HooDoo
Mt. Rose
Boreal
Sugar Bowl
Sierra-at-Tahoe
Lookout Pass
Loveland
Monarch
Wolf Creek

 

[salida]

Ahhh. Monarch, where it all began.

My intuition would say Monarch gets about 30% less snowfall than Wolfcreek does.

Never the less Monarch skis more intuitively then WC. Monarchs lift set up reminds me much of Solitude's, with lesser vertical.

 

[Geoff]

Totally different layout and clientele but you could compare it to Ski Cooper as well. I suspect very few folks have ever been there though and frankly Ski Cooper is much flatter; though very similar vert, very few people, only a base lodge anywhere near it, runs a cat ski operation on the next ridge line, etc... But mostly Leadville locals, not Texans. I think Cooper is a touch less acreage as well (ski area portion anyway, Cat ski has more than Monarch). Another comparison could be Sol Vista for vert and lack of crowds, but that is more a high end housing project and gets poor snowfall.

I'm not sure I'd compare Ski Cooper and Monarch. Sure, they're both small, friendly, with nothing around but a base lodge but that's where it ends. The front of Ski Cooper is really flat. Perfect as a learn-to-ski place but nothing an advanced skier would want to bother with. The back side is very intermediate. I was entertained in the trees on skier's left for a few runs but you can use up that terrain in a couple of hours.

 

[Tony Crocker]

ChrisC's points are well taken. Though most of these places are of primarily intermediate pitch, a few (Sugar Bowl, Mt. Rose, Alpental) have serious steeps.

 

[aajanice]

great photos!! Monarch really is one of the best places to ski.. lots of great terrain and challenging slopes!!

 

[ChrisC]

Has anyone done the catskiing at Monarch?

It's relatively cheap - $180/day - or 2x a Vail/Aspen/etc lift ticket.

 

[EMSC]

Has anyone done the catskiing at Monarch?

It's relatively cheap - $180/day - or 2x a Vail/Aspen/etc lift ticket.

Ironically, I have not, but my brother has. Not a large area that it covers (like 1000 acres or so), but reasonably decent terrain according to him (single black pitch for nearly all of it with maybe a few small drops to huck, etc..). Similar vert as the resort (1200-1500). He felt it was worth doing/paying for. I was hoping to hit it this season myself, but too many things got in the way of going down that way for a whole weekend.