Panorama

Author Message
flag newo
Posted: Sep 4, 2014 at 10:19 Quote
And if u take the chair you are not allowed on these trails? I'm pretty sure some people are going to take the lift up to ride there new xc trail when it's done, I'm sure people already do. Silverstar is a different hill, much smoother, can take xc rigs on most trails and have a great time. Pano is rough, get my thinking? Not trying to copy silverstar but tweak some their ideas that will work for us at our hill. Thanks for calling me out so I can explain more in depth.
flag jamesp
Posted: Sep 5, 2014 at 15:40 Quote
newo wrote:
Well we must not be riding the same sections of trail dman. Do you have your route on gps? Do u reach the lake? I guess I've been riding it the improper way?
.

dman is talking the "original" way which is on old packers trails over the ridge from Brewer Creek. Newo is talking about the route from the summit, along Taynton ridge, round the little lake, short hike-a-bike then hitting the Hopeful Creek downhill. If it were rideable from the Pano side, from the bottom then there is no need for the long drive/vehicle shuttle up Brewer Ck. Both ways, i.e. the areas all up around the little lake & all of the Hopeful creek bowl (inc the huts & packers camp), are all inside Pano's CRA.

Brewer/Hopeful is an awesome alpine epic that could be marketed that same as Frisby Ridge / Keystone / 7 Summits, if it were ever sanctioned.

As for lift access XC. Not sure how many but some people will use it. The problem I see is they won't run all 3 lifts in the summer to access the top. If you catch Mile One then its still a hella climb up to the summit. Having said that more XC / pedalling trails would get more visitors to Pano IMO. Let the kids ride the DH & mom/dad can go ride XC stuff.

Anyways I came here to say I got a few laps in at Pano at the end of the season. I don't know how it compares to 5-6-7 yrs ago but there are a ton of improvements compared to 2-3 yrs ago which is only only a good thing. Trail crew was very under-resourced for a few years there so there is looots of catch up work to be done. New ex & more staff for a few years should hopefully keep improving on the good work that has happened this summer.
flag d-man
O+
Posted: Sep 6, 2014 at 8:13 Quote
newo wrote:
Well we must not be riding the same sections of trail dman. Do you have your route on gps? Do u reach the lake? I guess I've been riding it the improper way?

I see the point of doing xc from the chair, sells tickets, bikes that people bring to pano are sometime not suited for most of our trails, it would be nice to give them another option. You could even bike up and ride them without the chair I guess? Also this is what silverstar does, as they now have the imba stamp which is cool.

I was being a smart a** with the "proper" reference to doing the loop from brewer, it really is a great ride. Riding from pano is great (would be even better with a proper single track to the summit) also but driving to the top is cheating to me... Yes I agree there could be work done on the trail from the summit.

I agree with Jamesp the trail is as good as the other epic alpine rides in the province and the cvcs took a poke at sanctioning it. They had funding but the old boys hiking group pulled some favors, made a stink about it to certain people and it fell through. I was told the cvcs is not interested in it anymore.... really to bad.
flag captain-sandbag
Posted: Sep 6, 2014 at 10:30 Quote
That is a shame. Even grown in like it is below the cabins, Brewer to Pano is one of my favourite rides. Maybe if the hill was on board with getting it sanctioned they would consider trying again?
flag Cro-Mag
Posted: Sep 6, 2014 at 10:39 Quote
tinfoil wrote:
That is a shame. Even grown in like it is below the cabins, Brewer to Pano is one of my favourite rides. Maybe if the hill was on board with getting it sanctioned they would consider trying again?

Why does it need to be sanctioned? Seems like its been good this long without.....just needs a couple days worth of love. Sounds like a good weekend of camping and friends.....

CM!
flag captain-sandbag
Posted: Sep 6, 2014 at 11:18 Quote
True that.

I look at somewhere like Revy though, where trails like this are sanctioned and it seems the increased ridership leads to more support for upkeep and further trail development, which I don't think would hurt the Invermere area. I know there is a bit of a hide the nice things from the tourists culture, and I get that, but I also think it can be a little counter productive in the long run.

It doesn't really need to be sanctioned, but I see only benefits if it were.
flag d-man
O+
Posted: Sep 7, 2014 at 9:07 Quote
tinfoil wrote:
That is a shame. Even grown in like it is below the cabins, Brewer to Pano is one of my favourite rides. Maybe if the hill was on board with getting it sanctioned they would consider trying again?
Pano was on board and was providing major funding. They pulled out after nothing was done in a year....
flag d-man
O+
Posted: Sep 7, 2014 at 9:09 Quote
Cro-Mag wrote:
tinfoil wrote:
That is a shame. Even grown in like it is below the cabins, Brewer to Pano is one of my favourite rides. Maybe if the hill was on board with getting it sanctioned they would consider trying again?

Why does it need to be sanctioned? Seems like its been good this long without.....just needs a couple days worth of love. Sounds like a good weekend of camping and friends.....

CM!
True but a hundred grand would sure make a nice trail....
flag jamesp
Posted: Sep 7, 2014 at 13:33 Quote
obviously the trail can be ridden without being sanctioned but, for example, no-one will ever build a single track to the summit to connect to an unsanctioned trail. Any other maintenance will be limited to the few people who do things like clear bits of brush off the Hopeful section (as happened last summer). Like tinfoil says, it doesn't need to be but there are benefits to it.

I think the CVCS is focusing on other areas that have been hinted that are more likely to be approved. There was another trail in the Pano area that they tried to have sanctioned & it didn't work out. Ditto Steamboat (although that predated CVCS). Putting time & effort towards projects that are more likely to succeed is totally understandable.

didn't Rossland spend something like $1.5m building 7 Summits? It takes $$ to build major trails from scratch, you can't access grant funding etc for unsanctioned trails.
flag d-man
O+
Posted: Sep 12, 2014 at 6:41 Quote
jamesp wrote:
obviously the trail can be ridden without being sanctioned but, for example, no-one will ever build a single track to the summit to connect to an unsanctioned trail. Any other maintenance will be limited to the few people who do things like clear bits of brush off the Hopeful section (as happened last summer). Like tinfoil says, it doesn't need to be but there are benefits to it.

I think the CVCS is focusing on other areas that have been hinted that are more likely to be approved. There was another trail in the Pano area that they tried to have sanctioned & it didn't work out. Ditto Steamboat (although that predated CVCS). Putting time & effort towards projects that are more likely to succeed is totally understandable.

didn't Rossland spend something like $1.5m building 7 Summits? It takes $$ to build major trails from scratch, you can't access grant funding etc for unsanctioned trails.

There is gov approval in place for the steamboat trails but the cvcs is short on time, money and support for the gravity style trails. Money is fairly easy to come by, time for directors not so much....

 


Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.024768
Mobile Version of Website