Alta wants your support

[crazy]

I’m all for the interconnect. It would be so much fun to ski from area to area over a four or five day stretch. It’s not like the wasatch is some pristine mountain range any longer. It’s crowded af. It’s the perfect place for a euro ski experience.

I love the argument that there’s no point because you can’t ski it all in one day, what the hell does that even mean? Does this make European resorts crap because you can’t ski all of it in a day? Weird.

I agree. The Wasatch is located right next to a major city that is growing quickly. It's already crowded, and will only get more crowded. Why not try and develop it in a sensitive way that balances both recreation and the environment? If the resorts do not expand and the population growth continues, the resorts and going to keep getting more crowded, and the backcountry will increasingly become a popular alternative to lift-served skiing. It's also preventing change, which people do not like.

If our goal is to protect the environment, let's protect actual wilderness. Let's make sure that the Uintas remain pristine. Let's protect Bears Ears. Let's make sure that ANWR remains undeveloped. As a civilization, our goal should be to develop a small, select number of locations such as the Wasatch that have already seen development and are close to population centers, and leave the rest of our mountains untouched and pristine.

Trying to prevent Alta from building a 15 person tram, or one of these resorts from building a new chairlift, isn't really protecting the environment. It's protecting backcountry skiing (pretty much the entire membership of Save Our Canyons) from minor encroachments by the resorts. I will continue donating money to actual environmental advocacy organizations, but will not support Save Our Canyons under their current leadership.

 

[skiur]

We made it 8 posts before this issue came up.

Honestly they are excluding an activity. Not people. And it was settled in federal court and on appeal.

What does a federal court case have to do with me not giving them any of my money? I will not ski at a place that does not allow snowboarding. That is my personal decision and being that the courts say it is ok for them to do it does not mean I need go there.

 

[thetrailboss]

What does a federal court case have to do with me not giving them any of my money? I will not ski at a place that does not allow snowboarding. That is my personal decision and being that the courts say it is ok for them to do it does not mean I need go there.

I completely understand and respect your POV.

 

[thetrailboss]

Here is the Wasatch Backcountry Alliance's stance on the issue:

Wasatch Backcountry Alliance is in favor of responsible ski area development. We support Alta Ski Area and many of our members are ardent Altaholics. However, while we do not question Alta’s right to develop their private lands, we do not support continued expansion onto public lands.

Earlier today, @AltaSkiArea sent an email to their subscribers regarding their role in the Central Wasatch Commission’s process of submitting a bill to establish the Central Wasatch National Conservation and Recreation Area. Wasatch Backcountry Alliance was involved in dozens of discussions that looked for ways to accommodate Alta’s stated demands, and wishes Alta was part of the legislation. There was no “bullying;” in fact, Alta was actively involved in these numerous discussions.

The collective of the CWC has offered multiple solutions - some of which included major compromises. These options would have benefitted Alta and the public by protecting high-value public lands and allowed Alta to obtain developable, high-value lands at their base in return. Alta would not accept any of those options. As a result, Alta Ski Area was left out of the bill due to their refusal to make any compromise, which we were able to achieve with all three of the other ski resorts.

We do not see our support of Alta and disappointment with their lack of compromise as exclusive of one another. We invite people to submit comments to the Alta campaign. https://www.alta.com/blog/supportalta. Please let Alta know how you feel about their role in the CWC process, and their stated desire to put a lift in Grizzly Gulch, including interconnecting to Big Cottonwood Canyon/Solitude, and wanting to preserve their right to develop your public lands on Patsy Marley and Mt. Wolverine. This is a great opportunity to get involved and let your voice be heard! #keepgrizzlywild #keepaltagreat

I can understand why Alta would not be interested in a land swap. For those that have not been to Alta, it is akin to MRG in that it has NO real resort owned amenities. If anything they have been farming out what they have to focus on the ski operation. At least one of the cafeterias is leased to a private operator. I think Goldminer's Daughter may also have been recently leased out. So Alta has no need for base area land because they don't want to build a hotel or condos. That is not their thing. Snowbird on the other hand wants more base area for development because their business is broader than just skiing and riding.

 

[raisingarizona]

Here is the Wasatch Backcountry Alliance's stance on the issue:



I can understand why Alta would not be interested in a land swap. For those that have not been to Alta, it is akin to MRG in that it has NO real resort owned amenities. If anything they have been farming out what they have to focus on the ski operation. At least one of the cafeterias is leased to a private operator. I think Goldminer's Daughter may also have been recently leased out. So Alta has no need for base area land because they don't want to build a hotel or condos. That is not their thing. Snowbird on the other hand wants more base area for development because their business is broader than just skiing and riding.

Alta can’t let go of their Grizzly Gulch property. It’s the key or link for the interconnect. Why isn’t WBCA sitting at the table trying to create an agreement for continued access through Grizzly Gulch even if that tiny parcel were developed? This is my problem with enviro groups, they often have an agenda and aren’t honest about it.

 

[raisingarizona]

@crazy - I hear that. There’s no stopping the growth in SLC, not until climate change forces it. I feel the same about a lot of Colorado resorts. I could see Loveland, A-Basin, and Keystone becoming connected. Break to Copper, Vail to Minturn to Beaver Creek and all of the Aspen resorts of course.

 

[BenedictGomez]

Trying to prevent Alta from building a 15 person tram, or one of these resorts from building a new chairlift, isn't really protecting the environment. It's protecting backcountry skiing (pretty much the entire membership of Save Our Canyons) from minor encroachments by the resorts. I will continue donating money to actual environmental advocacy organizations, but will not support Save Our Canyons under their current leadership.

Exactly. If you read the posts from people connected to that, it's clear that keeping "minor encroachments", as you aptly put it, out of their backcountry paradise is the real motivation for the attempt at killing ONE Wastach. And they'll use any fake environmental rationale to do so.

The irony is that if anything, I imagine ONE Wasatch would have an incremental net positive effect on the environment given it could alleviate some traffic in an area that suffers from winter inversions.

 

[AdironRider]

Exactly. If you read the posts from people connected to that, it's clear that keeping "minor encroachments", as you aptly put it, out of their backcountry paradise is the real motivation for the attempt at killing ONE Wastach. And they'll use any fake environmental rationale to do so.

The irony is that if anything, I imagine ONE Wasatch would have an incremental net positive effect on the environment given it could alleviate some traffic in an area that suffers from winter inversions.

This argument has been going on for the 12 years I've been out West. It is a small minority of rich bc nimbys that don't want to give up "their" backcountry to other users.

 

[abc]

I will never give any support to a place that excludes people because they snowboard.

they are excluding an activity.

What does a federal court case have to do with me not giving them any of my money? I will not ski at a place that does not allow snowboarding. That is my personal decision and being that the courts say it is ok for them to do it does not mean I need go there.

You stated your reason for boycotting Alta is they "exclude PEOPLE". TrailBoss correctly pointed out they don't exclude people, just activities.

You insist on boycotting a mountain based on facts that aren't there.

If you don't like the skiing at Alta, don't go there. But stop pretending you're doing something noble.

(I haven't been to Alta for several years now, I like Snowbird better)

 

[abc]

I don't feel strongly about One Wasatch either way.

Having skied in Europe a few times, I've gotten over the novelty of travelling across multiple mountains and valleys. It felt kind of cool to do it once in a while. But in reality, all that travelling and lift riding cuts into actual skiing. Remember, if you start in Park City and ride the lifts to get to Snowbird, you need the same amount of time to get back to PC. That's like an hour each way (if not more). How often do you want to do that? Everyday? Nah.

On the other hand, if I'm primarily skiing Alta by staying on mountain, but want to get over to Park City for a day, it's a much better option to ride the lift over rather than having to drive around.

So, if they build it, I'll use it. But I don't feel strong enough "supporting" it.

 

[MEtoVTSkier]

LMAO okay buddy whatever you need to tell yourself. I'm happy to see Alta and MRG struggle, not that either does but still. It's ridiculous to not allow snowboarders when we are happy paying customers. Taos learned, in time the others will as well.

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app

People keep saying that, and yet...

 

[MEtoVTSkier]

Why would you be traveling horizontally all day? Again, this makes zero sense just like the “you can’t ski it all in one day” argument. Why would you need to go to each hill in a day to make the interconnect valuable. You lack vision.

I’d love to ski Alta and snowbird for two days, head over to Solitude for the second night, ski half day at solitude and half day at Brighton with a sunset run into Park City and stay there for a few days. That sort of experience sounds super cool to me. Especially the part where I don’t get into a car for 5 days straight!

I’m with you guys on snowboarding bans, that’s super lame.

Especially if the hotels all co-operated and kept fowarding your suitcase daily...

 

[skiur]

You stated your reason for boycotting Alta is they "exclude PEOPLE". TrailBoss correctly pointed out they don't exclude people, just activities.

You insist on boycotting a mountain based on facts that aren't there.

If you don't like the skiing at Alta, don't go there. But stop pretending you're doing something noble.

(I haven't been to Alta for several years now, I like Snowbird better)

Sorry, I should have phrased it they exlude people who snowboard. Will that get your panties out of a bunch?

 

[ThinkSnow]

Sorry, I should have phrased it they exlude people who snowboard. Will that get your panties out of a bunch?

Well now that's not entirely accurate either.....I snowboard, but I also ski Alta whenever I'm in UT. ;-)

 

[thetrailboss]

Sorry, I should have phrased it they exlude people who snowboard. Will that get your panties out of a bunch?

Not to continue the sideshow, but I know "people who snowboard" that work at Alta and also ski at Alta. Again, it is not the people, but the activity that they exclude. I get how you feel though.

 

[BenedictGomez]

People keep saying that, and yet...

Next time simply post a handy link to help educate them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niche_market

 

[raisingarizona]

Especially if the hotels all co-operated and kept fowarding your suitcase daily...

There’s a business opportunity right there.

 

[raisingarizona]

Again with the going from one end to the other argument. That’s not necessary to benefit from the One. Why not spend an afternoon at Solitude and then back over. It just opens up so many options, I don’t see any negatives with it.

 

[Jully]

Again with the going from one end to the other argument. That’s not necessary to benefit from the One. Why not spend an afternoon at Solitude and then back over. It just opens up so many options, I don’t see any negatives with it.

+1

 

[crazy]

Exactly. If you read the posts from people connected to that, it's clear that keeping "minor encroachments", as you aptly put it, out of their backcountry paradise is the real motivation for the attempt at killing ONE Wastach. And they'll use any fake environmental rationale to do so.

The irony is that if anything, I imagine ONE Wasatch would have an incremental net positive effect on the environment given it could alleviate some traffic in an area that suffers from winter inversions.

Good point.

I go back and forth over how practical One Wasatch would be for me, but I believe that at worst it wouldn't hurt, and at best it could provide benefits for people in certain situations. Yes, going all the way from the Jordanelle Reservoir to the base of Snowbird might take half of your day and not be super practical, but there's a novelty to it that I'm sure some tourists would appreciate (hell, I would do it once just to do it). Think about how much better the snow is in Big Cottonwood Canyon versus Park City. I could see people staying in Park City hopping over to take some runs at Brighton on days when Brighton has better conditions. Likewise, I could see people skiing at Brighton or Solitude hopping over to Park City for lunch. On days when Alta is super crowded, you could take a lift over to Solitude and ski Honeycomb. Lots of possibilities. It wouldn't take very much to make this happen - a new lift at Alta and Solitude for that connection, and a lift or two in Guardsman Pass to connect Brighton to Park City. Then all that's left is rope drop between Deer and Park City.