BFP Article on the "Paradox" of Ski Resort Development (JPR)

[thetrailboss]

And focusing on Jay Peak in particular.

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/...aradox-?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|p

Feel free to read or comment.

 

[AdironRider]

After reading the article, it seems the author is trying to find an argument about environmental damage, when there really isnt much substance to base one off of. He uses quotes about building a conference center on the tops of mountains, when all of Jay's development is going on in what were glorified gravel pits or parking lots.

Couple minor infractions for filling in some wetlands for a tune of 80k, and he seems to be hamstrung on the fact that they will be consuming more energy as a result. No shit sherlock.

He conceedes that it has brought in 250 million to the NEK, which is only the most economically depressed area of Vermont. Is providing jobs, and increasing tourism dollar spent, which he admits 2/3 of which go to other members of the economic community other than the resort itself.

How exactly is this a paradox? This seems like winning for Jay Peak and the NEK all around, but a couple enviros are pissy about it. That doesnt make a paradox, that shows the environmentalists true colors more than anything.

 

[thetrailboss]

After reading the article, it seems the author is trying to find an argument about environmental damage, when there really isnt much substance to base one off of. He uses quotes about building a conference center on the tops of mountains, when all of Jay's development is going on in what were glorified gravel pits or parking lots.

Couple minor infractions for filling in some wetlands for a tune of 80k, and he seems to be hamstrung on the fact that they will be consuming more energy as a result. No shit sherlock.

He conceedes that it has brought in 250 million to the NEK, which is only the most economically depressed area of Vermont. Is providing jobs, and increasing tourism dollar spent, which he admits 2/3 of which go to other members of the economic community other than the resort itself.

How exactly is this a paradox? This seems like winning for Jay Peak and the NEK all around, but a couple enviros are pissy about it. That doesnt make a paradox, that shows the environmentalists true colors more than anything.

I agree. The comments from the VNRC rep were way off and showed just how little she knew of what was going on up there.

 

[riverc0il]

Business at Jay Peak is up 33 percent despite skimpy snowfall this winter, and the water park is a major factor, said resort spokesman J.J. Tolland.

WOW!

If that is true during this suspect snow year, then I guarantee you'll see another waterpark at a Northeast resort very soon, within the next few years. Worst snow season in decades and their business is up 33%? Either that guy is completely wrong or Jay is going to be the most profitable resort in New England this year and for many to come.

There is a narrow slice of environmentalist wackos giving all the other environmentalists non-wackos a bad name. Being pro=environment doesn't have to mean being anti-development and anti-business. Otherwise, we need to completely dismantle the grid and live 100% off the land. If Jay got Act 250 approval for their expansion, they have already jumped through more hoops than any other development in this country. Pretty lame talking about the valley floor as a sensitive alpine environment.

 

[St. Bear]

WOW!

If that is true during this suspect snow year, then I guarantee you'll see another waterpark at a Northeast resort very soon, within the next few years. Worst snow season in decades and their business is up 33%? Either that guy is completely wrong or Jay is going to be the most profitable resort in New England this year and for many to come.

There is a narrow slice of environmentalist wackos giving all the other environmentalists non-wackos a bad name. Being pro=environment doesn't have to mean being anti-development and anti-business. Otherwise, we need to completely dismantle the grid and live 100% off the land. If Jay got Act 250 approval for their expansion, they have already jumped through more hoops than any other development in this country. Pretty lame talking about the valley floor as a sensitive alpine environment.

I'm certain the waterpark is only a piece of the puzzle. Whatever you think about the Jay measurements, they've been getting the most snow by far. They claim something like 140" on the year. Even a 25% marketing roundup still puts them at over 100". That right there has a lot to do with skier visits.

 

[riverc0il]

I'm certain the waterpark is only a piece of the puzzle. Whatever you think about the Jay measurements, they've been getting the most snow by far. They claim something like 140" on the year. Even a 25% marketing roundup still puts them at over 100". That right there has a lot to do with skier visits.

Non-sense. Jay is terrible right now compared to average let alone a good year. You are suggesting that they are winning away guests from other resorts because they have received a few extra inches. But Jay always receives a few extra inches than every where else, that is a constant. But there are a lot less people skiing this year. My days are 50% my six year average at this point. Even die hards like myself aren't going out because despite the few extra inches, the skiing still generally hasn't been that good. Jay has a lot more trails open than a lot of places to the south. But I don't think that is going to bring in the visits. I call suspect on 1/3 increase in business but I have no doubt any increase is due to the new hotel and the waterpark. It definitely isn't due to having more snow than other mountains which happens every year.

 

[St. Bear]

Non-sense. Jay is terrible right now compared to average let alone a good year. You are suggesting that they are winning away guests from other resorts because they have received a few extra inches. But Jay always receives a few extra inches than every where else, that is a constant. But there are a lot less people skiing this year. My days are 50% my six year average at this point. Even die hards like myself aren't going out because despite the few extra inches, the skiing still generally hasn't been that good. Jay has a lot more trails open than a lot of places to the south. But I don't think that is going to bring in the visits. I call suspect on 1/3 increase in business but I have no doubt any increase is due to the new hotel and the waterpark. It definitely isn't due to having more snow than other mountains which happens every year.

Yes, they always have more snow. But in such a low snowfall year, in terms of %, they're winning by even more. Just look at the trip reports from Jay compared to Killington.

And once again, I'm not discounting the waterpark. I think the quote from the dude from Ontario was gold. As someone with a young child who hopefully will start skiing in the next year or two, it really resonated with me.

 

[thetrailboss]

WOW!

There is a narrow slice of environmentalist wackos giving all the other environmentalists non-wackos a bad name. Being pro=environment doesn't have to mean being anti-development and anti-business. Otherwise, we need to completely dismantle the grid and live 100% off the land. If Jay got Act 250 approval for their expansion, they have already jumped through more hoops than any other development in this country. Pretty lame talking about the valley floor as a sensitive alpine environment.

Unfortunately in VT that slice ain't so narrow.....

 

[snowmonster]

Where's the paradox?

 

[from_the_NEK]

Where's the paradox?

I think the author's favorite resort is Stowe and they are jealous that Jay Peak is now cooler.

 

[thetrailboss]

Where's the paradox?

Exactly.

 

[deadheadskier]

Could the lack of snow in Quebec also be part of Jay's success? Jay isn't the king of snowmaking, but they're probably better at it than Sutton, Bromont, Orford, etc. Jay might be getting a lot of visits from Canadians who normally ski those areas.

 

[gmcunni]

Could the lack of snow in Quebec also be part of Jay's success? Jay isn't the king of snowmaking, but they're probably better at it than Sutton, Bromont, Orford, etc. Jay might be getting a lot of visits from Canadians who normally ski those areas.

great, i'm heading to Magog and skiing Bromont, Sutton and Orford this weekend...

 

[kingdom-tele]

Could the lack of snow in Quebec also be part of Jay's success? Jay isn't the king of snowmaking, but they're probably better at it than Sutton, Bromont, Orford, etc. Jay might be getting a lot of visits from Canadians who normally ski those areas.

J is busy because of the water park, hockey tourney's, amenities, etc.

they are attracting the demographic they wanted, the money one.

the irony is great. a place established and marketed for diehard skiing now catering to people who would rather be inside.

FWIW- that "non sensitive" valley used to have a decent deer yard.

 

[from_the_NEK]

FWIW- that "non sensitive" valley used to have a decent deer yard.

I thought deer thrived on Bent Grass and Bluegrass. I

 

[kingdom-tele]

:smile:

pretty sure they are now just lined up outside the multiple star restaurant eating scraps

 

[drjeff]

What a novel concept. A ski resort spends a bunch of $$ and develops NEW things that have great marketing appeal to a wide cross section of skiers/riders and even some of their non skiing/riding friends and then some of what they have developed can be used either year round or just in the non snow times, and more and more people come to the area and spend money in the area which has a direct positive impact on the local economy! Wow, who would have ever thought that could happen!

Responsible development can and should happen, but frankly most state and federal reps, and even those in VT, should be bending over backwards in this day and age to make responsible growth easier to happen and hence see tangible economic impacts to those places that show that they can raise the capital to do so.

Should every ski area have an indoor waterpark and snazzy new hotel and golf course?? Nope, But if some would like to, and can do so in a responsible way and can find the capital to do so, well then the legal and impact study fees and time it takes for the process to move from concept to in progress shouldn't be something that is often measured in the millions of dollars and years. Responsible, shovel ready jobs with private funding should be something that just about every cross section of the population should be looking at with open arms

 

[UVSHTSTRM]

What a novel concept. A ski resort spends a bunch of $$ and develops NEW things that have great marketing appeal to a wide cross section of skiers/riders and even some of their non skiing/riding friends and then some of what they have developed can be used either year round or just in the non snow times, and more and more people come to the area and spend money in the area which has a direct positive impact on the local economy! Wow, who would have ever thought that could happen!

Responsible development can and should happen, but frankly most state and federal reps, and even those in VT, should be bending over backwards in this day and age to make responsible growth easier to happen and hence see tangible economic impacts to those places that show that they can raise the capital to do so.

Should every ski area have an indoor waterpark and snazzy new hotel and golf course?? Nope, But if some would like to, and can do so in a responsible way and can find the capital to do so, well then the legal and impact study fees and time it takes for the process to move from concept to in progress shouldn't be something that is often measured in the millions of dollars and years. Responsible, shovel ready jobs with private funding should be something that just about every cross section of the population should be looking at with open arms

Amen!

 

[kingdom-tele]

What a novel concept. A ski resort spends a bunch of $$ and develops NEW things that have great marketing appeal to a wide cross section of skiers/riders and even some of their non skiing/riding friends and then some of what they have developed can be used either year round or just in the non snow times, and more and more people come to the area and spend money in the area which has a direct positive impact on the local economy! Wow, who would have ever thought that could happen!

Responsible development can and should happen, but frankly most state and federal reps, and even those in VT, should be bending over backwards in this day and age to make responsible growth easier to happen and hence see tangible economic impacts to those places that show that they can raise the capital to do so.

Should every ski area have an indoor waterpark and snazzy new hotel and golf course?? Nope, But if some would like to, and can do so in a responsible way and can find the capital to do so, well then the legal and impact study fees and time it takes for the process to move from concept to in progress shouldn't be something that is often measured in the millions of dollars and years. Responsible, shovel ready jobs with private funding should be something that just about every cross section of the population should be looking at with open arms

no doubt. should be great. looking forward to the cul de sac suburbia development, strip malls, maybe a couple outlet stores, a few more indoor options will be nice.

god forbid anyone coming from that scene have to adapt to all the terribly awful free time here in rural VT, you know, with it being so dark and cold and all the other uncomfortable aspects of winter

 

[drjeff]

no doubt. should be great. looking forward to the cul de sac suburbia development, strip malls, maybe a couple outlet stores, a few more indoor options will be nice.

god forbid anyone coming from that scene have to adapt to all the terribly awful free time here in rural VT, you know, with it being so dark and cold and all the other uncomfortable aspects of winter

I explicitly didn't mention strip malls, etc, since there IS a big difference between development at a ski resort that relies mainly on short term visitors and development in the surrounding areas of businesses that are there and serve more yera round locals as opposed to visitors. A say Walmart or a McDonalds or free standing Starbucks isn't going to pop up by Jay because of what they're building any time soon (if ever) since there just isn't, and likely never will be the full time, year round population base to support that. But if the development at Jay (or any other ski area that wants to do something like that) brings in enough short term visitors to allow a local to say open up a new restaurant or bar or ski or bike shop, something that is based more on the short term visitor than the year round resident for a significant portion of their yearly revenue, then that's a win/win thing.

It's a very long leap from going from a rural area to even a surburban area, especially when there's no "major" population base nearby