Printable View
There's a bit of a problem is getting the data to resolve either of those questions though, right? It's difficult for me to imagine that with the innovation we've seen in B/C gear that pricing hasn't outpaced inflation. And that's before we start talking about entirely new gear like the Avalung which didn't even exist in 1991.Quote:
Originally Posted by zion zig zag
Still missing the point.Quote:
Originally Posted by YetiMan
Potentially the area the way it is can see x+y+z
Post expansion the area can only see y+z
Key word there is "potentially". As much as you may disapprove, the vast majority of skiers out there possess neither the fitness, the equipment, the training nor the time to count themselves amongst "X". Until you accept this reality, you will continue to misunderstand why the USFS acts as it does.Quote:
Originally Posted by tuco
You're a fucking clown.Quote:
Originally Posted by YetiMan
No, the data is there, you just know that it doesn't support your argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tin Woodsman
I was up there too. Nobody said it was a ghost town. Most of those users rode the lift,even the hippy golf course folk.Quote:
Originally Posted by BobMc
One big difference between the winter and summer is they do not restrict uphill traffic in the summer time. I would bet if you took the total number of summer users and minus out the lift riding public, your total left would be quite small in comparison to other trails. I still bet more would use this area in summer without the lifts and resort being there(me not included), go hike on damn near any trail in either canyon and tell me this isn't true.
As far as parking and canyon access, I think you are correct.
Really? Then please bust it out. I'm eager to see it since you've done all the work.Quote:
Originally Posted by zion zig zag
Yes, that is the key word. Thank you!Quote:
Originally Posted by Tin Woodsman
The fact that they don't have the fitness, equipment, training or time is really not valid. If you have time and money to learn to ski, you have time and money for the points you listed above. Also these same people that you speak of most likely won't be in that area anyway, they will just have to pay more for a lift ticket. So until you accept this reality, you will continue to misunderstand why alot of people do not want this.
I realize why the USFS acts as it does. You just can't explain to me why this would be the "greatest good for the most amount of people". At least you better come up with better points than the lame one listed above.
Do you really believe a lift in SF is going to make Soli a destination resort and generate major revenue and tourism dollars?
I gave you Alta. You said one isn't enough. I found 1991 lift ticket prices for Aspen, Vail, Okemo and Deer Valley in 30 seconds of google search. They all backed my argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tin Woodsman
Prove me wrong.
I see your point completely, you think since it's simple to get into silver fork that anybody who skis solitude could go ski it now. I disagree, would you take a novice skier or a little kid up into silver fork today? How about yesterday? Those are users on FS land who can enjoy skiing inside a ski area. If you limit the discussion to expert skiers you're failing to see the fact that this land belongs to all of the public.Quote:
Originally Posted by tuco
Obviously we know there are a lot of people who like to ski but should not ski in the backcountry...
You're honestly trying to say that any skier could just go ski Silver Fork if they felt like it, but backcountry skiers are walled off and prohibited from being inside a ski area? Neither of those are true, it's a ridiculous point of view.
As near as I can tell, most ski resort lift ticket prices have increased faster than the CPI since 1991 so you're right that it's getting more expensive. This doesn't mean it used to be "cheap", nor does it mean that the cost for that form of enjoyment has grown faster than for B/C skiers. In both cases, it is technological improvements (high speed lifts, snowmaking, better lodges for resorts vs. better boots, skis, avi equipment and clothing for B/C skiers) that are driving higher prices rather than expanding margins for the sellers. Very few people make money based on ski ops alone.Quote:
Originally Posted by zion zig zag
Edit: Then again, you have to consider that real (constant dollar) disposable income has increased 39% during that same time frame, so just looking at lift ticket prices in relation to inflation only tells half the story. Lift tickets appear to represent no larger a % of an avg person's budget than they did 20 years ago.
I'd agree, which brings us back to square one - a simple chairlift expansion is seldom if ever just that. It is also new lodges that serve pricey food, valet parking, condos, etc..Quote:
Originally Posted by Tin Woodsman
It seems to me that ski resorts have worked themselves into a hole with their ticket prices where they have no choice but to keep up the massive overhead, yet they are barely covering their costs with the price of a day ticket, which is getting ridiculously expensive. It reminds me a lot of the housing boom a few years ago where the going attitude was price doesn't matter, but all of a sudden, it started to matter a lot.
shhhh.... the "hardcore" tourers who started in the last 2 decades will lambast you again. then make movies :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tin Woodsman
Whose to say Solitude would let novice skiers go into those areas that last couple days? Whose to say they would find doing the control work to get it open cost effective.Quote:
Originally Posted by YetiMan
The point is that today, anyone of any skill level can for whatever reason go do basically whatever they want in Silver Fork. It may not be wise, but it's not prohibited. If Solitude leases the area and puts in lifts that obviously will no longer be possible.
It's funny that what makes Solitude the resort that I enjoy so much is that it is not Alta or and especially not Snowbird....all commercial and crowded with lots of idiot posers. Look at the different crowds at Snowbird vs Solitude, and whether you have to lock up your gear or not depending on the resort. They all serve their purpose as they stand now.
I have never skied in Silver Fork, but would like to when I am out there this winter. Then maybe I will see how this expansion would help them, but in the end, I think it would hurt them. They would have to raise prices to cover the added costs of covering/managing that terrain, plus the additional construction costs.
It sounds like they ultimately want it to be like Vail, and I say no way to that.
100% wrong. Alta is FS and they do not allow any uphill traffic. Go try to hike up Alta, patrol will tell you to leave and if you do not they will call the Marshall who will remove you by force. Solitude has the same policy and it will extend to Silver Fork if they expand there.Quote:
Originally Posted by YetiMan
Possible? Watershed protection is the highest priority of the Central Wasatch management plan.Quote:
Originally Posted by YetiMan
GMAFB, there are plenty of places you can do that in the Wasatch, Silver Fork isn't one of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by YetiMan
You're having difficulty reading: "it seems like it goes that way sometimes but it shouldn't"Quote:
Originally Posted by Dantheman
So apparently it goes that way in Alta at times, I think that's wrong and should be addressed by the forest service. If they're extending a permit to an area, they can dictate the terms, perhaps the terms ought to allow for soli to run a lift and rope boundaries and control snowpack back there but not exclude the touring public from the area. That seems like its own issue. It seems like that should be addressed along with or separate from anything else going on here. IMO the permit operator shouldn't have any ability to keep the public off that land.
Yeah, possible, meaning that adding a lift doesn't necessarily affect the quality of the runoff. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. I'm not convinced it automatically does, thus the "possible". I don't take it as a given that having a lift in an area wrecks the water quality of the snowmelt there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dantheman
I'll try to remember this when somebody gets buried back there...Quote:
Originally Posted by Dantheman
Potential for avalanches =/ extreme mountaineering-style skiing. A point illustrated all too well by the multiple in-bounds avalanche deaths in Utah last year.Quote:
Originally Posted by YetiMan
And yes, Yeti, I would take "my kid" to Silver Fork on this very day. I don't have kids though, so I guess I'll go fuck my wife and try to make some.
FUCK YOU SOLITUDE!!!!!!!!!
Today we skied Silver Fork, knowing those mutherfukkers to the east are eventually going to get there way. SUCK MY FUCKING BALLS!
On days like today, this is one of the few places we hippy, elitist, backcountry enthusiasts can ski. Saying we can just go somewhere else is utter fucking ignorance, there are few other places like this, this time of year, on a high danger day.
http://fritzrips.com/Gallery1/albums...n/DSCF0432.jpg
http://fritzrips.com/Gallery1/albums...n/DSCF0434.jpg
A big fuck you to Solitude.
http://fritzrips.com/Gallery1/albums...n/DSCF0447.jpg
http://fritzrips.com/Gallery1/albums...n/DSCF0449.jpg
http://fritzrips.com/Gallery1/albums...n/DSCF0451.jpg
Crowded today. Can't wait until Solitude puts a lift in and dumbs it down for everyone.
http://fritzrips.com/Gallery1/albums...n/DSCF0452.jpg
Again, suck my fucking balls.
Very nice! But according to another thread somewhere, shouldn't ya have cause an avalanche? I mean, you are from utah.
:D
So what you are saying is, that, now only experts can access this terrain but with a lift in there suddenly it becomes beginner terrain. And your saying my point of view is ridiculous. Jesus dude, thats scary!Quote:
Originally Posted by YetiMan
I think a little kid could do just fine in there, today or yesterday. Maybe not a novice little kid though.
The Milk Run is inbounds. Would you take a novice in there?
You go try hiking up a run in bounds at a ski resort and see what happens dude, then report back.
tag: yetiman justifies his own laziness in jeans
I started, and learned to cross country ski at 6 years old in, of all places, Silver Fork. Sure we stayed low and safe most times, but the first time I made it up the bottom of upper days I was 10. I also learned a lot about avalanches before I could drive because of my early experiences. People do, and should go into Silverfork. There are for more users besides backcountry skiers: snowshoers, cross country skiers for example.Quote:
Originally Posted by YetiMan
And ski lifts, necessary maintenance roads for lifts, increased vehicle traffic due to larger resorts and the compaction of snowfields increase erosion and/or negatively impact water quality. The entire east side of the county get some drinking water from Big. A far bigger population than the skiers at solitude.
I think a lot of you guys have very convincing points and they take a lot of the meat out of my side of this....
Maybe the best thing for the most people is to leave it alone, wtf, I don't know. I personally like skiing lifts, and my first instinct is to say that more of the general public benefits from an expansion than not, but I could be wrong on that, it's just a best guess as I am not an expert on any of the watershed stuff and the contracting/permit process and I am not an economist. I've just tried to apply my best logic and guess what the agency would do, or to do my best to steer the discussion toward something more in line with what the Forest Service would actually be considering...or my best guess of that.
There is an ugly kind of contempt on display in this thread toward people who aren't into BC skiing.
I think it's pretty laughable that any of you guys think you're superior to anybody because you like to slog around and they don't. If you're not adult enough, seriously, to get that you're not the most important person in the world...that your value system is one of billions, that your likes and dislikes are not the pinnacle of human experience, and that the fact that you're good at or interested in some specific thing doesn't make you a better human being than everyone who isn't as interested in or good at that specific thing...if you haven't learned that you're still a child in some key ways.
Not that I don't understand or relate, it's easy to be that way when you never step out of your comfort zone and try some new things...Every interest seems to have those guys, the guy who only surfs and has surfed his whole life and anybody who isn't a good surfer is worthless to him...the guys who build motorcycles and that's all they do with their lives and if you aren't into their kind of motorcycle or motorcycling you're worthless. It's a douchebag point of view. Being a human being worthy of respect involves more than one narrow little niche in a kind of obscure sport. Grow the fuck up.
If the facts show that more people benefit from some course of action I wouldn't personally choose so be it: it's not my land, it's everyone's land. I'm willing to accept that, are you?
Goes both ways, look in the mirror. The original poster has a [ame="http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26862"]history[/ame] of it too. There is some weird reaction by some resort skiers to think that we who only ski tour perceive ourselves as the elite. Not sure where you get that from. I just like to ski tour because it's what I like to do. We may come off as elitist because we viciously defend what we like to do and don't like the chance to do it taken away by a ski resort that will then deny us access forever.Quote:
Originally Posted by YetiMan
I have contempt for ski area managers who want to endlessly expand their boundaries for their own greed, despite how it affects others. I have no contempt for people who ride lifts. The more that do, the less I have to compete with for a clean line.
FWIW
I had an Alta season pass for 25 years. The last few years I had it, rode lifts maybe 4 or 5 days. Mostly used for a lift to leave the area. I called it my bus pass.
They priced me out and I lost interest in fighting for first tracks, people pushing, trying to knock you off the traverse and using ski poles as weapons when passed.
The season pass was less than $200 in the beginning.
Before that we just bought ten riders on Albion and Majestic. there was no Supreme lift, no Snake Creek, no Crest, no Great Western, no Summit and no Mineral Basin.
There are plenty of lifts, no more are needed to serve the "greatest good".
My knees no longer enjoy the pounding so fucking leave what's left alone, coudja?
:the_finge
I agree with Yeti in that people in this Forum can sometimes forget that there are other people in the world than maggots. Claiming that "people can already get into Silver Fork if they want..." That is ridiculous. There is all sorts of knowledge, gear, and physical fitness that are required to access that terrain that most skiers in the wasatch do not have access to. Sure, you might be able to make the claim that most maggots do, but that is not the issue. Personally, I would prefer if Solitude did not expand because if that happens in addition to the new lift at Alta, it will essentially merge BCC and LCC into one continuous area of development and human influence. Being a wildlife biologist, I am wary of the fragmentation of the wasatch which is already an extremely small patch of habitat. In addition, as a backcountry skier, Silver and Days are perfect spots for quick dawn patrols before work.
In essence, there are many views that need to be considered and the goal of FS land is not to cater to the majority position. It is to "sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the Nation’s forests to meet the needs of present and future generations." Yes the land belongs to the public but that does not imply that all of the public should have access to it, as multiple people in this thread have argued. Ski resorts are simply one of the many "needs of present and future generations." These expansions have nothing to do with giving more people access to public land. They have to do with making more money.
Which is part of the appeal. Taking the time to acquire the skills and knowledge to do so, and to do so safely. Nobody wakes up, puts on a pair of skis, and skis 21 1/2 at Solitude like Alto. It takes years of experience to acquire those skills. Maybe we can bulldoze 21 1/2 so I can ski it safely.Quote:
Originally Posted by mtnbirder
A question/observation on the attitude of the message board was ugly contempt?Quote:
Originally Posted by Trackhead
Yeah, I have no idea where that weird reaction came from. Could it be that perhaps every time someone asks about a resort, or snowcat skiing, or heli skiing, you have to have 15 people pile on about how the questionaire is a fag or lazy for skiing in the resort/heli/snowcat?
Please go back and re-read cololi's post. Dude was XC skiing in Sliver Fork at six years old. BC skiers are hardly the only user group. "Using" Silver Fork does not necessarily mean skiing the upper bowl. All anyone needs to enjoy Silver Fork is a pair of snowshoes which could probably be picked up at a swap or on ebay for under $50, and that is how lots of people do it. All of the summer trails in the Wasatch are heavily used in the winter by snowshoers and I have $100 that says snowshoers easily outnumber BC skiers in the Wasatch and in Silver Fork specifically.Quote:
Originally Posted by mtnbirder
Yeti - The only thing I have contempt for is you arguing that a lift up Silver Fork would be a greater public good than no lift. You dislike hiking, that's fine, nothing wrong with that, but this "greatest good for the greatest number" stuff is a ridiculous argument.
Seriously? Really it's ridiculous that you think it's ridiculous. This land is open to EVERYONE right now. Sure you need knowledge, gear and some degree of physical fitness. Even as a lift riding skier you need a certin amount of these aspects, so it's a moot point really. If you put a lift in there, then it is not open to everyone, because you have cut a segment of prospective users out of the equation. How is this not being exclusive? Oh ,it's not because you can still pay your $62(when a lift goes in, you can throw this figure right out the window) to use your own(public) land. That's bullshit and ridiculous!Quote:
Originally Posted by mtnbirder
That's akin to saying the freeways should be open to people that don't know how to drive(knowledge), don't have a car(gear) and are blind(physical fitness) because it public property.
Sadly, in the end, you and Trackhead are going to be correct. There more than likely will be a lift in there under the guise of the 'greatest good for the most people', when essentially it will really be about the almightly $$$.
Another piece of the Wasatch lost to development, lodges, condos, roads, lift towers, snow cats, snowmobiles, bombs, no uphill traffic. Gone, all for a private companies profits.
http://fritzrips.com/Gallery/albums/...n/IMG_2649.jpg
http://fritzrips.com/Gallery/albums/...n/IMG_2660.jpg
Look, I agree that the area is open to everyone right now. Your point about if there is a lift there, it won't be open to everyone is a great point.Quote:
Originally Posted by tuco
I was trying to say that Yeti had a good point about some backcountry skiers having an elitist attitude, ignoring the opinions of other people because skiing backcountry is better. Obviously this is not true of all BC skiers but I have definitely noticed it. In this forum for example, the experience and background of skiers is exponentially higher than that of the population of SLC. The people in this forum are the best of the best. So naturally you would expect to overlook the fact that the percentage of the population that does not have the ability to access Silver Fork, be it on snowshoes or whatever, is small. Just because Cololi went in there when he was 10, does not mean that the general public should strap on their snowshoes and head up.
This is not a bad thing. I agree with TH, that is part of the appeal. I was simply pointing out that some of the attacks on Yeti were slightly flawed.
This had nothing to do with my opinion for the lift however. As I said in my second paragraph, I am in no way in favor of any more develpment of the wasatch.
Understood. I wasn't personnally attacking you, nor have I personally attacked Yeti. In fact, he is about the only one to bring any decent points at all in favor, except for the points he brought up three posts of his back.Quote:
Originally Posted by mtnbirder
In the end we are all just stating opinions, right or wrong, I'm not going to think Yeti or any of you is a douche just because you might want a lift in Silver. I'm sure he's a cool dude and could probably have fun skiing with the dude.
Like I said, I hold a pass there and will ski that area regardless. I just haven't heard an argument that really makes me believe that this is the most good for the most people, period.
If you think about the layout in Silver, one lift ain't gonna do shit! Especially for you all that don't want to hike a little or traverse. So lets just say what it really is: the full development of Silver ie.. more than one lift and more than likely some base type development like TH mentioned.
I'm with TH, Soli can suck his after touring all day in Silver, SWEATY FUCKING BALLS !
Took a few visits to read through this thread, but it's an interesting one. I also started skiing in Silver Fk when I was a little kid, going to the mine in the flats on skinny skis with my mom wearing legwarmers for gaitors (yep it was the early eighties, yep Flashdance was hot). Was a regular in the Davenport Lodge before it was burned by visiting lift skiers.
More than once over that time Solitude has petitioned the W-C NF to expand into the drainage. Thanks to the work that SOC, SL City Utilities, homeowners, the FS (to their credit, they see ski resort expansion on FS lands as a headache), and the BC and lift-skiing public has put into the issue, the requests to expand into Silver have been routinely denied. I imagine this request will be denied, too. W-C NF likely sees little purpose and need for Soli to expand, esp. when weighed against watershed concerns, critical summer range for wildlife, avalanche control logistics and slippery slope considerations of granting this request to expand on FS land (it would be the first in how long? Since Albion Basin? Gad Valley? Even those are patchwork patented claims and FS lands right? It would surely reignite all the other ski resorts' rush to expand). I hope I am right, for all (most) our sakes.
That said, letter sent!
I would say this, having really thought about this probably more than I should have and slept on it for a few days....If they do allow for development it should certainly be with some careful oversight to ensure that whatever is built is built in a minimalist way. I would also say, as I did earlier with regard to condos, if this would involve roping an area of forest service land off from the non-soli-customer public, forget it- I can't support that....that's ridiculous and I can't for the life of me believe Alta and Solitude get away with that now. What a crock.
I suppose when I think "new lift" I imagine the best case kind of scenario because I remember when wolf creek put the waterfall lift in and it was really, really low impact. I've been visualizing that chair and the honeycomb chair for a lot of this discussion. I can't imagine the difference in water quality between water coming out of honeycomb with or without that honeycomb chair. Start bulldozing a lot of roads and constructing buildings and cutting a lot of timber and you probably have a different outcome. I also have this sense of all these early seasons of my life when all of a sudden you get a new chair and new terrain that wasn't there yesterday, it's a good feeling and I like it. At what cost...I don't know. There is an awful lot of due diligence involved in something like this and I sure hope the FS makes the effort to get it right, if I've learned anything from this it's how much people need/enjoy those sanctuaries right next to the city.
I wanted to post to give you all the satisfaction of knowing that you all have expanded my mind on some things. Thanks for that.
My daughter skied silver fork a few years ago when she was 11yrs old.Quote:
Originally Posted by tuco
Took a couple of her girlfriends along, ages 9 & 11.
On tele gear.
As part of a Brighton > TLP > Davenport > Silver > Days tour - w/a car drop.
Those in favor of chairlifts, do your husbands ski?
Heh heh.
Wra is right as always, too many lifts already.
:rolleyes: okdude... :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Shredgar
http://www.holidayvacationrental.com...C%20Skiing.jpg
I don't have any sort of data on this and no sort of educated guess, but I have seen the remnants a couple times of burst hydraulic hoses on snowcats--not pretty!(just thought I would edit this to say neither time was at Soli) And I would imagine they leave behind some sort of greasy residue from diesel fuel exhaust. Not debatin'-just sayin'.Quote:
Originally Posted by YetiMan
yeah, I guess any time you've got machinery in the mix it's a potential watershed issue.