New Montana ski resort?

Yesterday a crew of 12 good friends were able to sample what the B-root resort has to offer. Given that it was a free day of cat skiing, it was hard to pass up (<<<< this offer is open to everyone, call them if you are interested).

The cat picked us up at the base of the hill. There wasn't much snow as you can see.
http://tetongravity.com/forums/attac...1&d=1169775061

As we rolled up the hill in the cat, it was evident that there wasn't really every going to be any tree skiing at the base to 6000 foot level. Snow depths ranged from 1" to 12" near 6500'. However, I will say that they have poured a ton of money into prepping the slopes. They have removed all stumps and rocks, brought in topsoil and planted grass. Most of the runs we skied on had anywhere from 3" to 6" of firm hardpack on them. They had not blown any snow (no snowmaking installed yet), so it was good to see what it would be like w/out manmade help.


All the pitches of the runs were good to go, nice rollers etc. None of the runs cut so far can't be considered step, but they would be good maching groomers.
http://tetongravity.com/forums/attac...1&d=1169775061

They had a yurt on the top of the property where they fed us bullshit...er I mean lunch
http://tetongravity.com/forums/attac...1&d=1169775061

The temps had really warmed up the day before, thus thorougly fucking up the snow. The snow had about an inch of crust on top, making for very difficult and super ugly turns. Despite that, the peeps still had a good time. Turns out a super rockstar was in our midst. He's in a band that rhymes with Girl Spam.
http://tetongravity.com/forums/attac...1&d=1169776132

^^^^^^^10 points for anyone who can name the guy in the back seat^^^^^^^

All in all it was pretty interesting to hear the corporate pitch. They are poised and just waiting to hear from the FS on their new forest plan. My take on it was, the lower mountain will be groomer only (never enough snow to venture off piste). If they were to get up into the alpine, then and only then would there be true expert/fun terrain.

And for those that said the shots off Carlton ridge are only 1000 ft. Better take another look.

Quote:

---

(<<<< this offer is open to everyone, call them if you are interested)

---

But it sure helps when Jeff Ament is rolling with....

Quote:

---

And for those that said the shots off Carlton ridge are only 1000 ft. Better take another look.

---

Definitely wasn't knockin your stoke. Heck, it's another local mountain for zoo mags.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KoKopeLLi

But it sure helps when Jeff Ament is rolling with....

---

DINGDING! Actually they had no clue who he was. I didn't even know till I asked "What do you do in town?"

"I'm in a rock band" (all humble)

"Oh, which one?"

:fmicon:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FreakofSnow

And for those that said the shots off Carlton ridge are only 1000 ft. Better take another look.

---

If I could find a picture bigger than 200x200 I will take another shot at it. Does it look like good terrain when you get up there? Got more pics? I would love to be wrong about the terrain, but I am still waiting for something, anything, to give a realistic idea of their plans.

Looks like some rad skiing. ;)

Looks alright. What's the word on Feb. 10?

Yeah Ament's a zzzzoulian. He's brought the band to town before...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by komo

interesting. this golf course will use treated wastewater from its state of the art shit-straining facility. you think they'll have a separate path though the plant for golf course runoff?

---

The level of treatment of the water used to irrigate those GC's is the same level of treatment that is used before that water is put back into rivers, streams, etc. so no it won't be required.....doing what you suggest would be...well, retarted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FreakofSnow

I didn't know Butte had a ski resort? Oh wait....that was a just a great example of a poor analogy.

---

Got me on the poor ananlogy, but you get my point. Trashed environment. Shitty cut runs near wilderness don't look a whole lot better than a open pit mind. Oh wait, still a shitty.... Oh fuck it. Nevermind.

Maclay's an asshole, a lazy shit who's never worked a day in his life -- unlike his father and grandfather, who were hardworking simple men who tended to a ranch and respected not only the land but their neighbors.

The "resort" is ill-conceived. The golf course will suck ass, the terrain's not good for that. The ski runs already suck a rancid festering pustule-laden johnson. The whole thing is about building multimillion dollar "luxury homes" for out-of-staters. Having rich folk move to your area as their last place of fun, without really contributing any serious forms of employment to an area, is the worst kind of "economic development" that a downtrodden economy can experience... well, not as bad as strip mining, clearcut logging, or having a huge Superfund waste pit, but none of those things seems possible 'round here.

Maclay wrote a fucked-up lying piece of advertisement puffery in the form of a "sincere" postcard entreaty to the area's residents, asking them to reserve judgment and quit spreading false rumors about him and his resort. Here is how I replied to him in a nice letter. Next post....

From my blog...

Dear Mr Maclay

Thank you for the very personal touch of a generic postcard addressed to "Resident" at my address. I found it quite amusing that you have tried to persuade me to offer my support to your proposed "resort," without even taking the time to figure out who I am or what my name is. I can only guess that the reason for your approach is that I am supposed to be in awe of you -- and so very far beneath you that I should know your name, yet you do not need to know mine. But this really isn't such a big problem for me, as I am used to such arrogance from the spoiled children of self-made men, and I have been advised by many life-long residents of Florence that you are such a child of a self-made man. You see, I have taken the time and made the effort to find out about you and your history in the Florence area, as well as the history of your family. I only wish you had made the effort to do likewise about those whom you beg for support.

Now, before I can consider whether to offer my support of your "resort," I must ask a few questions of you. I would like to take the liberty of addressing your postcard's precise wording, and then making specific inquiries on various statements within that wording. I hope this is not too problematic for you. I assume you were being quite careful when you chose the precise wording of your postcard's message.

Your postcard begins,

There's been a lot of speculation about what our plans are for the Maclay Ranch. I'd like to set the record straight so you can form your own opinion based on the facts.

I would have to agree that there has been such a lot of speculation. However, I think that is primarily because you have been quite secretive and often disingenuous about what are your plans. And if you desire to "set the record straight," I would suggest beginning by doing so in the postcard you sent. Unfortunately, you chose to continue in your existing course of action, which is to confuse and obfuscate the issues with salesmanship and marketing-speak. Such as,

There were about 500 families in the Valley when the Maclays settled here. Now, after over one hundred years of farming and ranching, there are only a handful of the original landowners who make a living through agriculture.

While this is a rather pleasant (albeit biased) account of your family's history in Florence, I do not quite understand why you emphasize that many of the original homesteaders no longer operate working ranches or make a living through agriculture. I assume that is because you are going to soften me and other readers up for the idea that the best use of your land is to develop it for rich out-of-staters who are willing to pay over $1 million for a poorly, hastily made house on land that you are glorifying with a 4th rate ski slope array, and a craftily chosen name that includes the term "resort." But perhaps I'm getting carried away here. Let's move onto the next part of your postcard's message...

Subdivisions and sprawl have consumed the rest.

Mr Maclay, I'm going to suggest something very basic here. If you intend to "set the record straight" with some facts, perhaps you could give some factual support for the notion that "subdivisions and sprawl have consumed" the majority of the former ranches in Florence. And when you offer those facts, please be precise about how you define "subdivision" and how you describe "sprawl," because what you're planning for your "resort" is a subdivision full of sprawl.

I started looking for another way to preserve my family heritage, provide a year-round income and honor the spirit of the land.

I'm curious here. What does your "family heritage" have to do with whether I support your "resort"? And for that matter, what does a rich man's "resort" have to do with your family's heritage? My understanding is that your father and grandfather were simple, humble men who worked the land and were generous to the people of the community of Florence. That doesn't sound much like a heritage that supports reducing the locals in Florence and Lolo to being peasants and serfs to you and the rich folk you want to buy shares in your "resort." Can you help me with this point?

Additionally, I suggest that if you want to have a year-round income, you can find a job. Like most of your neighbors have done.

And if you intend to "honor the spirit of the land," perhaps you could explain how a 4th rate ski slope array and a rich man's overpriced "resort" do any sort of honor to the spirit of the land.

Let's get back to your postcard. It continues,

Bitterroot Resort is my vision for the future: not a disjointed group of buildings, ski lifts and homes -- a well and intelligently planned year-round community that is a model of environmental stewardship with a vibrant culture, and lots of open space that preserves and protects this place I call home.

Mr Maclay, I do not think the problem that most objectors have to your "resort" is any sort of "disjointed" nature of development. Rather, the problem I encounter most often in my own investigation and in conversation with fellow Missoulians is that you seek to change quite radically the nature of your family's ranch. You seek to develop an expensive "resort" that is designed to cater to wealthy out-of-staters and is designed to focus on a subdivision comprised largely of very expensive houses. Your primary intent appears, from all angles and perspectives, to be helping you get very, very rich without having to do anything except enlist a bunch of overpriced out-of-state "consultants" who know nothing about this Valley and nothing about the people who live here. Correct me if I'm wrong, Mr Maclay. Tell me what sort of work you have been doing. What labor have you undertaken, you personally? What physical labor? Have you done anything other than spend the money that your father and grandfather made?

I have a world-class team of consultants helping to shape the plans on what continues to be our family ranch.

I'm afraid that your enlisting a "world-class team of consultants" is quite easily translated as follows: you have hired people who know nothing about this Valley or its inhabitants, and who do not care about what happens here, other than to make you wealthy. If you cared about those who live here, you wouldn't need a team of consultants made up of wealthy out-of-state investment bankers, real estate developers, venture capitalists, and deceitful advertisement copywriters.

So you can see how it is that many people have been wondering why you are electing to try to persuade us all on the merits of your "resort", and why there has been so much of what you have called "speculation" -- can't you?

Continuing on in your postcard's message,

I want you to know that by using the latest technology, Bitterroot Resort can use water in a way that enhances the watershed: domestic water, snowmaking and golf course irrigation combined.

Mr Maclay, you cannot enhance the watershed by removing more of its water and sending it into the sky for evaporation (golf course watering; artificial snowmaking). Your plan for golf course irrigation and snowmaking invariably requires that you use more of the Carlton Creek watershed's water that currently feeds the Bitterroot River and eventually the Clark Fork, not less of it. If you truly believe that you will "enhance the watershed," then you have been sold a pig in a poke by those high-priced "consultants" that you have engaged. Perhaps you might want to study the sciences of ecology and thermodynamics. Within those two fields you will find the information that puts the lie in your statement alleging that you will enhance the watershed. You will not, and cannot, enhance the watershed by dewatering it beyond the usage to which it's currently put.

CONTINUED BELOW

CONTINUED FROM ABOVE


There will be plenty of open terrain for wildlife that range across this ranch, and I will continue to oversee the maintenance of our access road to the Carlton Lake basin just as our family has done since 1889.

If you intend to carve up your ranch into ski runs, luxury houses and a golf course, then you will not be leaving "plenty of terrain." And whether you oversee the access road's maintenance is irrelevant. What is relevant is how you intend to treat the land and your neighbors.

As we complete the planning process, please know that I've insisted on an environmental policy to clearly define our vision for sustainable and ecologically responsible resort planning, including native vegetation, Dark Skies compliance, and a minimized development foot-print and viewscape.

There's really no sincerity in the above statement. Your "planning" was complete as soon as you determined that you were going to build a "resort" that included expensive luxury houses, a golf course, and a ski area. What you are now calling a "planning process" would be more honestly described as a sophisticated sales job that hides the bad products of the "resort," and oversells the supposed benefits of the "resort."

The very fact of your "resort" makes it impossible to be ecologically responsible. There is nothing ecologically responsible in your plan. You can state otherwise and perhaps delude those who are buffaloed by your family name or your overpriced consultants and the misleading advertising language they write for you, but there are enough intelligent and environmentally informed people in this valley who know differently.

We all see your plan for what it is, Mr Maclay - a way for you to avoid working a single day for the rest of your life. It is pretty clear that you do not care about your neighbors. Rather, you would have them believe that they will find all sorts of "jobs" at your "resort." You don't bother telling them that these "jobs" include acting as servants to the rich out-of-staters you would like to bring to your "resort." And you definitely do not bother telling them that they couldn't possibly afford the cost of a house in your "resort", the price of a lift ticket at your "resort", or the greens fees for a round of golf at your "resort."

So who exactly is this "resort" for, Mr Maclay? In the close analysis, it appears to be precisely what I have been saying in this letter: a vehicle for you to get rich while avoiding actual labor, and for rich out-of-staters to have yet another place to further putrify with their condescending, pretentious city folk ways. In fact, it sounds like you're jealous of Charles Schwab's Stock Farm, and have some egocentric need to compete with Schwab. But if you bother to ask around in the valley, it seems there's not a lot of empathy or kind words for a "resort" that caters to rich out-of-staters who consider this their private playground and consider us unwealthy folk to be obstacles to their development or, alternatively, good "hired help" to act as their servants.

If you cared about the people who live here, and cared about "honoring the spirit of the land," Mr Maclay, you would sell your land to a land trust for perpetual preservation. But you're not doing that. You're making a "resort" for rich out-of-staters.

You should be ashamed of yourself. And you should stop lying to the residents of this valley.

Sincerely,



Resident

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by midget

The level of treatment of the water used to irrigate those GC's is the same level of treatment that is used before that water is put back into rivers, streams, etc. so no it won't be required.....doing what you suggest would be...well, retarted.

---

Uh, wrong.

Golf course water mixes with fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides specific to the hoity-toity non-native golf course grasses that are chemically forced toward survival in an inhospitable non-native environment.

It's not about the water alone. But thanks for trying.:rolleyes:

And besides, the Bitterroot River and the stream into which it feeds, the Clark Fork, are first-rate trout fisheries. Do I need to tell you about how sensitive trout are to chemical alterations of their habitat?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FreakofSnow

If they were to get up into the alpine, then and only then would there be true expert/fun terrain.

---

Sorry, but the "true expert/fun terrain" is not on Tom Maclay's land. It's on USFS land, and encloses a special larch study growth that is very unique to this area, as well as the Mormon Peak trail area. So -- sorry, but you're wrong.

The "true expert/fun terrain" is skiable by anyone who wants to skin up the Mormon Peak Road and the Mormon Peak Trail that runs to Lolo Peak. But it's not accessible by Tom Maclay's proposed lifts. In fact, the USFS told Maclay that his "resort" cannot extend into that USFS land.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smmokan

If every ski resort trying to open up went through all this shit, we wouldn't have anywhere to ski.

---

hey bro/brah, you're way core.

remind me to ask you for prescient analysis of every complex issue that comes our way. obviously you have the formula all sussed. just reduce to the most overgeneral and inapplicable summary conceivable, and decide based on that.

sounds like a formula for real success.

UC- Shit, went to quote your last post but it was to late. A little harsh but you make a lot of sense.

Anyone that thinks these places give a crap about the skiing is sadly mistaken. If if was a locals mountain by skiers for skiers, with appropriate scope, it would be judged differently.

Uncle Crud,

Although I don't completely agree with some of your opinions, I got a good chuckle out of your letter. You-funny-man

what's up with the fucking high horse? You raise good points but your smugness kills it.

Quote:

---

Quote:
Originally Posted by FreakofSnow
If they were to get up into the alpine, then and only then would there be true expert/fun terrain.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by uncle crud
Sorry, but the "true expert/fun terrain" is not on Tom Maclay's land. It's on USFS land, and encloses a special larch study growth that is very unique to this area, as well as the Mormon Peak trail area. So -- sorry, but you're wrong.

The "true expert/fun terrain" is skiable by anyone who wants to skin up the Mormon Peak Road and the Mormon Peak Trail that runs to Lolo Peak. But it's not accessible by Tom Maclay's proposed lifts. In fact, the USFS told Maclay that his "resort" cannot extend into that USFS land.

---

My my, you are an angry man.

Actually I said nothing about Maclay owning that property. I have been up there in the spring and am very well aware that is USFS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jumper Bones

what's up with the fucking high horse? You raise good points but your smugness kills it.

---

i just read the one on this page. i see too much use of sarcastic " marks but not much else. where's the overwhelming smug action?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nate s

Anyone that thinks these places give a crap about the skiing is sadly mistaken. If if was a locals mountain by skiers for skiers, with appropriate scope, it would be judged differently.

---

They don't make their money selling lift tickets. They make money selling huge 2nd homes by golf courses in mountain settings.

Don't be fooled by thinking this is a ski resort. This is a real estate development, no more, no less.

They almost all are any more.


+++++++++++++++

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smmokan

If every ski resort trying to open up went through all this shit, we wouldn't have anywhere to ski.

---

Sure you would. Anywhere your skins and lungs will take you.

Ancient thread bump.

Just wanted to ask whether anyone here has been able to hike/braaaaap up to and ski down the runs he's cut into the mountain? Looks like he's done some pretty extensive work up there whether it will ever open or not. Pretty impressive, but looks pretty flat.

Google satellite of the runs:

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll...h&z=15&vpsrc=6

^^ the cut runs are all on private land. I have hiked around on them in the summer. No real reason to try and ski them as they are all intermediate at best.

They are very visible from downtown Missoula.

I was actually looking forward to a lift serving Lolo Peak. The enviros like Uncle Crud were apeshit about this proposed ski area, but alot of their arguments were just hot air (i.e. larch plot). Plus alot of Bitterroot tea-bag conservatives who are NIMBY's were against it too, apparently because Jesus did not ski.

But what ultimately killed it was the Crash of 2008. This ranch had been in the MacLay family for over 100 years. Lost it to greed. Sad.

There were a couple years where the owner (Maclay) was doing free cat skiing on the runs that were cut on his property. I was signed up for it, but then their cat broke, so I didn't get to go.

They were also doing some downhill bike races there for a bit (Maclay's son is a big biker). Again, they were all on the private property, and they didn't have lifts - they were just shuttling everyone. I did one or two of those races and they were pretty fun, but like Harry said, it seems like the crash of '08 pretty much brought about the end of all that. While it would have been nice to have a north facing alternative to snowbowl, the layout of that resort seemed pretty goofy. There's a loooong flat section between lolo peak and the cut runs that are on Maclay's land.

Interesting bump, as a judge just yesterday ordered the land/assets sold at auction with a target price in the $20 million range.

How exactly does a family owned property from the 19th century go to a court ordered auction?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdironRider

How exactly does a family owned property from the 19th century go to a court ordered auction?

---

greed and debt. Looks like they needed a reason and excuse to log those trees?

sad really.

LOL. was so nice to see that douche fail

what a horrible idea.

Well I figured greed and debt, but in what exactly? I cant see cutting those ski runs bankrupting the place, but Ive seen better go down much worse.

I don't know the particulars of this debt, but there's lots of ways something owned for generations can become part of a debt auction. Like leveraging equity.

To answer the (recent) OPs question, the area is on private land, but does get skied. There is a public road that accesses forest land; it's not plowed but can be negotiated and used as a trailhead to access runs on the upper mountain. There is no base to speak of and no access to skin from it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdironRider

How exactly does a family owned property from the 19th century go to a court ordered auction?

---

(1) inherit ranch that has been in your family since 1889.
(2) take out $50 million loan using ranch as collateral.
(3) HOOKERS AND BLOW !
(4)
(5) Lose ranch when you can't make payments.

Update from the latest Snow Industry Letter...


JUDGE SIGNS FORECLOSURE ORDER FOR BITTERROOT RESORT

The developers for the proposed Bitterroot Ski Resort nearMissoula, MT, say that hope is not lost after a judge signed a foreclosureorder, according to published reports. District Judge Ed McLean signed theforeclosure order in June that would satisfy more than $23 million in debt, butthe Maclay family is still holding to the idea of salvaging something from theproject.



In 2005, Tom Maclay launched his ambitious plan to turn theranch that has been in his family since 1883 into Bitterroot Resort, a skicommunity that would include 2,700 upscale homes and a golf course. He cutthree dozen ski runs into the base of Lolo Peak and sought permission to use11,000 acres of the Lolo and Bitterroot national forests above his own propertyfor nordic skiing and mountain bike trails.



But the high-flying proposal quickly ran into financialproblems, with liens placed against the property in 2009 by a Missoulaengineering firm and a Hamilton marketing company that said Maclay never paidfor their services. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. Asset Holdings, which holdsthe mortgages on the 3,000-acre ranch, began foreclosure proceedings that sameyear, valuing the property at almost $19 million. McLean's ruling now puts itat nearly $23.6 million, with interest accruing at the rate of 15% per year -or about $7,500 a day.



A date for the sheriff's sale hasn't been set. But McLean'sorder specifies that the property be sold in a single parcel and says that ifthe property isn't surrendered immediately to the buyer after the sale, thesheriff can intervene. If the sale price doesn't cover the mortgage and othercosts, Maclay, Bitterroot Trails and Maclay Timber will be responsible for theinterest, along with attorney fees and costs. A year ago, Maclay put the blamefor his predicament on MetLife, complaining in an affidavit that the companyignored his requests to sell off his property to pay the mortgages.

So who has the modern take on this? I think they’re still trying to get this going

Radio silence, but with the changes in the weather around here an already snow challenged area has little hope of getting off the ground. If they were to reduce the footprint and move the proposed base area to a higher elevation it might have a chance but there goes the RE play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr_pretzel

So who has the modern take on this? I think they’re still trying to get this going

---

Haven't heard a thing about it. Why do you ask?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr_pretzel

So who has the modern take on this? I think they’re still trying to get this going

---

This was a fucking scam from day 1. They were NEVER going to get the Forest Service permits. I did not go back and read the thread but I am guessing I have been saying that for a decade or more.

This pretty much explains why it was never feasible in the first place.

http://www.lolopk.org/resort.htm

The days of new ski resorts in the U. S. are over. Maybe some private shit, but that’s it.