New Montana ski resort?

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.