My brother and I talked about this very thing. With a lift in there, they absolutly would have to extend the Honeycomb return lift. There is no way you could put lift served skier traffic down that road.Quote:
Originally Posted by skifishbum
Printable View
My brother and I talked about this very thing. With a lift in there, they absolutly would have to extend the Honeycomb return lift. There is no way you could put lift served skier traffic down that road.Quote:
Originally Posted by skifishbum
I am against this.
I ski at resorts and in the backcountry around 50/50.
In resorts, I primarily ski Solitude because it is small. Expanding into Silver Fork would make Solitude a "mega resort" and it would lose any character it is still (barely) there. I'd hate it if skiing at Solitude felt like I'm skiing at The Canyons.
Plus it would suck to lose Silver Fork as a BC destination. Soli owners need to be happy with what they've got, not be greedy, and not ruin Silver Fork just so they can have an excuse to promote their "new groomed terrain" in Ski Magazine advertisements.
I think he is referring to all that can be accessed once on the silver fork ridge - days, silver, cardiff, flagstaff. It's a lot of very good, accessible backcountry terrain.Quote:
Originally Posted by powder_prophet
It seems like you are intentionally clouding the issue by picking a BC skier vs. resort skier fight. Think of it this way - the same arguments could be made for putting a golf course in Silver Fork and I'm sure golfers, the Forest Service and Solitude Management would be all for that as well. Once that happens, don't try to drag your hippie ass in there for hiking, picnicking, bird watching, bow hunting, camping, flower sniffing or whatever else the public might try to do on public land. This is a golf course, damn it, and you are welcome to be here as long as you obey the rules, pay your fees and buy some weak, overpriced 3.2 beer at the clubhouse.Quote:
Originally Posted by YetiMan
Golf??? I'd suggest that golf=soy but I don't want my friend Bobmc to be pissed at me So I'll pad the post count with a repeat of some good reggae and marginal helmet cam stoke.
busy packing don't have time to edit in greedy greedy Solitude but word up to a special guest apperence by an out of town maggot Gimpy and his splitter oneplanking buddy. Hope you cats make it back out this winter had a blast touring with yous.
oh and any terrain you can walk up a groomed snowcat trail and access =sidecountry.
Strangely, there was a golf course, Valle Escondido, in a valley on the carson NF. I imagine their reasoning was something like this: more people will enjoy this than not. Greatest good/most people. Also relevantly, the golf course was a great place to nordic ski in the winter.Quote:
Originally Posted by StraightChuter
By the way, I am not a "resort skier"...as I said earlier, and you evidently failed to read: I like skiing at ski areas. I have never had the cash to stay at ski "resorts". Never. I have worked at a few. Isn't this about exactly the conflict you say I've picked: an inbounds skier vs. BC skier conflict?
Your picking a fight = my trying to understand the terms of the debate.
In that case, I'd say my side of the debate is that there are enough golf courses and mega ski areas already, especially in the small and crowded Wasatch. How about yourself? More is better?
My gut feeling is that undeveloped, publicly accessible open space is for the local people of a given area. Development on the other hand is for opportunistic outsiders who see open space as a commodity rather than a part of their daily life.
We need to find middle ground on ski area development. Right now it is at both ends of the extreme, all or nothing.
The mormon expansion is why they are so low-key to begin with. Don't fix what ain't broken.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyber Cop
:D
In many cases I am for expansion of ski areas where those expansions are justified. Thus, in many cases I agree that well-planned ski area expansion should go forward. Howevr, for the central wasatch, I think the answer is "nothing." The central wasatch is a really small range. It has 7 ski areas and most of them are pretty big (I would love to see a calculation of what portion of the terrain between Parleys and American Fork is within a ski area's boundaries - I bet the number is 2 to 10 times higher than for any other range in the US). Even small, incremental expansions in the central wasatch every few years could lead to a situation where the whole range is covered in lifts. As much as I like lift-served skiing, I think we need to leave some of the range for hiking and backcountry skiing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sol Skier
more good lift served skiing is better for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by StraightChuter
and I'm sorry I made Alto's indian companion cry. Again. :redface:
WWDWD???
If they're going to do any expanding of lifts in the Central Wasatch a lift from DV/PCMR <-> Brighton makes more sense due to the bed base in Park City. And well, this is in the works as well (lift up 10,420, and Clayton is already lift served from Brighton). I would be against any lift expansion as well though. Seven ski areas all within site of each other is plenty (too much already). I like the idea of ski areas, but haven't been to one in years. I just enjoy touring. It's like hiking or peak bagging in the summer, just that you use skis/skins in the winter.Quote:
Originally Posted by skiski
spew ecco warrior crap on ttipsQuote:
Originally Posted by Rontele
block the canyon with his prius?
No kidding. That's why areas like Vail and Killington rock.Quote:
Originally Posted by YetiMan
Exactly! I want Silver Fork to be just like Killington! I'll tell you the truth broseph, I'd probably have a better time lapping Outer Limits for 2 hours than skinning for 2 hours.Quote:
Originally Posted by StraightChuter
But another good point: skiing is definitely a binary system: either Killington or BC.
Not skiing BC today= "HAH WANKER! HAVE FUN AT KILLINGTON BRAH"
My mind isn't even really made up here, but if that's the reasoning for keeping lifts out....:nonono2: I'm pretty sure adding 500 acres and a lift to solitude won't make it Vail.
The more things change, the more they remain the same.
I think we can all agree development has been marching on for some time now. Granted, my Utah skiing history only goes back 45 years, but let's take a little walk down memory lane and see who wants to roll back the clock.
How about skiing at Alta when there was no Snowbird.
Skiing at Brighton meant you had Mary's, Majestic and Millicent was a single chair.
A day at Solitude was nearly a guarantee of getting stuck on the horribly unreliable Moonbeam or Powderhorn chairs.
I have fond Alta memories of skiing over to what would later become Snowbird.
I also have fond memories of skiing at the Bird.
I am definitely not saying I'm in favor of a new lift in Silver Fork. However, many of you have built lasting memories afforded by chairlifts and ski resorts that many before you opposed.
I truly believe development can't go on endlessly, nor should it. But next time you're riding the (insert lift name here) on a big time blower day, ask yourself what your ski day would be like without that chair.
You may now resume your pro and con rants and recitations.
Vail, like Rome, was not built in a day. Give it a few years.Quote:
Originally Posted by YetiMan
Or, the next time you are skiing the Meadow Chutes and looking over at the squalor known as Solitude, think of how much it would suck to have a lift put in there.Quote:
Originally Posted by InspectorGadget
It's true, yet another good point. Skiing inbounds at solitude sucks balls.
You are on fire tonight.
Hey now the guy that wrote the book on chutes in the wasatch told me there were not any chutes in the meadows.Quote:
Originally Posted by StraightChuter
Wait a minute that was you or an alias
Damn IG your old ;)
Nope, Soli is too steep. Even without the expansion.Quote:
Originally Posted by YetiMan
:D
The one Silver Fork development I endorse:
http://www.silverforklodge.com/art/p...nt_chimney.jpg
Quote:
Originally Posted by alto
X2!
:cool:
"If you only knew" what goes down in that kitchen:eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by alto
One of my favorite soli memories is Dan trying to drag a bunch of his guests and their gear up fantasy ridge and patrol having to "rescue" them. Fucking classic.
Woot another page might as well keep the silver stoke going
toph sucking it up
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y19...hbum/sd121.jpg
That was ski area development circa 1960's. This is what it looks like nowadays - a view of the brand new St. Regis Hotel at Dear Valet...Quote:
Originally Posted by alto
http://straightchuter.com/am-content/stpool.jpg
Outdoor heated pool at 7,200' in the middle of one of the largest snow zones in the US.
http://straightchuter.com/am-content/stfire.jpg
The "ring of fire" at the outdoor bar (totally empty when I was there). They've basically run a gas main under a bunch of river rocks and keep it torched at all times.
Aside from the overtly conspicuous waste involved with heated pools and outdoor blast furnaces, I don't really care if developers do stuff like this on private property as it makes a lot of wealthy people feel extra special. But, the problem is that all ski areas are trending towards this type of thing. A friend skied Alta a couple days ago and after signing his credit card receipt took a second look at it - $57 for four hours of skiing on rocks and man-made snow. Resorts are becoming more like private golf clubs for the wealthy and in that case, I don't think they should be given public land to help further their cheesy empires.
Right, because skiing used to be so much more affordable when adjusted for inflation. Oh, wait a sec.... With the exception of small local feeder hills, skiing always has been, and always will be, a pursuit for the wealthier segments of our society.Quote:
Originally Posted by StraightChuter
And I don't quite understand the point about DV. Are you saying that's the only and inevitable outcome for Solitude if the Silver Fork expansion goes through? Not exactly a compelling argument given that DV is about as far out on the end of the retard spectrum as you can get.
Most ski areas (almost all with worthy terrain) are too expensive.
They are distracted with the type of development shown above.
As a result guys like Mr. Straightchuter are driven into the backcountry and we are left without any vision in ski area management.
There aren't a lot of skiers. We need to stay involved with running our ski areas or there will be more of the overdeveloped bologna we already have.
you know...just from a pure and strictly skiing standpoint, I've had some good comped days skiing Deer Valley. I wanted to shart diarrhea at their attitudes and the base area and the overall "atmosphere" but it's fun skiing for a day. Especially for somebody who likes to lap trees, lap good soft bumps, and rail groomers. The trees there are empty and hold good snow.
But yeah, the base area and the attitude is repulsive to me.
Whoa, Ski Area =/ Ski Resort.
I think my little dirt bag ski area is running close to $57/day now, and a new chair has been in the works as well, but I don't see a heated pool in the future. Oh wait, the Alpenrose across the street has had a heated pool since the 70's, such opulence.
I'd be nice if our favorite ski areas didn't trend towards resorts, our private stashes always remained our own, that we could roll the clock back to 1994, or 85', or 76' before everything was ruined. Soli has always been a favorite of mine. Whether or not a chair goes in Silverfork isn't going to change that.
Having grown up skiing at small local feeder hills that have now been bought up by large corperations or gone out of business, this is exactly what I'm talking about. Skiing is getting really expensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tin Woodsman
I'm saying that with terrain expansion comes base amenities expansion. It is not like Solitude is going to expand into Silver Fork, then reduce their ticket prices and give locals a break.Quote:
And I don't quite understand the point about DV. Are you saying that's the only and inevitable outcome for Solitude if the Silver Fork expansion goes through? Not exactly a compelling argument given that DV is about as far out on the end of the retard spectrum as you can get.
Personally, I don't mind Deer Valley all that much. They have good skiing for what it is, and, they are on private property. If they want land, they buy it.
The lift up Flag, a lift into Silver Fork, or a lift to White Pine isn't about quality skiing, it's about marketing, and that elusive "ski the homo back bowls of XXX resort on XXX amount of acres!" It's about printing those numbers on a flier, or a web page, or some comparison in SKI magazine.
These expansions are NOT about skiing, they are about numbers, that's why they are so fucking stupid.
On that note, I've been skinning up Snowbird just about daily because the public land to the east won't let me. Ironic.
The ones that went out of business weren't charging enough. Their pricing is irrelevant. What feeder hills have been bought up by large corporations? Feeder hills aren't attractive to large corporations by and large b/c they don't generally offer real estate opportunities. Who wants a condo at the base of Ski Sundown in CT?Quote:
Originally Posted by StraightChuter
You're setting up a slippery slope argument here, not unlike the rationale for remaining in Vietnam back in the day. If we lose Vietnam, then we lose Cambodia. If we lose Cambodia, then Thailand is next, and so on.... One does not inevitably lead to the next. Using DV's retarded state of base development as the inevitable outcome for a Silver Fork expansion makes zero sense. As for reducing ticket prices and giving locals a break, there is no scenario where that's likely to happen, expansion or not, so it's irrelevant.Quote:
I'm saying that with terrain expansion comes base amenities expansion. It is not like Solitude is going to expand into Silver Fork, then reduce their ticket prices and give locals a break.
Huh?Quote:
Originally Posted by Trackhead
If the marketing department hypes a new expansion, it's not about skiing? Ohhhhhhhhk.
What's going on? This is the second homo reference in this thread and this one is in yellow font.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trackhead
Your not skinning up the bird in lycra tights, a barbie backpack and trab skis are you?
Think what you want BobMC, this is about marketing numbers, not the actually quality of the skiing.Quote:
Originally Posted by BobMc
These Homo Back Bowls are at Snowbird????Quote:
Originally Posted by Trackhead
Man - I've gotta start skiing there more often.