an area with some great terrain, but a lot of slogging to get out of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trackhead
Printable View
an area with some great terrain, but a lot of slogging to get out of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trackhead
I prefer ski to the road, probably for the same reason I prefer snowboarding.Quote:
Originally Posted by dk_alaskan
there really isn't access to the road in most places, plus no motorized access either, whence the slog.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyber Cop
random/
when I was at school at fort we got a six foot dump over 2 days. Two snowboarders died in that storm something like 150ft down an embankment from their car. They rode in to the drainage to get to the car and the snow was 12-18ft deep.. Makes you think.
only 2 comments (well maybe 3) to add from skimming the last 2 pages
1. i wouldn't want to fall with Yeti hot on my tail
2. yeti would definintely "break" the trail for you hackhead
3. if yeti actually starts touring this year, look the fuck out come mid to late season when we actually do get some snow ...
... please just stick to slapping the puck around J and leave us tight turners some snow :biggrin: ;)
Thanks for the compliment but I fixeded that 4 U.Quote:
Originally Posted by YetiMan
I'm a skibum/resort rat with a bit of wanderlust and a burning desire to ski untracked pow and in with the zion zig zag skill set. To quote Neil Young
"Was he a heavy doper or what"
Oh and I hearts Woodsy
The soli shit show started swirling down the shitter The day Mike G left
Quote:
Originally Posted by alto
This is certainly one of my least favorite things I EVAR took part in building.
Dayum! that bastid is still fukin fugly!!!:the_finge:the_finge
Passing along some info I got emailed to me for those of you who would like to see this thing DOA:
Letters need to go to the District Ranger and the Forest Supervisor to convince them to reject the proposal now. The best way is to reference the 2003 Revised Forest Plan and remind the Forest Service to stick with it.
For the Central Wasatch Management Area the plan:
Has watershed protection as the highest priority (natural lands produce the highest amount and quality)
Wants plants and animals at their natural distribution (Silver Fork is summer range for big game)
Confines resort development to current permit boundaries in plan
Designates Silver Fork Canyon Recreation Opportunity Spectrum as Roaded Natural which does not include large scale ski resorts
Wants to maintain scenic resources (lifts are not part of a natural background)
Letters have to get in now! It would be great if we can get the Forest Service to stick to the plan after all the work that went into it and reject the proposal from the outset. Please tell the Forest Service that you like the canyon just the way it is and that dispersed recreation is being forced from the Wasatch. Resort skiers from this proposal will access Day's Fork as well driving dispersed recreation from it as well.
Please send letters to:
Cathy Kahlow District Ranger
Uinta/Wasatch-Cache National Forest
Salt Lake Ranger District
6944 S 3000E
Salt Lake City Utah 84121
Brian Ferebee Forest Supervisor
Uinta/Wasatch-Cache National Forest
Federal Building
125S State Street
Salt Lake City Utah 84138
Fixed it for you!Quote:
Originally Posted by skifishbum
Just mailed off my 2 cents. Not sure it's even worth that, but feels good to do something.
I'm writing in regards to the proposed Solitude lift expansion in the Silver Fork drainage. This is a great area to ski in and I've been enjoying it for 10 years or so as a backcountry skier. I also ski inbounds at Solitude several times a year.
I’m not sure how the process works, but it’s my understanding that these are public lands which will be allocated for different uses by the USFS in a way that, as your slogan states “cares for the LAND and serves the PEOPLE.”
There is a huge billboard advertising Solitude at the mouth of Big Cottonwood Canyon that says: KROUDS (we don’t even know how to spell the word). And this has been my experience with skiing at Solitude, there are no crowds of PEOPLE except for the Christmas and President’s Day holidays. There is no cry from the skiing public, the PEOPLE, to expand into Silver Fork that I am aware of. Where then is the motivation for this expansion coming from? If the lift lines were long and the slopes overcrowded it would seem worth considering, but this is not the case.
I’m just a skier who enjoys the many options, lift served and backcountry, that do exist in a fine balance in this tiny mountain range. There is within me a huge concern with the fact that a few more lifts here and there will drastically change the 'solitude' that exists away from the lifts and the areas they serve. My vote, as one of the PEOPLE, if I have one, would be not to add a lift in Silver Fork.
Please let me know if there will be any public meetings I can attend, or what process I can be involved in with this important decision making.
Thank you for your time,
Noah Howell
No offense DTM, but there are some of us who are all for this, us resort skiers.
Along with letters of disapproval from most in this thread, I will be sending a letter of approval for this proposal.
People can bring all the hate they want to me, but that is not going to change the fact that I am a beat up resort skier/rider and the more access I have to ride fun terrain off a lift, the more fun I have. Physical limitations prevent me from really doing the bc thing.
IMHO, more lifts will happen in time all over the Wasatch regardless.......
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzzworthy
Not to get personal Buzz, but wouldn't soft, untracked pow be less abusive on ones body than some shitty, tracked out mank so frequently found at ski resorts? Not to mention zero impact, aerobic activity?
Double surgerized knee that won't let me turn properly and a blown out lower back. How do you suppose I get up to get down?Quote:
Originally Posted by Trackhead
You mean you can't do kick turns in a switch back because of your knee?Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzzworthy
How can you ski at a resort and get WAY more downhill skiing in every day and have that not hurt your back more than hiking up and getting far less downhill in? I've had heinous sciatica, and when I did, hiking up never made it worse, it was the abusive downhill that hurt more.
In all seriousness and sincerity, what you need is a season in the backcountry, not on the lifts.
Hell, I can't do a kick turn in the middle of a freakin groomer. Unpossible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trackhead
edit: blog going to PM
Buzz, Trackhead is speaking the truth here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trackhead
My left knee is missing most of its meniscus from being blown apart and laps on the lift most definetly cause me more pain than a day of treehugging.
Also, the fact still remains that Silver is just a traverse away from Soli.
Silver Fork has a new designation, it's not wilderness, it's.......;)
http://www.signmonster.com/catalog/images/d9-6_LG.jpg
I just got a prompt reply from my email to Brian.
"Thanks for your comments Noah and we will keep you informed. BF!"
For those tree huggers that want to save a piece of paper just send an email to the following folks.
Catherine Kahlow- ckahlow@fs.fed.us
Brian Ferebee- bferebee@fs.fed.us
Boarding fresh lines, yes, this sounds wonderful, would be all for it.
Skiing them, great, where do I start. I don't even know how to ski powder yet. Last real ski days were east coast, picked up board day I moved here 12 years ago.
The lift(s) would allow me to at least get some freshies on my board on those pow days.
This is my rock and hard place. Want fresh, can't ski it (yet), can board it (with back pain).
Someone lend me their splitboard for a day with TH, SFB and Tuco in Silly so I can truly see what all the hubbub is about. :D
I'll lend you one of mine but, you start at the bottom of the hill and walk to the top or as far as you can make it.
You mean you want him to start at wasatch blvd?
Isn't any kind of motorized transportation evil??? TELL ME YOU DON'T, gulp, DRIVE up the canyon, RIGHT??!!!!! POLLUTTERRRRRR!!!!!!!!!
Damn hippies.
I fully expected some here to write in letters of approval, but I am counting on the lazy resort skiers to send in a lot less than the BC skiers ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzzworthy
I have nothing against resort skiing, I do it all the time and have had an Alta pass for the last seven years. What I have a problem with is expansion that is in direct conflict with the Central Wasatch Management Plan.
Seriously dude, you're high as fuck if you think BC skiing is harder on your body than resort skiing. Given your litany of ailments, if I were your doctor I would probably recommend that you stop resort skiing altogether. Since you can't ski pow, why the hell don't you get splitboard? You and your wife are both successful professionals, certainly you can afford one. It will cost a lot less than lift passes in the long run.Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzzworthy
Maybe, but I will do all can to prevent it. For me, the coolest thing about the central wasatch is the unique balance of developed resort skiing and undeveloped backcountry.Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzzworthy
Well Buzz, I just hope you don't change your mind one day, cause if the lift goes in there is no getting that terrain back.
Some people are just lazy. It's the merican way. Letter sent.
ZZZ, I find this actually funny. I am one person. Since when does one person's opinion(s)/desire(s)/action(s) truly accomplish anything when it comes to proposals not unlike this one?Quote:
Originally Posted by zion zig zag
DTM, you are correct on the split, no reason I can't get one. Large investment in something I am not sure I will enjoy on a regular basis though. Not a fan of avie conditions, my wife will certainly not follow as she is a resort only skier....
Doc said I can ski so I am.
wra, if serious would like to try one, never have yet. Assume start up old HC return road? Not digging frozen's idea, sorry man.
There are many more that want this. I simply stated so via keyboard here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzzworthy
True, but you are currently the only one posting here in favor, so we are ganging up on you in the school yard.
You are the current pin cushion, every thread has one.
Letter written. I'll leave y'all to guess which side it was on.
Works for me, I don't really care if I am the pin cushion here. No skin off my back whatsoever.
Sure, I'll start a Wasatch blvd. You're welcome to join in. Buzz may not like that, though. Busses start this weekend so...Quote:
Originally Posted by frozenwater
Been a hippie since the sixties. Too old for a change.
Looks like we will see some expansion at Solitude. The old Powderhorn lift base will soon house "Poco's Tacos." Thereby killing two birds with one stone.Quote:
Originally Posted by rideit
YM:
"I guess given good terrain I'd rather get on a chair at the bottom and ski laps than cross country ski uphill and get 1 or 2 runs a day on better snow."
F:
in response to Yetiman.. you are ignorant!
i have hiked, skied, camped, worked, n lived in silver fork. going back to 1982. what does that mean? i dunno. but i remember what one man said when asked to sell land 4 development: "when your children's children think themselves alone in the field, the store, the shop, upon the highway, or in the silence of the pathless woods, they will not be alone. In all the earth there is no place dedicated to solitude."
sfotex is right.
The problem here is that Solitude is asking to take a huge chunk of public land solely for its own profit, with no compensation to the public who will forever be locked out of their own public lands.
I notice that all the people supporting the expansion are already Solitude pass holders. That's great for you -- but you are asking the other 99.99999% of the world to pay $62/day to enter their own public lands, just so 0.00001% of the public can have a chairlift that benefits them personally.
YetiMan: I love you, I really do. But don't you see the irony in passionately protesting the fact that you couldn't surf your favorite spot for free because a trailer park owns the tidelands and charges access ([ame="http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=173331"]Police Looking For You Thread[/ame]) -- while supporting Solitude in their effort to annex public land and charge access to Silver Fork, denying access to backcountry skiers?
apples and oranges.
The action on the part of the beach "owner" reduces the amount of public enjoyment of a public recreation asset. The action on the part of solitude increases the amount of public enjoyment of a public recreation asset.
The minorities are switched. In the beach situation the minority is the 2 individuals who want the 500 members of the public kept away from their private beach; with Solitude the minority is the 2 BC skiers who want the 500 inbounds skiers kept away from their favorite place to ski tour.
The major fallacy of the BC side of this argument is thinking that the only party who benefits from a bigger better ski area is the owner of the ski area...that the opposing parties are 1 resort owner and a community of BC skiers...where in reality it's a small community of BC skiers vs. a larger community of inbounds skiers plus everyone who benefits from tourism in Utah plus taxpayers in general who benefit from permit revenue.
Stand at the top of Hidden Peak any given ski season day and watch how many members of the public enjoy mineral basin. Now, imagine if that was out of bounds....BC.. A handful of hardcore dudes are going to go out there and deal with snow safety and skin back up and all that relatively miserable shit that most of the public doesn't like (because they ski for FUN, and skinning....and digging your blue faced buddy out of avy debris...and figuring out what to do if you break some equipment back there...aren't fun...) leaving the bigger part of the public out of enjoying that land. Not only are the larger group of the public not using and enjoying their land, but they're paying for search and rescue when hardcore guy screws up, ski patrol is getting called back there to assist with burials and injuries a few times a year...etc etc..Sure it's good for the harder core perspective on things, better snow back there if it's a risky area limited to people who don't mind dying to ski pow. But let's not pretend that's the greatest good for the most people...and if it's not, it's probably not going to be the best option for the forest service.
Now maybe if you want to say that one BC skier is 100 or 500 times more worthy of enjoying Silver Fork than some regular non-mountaineering skier because of their willingness to die in a slide and XC ski to get in/out...fine. But let's call it like it is, if you're for denying the permit, you're for an option of less public use of that land, not more, and less benefit to the common taxpayer, not more.
The majority of the public owners of that land have no interest in being on it at all, but each and every citizen is just as much an owner as StraightChuter...If the FS can bring economic gain to the area via tourism in the forest, they will; that's a good use of USDA lands (it's not a park!), that action finds the greatest good for the most people. Not the greatest good for a few BC skiers, the greatest good for the public as a whole comes from running lifts so that regular people can enjoy skiing on their forest.
If this is a public policy debate, the small special interest group of BC skiers is on the minority side. Nothing wrong with that per se, but let's not misrepresent who's trying to pull one over on who here. FS policy would be distorted by favoring the smaller group, just like tideland policy is distorted by favoring oceanfront homeowners over recreating public in the ocean.
Skied Mineral Basin for years. It was a wonderful place until they built a lift. Last time I passed through on an Alta to White Pine tour I was threatened with arrest for...tresspassing.Quote:
Originally Posted by YetiMan
Another area for expansion that never gets used by the public.:rolleyes2Quote:
Originally Posted by YetiMan
http://fritzrips.com/Gallery1/albums/Random/ass.jpg
Didn't have a ticket, but had to get to Mill Creek some way.
http://fritzrips.com/Gallery1/albums...season/8_G.jpg
wow. that's completely bogus. It shouldn't be that way at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by wra
I'm surprised they would even go there. It's your land.
I'm a pass holder at Soli and don't want to see this happen.
Yeti- It's great your looking out for the greatest good for the public and all. This being the case, don't you think it's a little short sighted to make this a BC skier vs. resort skier argument? Do you really believe that it is just BC skiers that enjoy SF the way it is now. There are a lot more users of public land up there than just skiers. Go hiking up there on a weekend in the summer. Hell the first tour I did up there early last year I saw quite a few bow hunters and a couple were up there pretty high. So if your going to make this about the public, you better include all the users(public).
Exactly. I frequently hike in all of the drainages without ski lifts. I rarely hike in drainages with lifts. In the summer you can see how much the lifts disturb the ground. It looks like shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by tuco
fair enough....Quote:
Originally Posted by tuco
and it's not me or my position, none of us here get to make the decision...I'm just arguing a point (or several points). Honestly I think there is something compelling about leaving the norther pow circuit alone...but as I said, let's not pretend that best serves the stated FS policy.
Is having a lift in an area detrimental to off season recreation? Summer hiking, hunting etc? By that logic this (pic shown) has been developed and spoiled because it's inside a ski area:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._July_2009.jpg