A-basin attempting to open new terrain

**Crinkle** · 11-30-2005, 04:55 AM

http://www.vaildaily.com/article/200...28/0/FRONTPAGE

SUMMIT COUNTY - Although it skis much bigger than its designated 487 acres, Arapahoe Basin is often described as Summit County's smallest ski area. But The Legend might soon be taking a giant step up the ladder size-wise, with a now-formal proposal to expand lift-served skiing on 325 acres in Montezuma Bowl, on the back side of the area's existing terrain.

As currently envisioned, the plan would nearly double A-Basin's skiable terrain, adding 175 acres of intermediate terrain and 149 acres of advanced and expert terrain, most likely served with a fixed-grip double or triple chair.

"We think this project will address some of the congested areas we have, and it will add some fantastic skiing and riding," said A-Basin general manager Alan Henceroth. "There's some good stuff in Montezuma Bowl for different levels of skiers and riders, some big double-black-diamonds and some great blue cruisers," Henceroth said, describing the potential terrain in the proposed expansion area.

Scoping phase

The White River National Forest issued a scoping notice for the proposal Nov. 17, and will be accepting public comments through Jan. 6 in the first phase of evaluating the proposal. The analysis will involve a full Environmental Impact Statement, said White River National Forest supervisor Maribeth Gustafson.

The proposal also calls for replacing the existing Exhibition chair with a detachable quad in a slightly modified alignment, as well as an expansion and improvements to the ski area parking lots. Relocating the top terminal of the Exhibition lift would create the space needed to build a 4,00-square-foot Midway Lodge, previously approved under A-Basin's 1999 master plan.

The proposed changes are tied to an amendment of A-Basin's existing master development plan, said U.S. Forest Service District Ranger Rick Newton. According to Newton, the agency will approve the master plan amendments within the next few weeks, clearing the way for site-specific evaluations of the proposed parking and lift changes.

A-Basin officials have been discussing the Montezuma Bowl plan for the past two years, holding preliminary talks with other federal agencies, town of Montezuma residents and the Snake River planning commission. Ski area experts have also been conducting snow studies in Montezuma Bowl for the past couple of years to determine the best location for a lift and trails.

Natural resource issues

Newton said those early discussions suggest the proposal can be fine-tuned and implemented with only minimal impacts to natural resources, including wetlands and wildlife. The bottom terminal of the new lift would be situated at about 11,350 feet, staying above a forested landscape movement corridor deemed important for lynx and other wildlife. Some of the terrain below that terminal could be used by skiers and boarders willing to hike back up to the base of the lift, according to the scoping notice.

According to maps released with the scoping notice, some tree clearing would be required in Montezuma Bowl along the lift corridor and to create "collector trails" to funnel skiers toward the bottom lift terminal.

According to the Forest Service scoping notice, the Montezuma Bowl expansion would help disperse skier traffic throughout the area, leading to a more "well-rounded recreational experience." The scoping notice suggests A-Basin is "out of balance" with its skier/rider market, and that the new terrain would help restore that balance.

The expansion is also expected to help meet the anticipated increase in skier demand projected over the next few years. With a growing Front Range population, the Forest Service projects that skier visitation in Colorado will increase by 800,000 by 2010, and cited a 33 percent increase in skier visits at A-Basin during the past three years as evidence for that growth.

Backcountry impacts?

Montezuma Bowl is designated as potential lift-served terrain under the White River National Forest plan, but has long been a favored venue for lift-accessed backcountry skiing and riding. Backcountry enthusiasts often use a car shuttle to ski and ride the terrain, leaving one vehicle parked along Montezuma Road and then using the area's existing lifts to reach the top of Montezuma Bowl.

Backcountry enthusiasts appealed that section of the forest plan, citing a cumulative loss of easily accessible and lift-accessed backcountry skiing in Summit County from a variety of factors, including snowcat skiing at Keystone and a new lift to the top of Peak 8 in Breckenridge.

The appeal was denied, but Newton, who is a backcountry enthusiast himself, said he is sensitive to those concerns. Before approving the cat skiing operation at Keystone, for example, he invited backcountry skiers to help shape the proposal and held a winter tour of the area.

Similarly, Newton acknowledged that the Montezuma Bowl plan will have an impact on backcountry use. But he said some backcountry skiing opportunities will be preserved in the general area. That could potentially involve relocating the existing backcountry access point near the top of the Norway lift, he said, explaining that one possibility is to add a second access point somewhere along the ridge. One of the new access points would be aimed at providing access more to the west of the new lift-served terrain in Montezuma Bowl, down along the ridge leading toward the Beavers and points beyond, while the second access point could provide a gateway to terrain east of Montezuma Bowl, including Thurman Gulch.

But backcountry access issues are unlikely to crop up as significant issues as the proposal progresses through planning, at least based on informal input the ski area has received so far, said Henceroth.

"People have overwhelmingly told us they're excited about this and that they want us to do it," Henceroth said, referring to written comments he's received as well as informal talks with customers at the area. "I'm curious to see what the public response will be in the scoping," he concluded.

An increase in parking capacity at A-Basin is needed to meet existing demand and the new demand that could result from the terrain expansion, Newton said. The ski area could create 331 new spots by widening and re-grading several of the existing lots, upping parking by 23 percent, according to the scoping notice. In conjunction with the parking improvements, the ski area would create a series of sediment detention ponds along the west edge of the parking areas, parallel to the highway, to help address an erosion control issue around the ski area base that has the potential to result in some unwanted discharges into the pristine waters of the North Fork, among the cleanest Snake River tributaries.

At the same time, the Forest Service and ski area hope to increase the safety of pedestrian highway crossings from the parking lots to the lifts, with better sight distances, reduced vehicle speeds, increased signage, flashing lights and defined crosswalks. A proposed underpass approved in the area's existing master plan, will also be re-assessed.

**shera** · 11-30-2005, 05:46 AM

I skied down to Montezuma Road a couple of times last year. So thin.

Seems like they would do better to manage the terrain they already have. I still don't understand why Pali doesn't get stomped down. Highlands gets stomped down. Silverton gets stomped down. Loveland gets stomped down. It's not rocket science.

And I don't understand why we can ski the lower east wall and do the big traverse and not be able to ski the upper east wall. If it's avy danger, then we shouldn't be allowed under it either. And if it's not avy danger, then there's no good reason to keep it closed.

I'll never forget that "The Legend" kept everyone on a traverse on such a big powder day this year. A precious gift from heaven squandered, although there were patroller tracks everywhere that morning. I guess I should be pleased that somebody got some of that.

Montezuma Bowl might be a bit too much for them to handle.

**The Dark Side** · 11-30-2005, 08:22 AM

I agree. I've been saying for years (not just after the avalanche) that they need to boot-pack Pali in the early season. If they got a hundred people to boot pack it (free tickets?) for several weekends in a row (both days), they would greatly reduce the depth hoar problems. As it is now, in January after it is skier compacted a hard pole plant puts your pole down to the ground and getting trap door collapse is possible in the trees.

**lemon boy** · 11-30-2005, 08:25 AM

I know it is now fashionable to bag on the basin but....

Keeping people out of the starting zones high up in the E. Wall does make sense even if they allow access to the lower part of the east wall.

I do agree that the zuma bowl expansion is a little suspect...windblown and south facing? sweeeeett! Basin used to have a packing crew, I don't know why they dispensed with it.

Edit- TDS - A freeforall packing crew at the basin probably would be a non-starter but a 5 man 2 week = free pass packing crew would be totally on the money. 5 guys (plus say 2 patrol supers) could do the majority of the heavy lifting in two weeks easy.

**shera** · 11-30-2005, 08:30 AM

Originally Posted by lemon boy

I know it is now fashionable to bag on the basin but....

Keeping people out of the starting zones high up in the E. Wall does make sense even if they allow access to the lower part of the east wall.

I do agree that the zuma bowl expansion is a little suspect...windblown and south facing? sweeeeett! Basin used to have a packing crew, I don't know why they dispensed with it.

Edit- TDS - A freeforall packing crew at the basin probably would be a non-starter but a 5 man 2 week = free pass packing crew would be totally on the money. 5 guys (plus say 2 patrol supers) could do the majority of the heavy lifting in two weeks easy.

I admit I'm in a bad mood and I'm being harsh. I won't say anymore about the basin. I really love that place.

Well, I will say that there are enough nationals to pack down Pali without giving away anything...

**lemon boy** · 11-30-2005, 08:52 AM

I don't know why you'd be in a bad mood:

I should be the pissy one "working" today (actually, I get to go hear the hick speak this AM which will be hopefully interesting). I'm prepared to cut the basin a LOT of slack because year in and year out it takes them a while to get going but in the end they get things dialed and generally do a good job...the early season there is always frustrating.

**marshalolson** · 11-30-2005, 09:17 AM

I don't see alot of vert on the top of zuma, as the lift is only supposed to go just below treeline. considering the avy danger in zuma bowl, are they planning on grooming it or what? or have perm closed areas that are the only high angle shots worth skiing back there?

steep, windscoured, above treeline terrain that will not be open very frequently vs. backcountry access that alot of folks use safely?

seems pretty silly really. they might as well put a t-bar on the prof

**MOHSHSIHd** · 11-30-2005, 09:48 AM

shit, ill pack stuff there if it means they will actually open stuff...

**snowfire** · 11-30-2005, 10:15 AM

Originally Posted by SheRa

I still don't understand why Pali doesn't get stomped down....

Montezuma Bowl might be a bit too much for them to handle.

It does. We usually pack Pali face every year. If that's not going on this year, it's news to me. And many more trollers will be hired for Zuma's opening. Not that I'm too thrilled about that terrain either.

**summit** · 11-30-2005, 11:37 AM

Originally Posted by SheRa

I skied down to Montezuma Road a couple of times last year. So thin.

Seems like they would do better to manage the terrain they already have. I still don't understand why Pali doesn't get stomped down. Highlands gets stomped down. Silverton gets stomped down. Loveland gets stomped down. It's not rocket science.

And I don't understand why we can ski the lower east wall and do the big traverse and not be able to ski the upper east wall. If it's avy danger, then we shouldn't be allowed under it either. And if it's not avy danger, then there's no good reason to keep it closed.

I'll never forget that "The Legend" kept everyone on a traverse on such a big powder day this year. A precious gift from heaven squandered, although there were patroller tracks everywhere that morning. I guess I should be pleased that somebody got some of that.

Montezuma Bowl might be a bit too much for them to handle.

My sentiments exactly.

**funkendrenchman** · 11-30-2005, 01:43 PM