wolf creek fighting back against developer

[Crinkle]

Wolf Creek fights for territory
Offbeat ski area opposes plan for resort in its midst

By Electa Draper
Denver Post Four Corners Bureau


Post / Shaun Stanley
Davey Pitcher, President and area manager of Wolf Creek Ski Area, climbs a steep slope on the ski mountain with Alberta Peak in the background. The Pitchers, operators of the ski area for years, feel the character of the ski area will be changed by a proposed development at the base of the mounatin.





WOLF CREEK PASS - A Texas business legend is stepping on the toes of a Colorado mountain legend.

The Pitcher family, which owns Wolf Creek Ski Area, has bucked industry trend after trend: declining to support Ski Country USA marketing efforts, paying above-average wages and stubbornly keeping Wolf Creek as simple and undeveloped as possible in the wildest, snowiest corner of the state.

It sets them apart from central-Colorado resorts surrounded by seas of cloned condos and look-alike shops.

But the Pitchers, descendants of the San Juan Mountains' heroic pathfinder, Otto Mears, now find themselves stuck in an unhappy dance with Texas billionaire Billy Joe "Red" McCombs.

McCombs and partners are proposing to construct the biggest ski resort village in Colorado at 10,000 feet and smack in the middle of Wolf Creek Ski Area - something the Pitchers say would hurt the essence of the place they worked hard to build.

"It's a mess," Wolf Creek Ski Area president Davey Pitcher says. "Our credibility is at stake. What lives on in southwestern Colorado is at stake.

"Fifty years from now, Colorado will be a better place if this meadow is just left alone."

The issue has set up a clash of titans.


McCombs, born in Spur, Texas, in 1927, is an automobile, oil, communications and sports magnate, part of the nation's corporate elite.

He started his business life as the country's youngest Edsel dealer and one of the few to turn a profit on a model now synonymous with "dud."

In 1972, McCombs co-founded Clear Channel Communications Inc., now the nation's biggest owner of radio stations, biggest concert promoter and biggest outdoor advertising company.

He owns pro football's Minnesota Vikings and has owned pro basketball's San Antonio Spurs and Denver Nuggets.

Bob Honts, McCombs' venture partner and spokesman for the Wolf Creek project, says the 76- year-old McCombs will not be available to comment on the flap with the Pitcher family.

For their part, the Pitchers are San Juan Mountain aristocracy.

Kingsbury "Pitch" Pitcher is the grandson of Mears, a Russian immigrant who rode with Kit Carson during the Civil War and Navajo campaigns and later befriended Ute Chief Ouray. Mears penetrated the formidable San Juan Mountains with roads and rails that made commerce possible and earned him the epitaph "Pathfinder of the San Juans."

Pitch Pitcher is a vertical pathfinder. He seemed to have Mears' uncanny knack for survival and success when it came to slopes, of which he has designed many. He owned the Santa Fe Ski Area until the mid-1980s.

Pitch Pitcher acquired Wolf Creek in 1976. A thousand vertical feet is not a big ski mountain. But Wolf Creek is a meteorological fluke. It lies where two branches of the San Juan Mountains intersect to form a giant "L." It is also a snow trap, the snowiest place in the state.

Thirty to 40 feet of snow fall there most winters over terrain that is naturally varied and not a collection of cookie-cutter runs, says Davey Pitcher.

This season just ending was the ski area's best ever. Skier visits, 210,000, were up 17.5 percent over the previous season.

But the place had humble beginnings. It was born in the 1950s when potato farmers from the San Luis Valley cut a few runs into the mountain, strung a towrope and turned it into their weekend club.

In the 1960s, a group of Texans, including members of the Dallas Cowboys football team, tried to make a real enterprise of the ski area, but they floundered.

Pitch Pitcher stepped in. He and his sons have run it ever since.

Davey Pitcher is not just president but chief construction worker, a nondivision of labor underscored by his attire, brown Carhartt farm pants and a Ralph Lauren long- sleeved pink cotton Oxford shirt.

He says his father and mother, Jane, still run the business to some extent.

"My father's love of skiing is what's always driven the business," he says.

Pitch Pitcher is in Hawaii and couldn't be reached for comment.

Now, for the first time, the Pitchers are publicly saying that the McCombs venture and their Wolf Creek are a terrible mismatch.

McCombs owns 288-acre Alberta Park, a vast wood-ringed meadow that is surrounded by the Pitchers' 1,300 acres of federally permitted ski area. Both places lie within millions of acres of Rio Grande National Forest and two wilderness areas.

Here, McCombs proposes to build "the highest-quality mountain resort village in the U.S." - a billion-dollar project, says venture partner Honts of Austin.

Honts says he has contracts signed by the Pitchers as late as 2000 promising their support.

"We're puzzled," Honts says. "We've always liked the Pitchers."

All that is needed now for work to begin, Honts says, is Forest Service approval for construction of 250 feet of road across public lands into Alberta Park. The Forest Service can't really deny access, he says.

Davey Pitcher says he will no longer be pressured into going along with a project that has ballooned from a few hundred units when first proposed in 1986 to potentially 2,172 units tucked in next to the Pitchers' slopes.

"During that 18 years, we've carved out a personality, a niche," Pitcher says. "It is the antithesis of the big developed ski area."

Pitcher shuns even the word "resort."

In mid-March, the Forest Service began its review of the McCombs-Honts application to build a short stretch of road across public land to Alberta Park.

The entire environmental impact statement will take nine months to a year to complete, Forest Service coordinator Stephen Brigham says. The agency is still studying what its review will encompass.

"The (village) plans are not compatible with Wolf Creek's ski permit at this time," Davey Pitcher says. "There was never adequate Forest Service analysis that speaks to 2,100 units or 5,000 cars - a city on a mountain. We welcome with open arms the chance to revisit the proposal."

The village plans also describe more than 4,000 underground parking spaces, a natural-gas-powered antique-replica train and more than 222,000 square feet of commercial space, including a dozen restaurants, a few hotels and acres of shopping.

Honts says there would be litigation if the Forest Service were to try to block development at this point. He says the agency over the years has twice approved the concept of the village.

In August 2000, Mineral County commissioners approved a preliminary plat. The commissioners have land-use authority, not the Forest Service, Honts says.

He points out the enormous tax and other financial benefits for three poor counties, Mineral, Archuleta and Rio Grande.

The Pitchers already have benefited from the venture granting them an easement in the park for the family's Alberta Lift, built in 1999.

"A rising tide will lift all boats," Honts says.

Chris Gerlach, president of the Pagosa Springs Lodging Association, disagrees, saying the competing beds would be disastrous for many local businesses.

Moreover, Gerlach says, "the Pitchers have done a fantastic job with Wolf Creek. The ski area here has preserved the natural beauty and splendor of the environment. It is in balance and in tune with our region and does not cater to the rich and the ski elite."

Pitcher says he worries that a politically well-connected McCombs could push his family off the mountain. After all, he says, McCombs acquired Alberta Park in a 1986 land swap with the Forest Service that was denied by local foresters but approved in Washington.

Colorado Wild spokesman Jeff Berman says that override meant pristine acres in the wildest corner of the state were wrongly traded out of public ownership.

It is land between the South San Juan Wilderness, the most unspoiled tract from Wyoming to New Mexico, and the state's biggest wilderness, the Weminuche. It is an important corridor for wildlife, including the Canada lynx, introduced there over the past five years.

Honts says he and McCombs got there before the lynx.

[Odin]

Clear Channel, The Vikings, "Red" McCombs, and the DNR SUCK!

[summit]

fuck that shit... Pitcher needs to hire some hippies to chain themselves to the trees... they'll work for burritos

[Buster Highmen]

Most amusing, especially given the flack that Silverton Mountain has gotten in the light of their minimal development theme.

[lake effect]

Buster beat me to it.

This will be a startling example of money and political access if this mega-resort gets built.

[highlander]

As much as I detest McCombs and what he's done to the Vikes and still might do (move out of mpls), I suppose he has every right to do this as they own the ground and their have been agreements in place to build something. Why would they make that deal with Red in the first place? He's that old, uber rich, has his own business school, etc. he could be the devil incarnate with the red moniker and all. If this happens it would be a travesty, but is the weekender mom and popper really going to schlep all the way down there to blow their hard earned or would they stay in Summit? I don't know, but i'm sure his biz school people have answered all these questions. If he has the ability to do it he will, he more than has the resources.

[Lane Meyer]

Pitch Pitcher is in Hawaii and couldn't be reached for comment.

[/B]

If I run into the guy, he'll get a cold beer and a pat on the back from me for staving off those assholes from Texas. Why can't they just got to Vail and be happy, leaving Wolf Creek for us the way it has been and always should be?

[Artie Fufkin]

Here is an update on this debacle. It's long, but the link will disappear next week. This is from the Durango Telegraph. It appears that they are trying to fast track the EIS on the WC development. I am not an expert on BLM/EIS/National Forest Service matters. But it appears that the EIS process for Brill/Silverton was dragged out as long as possible. But this one could be moved quickly. I doubt that money has anything to do with that.


An excerpt from the article:
"The Pitchers received word that McCombs was working with Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, a Texas republican, to introduce a last minute amendment to an Interior Department appropriations bill. The “midnight rider” would have exempted the 287-acre parcel from public review and allowed McCombs to essentially break ground without public approval. " Yikes.


Wolf Creek village tries to cut out public
Massive development asks Congress to end public review
by Will Sands 9/16/04

Dismantled chairs await another season at the base of Wolf Creek’s Alberta Lift. The chairlift crosses land owned by Minnesota Vikings owner Red McCombs, who proposes to develop the meadow. Opponents of the ambitious development and Congressman Mark Udall fought this week to block a “midnight rider.” The rider would have exempted the
development from an environmental review that is currently taking place.

Opening day may still be more than a month away, but Wolf Creek Ski Area is drawing the spotlight. A proposal to develop a “Vail-sized city” at the base of the ski area continues to stir up controversy. Now, opponents and U.S. Representative Mark Udall are alleging that proponent Red McCombs is trying to pull political strings to skip the public process.

The Village at Wolf Creek is not directly tied to the Wolf Creek Ski Area, which is widely recognized as an environmentally friendly, no-frills, family-run operation. However, a Texas development company, funded by Minnesota Vikings owner McCombs, has proposed a massive development near the ski area. McCombs would like to develop 287.5 acres just east of Wolf Creek Pass and at the base of the Alberta lift.

The land was first acquired during a suspicious 1989 land exchange with the Forest Service. The swap was originally denied by the Rio Grande National Forest for not being in the public's best interest. Two weeks later, an order issued from Forest Service headquarters in Washington, D.C., overturned the local agency and allowed the land exchange to proceed.

Nearly 15 years later, the Rio Grande National Forest is now studying a proposal by McCombs to construct 2,172 new housing units and 222,100 square feet of commercial space. As part of the plan, 12 new restaurants, several hotels and a convention center would also be built on the meadow. Opposition to the Village at Wolf Creek has been off the charts.

“This is a ridiculous development proposal,” said Jeff Berman, executive director of Colorado Wild. “Trying to put a city half the size of Durango on less than 300 acres, at 10,300 feet of elevation and at the snowiest place in Colorado makes no sense whatsoever.”

In addition, Berman said that the development will essentially destroy the character of the current ski area. “Besides the obvious environmental impacts, such a ridiculous development would steer away most skiers who go to Wolf Creek precisely because it's not Vail,” he said.

This factor has driven the owners of Wolf Creek Ski Area, the Pitcher family, to join the coalition called Friends of Wolf Creek, which includes individuals, businesses and conservation groups. This week, the Pitchers alerted the coalition and Congressman Udall that more dirty business seemed to be taking place.

The Pitchers received word that McCombs was working with Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, a Texas republican, to introduce a last minute amendment to an Interior Department appropriations bill. The “midnight rider” would have exempted the 287-acre parcel from public review and allowed McCombs to essentially break ground without public approval. In recent months, 4 the Village at Wolf Creek development team has publicly stated that such an exemption is warranted, claiming that the project has already gone through two environmental analysis processes.A0However, last Monday and Tuesday, the Friends of Wolf Creek and Udall successfully fought to keep the rider off the bill.

Lawrence Pacheco, Udall's press secretary, commented, “It's unconscionable for a senator who lives outside Colorado to introduce this kind of rider to help a major contributor like McCombs. Congressman Udall firmly believes that this kind of business should be done in the full daylight. What the developers are proposing is a midnight rider that essentially eliminates public oversight.”

Berman added, “That this kind of thing can go on at all is a sad example of how our political system can work.”

On Monday, Berman sent e-mail alerts to hundreds of people urging them to contact Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell, who sits on the Senate Appropriations Committee, and ask him to remove the Wolf Creek rider. The rider was not introduced into Tuesday's Interior Department appropriations bill, according to staff with Campbell's office.

However, Berman and Pacheco agreed that it has also not gone away. There are a total of 13 appropriations bills that must be approved for next year's budget. In most years, the bills are combined into a giant one that inevitably carries numerous unrelated riders like McCombs'.

“If it's not offered today, it may be offered at another time in the future,” Pacheco said on Tuesday. “Typically, they wind up wrapping all of these bills into one omnibus spending bill that's thousands of pages long. Numerous things get snuck into these large bills.”

As a result, Berman said that the Friends of Wolf Creek will be keeping a close eye on the Senate Appropriations Committee. “Nothing is ever for sure in this kind of thing,” he said. “We have to keep our ears to the ground.”

Meanwhile, the Rio Grande National Forest is continuing to evaluate the environmental impacts of the Village at Wolf Creek, exactly the process that the Village at Wolf Creek has tried to evade. During this time, Steve Brigham, National Environmental Policy Act coordinator, said that the proposal has drawn record levels of interest and opposition in the otherwise sleepy district. A total of 520 letters on the Village at Wolf Creek were sent to the Forest Service during public scoping. Eighty-three percent of them adamantly opposed the development.

Brigham's office is now working to assess these comments and on-the-ground studies and release a draft environmental impact study of the proposed development. The draft is expected in coming weeks.

“It sounds like the draft will be coming out at the end of September or sometime in October,” Brigham said. “The public will then have 45 days to comment on the draft. We'll look at those comments and they'll influence where we go from there.”

However, the draft will prove to be controversial. Berman said that if it is released that soon, the Forest Service can expect some serious negative feedback. He charged that the agency has been working on the usually exhaustive document only since April 15 and the process appears to be on a fast track. Consequently, Berman said that the Friends of Wolf Creek are expecting a thrown-together document.

“I've heard rumors that they're trying to publish the draft EIS at the end of this month,” he said in closing. “If so, it's guaranteed to be one of the shoddiest drafts and will be ripe for criticism.”

[kailas]

That's why Coloradians hates Texass, they come here see a nice piece of pristine land and all they can see are $$$ signs. This ass-hole Texan has closed the main route into the Wilson group trying to force a land exchange with the government so he can build hugh trophy home that will sit empty 90% of the time! Go back to Texass, leave Colorado alone! I met the Wolf Creek owners at Silverton, they were in my group, they rip!

[cmsummit]

Fuckin' hate those Republican Texas assholes and their "bigger is better attitude". Hopefully the EIS is thrown together in a shotty manner and doesn't get approved, at least this time around. 4,000car underground parking? 220,000sq.ft. of retail space? WTF? Leave it alone.

[Foggy_Goggles]

Aren't land swaps usually done to eliminate small tracks of private property surrounded by public lands? I wonder how/why it got done in the first place. Its looks like the public is involved which is good.

[Artie Fufkin]

Originally posted by Foggy_Goggles
Its looks like the public is involved which is good.

This link could have been posted before, if so here it is again:

Friends of Wolf Creek

[meatdrink9]

Super lame. I hate hearing stories of politicians doing what's wrong for the general populace of an area to help one of their wealthy supporters or interest groups. Sucks. If you ain't got money you ain't got a voice.

BTW, Snowbasin did a similar shady landswap a few years back, but it was to expand terrain and holy crap did it kick ass. If this swap were from the pitchers looking to make expand more skiing I'm sure we'd be happy to see it slip right through.

[cmsummit]

Hopefully the NFS determines that crucial lynx habitat will be destroyed, that vital wetland areas will be disturbed, it will be an eyesore and will not grant access over public land to this area. It'll completely ruin the Wolf Creek experience. Good to see that 83% of the 520 publically submitted letters to the Forest Service were against it. That's serious opposition.

[homerjay]

Save Wolf Creek!!!!

Silverton's EIS was dragged out and contested because they didn't have republican Texan congressmen on their side.

Simiilarly, these land swaps are super shady. What happened to the one near CB that someone bought millions of dollars worth of land for a few hundred bucks?

[Mountain Junkie]

Originally posted by cmsummit
Good to see that 83% of the 520 publically submitted letters to the Forest Service were against it. That's serious opposition.

Unfortunately this isn't a democratic process. Two immoral, rich pricks with friends in high places are hard to beat.

like this is why I abhor the wealthy. Why does money blind common sense? Besides, there is no way this thing could suceed. Wolf Creek isn't a big enough ski area to support those kinds of vistor numbers. If it isn't a big enough enviromental a-bomb as it is, it's going to be worse sitting there bankrupt.

I think I'm about to blow an artery.... Hide the Abbey, I'm about to go Hayduke.

In regards to the EIS, I thought Silverton had to go through the BLM for their EIS, which was a major factory in delaying the process. However, I'm sure the EIS for the "Village at Wolf Creek" is being fasttracked.

[homerjay]

Originally posted by Mountain Junkie
In regards to the EIS, I thought Silverton had to go through the BLM for their EIS, which was a major factory in delaying the process. However, I'm sure the EIS for the "Village at Wolf Creek" is being fasttracked.

Exactly. Having rich congressmen on your side trying to develop land v. laying down your life savings and passion trying to save the soul of a sport. Who gets the preferential treatment?

If they build something, let's burn the mother fucker down.

[cmsummit]

HOLY SHIT!! Just goes to show you what a peon I am-

Just mentioned this project to my boss and was informed that the entire EIS was done by an entity of the same company I work for out of an office in Virginia! Nothing against those folks back in VA, but what the hell do they know about an delicate ecosystem at 10,300' in the Rocky Mtns? Hopefully, not much, and the EIS is done so poorly that the Forest Service, barring any pressure from Washington bureaucrats, will never approve it. Will have to somehow get my hands on that statement to check it out, heard it's a four inch thick document. Sounds like some pleasant, leisurely reading.

[homerjay]

Originally posted by cmsummit
HOLY SHIT!! Just goes to show you what a peon I am-

Just mentioned this project to my boss and was informed that the entire EIS was done by an entity of the same company I work for out of an office in Virginia! Nothing against those folks back in VA, but what the hell do they know about an delicate ecosystem at 10,300' in the Rocky Mtns? Hopefully, not much, and the EIS is done so poorly that the Forest Service, barring any pressure from Washington bureaucrats, will never approve it. Will have to somehow get my hands on that statement to check it out, heard it's a four inch thick document. Sounds like some pleasant, leisurely reading.

cm, who do you work for? pm me if needed.

[joshbu]

Originally posted by Odin
Clear Channel, The Vikings, "Red" McCombs, and the DNR SUCK!

Clear Channel sucks most of all. If you ever wonder why nothing good is ever on the radio any more, look no further than Clear Channel.

http://dir.salon.com/topics/clear_ch...ndex.html?ti=1

[AntiSoCalSkier]

Isn't this a really poor business plan on the part of the devloper? The Intrawest "Villages" work because the same company owns the skiing and the real estate. In this case, the Wolf Creek owners have a serious trump card, since they own the actual attraction. If the mountain becomes too crowded, the Texans aren't going to be able to expand the ski area since they don't own enough land (unless they have some sort of plan to build a seperate but connected ski area). On the other hand, the Wolf Creek owners can do all sorts of things to screw with the developers. For example, they can limit how many multi-day tickets are sold, and sell day passes in a location that is difficult for the village residents to get to. Then all those people spending $250/night for their room won't be able to ski. At the most extreme, the resort owners can simply wait until the village is complete, then shut down the ski resort, leaving the Texans with a very expensive resort with no amenities.

[Foggy_Goggles]

Re: the EIS

Don't assume that the EIS actually means anything. It's simply a bueracratic hurdle. You'd be amazed at how little the FS actually knows about the Ecosystem's they manage. The FS assessment identifies the area as habit for both Elk and Lynx. Nobody I know, including folks who have been in the BC thousands of days over multiple decades, has seen any evidence of either of those animals. Like I said, its simply a hurdle. Often times, little if any logic is applied.

[365wp]

Originally posted by AntiSoCalSkier
Isn't this a really poor business plan on the part of the devloper?

That's assuming the developer needs to sell 100% of the units to turn a profit and the sole desire of the people purchasing the units is skiing.

I haven't spent a lot of time in the WC area, but I think SW CO is one of the prettiest places I've ever been to. And my guess is the close proximity to WC might be seen as a bonus, not a necessity. A lot of people come north to CO in the summer...Silverton's daily population goes from 500 to over 3k as people come and go on the trains and through the mountains on 550 (?).

At the most extreme, the resort owners can simply wait until the village is complete, then shut down the ski resort, leaving the Texans with a very expensive resort with no amenities.

Might be what the Texans are waiting for...WC closes, they grab more land or use power to acquire more land and build Vail II.

[Skip Dooley]

Fuck Texas!

[crashnburn'd]

Originally posted by Odin
Clear Channel, "Red" McCombs, and the DNR SUCK! The Vikings however, are going to crush the Eagles Monday night on route to a Super Bowl victory.