I'm not articulating this well, but as a public agency managing a public good, at some point the Forest Service needs to be held accountable for preventing affordable & reasonable winter time recreation & access.
The epic & ikon duopoly is certainly bad, but in the USA compared to Europe or Canada even the private "mom & pop" areas are a monopoly, limiting consumer choice and options.
The forest service on the last 30 years has been an impediment to skiing and recreation in general. Speaking with a friend who is higher up in the FS (and a skier) he thinks if the forest service of today existed in the 1950s we would not have any skiing in the USA on public land. While there's no overt animosity toward skiing there are a lot of individuals who are subversively adding road blocks towards less human access summer or winter.
While I'm not suggesting that Vail Corp should get the keys to the city, perhaps some leniency towards small community and non-profit skiing could be instituted? What if the Cascades had a handful of the corporate held big resorts but a few dozen small areas with 1 - 2 chairlifts in cool places that were non-profit & volunteer run?
At the very least the development process needs to be streamlined and litigation minimized.
Bookmarks