Solitude claims that they are leaving the Meadow Chutes and West Bowl alone but 100's of "slackcountry skiers" will just leave the resort boundries and track it all up.
Yep. From the top of whatever lift serves the Honeycomb cliffs area, it's a simple bootpack up to access much of this terrain. Have you noticed the increase in bootpackers along Davenport Hill and up to the west bowl? Imagine once a lift goes in. Backcountry skiers just simply won't ever go there anymore -- it won't be worth it.
Any ideas on what we can do here to stop this (other than public comment)?
Here are a few thoughts. Save our Canyons is a great org to join and support. Part of Solitude's argument is that while they serve hundreds of thousands of skiers each year, SOC only represents a few thousand locals. If you care about this stuff, you need to join the orgs that fight against development. Tell your friends. Post crap on the 'net. Public comment is also essential. It might seem like the FS or BLM probably ignores most letters written by private individuals, but take a look at any EIS, and you'll find that they are obligated by law to respond to substantive criticism. It's very important to make substantive comments, not just "I like to tour, so screw the resorts." I try to keep mine to 90% policy and law and 10% personal subjective feelings. A great case-in-point is the new wilderness legislation from Rep. Matheson. If you look at his press releases, he considered local input essential in his decision-making process, and he might not have proposed this without the support of locals.
Here's my letter to the FS when they had the last public comment period for Solitude's last attempt:
Mr. Ferebee and Mrs. Kahlow,
I write today to vociferously protest the requested expansion of Solitude Mountain Resort into Silver Fork Canyon. Silver Fork is one of the few remaining pristine mountain canyons in the Salt Lake Ranger District, one of the most heavily-utilized Districts in the West. As a tributary to Big Cottonwood Creek, the water that drains from Silver Fork provides part of the clean drinking water to more than 600,000 people, and ski resort expansion into Silver Fork would surely threaten the overall watershed and increase the turbidity of Big Cottonwood Creek.
Added to the ecological damage that lift-served skiing would render upon Silver Fork, the loss of this area to the backcountry ski touring community and other human-powered winter travelers of the Wasatch would be truly devastating. Silver Fork is one of the few remaining north-facing drainages of the Wasatch Mountains that can provide relatively safe ski touring even in high avalanche danger. It has been an extremely popular area for backcountry skiers for decades.
And when the loss of Silver Fork is placed within the larger context of the encroaching development of the Wasatch Mountains, the trend is clear: human-powered recreation is being relegated into a smaller and smaller area. Just within the last two decades, ski resorts have expanded into several other drainages in the Wasatch. The fact that many resorts offer “gates” into the backcountry means that beyond the awful loss of these areas to backcountry skiing, the resort gates allow resort skiers to ride lifts to access the terrain adjacent to the resorts, prompting the new term “slackcountry,” further crowding this terrain. If Solitude is permitted to develop Silver Fork, and Alta expands its lifts onto Flagstaff Mountain, this portion of the Wasatch will almost be completely closed to backcountry travelers forever.
The trend appears to be to cater to those who can spend upwards of eighty dollars for a few hours of skiing with lifts, warming huts, lodges, and other unnecessary development to the detriment of those of us who choose to use our legs and lungs to access this terrain instead of our pocketbooks.
Salt Lake County’s Wasatch Canyons Master Plan from the 1980s concluded that this area should remain open because of its popularity with backcountry travelers. And, the 2003 Forest Plan concluded that no ski resort expansion should be permitted. The 2003 Record of Decision (ROD) “allows no expansion of current ski area permit boundaries into adjacent highly valued
undeveloped areas, but continues to manage within existing permit boundaries for world-class skiing opportunities in winter; and in summer for nature-based recreation opportunities complementary to resort facilities.”
Solitude’s stated reasons for the expansion also do not pass even a cursory common sense analysis, especially considering that they propose expanding their resort by 50 percent. They claim that they cannot meet future or current demand for access to this public land. First, providing access to public land is not Solitude’s job. Second, their stated reasons make no sense. The skier density in the Wasatch resorts is just 255 skiers per acre, which is significantly less than the 400 skiers per acre that is common in most other western resorts. Solitude’s marketing campaign this year quips that they cannot even spell the word “crowds,” and hearing a resort named “Solitude” complain that it is too crowded is absurd on its face. Third, this discussion is actually premature until the vehicular constraints of the Wasatch are resolved. The transportation infrastructure needed to allow the expansion of lift-served skier visits does not currently exist in Big Cottonwood Canyon. Fourth, even if Solitude’s arguments did have credence, taken to their logical conclusion, it would require endless expansion to meet the surely rising future populations of the area. Is this sustainable? Does this comport with the mandate that the National Forests be managed with “multiple use” as its watchword? Must natural areas enjoyed by human-powered recreationists always yield to the stated economic necessities of a few ski resorts?
I urge you to enforce the 2003 Record of Decision concerning Silver Fork and deny Solitude’s proposal. Once this pristine mountain area is gone, it will be gone forever to the corduroy-groomed slopes, downed trees, lodges, and parking areas involved in ski resort expansion. This expansion would be to the great detriment of backcountry travelers like myself and ruin this area for both summer and winter travelers for the benefit of a few lift-served skiers and the bottom line of Solitude resort. The Wasatch is simply too small to abide further and further economic development and encroachment of natural areas. Please deny this request and maintain this special place for future generations.
Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter,
me