Results 51 to 75 of 519
Thread: Solitude Expansion...
-
11-25-2009, 10:58 PM #51
See you homos out there!
-
11-25-2009, 11:06 PM #52
-
11-25-2009, 11:08 PM #53
BCC doesn't have SHIT for tacos, AFIK, so what's the point here?
Forum Cross Pollinator, gratuitously strident
-
11-25-2009, 11:10 PM #54
-
11-26-2009, 12:27 AM #55Registered User
- Join Date
- Oct 2004
- Posts
- 109
I agree with your sentiments, Utah is crowded with a bunch of ubercore shredgnarlians. Suggesting central Idaho as another option would be sending them into the arms of 2-stroke burning, gun toting outdoor enthusiasts. With any luck they will be scared back to the safety of the heard. Colorado is much safer, and there are more core as folk down there to slurp down energy goo with as you discuss the merits of human powered ascents While driving up I-70.
-
11-26-2009, 01:53 AM #56
I'm a transplant to Utah from Idaho, so I'll tread lightly.
Work brought me here, and the access to the backcountry/slackcountry/sidecounty/whatever maintains my positive attitude about the place.
I haven't skied the resorts that much, so it wouldn't benefit me if they acquired more terrain. I'm against the proposed expansion...
...but as soon as one truly convinces the herd to relocate to central ID, I'll find them and stick a knife in their throat and start twisting. That is, if the Stanley locals don't shoot you, first.
I think most people have a case of the "NIMBY's."
But if you want a more "backcountry" experience, then we had better obliterate any company that has proffered progressive equipment and move back to 3-pin tele gear, leather boots, and voile snakeskins. Hell, use rabbit skins or mohair. These measures would truly weed out those that aren't "core." The truth is this: The BC experience is the new black because it has presented itself as a feasible option to a much larger demographic. And that demographic grows each year. And we're all to blame for it, as we all sharpen the double-edged sword of progression.
That being said, I'm all for keeping Silver Fork free of the resort-goers.Click here to increase your vocabulary.
-
11-26-2009, 08:29 AM #57Registered User
- Join Date
- Feb 2005
- Location
- SLC
- Posts
- 1,124
This thing presents the exact same problem as the flagstaff lift - once you are on that ridge, you can ski everything from the eastern side of cardiff, through days to silver with very little effort. So basically, it ruins the whole powder circuit.
Isn't there plenty of lift serviced terrain in the wasatch? If solitude expands into silver fork, then in 10 or 20 years some dumbass will be clamoring to expand into some other drainage, because they are bored of the lift serviced terrain available at that time.
I like resort skiing, but my favorite thing about the wasatch is the undeveloped terrain for skiing and hiking. And Yetiman, I don't have the fucking time to drive to central idaho every time I want to ski backcountry. I have kids and a demanding job, so I often only have a few hours to ski. Like many, many people in the SLC area, I like backcountry skiing with my free time and I like having a fair amount of good terrain that is easy to access in the central wasatch.
The funny thing about the argument of many here is that they say "hey, it's already tracked out anyway, so they should just put a lift up there" while also arguing that more people like resort skiing so the resorts should just get all the terrain they can gobble up. Why do you think the backcountry terrain gets tracked out? It's because it's a very popular activity. And I know that I can get fresher tracks by driving my dirtbike down to Nebo like Trackhead, but I just don't have the fucking time. Without lifts, I can still get nice, relatively untracke snow in the central wasatch for a minimal time commitment. I really like that, and have many friends who feel the same way.
And there is no need to expand to keep the resort crowds spread out. Shit, Alta, Snowbird, Park City and Deer Valley (our 4 most crowded resorts) are still much less crowded than colorado front range resorts. And Solitude, Brighton, Snowbasin and Powder Mountain are still really really uncrowded compared to most of Colorado.
I know some people hate this idea, but if we want more room for expansion of our ski industry, why don't we focus it on Snowbasin and Powmow? They've got tons of terrain with no people on it. Let them put in some faux euro base villages up there so that they can attract vacation skiers.
-
11-26-2009, 08:50 AM #58
Bump for Buddha, Bros, Bob, and can't we all get a Bong on the Booter to EGP
Oh and Brain Damage is so not ready in case you were wondering
"When the child was a child it waited patiently for the first snow and it still does"- Van "The Man" Morrison
"I find I have already had my reward, in the doing of the thing" - Buzz Holmstrom
"THIS IS WHAT WE DO"-AML -ski on in eternal peace
"I have posted in here but haven't read it carefully with my trusty PoliAsshat antenna on."-DipshitDanno
-
11-26-2009, 09:15 AM #59
You spelled herd wrong, fucktard.
Balance is a good thing. I ski in the backcountry and at the resort, I enjoy both. They are both the same sport, SKIING, which everyone on this board is passionate about it, at least I hope they are. It's nice to get out early before the lifts are turning on the weekday for a dawn patrol and hit some great terrain. 2500 vert of ascending then skiing in 2 hours isn't bad before work. If resorts start expanding onto this terrain it means no more uphill traffic, and people who are passionate about backcountry SKIING before work lose some of the best quick access terrain.
As for Silver Fork specifically, I don't see the point. Short shots, long traverses out. Maybe they will put a long tow at the bottom like Alta.Last edited by JTrue; 11-26-2009 at 09:38 AM.
-
11-26-2009, 09:15 AM #60
Nothing valueable to add, but signing up to see how this plays out.
Low post count because I'm too busy working and then skiing, but not neccessarily in that order.
-
11-26-2009, 09:36 AM #61
This thread is worth it for the Yeti equation alone. Strong work.
I don't want lazy resort skiers to get to my secret BC stash,but then again I'm too fucking lazy to actually tour somewhere that isn't sidecountry. And I'm sticking with this.
-
11-26-2009, 10:39 AM #62
What is going to be really ubergnarbrobrafuckingrad is when Alta gets the lift up Flag, Solitude gets the lift into Silver Fork, and then Dicko gets his lift into White Pine.
-
11-26-2009, 01:41 PM #63
message removed i'm a dick
Last edited by alto; 11-26-2009 at 02:22 PM.
-
11-26-2009, 01:44 PM #64
not so much throw it away as...
ski it without having to gear up and turn it into some kind of expedition every time.
Also, it is true that everyone who doesn't like skinning is a dumbass. Thanks for pointing that out.
Also, since we're throwing insults around: how about this you fucking fuck: you go make your living hiking around for 1000s of hours, fuck your back up, and see if you maybe don't find that an enjoyable form of recreation anymore. Liking to ski more than liking to trek isn't a lack of creativity. If I would rather spend my day slogging around I'd be doing that. I guess that's fun for you guys, I don't know, it doesn't make you a genius and me a retard. Fuck off.
-
11-26-2009, 01:52 PM #65
Silver Fork is Wilderness?
This is the first I've heard.
-
11-26-2009, 02:02 PM #66
-
11-26-2009, 02:06 PM #67glocal
- Join Date
- May 2002
- Posts
- 33,440
Let's negotiate a settlement. Put the lifts in and ban all cars. period.
That way we can have wilderness in the cities, but lifts to the backcountry.
-
11-26-2009, 02:07 PM #68
There isn't a peak in the Wasatch that is more than a 5 hour approach for the average touring person.
I was driving up LCC today to skin up Snowbird of all places, yeah, I'm the gay guy Yeti man talks about. Yesterday I got off the phone with Otter, we were both bitching about the Wasatch shit show. But fuck that, the drive and the skin cleared my mind. The Wasatch is a cool place. Just hike past the fence line of the herd and you can have a pretty good day away from most. Anybody you run into "out there" likely will be your peer and usually a friend.
Fuck the haters. The Wasatch is still a good place despite all the arguing on TGR, all the lifts going in, the heli, and the bro/brah's.
Last edited by Trackhead; 11-26-2009 at 02:32 PM.
-
11-26-2009, 02:11 PM #69
message removed again.
Last edited by alto; 11-26-2009 at 02:23 PM.
-
11-26-2009, 02:20 PM #70
"The Wasatch is still a good place despite all the arguing on TGR, all the lifts going in, the heli, and the bro/brah's."
Best line of the thread. Thanks.
One thing I can say, this thread has become typical for around here. Let's make it personal...very entertaining, for sure.“How does it feel to be the greatest guitarist in the world? I don’t know, go ask Rory Gallagher”. — Jimi Hendrix
-
11-26-2009, 02:56 PM #71
Most people who are opposed to expansion are from Vermont and haven't been able to pull their heads out of their asses and clean their eyes and look around. The wastach is a small range with below-average terrain and above average snow quality by international standards (and even within the states).
there is nothing wilderness about it. that point has been covered. Just because you want to ski some low angle bullshit on your lunch break doesn't justify not building a lift there.
If you want to go for a tour, go somewhere else. Silver fork mostly sucks dick anyway.
Whether it is liked or not, big business will continue to develop utah until it is interconnected, too expensive (which it already is), and poorly planned. Welcome to Capitalism! Don't like it? Go elsewhere. No one in the Republican-controlled state government gives a shit about your touring desires.
Oh and I forgot to mention the water thing. The whole Utah-watershed joke is so fucking laughable. Only people with money can shit in the watershred, especially if they are mormon-owned/backed.
You think your ski area is going to dump less shit in the water than me jumping into lake mary? NO FUCKING SWIMMING NO NO NO NO NON !!!!!
/ENDRANT
-
11-26-2009, 03:46 PM #72Registered User
- Join Date
- Oct 2004
- Posts
- 109
I wrote a song:
I like to ski
I like to ski
ski ski ski
skiing is for me
you like to bitch
you like to bitch
bitch bitch bitch
you're going in switch
We are the jongs
we are the jongs
jong jong jong
lets sing a happy song
we like to shred
we like to shred
shred shred shred
shred til we're dead
We got boards on our feet
We got boards on our feet
feet feet feet
our life is so neat
I find it is a happy song to sing on a hike, or going downhill really fast. If you sing it down there in mormon country maybe people will quit being so angry about being in the mountains. Leave the ego and attitude in your fucking car brognar.
-
11-26-2009, 03:48 PM #73
Bullshit, most opposed live here, doesn't matter what state you popped out of your momma's vagina.
Getting your dick partly sucked is better than nothing, I like to have the option.
It's currently public land, so my lunch break desires to get my dick partially sucked with some skiing thrown in are indeed valid.
Russia?
The only thing in your rant that makes any sense.
-
11-26-2009, 08:10 PM #74
Silver Fork is wilderness for where it's at. For some people, the Wasatch is all the wilderness they'll ever have the opportunity to experience. It's not about elitism, it's about saving some places where people can go without paying money and having to put up with a bunch of rules, where they are responsible for their actions and the consequences.
Last edited by sfotex; 11-26-2009 at 10:17 PM.
When life gives you haters, make haterade.
-
11-26-2009, 09:29 PM #75
While I agree that this view and certainly the definition of a wilderness are tough to put together, this picture shows exactly why the wilderness act was needed. And I think you've missed the point.
The Wilderness Act was put in place in order to stop areas of growing population from trampling everywhere around it.
So what if you can see a city from where you are? The wilderness designation was put in place to stop all 2 million of those people from being right next to you. And Salt Lake is unique in the fact that it offers so many places where you can see so few people within a short drive of the city either in the cottonwoods, or elsewhere.
To say that these areas should not be protected just because there are areas of high population near them or within sights is just absurd.Originally Posted by wintermittentOriginally Posted by snowsprite
Bookmarks