starting a ski area on Forest Service land

[yeahman]

Full blown resorts aside, I'm surprised we haven't seen more proposals for backcountry ski areas. Minimal infrastructure - a couple of warming huts. Access via skin track. Some level of avalanche control.

Seems like it'd be (relatively) palatable to the eco warriors, and based on the number of people I see skinning up groomers while the lifts are spinning, it seems like there's a market for it.

Some of the bc terrain near Lincoln and Seeley Lake might be a great option for something like that, and a community that welcomes recreation dollars would be a huge positive, rather than the NIMBY attitude likely to be encountered in other Montana locales. Just don't fuck with the snowmobile access!

[dunderhead]

Yup. ROI. Passion only goes so far.

What is the ROI on saving whales, singing, writing a poem, going for a walk, having a dog, reading a book, saying hi to a stranger? that is all shit we do. There is more to life than ROI, unless of course you were brainwashed by the University of Chicago economics department, idolize Elon Musk, and strive to work on Wall street with all the other douchebags.

[Percy Rideout]

I first read this thread last night but did not respont. Today, while taking line after line of fresh, steep, and untracked powder on one of the most epic days at Aspen Highlands, I thought about this discussion.

My theory is as follows. In this day and age, more and more maggots all over north America are pushing the limits of extreme skiing on steep, natural, powder terrain. It really takes the largest, most popular, "corporate" ski areas like Vail, Aspen, Squaw, etc. to open terrain of this magnitude to us rippers. It takes a LOT of money to maintain, control, and patrol extreme terrain and keep it "on-piste".

Again I bring up Aspen Highlands because of my experience today. 12" of new snow had fallen overnight, bringing the 48 hour total to almost two feet. There were freshies to be had to every local ripper and visitors in the know. We were all taking lap after lap off the runs like Kesslers that conclude at the Deep Temerity lift. However, everyone who woke up that day and saw the snow totals was there for one reason: to hike the bowl. Bomb blasts were heard from high above all morning, but it hadn't opened. Finally, around noon, ski patrol dropped the first of many ropes that allowed hikers to move up the ridge.

Together, dozens of people hiked up to the next roped section, and waited for ski patrol. This process went on for almost two hours, through 3 sets of ropes. Although many people dropped in early, there was a sizable group who kept advancing as far as ski patrol would let them. Eventually, ski patrol finished the job for the day and opened up to the Fundeck gate.

My point is that today's operation took a lot of money. I personally saw at least 10 different patrollers involved in some way or another, not to mention snowmobiles, a cat, and tons of explosives. The payoff came in opening some incredibly extreme big mountain terrain to a group of dedicated individuals who just came to rip pow.

An earlier poster in this thread used the phrase "the Silverton model". I'm not sure what that means, but I've snowboarded Silverton. If running a ski area on a low budget -- with a limited ski patrol staff who are stretched so thin by duty that they can unintentionally come off rudely to guests, with a ticket office that sometimes has to turn away skiers because they are "at capacity", that requires guests to wear avalanche transceivers because patrol doesn't have the resources to effectively blast steep slopes to verify their safety, and at the end of the runs requires guests to wait for a bus just to take them back to board the chairlift again -- is what's known as the "Silverton Model", then you can have your Silverton.

Its no coincidence that the ski areas with the most accessible extreme terrain for maggots is also home to high priced condos, retail shops, and restaurants and big wide open groomers full of wealthy gapers. The capitalism that we all love to hate or hate to love provides these ski areas with the necessary resources to provide the best extreme terrain for "the rest of us".

Lester Crown read this thread, and the idea to start Alterra/IKON came to him after reading this post.

[Joey Joe Joe Junior Shabadoo]

What is the ROI on saving whales, singing, writing a poem, going for a walk, having a dog, reading a book, saying hi to a stranger? that is all shit we do. There is more to life than ROI, unless of course you were brainwashed by the University of Chicago economics department, idolize Elon Musk, and strive to work on Wall street with all the other douchebags.

Go round up some investors with this sales pitch and let us know how it goes. There's no such thing as a free lunch in this world, especially when it comes to ski resorts.

[Bunion 2020]

What is the ROI on saving whales, singing, writing a poem, going for a walk, having a dog, reading a book, saying hi to a stranger? that is all shit we do.

Fairly high in my book.

There is more to life than ROI, unless of course you were brainwashed by the University of Chicago economics department, idolize Elon Musk, and strive to work on Wall street with all the other douchebags.

Your Trust Fund been released yet?

[MagnificentUnicorn]

What is the ROI on saving whales, singing, writing a poem, going for a walk, having a dog, reading a book, saying hi to a stranger? that is all shit we do. There is more to life than ROI, unless of course you were brainwashed by the University of Chicago economics department, idolize Elon Musk, and strive to work on Wall street with all the other douchebags.

None of the things you listed requires much of anything from the participants. Like I said, it’d be great to have a ski area up every valley on the east slopes of the Cascades, but we live in America and anyone who would do the ground work and pay for one of these areas is going to want something in return.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Bunion 2020]

but we live in America and anyone who would do the ground work and pay for one of these areas is going to want something in return.

BINGO!

And from the looks of things Aaron Brill has done well for himself but he ain't a millionaire and he worked his ass off to get where he is.

[dunderhead]

None of the things you listed requires much of anything from the participants. Like I said, it’d be great to have a ski area up every valley on the east slopes of the Cascades, but we live in America and anyone who would do the ground work and pay for one of these areas is going to want something in return.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Yeah, maybe you are right. But then again, there are plenty of independent's turning a profit, there are co-ops succeeding, and everyone knows a nonprofit like Bridger has the best skiing in Montana and stays in the green. The original point being that the impediment is the forest service.

But then again, you are the MAN on the ground wondering where clear cuts and roads are NE of Stevens. uh, everywhere, this took
me 45 seconds to find and is not Wilderness. clear cuts, roads and alpine. Maybe IRA but I doubt it.

[Buster Highmen]

I'll take Silverton anyday.

[dunderhead]

I'll take Silverton anyday.

yeah, the model works, is profitable, and there are plenty of spots for more of them. Since we have so many experts on this I will post this link. I think Blurred posted it earlier on. It is about the failure of the 1986 NFSAPA bill. A deep dive into why the forest service has failed in their mission statement of providing recreational and economic opportunities to rural areas. Jump to section III. SKI RESORTS AND NATIONAL FORESTS: RETHINKING FOREST SERVICE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECREATIONAL USE (bc.edu)

[MagnificentUnicorn]

Yeah, maybe you are right. But then again, there are plenty of independent's turning a profit, there are co-ops succeeding, and everyone knows a nonprofit like Bridger has the best skiing in Montana and stays in the green. The original point being that the impediment is the forest service.

But then again, you are the MAN on the ground wondering where clear cuts and roads are NE of Stevens. uh, everywhere, this took
me 45 seconds to find and is not Wilderness. clear cuts, roads and alpine. Maybe IRA but I doubt it.

That ridge line at the top is the Rock/Howard/Mastiff group and it’s not wilderness but you will never see a ski area there for various reasons too long to elaborate here. The clear cuts at the bottom of your image are the area I was talking about. That’s private timber land and it is adjacent to FS alpine terrain on Arrowhead. That’s your best bet.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[dunderhead]

That ridge line at the top is the Rock/Howard/Mastiff group and it’s not wilderness but you will never see a ski area there for various reasons too long to elaborate here. The clear cuts at the bottom of your image are the area I was talking about. That’s private timber land and it is adjacent to FS alpine terrain on Arrowhead. That’s your best bet.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

cool, yeah, i was just using it as an example and one could find 100 spots like this up and down the east side of the Cascades and maybe 10 of those would go if the forest service allowed it. And the original point is that they simply don't. And if you wanna know why, go to that link i just posted. Maybe this spot is no go cuz of the bull trout in lake wentachee, the people around Plain, salmon in the Wenatchee, sasquatch on the ridgeline, or whatever? Maybe the forest service is getting their pockets lined by creating a monopoly for these garbage corporations? Maybe I just don't know shit and when my trust fund comes in I can just go douche it up in Leavenworth with all the other tools?

[raisingarizona13]

Full blown resorts aside, I'm surprised we haven't seen more proposals for backcountry ski areas. Minimal infrastructure - a couple of warming huts. Access via skin track. Some level of avalanche control.

Seems like it'd be (relatively) palatable to the eco warriors, and based on the number of people I see skinning up groomers while the lifts are spinning, it seems like there's a market for it.

Being a poor working class skier I love this model. I think an area with a completely protected skin track line to mid angle tree skiing but also access to bigger, high alpine skiing would be sweet. Maybe have a warming hut at the base with a wood burning stove, a keg of beer and some food. If the tree lines are manageable enough you could skip the avid mitigation. Maintenance, or at least a lot of it could be left to a local volunteer group. I see it like a city, or community park. If there were a lot of places like this that didn't cost very much to use I'd travel all over to ski at them. It would create a completely different sort of mountain town than ones with major ski resorts.

[Buster Highmen]

yeah, the model works, is profitable, and there are plenty of spots for more of them. Since we have so many experts on this I will post this link. I think Blurred posted it earlier on. It is about the failure of the 1986 NFSAPA bill. A deep dive into why the forest service has failed in their mission statement of providing recreational and economic opportunities to rural areas. Jump to section III. SKI RESORTS AND NATIONAL FORESTS: RETHINKING FOREST SERVICE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR RECREATIONAL USE (bc.edu)

A suggestion, if I may.

Don't waste your time arguing with Eeyores, Negative Nellies and Can Doodoos. Yes, it's fun to let one's imagination spew out on the webpages, but ultimately, that's a waste of time.

There's a bunch of locales where a new Puget Sound ski area might work. LWS (TAFKALS) has listed a few and there's more. Spend time identifying them and sorting their various attributes and detriments.

The real work has more to do with writing up proposals and finding investors or funding. That's where time would be better spent. Try reviewing other MDPs for Crustal (successful) or Sandy Butte (unsuccessful) .

Regarding human powered only, the problem with that model is financial flow in the age of insurance premiums. That and the difference in topography and weather in the PNW relative to the Rockies where in the latter case, there's so much more access to snow and skiable terrain.

[John_B]

As alluded to by dunderhead you'd be dealing with bull trout and steelhead which are ESA listed as Threatened as well as spring a Chinook which are Endangered.

Beyond the prior issues in the Methow with the attempted ski area on Sandy Butte I have a hard time time imagining a suitable location in the Methow. The way upper Twisp would have snow and terrain but wilderness, shitty roads, lack of suitable flat spots for a base as well as all of the ESA issues of the Wenatchee area.

[raisingarizona13]

A suggestion, if I may.

Don't waste your time arguing with Eeyores, Negative Nellies and Can Doodoos. Yes, it's fun to let one's imagination spew out on the webpages, but ultimately, that's a waste of time.

There's a bunch of locales where a new Puget Sound ski area might work. LWS (TAFKALS) has listed a few and there's more. Spend time identifying them and sorting their various attributes and detriments.

The real work has more to do with writing up proposals and finding investors or funding. That's where time would be better spent. Try reviewing other MDPs for Crustal (successful) or Sandy Butte (unsuccessful) .

The biggest hurdle might be finding the right location with the right Forest Service District Ranger that would actually entertain the idea. A lot of FS employees aren't interested in rocking the boat or creating a huge workload for themselves. The eco nuts have succeeded in making a lot of land mangers scared to go forward with projects like these.

[dunderhead]

A suggestion, if I may.

Don't waste your time arguing with Eeyores, Negative Nellies and Can Doodoos. Yes, it's fun to let one's imagination spew out on the webpages, but ultimately, that's a waste of time.

There's a bunch of locales where a new Puget Sound ski area might work. LWS (TAFKALS) has listed a few and there's more. Spend time identifying them and sorting their various attributes and detriments.

The real work has more to do with writing up proposals and finding investors or funding. That's where time would be better spent. Try reviewing other MDPs for Crustal (successful) or Sandy Butte (unsuccessful) .

Good point, these people have bent the knee to their corporate overlords, their souls are broken, and their dreams are dead. I wonder if their bosses know they are posting on this dumb forum while they should be entering data or whatever sad thing they do. I already got my spot picked, it is in MontIdahoming and is epic. .

[nickwm21]

Full blown resorts aside, I'm surprised we haven't seen more proposals for backcountry ski areas. Minimal infrastructure - a couple of warming huts. Access via skin track. Some level of avalanche control.

Seems like it'd be (relatively) palatable to the eco warriors, and based on the number of people I see skinning up groomers while the lifts are spinning, it seems like there's a market for it.

There is a decent discussion about this in the PNW thread.

I would love to have a minimally developed, avy managed backcountry ski area…

But how much would you pay to go walk uphill there? $30?

With the economics of securing the land, getting sewer and potable water there, and providing avy control - it would be somewhat expensive to participate.

The example of Bluebird Backcountry in CO was given. A Bluebird day ticket is $60. A Baker day ticket is $75. Where would you rather ski?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[raisingarizona13]

There is a decent discussion about this in the PNW thread.

I would love to have a minimally developed, avy managed backcountry ski area…

But how much would you pay to go walk uphill there? $30?

With the economics of securing the land, getting sewer and potable water there, and providing avy control - it would be somewhat expensive to participate.

The example of Bluebird Backcountry in CO was given. A Bluebird day ticket is $60. A Baker day ticket is $75. Where would you rather ski?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

This is why I prefer the minimalist approach. Maybe it won't have that "sick gnar" but if the recognized ski lines/runs/glades are more manageable as far as avalanche danger goes you might be able to make it more like 10 bucks a day. Maybe the warming hut/lodge could be a privately owned business.

[dunderhead]

Some of the bc terrain near Lincoln and Seeley Lake might be a great option for something like that, and a community that welcomes recreation dollars would be a huge positive, rather than the NIMBY attitude likely to be encountered in other Montana locales. Just don't fuck with the snowmobile access!

Yeah. that stuff up there is huge and endless. There are forest service roads that go high up but they are unplowed so it is snowmobile access. There are too many issues to ever do a lift in there, Griz, first nation, etc. But yeah, it would be a cool spot to just plow a road up and let people without biles just go walk. Another thing the forest service is too lame to do, plow an access road. I mean fuk, Hyalite is plowed by donation I think? Of course, this is the only spot like it, so it is a massive shitshow, and the forest service is always threatening to take it away. Great place for me to drive my Audi and model my new Arc'Teryx coat before wrecking it with my ice axe or whatever the fuk that is, god it is good to have a huge fund

[toast2266]

There is a decent discussion about this in the PNW thread.

I would love to have a minimally developed, avy managed backcountry ski area…

But how much would you pay to go walk uphill there? $30?

With the economics of securing the land, getting sewer and potable water there, and providing avy control - it would be somewhat expensive to participate.

The example of Bluebird Backcountry in CO was given. A Bluebird day ticket is $60. A Baker day ticket is $75. Where would you rather ski?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Yeah, it'd certainly be tricky to find the balance of how much you could charge. But lift served areas will continue to get more expensive and more crowded, which would make the backcountry resort more viable. And while I probably wouldn't pay $60 for a day ticket, I might pay $300 for a season pass.

I don't know much about the costs of operating a backcountry ski area like that, but I'd imagine the biggest cost would be insurance. Something with good but not necessarily avy prone terrain might keep insurance rates down?

[hatchgreenchile]

yeah, the model works, is profitable, and there are plenty of spots for more of them.

Interesting thread...

I have my doubts. A place like Silverton, which is truly one of a kind, can make it work because their terrain is SICK, they get great snowfall and have the altitude and aspect to preserve it. Those factors, in unison, are extremely elusive! They charge accordingly, with extremely low capacity limits. Is the "model" <400 skiers per week, because that's what they get away with during each weeks guided days. The helicopter helps too.

There are some rumblings about Kendall Mtn expanding, that will be interesting to watch.

If money was no issue, I'd be trying to make something work by Platoro CO. Seriously.

[Joey Joe Joe Junior Shabadoo]

Good point, these people have bent the knee to their corporate overlords, their souls are broken, and their dreams are dead. I wonder if their bosses know they are posting on this dumb forum while they should be entering data or whatever sad thing they do .

That's kind of ironic, did you read the paper you linked? It sounds like it was written at the behest of Vail's corporate overlords by someone who has neither lived nor worked in the WRNF. I live in a ski town and have no problem with ski resorts but if you want to start a new one do some homework, quit blaming the FS for everything and find a better position piece because that paper is shit.

[dunfree]

Interesting thread...

I have my doubts. A place like Silverton, which is truly one of a kind, can make it work because their terrain is SICK, they get great snowfall and have the altitude and aspect to preserve it. Those factors, in unison, are extremely elusive! They charge accordingly, with extremely low capacity limits. Is the "model" <400 skiers per week, because that's what they get away with during each weeks guided days. The helicopter helps too.

There are some rumblings about Kendall Mtn expanding, that will be interesting to watch.

If money was no issue, I'd be trying to make something work by Platoro CO. Seriously.

the original hype for silverton now 20 years old, was lower cost skiing more akin to an nz club field. I think it’s clear now that that wouldn’t have worked.

[raisingarizona13]

Interesting thread...

I have my doubts. A place like Silverton, which is truly one of a kind, can make it work because their terrain is SICK, they get great snowfall and have the altitude and aspect to preserve it. Those factors, in unison, are extremely elusive! They charge accordingly, with extremely low capacity limits. Is the "model" <400 skiers per week, because that's what they get away with during each weeks guided days. The helicopter helps too.

There are some rumblings about Kendall Mtn expanding, that will be interesting to watch.

If money was no issue, I'd be trying to make something work by Platoro CO. Seriously.

I'm still blown away with their snow safety program. It's a cool model and they've made it work but going into that with the San Juan snowpack seems extremely risky and bold. There's gotta be a good level of stress for that team trying to keep people safe there.