Thoughts on proposed ski area?

chewyman55

Active Member
Messages
843
I'm not from or familiar with the area so I'm curious what you local MM fellas think about the proposed ski area near Logan. Sounds like it's pretty good winter range for deer and elk and sandwiched right between a Management area and Wilderness. Saw an interview tonight from the developers saying animals would benefit from the ski area because they were going to put in plants for them. Had to chuckle about that. What are your thoughts?

http://www.ksl.com/?sid=22597636&ni...ounty-ski-resort-outrages-some&s_cid=queue-15
 
elkun!

The few Pet Deer that will live right at the Ski Resort will Benefit!

The Greenies will hand Feed them!



Hello Mr. Wisz,This is the UDWR Calling....LMMFAO!
15" Bases?
30" 5ths?
GOOD GAWD A MIGHTY!
 
elkassassin, them dears; that will be hand fed at the (resort)? aint the 4 legged kind,,,,,,
 
>elkassassin, them dears; that will be
>hand fed at the (resort)?
>aint the 4 legged kind,,,,,,
>

+1
Zeke
 
I found the resorts master plan and had a quick look at the wildlife impact report and thought it was quite contrary to Mr. Checketts' claim that there will be more deer and elk then ever before because of the ski resort. This statement from the report says it all "Due to Project development there will likely be increased use of the adjacent RWMA and USFS Wilderness Area because access will be improved. Increased use of these public lands may negatively impact wildlife that use these areas, particularly for big game during the winter.

"Here is the URL to the report. If interested look up Appendix B.

http://www.brwcouncil.org/reports/081011_Master Plan_LoRes.pdf
 
Where they want to put the resort it will never make it, they don't get enough snow. Those low slopes will be bare of snow even before the valley floor. Their slopes will melt off very quickly. I live here in cache valley and remember reading the proposal when it first came out and my initial thought was a failed business. There's not enough people in cache valley to support two resorts and it won't pull in people from out of the valley.
 
I grew up in Richmond, and have watched deer on the winter range exactly where they propose to place this resort. This is prime mule deer winter habitat. Any deer that come out of Cherry Creek will be pushed over into City Creek or High Creek. The carrying capacity of the land will not allow for all those animals. I am really surprised that this idea has made it this far.
 
+1 to both posts above.

Stupid place for a ski resort.

Can't believe it's even a possibility.
 
Sounds like another, 'NOT IN MY BACKYARD' scenario.
4abc76ff29b26fc1.jpg
 
To me it's not a "not in my backyard" scenario. I don't know how they think there will be enough snow, that's why deer and elk winter there. When it does snow on those hills it melts quickly. It's just a really bad business plan that I don't think will succeed. From the south end of Logan I can be at beaver mountain in close to the same amount of time and can ski on 5x the snow they will have there.
 
LAST EDITED ON Oct-19-12 AT 10:58AM (MST)[p]I realize that there is the ability to make snow, but they will have to rely on machines to make 90 % of there snow. Then that raises a question for me, do they have enough water rights to make that much snow?
 
>LAST EDITED ON Oct-19-12
>AT 10:58?AM (MST)

>
>I realize that there is the
>ability to make snow, but
>they will have to rely
>on machines to make 90
>% of there snow. Then
>that raises a question for
>me, do they have enough
>water rights to make that
>much snow?


Well to answer that question. I will bring Sun Valley to the table. They are very willing to pay for the water usage, and they survive all winter on man made. If you even had a clue how much the resorts actually used every year you soils sh&# yourself.
 
I don't know a whole lot about this specific scenario, but to me it comes down to whether or not this is private land or not. If he is only developing his own land, then I think he should be able to do whatever he wants.
 
>I don't know a whole lot
>about this specific scenario, but
>to me it comes down
>to whether or not this
>is private land or not.
> If he is only
>developing his own land, then
>I think he should be
>able to do whatever he
>wants.


The owners first problem is the area does not get enough snow. He will have to make snow to survive. The ski area will be basically a bunny hill with man made snow. I used to Hike up the NC and ski it when I was a kid. We managed to do it one year, and I thrash my skis on the rocks. NC hill is less than a mile from the propose location. I am guessing that owner believes that with the cold winter temps he can make snow and pull people in to ski. Richmond has a population of 5000, Cove 23 and 10 dogs (and they are all related), Lewiston 2000 (maybe), Preston ID (no clue how many rednecks live there), oh and mighty Trenton 200 residents (who go outside to pee). Richmond does not have a store, only 1 gas station, 1 bar, and 3 places to eat. Oh ya, Napolean Dynamite ate there once, I think. It makes you think vacation destination, right...

Richmond is right up against the foothills. There are 3 major canyons that feed down to the winter range (High Creek, Cherry Creek, and City Creek). Each has winter range that can support deer through the winter months. When there are hard winters the deer live in the city. Pushing the Cherry Creek herd into the other canyons will put an excessive strain on the winter range at a risk of loosing a lot of animals out of both drainages. Stress placed on the deer will have an effect, as well as reduced fawn birth weights because of the stress caused by human interactions. Predators are a problem in the area, I spent a lot of time killing dogs in that area. Lions have been a major problem in the past, not sure how they are at this time. Wolves are in the area. I personally saw a wolf just over the border 2 years ago. You know they are in the area now.
So if this goes through and the deer herd becomes concentrated, predators will move with the herds, and human caused stress will continue to build because of the close proximity. What do you think will happen to the resource? Who will be responsible for the actions? How will will the herds recover?
For a guy that has some money, this investment is not a smart one. My guess is that he will go and thin some trees and brush (which will be good for the area), but in the end the ski hill will not go in. The place is beautiful. I would hate to see it change.
 
Not only no, but hell no!!! Funny how all the people that come to this state to ski are totally fine with ruining great habitat by swiping huge swaths of trees, grass and shrubs for a huge eye sore on our mountains, yet are the first LIBERAL fags to be anti hunters, anti access, and anti trail riding.

Interesting how horse/hiking/biking/motorcycling single track trails are in trouble of or being closed daily by the USFS because they are eye sores to granola eaters or they hate the sound, yet are open to making these huge ski resorts down through some of Utah's most beautiful and pristine mountains.

Yes, I am very passionate about this subject!
 
No it is the canyon to the north. You will actually be able to see the top of it from the gun range to the east. Low pass is part of it to the east.

Richmond is about 2,300 people and yes we only have one stop light. The ski resort will have to be accessed by going through town and winding your way around through all the residential area.

It is a section of private property located between to government pieces of property.

A conditional use permit with many conditions has been issued.

It is being challenged in court and goes to court in April I think. Could be wrong on the court date.

It is not located in Richmond so it went before the Cache County Council and was conditionally approved by that board.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom