Bitter root resort yay or nay

I live in the bitterroot and personally probably the worst idea ever to put a ski area there. First of all the valley inversion is to great to the tops of the mountains it can be 50 degrees here in the valley and in the mountains itl be 20. The base area will run out of the the valley and thats where a majority of the runs will be. the bitterroot hardly gets anysnow in the winter it usally rains in the valley. It will never be a great resort. Almost all of the runs willl be groomed and iced to perfection. and the runs that wont be groomed will be bumped and icy. now the resort also wants to expand to lolo peak wich would be sick BUT itl be 50 years before there to that point. wich sucks for us. so in the mean time its going to attrack more crowds to the bitterroot with huge wallets while in the meantime bringing way too many people to losttrail causing losttrail to over crowd and be ruined. so what do i have to say about it. good thing it'l take um my lifetime to become anything close to a nice ski area!!
 
and it will cause property taxes to soar and drive out the locals like what is happening in whitefish
 
well, i dont live down there, so i dont know as much about it, maybe it would ruin a sick backcountry spot but as far as i do know id say YAY!
 
As was stated before, it's in a really bad spot and is destined to failure. With that in mind, I could dismiss the possiblity of the resort purely on politics (or lack thereof). He's trying to impose the area on the valley when it's clear the majority of people don't want it there, yet he still persists. Yeah, it'd be cool to ski Lolo Peak, but I'd rather skin up there and have it all to myself.

So this is a nay from me.
 
For those against it, I'd encourage you to go to their website and sign up for a day of cat skiing at the resort. The snow is good and it's cool to get a free day of cat skiing. They have thought of all your objections and worked through them. The majority of the lower mountain would be covered by snow making.

They've got people involved that seriously know what they're doing. This isn't just a bunch of people that have never done this before. The COO was the mountain manager at Breckenridge.

The resort would be a good thing. More skiing is never a bad thing... plus, they do have plans for a large park area like any of the major resorts in the country. Seriously though, go ski with them, you'll get a better understanding of what's going on there than just bitching about it on newschoolers.
 
They can work through everything perfectly, but if the people who live there are against it, then I'm going to side with them. They were there first, and what the developers do will affect their lives.
 
I'm sorry, but a free day of cat skiing doesn't make it ok to rip down a bunch of trees and create an eyesore for the valley. If they had worked through all the problems, there wouldn't be so many objections to the area. This isn't the case--if the people higher up had been listening to the community at any point during the past few years there wouldn't be so many issues right now. It's one thing to say you're willing to work through minor issues, and another thing entirely to put a band-aid on a much larger problem.
 
He already took down a majority of the trees. Just drive by Missoula on the Freeway and you can see where the trees have been thinned out for ski runs. It is private property, im pretty sure he has the right to do what he pleases on his land. PLUS, driving all the way to Lolo pass is kind of a pain in the ass, the road is bad and its far and the access is horrible up there.
Im not sure what I think on this issue but I think Im going to have to go with a YAY!!, Missoula could definitely use a better ski mountain nearby thats for sure. Even if he did build it, there is no way it could be as big as Breckenridge in the next 20 years or even close. It will be pretty much be local people for the most part going there in the first 5 years. They have always said that Big Mtn is going to turn into Colorado and its not, yea its busy during the holidays but after that its mostly locals.
Seriously, i bet the snow on that mtn would be badass. You can drive up to Lolo Pass when you dont think there will be snow because it is warm in Missoula and not stormy and you get up there and there is just snow all over.
Honestly, if Missoula had a big ski resort right next to it, it would be one badass college town thats for sure.
 
Well, I suppose I wouldn't mind going cat skiing for free. That sounds nice. Even if I don't support what they are doing.
 
i hate to break this to you guys but it will be 50 years till theres a lift on lolo peak. for the first ten years of operation the runs you see now will be all you get. after that they want to expand up the ridge if they even get aproval that is 20 to 30 years away. and yea it wont be anybetter skiin that snowbowl for a long time. just overpriced and shitty
 
Yo.. all I know is: I went on the ski cat tour last Thursday, and I would NEVER PAY ANY AMOUNT OF CHEDDAR, NO MATTER HOW LITTLE, to shred that crap. It's mid-January, in an above average snow year, and there is, at most, 18 inches at the TOP of the existing runs (on Maclay's property). I've been all through Carlton Ridge and the Lolo Peak/Carlton Lake area hiking and skiing... and it's sick, obviously. But if you take a look at the final proposal for the BR Resort, the area is about 5 miles long and 10 feet wide (exaggeration, but you know what I mean.) If you are stoked to get lift access to the peak area, you better pack a lunch... you'd have to zig-zag lifts until noon to even get to the lake under the peak... which you'd have to TRAVERSE to get to the peak lift. I mean, I like chair lifts and all, but I'm more about the skiing (call me crazy!) The vision that they have created and the markets they wish to attract just don't line up. They don't have good, quick access to bomb terrain (which would attract the local crowd), and they don't have the snowy, Aspenesque atmosphere (which would attract the "Ski Vacation" rich crowd). They do have a big company (ecosign) and a heavy hitter (Tom Gill, or whatever the fuck that slickster's name is, the Breckenridge guy. God, he's smooth), which makes me curious. I mean, they have to know more than I do... But I do know what makes good turns, and they don't, at this time, have it. Peace.
 
It's kind of a given that the skiing would suck 95% of the time on the lower mountain, but that's not my issue. I really hate how they'll destroy that much land just for a substandard ski area that would most likely fail--then what? Sure, it's private property, but this transcends the issue of your neighbor putting a rotting car in his yard. We're talking about mowing down ribbons of forest because someone with power has some grandiose illusion of a destionation resort.
 
I guess that depends on what your definition of "Destroy" is. Honestly, the 12,000 or so acres of land they want would most likely be managed more closely and carefully than a good portion of the rest of the Lolo/Bitterroot National Forests, because: A) As a private enterprise with the all mighty dollar in mind, it is in their best financial interests to present a well-managed and attractive product to their paying customers, and B) More capital + smaller acreage = closer attention to more land. This is straight from the mouth of their face man that made the presentation during the delicious sammich lunch provided at the Resort's summit yurt, but he's got a point. Not that that is a reasonable justification, but... he's right.

If, on the other hand, you view the cutting of trees in general as "Destruction," then... yeah, I suppose you've got a point.

I mean, you'd be able to see the runs from town, but... I still think the biggest eye sore on the Missoula Skyline is Snowbowl. What a dump.

 
Perhaps a different way to look at it...

The resort is going to happen. There's no stopping it on some level. If Maclay gets access to Lolo peak/Carlton ridge it'll be a public resort. If he doesn't, the runs cut now will become a private resort along the lines of The Yellowstone Club. They'll be installing lifts and snow making in 2009.

I don't know why the guy above didn't like the snow, you must not have gotten the same conditions I did. I skied a foot of pow all day. I had no complaints about the snow. All that was natural snow at relatively low elevations. With snow making they'll do just fine. Plus they'd be open by Thanksgiving. If you're ok waiting an extra couple weeks for your season to begin that's cool but I'll take earlier skiing any day.

And just to address the issue of whether it's wanted or not... The only poll that's ever been taken regarding a ski resort on Lolo peak came back that 64% of the Missoula/Bitterroot population was in favor of the resort. It's just that those opposed to it tend to be a lot more vocal.

I really am having a hard time understanding why skiers are against a new ski area.
 
I'm not totally against another area, it's the location that bothers me most. Not only is it another set of cut runs in plain view of Missoula, but the terrain and snow aren't exactly top notch. I mean, if you're going to put all the time and money into that kind of development at least do it in a good spot. I'm sure this area works out better for whoever is in charge (I forget his name), but it just doesn't seem like a great idea to me. What will this place have to offer that I can't get anywhere else?
 
Quoting something like "I don't know why the guy above didn't like the snow... I skied a foot of fresh powder, blah, blah..." - MeatRider

I don't know... I guess a foot of low-elevation, heavy snow on a six inch base with NO tree skiing opportunities just doesn't strike me as "good skiing." Especially when they want to charge $70 bucks a day for it.

Guess I'm just spoiled from shredding the REAL shit at LT.

I used to live in Carlton (Florence) directly under the development, and was siked when I realized that there could be a resort within a mile of my toilet. I'm no Missoula, Knee-Jerk, Aniti-Development type of dude, I'm all for good skiing and think that a ski resort is a pretty responsible use of public land. BUT... after actually visiting the resort and listening to what they had to say (and peeping the HORRIBLE snow conditions for myself) I just can't support it. I wanted to believe that it was about the skiing... but it's just not.

Not to offend, but if you were excited by the shallow, just-north-facing-enough-to-cover-the-dirt groomers that they took you on, well................ Shit! Enjoy your season pass!
 
we already have one low elevation resort in missoula that failed. the climate in this area, for atleast the last decade, is simply not conducive to a ski resort based under 4000 feet. even if you are satisfied by shitty man made on some groomers, you have to consider the amount of water that place would suck up every winter trying to make snow. (if it actually stays cold enough to make snow most of the winter.) this in an area with serious drought issues. then the fake snow gets rained on in peak season. and to expect cold enough temps early and long enough for turkey day skiing that low is naive at best.

the missoula and bitterroot valleys are locked in by mountains with limited access, which will already make the inevitable growth in this area difficult to absorb. have you dealt with traffic on reserve, brooks or 93south? i know i definitely do not want vacation skiers flying into missoula or accessing the br valley via interstate through missoula. destination skiers wanting to hit up montana should go to big sky or the whitefish resort at big mtn. a successful br resort (which i believe is a huge stretch) would change the face of this place for the worse.

snowbowl has proposed and is working towards an expansion up tv and down the butler creek drainage that will happen waaay before maclay could gain approval from the forest service to expand up to lolo peak and build lifts/lodges. this growth at the bowl is our best bet for accommodating the rising pops that crowd weekends and holidays.

for the record, br resorts ugly and obvious parallel cuts are a much dumpier eyesore than the cuts visible on the bowl.

nay.
 
just signed up for cat skiing on the 22 so ill give a more definate yay or nay after i check it out and see what they have to say.
 
I definitely recommend taking advantage of the cat tour. Whether you end up being impressed or disappointed, it is a good way to get a feel for what they're trying to do. Plus, the cats are hella ballin. Bring some DVD's.
 
how long does it usually take to get the confirmation email because i signed up 3-4 days ago and still haven't gotten a confirmation yet the amount of open spots on their site has decreased.
 
I didn't get mine until two days before I was supposed to go.

While the snow may not be great, I had good conditions, plus I went into it with low expectations. I didn't roll up thinking it would be the steepest, deepest skiing I'd ever done. I expected it would be average snow, mostly groomed and low angled runs. The resort crew showed up with sick cats and did their best to get us into untracked snow virtually every run we hit. Basically, they exceeded my expectations in every way. Maybe those that are hating on it went in with higher expectations than I did. Remember too that they have plans for extensive snow making. They've done the studies and apparently they can blow enough snow to open by Thanksgiving every year.

Complaining about being able to see runs from Missoula? Seriously?
 
Are they really delusional enough to think that many people in Montana will pay to ski man-made snow? Unless there's something set up like cheap night skiing, I don't really see why anyone would choose to ski man-made groomers--save for the first couple weeks of the season. Granted Snowbowl isn't always that great and everything else is a ways away, but I'd gladly make the drive to ski something fun. You have to have something better to offer than "Come in with low expectations, it's not that bad."
 
Exactly.

Damn fucking right my expectations are high. Why?

1) "World-Class Destination Ski Resort" If I'm not mistaken, they've thrown that term around a bit. What would you "expect" from a WCDSR?

2) I'm a huge badass who requires deep, light snow and steep, varied terrain to get me off. Luckily I live in a place that can provide both. But from what I gathered at the snowcat tour, I (and other huge badasses like me) are not their target market. They are targeting rich fucks who go on Ski Vacations to places like Telluride, Sun Valley, Steamboat, Vail, Whistler and Big Sky. Have you ever heard anyone even TRY to make the argument that those places don't have enough snow or are otherwise fatally flawed in some manner. No. You know why? Because they are built on fantastic, wet-ski-dream style mountains (maybe with the exception of Sun Valley). See the difference? Why vacation at Bitterroot Resort when you go to Big Sky instead? Seriously though... huge badass.

Expectations too high?!!! Fuck that.

What a great ad campaign! "Bitterroot Resort: Lower Your Expectations."

I grew up skiing the east coast and I hope to god that I never have to spend another day on man-made again. Am I right? I thought that was one of the perks of living here.

Did you get a chance to check out their golf course? What were your expectations there? Because that shit WILL be world-class.
 
Seriously? You expected a "resort" that's barely cut trails, not strung a single lift, doesn't really groom anything yet or installed snow making to be world class?

The reason I went in with low expectations was because I recognized where they're at in the development process. They're at the very beginning of creating the "world class resort." They're not going to be the best right off. That'll take time. At least they're trying.

As for skiing man-made snow... Hell yeah I'll ski that if it means my season starts a month earlier and lasts a month longer.
 
i just got my confirmation email for february 22. me and miralas are going and i think bigmtn4ever is going.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top