Location on proposed new gondola
Utah is considering putting in a 3 mile gondola to link The Canyons ski resort to Solitude ski resort. 2 bills are before congress currently. One for the project and one against. Economist say the gondola could greatly assist Utah’s $1.2 billion ski industry and assist in their future Olympic bids. Environmentalist say the gondola will damage wilderness, taint the watershed, and turn off backcountry skiers. What do you think about this project?
WHAT IS “SKILINK”?
- It’s a new newly proposed gondola that would connect Solitude ski resort to The Canyons ski resort allowing skiers and riders to travel between the Park City ski resort area to the Big Cottonwood ski resort area
- 20 tours reaching heights of 20-40 feet tall
- 11 minute ride
- 3 miles in distance
- $35 million = cost to build
- Will move 1,000 people per hour
- Could be the first step in connecting all 4 Wasatch ski resorts and expanding their boundries
Read the New York Times article on this project:
“Along a Utah Range, a New Skirmish Over Development or Conservation“
The Wasatch Mountains = narrow mountain range that runs 200 miles north to south
UTAH’S “SKILINK” CONTROVERSY:
- 2 competing views in congress currently
- 1 bill = Wasatch Range Recreation Access Enhancement Act = create the “Skilink” gondola
- bypasses jurisdictional and environmental laws
- overrides federal and local restriction on ski resort expansion in the Wasatch Range
- National Forest Service would have to sell 30 acres of public land for this project
“An interconnection would boost the ski industry tremendously. This will be a game changer. There’s nothing like this in the United States.” - Republican Utah Senator Wayne L. Niederhauser“…$51 million increase in the state’s economy in SkiLink’s first year, creating jobs and revenue that would go up in future years…” - Talisker Corporation 2010 study
Deep Utah pow. photo: adam barker
- The other bill = Wasatch Wilderness and Watershed Protection Act = stop the “Skilink” gondola
- preserves the same area of land “skilink” would potentially use
- states that this zone is a valuable watershed and wilderness area
- could create precedent to allow further ski resort expansion in the Wasatch
“It’s the cumulative effect of expansion that we are worried about.” - Jeff Niermeyer, the director of Salt Lake City Public Utilities“[the Wasatch already had] a good balance between ski resorts and backcountry skiing, and something of the magnitude of SkiLink would forever alter that and certainly make the Central Wasatch less attractive to backcountry skiers.” - Mark Menlove, former head of Ski Utah
Salt Lake City & the Wasatch Mountains
MORE “SKILINK” INFO:
- Big & Little Cottonwood Canyons hold 4 ski resorts and produce 60 percent of Salt Lake City’s drinking water
- 6,294 acres of the Central Wasatch are covered by ski resorts currently
Should they put this thing in?
Will it lead to all 7 of the Wasatch ski areas connecting?
If they do it, will it effect backcountry skiing and the environment negatively?
Read the New York Times article on this project:
“Along a Utah Range, a New Skirmish Over Development or Conservation“
I say go for it. This would be cool and we need more Euro style ski resorts in the USA. or should I say, we need “a” Euro style ski resort in the USA
it has potential to ruin drinking water for over a million people. just because it sounds cool means fucking nothing. the bill for skilink would allow more for developers to bypass restrictions which pretty much means they can do whatever they want. plus, the backcountry around there is sick and a fucking gondola filled with gapers from the east coast.
what is the problem with the east coast? angry. dude you don’t own the west coast just because you happen to live there. just my thoughts. as far as the gondola, if it’s going to affect drinking water, or ruin the wasatch backcountry and that’s a fact/concensus, than I would not be for it even though it does sound cool. personally I could be at any of the ut resorts esp in LCC and there is enough terrain to keep me busy for days I don’t need a connection to anywhere else.
I’m not opposed to the ski link, and it’s most likely not going to ruin the BC skiing, it’s mostly mellow terrain soft pitch bowls from there anyway.
If you want purity and someplace pristine, go ski/hike in the uintas, the wasatch is tainted as f*** being so close to SLC anyway.
I wanna see a lift from midway/heber valley, talk about a boost to the economy! BOOM.
From what i understand, it’s only going to go over a stretch of backcountry that is south facing and not that popular to tour anyways . I also believe it’s just going over that terrain it’s still not part of a resort (correct me if i’m wrong). Either way Solitude will become way too crowded with PC tourists that never would’ve visited Solitude. Good for them, but bad for all day fresh at solitude. You can’t drink, have fun and the snow blows in utah anyways, there’s no way it’ll boost the tourism that much.
This may not be the most popular spot to tour but there are always people there. It is good place for beginners and great for when they avy danger is high and dangerous.
The snow blows in utah? LOL
I can’t wait to help pick up all the trash that gets thrown out the windows. Plus, the view at 40ft is amazing!
keep solitude gaper free!
“Solitude” will have to change their name then right?…I mean being connected to a place like “The Canyons”, prepare for the fun!
later cardiff, emma ridge, grizzly, wolvie, rocky, silver, days, it was fun skiing you. That’s just a fraction of the terrain lost that could be lost. Lame ass shit
Because if the skilink goes, then all the other lifts will follow
Mike is right, if skilink goes through there are many other projects that could easily pushed through.
The original excuse for skilink was to cut back on traffic. What does talisker (a land company) care about traffic.
Now the excuse is the economy and the olympics.
If they want to improve the wasatch, build a Cog Train or gondola up each canyon.
They claim numbers of 500 permanent jobs with a single lift connecting 2 resorts… What a load of BS.
DO NOT SELL A STRIP OF LAND IN MY NATIONAL FOREST TO A CANADIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY.
Exactly
So wait, ah, go back… a bill before congress to spend who’s money? and it will make who richer? it may or may not benefit a bunch of snow loving fools like myself but shit we are out of money here in the usa and spending our tax dollars on this all the while paying intrest since we are in debt up to our eyes is INSANE. WTF did I miss here? Smells to me like some lame ass congressman has property at Solitude is my guess…greedy bastard.
yeah that or most of the local population opposes it for a multitude of reasons. based on your logic, id like to build a coal power plant in your backyard. any money spent is money well spent right?
oh and the bill is there to overturn a series of existing laws. not so they can simply “spend their money”. i.e. youre advocating allowing a private foreign corporation to buy new laws so they can proceed with a currently illegal construction project
No dude you misunderstood me. I agree with you and it pisses me off to see laws get changed to benefit corporations at the expense of local people and wildlife.I in now way favor this even if it does sell 30 acres and make us some cash. I had to read what i had written a few times before I could figure out your pov.
WTF did you miss here? A whole lot zippy. If you did yourself a favor and actually used your brain for 2 seconds you would save yourself the trouble of sounding like a dumbass. Where did you gather that the government would be spending money on this? Not all bills before congress are calling for government spending, genius. In fact, the government would profit from this by selling the 30 acres of forest service land. But nice try.
that said, you are right about one thing here, and that is congress being greedy. Somebody is definitely lining the pockets of congressmen for favorable votes at the expense of the environment. Any bill that bypasses environmental regulations for the sake of land development by a private company is BS!
Hey i was baked, what I meant to say is that i hope no public money gets used (i was baked and had a hard time figuring it out) and man am i glad that my local mtn. is 2900 acres of all private land with tons more available to add acres if they ever figure out how to fill the chairs they have now, all without pissing off any local threatened/endangered wildlife. Really didn’t mean to get anyones panties in a twist.
Build every interconnect, f*&k lift lines and crowded slopes!
Its one of the few swaths of undeveloped, easily accessible places to get away from the valley inversion. Backcountry skiers, regardless of their individual terrain preferences, appreciate this area for the peaceful, mellow, undeveloped option it is. don’t we all like calling it ours? lets keep it that way.
The ridge that will be bisected by SkiLink is the Wasatch Crest, a pristine place for not only backcountry skiers but thousands of hikers and bike riders each summer. If it becomes private property, it can only have negative consequences for public users. Additionally, the gondola on the Talisker side is located inside a gated community of million dollar homes. Ordinary skiiers would have to ride 4-5 lifts to even get to it. SkiLink is a terrible idea!
In my opinion the Crest and surrounding area are some of the most beautiful in the Wasatch and is also very important for wildlife. WE HAVE TO STOP SKILINK!!
I’m with Karen here. I am not a backcountry skier, I am a mountain biker and one of the most important trails in utah, Crest will be affected by SkiLink. The main issue here is that this will set a precedent for the other resorts in the wasatch (Alta) to expand onto public land. We have to protect what little we have left in the wasatch.