OCR Text |
Show WASATCH Ranger for those local forests, said they made it clear to Gardiner that Snowbird’s permit to operate on Forest lands would have to be amended or renewed altogether before Baby Thunder could be installed on the western edge of the Little Cottonwood Canyon ski resort. “No one here told him that,” said LeVere. t is the renewal of Snowbird’s 1980 permit that is at the center of the dispute. And taken as a whole, the argument over the permit appears, at first blush, like a bureacratic can of worms that only the federal bureacracy could dream up. But dissected, analyzed, simplified and distilled, it comes down to this: 1. In order to use public Forest Service lands, corporations, like ski resorts, must obtain permits. 2. The permits take into account environmental assessments and disallow “significant impacts” on Forest land by corporate facilities and uses. 3. Some of the earnings made by private enterprise when using Forest Service permits on public lands must come back to the government in fees calculated by a complex formula. But the Snowbird CEO argues that the feds keep changing rules and regulations on him — rendering a lose-lose deal for the ski resort. Gardiner maintains the Baby Thunder chairlift was outlined in the ski resort’s original permit map and was always planned to be constructed inside the original permit area. Therefore, he contends, it should require no new permit “But then they came back and said Baby Thunder was a ‘major modification’ and they wanted to negotiate a new permit,” Gardiner said in a strained voice while poring over his legal file. “How can they say it’s a ‘major modification?’ You tell me . . . It’s the smallest lift in our area.” A new permit would cost Snowbird tens of thousands of dollars more each year. The present annual fee paid by Snowbird is $212,533, according to the General Accounting Office. The law suit, now in Utah’s Federal Court, won't be cheap either. “It’s going to cost me hundreds of thousands of dollars and take years,” Gardiner said. But Snowbird is ready to fight. Snowbird and Gardiner seem to be hanging their hat on a ruling issued by the head of the Forest Service ten years ago. The Chief National Forester sided with Snowbird in an earlier dispute. During the mid-1980s, the resort appealed a ruling by local Forest Service officials that its permit and fee structure should be amended to take into account all retail restaurants and stores at its base Operations — some of which are on privately-held property. But the Chief Forester ruled for Snowbird, saying local officials could not unilaterally amend the permit. That ruling probably saved the resort half a million dollars, or more, during the last decade. But that judgement also included this statement: “.. . any further expansion of the Snowbird area or other modifications involving permit amendment shall occur only after thorough re-examination of Snowbird’s annual fee and the MOUNTAIN allocation of the Graduated Rate Fee System which underlies that fee.” And that is the rub. “The current proposal of the Baby Thunder lift is an action requiring at least a permit amendment and preferably a new permit. This in turn requires the reexamination of the basis for fees,” District Ranger Sieg stated in a summary report. And that, says the Snowbird CEO is “extortion.” “Sieg said you will not get one damn thing until you agree to pay more money to amend your permit . The Forest Service is blackmailing us,” Gardiner said. But that isn’t the only problem. TIMES parking in Littke Cottonwood Canyon .. . If the canyon is at capacity now, why do we want to increase the number of skiers? . They still haven’t addressed parking and traffic in the canyon.” [he Forest Service decision to embrace the “cumulative effects” aspect of environmental assessments of ski resorts, changes how all. future resort expansions on public lands will be viewed in the Wasatch Mountains. The decision was an important one, Lewis said. “We tried to tell them, look, don’t look at this thing in a vacuum, look at the impacts this will add to the canyon as a whole.’ Utah Department of Transportation data indicates that as many as 10,000 vehicles already crowd the narrow canyon road on a busy day during ski season Ray Gardiner, CEO, Snowbird. An environmental assessment of the Baby Thunder lift by the private consulting firm Seare Brown, indicating the pro- ject would cause no significant impacts, has been tossed out. The Forest Service had originally accepted the analysis. Again, Gardiner cries foul, claiming a biased Forest Service District is running the end-around its own rules and regulations to stop his Baby Thunder project. All this, simply because the local Forest Service officials “don’t like Snowbird.” The District Ranger flatly denies the allegation. “Ray Gardiner doesn’t want to understand how the Forest Service oper“Sieg said you damn pay will not get one thing until you more money your permit... to agree to amend The Forest Service is blackmailing Interestingly the Athey/Lewis appeal is stamped May 4, 1994 by the U.S Forest Service date for The closing appeals was May 3. Although the letter carries no postmark, Lewis has made a sworn statement that he mailed the letter, as required, by the May 3 deadline. The Forest Service and the U.S. Attorney's Office have accepted the appeal as valid, meaning that a more comprehensive environmental assessment must be completed. us,” (OTR tIT any LL ates. He doesn’t like the answer he keeps getting from us,” Sieg said, On the last day of the official appeal period, local skiers and backcountry enthusiasts Bob Athey and Steve Lewis (Lewis is a Wasatch Mountain Times contributor) appealed the Baby Thunder environmental assessment. The crux of their appeal was this: the Seare Brown analysis did not take into account the “cumulative effect” on the entire canyon that another chairlift, more skiers and more automobiles would have on the environment, “When is enough, enough?” Lewis asked rhetorically in an interview. “The Forest Service master plan says no more PAGE That adds up to an inside job, Gardiner claims. The Snowbird CEO's statement may be off the mark. But it does have an element of truth in-it, Lewis admitted. An anonymous person, identifying himself only as a Forest Service employee, notified the Salt Lake Citybased Save Our Canyons group that unless an appeal was filed by May 3, Baby Thunder could be approved. Lewis, who is a member of that loose-knit environmental group, said he did have an ulterior motive to stop the Baby Thunder lift, which does not climb to any peaks but does open beginner and intermediate ski terrain. “If you build the Baby Thunder lift, it will be the gateway to White Pine Canyon and then the White Pine ski lift,” Lewis said referring to the area just down Little Cottonwood Canyon from Snowbird. White Pine Canyon provides spectacular ski terrain and snow conditions and is a favorite of expert backcountry skiers. “We're talking about preserving the quality of Little Cottonwood Canyon,” Lewis said. “I don’t have anything against ski resorts, it’s just that this is public land and the public ought to have some say in what happens there.” And, Lewis says, the public is not necessarily getting a good deal by letting Snowbird run its chairlifts across public land. “There is a national debate going on about the fee structures and the fees paid by resorts on Forest Service Land.” Recent information made public by Sen. Bill Cohen, R-Maine, reveals that the Forest Service gets only 68 cents on a 11 $38 Snowbird lift ticket. — an amount equivalent to less than two percent of the resort’s gross ticket receipts Although Snowbird owner, Dick Bass, has s ated publicly that his resort ultimately will expand into White Pine The District Ranger flatly denies the allegation. “Ray Gardiner doesn't want to understand bow the Forest Service operates. He doesn’t like the answer he keeps getting from us,” Sieg said Canyon and Mineral Basin to the south, Gardiner insists Baby Thunder is not part and parcel of any greater expansion “Baby Thunder has nothing to do with White Pine Issues of expansion will be addressed as they arise Baby Thunder is within our present boundary,” Gardiner insisted ut assistant U.S. Attorney Carlie Christensen, who represents the Forest Service in the legal battle, said Baby Thunder was not covered under the original Snowbird permit. “When there is new construction, permits are re-negotiated. There is precedent,” she said “When the Little Cloud and Mid-Gad lifts were built in 1986, the Snowbird permit was re-negotiated.” Which could well mean that the Baby Thunder lift could be installed after a new permit is negotiated between the Forest Service and Snowbirc That is anathema for Gardiner, who describes Snowbird as a “national treasure.” As such, he says, local Forest Service officials should help the resort expand, rather than hinder it “Snowbird is among the five most widely known ski resorts in the world,” the resort CEO claims. “Few people realize how important this canyon is to the state... This canyon and Snowbird are as important as the parks in Southern Utah.” Gardiner adds that Snowbird is recognized as one of the most environmentally friendly resorts anywhere and could use a little help with the approval of Baby Thunder. Snowbird needs the beginning and intermediate ski terrain in the Baby Thunder area to attract more skiers and competitive to remain with other Wasatch Mountain ski resorts. “It is very important to us, because some people think we don’t have enough intermediate terrain . So they ski at Brighton, or somewhere else.” But for now, Ray Gardiner’s Baby Thunder lift will sit in the dark and collect dust. Intermediate and beginning skiers will have to take their chances in Gad Valley or drive another mile up the road to Alta’s Albion Basin, where there is plenty of beginning skier terrain. Or the beginers and intermediates could go up Big Cottonwood Canyon to Solitude or Brighton. Or even take a trip around the mountain to Park City, Wolf Mountain or Deer Valley. And of course, there’s Powder Mountain, Snow Basin, Sundance, Brian Head .. . |