A Gondola to the top of Alpental?

One more thing...<br>The ski school at Alpental suffers from a lack of beginner terrain, the rope tow only operates when there is a lot of snow and there is no flat terrain to get people to the point where they can ride the lower chairlifts. The SUP area includes some of the flat terrain at the base of the Phantom ... given the crowded nature of Alpental base area, and total lack of anything flat, this might be a good place for a handle tow and/or magic carpet area, nicely seperated from the traffic on the main hill. <br><br>Of course, putting a beginner area smack dab at the bottom of a massive slide path may be frowned upon. Alpental needs some beginner terrain though, it's a major problem for the ski school there.

I offer experienced constructive advice on this subject for those who want to place comments.<br><br>With the help of many people we were able to find loopholes in Crystal's MDP snuck in by Mount Rainier NP and the USFS that would have PERMANANTLY restricted access into public land from the ski area. I submitted a comment and out of all the comments only 4 were taken seriously enough to fall into the rules of acceptance that took our complaint to mediation and we won our case. <br><br>We stopped the Park and USFS from setting a precedence that COULD have caused a ripple effect for all Americans who want to access their tax paid lands across the nation. <br><br>In my opinion the people who are serious about Alpental's developments read the Masterplan and EIS closely. There may be issues hidden in the fine print worth submitting a comment to protest.<br><br>If you see somthing you approve of or do not appove in the EIS/MDP put it in writing and submit it BEFORE the deadline! <br><br>Futhermore-<br>1) Be specific to the location of the issue. Such as Article 3, Section 5, Paragragh 2, 3 AND 4 on....<br><br>2) Put your dispute in a context that pinpoints the effect of such article on the viability of rules in that area of the USFS. Or even laws that apply.<br><br>3) Do not write your comment so the answer comes back to you with a canned response. Make them work for it.<br>Such as...<br>Bad example-I do not like the tree cutting plan on Shot 6.<br>Good Example-The Tree cutting project in Section 4, Article 10, Par agraph 5 states.....<br>I find the the trees are important to the biological growth of... and any harm to these are against such and such treaty of ...<br>Make em work!<br><br>4) Make your comments as professional and focused as possible.<br><br>5) Encourage others to write, who feel the same way you do.<br>Help them to get an effective letter in to the USFS. The more effective letters the better to support your cause. You can send a letter and have others names that support the letter on your copy.<br><br>6) These letters are public, so be aware that you may get letters your way from those who feel disagreement to your opinions.<br><br>7) If you have interest on a particular part of the plan like the gondola. State why you think it is such a great idea or bad idea so it is on record. But it must be very detailed on the cause and effects of the gondola. Once the final replies from the USFS are sent back to you there is a period to comment on their replies- after that they can only be revisted under certian conditions. These comments to the USFS replies need to be in on time and VERY focused or they will be tossed out!<br><br>Since this is a mandatory process of the MDP/EIS follow the rules that they tell you how to reply.<br><br>Good luck to all in the process!<br>Joe

In my opinion, Ski School "beginner" terrain should not be at Alpental. Ski Schools are fine, but beginners need to go to West and/or Central to start and work their way to Alpental (makes too much common sense though). <br><br>What happened to Hyak when it was raped by the new owners (Booth Creek) to put new equipment at Alpental (primarily lights, but other stuff as well) occured because out of town California folks came into a new area (Snoqualmie) with the "we know better" attitude and messed up our place. It took Booth about 3 years to figure out that the local folks kinda knew what worked and what didn't. <br><br>None of these plans submitted are new. These were submitted back in 1998 and only some have changes to them, but for the most part its all old news.

I noticed the following statement in the Seattle Times today. It jumped out at me, since I haven't heard such a strong statement before. <br><br>

"I'd be shocked if there is viable skiing at Snoqualmie Pass in 20 to 30 years," [Cliff] Mass said, "I think it is going to be history."<br><br>Source: "High drama, low snowpack in last year's weather," The Seattle Times, Jan 2, 2005, page B1.

<br><br>Cliff Mass is a leading weather researcher at U.W. He may have spoken a bit flippantly, to give the reporter a sound bite, but it still gives you pause.

In my opinion, Ski School "beginner" terrain should not be at Alpental. Ski Schools are fine, but beginners need to go to West and/or Central to start and work their way to Alpental (makes too much common sense though). <br>

<br><br>I would tend to agree, but Alpental does get a fair number of people enrolling their kids and/or selves in ski school programs. From what I understand, it's mostly parents who ski Alpental putting their kids in lessons while they ski. They want to be at the same area as their kids are, and are unwilling to navigate the zoo at West. For a 2 hour lesson, I cant blame them, there isnt enough time to get the kids into a lesson at West, wait for the shuttle, ride the shuttle, ski, wait for the shuttle, ride the shuttle, find the kids, etc.. <br><br>If it makes money, they'll keep the school there. A small beginner area of some sort might not require a huge investment and it would make the base area safer for skiers and students.

This may be a little off-topic, but why exactly are there no "destination resorts" in WA?