Snoqualmie Master Develop. Plan-Feb.21 deadline

At what age is a tree considered 'old growth'? The trees between Hyak and Central are not first gen, and I'd guess might be 75 yrs old (just a guess looking at their size). The Summit is not looking to 'clear cut', just make a path through them for a return route which is much narrower then an actual ski trail (about the width of a groomer usually) and cutting any of the larger trees would be very minimal. Since most here say they don't like to ski at resorts I can see how it is easy for you to say no to any area plan, but the majority of the ski community does ski resorts and this would be a big help to connect Hyak to the rest of the Summit areas.

I like the idea of a gondola to the top. But only if every other chair is removed from the mountain and they go back to not allowing snowboarding. Remember that? Those were the days.

i received a large brochure yesterday from the summit ski area describing the proposed construction. i'm guessing they are sending this out to season pass holders such as myself. included is a pre-addressed comment form, and the brochure offers hints for how to make constructive,specific comments (the examples provided are in favor of the development). <br><br>i've looked it over carefully and don't really see the changes as an improvement. i guess i like that small ski area as it is. in addition, i don't really want to see bigger crowds or more expensive lift tickets. i'll be using that pre-addressed comment form to voice my opposition.

It is unfortunate that all of these plans have to get lumped into one huge EIS. There are a number of improvements proposed that should have happened years ago on non-federal land. Stuff like replacement of the Holiday & Gallery beginner lifts with something from this century (how about some safety bars!?), a short lift accessing the consistent flat pitch lower skiers left of Central Express, a parking structure somewhere, etc etc. These are improvements on developed land that would make everyone's life easier and safer and would have no new impact on the local environment. The Summit's role in NW skiing is to get new people into it and give beginners a place to practice. They've been doing that for so long yet so much seems to have been overlooked in those years. Despite the hordes of newbs, none of the ski areas up there are particularly good at accomodating the average beginner.<br><br>Overall I'm pretty much ok with the plan as is, since many of these issues do get addressed, although I am pretty lukewarm on the gondola idea. On the one hand I like the idea of being able to do top to bottom runs, on the other there's no way the terrain up there can handle that many more people. Also, the proposed lift layout will have the main Alpental ski area chock full of lift towers, as if there werent already enough things to collide with.

Anybody know why one high-speed quad to replace the Eidelweiss lift wasn't proposed?  It would go a long way to ease the congestion there.  Are high-speed quads that expensive vs two other lifts or trams/gondolas?

At what age is a tree considered 'old growth'? The trees between Hyak and Central are not first gen, and I'd guess might be 75 yrs old (just a guess looking at their size).

<br><br>That's interesting. To answer your question, old-growth is a sort of nebulous term people debate that doesn't have an exact date on it. In Doug fir forests, my understanding is a stand can begin to develop old-growth characteristics (e.g. vertical and horizontal heterogeneity) in as soon as 160 - 175 years in highly productive areas, though it takes longer in other sites. Most of what people consider old growth around these parts is 300+ years. <br><br>So - if it was only 75 years old, it wouldn't have had time to develop into old growth naturally.