New non-motorised snoparks

I think people are reluctant to post ideas that are just pipe dreams. TobyT's initial reply in this thread summarizes the problem well.

If we want to list pipe dreams, here are a few:

* Stafford or Beverly Creek (or beyond) in the Teanaway area
* Mountaineer Creek in the Stuart Range
* Something up the Cle Elum River
* Near Heliotrope Ridge on Mt Baker
* Schriebers Meadow on Mt Baker
* Mt Pilchuck
* Something close to Washington Pass
* Something close to Harts Pass
* Something up the Twisp River
* Cayuse Pass
* Anything close to Mt Adams

I previously listed the White River road near Mt Rainier.

Micah's suggestion of the Mountain Loop Highway is certainly intriguing.

Creating new non-motorized snoparks would probably require new user fees to pay for maintenance.

Thank you for thinking about it Lowell, good suggestions. There would be more from the community for sure but many realize they would involve more plowing and don't seem feasible in the current funding methods and availability.
To answer Ruffryder, certainly any lack of suggestions does not mean lack of desire or interest. A good number of ideas could be feasible w/o adding to any motorized/non-motorized conflict as well.
John

On Mt Hood I would like to see some access to the West/Northwest side. Using Lolo Pass Road as the focus a paved 2 lane in the right direction to Lolo Pass. Personally I don't care if it is non-motorized or not. I frequently use Frog Lake snow-park, and have had no problems with sledders, dog sledders, snow-shoers, etc. I think it should be kept simple, so it can be managed. Over complicate it and no one gets anything, as it gets hung up in study.

I'm going to use this resurgent thread to think outside the box a little. Recently the Utah senate approved a tram from Park City to Snowbird/Alta. It got me thinking about trams and gondolas in relation to road access, the ONP issue, etc. Here's some basics.

Roads (in wintertime):
1. Viewshed: Very significant viewshed impact from above (neighboring peak). Rarely an impact from ground level.

2. Access: shuts down easily in bad PNW weather high precip events. physically blocks overland travel.

3. Cost: Capital already amortized for exiting roads. Very high maintenance (I've heard $250,000/year for snow removal thrown around a lot lately, probably a lot more for MRNP and the freeways). Constant need for improvements with growth (ie parking) and summer repairs

4. Environment: Negatively impacts some animal movement. Incredibly inefficient burning of fuel in winter worthy vehicles by many small parties. Noisy.

Aerial Tram or Gondola:
1. Viewshed: Hard to see from above. Very noticeable from the ground level. Tram More so than Gondola due to higher tower heights.

2. Access: Only shuts down in very high wind. Does not impede ground travel.

3. Cost: 15-20 million for recent 10 person gondolas. 30-50 million for recent 60-100 person trams. Maintenance/staffing costs unknown, but likely marginal compared to snow removal.

4. Environment: Does not affect land animals. May affect birds? Extremely efficient and clean way to move people when hooked up to regional electric grid. Some operational noise.

I'm trying to stimulate debate here, so what do you all think? Aesthetically and economically worth it in the long run? Costs too much? Idea too radical? Even bringing this topic up is likely to rile some feathers, so please resist the urge to depart from cogent argument.

so please resist the urge to depart from cogent argument.

But, but, this is the Internet!

Seriously, though, I think that is a good idea. I remember reading an old Sierra Club article talking about Trams in National Parks. The initial reaction is negative (as it strikes people as being a bit like a cross between Disneyland and a ski resort) but when you actually read the advantages and disadvantages (as you have described) it sounds pretty good. One advantage is that it tends to be easier on the wildlife.

Having a tram to a spot just for backcountry use (skiing and snow shoeing) would be very different, but I think it would be great. Imagine a tram that ends at Sunrise. You aren't supposed to necessarily ski down to the bottom (and then get back on the tram) but ski (and snowshoe) from there, and return by tram. I personally would love to do that. Similarly, a tram that ended within a mile or so of Schriebers Meadows would be a blast (again, as long as snowmobiles are not allowed that day)*

* Speaking of which, that is my idea for managing snowmobile/skier conflict, in several places. Allow snowmobiles on alternate days (say, odd days) like they do for bikers on the Middle Fork of the Snoqualmie. As long as everyone knew the rules, I think that would make for a nice compromise.

Yes!!!!
Tram to Sunrise or Steamboat Prow.
I have been an advocate for this for years.
Imagine the skiing....the increase in business in the rural area of Greenwater and income for the NPS.

Greenwater could become the WA equivalent of Chamonix!

Great idea!


BTW RossB-alternate snowmo-skier day access...won't work...what skier wants to ski in an area covered by snowmobile tracks from the previous day.....and vice-versa.

Alternate weeks might work somewhat, but alternate days = mostly useless, at least for skiers who tour in part for turns.