an uphill battle

Commenters Object to Bitterroot Resort Proposal


By Matthew Frank, 2-08-07

 
 

A majority of citizens who submitted comments to the Forest Service regarding the potential for skiing atop Lolo Peak are opposed to the idea, according to an analysis conducted by the Sierra Club.

The results indicate that about 80 percent of the comments were in opposition to the proposed Bitterroot Resort, and of those, 43 percent cited wilderness, roadless and primitive values as the main reason. Twenty percent spoke out in favor of development.

The Forest Service, in response to its revision of the Lolo and Bitterroot National Forest management plans, received nearly 2,000 total letters, 1,014 of which were specific to the future management of the public lands around Lolo Peak.

“It’s very telling,” said Bob Clark of the Sierra Club, “that between these two forests, the future of just 12,000 acres garnered more than half of the comments. It shows the level of interest and concern.”

As Perry Backus of the Missoulian reports, Bitterroot Resort Chief Executive Officer Jim McGill said he wasn’t surprised by the comments. “We’ve found that it’s usually the people who are opposed to a project who voice their opinions,” Gill told the Missoulian.

Forest Service officials are now reviewing the comments as they develop final management plans, which will be released in the spring and followed by a 30-day comment period.

“The results of the comment analysis are what they are, “ said Clark. “There isn’t any bias.”



Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.

Read more Missoula stories
Advertisement

Comments

"t's usually the people who are opposed to a project who voice their opinions"? No shit? Wow ! It seems that the Bitterroot Resort Executive really would rather not hear any voices of dissent. I mean why should they care what the public thinks? The plan only pertains to land belonging to the PUBLIC. Sheesh.
I'd love to see this thing go to a public vote. We'd all get a better idea as to what percentage of people want to see this thing go forward.
I think that people who would support this project probably have jobs, oh I mean better things to do than write letters to the Forest Service.
"I think that people who would support this project probably have jobs, oh I mean better things to do than write letters to the Forest Service."

If they have "better things to do" than participate in the democratic process of their government, then they have no business whining.
"People who would support this project probably have jobs"? What a crock. Who do you think is gonna be skiing on machine-made snow on Lolo on weekday afternoons? Save Lolo Peak !
I don't have strong feelings either way, but people should imagine a Missoula Valley with NO local skiing, because that is the way the weather is heading. That may still not be reason enough to develop Lolo Pk., but I think alot of "anti's" have their heads in the sand about the future of skiing at Snowbowl. But then again, lift served skiing is an incredibly energy intensive endeavour anyway you cut it.

-Californiamontanacan
Wait... I have a job. I also vocalize on issues I support. Here are some examples:
1) I support protection of Forest Service Research Natural Areas - areas that have the highest level of protection the FS can give - Carlton Ridge Research Natural Area, for instance.
2) I support open space preservation, and development that provides opportunity for low and middle income people to get in on the ground floor. Not exactly what you had in mind, eh, Tom?
3) I support the value of community and public opinion - I support decisions that self-interested communities make in the best interest of their shared future. - That's why the comments run against your silly little proposal, Tom.
4) I support the Forest Service for refusing to cave and allow you to build a ski resort in a roadless area, a research natural area, and an area prone to landslides.
5) Finally, I support Tommy's right to do whatever the hell he wants with HIS property. Keep your dozers, chainsaws, lifts, condos, McMansions, and marketing off our public land, sir. Go ahead, Tom, Develop! That muddy, knapweed covered hill you've got there might even be able to support man-made snow for a couple of weeks every season!

- on a side note - I just moved to Durango, and we currently have a rich weasel Texan with his sights on Wolf Creek resort here - he wants his own 'lil Vail up there. - he's having trouble though, Tom, and he's a damn sight richer than you are!
Good Luck, A$$*≤!
Wow, you guys need to settle down. Ive been up to Bitteroot resort and seen averything that they are panning on doing, and let me tell you that it is not nearly as bad as all you "over the top" environmentalists make it seem. Bitterroot resort would mostly change the missoula valley for the better. and i am sure of that. Check both sides of the arguments before taking a stance.
Trying to cast aspersions and doubt by name-calling (over-the-top environmentalists) is a cheesy ploy, Chris, and we all can see through it. The only thing that's over-the-top here are the plans to grab public land for profiteering by developers.

Name

Email

Your Comment

Comment policy:

NewWest.Net encourages robust and lively, but civil participation from our readers. By posting here, you agree to the NewWest.Net terms of service. You agree to keep your comments on topic, respectful and free of gratuitous profanity. Contributions that engage in personal attacks, racism, bigotry, hatred or are otherwise patently offensive will be subject to removal.

Other than using a filter that scans for comment spam, we do not moderate contributions before they are posted and we do not review every thread, so we ask that you help us in keeping the discussions civil and appropriate. Please email info@newwest.net to notify us of comments that may violate these guidelines. Thanks for your help and cooperation. Click here for some tips on how to best interact on NewWest.Net.

Remember my name and email address.

Notify me of follow-up comments.