There will be development around Grand Targhee. The only question is, how much of it will be on the mountain and how much will be in the valley. I can see no reason why there cannot be the 775 units on the mountain. It is not people that destroys wildlife, it is habitat loss that destroys wildlife. It will make little difference to wildlife or ecology whether there are 300 or 900 units on the mountain where it will be confined to 120 acres in either case. Buildings can be designed “green” and eco-friendly, as can the entire resort. Why not focus on how eco-friendly the design is rather than focus on the number of living units. I think the wildlife/ecology vs number-of-units argument is hollow in this case.

I personally am wondering if the commissioners aren’t just being provincial. Maybe they simply do not want Grand Targhee to become a better resort than Jackson Hole because Targhee is more of an Idaho resort where it is only accessible from Idaho. Targhee is certainly better skiing than is Jackson Hole. Maybe the commissioners are simply trying to prevent Targhee from being the best ski resort in the Tetons. Maybe their motive is greed because they believe they can keep development on the Wyoming side of the Tetons rather than seeing it move to Idaho where the skiing is better. It is a strange situation.

The USA will continue to grow. There will be more skiers in the future. The resorts we have will not be enough. Do we want to new developments and see more habitat loss? Why don’t we allow higher density at resorts we have rather than develop new areas and lose more habitat? Targhee is a big open ski mountain that can handle a lot of skiers. Why not let the 900 living units be built there with a small footprint? Isn’t that eco-friendly too? We think we are doing wildlife a favor by lowing the density of development? I don’t think so. Unlike wildlife, development will just move somewhere else. Developers will destroy more habitat to create more slope-side living units somewhere else. The Teton’s wildlife certainly needs to be protected, but Targhee is perhaps the greatest ski mountain in the USA and some development should be allowed. What is wrong with keeping the footprint small and focusing on a green and eco-friendly design rather that simply curtailing the plans? I think wildlife would be best served if all slope-side development was put into a single high-rise with green and eco-friendly design and small footprint. There woarst thing we can do is force development to spread out over the mountainsides and with thinking like this, it certainly will.