Never met a highway expansion ya didn't like eh Budd? I think it should be provincial policy to encourage use of the EXISTING rail corridor more effectively instead of improving the hwy so that people can crash their SUV's at even higher speeds on the Sea to Die hwy. Esp. since, as the article notes, many of the potential new visitors will be coming from China and unlikely to bring their cars with them.

Keep on squinting; nothing like unbridled denial. There is no climate change. Nah. Get a season pass and drive back and forth to ski resorts in full-on insular style. And say "sustainabilty" a lot, for that full hypocritical touch.

Skiing on mountains is not possible without snow. Glaciers are melting in B.C. and Greenland due to global-warming, so where is the snow going to come from? No one is going to go to ski resorts, if there isn't any snow there to ski on. I wonder what the snow conditions will be like in 2010, it has the potential to be a very embarrassing situation. Has anyone gone skiing recently?

I agree that vacationers from China are not going to be driving here, but they may well rent a vehicle once they land. And there is still a huge North American and Western Canadian market to be served. The problem with the train was that it was too expensive. Not only could you take two people in a car for less, it was even less expensive to drive by yourself!

I tried to go skiing on the weekend of the 22nd and 23rd, but the weather was a complete washout, so we never left the cabin. Whistler is having a very bad year for snow, and personally I hope they have another couple of busts in 2006 and 2007. That will help to counter the Olympic-hype in the property market, and perhaps keep prices and rents there from rising any further, and perhaps even bring them down. That's what's needed: more of a good thing at more affordable prices. The reason the ski market is aging is because tow ticket prices and rents got ahead of the wages that younger people, on average, are making.

so, improving the hi-way to lower prices is a good idea, but improving the train service for the same reason isn't?' Wouldn't better service equal more customers equal higher ridership and lower costs (and then lower fares) for everyone, not just those who can afford a car?

Someone posted on another thread a few days ago that not one ski resort is open in Washington state; first time ever. I think Mount Washington on Vancouver Island has also been down for awhile. When the ski resorts close, when the golf courses flood, that is when the neo-cons "might" begin to take global warming seriously - that's the kind of science they believe in.

Simply put, the market is saturated. Colorado has been dealing with the same shake-out for at least a decade, which is why that state has had some amazing multi-hill passes. The problem is intensified in BC because, unlike Colorado, we don't have the 4 lanes of highway access. Instead, we have dangerous roads leading to Whistler, Kicking Horse, the Kootenay, even the Okaganan hills. Add the usual run of hotel gouging, skyrocketing lift costs, and we have a problem. No wonder the industry is falling apart.

i think you're on to something lynn. perhaps the neocon denial of global warming is because it ensures that golf courses will be open year round;)

Skiing is a rich persons sport, and has been for years.I find it hard to give a damn whether it snows or not. Some of us are trying to keep a roof over our heads and food on the table. If you have time to worry about any of this crap, you're a lot better off than most of us.

The Vancouver Review's winter cover story "Last Resort" is worth checking out if you're interested in issues relating to Whistler. Funny too.

Hey David...how come Lisa Richardson is "Squamish-based" when she writes for the Tyee and from Pemberton when she writes in the Pique and the Whistler Question? Just wondering.

Relayer said it best. Those wanting 6 lane highways to Whistler should give their heads a shake. Whistler's ecosystem needs more tourists like the world needs another case of SARS! Downhill skiing is a rich man's sport, as is skidooing. Cross country skiing is less environmentally intrusive, but rich men want to ignore it all and drive their BMWs everywhere at any time at their convenience, riding roughshod over the environment. There is no such thing as creating "profit" from a ski hill--only taking it, either from the environment (Mountain ecosystem--soil, wildlife and wildlife habitats, lakes, forests, fish, rivers, etc.) and/or from the labour of other people. There are too many people on the planet, so would the socially and environmentally unethical please just step off the planet? Thanks.

The snow at Whistler is going to non-existant by 2010, if this current weather is more than a "blip". While that doesn't bother me at all, what DOES is the massive spending spree the government is embarking on for the 2010 Olympics. If we must have a winter games, then why aren't we moving the venue to a ski run such as Big White, or Silver Star. or anywhere where snow will be be guaranteed? Right now, the whole advertising and construction budgets amount to just so much free advertising for IntraWest. Be a shame to spend $10 billion or so for the party, and have no one show up.........

We had a young man killed in a brutal fight outside a bar in small town BC a couple of weeks ago. The bar is alledged by my young friends to be out of control. There apparently is underaged drinking, drugs galore and the whole sad scene. Why do we have to have bars open to 4 am and where is the govt. liquor inspectors..

We had a young man killed in a brutal fight outside a bar in small town BC a couple of weeks ago. The bar is alledged by my young friends to be out of control. There apparently is underaged drinking, drugs galore and the whole sad scene. Why do we have to have bars open to 4 am and where is the govt. liquor inspectors..

It is about time we had some more serious resorts in the Vancouver area. Right now, Whistler is the monopoly, so they can get away with charging $70 for the privelege of standing in a lift line. In Europe, practically every mountain has a ski resort on it...here, we have a gadzillion mountains, and just the one local resort.

a few comments, first on the story, then on some of the remarks afterwards. i've worked as a freelance writer almost exclusively on winter sports and recreation for the past twenty or so years. i have found the provincial govt's 'fast tracking' of resorts to be a bit problematic. the original Commercial Alpine Ski Policy alluded to earlier was actually initiated in the wake of several high-profile bankruptcies in the mid 70s and early 80s, when even Blackcomb Mountain burned through its original owners, back in the days of 23 percent interest rates. the idea was to NOT have new resorts in close proximity to existing ones open up until true financial viability could be attained. revelstoke's location (no airport nearby) is problematic, jumbo and cayoosh are even a step more remote than, say, places which already face access problems like red mountain and ski smithers, and realistically, developers do watch global warming, and they know that any resort in the sea to sky corridor or even east in the fraser valley is a truly risky bet. where will the skiers come from - yes, that is an important part of the equation; but it's not the whole story. many resorts finance their expansion (and earn significant income) from selling the land to developers (or going into the development business themselves) for new lodges. this 'real estate play' has turned small, local's only hills like sun peaks and big white into major destination resorts, since the money raised allows the resort owners to put in high-speed chairlifts, luxurious amenities, and other recreational facilities (xc ski trails, skating rinks, snowshoe areas, even a community pool at sun peaks) that attract both a regional and a national, if not international, clientele. the 'model' from the 1960s of a small local hill struggling away and barely staying alive from year to year can be seen in a place like Hemlock Valley near Aggasiz, and in smaller areas like Crystal Mountain near Kelowna and even Ski Phoenix near grand forks. however, these smaller areas do provide an affordable alternative to the 'mega resorts' (there really is only one true mega resort in BC, and that's WB). a lot of the comments refer to the 'lack of snow' at WB, and as stephen vogler pointed out in the Globe a week ago last Saturday, that's nothing new - whistler has always had problems hosting events. however, many people (and the media) don't realize that Cypress Bowl is where many of the Olympic events will be held, and that resort is even at greater jeopardy with global warming, etc. old-timers admit that reliable skiing on the North Shore has been pretty spotty, even back in the 40s. silver star and big white here in the interior were not immune from the warming trend of the past two weeks, but they did have a sufficient base to offer very good conditions; which have improved with new snow over the past couple of days. (mid mountain base of 160 - 170 centimeters - roughly five feet). two events - a freestyle skiing event and a snowboard cross event scheduled for cypress have, in fact, been moved to silver star and big white and i'm sure both resort would be able to pitch in and accommodate Olympic competitions if they had to. their altitude and interior location certainly makes them less susceptible to the lashing of warm tropical air that whistler just received (try telling that to BCTV and other local weather forecasters, who essentially believe that 'if it's crappy in whistler, it's crappy everywhere' -just another bit of lower-mainland centric attitudes that we in the Interior must continually live with; but i digress.) i will come clean here and admit that i do some media relations work for both mountains, but it's been an uphill struggle to get people to believe that we're even open down there in the lower rainland. (hope that answers budd's and ranbir's comments). is skiing expensive? at many levels, yes, but dammit, so is bloody fly-fishing, RV camping, horseback riding, and outfitting your son for hockey. ernest hemingway said it best whe he wrote in the nick adams stories "Nick tries to express how much he loves skiing. George says that it is "too swell to talk about." later when his wife gets pregnant, Nick Adams gets rather upset. “Maybe we’ll never go skiing again, Nick,” says his friend George. “We’ve got to,” Nick says. “It isn’t worth while if you can’t." for the real skier, keeping the lifts operating profitably is someone else's problem. frankly, i'd love to see some of the olympic ski events handed out around the province - that would really make people feel a lot better about the whole deal out here in the 'heartlands'. europe DOES have a gadzillion lifts on every mountain - sort of like canadian towns and cities have (or used to have, that damned global warming) skating rinks outside. actually, many ski areas have worked hard to mitigate environmental problems (waste water treatment, for instance, has come such a long way and many ski areas seed their trails in the summer so that the snow sticks better to the vegetation. certainly, there are environmentalists who will say that ski trails look just as bad as clearcuts, and i won't begin to try and win that argument. my apologies for the long post, to those skiers and boarders out there, 'in powder, ins'hallah'...

Steve, that was a very good summary from someone who understands the ski industry throughout BC. I too share your doubts about places like Revelstoke, Jumbo and the Cayoosh proposal. It would seem someone somewhere wants to ensure people can ski their hearts out between Calgary and Vancouver with the anouncements of Golden, Revelstoke and now at the Coquihalla summit. Readers who think the latter site would be a natural should visit the BC Highways web site and have a look at the travel-cam just below the summit.***Jonathan, your dream of cheap lift tickets (under $70), when the competition increases is just that. Lift tickets at the much smaller Sunpeaks resort are already $60 a day and climbing, which is competitive with Big White and Silver Star. And while they will certainly welcome you as they take your money, chances are, the operators are far more interested in attracting overseas or at least out-of-town skiers, whom they know will plunk down whatever it takes. I don't ski so I don't have a lot of interest in seeing more backcountry turned into suburban real estate. But as long as this government is into subsidizing ski hill developers and thus skiers, another hidden reality I oppose, you certainly can't complain.

the issue of prices has come up a few times in ths thread, and though i've worked in the industry, you have to take those 'ticket window prices' with a grain of salt. whistler-blackcomb sell affinity cards that heavily discount their tix on off-peak times, and 'books of five' and books of ten are popular options. the North Shore mountains have had some excellent early season pass deals over the years. at big white and silver star, we offer a '$5 Friday' night skiing package that not only lets you ski for several hours (on a high speed lift at Big White, no less) for $5, rent skis for $5, and (at silver star) even get a cheap pizza or spaghetti & drink for $5. at big white, you can ski midweek and stay at a lodge right on the hill for under $100 per person, all inclusive. (lift & accommodation). try renting even a cheap motel in vancouver for that price. decent equipment (i know, cuz i do it for my kids) can be had from foraging at spring garage sales for literally spare change. (boots - $5, skis - $15) - there is SOME trickle down benefit from having affluent folks do a sport! clothing - ditto - there are plenty of hand-me-downs in this sport. though the sport suffers from 'yuppie-itis' at whistler-blackcomb big-time, a trip into the Interior shows that a lot of families love the sport, and they make time and money available in the family budget to do it. the thrill of watching a kid even ride a chairlift is pretty darned cool, not to mention watching 'em do their little 'pizza plow' turns under the chairlift. as for snowboarding, the creativity and sheer exhilariation that it offers (and it's much easier to learn) has revitalized the entire winter sports industry and keeps those unruly teens out of the mall and off the xbox... there IS a lot of soul out there, even in Whistler. yes, you do have to turn a bit of blind eye to the excesses of materialism, but a trip into the Okanagan or the Kootenays will give you a cool, unhurried vibe that whistler has kind of lost over the years. and the caress of that fresh snow as it billows over your knees and hips, well, as hemingway put it, 'it's too swell to talk about...' on another note, aside from jumbo and cayoosh; very few ski resorts on existing crown land offer much in the way of wilderness values. the 'suburbanization' if you will (actually, most new developments are attractively landscaped within existing forests, etc) happens, in many cases, in parking lots where the land is turned over to developers because it's flat and drains well. one other note - in kelowna, vernon, and even salmon arm, you can take a regularly schedule bus (oh, yes, and apex in penticton too) up to the hill for less money than driving by yourself. and really, guys, if there was the amount of carpoooing going to work that most skiers and riders exhibit on a typical weekend, our air would be much, much cleaner.

Seems folks miss the point. Maybe what we need in this province and perhaps the entire country is less reliance on tourism to drive the economy and create jobs. Tourism jobs don't pay much money, don't offer much in the way of benefits and aren't stable enough to allow people to plan a future. It may be OK for people who want to make a few bucks at a low commitment job, but it's no way to run an economy. Here in Victoria, the biggest event of the year is when an American aircraft carrier hits town and vomits 5000 pimply sailors onto the streets. Man, watch those plastic Mounties just fly off the shelves! It would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic.

Ah tourism! The panacea to economic woes. Along with slot machines. This government's agenda is so very shortsighted and vacuous that we'll all be selling trinkets to Chinese visitors within a few years. Meanwhile, what few logs are left will have been flogged by Weyco et al at bargain basement prices, billions will have been squandered to host a big Olympdick 17-day jockfest, and our economy will have sunk in the vortex caused by the demise of the friendly giant down south. Great. I can't wait.

i don't think anyone has EVER called tourism the 'panacea' for BC's economic ills - it is a way of diversifying local economies and perhaps saving a few jobs when the mills and forests and mines shut down, as they obviously have in many places. there actually ARE opportunities in the tourism industry for people who've scrimped and saved their money or who have access to capital to go out and open successful small businesses, usually on a seasonal level, that may give them a semi-decent standard of living and allow them to stay in the community. is this 'selling trinkets to the chinese?' well, the other option is to move to the big city and find work there (just don't try to find jobs in communications of media, there isn't anything available as i'm sure our moderator will tell you). and pay big-city rents and housing prices while you're at it. like everything in life, a 'career' in tourism calls for people to use their brains and choose wisely, based on the best information that they have at the time. resorts also create needs for skilled tradespeople in both maintenance and construction (maybe not your typical tyee reader), who are well-compensated for their efforts. and, just because i'm trying to find out, what IS the NDP's economic agenda??

I have to say I enjoyed the bitter misyandry of Marysue's eco-feminist contribution. I could almost smell the marijuana smoke wafting gently skyward.

To Steve Threndyle, I can assure you that the initial Commercial Alpine Ski policy dates from the period when Dave Barrett and Bob Williams were running the BC Govt. Coincidentally, that was also when Cypress was developed as a government owned operation, ... only to be "privatized" along with Seymour by Bill Bennett in the Restraint Putsch of the early 1980s. You're right that these ski developments in BC use the sale of condos and other real estate to help pay for good quality lifts. That was the object of the policy, to provide public land at little cost to the ski developer, whose real estate arm could then turn it into a major source of cash.

As for $5 nites at Big White, I wouldn't mind that kind of deal myself! Big White and Sun Peaks (aka Tod Mtn) seemed to have diverged in their tow ticket pricing policies, with Big White keeping down Season's Passes so they are still affordable, even to a family of four or five, while Sun Peaks has raised their prices considerably. As for Whistler, I have the five day card and it works out to a bit over $55 per day when you include GST. When I first started skiing the tickets were less than $10, so assuming a general tripling of prices since, I wouldn't feel to hard done by with tickets in the $30 to $40 range, but $50 and up is a bit much, especially when they got all that revenue from selling the free land they got.

I don't know what the financial viability of Revelstoke or Jumbo may be, but someone with money thinks they aren't going to have a problem. In the case of Cayoosh, the somebody is Nancy Greene and Al Raine. Is there really any chance they have it wrong, ... for the first time ever? They say that for the resort they have in mind a major road improvement is not needed, they can make do with the highway as it is now, and that may be so. I am thinking that from BC's economic development viewpoint it would be desirable to put in as much recreation capacity as possible in the Squamish to Lillooet corridor over the longer term. While Cayoosh has been delayed in part because of a lack of agreement on the part of the Native people in the area, one of the benefits of further recreational development throughout that area would be Native employment and entrepreneurship.

al and nancy are getting on in years, esp al. i think they've pretty much given up on cayoosh ever seeing the light of day. cayoosh was modelled on a year they spent living in saas-fee after nancy won the olympics. they wanted to build a remote, car-less village (well, they got the carless point right in whistler) as a small-scale, big mountain resort that was not near any major centre. it sounds great in theory and in the beginning, al had the First Nations on board; but then i believe the leadership of the band council changed and, well, it was back to, well, the usually depressing scenario of 'lets's say no, and we'll get more money in the long run.' al is actually a really great guy - he used to live out in a log cabin up near revelstoke, i believe, when he was coaching ski racing. he is a real original, as many in the ski industry were in the 50s and 60s. hey, $55 is hit, no doubt about it, but if you pick your days - midweek, when it's cold, and there's a been a fresh dump, whistler is one hugely fabulous mountain to ski. a REAL mountain, like lake louise. when whistler 'went big' - the prices went along with it. even americans during the height of the USD complained that 'gee, this is pretty expensive for canada.' i think that it's the exchange rate, and the added hassle of getting across the border either by car of plane that is killing the whistler business right now. btw, i remember well the 'cypress sell out' and former trade union head les mcdonald railing at wayne booth and cypress bowl recreations. remember when the lifties wore those brown BC Parks shirts?? as for the cost, warren miller had a very good column in SKI magazine where he advocated that ski resorts do what drug dealers do (he was semi serious!) and GIVE AWAY the 'product' until people are hooked!!

steve t, it seems the more you write the less I agree with you. I realize you work in the industry and have to protect your ass, but your responses here are increasingly pro development and pro Liberal government policy while you have no trouble dredging things up from 40 years ago to blame on the NDP. But my greatest concern is your cheap shot at the first nations band that was involved in the Cayoosh Creek plan. Provincial governments change, city governments change. When they do there are often radical or dramatic shifts in direction so why is it so bad that first nations change direction when a new council comes along? "Let's say no, and we'll get more money in the long run," is quite a slap at people you didn't even bother to identify, while playing ol' Al(Raines) up to be "a great guy". My understanding of the proposed Cayoosh Creek agreement between teh band and developer was that there would be jobs for local first people nations. And why in hell shouldn't they get some priority on jobs when this development was planned for their traditional lands? There was no "more money" for the band council to get. Sorry guy, but you're now sounding too much like a paid flack who duped us with an initial story only to try to get back into the good books of those right-of-centre developer types by shitting on the NDP, trade unions and First Nations. BTW, while I am not a tradesman, I suspect there are quite a number of trades people who read the Tyee, some of whom actually can afford to ski. Finally, if Warren Miller wrote such a "good column", why would he say such dumb things and why would you repeat them?

Hey Budd: I have to disagree with you one one point. There's plenty of recreation capacity in the Sqaumish to Lilloett corridor, it's just not the kind you can put a turnstile on. Personally, I guess I'd prefer to see ski lifts over clear cuts, esp. since tourism love it or hate it, is a better employer than the increasingly automated forest industry, but as a mountain biker who hates to see the development slowly climbing the slopes of the North Shore, I can understand why back-country enthusiasts would decry too much structured fun in their playground.

I know how to spell Squamish. Really I do.

allan: i am certainly not asking you to agree with me; a lot of people on the left and right think my ideas are a bit half-baked. for the record, the NDP under Mike Harcourt was very open to resort development, especially the much-discredited moe sihota, who saw that recreational development of crown land was a good thing and something that might help diversify the economy of the interior and the island. and while i suppose i did have battlin' bob williams as one of my heroes back in the day when i thought that nationalization of everything was 'the answer,' i've disavowed that philosophy though i'm still a long way from being a card-carrying liberal party supporter. my sincerest apologies if my remarks about the cayoosh first nations band came across as racist - the only point that i wished to make about the cayoosh band is that raine apparently thought he had the goodwill of the band at one point, and now he doesn't. you're right, times do change, and ski resorts ALL need employees and entrepreneurs, First Nations and otherwise. i rather doubt that there will be any development in the cayoosh until its developers can strike an agreement with the band indeed, i think there current postiion opposes any development at any price- certainly it's their right to decide if it's in their best interest. the political climate has changed in terms of bringing First Nations into consultation which is certainly more fair, but delays the process (and the jobs) as well. maybe that's as it should be - i'm sure the BCMCers and other backcountry ski and snowmobile groups like it just the way it is right now. one point that raine made to me - and he's spot on about this, is that there are very, very few places in BC where you build a decent destination ski resort. you need good roads nearby, access to a fairly major airport, a reliable snow pack that doesn't avalanche on you, the snow can't be too wet and sticky, and the terrain has to offer something for everybody. raine flew dozens of hours in the sw corner of bc before a swiss guide that he was with spotted the cayoosh, which, even in this day and age, is still way the hell out there. as far as warren miller's comment goes; perhaps the analogy of handing out free drugs to get skiers hooked was inappropriate (it didn't go down at all well with the people he was talking to - it was some kind of round table discussion), his 'larger point' was that the sport should be made cheaper in order to attract new people (which is what lisa's story was about, and some of the ensuing comments) and, more importantly, retain them as skiers. (from a retail standpoint, the success of virtually ALL recreational sports relies not about growth, but about retention - sustainability, if you will). and i would expect that many tradesman do ski, and certainly can afford to as they likely make significantly more money than 'PR hacks' and apologists for the Liberal party (where did you get that??). on another note, before global warming, well, let's just say, back in the old days, there were a LOT of community owned ski hills, not maybe so much in BC (though i think there might be a couple - murray ridge in ft st james, and there are a couple in the united states). many smaller areas do quite well with fixed grip lifts and basic services (and offer skiig for a cheap price) but those at lower elevations do suffer, and i really believe that problem will only get worse. for instance, crystal mountain over in westbank had apparently very good snow conditions between xmas and new years, is very cheap to ski at, and yet people do not go there - the bar set by big white, silver star, and apex is simply too high. like every consumer product, operating a ski resort is not just about 'cheapness', it's about offering consistent value and innovating in order to do that. finally, VANOC spokesperson sam corea said today that the answer at whistler would be to 'make snow'; alas, you need temps of i believe minus 5 to minus 8 in order to do that, and whistler came through a two week spell (as did vancouver) where even night-time temps were nowhere near that. i can't recall for sure but aside from grouse, i don't believe that cypress has snowmaking capacity (nor likely should it, with its location in a Class A park and the water conservation issues, etc). realistically, the only answer would be to move some of the games events to the interior. whew! another long post... i guess i should click on a couple of david's banner ads to show my 'support' for the site...

Your comment, Jonathan, about the obvious void of real competition for Whistler is correct. It is an economic reality that 'clustering' of resorts is a major benefit to everyone. So why does this lack of competition exist? Is there a possibility of a carefully plotted back field in motion 'played' by a few vested interests intent on blocking competition?

Whistler's "monopoly has everything to do with PROTECTIONISM at any cost; the fear of competition from a better product with significantly better conditions for the consumer; a product that would force Whistler/Blackcomb into line of having to give better value for the dollar because people would have a choice. Of course, ski resorts should stand on their own feet, unlike the millions of taxpayers' dollars that have been poured into THE MONOPOLY.

Moe Sihota was publicly supportive of and had a healthy perspective regarding new ski resorts re: competition/job creation etc. Could it be that his progressive efforts were targeted because they did not meet the approval/needs of big Whistler money (read Campbell's network of bagmen). He presented a threat to their land holdings in Whistler - and they got him. Once again, allan, Moe was not one of THEM, if you get my drift (and I think you will!) Moe would be a great asset in a new Cabinet - and boy oh boy, would he keep the Liberals in line!

apologies to wonderwoman but her analysis is a bit of a conspiracy theory. what really happened at whistler is this - the industry became basically revolutionized when intrawest bought blackcomb mountain from aspen skiing corp in, i believe, 1982. whistler, owned by the Young family (primarily) out of Vancouver, had in fact done what a lot of monopolies do - they took the local market for granted, and (though the tix look cheap in comparison nowadays) gouged the crap out of them, served up lousy, expensive food, and operated old, slow lifts. (this is not revisionist history, this is the way it went down). in fact, if anything, the story of how whistler developed turns a few lefty shibboleths on their head - ie - local ownership = better; small guy = innovative, etc. intrawest took the land that they had purchased from aspen ski corp on blackcomb mountain and developed what is now known as the "Benchlands" area - the Chateau Whistler, Le Chamois, the whole base area, and with the money they received from developers installed Doppelmayr high-speed chairlifts, opened on slope restaurants that did not look like dirty high school cafeterias, and essentially targeted 'their mountain' not to vancouverites, (though they did offer some very attractively priced season's passes), but to the 'international crowd.' it was intrawest, not the young family - who put whistler-blackcomb on the radar map of the international media (with a lot of cooperative help from the whistler resort association - the non profit marketing arm of all of the local merchants and hoteliers). the young family (whistler) reacted in a positive way to this competition - they installed new high speed lifts, put a chair to the peak of Whistler, and for about a ten year time, the beneficiary of all of this competition was clearly the vancouver skier. the original 'blackcomb card' came out during this time, as did other promotions. whistler and blackcomb both fared very well during this time, or we can surmise that they did because both mountains continually recorded record skier visits. however, unlike intrawest and blackcomb, the young family (whistler) never did have any real estate to sell off (well, maybe a bit near the base of the old gondola). their 'profits' came from selling lift tickets. i put that in quotation marks because, with the enormous debt that whistler took on in competing with blackcomb, i'm sure that the young family was in financial difficulty even with record skier numbers being recorded. as a privately-held company, we don't really know. here's where the story (are you with me so far) get interesting, and i will say that it is also a bit of conjecture on my part. whistler's fate was essentialy sealed on December 24, 1995, when four chairlifts dropped off the "Green Chair" high speed quad and fell into a gully. two people were killed, and a couple of others maimed. my wife, (pregnant at the time) had been snowboarding - and was three chairs behind the last chair to drop, and witnessed the whole thing. now, here is an interesting aside - the snowpack at that time was well below normal - another, i believe, el nino year - and the reason that she was on the lift was that she was riding DOWN, snow condtions on the bottom of the mountain were very marginal. anyways, the chairs dropped off, people died, families sued, and, next thing we know, intrawest has given the young family an 'offer that they couldn't refuse." (again, this is a bit of conjecture; bob barnett at the Pique would know much more about it). whistler, in its haste to go up against the upstart (and publicly-traded) intrawest had invested in high speed quads made by YAN chairlifts in new mexico. apparently, the YAN version of the high speed lift was significantly cheaper than those built by doppelmayr or poma in Europe, and the welds holding the chairs onto the cable developed cracks which under the strain of downloading, failed, causing the chairs to fall. the young family (whistler) would likely have been covered by liability insurance, i'm not privy to any of those details, but basically that accident ended the 'competition' for the skier dollar in the sea to sky corridor on a very tragic note. however, several other developers have had plans over the years for resorts to rival whistler - the most infamous being nan hartwick - a west van (i believe) realtor who was a very close friend of then-premier bill bennett. she had plans for a ski area in the callaghan valley, where the XC sites will be held in the olympics. adi bauer, from switzerland, even built the beginnings of what would be a mega resort above squamish on brohm ridge, but ran out of money. the brohm ridge idea was bruited about for quite a few years and a CA developer, wolfgang richter, was heavily involved up until about two years ago(lisa, our author, would know this story well). i think that brohm ridge is dead in the water because, well, the terrain simply isn't very good, and the weather is absolutely atrocious for the most part. i hope this clarifies the whistler story for you, wonderwoman, and perhaps dispells your idea of campbells' bagmen, monopolies, etc.

As a member of Save the Eagleridge Bluffs Coalition, I am concerned that the 2010 Olympics are being promoted as Green Games, yet we are about to trash what the Province reports to be most ecologically significant site on the entire Sea to Sky corridor, above Horseshoe Bay. This they will do by cutting directly through this small reserve with a 200ft wide four-lane versus a 1.4 k twin tube tunnel as originally recommended by their own consultants. Not only will the tunnel be shorter straighter with lesser gradients and lead to less congestion and confusion at the Horseshoe Bay interchange, it will therefore be safer. Further many suspect that, despite all the Govt's propaganda it will be no more expensive. We have estblished that despite Falcon's claim that after months of argument, there is not time to switch to the tunnel this is absolutely untrue. Much misinformation has been published around this issue including that 1,200 houses and a golf course and school are to be built on the same land. Mr Falcon the main proponent of that eventuality, full well knows that the West Van OCP will disallow that, unless he chooses to overturn our byelaws. If we are going to host the Olympics, inspite of the climate change risks, which evidently do not concern Rogge, then at least let us meet our environmental committments, safety and other commitments While many agree that rail represents the most economical and environmentally most effective mode of transportation, it is now too late to expend the additional amount of money needed to bring the rail up to efficient reasonably fast commuter service. I am not alone in these opinions. For anyone interested in this piece of the puzzle our web-site is wwww.eagleridgebluffs.ca

Sorry aboutthe typo should obviously read a four lane 200ft wide highway--

Stephen: With respect, your 'comment' bears no relevance to the issue at hand. I have no idea what you are saying or what your motives are with your long, rambling comments. The one item I noted that has relevance is Nan Hartwick winning the hard earned rights to build an international resort with NO government funds because the 'product and her vision was sound'. The facts reported stated that Moe Sihota and Glen Clark were strongly supportive of Mrs. Hartwick (along with the general public) because of her initiative, because they knew the FACTS, These two Cabinet Ministers showed they had the foresight to support solid privat sector intiatives. I repeat: I am a free entepriser with a big social conscience. Like so many other people, I stomach corruption from within government circles. What happened to Mrs. Hartwick remais a disgrace. Her project was and IS, THE REAL THREAT to that handfull of Whistler big bagmen and that is why she was targeted.

With respect, Steven, do your friends have a hard time understanding you? I relate to what allan feels like; your above comments serve to clarify nothing. Perhaps is your motive to run on about trivia, to distract from the obvious at hand? Please try to take a deep breath and clarify your own thoughts; you leave the impression that you are wondering around in a fog, perhaps having spent too much time in Whistler!

Correction to my sentence above: It should read:

"Like so many other people, I CANNOT stomach corruption from within government circles."

Of course you are not alone in your opinions, David. Good for you and your group for having the courage to speak out and counter with the truth. As I was saying above about "corruption" . . .

You managed to actually have Rogge's ear yesterday which was a miracle in itself. The 'campaign of misinformation" from the government is simply a tactic employed by this little group against anyone who dares to go against their personal agendas. Very little that this 'bunch' has done with public assets has been made in the best interests of British Columbians. I hear the frustration in your words, but please remember, that 'What goes around, comes around'. NEVER GIVE UP.

wonderwoman - your point, i believe, was basically this - that somehow the Liberals had colluded with Intrawest to form some kind of monopoly on ski resorts in the sea to sky corridor. do you have evidence of this? brohm ridge has failed to find any backers, because the project is simply in the wrong place. as i said in an earlier post, there are very, very few places in BC where building an economically viable ski resort can be done, either with or without government help. funny, though, that until (i believe) the liberals came to power, that entire callaghan valley that nan hartwick wanted to develop for DH skiing was put in some kind of government "under study" zone - people lobbying for parks wanted to preserve it as wilderness, but could not do so. it is an outstanding site for Nordic skiing (as Rogge himself has pointed out) and there truly IS a major need for a top notch XC facility for the Lower Mainland, who are stuck with low-elevation Cypress or a three hour bus trip to Manning Park. as for 'sides', well, these resort and resource issues cannot be tarred with a general brush - we both know that the NDP supported resort development in SOME areas, and the Liberals are fast-tracking things - which - going back to my first point - (and the story) does give rise for some concern - where, indeed, will the skiers come from. you can't be reading those long, rambling posts very well, otherwise you would know that i'm not based out of Whistler. as for corruption, well, unfortunately the best premier that the province ever had (and a skier, i might add) - michael harcourt, had to 'take the fall' for boneheaded idiocy within his own party.

one other comment, to wonderwoman - Nan Hartwick's project was in the hopper LONG before Moe Sihota and Glen Clark came on the scene. I believe, in fact, that she took bill van der zalm to court because she apparently had a 'deal' with the SoCreds under Bennett to go ahead with the Powder Mountain proposal and the zalm had quashed it. (pffft - bong hit!) though, that was over 20 years ago, and my memory might be HAZY on that one, but i believe that's how it went down. there was a story in the Courier about it once...

Well Steve, I am interested in your comment that Wolfgang Richter's Brohm Ridge "is dead in the water because, well, the terrain simply isn't very good, and the weather is absolutely atrocious". Surely the terrain and the weather would have been closely examined before any significant money was invested in detailed designs or environmental assessments?

I have been told by people who claim to be "in the know" on the chair at Blackcomb that while various "green people" may speak out against further commercial ski development, the real reason no one ever gets approval to go ahead is because the Vancouver business interests who own property at Whistler won't hear of it. Of these, Intrawest is a very large and visible player, but the many well-to-do owners of not-so-modest $3 million dollar log cabins are really the biggest political obstacle of all. How else does the average person compute the fact that Callaghan Valley is good enough to be part of our Olympic bid, ... but somehow not quite good enough to be approved as a separate commercial ski development?

Please accept my apologies for using "information" picked up on the chair from self-proclaimed people in the know. It's sort of like getting your data at the barber shop or the beauty salon, I know. OTOH, compared to getting your information from CanWest News, ... maybe it's not such a crummy source after all.

budd: ski resort development is, by and large, a dreamer's game; it always has been. intrawest is a publicly-trade (ITW) company on both the TSE and the NYSE, and its holdings are far greater than just Whistler (in fact, they have done real estate developments at rival resorts in the past, sun peaks being one of them). i believe that richter was right at the very end of his EAP when he ran out of money; there may be new propenents now, but i haven't heard much. look, if people on this thread want to believe what they hear on the chairlifts or put two and two together by examining political connections that may (or may not) exist in some kind of XFiles fashion, that's fine with me. my observations are based on researching and writing articles for the past two decades on bc resort development. one of the guys wbo worked for nan hartwick was frank baumann, the infamous squamish geologist who is on the news every time there's a landslide on the sea to sky. he told me once that 'it's awfully foggy up there, like mid-mountain at whistler - the terrain is above treeline (again, viz problems), and he didn't really think that it had the proper mix of terrain for all levels of skiers. he did say, in a prescient way, that it would make an excellent cross country area because of the rolling/flat terrain. alas, there's not much money in developoing xc resorts. now there's a place where the govt could have stepped in and put a provincial training facility for xc skiers. as for your earlier comment about the crystal ridge chair - there really isn't much good skiing over there - runs are short, off fall-line, and it is a funny little vestige of the aspen ski corp days. and let's be clear about this - ANY new resort would be charging 'whistler prices' due to the enormous start up costs. which is why developers buy existing resorts (kicking horse - white tooth, red mountain, mount baldy, etc) and then lobby to expand from there.

"brohm ridge is dead in the water because, well, the terrain simply isn't very good, and the weather is absolutely atrocious for the most part." - S.T.

As much as you purport to know (and write on ad nauseam), S.T., folks should be really be made aware of this fact:

VANCOUVER (CBC Radio - Vancouver, Oct 20 2004) - A B.C. Supeme Court justice has overturned a decision on a proposed ski resort at Mount Garibaldi. Justice Mary Koenigsberg has ruled the provincial government breached its duty by not consulting with the Squamish First Nation. The Squamish Nation claims the land around Mount Garibaldi as its traditional territory. Justice Koenigsberg says the province approved plans to build a four season resort at Garibaldi last year. However, she says because there wasn't proper consultation with the Squamish First Nation, the approval has to be revisited. The company behind the development calls the ruling a definite setback. Mike Esler, CEO of Garabaldi at Squamish Inc. says he's looking forward to the consultation with the First Nation and remains optimistic the plan will go ahead eventually. "No question we've been set back, perhaps 18 months – maybe even longer – but you have to get it done right." Esler says the company's shareholders are hoping to meet with the Squamish First Nation and the B.C. government soon. -30-

thank you, KJ, that is good info. we'll see what happens. as far as brohm ridge (or many other ski resorts go) a fool and his money are soon parted. this ain't drilling for oil, people...

Budd- you thought that was mysandry?? Interesting; I thought it was a valid observation. Rich women and men. You need to smoke a joint and relax a bit yourself, evidently :)

Jesus, what I wouldn't give to smoke a joint and go skiing. Yeah, downhill skiing! Plus I would drive there!! But I can't afford skiing. $50 plus a day, that's golf money, i.e. stupid. Oh well, I could still smoke a joint.

what a great province we live in ron (sorry folks, for sounding like a liberal hack) when we can choose between stoking a fatty, hitting the slopes, or swingin' the clubs. as for driving, hell, no one likes driving... $50 for the bliss of sliding on snow, versus $50 for whacking at a little white orb (and having to shell out when you hit the water hazard). no comparison for me.

Yep, skiing is fun. I mean, real skiing, not that cross country stuff. Although biathalon looks fun. I suspect that many boring, interminable sports like golf could be improved by the addition of weapons.

Steve, I have to disagree with you regarding the Crystal Ridge Chair. Everyone I know likes the runs over there, perhaps because they're more intermediate. The only argument I heard from someone I know for NOT putting in a new high speed quad is that he doens't want that part of the mountain to attract too much attention, he likes it the way it is now with only small numbers of people!

Would it be possible to build a new Crytal Ridge Chair that went higher than the present one, to the top of the ridge above? Just wondering.

Lisa Richardson; I thought you did a great job with this story. It's unfortunate it has been hijacked by others who were less than thrilled that you can churn out such good copy without first bowing to the appropriate icons.

well, hunter s thompson DOES live in aspen, a ski town, dont'cha know. no stranger to weapons, he. don't think he skis or golfs, though. he doesn't really have to - he's quite capable of making his own fun.

Steve, these wild digressions...are we hijackers? Does that bring this discussion under the Patriot Act? Think, man.

now that i've introduced hunter s thompson as an 'icon' (well, mine, anyway), i will answer - no, make that comment with Budd and tell him that hey, ANY lift expansion is possible, damned near anywhere. (in europe, the mind boggles at the places where they can string cable). next time you're up at WB (wait for snow!) ask for some local to take into the very tasty "CBC North" powder stash that comes out at the bottom of the crystal chair (see, it IS worth reading this thread). it is inbounds, but very definitely NOT on the trail map. and yr bud is right - older, slower lifts preserve the pow after a big dump. crystal rocks, esp on stormy days, and the gapers hate riding slower lifts. as for allan, my comments, (not drug induced, like marysue's were purpoted to be) were to add a bit of context to certain parts of the story (which was generally very well done, and addresses many of the challenges facing the resort industry). there was one part of the story that was basically apropos of nothing, btw. the fact that BC has 16 percent of all of the resorts in canada and 9 percent in north america means squat. you could likely put three quarters of the ski areas in ontario and they'd fit quite nicely into whistler bowl. the economics of resort development are voodoo enough. even the figure of 'skier visits' is largely misleading to the bottom line of a resort. there's a big difference (to a resort's profitablilty) between a high roller who comes with his family to whistler, rents a suite at the Pan Pacific, and eats out every night and the dirtbag powder hound who lives out of his van, visits his local ski area 120 times in the season, and survives on 'ketchup soup' scammed from the cafeteria. like clothing boutiques who must suffer from people 'just looking', the former customer is highly sought after, the latter customer is tolerated. uh-oh, there i go, picking on the poor...

Steven: I have reread your posts. I respect that you have compiled a lot of information from your point of view; perhaps I even misunderstood some of your comments. I agree with you about the Sam Corea's sill comment about making snow at Whistler, when temperatures are above freezing. Although you have not dispelled my perspective on the PROTECTIONISM surrounding Whistler/Blackcomb by vested interests, to block competing resorts (expressed by Budd and others above) you are entitled to your opinion.

There was a lot of media coverage, CBC, the Sun, and the Courier article, etc. detailing some of the circumstances surrounding Nan Hartwick's project and the terrible treatment she received from government. What came through loud and clear to myself and many others, was this:

after spending millions of investment dollars traversing tortuous, bureacratic red tape etc. for years; then succeeding in winning the final proposal call for an international ski resort in the Callaghan Valley; she had her legal rights ripped away. Something is wrong with this picture, don't you think?

Mrs. Hartwick's treatment by government was abusive. I believe that all British Columbians should be concerned with a scenario like Mrs. Hartwick experienced, With all of your knowledge Steven, I am sure that you respect Nan Hartwick and wish her well, as many of us do.

To Steve and Wonderwoman: I am not personally carrying a brief for or against Nan Hartwick, or for or against Intrawest, for that matter.

My interest is that of a casual consumer of the product, usually 5 to 10 days a year, tops. A permanent intermediate who just likes to be outside in the middle of winter without having to rough it unduly. I want to see additional developments that will help to bring down prices of tow tickets and accommodation, and increase production and employment in BC tourism at the same time.

If Hartwick or someone else picking up that venture can add to the ski capacity, and it meets environmental standards, fine. Same with the Squamish development and Cayoosh. The particular developer doesn't really interest me, so long as there is competition. And going back to the comments made to me by one of the instructors, I repeat, it's too bad that when Whistler failed it was bought by Intrawest instead of some rival concern. They have been using Whistler as a cash cow to finance their other ventures for the past several years. That's classic monopoly conduct.

wonderwoman - wow, thanks for re-reading all of those lengthy posts. i've never done this before, but the sport is obviously something i am passionate about. budd: to you, and the literally tens of thousands of 'displaced' vancouver skiers and snowboarders who find whistler 'too expensive' (definitely a valid point), i would tend to adopt a whole new approach - basically, set aside time (say, two or three four day weekends) and drive the five hours to big white, silver star, sun peaks, apex etc. and get out of the whistler 'sea to die' highway rat race. catch cypress on those epic days (they DO happen, and i think the ski terrain is very good up there). wonderwoman - as i believe i mentioned earlier, nan hartwick's problems were with vander zalm in particular, i believe (hence, the lawsuit??) did moe sihota in fact take up her cause? i believe your earlier comment was that it was campbell 'bagmen' who gassed the project, but to the best of my knowledge nan's deal went down when gordo was running triathlons as the mayor of vancouver, maybe even before that... to budd: if you're at whistler, do check out the new 'peak to creek' runs over on the old whistler (gondola) side of the mountain. good long runs, and fresh pow on the right day (ie - today, friday!). yahoo - SNOW again!

I picked up on your passion and it is a good thing, Steve. Yes, according to all media reports, evidence proved that VanderSlam did interfere,abuse his Office's power directly to insert his friend, the former Attorney General (who chaired the 1986 Leadership at Whistler) into Nan Hartwick's exclusive, proponent position. That was one 'hit' she took.

I like yourself admire Moe Sihota and his courage. In fact, he backed up former Minister Kempf whose Minsitry had chosen Nan Hartwick as the final proponent and became a vocal advocate for Hartwick when the scandal broke in public; was this was an example of cross party ethics or what! In more recent years, I was amazed to see it reported that Sihota and Kempf both testified in court on behalf of Nan Hartwick also naming the specific bureaucrats who had also been involved in the wrongdoing. Are these land bureaucrats still in the Land Corp.?

Another BIG BLOCK she faced was stated on a major CBC (I think) documentary (and other articles), a couple of years ago: the Callaghan Valley's superior year round conditions etc. was a threat to big money in Whistler, (supported by millions of taxpayers dollars in continual bailouts), were antsy about the real competition next door with their land holdings in W/B. Did you see this extensive coverage, whith helicopter views of the immense glaciers in the Callaghan or were you out on the slopes?

Who were the 'bagmen' in the shadows around Bennett and VanderSlam? Who are the 'bagmen' propping up Campbell? Who is controlling the land deals in the Olympics? Who are the large land owners in W/B? Now, being the deatailed researcher that you are let's see a little more of that expertise at work, my friend.

your info wrt callaghan (which i've ski toured in a couple of times) is truly great stuff (worthy of a tyee investigation, methinks!) - hey, i am quite willing to entertain the notion that someone within the socred (now liberal, of course) party had it in for nan hartwick in order to 'protect' whistler interests. she did call me up (i actually called her - god, twenty years ago?? when i first caught whiff - not of the scandal, but of the ski area - this was pre zalm). one expects, though, that if she has 'had her day' in court, and lost, that she doesn't have much recourse. that doesn't mean we can't 'conject' what, and why, things might have happened. when i think of moe, i see a great opportunity lost for the NDP provincially but hell, what do i know. i liked bob williams at the time, too. political parties are rather schizophrenic when it comes to 'gunslingers' - i still maintain, though, that the NDP got an 'extra term' of office by nominating glen clark - he was the 'street fighter' they needed to combat gordo. carole james, IMHO, doesn't and will not cut it. either way, resort development does seem to be on the agenda. as to whether callaghan would ever make a decent DH area or not, i tend to agree with baumann. ANY area that is bereft of trees is not going to be much fun to ski in foggy, warmer weather, which is the way things are headed! now, the area is overrun with bloody snowmobiles! there's a small backcountry lodge there that jack christie has written about, and i believe there has been some controversy there with the Olympic bid. frankly, i'd have been happy to see it become part of the stoltmann wilderness, but by the same token, very few backcountry users (non mechanized) go back there - it's just too far off hwy 99 for day trips. i'm done with the coast and writing about whistler - besides, you cannot beat 'the pique.'! i'm in the interior, now, where the snow is dry, the traffic to the areas is light, and the prices are (somewhat) reasonable. if you or budd want to read an excellent book about this (i was surprised that lisa didn't mention it) - check out 'downhill slide' by an american, hal clifford. he's a bit of a romantic about it all (even more than i am!!), but he raises some excellent points. it's a great read - maybe you can get it at the library or a used copy on amazon.com. see you on the slopes, i hope!

Say Callaghan ten times. Then say Brohm Ridge, then Apex, then Cheam...it's all about real estate with ski resorts being the tools used to exploit it. If you can piggyback these resorts on the back of the Olympic swindle, so much the better since taxpayers pay for it...Ah, those were the days when the developers didn't have a care in the world, when governments, Socred, NDP, and now Liberal, were only too happy to play along. Those days may be ending and some mighty nasty chickens are coming home to roost. Wait for it, it's long overdue and it's going to be fun to watch.

don't see many new skiers any more screaming for double black diamonds. Only expansion I see are green dots and condo's. Bus loads of beginner skiers and boarders, I can put up with if it keeps the lifts open. Interior resorts love this year, Easter's early so they can close and save money on the ski pass holders that would ski all year if they'd stay open. Never was about skiing the fastest and cheapest way to get land developed is to propose multi million dollar resorts. Government falls all over itself to help it along. Cuts environmental red tape. Go to Lands with a proposal to purchase a city lot size piece of crown land for a cabin, you'll get a form letter saying they might be able to look at the proposal in a year. No chance it will get approved. Resort proposal and the rubber stamp will be out before you finnish your speach.

The Whistler economy isn't all it's crack up to be, says councillor Nick Davies. He's quoted in a CBC report, saying the people of renowned international ski resort must begin "questioning some of the sacred cows that we proceed on."

He goes on to say the ski town should pursue an airport that matches its international attraction. "At night, in my dreams, I see the glorious Airbus A380 landing at our shining new airport, bringing planeload after planeload of travellers who want swoosh down our rain-soak, er, snow-laden slopes."

Davies said he will be pursuing the airport's construction with the government immediately, so that it'll be on time for the 2010 Olympics.

When asked if this would diminish the need for the expensive Sea-to-Sky highway improvements currently underway for the benefit of Whistler, Davies replied, "Let 'em eat cake and fly here instead."

Premier Campbell wasn't available for comment at press time.

Been looking for new information on "Jumbo Glacier Resort" I am a native from the COTR trying to understand why they want to build another ski hill in the area. Since we already have quite a few in the areas.
The tourism was growing before they want to build the Jumbo Glacier Resort. Besides there is other ways to bring in the tourism in the area.
Plus,I like seeing the wild animaals roam free & the wild flowers grow & clean water that will flow down the streams & also walk where there is no pollution of any kind.
In other words keep the thing the way they are clean, wild and free.

Been looking for new information on "Jumbo Glacier Resort" I am a native from the COTR trying to understand why they want to build another ski hill in the area. Since we already have quite a few in the areas.
The tourism was growing before they want to build the Jumbo Glacier Resort. Besides there is other ways to bring in the tourism in the area.
Plus,I like seeing the wild animaals roam free & the wild flowers grow & clean water that will flow down the streams & also walk where there is no pollution of any kind.
In other words keep the thing the way they are clean, wild and free.
P.S.
Do you have more information on the project?