LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Classic N.I.M.B.Y.
by Russ Montgomery
Mar 11, 2010 | 1533 views | 16 16 comments | 21 21 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Editor:

While I’m sure the Telluride Ski Co. proposal to offer guiding skiing in Bear Creek has brought out the whole gamut of opinions, it was the quote in The Watch newspaper article by Sheep Mountain Alliance’s Hillary White that really set me off.

Ms. White was quoted as saying “Any additional people in that area, whether guided by so-called professionals or not, add to the danger of those who enjoy the quiet, backcountry solitude of recreating in those lands.” There is your classic example of “Not in my backyard; I have mine now, keep out; I was the last local to move here” attitude. This coming from the so-called steward of the wilderness movement. Ms. White’s statement of “…whether guided by so-called professionals or not…” gives clear indication that she wants no more people in “her backyard.” She is not concerned with the “commercialization” of Bear Creek; she just doesn’t want anyone else to enjoy it, no matter how they get there. Get real. We live in a resort area that caters to bringing in more people to enjoy our little slice of heaven. The world is growing, as are the users and the conflicts on all public lands due to people who think that only they should be able to recreate there in only their way and voila! – you have a Wilderness Bill. Personally, I think I would rather have a guided group above me in Bear Creek that can make protocol decisions as opposed to some of the other yahoos that ski there.

I believe Ms. White’s real motivation behind the opposition to the Bear Creek proposal and the pushing of the wilderness bill is to keep as many people as possible out of her and the vocal minority’s favorite areas. She needs to understand the reality of The Public and Friends Using Their Public Lands, or go find her very own private bought-and-paid-for slice of heaven and fence out the “undesirables.”

I only hope Senator Salazar and the rest of Congress see through this charade and kill the Wilderness Bill before we are all excluded from using our Public Lands in appropriate manners.

Sincerely,

Russ Montgomery

Check out more ski coverage and opinion on Ski Watch.
Comments
(16)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
We Should
|
March 18, 2010
Complain to the forest service about not having lift access in the Creek!
maybe...
|
March 14, 2010
because it isn't all Forest Service land. I believe any guided tour would have to cross into the Bear Creek preserve which has a history of opposing commercial ventures on its land. This is a good thing. Keep the creek free!
Marmot
|
March 14, 2010
Why not authorize a variety of INDIVIDUALS to market their services as guides as well as businesses and Telski? If they are public lands why shouldn't anyone with the requisite qualifications have the opportunity to act as a guide? Likely many of the same people who would otherwise be forced to work for Telski at subsistence wage would like to do it directly, not to mention local business!!

Complain to your Congressman about Forest Service relationship with Telski!
FaceOnMars (nli)
|
March 13, 2010
One thing which seems to be missing here is any sort of competitive selection process for the guide service.

Bear Creek is outside of Telski's permitted area, so who shouldn't another guide service have a shot at getting the job? I don't believe operating the ski area adjacent to BC ought to give Telski any sort of "leg up" in a selection process. But wait, there apparently is NOT a selection process.

Telski seems eager to enter markets in the area it has traditionally stayed out of ... so why not a little healthy competition when it comes to being awarded the ability to guide in Bear Creek?

Or another way to look at it: why is the NFS not only enabling, but propping up a monopoly?
welfare for corps
|
March 13, 2010
The reason the Forest Service is so eager to appease Telski is because of the hours they put in listening to lobbying from Reilly. After all, most gov't exists on the behalf of corporations.

Where the public will get screwed again is because more and more of our public lands will be closed for corporations like Telski. Just wait, next we'll here a proposal to close Bear Creek while "guides" take their client through the dangerous areas.
anonymous
|
March 12, 2010
"...pave over every bit of our lands..." We're talking about guided skiing into a sliver of the thousands of acres national forest surounding Telluride.

An "extreme" reaaction? Yes. Fox news and teh Republican party could use your help (They are in fact intentionally creating controversy to stall the agenda of Obama's administration.)



Try to be a bit more tempered. Let me help you:

With guided skiing, maybe some of the hardcore skiers in Telluride could get an opportunity to do what they love and get paid for it. I mean, I know all you back country skiers love washing dishes and busing tables. And while they are at it, they could impart on our guests the importance of environmental responsibility. You never know, this may make an impression on our guests. They might even go home and adopt a more responsible environmental lifestyle. They might influence others, too.

Oh, and what else do we have to show for as accomplishments in our society. Well, we have an African American President (woo-WHO!!!). We have a full-fledged popular environmental movement, fighting hard to preserve our planet (no, the war has not been won, but progress has been made). We had a successful civil rights movement. Women & African Americans were provided their right to vote. The threat of nuclear destruction of the planet no longer exists. Communism and the evil Soviet empire is dead. Seems to me like we took on a lot in the last 40...50 years, and won.

...You know, some might say the glass is half full.
FaceOnMars (nli)
|
March 12, 2010
Seems to me that Telski's paid guided services would be a new "encroachment" of a private interest into what is currently a highly prized PUBLIC asset.

I have no idea what motivates Hillary, but I believe Russ is way off base: wilderness designation keeps it so it's EVERYONE's back yard!

A private interest operating on public lands is the first step to constraining access.

really...?
|
March 12, 2010
Are we really supposed to believe if only we pave over every bit of our wild lands somehow this is going to benefit the working class? Earth to Montgomery and his shills: we've been doing that for the last 20 years and all we've got to show for it are mega mansions and gated communities--hardly a boon to the working class.
...Hmmm
|
March 12, 2010
...at least you will stillhave your polluting truck/suv to drive back and forth from Ophir/Norwoood/Ridgway in. It is important we be good Americans and make sure our working class communites to work everyday. We wouldn't want them spending that time with their families or getting exercise...and we need to support the oil industry. Sorry folks, 5 o'clock...only the rich people get to stay, close the gate at the spur on your way out. (this is the best you can do?)
Doh...
|
March 12, 2010
Wilderness bill mentality sucks because it will keep me from accessing lands in my $10,000 pollution-spewing machine. A clear blow to the working class.
Even though
|
March 12, 2010
I would rather not see guided tours in bc, I totally agree with Russ' letter, he's dead on, this wilderness bill mentality sucks.
So...
|
March 11, 2010
...You are suggesting we should condemn Telluride's working class to a life guaranteed poverty? Doh!

There is no American Dream in Telluride.

If you want to own a home, provide an opportunity for a better life for your children, and save for retirement...make sure you don't make the wrong choice and drive down the spur to Telluride.
yeah right
|
March 11, 2010
All the working poor are sure to make oodles by the commercialization of all our beautiful lands--except they won't be beautiful anymore. Doh...
uhhh..
|
March 11, 2010
...maybe if we started looking at opportunities to make money, more of us working poor in Telluride would have money!!!
barf Russ
|
March 11, 2010
Actually, Hilary speaks for me and I'm no extremist. Enjoy Bear Creek as is. Quit seeing every gad damn thing is just another money making opportunity.
ahh....Hillary
|
March 11, 2010
Hillary only speaks for the extremists in Telluride. Extremism is a sad and poisoned state of the mind. It does not foster community or compromise. Fundamental elements to a healthy society. You don't need to turn on CNN or read the NYT to see extremism in actions, you only need to follow the actions of Ms. White and friends.