felker, I've been skiing nearly 40 years. so what? big friggin' deal. I'm not interested in comparing swords. I'm talking about the sheer idiocy of the type of growth Tom Maclay is proposing.
the problem isn't that Lolo Peak has bad terrain. it has good terrain, very good terrain.
the problem is (1) what Maclay wants to do is build a Vailish place, not a skil hill; (2) you already may ski at Lolo Peak and its surrounding ridges by simply hiking, snowshoeing or skinning up; and (3) Maclay's "development" will absolutely ruin
the value of all farmable and grazable land that lays downstream of the "development" in Carlton Creek's drainage.
before you start trying to tell ME what should happen in MY neck of the woods, why don't you try getting some facts first.
and as to feallen et al., YOUR slice of Lolo National Forest remains whatever of it you happen to use. given your distance I'd say your claim is vastly remoter than mine or my friends here in the immediate area. pees oaf, mateys.