or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ski Utah while we can

post #1 of 18
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Leavitt's passion in this arena grew out of his experience in Utah. While his home state is largely rural, the vast majority of its population -- and most of the projected future growth -- is concentrated in an environmentally sensitive corridor along the Wasatch Mountains, stretching 100 miles to the north and south of Salt Lake City. The population of this sliver of Utah is expected to swell from 1.6 million in 2000 to 5 million by 2050. -- New York Times 09/20/2003
Is this for real? Can you imagine the lift lines on powder days?
post #2 of 18
Quote:
Originally posted by Rio:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Leavitt's passion in this arena grew out of his experience in Utah. While his home state is largely rural, the vast majority of its population -- and most of the projected future growth -- is concentrated in an environmentally sensitive corridor along the Wasatch Mountains, stretching 100 miles to the north and south of Salt Lake City. The population of this sliver of Utah is expected to swell from 1.6 million in 2000 to 5 million by 2050. -- New York Times 09/20/2003
Is this for real? Can you imagine the lift lines on powder days?</font>[/quote]Glad I'm in New England where the land is maxed out and the bad economy drives away people from away who might want to move here. I'll take the lower standard of living to preserve the snow for myself and my progeny.
post #3 of 18
Is that number really that big considering that we're talking about a 51 year time frame?
post #4 of 18
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by PinHed:
Is that number really that big considering that we're talking about a 51 year time frame?
Yes, its insane. The US population is expected to grow by less that 50% in that same time frame while the SLC area will grow by over 200%. To make matter worse, SLC is in the west were fresh water resources are already overtaxed. I don't see how that are will be able to handle that many people.
post #5 of 18
When I was a newspaper reporter in Southern Michigan about 40 years ago, I attended a conference in Detroit where some national population guru predicted that by the end of the last century, there would be one continuous community stretching along I-96 from Detroit to Chicago. The same guy predicted that in the same time frame, the shores of Lake Michigan from near where I live in Traverse City to Milwaukee would experience the same development. If he were alive today, he'd probably say he meant the end of the current century. There has been tremendous growth in the two areas he described, but nothing like what he predicted.
post #6 of 18
Yes the wasatch front is growing that fast. I am from a once small town called logan about 90miles north of salt lake city. here in logan, we cant even handle the massive growth. It is insane. Lift lines are getting longer.... there are more snowboarders..... SOMEONE STOP THE MADNESS!!!

duke
post #7 of 18
Kneale, if you climb the first hill above my village, you can see
lights (at night, of course) stretching as far as Milan, 30some km away) without interruption.
What once were indian corn fields, where I used to play, woods
and alike, are now all houses or industrial settlement.
I lived in a rural area once upon a time.
And I'm not that old...
I do allow that Italy is a different matter, compared to what you guys live in, we have very few flat exploitable land...
post #8 of 18
Future population shifts are a big problem in many parts of the country. Houston Metro(public transportation) runs regular ads regarding the need to plan for what will happen here in the next 20 years(pop. 4.5 million >> pop. 6.5 million).

...I would think other interior population centers like Albuquerque, Denver, Las Vegas, Phoenix, and Reno/Tahoe are looking at similar problems.
post #9 of 18
Bloody terrible. I'd love to ship you all some good quality condoms, but I'm afraid you'd fall out of the Australian ones.

[img]graemlins/evilgrin.gif[/img]

Really, it isn't good news. It's also gonna push the tourism dollar away to either Canada or Europe. I know I wouldn't pay the thousands and thousands to ski a packed resort that couldn't handle it.
post #10 of 18
That is an accurate projection. If you think that number is scary, the SL valley is projected to be able to support 6-8 million people. Luckily, the state is already putting things in place to help with the growth. Many cities have increased housing densities and a 30 year transportaion plan is under construction. It will include more light rail spurs, commuter rail, bus rapid transit, car pool lanes, etc. Water is th biggest issue, but also the biggest factor in slowing growth. Utah only uses about 30% of it's alotted Colorado river water (California steals the rest of it) An agreement between the Dept. of Interior and several water companies in socal will enable Utah to pipe water from several reservoirs on the river system to the Wasatch Front. The link between the system is near completion, with the Central Utah Water Project finishing up in 2006. The project combines pipelines, rivers, and reservoirs to deliver water.
post #11 of 18
nice to know that at least in some part of the country, tax dollars actually go to good common use. I wish things were like that in the northest, where the roads get neglected but families on welfare have big screen TV's.

Seriously though, I'm glad to see that the infrastructure out west is well taken care of. We're beyond help over here.
post #12 of 18
Quote:
Originally posted by PinHed:
Is that number really that big considering that we're talking about a 51 year time frame?
good grief! you can't be seriously saying that?! : we are not talking about an entire state here, we are talking about a 'sliver' of land that is more than doubling in size in less than 50 years!!! where does the water come from for all the new houses??? where does the waste (sewage, garbage, etc) go to??? how about the air quality in an area that already suffers from natural and unnatural sources of air pollution??? good luck seeing the mountain range through the clouds of smog, and where do you think the houses will be built? why, all up and down the canyon, that's where! so much for so much for public access to lands, and a quick drive to beautiful trails, you'll now be in somone's backyard, and it ain't mother nature's. i have sucked my fair share of exhaust from the traffic going up and down little and big cottonwood canyon in the winter time, and i can only imagine when that is doubled... um, so do we not understand the meaning of 'environmentally sensitive area'??? :

but then again, i suppose the land is there, why not develop it, huh? what good is it to us if we aren't making money off it.
post #13 of 18
Truely suckey, perhaps it will blow up like Colorado and no one will be able to afford to stay, or want to ski in the state they are living in. Lets hope it doesn't follow that model!
post #14 of 18
Quote:
Originally posted by turbo:
Truely suckey, perhaps it will blow up like Colorado and no one will be able to afford to stay, or want to ski in the state they are living in. Lets hope it doesn't follow that model!
i was wondering if maybe that was why pinhead didn't see the grotesqueness in all of this... :
post #15 of 18
Back to the crowded slopes part of this discussion... even if the Wasatch Front population gets to 5 million, right now only 5% of those people ski or snowboard, so at 5 million there will only be about 250,000 local skiers and boarders.
I don't recall exactly what the comparison numbers are for Colorado, but I guarantee you it's a lot more than 5% and metro Denver is alredy a lot bigger than what SLC's forecasted growth is!
So, yeah the environmental impacts will suck, but don't count on Utah's slopes being packed - of course that's counting on global warming not trashing our winters in 50 years time.
post #16 of 18
What makes you think people of a non-skiing persuasion will choose to move to Utah. The 5% number might be correct for the resident population, but just as was the case in Colorado, many of the people relocating will be doing so with a bent toward mountain recreation.

There isn't a way to stop overuse of the Utah ski areas. Utah's own wish of fame and glory will bring about the situation we all lament.
post #17 of 18
Quote:
Originally posted by The Oz:
Bloody terrible. I'd love to ship you all some good quality condoms, but I'm afraid you'd fall out of the Australian ones.

[img]graemlins/evilgrin.gif[/img]
You guys just need to learn to speak English normally. American women have been telling you guys that you ARE big dicks, not the thing you wanted to hear from them. [img]tongue.gif[/img]
post #18 of 18
Quote:
Originally posted by PinHed:
Is that number really that big considering that we're talking about a 51 year time frame?
My remark was towards the growing density of the skiing population. The ski market will always be a relatively flat market. I didn't mean to offend by minimizing the overall scary reality of over population. It's a sad commentary regarding intermountain population growth. I lived in the CO Front Range when it was a still a cow town as many of you did also. It's a scary reality that I've seen with my own eyes.

Three Letter Acronym: ZPG. Practice it!

[ September 28, 2003, 01:01 PM: Message edited by: PinHed ]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion