Dear Mayor,

As a backcountry skier and a lover of the Wasatch mountains I’m very worried about the news of the planned chairlift to Flagstaff Ridge.
Flagstaff is a premier ski terrain for backcountry, providing also access to the fields of Silver fork, Days fork and Cardiff: that’s the heart of the Wasatchs as we love them (I’m italian, live in Italy but the passion for your mountains and its snow is carrying me there every year, to the point that now I’m planning to buy a house in SLC).
What will remain after? We’ll have either plenty of off-slope ski tracks in those valleys, or the prohibition to walk past the chairlift!
Alta and Flagstaff ridge won’t be anymore the first aim in a clear sunny morning after a snowstorm, this fear is giving me a lot of sadness.
I haven’t known Alta before the building of the ski resort, but what I can say is that now the situation looks well balanced: on the right side you have the comfort that the progress has brought us, on the left side the wilderness that every person sometimes looks for.
If you can stop the project, please do.

If anyone wants to use bits and pieces here:

Dear Mayor Pollard

I am writing to urge you to preserve backcountry ski access up the Flagstaff area of Alta.

I live in San Francisco and make one or two week-long trips to Alta every year. In the process I spend quite a bit of money on lodging, food, equipment, instruction, lift-tickets, guide services, and transportation for me and my family in LCC. I make the trip because of the easy backcountry access Alta affords – a rare asset among North American resorts. I am not interested in “sidecountry” access from the resort that is common at many ski areas. I am looking for easy, earn-your-turns backcountry access that lets me ski powder a day or two after a storm. The quick backcountry access up Flagstaff is the reason I continue to come back to LCC. Building a lift up Flagstaff will turn the slopes around it into heavily trafficked sidecountry. I do not need to travel to Alta for that. Rather, I would take my money to Jackson, WY or even make the trip to Revelstoke, BC to find easily accessible backcountry at a resort my family and I can enjoy. Of course LCC would still have a lot of backcountry area. However, I am only visiting for a week and do not have the time that locals do to scout more remote slopes. In its present form, Flagstaff allows me to walk across the road from the Peruvian and go.

As I am sure you are aware, backcountry skiing is growing rapidly as better equipment and avalanche education lead more skiers beyond the ropes. Alta has so far preserved a unique area that will bring all its businesses a growing number of tourist dollars in the future. I urge you to do everything possible to ensure Flagstaff remains true backcountry.

Kind Regards

There’s an additional argument against the lift from a different constituency that you need to target.

I live in San Francisco and make one or two trips to Alta every year. In the process I drop a pretty nice chunk of change in LCC. I make the trip because of the easy BC access. I’m not interested in easy slackcountry access that I can find at tons of ski areas. I want easy, earn-your-turns BC access that gets me the goods a day or two after a storm (OK, it’ll be a bit skied, but good enough for me). The quick BC access up Flagstaff is a big reason I come back to LCC. Put a lift up Flagstaff and that reason is gone. I’d rather take my money to Jackson or even make the trip to Revelstoke. Of course there is still a lot of great access in LCC, but I’m only there for a week. I just want to walk across the road from the Peruvian and go.

I can’t imagine I’m the only one who falls in this category. If Alta (resort) simply assumes that every tourist wants more lift-accessed terrain they’re wrong. I’ve written Alta (the town and resort) to tell them so. If these efforts are going to succeed I think we’ve got to go beyond the usual locals vs. resort arguments.

Marc