That’s ok, though, because by then the developer will have sold the 20000 or so condo units that the large number of lifts allows them to build (there is a formula for this), made his profits and be off to other projects. And, we will be blessed with two more golf courses, and Brohm and Cat lakes won’t be public anymore.

Sounds like a good deal.

So I guess then it will draw like minded people of all ages. Have you ever been to Cat Lake? The place is a hole and is treated as such by the locals. I was sick to my gut when I went to visit. Beer bottles everywhere and every sign of any meaning was trashed. The shit houses where full of well you guess. The lake had at least thirty bottles(broken) all over the beach. So is that a good way to have a park? That is why I am not against the idea. As it is clear to me that it would be better kept. Brohm will not be lost to the developer It willl become a park soon. It is kept up at least.

Have you been to the old ski lodge at all? The place is a shit hole also, full of broken sled parts and oil cans everywhere the sled club cat leaks more oil then a old ford. I mean come on the place is a full on mess is that how it should be kept? The Alpine is a mess vehilces drive right ontop of the galcier is that a better way?

At least with a ski resort we would be able to be apart of something being built. We could give ideas of green spaces and have input into summer trails and MTN bike trails and then we have access with control.

Hummm does that not sound like a better idea???

I wonder if it is as mossy there as it is in Powell River.

If you think that this development proposal is about skiing, you should give your head a shake. The ski area design proposal lays out 25 or so lifts on an area about a third the size of Whistler. These access amazing low elevation, south and west facing (i.e. crusty) terrain. The last phase of build-out shows a few north facing high elevation slopes (just one small corner), but you’ll be treated to running a circuit of four lifts to ski that line twice. The only beginner runs are cat tracks. You’ll be waiting at least ten years before the upper lifts are in the ground, but by then, the shoddiness of the terrain and the inappropriate location will have killed this off as a viable ski area. That’s ok, though, because by then the developer will have sold the 20000 or so condo units that the large number of lifts allows them to build (there is a formula for this), made his profits and be off to other projects. And, we will be blessed with two more golf courses, and Brohm and Cat lakes won’t be public anymore.

Sounds like a good deal.

proposing a false dichotomy: either we let the developer go forward with this proposal or Cat lake continues to get overused and trampled. Are you sure there isn’t a third (or fourth or fifth or…) option?

What would another option be. Either they log and wreck the area that way or we agree to have some sense of green space and use it in a effective way instead of all the abuse the area has taken and seems to keep getting.

Similarly with the old lodge up there. Surely the current user group (snowmobilers) should take ownership of that or risk losing access (kind of like climbers, eh?).

What the hell are you saying? You feel the sled club should just own it???? They have trashed the place do you noy understand that. take ownership they can barley handle a lease. The place is trashed. That is OK.

– hence the patently ludicrous lift and ski run plan. The GAS proponent is simply taking advantage of this to develop and sell real estate. As a ski area, it is a poor choice, and has been for the forty odd years this idea has been kicking around. Due to low elevation (the resort tops out at 1600m, which is Whistler mid-station), it will be an even poorer choice forty years into the future.

Bad money is why it sits as it does not any other reason. The place would have year round skiing and would open the entire area to a user group that would take care of it. The world is growing no matter how hard you try and stop it. It needs however to grow in a good way. And we the people can make that happen. If we dream abit and look at facts and not ego.

I oppose the proposed GAS development for many reasons including impacts on wild life (from goats to fish), impacts on current user groups (if sledders are pushed from another of their traditional areas where might they look next?) and the fact that its just a massive real estate development all dressed up as a resort (which is what most resort proposals are these days but this one is particularly blatant).

I also don’t like the very real potentiality that GAS will apply for park boundary adjustments so that further development within what is now Garibaldi park can take place. I heard the CEO of the proponent company clearly state that doing just that (developing resort facitities into Garibaldi park) was something they would not rule out.

We already have Whistler just down the road. In my opinion development should be concentrated in areas of current settlement (i.e., Squamish or Whistler) and wild lands (note I didn’t say pristine) should be left as that.