Backcountry skiers need access to public or private land where skiing is allowed. We blog about issues that affect such access.
It’s summer, how about I cast a wide net?
Here in the USA, we have a pervasive problem with housing our population. The issue hits our mountain tourist-economy regions as much as anywhere. It’s challenging to live where you can ski tour without excessive driving — or more altruistically, tough to raise a family in a place you might love. And if you do raise a family in a mountain town, your kids might be forced to leave when they become adults. I’ve always had a vague unease with the government’s role in this. Seems like they might be the problem, and the solution. Worth pondering. Here are a few articles that zapped me. First, the title says it all: How San Francisco Planned Its Own Housing Crisis. And on an up note, check out what Oregon just put in motion!
Here in the Aspen, Colorado area towns outside the resort cores are housing most resort workers, thus enabling the astronomical real-estate appreciation places like Aspen are known for — which in turn creates jobs for the workers. Yeah, I get it. But I can’t help but thought experiment: what would Aspen look like if nearly all its workers still lived there?
I’ve been pondering big-W wilderness. What makes it special? It’s not hard to find the same trees, animals, and even solitude a few hundred feet off the side of a country road as you’ll find after a backpack into hills — where it’s legally called “Wilderness.” Conversely, if you’re not careful you’ll find legal Wilderness to be crowded, noisy, beat to a pulp: Cirque of the Towers in the Wind River Range, in July, for one example of a “sacrifice zone.” So, that’s what we’ve made for ourselves, a mixed bag we call “Wilderness.” Being a recreation advocate I can live with that, as the vast majority of our Wilderness is not trashed.