[at-l] More on Saddleback

[Slyinmd@aol.com]

<< Saddleback Mountain Ski Area owners have announced with great fanfare that
 it is prepared to "donate" 660 acres along the ridgeline of the mountain to
 the National Park Service. Unfortunately, the fine print in the ski area's
 offer reserves to the ski area the right to build ski lifts, roads, and
 gondola rides across the trail and along the trail.
 
 The following is a reply to the misleading press reports about the
 Saddleback proposal. The author is Mark Simpson, newly elected president of
 the Maine Appalachian Trail Club.
 
 Your article on Friday, April 9, regarding the future of Saddleback Mountain
 requires clarification. Unfortunately, you have chosen to reprint without
 examination all of the rhetoric provided by Saddleback's owner without
 seeking a single comment from the Maine Appalachian Trail Club, Appalachian
 Trail Conference, or National Park Service. Representatives of those
 organizations have worked in good faith with Saddleback's owner and manager
 for a decade to protect the Appalachian National Scenic Trail while
 continuing to enable substantial ski-area expansion. It is those groups that
 have repeatedly attempted-in direct talks and public settings, not at media
 events without notice to the other parties-to "strike a balance" between
 Trail protection and ski-area development.
 
 Saddleback's "donation" offer will not protect the Appalachian Trail.
 Indeed, it is virtually no different than its earlier offer, which amounted
 to little more than a right of passage for hikers to follow the A.T.
 footpath that has been in place on the mountain for almost 70 years, long
 before any ski development. The most recent idea of "doubling the acreage"
 may look good on paper, but it's far from the whole story-which must begin
 with the location and nature of the acreage and surrounding elements, not
 the quantity. Saddleback's proposed "corridor" reserves to it the right to
 construct seven new ski lifts and related ski trails near the A.T. along the
 alpine ridgeline and to cut two new ski trails across the A.T. Actually, the
 "gift" would reserve those development rights to some imaginary future
 owner, since the current owner does not make investments in the property.
 
 Those developments, along with related snowmaking, utility lines, signs,
 fences, and other ski facilities reserved as part of the "donation," would
 fundamentally alter the outstanding scenic quality enjoyed by thousands and
 threaten the sensitive environment along the ridgeline. Saddleback's
 donation is like the Trojan Horse: It looks good on the outside, but the
 details on the inside will destroy the unique character of this stunning
 mountain.
 
 By contrast, the National Trails System Act speaks to values and resources
 to be protected for national scenic trails, not to square footage.
 
 Saddleback claims its proposal would have little impact on the Trail. In
 fact, Saddleback representatives have no idea how their proposal affects the
 natural resources and scenic quality of the mountain. They have done nothing
 more than place stakes in the ground near the ridgeline, indicating where
 they want to put the top terminals of lifts.
 
 By contrast, the National Park Service has hired some of the most skilled
 companies in the region to develop detailed analysis of several
 ski-expansion proposals (including Saddleback's), including state-of-the-art
 photo-simulations of what lifts and trails would look like on the ground.
 NPS is planing to release the study for public review and comment this
 summer.
 
 Saddleback also misrepresents the park service's legal authority to protect
 the Trail. NPS is not limited to acquiring a 1,000-foot-wide corridor.
 Congress gave NPS wide latitude to determine what lands are needed for the
 Trail to protect the values and resources, natural, scenic, and cultural,
 associated with the Trail. In Maine and elsewhere, NPS has acquired a
 corridor of varying widths, depending on the type of land involved and the
 views from it. Numerous court cases have supported the park service's
 approach and upheld its legal authority, including several cases in Maine.
 
 Saddleback, not the park service, is to blame for any loss of ski-related
 economic activity. Since 1994, when the (Maine) Land Use Regulation
 Commission granted Saddleback's development request, the ski area has had
 the green light to more than triple its current capacity in areas unaffected
 by any Trail-protection proposal. But, owner Don Breen hasn't invested a
 dime in new ski terrain, new lifts, or other improvements.
 
 The employees of the ski area and the residents of the Rangeley area know
 who is standing in the way of growth there.
 
 Unfortunately, Saddleback's proposal brings little new to the discussion.
 However, we will continue to work in good faith toward a reasonable
 resolution of this issue, one that balances the need to protect the
 Appalachian Trail as a national, even international treasure, and the
 potential for the ski area to contribute more to the economic stability of
 the region.
 
 Sincerely,
 Mark Simpson, Farmington
 President, Maine Appalachian Trail Club
 
 Mark summarizes the situation very well. Please make your voices heard. Ask
 for a copy of the National Park Service environmental assessment before May
 1. And once you receive it submit your comments to the National Park
 Service. The URL was posted a few days ago. If you don't still have it, send
 a note to:  ellen@clinic.net and I'll see that you get it. >>

* From the Appalachian Trail Mailing List |  http://www.backcountry.net  *

==============================================================================