Comments to the Mittersill Expansion

My Letter to the State opposing Mittersill Expansion:

9/28/2012

To DRED:

I would like to offer the following comments in opposition to the proposed Mittersill expansion.  Mittersill has a long history. After Mittersill closed ski operations in 1980 many devoted skiers anonymously volunteered to maintain the trails through unorganized, but dedicated attention.  For thirty years these skiers kept Mittersill from regrowing into forest.  An entire generation of skiers have enjoyed hiking up “the saddle” from the Taft Slalom Trail to gain access to trails that were more difficult to ski, but always worth the softer, natural snow surface that existed there, because the skier traffic was light and the terrain was special. Without this volunteer effort for over thirty years there would be no trails on the mountain today, and the state probably would not have been justified in returning it to operation.

When the state acquired access through the land swap with the National Forest, the sales pitch at that time was: Mittersill would remain a “backcountry like” experience, without grooming or snow making, and without widening the original trail footprint. I use the term “backcountry” loosely because true backcountry requires skiers to hike up  and this was a backcountry downhill experience without earning your turns. Unfortunately, the state has reneged on this promise. 

The first year was pretty good. The Mountain operated a bus shuttle from the Mittersill parking lot and transported skiers back to the main base area.  But after the double chairlift was installed the skier experience changed for the worse. The first year we had plenty of natural snow.  The ski lift operated for most of the winter. But the old narrow trails now had much more skier traffic and the ski conditions deteriorated, as the trails were unable to sustain the heavy traffic.   The very reason good skiers went to Mittersill was ruined. 

The second season the new chairlift  only spun a few days because we had a poor snow year. This alone makes me question the judgement of the state legislature for approving what became a $3 million expense  for a ski lift that doesn’t operate most of the time. As an aside, the shuttle bus could have continued to operate at almost no additional expense to the state, and in so doing, the state would’ve honored the pledge it advertised when they sought approval for the area in the first place-- to preserve a back country-like experience.

But having foolishly invested in a chairlift that never runs, the state is now doubling down to correct that mistake by making another one-- adding snow making. This is the final insult of the whole project. If the state wanted to develop the Mittersill area into an extension of the same skiing experience already abundantly available at Cannon, why didn’t they pursue it openly from the beginning? Has anyone in Concord ever heard of a Master Plan? Using Mittersill as a dedicated race course with snowmaking and a ski lift was never mentioned, not even once, during all the proceedings that led up to the seeking the initial approval to  acquire Mittersill.

While FSC may “gift” the improvements to the state, there remains a significant annual operating and maintenance cost. I would remind the state that the Tram (the jewel of the mountain) only operates 4 days a week during the high season because of operating costs. Additional ski lift attendants and additional snowmaking will add cost to an operation that doesn’t use the lifts already in place. Maybe the state should require an additional operating fee from FSC for the new facilities and at least make it revenue neutral.

So having expressed my opposition to this proposed expansion, I wish to convey a question to the legislature: What’s next after this? Is there any kind of Master Plan? Shouldn’t you require one? Why should the state and the people tolerate a surprise approach to the development of Cannon? While I don’t like the direction that Cannon is going today, I’d have no complaint if it came from a master plan, had been presented years ago, and followed through in a transparent and prudent manner, with people having been given the opportunity to provide input to the expansion, and see the broader picture. What could be next? I don't think you know. The state should develop a master plan, maintain it, and follow it.

Gary Way

91 Liberty Hill Rd

Bedford, NH 03110