Four and a half years ago, I was on Capitol Hill聽testifying before Congress that the outdoor recreation industry is a force for job creation and, as such,聽should be taken into account when considering policy proposals that affect public lands. I鈥檇 brought with me the latest report from the Outdoor Industry Association, which showed that the industry generates $646 billion in consumer spending聽per year and聽supports over six million jobs.

After completing my testimony before the U.S. House Committee of Natural Resources, then-ranking minority member Rob Bishop (the Utah Republican is聽now Committee Chairman) challenged the figures I presented, saying he didn鈥檛 believe any of them were accurate, given that they were generated by an聽industry trade group. We were exaggerating the numbers for our own self-benefit, he said, and they couldn鈥檛 be trusted.

This situation has repeated itself in innumerable ways and situations in the years since鈥攚henever I or another member of the OIA steps up to the podium to defend the value of our public lands. But a new bill introduced last week by U.S. Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and Cory Gardner (R-CO) would require the Commerce Department to track the industry鈥檚 economic impact鈥攃onsumer spending and employment statistics鈥攊n the hopes that the information will influence future policy decisions. Their bill needs our support.

Though the membership of OIA is confident that our own 聽and methodology are objective and accurate (and have been confirmed聽by various states doing their own research), official government data serves multiple purposes. Not only does it make it more difficult for lawmakers like Rob Bishop to torpedo rational and appropriate arguments, it also聽come out annually so as to create an official, regular, and consistent measurement of the outdoor recreation economy. It can then be compared to other economic sectors measured by the government, which in turn means that our jobs and impact聽will be counted聽toward the national GDP.

Why is that important? Because this sort of long-term tracking from an impartial government source will help Congress and the administration make appropriate and well-informed policy decisions that聽affect not only our industry but the financial well-being of many hundreds of thousands of Americans, the economic vibrancy of hundreds of towns, and the health and quality of life of millions of Americans. An industry that generates nearly $650 billion in annual spending, provides billions of dollars of direct impact at local and state levels,聽and serves the life blood of so many rural, gateway communities deserves this level of attention, respect,聽and government-generated economic data.

I vividly remember in the early 1980s when then-Speaker of the House Tip O鈥橬eill told his colleagues that everyone was entitled to their own opinion but not their own facts. O鈥橬eill鈥檚 words have returned to me frequently throughout this process and his point is well taken: We need a place to begin this discussion. Having unassailable facts and data does not guarantee that parks will be funded,聽access will be maintained, and聽wild areas protected.聽Nor does it mean that聽that supporters of the land transfer movement will stop their campaign to expropriate public land. However, it does mean that we will be able to put an economic cost on decisions that impact public lands.

To support the bill introduced by Senators聽Shaheen and Gardner, contact your representatives聽and let them know that we need the outdoor industry to count and be counted. OIA has prepared a sign-on letter (click the “Download” link).

Peter Metcalf is the CEO聽and founder of outdoor gear supplier Black Diamond Equipment.

The post Op-Ed: The Government Needs to Measure the Outdoor Economy appeared first on 国产吃瓜黑料 Online.

The supporters of SkiLink, a proposed gondola linking The Canyons resort and Solitude in Big Cottonwood Canyon, would have you believe a myriad of wrongs would make a right after all. I couldn鈥檛 disagree more, and I鈥檓 not alone.

Over 80 national and regional companies and organizations, many directly tied to the snowsports industry, overwhelmingly oppose the proposal. Why? There are many reasons.

SkiLink is an attempt by Talisker, a Canadian real estate development company which owns and runs The Canyons, to privatize pristine, publicly-owned land that is popular year-round with backcountry skiers, hikers, and mountain bikers. The citizens of Park City and Summit County in Utah have voluntary taxed themselves to tune of over $20 million over the past 20 years to secure open space and trail heads. Now a private company is attempting to develop land that is already protected and already belongs to the citizens.

Contrary to what its boosters would have you believe, SkiLink, which is currently prohibited by U.S. Forest Service and Salt Lake City master plans, would not be a meaningful solution to easing traffic and congestion between Park City and the Cottonwood Canyons; in reality, access to SkiLink would only be available if you buy a $96 lift ticket and ride multiple lifts for over 1.5 hours to reach Big Cottonwood Canyon.

SkiLink would also negatively impact the watershed of Salt Lake City. For those unfamiliar with Salt Lake鈥檚 topography, the canyons to the east of the Wasatch front serve as the watershed for over 200,000 people. This is why the elected mayors and representatives of Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County adamantly oppose this project.

SkiLink sets a dangerous precedent of selling off public lands for commercial development without due public process and opportunity for local stakeholders to participate. Over the course of three different extensive public input processes, over 90 percent of Salt Lake citizens have stated opposition to this type of development.

Proponents of the linkage like to point out that the promotional value of something like this would be huge. True, but they don鈥檛 ask a more important question: 鈥淲hat is Utah鈥檚 signature ski and recreation product and how do we enhance it?鈥�

Utah鈥檚 greatest draw is the mix of accessible pristine alpine backcountry ski terrain next to world-class ski resorts. To destroy that is to destroy our unique product and an integral component to our summer recreation economy. The question is not about promotion of a single resort or season, it is about enhancement, protection, and thoughtful Wasatch-wide transportation solutions to ensure our ski and recreation industry is as vibrant in 2025 as it is today.

In its current form, SkiLink is a premature proposal that smacks of insider deals and cronyism and fueled by a bigger-is-better-Disneyland mentality. It鈥檚 a piecemeal solution that could very well initiate an arms race of ill鈥揷onceived lift expansion in the Wasatch. SkiLink should not be approved until an overarching plan can be developed that is thoughtful, fair, and equitable among all stakeholders in the Wasatch, from an economic, environmental, and quality of life standpoint. Working toward an effective master plan that is beneficial to all should be the goal here鈥攏ot a wrongly and poorly conceived plan, which is what the current SkiLink proposal is.

What we do now is done forever.

The post Powder Nightmares: SkiLink Is a Terrible Idea appeared first on 国产吃瓜黑料 Online.