When most ski resorts were winding down their seasons on March 19, 2014, Ski Utah was announcing their plan to change ski resorts in North America forever. Ski Utah is a trade group that represents Utah’s 14 famed ski areas. They proposed connecting seven of Utah ski areas creating the “largest contiguous ski experience in North America”. The result would be thousands of acres of terrain that could be accessed with one lift ticket.

The initiative is called One Wasatch.

One Wasatch includes Park City Mountain Resort, Canyons, Brighton, Solitude, Snowbird, Alta and Deer Valley (the last two resorts in that currently don’t allow snowboarding). The combination of would result in a complex spanning 18,000 rideable acres accessed by 100 lifts.

A Long-Term Idea

One Wasatch is the latest in a long line of ideas for connecting Utah ski resorts. The concept is not set in stone, and development does not appear likely to be possible in the near future because of a dispute between Park City Mountain Resort and Vail Resorts (who own neighboring Canyons), as well as the logistical challenges of implementing the idea.

The president of Ski Utah, Nathan Rafferty, noted in the press conference on March 19, 2014 that One Wasatch is still a “concept” and not yet a “plan.”

“Every one of those connections has some kind of public process and permitting process, so it’s not like you can put a shovel in the ground tomorrow,” Rafferty said. Although, he did continue to emphasize that all seven resorts are on board and committed to the concept of One Wasatch.

The popularity of Utah’s ski areas has increased steadily since the 2002 Olympics, growing from roughly 3 million to 4 million visitors. Rafferty believes One Wasatch could double or even triple that number of visitors.

Like many earlier proposals to link various Utah ski areas, the March 19th announcement was met with criticism from groups of environmentalists, backcountry organizations.

Here’s a simple breakdown of the arguments for and against One Wasatch.

The Pros: Arguments in Favor of One Wasatch

• Visitors will be able to ski and ride seven different and get a broader experience skiing and riding in Utah and the character of each resort.
  
• Purchasing one ticket could save visitors money on multiple passes to multiple resorts.
  
• Visitors could stay at whichever resort they like, and easily visit the others throughout the day or, alternatively, tour across the Wasatch on ski or board and stay at different resorts each night.
  
• The concept of a European style resort complex with 18,000 acres of skiable terrain would create an experience unique in North America and increase Utah’s popularity as an international ski destination.
  
• Visitors would spend more time on the mountain and less time in their vehicles getting from one resort to another.
  

The Cons: Arguments Against One Wasatch

• The Wasatch Mountains are a limited resource and if resorts continue to expand without end, the range will end up becoming completely developed.
  
• Part of the development would take place the carefully-protected watershed that provides water to more than one million Utah residents.
  
• Much of the backcountry terrain dear to local Utah skiers and riders would be made accessible, or be occupied, by lifts connecting resorts.
  
• The combination of all seven resorts into one resort complex could result in an outrageous ticket price.
  
• Alta and Deer Valley currently do not allow snowboarding, creating the possibility that snowboarders could end up paying the same ticket price as skiers for a more limited experience (although Alta said it would “address” the issue as One Wasatch progresses).
  

There is no telling what the future holds for One Wasatch -- whether the seven resorts will mold into the largest ski complex in all of North America or if it will fall to the wayside like the many proposals that have come before it.

What is not likely to end soon, however, is the battle for the future of the Wasatch Mountain Range.

What do you think? Is One Wasatch a step forward for the North American ski industry? Or a misguided marketing scheme?