1
50
1
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/1ea510c15a238ccf9fa7358fcb64fc32.mp3
f78c986a0fdab62b3571ef694644db75
http://highway89.org/files/original/cdd79f69f24af51026686026396d0e40.pdf
a76a08d31a66f0f33e03b8cae68995c3
PDF Text
Text
LAND USE MANAGEMENT
TRANSCRIPTION COVER SHEET
Interviewee:
Ted Seeholzer
Place of Interview:
Date of Interview:
Beaver Mountain Ski Area Office, Logan, Utah
November 19, 2008
Interviewer:
Recordist:
Brad Cole and Clint Pumphrey
Brad Cole
Recording Equipment:
Marantz PMD660 Digital Recorder
Transcription Equipment used:
Transcribed by:
Transcript Proofed by:
Power Player Transcription Software: Executive
Communication Systems
Susan Gross
Randy Williams (2 March 2009 & July 2011)
Brief Description of Contents: Ted Seeholzer is the owner of the Beaver Mountain ski area in
Logan Canyon. He speaks about the history of Beaver Mountain (which has been owned by his
family since its inception), and his varying roles with the ski resort – beginning in childhood. He
also talks about interactions and his relationship with the Forest Service and Utah School and
Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA) over the years.
Reference:
BC = Brad Cole (Interviewer; Associate Dean, USU Libraries)
CH = Clint Pumphrey (Interviewer; USU history graduate student)
TS = Ted Seeholzer
NOTE: Interjections during pauses or transitions in dialogue such as “uh” and starts and stops
in conversations are not included in transcribed. All additions to transcript are noted with
brackets.
TAPE TRANSCRIPTION
[Tape 1 of 1: A]
BC:
Hi. This is Brad Cole from Special Collections and Archives at Utah State University.
Today is November 19 [2008]. And we’re in Logan, Utah visiting with Ted Seeholzer at
the Beaver Mountain Office – Beaver Mountain Ski Area Office. And also accompanying
me today is Clint Pumphrey, a [graduate] student at Utah State University.
Ted I always like to begin my interviews from the very beginning, [so] if you could tell
us when and where you born?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
1
�TS:
I was born in Logan, Utah – 1932; January 29, 1932. Seventy-six years ago.
BC:
And who were your parents?
TS:
Harold and Luella Seeholzer. They were both – my mom was born in Wellsville; my dad
in Logan.
BC:
And had they lived in the valley for quite some time?
TS:
All their life. Dad served no military time. And the furthest dad got away from Logan; he
went to New Zealand to help on the temple over there.
BC:
And your mother was from Wellsville you said.
TS:
Wellsville, yep. And her dad actually started the service station business in Cache Valley.
You can see the old – there used to be a service station between 1st and 2nd North, on the
east side of the road kind of where the Royal Bakery is there.
BC:
Um-hmm.
TS:
He started a service station there. One hundred years ago or more. I don’t have the
pictures handy here, but we do of course have them of that. So he was instrumental. He
also meddled in the horticulture business with Utah State many years ago. So our
family’s been active, not just the kids.
BC:
Um-hmm. So did you have a greenhouse then?
TS:
He had a cellar. That’s all they had was a cellar over there. They’d plant the trees, of
course harvest the apples and store them in there. At one time there was lots of orchards
in Wellsville; lots of orchards in Wellsville. I remember as a young person going over
there – the orchards. And he also had a cellar – it was a (what do you call them when they
have) a co-op type thing. And then he also had his own cellar that he would use for his
apples; and then he raised chickens at the same time. And I can still remember as a young
man and watching them count all the eggs and this, that and the other. He was a very
energetic old chap. You know, he was a “Svede” – Swede.
[Laughing]
And Grandma was a Dane. And they had their coffee every morning with their lumps of
sugar. I can still remember that. You know, maybe I’m getting off the subject here, I
don’t know.
BC:
That’s fine. So what were their names?
TS:
They were Brobie.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
2
�BC:
Brobie.
TS:
Don’t ask me Grandma Brobie’s name before she was married, I don’t know that. I don’t
recall that.
Did you got to school at Logan High?
BC:
No, I’m actually from Pocatello.
TS:
From “Pocaroostie”?
BC:
Yeah.
TS:
Can I give you a little more history there. My granddad’s brother had a cobble,
shoemaker, right across Logan High there on the corner – 100 years ago back in the ‘50s,
the old fellar did. You know, my family’s got quite a history here in the valley.
BC:
Sounds like it.
TS:
Yeah, yeah; a lot of history.
BC:
So what were some of your memories of growing up in Logan in the 1930s I guess?
TS:
Yeah. I know that my dad’s a plather by trade, okay. He’d put lath on it for you, plaster.
Of course during the Depression they did anything they could. He talks about working
with the Forest Service on the PWA [Public Works Administration agency of New Deal]
type stuff: going and roofing buildings, or whatever they could do to make a dollar. Dad
also trapped. His dad was a game warden at that time: muskrats and beaver, that’s where
some of the income was. I was born on West 3rd South and at that time Dad raised foxes
and mink for market. Shortly after that the Russians came in with all of their furs and of
course the mink markets went to the deuce [devil]. Dad was forced to sell and then
continue with his lathing. He still trapped rats; we still have some of the traps they used.
And like I say, his dad was a Fish and Game man.
I remember stories about Old Ephraim. Dad and his brothers chased Old Ephraim; the
same as the Crookston stories that you’ve heard. And I can’t remember the gentleman’s
name that finally ended up catching Old Ephraim. [Frank Clark; see USU’s digital
collection of Old Ephraim materials online.]
I know that our family lived on game: deer and elk and fish and ducks and pheasant;
[these] were extremely important to our meals. Dad used to illegally hunt ducks for
market. Dad was a pool player I guess. Down at the old Dee Woodall Pool Hall he’d
bring those ducks in there and throw them in the corner; you could take two for a dollar,
put the money on the counter. That’s what Dad bought shells with and whatever else he
needed. But I do remember that as a young person.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
3
�But I also remember the old automobiles and our trips to the canyon. [Getting choked up]
This canyon is pretty important (excuse the tears), but it’s been alive forever. I started
helping my folks [inaudible] when I was six years old and we’re still here. We are the
longest family owned ski area in America. I’m proud of that; pretty proud of that.
Anyway, I’ll try and collect myself here. But it’s touching. And you’ll find that the more
you dig the more it means to me. So anyway, that’s what I recall.
We did move from there on South Main, Logan River was right in our backyard. We
could fish anytime when the stream was open. And we always hunted ducks and
pheasants and those types of things. Dad got involved in the ski area in 1936 when it was
at the Beaver – and then it went from there up to the Sinks. Now, if you know where the
Sinks are, [they are] about a mile and a half above the state sheds up on the summit. It
was there from, oh, we finally came back to the Beaver in 1947 when money was
appropriated for the road through the county and the Forest Service and the state. Then
the Forest Service was very instrumental in bringing the water to the area. It was in ’39
that my dad and another gentleman took over the ski area and made it go [and we’ve]
been there ever since.
BC:
Who was the other gentleman?
TS:
Don Shupe.
BC:
Don Shupe.
TS:
Don Schupe was an auto body man. Shupe Auto body – it’s now (it’s no longer Shupe) –
shoot on the corner of 10th North and Main.
BC:
Oh, is that Miller’s?
TS:
Millers! Don Shupe was a first cousin to Charlie Miller, or brother-in-law or whatever the
situation was. And Don was there a couple of years and his back gave out on him and so
he had to bow out of the picture. Jane Johnson, who was married to Max Johnson
(LeGrand Johnson’s son) – it was her dad. (I mean just to give you a little relationship to
people that are still alive.) And we see Jane once in a while and we kind of kid about it a
little bit – what might have been, you know. So anyway, that’s the story. And I don’t
know how far you want to go along with this.
We came back in 1947; we put a rope-tow in. And then in 1948 we put in a T-bar.
There’s a big picture around here somewhere of it. Put in the T-bar and that run there for
a lot of years. That was kind of a make-shift – there was chairlifts in those days, but
money wasn’t available for us to do that. There wasn’t enough skiing public, lots of
things you can say why it wasn’t necessary. The size of Cache Valley wasn’t – the
population that skied was very small (and it’s still not very big in relationship for a major
business).
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
4
�CP:
So who were most of other people who came to Beaver Mountain? Were they from the
Valley?
TS:
That started it?
CP:
Just to ski there?
TS:
Yeah. And it still is. We probably have less than – unless you want to call it college
student as a vacation skier or a transient or whatever word you want to use – then we
have about 1 to 1.5% of our people are out of state or transient skiers or vacation skiers or
whatever word you would attach to it. And we don’t see many of those. We’re seeing
more because of developments at Bear Lake. Wasatch Front is where a good share of
them come from. But we do have people who have timeshares and once they have come
and skied here we seem to get them back. The problem with that is the duration of the
sport that you do, that you’re real active in it: three years, five years, ten years? How long
did you play tennis? How long did you play golf? How long did you play badminton?
See, so this interest span, you have to have new all the time to replace the guy that’s
dropping out. That’s a pretty big deal actually in our sport.
You had a question?
CP:
Yeah. Just to go back to when you first started working at the ski resort – what kind of
responsibilities did you have then?
TS:
Up at the Sinks – now I’m five, six, seven years old; I was born in ’32, so ’39 is what?
[I’d be seven?]
BC:
Yeah.
TS:
Dad built a building there out of weedy-edge siding. I don’t know if you know what that
is or not – that’s the edges when you cut timber, you don’t cut the bark off? Okay, that’s
weedy-edge. Dad built a small building down there – I think 12 by 14 or 12 by 12 – I
can’t recall. And Mother – that building was to serve as a warming hut and food service.
Now I forgot the question you asked me.
CP:
What did you do? What were you responsible for?
TS:
Oh, what did I did do? Okay, alright. Our function as kids of course was to, of course we
weren’t running lifts in them days, but we would bring the food service from up on the
road, down to that building for Mother – the foods were all fixed at home: the chilies, the
barbecues, that stuff was all fixed at home. And we’d carry it, all in boxes. Dad pulled a
trailer behind the car (brown ’39 Chevrolet), I can remember just like it was yesterday.
And then we would take that stuff down there and then we would bring it back. Sure, we
had a little snow to shovel, but you know, six-seven year old, you don’t get a whole
bunch out of them other than lip service. Then as we got older, 12 year old, 13 year old,
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
5
�we were running – I was running a lift then. Today they would put you in jail if you did
that.
BC:
Now up at the Sinks, there weren’t any lifts then?
TS:
We had this cable (we called it a rope tow); it was like a rope-tow except it was a 9/16”
cable. And we had some hooks (I don’t have one here) that you would hook on the cable,
wrap it around you and it would pull you up the mountain. Now, how did you keep that
cable from burying you in the snow? Well on the highest spots we’d go cut an aspen, lay
it on the high spots and the cable would run on that. Of course, then we only skied
Saturday and Sunday, and there was a heck of lot more snow fell then than there is today,
I’m here to tell you. Talk about global warming, talk about whatever you want: we don’t
have the snow today we used to have. So it was always a big deal then to dig out of our
buildings, we left shovels outside – couldn’t get into them if we didn’t have a shovel! So
then those were the type things that Norm Mecham and I (Norm, he lives in Arizona or
somewhere now). But that was our responsibility to go up and dig it out.
My brother worked when he was older – he was almost eight years older than I am – so
he had more responsibilities. Then he went away to school and blaty, blaty, blah. But he
went in the military is where he went. ’42 he went and Uncle Sam joined him up.
And then in 1947 we came back here [Beaver Mountain]. But in those days ski crowds
were different than they are today. Utah State used to have a big winter carnival deal up
there. And when you go up there if you look on your left-hand side going up – it’s pretty
steep mountain there – and they used to build huge snow sculptures. I don’t mean these
snowmen kids make out in their backyards; I mean 12, 15, 18 foot high snow sculptures
of like the pyramid stuff is what they would build; or horse and buggy-type thing.
Literally shape them. It was a big deal. Somewhere I have those pictures. I don’t have
them now.
BC:
And that would have been in the 1940s?
TS:
That would have been in the ‘40s, yep. But see to prior to that Utah State held their
winter carnivals down at the old CC Camp [CCC: Civil Conservation Corps], right there
on that hill. Yeah. And Logan High used to hold a winter carnival down there also.
BC:
And the CC Camp, that was at the Sinks area?
TS:
No, The CC Camp is – do you know where the road to go to Tony Grove is?
BC:
Um-hmm.
TS:
Okay. Right across the street from that, they call it USU Training Center now.
BC:
Right.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
6
�TS:
But that’s the old CC Camp. And of course that come out of the Depression, like the
PWA did. And Utah State held their winter carnival – because it wasn’t until 1939 that
the road to Logan Canyon was open to Bear Lake; ’39 it opened to go to Bear Lake and
that’s what permitted us to move the ski area from down where it was, up to the Sinks.
Because we had to walk in; we parked down on the highway down there and walked into
the ski area.
BC:
At Beaver?
TS:
At Beaver, yeah. We didn’t go around the road – we cut through, you know; walked
across the creek and walked through the draw I’m telling you where the rock deal was?
That’s the canyon we went up. Now I’m jumping all over, but my feeble mind doesn’t
always work in a straight [line]!
CP:
Yeah, well since you mentioned the road, maybe we could talk about that a little bit. In
the early days – in the ‘40s when you first started having a big role in managing the ski
resort – what was it like getting up to the ski resort through the canyon from Logan?
TS:
In most cases the road was plowed like it is now. Of course, let’s be honest – the plow
trucks then probably went 20 miles an hour; today they’ll go 40-plus, or 30-plus,
whatever the turns will permit them to. The roads were in good shape, but what would
happen was the road would narrow and narrow and narrow because they didn’t have the
quality equipment to blow that snow off the side 100 yards or 100 feet or whatever. And
they did not use graders (patrollers with the wing on them) where they could come along
and slice the top of that off so the next time the truck come it could blow it over the bank.
And I’ll guarantee you they’ve made strides in building roads to help winter. Because
you never build a road lower than the sub-grade out the side. Because when the wind
blows, all the snow goes on the road. So you elevate the road so the snow blows crossed
it. And they have done that in several places in the canyon. But the road equipment today
is far superior. You have better tires on your automobile; you also have more four-wheel
drives. So driving today is much easier than it was then. But in conversation with a lot of
ladies that drive, it’s a terrible road! It’s unsafe! It ought to be closed! My goodness lady!
[Laughing]
CP:
So what was the condition of the actual road in the ‘40s when you first started working?
Was it paved all the way?
TS:
It was paved all the way – it was paved to Garden City. But it was much, much narrower.
Over the years they have been able to widen the road in various places. Environmental
restraints stop the road, like in the Forks, on up through there – environmental restraints
have inhibited the width of that: right, wrong or indifferent it depends on which side of
the fence you’re on. My complaint about the narrow road is that one tree blown across
the road can stop traffic and I’m saying, “Wait a minute. Is this modern times or is this
horse and buggy stuff?” And that’s one little complaint I have about some of the
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
7
�restrictions. I am very environmental. But I’m also on the safe side for you and I to travel
the roads.
BC:
Yeah.
TS:
That’s where I’m coming from on that. We could do things to ruin that ski area, but we
won’t do it; we won’t do it. Because once we take all the trees, once we push all the
brush off and those things, now we’ve ruined the aesthetics and you’re probably not
going to come up there. At least that’s our thinking; now maybe our thinking isn’t good.
But that is our thinking on it. We’re in need of some more parking lot but we don’t have
any place to go other than start cutting down trees. We’re not very enthusiastic about that.
We’re in conversation with the state to use some of the flatland down below and they’re
not very enthusiastic about that! Because of aesthetics. So what do you do? You say
okay, we’ve only got parking for 800 cars and when anybody else comes, we send you
home? Is that what you do? I guess it is. When the restaurant is full you sit down and wait
until somebody leaves, don’t you?
BC:
Yeah, that’s true.
TS:
And that’s the only answer I have right now because my wife is part of this; one daughter
and one son and their significant others. And I think they feel like I do, that we’re not
willing to cut down trees to make a place for you to park: right, wrong or indifferent. So
anyway, I keep getting off the subject.
CP:
That’s fine. I just wanted to ask you I guess during the 1960s they started to widen some
of the road down here closer to Logan; and then during the ‘70s and ‘80s it was kind of in
a gridlock because you know, they had to do the environmental assessment on the rest of
the road to see if they could widen it further or straighten it further. And there was a lot of
discussion I guess, in the valley and elsewhere, about how they should go about doing
that. And there were some people I guess who were very, very much for the straightening
and widening so they could get back and forth to the ski area, to Bear Lake –
TS:
Well not just ski area, but Bear Lake, but consider one other thing; think about one other
thing besides you and I to ski and to camp and that. This guy that lives in Bear Lake – he
doesn’t have access to a quality hospital. He has access to an ambulance, he has access to
an ambulance – but he is 40 miles away if he lives in Garden City, from a quality
hospital. Now do we deprive him of that privilege?
CP:
Right.
TS:
He’s got a hospital in Montpelier that’s like this one down here was 10 years ago. See. So
there’s more to it than just a place for you and I to drive; there’s other people to think
about to in the use of that –
CP:
So when all that debate was going on, did the people at the ski resort at all get involved
with the discussion with the –
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
8
�TS:
I sit on the board on Logan Canyon to decide – not decide – put input into the decision to
do what we do with the highway. We are restricted extremely by the Corps of Engineers.
The Corps of Engineers will decide what you’re going to do. Let me give you one
example of what our group did just on the last section from the dug way – from the twin
bridges – up.
Okay originally there was a design on that big cut right at the top of the twin bridges, to
take and cut that side off and go out around the side where all the timber is. We sat there
and looked at that and said, “What kind of a fool’s trick is that? Why don’t we go this
way, move the bridge downstream, we’ve got a barren hole here that we could lay the
sides back, whatever degree you want. We’re going to cut down a few trees, very few,
and you pull the road out of the shade and you put it up here on the hill and you don’t cut
down all this old forest.” Well imagine that! Somebody else can think just a little bit too!
So it’s just things like that, that they have people like me on the board because we all
have tunnel vision occasionally.
BC:
And that board – you called the Logan Canyon Board?
TS:
I’ll think of the name of it in a minute. There’s ten people sit on it. And you know what?
I’m the only one that doesn’t have my hand in the county or state’s pocket. I’m the only
person that doesn’t draw a paycheck from a government agency.
BC:
So that was a sort of inner-governmental board?
TS:
Yeah, it’s still there. It’s still in effect. I would be getting called in – they’re getting close
to doing a piece from the Beaver on up over to the Summit. My mind is getting weaker,
but I’ll think of the name of that board in a minute. There’s ten of us on there but I’m the
only one that doesn’t belong to a government agency.
BC:
So how do you feel with all the input and push and take – how do you feel like the road
project came out?
TS:
I think it was good. See, had you been here 30 years ago that road from the head of the
dugway was going to have cut right across the mountains and come in at Ricks Spring. It
would have crossed the river twice. See the thinking on roads has changed so much in the
last 50 years or 40 years. Years ago it was a straight line was the shortest route and the
best route. Well, in some cases yes, but many cases, no. That would have been a hell of a
mess if we’d have cut through and built a bridge across the road there and then cut that
mountain and crossed the river again to come in at Rick’s Spring. And see you’d have the
same thing at Hattie’s Grove. Instead of going around the bend and up – cut a chunk on
the upper end of Hattie’s Grove off and Bear Hole, then up to the cattle guard. To me that
wasn’t an appropriate route in those days – or even today even. So by getting more
people together and talking about it – and you’re always going to have conflicts. No, I
think they’ve done a good job on the road.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
9
�Mr. Weston who used to sit on the State’s – he used to sit on the UDOT Board [Utah
Department of Transportation] (he used to be the president – they have a committee just
like everybody else, the state does). He thought, “Well,” he said, “We’re going to get this
middle section of the road done. We’re going to get that done eventually.” He says, “Now
what we have is an hourglass. We’ve got good road on this end. We’ve got good road on
this end, and we shrink down in the middle.” He thought that the public would demand
that they do something through there. Well guess what? It won’t be in my lifetime. It
won’t be in my lifetime that that will happen. And there’s not much in my mind that they
can do there. Where do you go? You’ve got [a] steep mountain here and you’ve got river
there. Where are you going? Are you going to put an overhand over the river and let them
drive out there?
[Laughing]
You going to put up on the mountain 100 yards to get 10 more feet of road? I don’t think
so. The only thing that I can see that gets obnoxious is that they elevate the road, raise the
road up itself and leave the mountains. That ain’t gonna happen either. See, that’s what
they were going to do in Little Cottonwood Canyon because of avalanches.
BC:
Hmm. They were going to elevate it?
TS:
No. What they were going to do is they were going to build a wall here and build a bridge
over the road – just the opposite – and let the avalanches go over the road. Oh yeah!
There was a big study on that. Because it’s big dollars! Huge dollars! And believe me,
money talks! If you don’t think so, look at the last election.
[Laughing]
Let’s not get into that one. But anyway, you know we’ve done a lot of things at the resort
and a lot of changes take place. Roads are important; I’ve been screaming for seven or
eight years now that they get our entrance to the Beaver changed. And I finally got it this
summer. Because see, what was happening there when you came out of the Beaver you
would start a right hand turn – here comes the highway and you couldn’t see back up the
road to see if anybody was coming because the snow was piled too high. And let’s be
honest – the State can’t be responsible for every little piece of snow that you and I can’t
see over; they just can’t do it. And so by making it come straight out at the road, now you
and I can see up and down the road. Built a passing lane. Good. We haven’t had many
accidents – to my knowledge we’ve never had a real serious accident there; we’ve never
had a death. So maybe it wasn’t all that important. I’ve been cussed by a couple of people
because it is a little inconvenient to turn and then have to get down, whereas the other
way they’d be on the turn. But that’s okay, they’ll get over it. I think it’s a good thing. So
yes.
BC:
So after you moved back down to Beaver when did the first major lifts come in? You said
you had a rope tow and T-bar?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
10
�TS:
We had a rope-tow and then we put the T-bar in. Put the T-bar in ’48.
BC:
Um-hmm. And how far did the T-bar go up the mountain?
TS:
Okay. The T-bar went up about 1800-1900 feet. That was in ’47-’48. Then in 1960 we
put the first chair lift in. That would be the Face Lift. It’s still there and it’s still in the
same place. It hasn’t been remodeled; it does have a new drive; it does have new bull
wheels top and bottom. Still use the same chairs, new rope; same terminals. So it’s
basically the same place.
The ticket office that’s there now was built in ’47. One of these days we’re going to find
enough money to get it out of there. And in 1964 we put the Little Beaver Lift in. And the
same year we put that in we built the Lodge. Now the Lodge has only been remodeled six
times since we originally built it. And we’ve got a big addition going on it right now.
And then in 1967 we put the T-bar in – which neither one of you I think has seen run. It
was one of them good ideas that didn’t work. [Laughs] And then in 1969-70 we put the
Dream Lift in. And then six years ago, whatever that was, we put Marge’s Triple in. Then
we built a tube hill and that was another one of those good ideas that didn’t work. The
only thing that we salvaged out of that is the yurt and the yurt deck. We turned that into –
well we rent it out during the summer, okay. But now it’s rented every weekend in the
winter (with family groups or birthday parties or whatever; some are a few weddings,
things like that, family reunions, church groups, scout groups). But the yurt wasn’t a
terrible investment, but the lift [to tow tubers up the hill] was. Of course we were able to
sell that so that wasn’t too serious.
CP:
So when – I guess maybe we’re jumping ahead a little bit – so when snowboarding first
became popular was there any discussion at all about what Beaver Mountain would allow
and what they wouldn’t?
TS:
No. In the original – when snowboards first came out they had an organization (don’t ask
me the name of it) that they had for boarders and had a gentleman from Salt Lake that
would come up here, a young person. And he would watch you with your board and see
what you could do with your board. And when he decided that you had the ability to get
on the lift and off the lift with your board then he would give you a piece of paper or slip
that said we may sell you a lift ticket because you now have the ability to board and get
off the lift.
Okay, at first we restricted them from Little Beaver. Why did we do that? Because we felt
that the ability of a boarder to handle his board, we were concerned about mixing two
beginners. We also used to keep them off the ridge for the same thing. And all that
happened there was it created a big argument between our ski patrol and the boarders,
because the boarders were always deaf to the ski patrol, to see if they could get down
there without getting caught. But then what happened about the third year with boards – I
jumped over this – boards did not have medal edges. Just like skis didn’t used to have
medal edges. And so the industry said, “Wait a minute. You have got to have medal
edges.” And why? Control, control. And so then they started to put medal edges on them
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
11
�and I think probably better bindings and blaty-blaty-blaty-blah. And today it’s – I think
there’s only three ski areas in the United States that don’t permit them and two of them
are in Utah: Alta and Deer Valley.
And that’s a business decision they’ve made. So I don’t think you ever will see them at
Deer Valley; I think someday possibly at Alta. And the reason I say that – these kids, the
skiers and snowboarders now – they hang together, they all come up in the same car or
whatever. They’re not like before, in my recollection of snowboards is that they were one
bunch and skiers were another bunch; they didn’t co-mingle, but they do today. They ski
the mountain together, they ride the same chair and eat lunch and all that. So Alta
(between us girls) is actually losing skier days. Finest ski area in America, there ain’t
nothing better than Alta.
BC:
Yeah.
TS:
Bar none. It’s the best. Their older set that skied there forever – the Spence Eccles and
those types – do not want to mingle with the snowboarders because they’re a little lower
grade of people.
[Laughing]
That’s the philosophy! And they have convinced Donald and before him Chick Martin,
that Alta would be a better ski area without them. I do know of some things that we have
problems with boarders. One is visibility, and we do have more collisions with boarders
than we do with skiers. That is a problem. They’re smart-mouthed (boarders), but you
know what? There are smart-mouthed skiers too!
CP:
Yeah.
TS:
It doesn’t all – just because you’ve got a board on you you can use bad language because
you could put skis on you and use the same language. That’s kind of a far-fetched deal
there. But no, boarding has changed a great deal and it’s probably 47-50% of our
business. We haven’t done a little survey in a while. Depends on the day; depends on the
day how many boarders we get. I think boarders are becoming more acceptable than they
were 15 years ago, or 10 or five even. I have concerns over some over the other
gimmicks that we’re using: bicycles on the mountain on snow. I have concerns over that.
We talk about – I don’t know if you’ve ever – do you ski?
CP:
I do.
TS:
Okay. Have you seen them up there on their – they’re not a bicycle with tires but they sit
on it, yeah. I have a problem with them in that they don’t have anything on their feet.
And so when they get on and get off the lift they can leave bad marks in the snow.
CP:
Right.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
12
�TS:
I think they have good control. Most of the people I’ve seen on them are a little older set.
100 years ago when Merlin Olsen and them guys were skiing we had what we called a
“sit ski” and it was very similar to these. And my hell, when them guys would fall they’d
leave a crater a size of this room!
[Laughing]
And not just him; I just can remember – I’m trying to think of the other guy that used to
play football same time Merlin did. Both of them skied. My hell they’d get in the chair on
the Face Lift together, the chair would almost come off the rope! [Laughing] Because,
you know, they were both big people. But we don’t have them to rent and we probably
won’t. How many things do you let on your mountains? You know? I think there’s a limit
to what should be permitted on a mountain to have fun with. If somebody else wants to
do it, that’s fine. And that’s Alta’s thinking on the snowboard and that’s Deer Valley’s
thinking on the snowboard: let them go someplace else. There is a place for them so,
there you go.
CP:
So I assume you’re a skier yourself?
TS:
Yep.
CP:
How long have you been doing that? All [of] your life?
TS:
Yeah. I won my first race at Alta at the age of 12.
CP:
Yeah?
TS:
I won at Snowbasin at the age of ten, before they had a lift. I won a metal at the NC2A
[NCAA].
CP:
Okay.
TS:
So, been around a little bit; been around a little bit.
BC:
So have you tried to snowboard?
TS:
No!
[Laughing]
No, something we ought to have at our resort is we ought to rent padding for first-timers.
[Laughing]
And thumb restraints. Because that’s what we’re hurting; we’re hurting thumbs, elbows
and shoulders with boarders.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
13
�BC:
Um-hmm; right.
TS:
The thing about boarding – a boarder the first day and a half, two days has more trouble
than the skiers. But by the third day he run off and hide from skiers. It’s a faster learned
sport. At least that’s what we’re seeing; even with or without lessons, it doesn’t seem to
make that much difference. I don’t know why it’s easier to stand on a plank with two feet
than it is to have two feet out here. I don’t understand that. But they do, they just run and
hide from skiers. Yeah.
CP:
Um-hmm.
TS:
The demand that we have now for board use – we entertain a lot of schools. Last year I
think we had 32 different schools. Some of them came twice, but not many – and the big
demand was for boards. It cramps us to have enough boards for all the kids that want
them. Another thing that’s happening in the ski industry in the last three years really has
been strong is the helmets. And we have some helmets to rent, but on the weekends we
pretty much rent whatever (I don’t know we’ve got 12 or 15 of them). When these kids’
schools come, every kid wants a helmet.
CP:
Um-hmm.
TS:
Are they necessary? I don’t know. I think there’s a deterrent with them. If you’re not
going to fall and hit a tree, I don’t think you need one. If you’re going to hit the tree the
next turn, then I think you better have one on!
[Laughing]
But they don’t solve all the problems; I’m sure they solve a hell of a lot of them, but they
don’t solve them all. Like the girl that hit the tree up at Beaver last winter and broke her
neck. But she hit – I mean I’m sure she had good speed – but it just pshh and that was it.
If she’d had a concrete block on there she would’ve still done it; it’s just one of those
things. And they happen. Thank goodness that’s the only second one in our ski area
career, you know we feel good. We don’t feel good about it; we feel good that we’ve
only had two.
BC:
Could you tell us a little bit about your relationship with the Forest Service? How does
the ski area work within the National Forest? I assume you don’t own all the land, but do
you own some of it, or . . . ?
TS:
None.
BC:
None. Okay.
TS:
Incidentally right now it is not owned by the National Forest. It’s owned by the SITLA.
You know SITLA is the School Institute for Trust Land.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
14
�BC:
Right, okay.
TS:
Years ago, early, early in life doing business (and I’m talking now when I’m 15, 16, 17
years old) listening to my dad talk to Owen Despain and all the other Forest Rangers that
we’ve had; and MJ Roberts and on and on – Dave . . .
BC:
Baumgartner.
TS:
Yeah. Until environmental thing became strong we could do about whatever we wanted.
In other words if we wanted to cut a trail here, we could cut a trail there; if we wanted to
build a road here, we could build a road here. And then as the environmental movement
got stronger, now we were more restricted; we had to do assessments and blahty-blahtyblah. And I’m not saying that’s right or wrong, but you asked about the association.
BC:
Right.
TS:
Life with MJ Roberts, when he was Ranger up here, became almost unbearable.
BC:
And when would he have been Ranger?
TS:
Dave Baumgartner replaced him.
BC:
Okay. So Dave came at about 1990 –
TS:
Yeah, 1990-something. But see MJ Roberts had a long, long span. MJ Roberts and I did
not get along; at all. I guess we were both too hard-headed.
BC:
[Laughing]
TS:
Dad got along with MJ. But I couldn’t. MJ insisted on – we wanted to drill for water –
MJ wouldn’t let us drill for water. You know why? Because he didn’t want a ski area on
the National Forest. We had to have water! We were getting two gallons a minute from
the Logan Canyon side through a pipe that was buried that deep [gesturing]. We had
winters that that froze up – then what did we do? We hauled water up there in milk trucks
and pumped up to the reservoir and then feed it back in during the day for our restrooms.
There was things that wanted to go on Mount Logan that MJ – that would take power up
there to run the microwaves and stuff that’s up there – MJ about had a fit! He wouldn’t
let them put them on the poles because that was visible, and he also wouldn’t let them dig
a trench because of erosion. So he was kind of anti-everything. The forest itself I don’t
think was that way. You have to understand that every Forest Ranger runs his own
district as if he owned it.
BC:
Um-hmm.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
15
�TS:
Then when Dave Baumgartner got in – and others – life became a little easier because
they could see all they was doing was tying our hands. There is a demand for skiing;
there is a demand for picnic grounds; there is a demand for motor bikes. We have to have
sacrifice areas. It can’t all be trees and cows and deer and elk. That forest is used by
everybody; we all own it. We can’t destroy it; we can’t destroy it, but wise use. The
difference between an MJ Roberts and Dave Baumgartner was let’s see what we can do
and do it right.
Fred Lebar was my mentor and he was Assistant Ranger under MJ Roberts. Fred Lebar
could see – if I told you where we took the material on top of the mountain to build the
Dream Lift, you’d call me a fibbing liar. I mean we pulled everything on top of the
mountain behind dozers up roads that were that steep. Because MJ didn’t want a road
built (which would have been much nicer). You go up there in the summer, you look up
the rig and you see that road.
BC:
Yeah, huh.
TS:
We wouldn’t have had to build that road if he’d been not so dang hard-headed. So what
happens? You build a road straight up a mountain – which way does water run? Straight
down. You can build [in] all the cross members you want; until the sheep lay in them and
knock them down and then you’re right back where you started again. But anyway, after
Fred Lebar came in, I talked some sense into Fred; he talked MJ into letting us drill for
water. He talked him into building better roads; a road that was out of sight out of mind
to the top of the mountain. You can’t see it from the highway anywhere, and we could
use it without all the watershed problems, this, that and the other. Then President Clinton
made the Escalante Staircase down there a National Monument.
BC:
Monument, yeah.
TS:
Underneath that evidently is a lot of coal. And of course SITLA owned that land, but
when they made it a National Park now SITLA was booted out. So in order to satisfy
SITLA to replenish their income, they gave SITLA the privilege of choosing the land that
they would like to own to replace what they had lost down there. Well that went on for
two years and the attorneys fought and fought and finally the President stepped in and
said, “Hey this is bullshit. You take what you need without disturbing the forest and the
forest will relinquish it and do all these trades.”
Well SITLA owned 17,000 acres of land in Franklin Basin. SITLA has one thing in mind,
and that’s to make money. That’s their sole function is to make money. They were
making somewhere between $2500 and $3000 a year leasing that out to sheep and cows.
Not very much is it? The first year they claimed and took over Beaver Mountain they got
a check for $30,000 – which would you rather own?
[Laughing]
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
16
�You know? You don’t have to be too bright to figure that one out. The difference
between SITLA and the forest is that SITLA wants you to do things that make money,
because if you make money, we make money. Now, we run stuff by SITLA – we just had
a meeting with them here a while ago. We’re up against a master plan; the county says
we got to do a new one. So we met with SITLA and told them of things we wanted to do
and they pretty much approved everything except a parking lot down on the road. Well,
okay if they’re not willing to do that then we’re going to have to restrict people (some
days) that want to come skiing. That’s just the way it works. Other than that, we pretty
much have a green light. We do need more water if we ever want to make snow. We have
enough water to give you a drink and flush the toilet. But if we ever want to make snow
we do not have enough.
SITLA would love to take all that land down there and develop it. I think it’s a ways off.
I think it’s a long ways off after seeing – well we’ve all seen. We have some friends in
Bear Lake that want to do some things with us up there to try and entice people to buy
their property. And I talked to them the other day and they said, “Forget that for awhile
because there isn’t any money.” There isn’t any money.
BC:
Yeah.
TS:
But that’s the difference. One wants you to do things to make money, the other was more
apprehensive about growth, about growth. We never see SITLA. The only time we see
them is when we send them a check!
[Laughing]
BC:
So when you worked with the Forest Service did you actually have to buy a lease from
them? Or how does that -- ?
TS:
Okay. SITLA and the forest – it used to be that we could get a ten year lease, then it went
twenty, okay? Large ski area that have to borrow millions and millions of dollars, the
banks wouldn’t loan them any money. So it took about six or seven years of the National
Ski Area Association to go to Congress and say, “Look, we have got to extend the lease
that permits on these ski areas because these people can’t grow. We need the long term to
borrow money. We don’t need more land until we need more.” I mean you know how
that works, you know?
BC:
Yeah.
TS:
I don’t need more potatoes until I empty my plate you know? And so finally they got the
Forest Service to give us a 40 year permit; 40 year permit. SITLA doesn’t like it. I don’t
care whether SITLA likes it or not! If I’m going to spend millions of dollars I want to
know that my permit is safe; I want to know that my permit is safe. I’m not going up
there to invest millions in this place and some attorney in Salt Lake that sits on SITLA’s
board and says, “That’s too long of a lease.” I don’t give a damn what he thinks! You
want to put your money into it Jack? So they’ve been pretty good.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
17
�They have wanted to re-write it. We have two permits there because at one time on the
Beaver, on the Dream Lift – there’s 31 acres there on a run we call Gentle Ben that
belonged to the forest. So (this is after the land trade) then we had to get another permit
for that. Wait a minute, maybe I’m telling you the wrong story here. That was state land,
that’s right. That was state land when it was forest because that little piece in there
belonged to the state. The state owned the other side. So we had to get a permit from
SITLA to use that 31 acres. Well now we’re still carrying that 31 acres and we’re
carrying the other one for 1000 acres. And they’re kind of holding that over our head a
little bit. Instead of putting both of them together (it would save us a little bit of money,
but no very darn much). They want to re-write the permit and go from a 40 year permit
(we’re good until 2038). And see then what we want in a permit is an automatic
extension for five years and five years. Now, how good is our permit? I don’t know.
BC:
Yeah.
TS:
Until somebody really tests it and somebody wants to own Beaver Mountain and wants to
kick us out, I guess that’s the day we’ll test it. My personal opinion is, the way it would
really be tested if somebody came in and wanted to develop all this down here, wanted to
take this 3000 acres and they wanted the ski area to do it and so they put the bite on the
state, says, “We won’t do it unless we own the ski area.” Then I think you’d start to see
some fur fly. I think that’s when it would get down dirty and ugly. But that’s not going to
happen in my lifetime. Because the money isn’t out there to buy. Bear Lake’s got what?
500 lots over there to sell?
BC:
Yeah.
TS:
Why would you buy one at Beaver Mountain? If you wanted to use Bear Lake’s you’ve
got the 12-15 mile travel; you could own one at Bear Lake and sit on the lake in the golf
course, if you want to go skiing you drive your 13 miles, go skiing and come back to your
place. That’s what I think. To me, Beaver Mountain is not a very attractive place, unless
that’s all you want to do and have a summer home. Then Beaver Mountain is not a very
attractive place. Whoever does it has a got a big row to hoe: they’ve got to bring more
power in. Now sewage is the big problem; we can bring power in and we can drill for
water – but something’s got to happen to that sewage.
CP:
Yeah.
TS:
And if you come in there with a 500 unit development or 200 unit development – that’s a
hell of a lot of sewage.
CP:
You can’t just get a septic tank, you know.
TS:
That’s BIG septic tank! We have seven septic tanks. We have seven septic tanks and we
pump them twice a year. Knock on wood, our drain fields are still holding up. See, a lot
of that land up there is clay.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
18
�BC:
Yeah.
TS:
And clay doesn’t take water. Well, when we hit a rock bed we just jump up and down!
We just jump up and down. But you know, I don’t think it’s going to happen for awhile.
But that was SITLA’s mission: to make money for the state of Utah.
BC:
Right.
TS:
And they do make a lot of money. They do make a lot of money for the state. They have
coal fields and that down there that are generating $100,000 a month! That’s a lot of
money for the school systems! A lot of money, that’s fine. The only thing I object to is
that Cache County charges us property tax on that land – not on the lift and that (they
charged on that, and that’s fine), but they are charging us property tax on that (I call it
real property) –
BC:
Right.
TS:
Okay, as if we owned it as developable property. They’re saying out of this 1,000 acres,
800 of it is developable. And I’m saying, “Bullcrap.”
BC:
Yeah.
TS:
It’s not developable! You’re not going to build on 32% slopes!
CP:
[Laughing]
TS:
And I haven’t been able to convince them (and I haven’t taken them to court) over the
fact that we really don’t want to give you $30,000 in taxes for something we don’t own.
BC:
No.
TS:
Now, it ought to be one or the other: we either ought to pay the state or we ought to pay
the county. One of the two, but not both, at least that’s my thinking. I’m sure I’d get some
arguments over that. [Phone ringing] Yeah, that’s my wife. Excuse me, please.
CP:
Sure.
[Stop and start recording]
CP:
Make sure it’s going there. Alright, we’re back. So we were just talking about your
relationship with government agencies and things that you have leases from and
everything, for the ski area. Just to kind of maybe get a base line here – we talked about
SITLA and the Forest Service; there’s some state land that you all lease from right now.
When you first started working at the ski resort was the land ownership different than it is
today?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
19
�TS:
Well the land ownership when we first started, either up at the Sinks or down at the
Beaver, was all Forest Service land. Either place it was. And then – hmm, I’d have to
look it up, but probably nine years ago it was turned over to SITLA, which is the School
of Institutional Trust Lands and they became the landlords. Their function is to develop
the land and make money for the school systems. So it’s just been the two different land
owners; both of them with very different missions – not different missions, but different
attitudes. One wants to make money and the other doesn’t care whether they make money
or not because they get a blood transfusion every July. But SITLA needs to make their
own money for themselves, the people that run it and also for the school systems. So that
in essence is the two different people that we do business with.
We do have to account to Cache County for all building permits, for taxes, for building
inspections, for food service inspections, for water testing, all of those types of things. So
we’re just like any other. We’re almost [like a] city in that we have to adhere to all the
rules and regulations almost that Logan City would have to adhere to. Safe drinking
water, fire prevention, water systems for fire – you name it. We do have ambulance
service up there, we do have ski patrol that has excellent facilities to take care of injured;
we do not have the ability to shock a patient in case of some heart problems from
afibrillation – we do not have that, but almost that good of communications with them.
As soon as the county gets this 800 megahertz [MHz] in, then we will have direct support
from the hospital to run some of this equipment that we do not have – oh, you get 100
people and somebody doesn’t know what they’re doing, but with the direct support from
the hospital and this 800 MHz comes in will be a good thing. It will also mean that the
Fire, Sheriff’s Department, Police Department can talk all the way through Logan
Canyon without the help of repeaters. They’ve tested it; they can talk right from Third
Dam to Garden City from the top of the Beaver. And this side is being developed; they’ll
build it next year which will be a good thing. There’s no site up there for cell phones;
there’s a little difficulty there going on between the state and federal government because
the state wants it on their land because they make a lot of money off of cell phone towers.
CP:
Um hum.
TS:
SITLA has given the state the right of way over the land to get to Beaver Mountain. But
also written in that right of way is the fact that they will not be permitted to put cell
phones on their tower.
CP:
Ah.
TS:
Right, wrong or indifferent, when you have the power you can do what the deuce you
want, you know?
CP:
Right.
TS:
If you have to ask permission you do what you are told usually. That’s the way it works.
So, it will be a good thing.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
20
�CP:
So, can you think of any government policies: national, local, state policies that have had
a major impact on your operations over the years?
TS:
The big thing was when they made our permits to the National Ski Area Association they
made the permits for forty years. But also within that system is the fee system; it’s locked
in for forty years. With so much based on income; as you make more money you pay
more. It’s based on a million income, two million, three, four, five up to a hundred
million dollars: which some ski areas would do; some of your large Colorado areas. And
it is all predicated on the dollar’s worth. When the dollars up it costs us a little more and
when the dollars down it costs us a little less. It is something that set in concrete so small
little resorts don’t have to go negotiate that with our Forest or the state or whoever owns
the land.
If you are on private land then that is something else. But we do pay income taxes on
every dollar that comes in like anybody else. We do pay sales tax. We do have a small
exemption on sales tax and that is for the lifts, our snow making equipment, our snow
grooming equipment. Now why did the state of Utah do that? Because Colorado has no
sales tax on lift tickets; so we compete directly with Colorado for skiers. (Not Beaver
Mountain so much but the Salt Lake resorts.) So the Utah Ski Association met with the
legislator a number of years ago and said “Hey look, we are at a disadvantage; we need
something to kind of offset this sales tax on lift tickets.” So they did give us the
exemption on the purchase of ski lifts, on the maintenance of them and on snow making
and on snow vehicles: over the ground vehicles. But that is the only break we get.
CP:
So how has the environmental movement changed what you do at the ski area? Have
there been any laws enacted or anything like that or environmental laws that have
changed how you [do things]?
TS:
Not that I am aware of. The state is not immune to the environmental movement. But
they are immune to . . . In other words if SITLA did not want to adhere to Cache County
rules they wouldn’t have to. They’d just tell the County to go jump in the lake. They may
end up in court. I’m not saying they wouldn’t do that. But, I remember a statement that
the director of SITLA [made]. He came up here I took him around and introduced him to
all the [Cache] County Commissioners and Lynn Lemon and all those people that’s
involved in that, our state representatives when this thing was taking place. And the lady
who was chairman of the County Commission asked this person “Well, would you adhere
to County zoning?” And he said “Yes, if it doesn’t interfere with what we want to do.”
What did he tell her? “Yeah, if you don’t bother us, we’ll go along with you.” You know.
CP:
Right.
TS:
So that’s between the state and the county. Our deal with the county, we have a master
plan: we work on a master plan. We have to submit drawings, we have to get building
permits. Blah de blah de blah; so nothing’s really changed.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
21
�CP:
So aside for that one forest ranger that you mentioned, your relationships has been pretty
good with the government?
TS:
They have, they have. You have to give and take. You can’t be overly demanding, but
you have to go in and – See the difference between the Beaver Mountain and the Forest
Service: we have to make money because we don’t get a blood transfusion every 12
months; we have to make our own money. And if they make life so miserable and so
expensive that we can’t make a profit and then we cease to exist. So they have to be (I
don’t know what word I want to use here) but they have to be sympathetic to our needs
because Beaver Mountain entertains more people on that 1,000 acres of land than the
Forest Service does – not on the whole Cache – but on the Cache/Blacksmith fork/Logan
Canyon and then up toward Richmond. We entertain more people than all the
campgrounds and that put together on this part of the Cache except maybe during the
deer hunt.
CP:
Whoa.
TS:
So as far as campers, trailers, hikers, bikers, horse riders; we entertain more than they do.
We entertained last year 87,000 people.
CP:
So what kind of – you know, 87,000 now – what kind of increase have you seen since
you started working at Beaver Mountain?
TS:
When I was a kid and we were up at the Sinks, lift tickets were $1 a day. And I can
remember when $39 was a big day.
CP:
Wow!
TS:
This book right here you saw me digging out?
CP:
Uh-huh?
TS:
That book, that book is one that my folks kept that tells what money income was at the
ski area. For example, (let me go back) – [flipping through pages of a book]
CP:
This is a ledger?
TS:
Yeah, this is a ledger.
CP:
With the date?
TS:
This is the date: on December 15, 1956 we took in $47.25 on the lift and $13.30 on the
shelter, in 1956.
CP:
Uh-huh. Yeah.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
22
�TS:
So how many people is that? I don’t know what lift tickets were at that time. This doesn’t
tell me. For the month of December we generated $1,128; in the food service we
generated $331.
CP:
That’s where the money is, or was then.
TS:
Yeah! I mean, you know. And here it says it started a lift December 19, 1954. December
19 they did $41.25 on the lift and $12.80 on food service. The month of December we did
$175.50 on the lifts. That’s not very much money!
CP:
No, no. Especially now, with passes being a few hundred dollars, so.
TS:
And this goes back – I talked to you about the Mount Logan Winter Carnival; Mount
Logan Ski Club Carnival – here’s all the people that raced and the times. And a lot of
these people are still alive, like Jerry Wallace and Max Sears, John Croft – these are
people that are my age. Eldon Larsen’s dead, but I mean that doesn’t mean anything to
you, but my dad kept records of everything.
CP:
Yeah. So what years, what time periods does that book cover there?
TS:
[Looking in the book] March 10, 1946. And here’s the cross country, the snow sculpture I
talked to you about snow sculpturing.
CP:
Uh-huh.
TS:
American Vets Rotary Club Mountain something, somebody – I can’t remember. (Some
of the book’s had water spilled on it.) But this book here, this little one, gives all the
times that our people worked. This one is not so old here; who worked, how many hours
and what their pay was. It’s kind of fun to dig back in that when we paid people $2.20
and hour.
CP:
Right, right.
TS:
You know, kids in high school.
CP:
So how have people’s demands changed? Skiers’ demands changed over the decades?
TS:
Well.
CP:
I’m sure what skiers expect from Beaver Mountain is much different than something they
might expect somewhere in Park City, or –
TS:
Right, right. It depends. Skiers today want lifts that run good, lifts that are comfortable;
they would like high speed lifts. Beaver Mountain can’t afford high speed lifts for a
couple of reasons: first of all the expense in buying them; and second of all, the expense
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
23
�in hiring the qualified people to run the electrical system in them. See you would need –
on high speed lifts – you have to hire EEs (Electrical Engineers).
CP:
Really?
TS:
What would you have to pay an Electrical Engineer? $50, $60, $70,000 a year? Psh.
Maybe $80 maybe $90? That’s a lot of money!
CP:
Right.
TS:
Where we can get guys with the lifts we have now, we can hire them for 35-$40,000.
CP:
Um-hmm.
TS:
But the public does want the faster lifts; they want better groomed ski runs (which we
have the ability to do); they want good food, fast; they want a place to lounge (which you
can’t always supply – you get 1,000 people, you’re lodge holds 300 you know,
somebody’s going to have to leave) that’s a problem for us. We do not have the problems
with our clientele that the Salt Lake resorts do. Why? Most of our skiers are local. 85% of
their skiers are out of state, probably people that make a little more money who seem to
be more demanding. Now somebody don’t misunderstand what I just said, “seem to be.”
You can talk to the guys and gals that work at Alta on the lifts and they’re very happy
when spring comes because they’re tired of putting up with people who are demanding.
CP:
Right.
TS:
The Deer Valley will tell you the same thing; Park City will tell you the same thing. We
have a totally different – not totally – but pretty much different clientele than they have.
So a ski area ought to be a fun place to work, because whomever’s there is having fun;
they want to have fun. They’re there for enjoyment. Maybe they only take one ride and
go out and tailgate the rest of the day.
CP:
Yeah.
TS:
But that’s their entertainment! That’s what they do! Who says that because you buy a lift
ticket that you’ve got to make 15 runs a day? It’s an activity, it’s a sport, it’s a recreation,
it’s a happening.
CP:
Yeah, yeah.
TS:
And we’re seeing more and more of that all the time. We’re selling, oh 4 or 5,000 season
passes. Do you think them people are going to come up there everyday and beat their
head against the wall and run, run, run? No. They’re there for the experience; they’re
there to have fun; they’re there to socialize.
CP:
Right.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
24
�TS:
That’s good. That’s the way it should be; that’s the way it should be. Sure we have young
people that come up there (and older ones) that they got to get as many runs as they can
get because they spent $38 for a lift ticket and “by God, I’m going to get my money!”
Fine, fine. You can ski just as dang hard as you want. It doesn’t bother me. If you want to
go out and tailgate on your parking lot and fix whatever you fix – fine with me! Just don’t
leave your mess! [Laughing]
CP:
So then back in the ‘40s, you’re saying that basically the people just wanted a way to get
up the mountain and –
TS:
Okay. Back in the ‘40s we had a different ski area than we got today.
CP:
Right.
TS:
Back in the ‘40s you had the outdoor, mountaineering-type person – that was rugged (I
don’t like that word), but the rugged type individual. Today what have we got? The sick,
the lame and the lazy!
[Laughing]
Included with these others.
CP:
Right.
TS:
Who would’ve ever thought back in 1940 that you would have had adaptive scheme for
somebody that didn’t have his legs.
CP:
Mm-hmm.
TS:
Or somebody that didn’t have any arms; or somebody that couldn’t stand up that had to
be in a wheelchair. Who would’ve ever thought of that in 1940? We’ve got them
everyday up at the Beaver!
CP:
Uh-huh.
TS:
Thank the good Lord there’s people that are willing to do that for those people.
CP:
Uh-huh.
TS:
We, at Beaver, try to make life easy for them. We donate lift tickets to those people. And
here again, what I just said, the sick, the lame and the lazy. And I don’t mean that
derogatory, but that’s how it’s changed! We don’t just have a fur coat that we pull on and
go skiing, we got underwear and we got clothing that would keep you warm at 40 below!
CP:
Right.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
25
�TS:
And doesn’t have to be six inches thick like the old suits we used to wear. And the big
awkward shoes and four layers of socks! Now we wear one layer of thin socks and keep
warmer than the days when we wore six pair of socks!
CP:
Yeah?
TS:
So things have changed. Our equipment has gotten better; the lift has gotten better, the
food service has gotten better, the lodging has gotten better. Not just at Beaver Mountain,
at ALL resorts.
CP:
So have you ever tried to actively draw any of the crowd from Salt Lake City?
TS:
No.
CP:
Never tried? Never had any desire.
TS:
Well, okay. We do a little of it. But why should I solicit you if I don’t have a place for
you to stay?
CP:
Right, right. I mean you’ve got your niche, so.
TS:
Yeah, we’ve got a niche!
CP:
Right.
TS:
We think that if we ever get Bear Lake organized – have you been to Bear Lake lately?
CP:
I have!
TS:
Have you been there this winter?
CP:
I haven’t been this winter. Last time I went was – well, actually last time I went was this
summer.
TS:
Okay, there was a few food places open, a few places to go eat weren’t there?
CP:
Uh-huh.
TS:
A couple of service stations, weren’t there?
CP:
Yeah.
TS:
Do you know what you’d find if you went over there now?
CP:
What’s that?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
26
�TS:
You’d find three food services open – one of them’s just Thursday, Friday, Saturday; the
other one’s open seven days a week and the other one’s open five days a week. Is there a
grocery store? Well, not as big as this office we’re in.
[Laughing]
See. You got a place to go to a movie?
CP:
Uh-huh,
TS:
Do have a place to go bowling?
CP:
No, none of that.
TS:
Have you got a bar to go in? What have you got? Nothing. So would you want to take a
vacation and go and stay at Bear Lake with nothing to do after seven o’clock at night?
Probably not. So why should I solicit you to come to a place that I don’t have a place for
you.
CP:
Right.
TS:
Now, let’s be honest. I think there’s people out there that we could solicit and tell them
honestly what we are that would come and stay at a hotel/motel in Logan, and travel the
30 miles to the resort. Why? Mon-ey! They can stay down there for 40, 50, $60 –
whatever it is – they can ski for $40.
CP:
Um-hmm.
TS:
That’s a damn cheap ski trip.
CP:
A good deal.
TS:
It is! But you have to be willing to relinquish the assets that are at Deer Valley or Park
City.
CP:
Right.
TS:
You have to say, “Well they’re not of value to me.” I don’t have them, I don’t have any
money to pay for them either.
CP:
So has anyone in your business actively tried to encourage development of Bear Lake at
all, or is that kind of outside your –
TS:
I think they need a large convention center over there; they need a decent grocery store
over there. They need some entertainment over there. But what I can understand, that of
the people that own homes in Bear Lake, Garden City, all that area – that maybe 5% of
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
27
�them use them year-round, and the other 95 are used for a few weeks out of the year
when Bear Lake is handy or if they came from the Wasatch Front, come up here and take
over the Christmas Holidays. We do get quite a few people from the Wasatch Front over
Christmas because they own places over there.
But for us to go out and solicit large groups of people to come to Beaver, it might work
once, but you’d never get them back. You’d never get them back because we are not that
kind of a ski area. We’re that kind of a ski area, but we’re not that kind of a facility ski
area (if that makes sense to you).
CP:
Yeah.
TS:
People say “Well look at all these people that go to Park City!” I said “My Lord! Look at
Park City! It’s a mile long with stores on every side: hotels, motels, bars, eating food, rent
skis, buys skis, buy a fur coat, buy a diamond ring, what do you want?!”
CP:
[Laughing] And they got a airport, you know, not very far away, so.
TS:
Yeah! See, so that what I think most ski vacationers want. Not all, not all.
CP:
Convenience. Yeah.
TS:
Convenience! I was in Ketchikan five years ago. And at Ketchikan these –
CP:
Alaska?
TS:
Alaska. Ketchikan, Alaska. Where these ships come in from these people that are on
these cruises; cruise ships come in there. There were two cruise ships come in there that
would hold roughly 4,800 people a piece. They both pulled up to the dock; long as a
football field; four stories high – I don’t know how big. And we’d sit in there waiting for
an airplane out of there, we had a day to loiter. And the town there at Ketchikan is about
four blocks long, (the whole thing it’s a lot longer than that). Those tours were totally full
of those people coming to buy stuff to take home. You think those locals didn’t know it?
You could walk there at 10 o’clock and there would’ve been nobody in the store, but at
11 it would have been full of people taking your money and people shopping. And they
would blow the whistle and all those people would leave and they’d go back on the boat
and it was a ghost town again. So people will spend the money if you’ve got a place for
them to spend it. And you don’t have that at Bear Lake. Now, summer pretty good;
winter, not so good.
CP:
Well I just wanted to go back and ask you one more question about an environmental
policy that’s come up in recent years, and just was wondering if it affected your business
at all. Just the debate over motorized versus non-motorized transportation: snowmobiles –
TS:
It hasn’t got onto to us because we so far have been able to keep the snowmobilers out of
there in the winter: because skiers and snowmobilers collide.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
28
�CP:
Um-hmm.
TS:
If they go up there on the mountain and they dig a deep hole and some skier falls in it,
hurts himself, who’s responsible? I don’t know where that guy is that left it with a
snowmobile. Those are things that we get concerned about when we groom, that we don’t
leave bad places for you to drop a ski or a board in and get hurt. Those are things that we
try to avoid. No, we have stayed out of that fight between the cross-country skier and the
snowmobiler. No, it hasn’t affected us because we’re a different – no, we don’t permit
them to park in our parking lot; we need it for our people. There’s a parking lot down
there, go use that and if it’s not big enough, don’t bother me go to the state. That’s their
concern, not mine.
CP:
Right.
TS:
See, what happened with the environmental movement – when we first started to develop
in the ski area in 1977. We had to do a big master plan: that was it. (Fact it was before it.)
So what we did, we hired some people to make all the lines and the circles, and write the
write-ups. And we had two meetings and we invited all the politicians, we invited all the
environmental community, of course the Forest Service, ski groups, anybody else. And
we met at the ski area. We had a few hundred people show up and we had about eight
tables. And we had a chairman at each table: he talked about power, or he talked about
whatever it was – cutting trees, or putting up ski lifts, or parking lots, or whatever. And
so all of these environmental groups, they came and they got their input, they got their
input to what they thought ought to happen. And those inputs were considered and then
we wrote up the EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) and those things were put in
there weighed against something else. You know what? We never had one complaint
from the environmental community because they were invited to have their say. Now if
we would’ve done that without including them, they would’ve found reasons to block it
or get our master plan. But because they were involved, they had input into it, they were
happy with that. So, we’ve done a couple of things right.
CP:
Right, right. I just wanted to ask another thing about how the ski area has changed over
the years. How has it changed in terms of summer use?
TS:
Okay, years ago – of course when we were in the Sinks, we had nothing. We come into
Beaver in ’47, we had nothing. Then about 12-15 years ago we decided to try summer
activities. And so we planted three semi loads of grass out around the deck at the lodge so
that it looked nice. We cleaned up all the brush and the rocks, we cleaned all that up. I got
pictures to show you what it looked like, the devil. And so then we put the RV hookups;
put in 15 of those. And slowly we started renting them. So now 15 on the weekends, 16 is
not enough. So we put people on what we called the “upper side” and they can run a cord
and get power; they don’t have sewer, they don’t have water. And then we have tent sites;
six tent sites. Some of them one tent, two tents; some of them 7, 8, 9, 10 tents. We have
permanent pitch tents. We have four, ten-man tents that are permanently pitched that you
can rent for whatever you want. And you have water there, but no power, no sewer. But
we do have toilets, temporary toilets. Then we have the yurt, we rent the yurt out. That’s
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
29
�rented out a lot in the summer. The day lodge, we rent the day lodge out. So we’ve gone
from doing nothing, to finding everything we’ve got at the resort where we can put a tent,
where we can put an RV spot. Now we can build some more RVs in the upper parking
lot, we can do that and we will do that. But we’re looking for a little more demand
because you understand in economics if you build and they don’t come, you still get to
pay for it.
CP:
That’s right.
TS:
But when there’s enough demand and you build and you know they’re going to come,
then you’re fine. So maybe our financial philosophy is different than the others: we don’t
like to borrow money. We don’t borrow money. Beaver Mountain has not borrowed
money since 10, 11 years ago when my wife and I bought my brothers and sisters out, we
didn’t have the money so we had to borrow it. Since then we’ve been able to do whatever
we’ve done, on our own money. And that’s good because we do not build, we do not
spend before we’re sure of our return. That’s the way it works. That’s the way it should
work! It’s worked for us.
CP:
So then, just to kind of sum up everything we’ve talked about – what do you feel is the
future of Beaver Mountain? What do you think will happen after, when you pass it on to
someone else?
TS:
Well, I don’t know what’s going to happen, but what I hope happens – two of our kids
and their significant others are in the business with us. Our son Travis is around 50-ish;
Jeff [son-in-law] is around 57, 58. Travis doesn’t have any boys; Jeff’s got two boys. At
the present time they’re not very interested in the business. Will they become interested?
Will the girls take it over and run it, do the man’s work? I don’t know, I don’t know. I
would like to see it stay in the family; I’m sure my folks would, you know? What
happens with development down below? Are they going to find an opportunity there to
sell it and walk away from it and make a lot of money? Or will they cherish it like we
have and say, “No, I don’t need the money, I don’t need the money”?
I think the ski area will grow more. I think there will be a couple more lifts put in; there’s
going to be some lodge additions, those types of things. We know that there’s going to be
more food service put in up towards the other side of the ski patrol building. There’s
going to be some buildings put in over at Marge’s Triple for food service and for
restrooms; that’s going to happen. So I see the ski area staying together, unless, as we
talked earlier, that the state finds a buyer for the whole thing and the only way he’ll buy it
is if the ski area’s included and they find a way to boot us out of there.
So that’s my hope. Now are you the one that asked about a mission statement?
CP:
No.
TS:
Oh, I got another meeting at 12:15 or something with somebody else on similar stuff.
They want to talk about bicycles and summer bicycle rides and where’s your mission
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
30
�statement? Where are you headed? Well, I think mission statements are for a little bigger
company than we are. I think if you sat Jeff in that corner and Travis and the rest of them
in these other corners, you went around and asked them, “What do you think is going to
happen to Beaver?” I think almost without exception you would get the same answer,
because we’re a small company and we have meetings and get-togethers all the time and
discuss where we’re going, so. Anyway, we’ll see what he wants to know.
CP:
Right. So you think it will stay –
TS:
A “Ma and Pa”?
CP:
Yeah a “Ma and Pa” that caters to a local crowd?
TS:
I think so.
CP:
Think so.
TS:
They say Logan is going to double in the next 20 years. Maybe, maybe. We do have
room up there to build more day lodges and that if we need. We hope to build one now,
we got problems with the ski shop, we got problems with the ski school, we got problems
in food service. We need more room. We need more locker space, if you want to rent a
locker. Our lockers are totally booked, and they have been. People they keep them and if
they decide they’re not going to stay, they turn it over to somebody else.
CP:
Do you think that the warmer climate is going to affect the way that your business is run?
TS:
I read an article here awhile ago that scared me to death because they predicted that by
2038 it would not snow – and that’s the last year of our permit with the state. How
expensive would that be? Yeah, I’m concerned over the climate. But the thing that
bothers me is Congress or whoever, the Environmental Protection Agency, is not willing
to let business do things that we hold down the greenhouse gases. They’re still running
their coal-fired generating plants, when they could put nuclear in, that puts out one-tenth
the emission.
CP:
Right.
TS:
And probably safer, if the truth was known. They said we would have to have two
Chernobyls a week to be any more than dangerous than the coal-fired plants. Do you
think we’re going to have two of them a week? I don’t think so. Three mile island? I
don’t think so. Now, they’re talking about the down-winders. Yeah, that was probably a
mistake. No, I don’t know. I think sometimes people do these things and say these things
to try and get some notoriety. I wish they had a little more technical data to tell us about
before they opened their yip. You know? Everybody wants to be up here; everybody
wants to be the knowledgeable guy or gal and I think sometimes the stuff they throw at us
is total bullcrap. But it is a concern because we do not have the snow now that we had
when I was a kid. We do not have that, I know that. I know that.
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
31
�CP:
What kinds of measurements do you remember?
TS:
Well, that’s been so long ago. I can remember years of 120 inches of collected snow. We
can get 350-400 inches of snowfall, but it settles down;120-140. But now, if we get 80 or
90 it’s pretty good.
CP:
Right.
TS:
It’s pretty darn good. I can’t remember what last year’s was, I’d have to – let me write
that down in the book that I don’t have here.
CP:
It was pretty good last year.
TS:
Oh the skiing was good, yeah! It was slow coming. We didn’t open until the 22nd of
December!
CP:
Right.
TS:
I remember one year, ’77 or ’79 we opened the 23rd of February and closed the 15th of
March. That wasn’t too prosperous; we didn’t make too much money that year.
CP:
Um-hmm, right. So you save your money during the good years for when you have lean
years?
TS:
Well some people save for a sunshiny day and we save for a rainy day.
CP:
Yeah?
TS:
But you know, it’s been good to us. And so I’ve been wise with our money, we’ve tried
not to overbuy; we’ve tried not to over-speculate. Yeah, we’ve made mistakes; will we
make more? Oh yeah, I’m sure we will. If we do anything we will, if we do anything
we’ll make mistakes. It will be interesting to see what happens in the – wish I could look
back on this in 10 years and remember what we talked about. But I think the ski area will
continue to grow, as long as we have winter. As long as we market it right and treat our
people right – and that’s part of marketing – and provide a fair service for a fair price.
That’s what it’s all about. If you didn’t like hotdogs you got a Joe’s, you wouldn’t go
you’d go somewhere else won’t you?
CP:
That’s right.
TS:
Yeah, that’s right. And our transportation any more, yeah it’s kind of expensive, but it’s
not very far to Powder Mountain or Snowbasin, or Wolf Mountain, or you get a little
further down into Salt Lake. But it doesn’t seem like it bothers people to drive that far
anymore.
CP:
Yeah, well is there anything that you’d like to add?
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
32
�TS:
No, I’ve probably said more than I got knowledge to say. But if you have any questions –
why, the phone’s here. Don’t be afraid to call.
CP:
Sure.
TS:
Don’t be afraid to call. And I’m sure I’ve missed a lot of stuff, but you know, you can’t
live a lifetime in two hours.
CP:
Right, right. Well, it was good to talk to you.
TS:
It was good to talk to you and good luck to you with what –
[Stop recording]
Land
Use
Management
Oral
History
Project:
Ted
Seeholzer
Page
33
�
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Where else is this found?
Give the URL for the item, if it is in another respository (like CONTENTdm)
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/337">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/LoganCanyon/id/337</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Hosted by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Conversion Specs
Recording equipment: Marantz PMD660 Digital Recorder
Transcription equipment: Power Player Transcription Software: Executive Communication Systems
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2012-10-17
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Ted Seeholzer interview, 19 November 2008, and transcription
Description
An account of the resource
Ted Seeholzer is the owner of the Beaver Mountain ski area in Logan Canyon and talks about the history of Beaver Mountain (which has been owned by his family since its inception), and his varying roles with the ski resort – beginning in childhood. He also discusses his interactions and relationship with the Forest Service and School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA) over the years.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Seeholzer, Ted, 1932-
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Cole, Bradford R.
Pumphrey, Clinton R., 1984-
Subject
The topic of the resource
Seeholzer, Ted, 1932---Interviews
Seeholzer, Ted, 1932---Family
Seeholzer, Ted, 1932---Career in the Ski Industry
Beaver Mountain Ski Resort (Logan Canyon, Utah)--History
Beaver Mountain (Utah)
Fishing--Utah--Logan River
Hunting--Cache Valley (Utah and Idaho)
Shupe, Don
Skis and skiing--Utah--Logan Canyon--History
Ski resorts--Utah--Logan Canyon--History
Seeholzer, Harold
Seeholzer, Luella
Sinks (Logan Canyon, Utah)
Utah State University. Forestry Field Station Camp
Roads--Utah--Logan Canyon
Roads--Snow and ice control--Utah--Logan Canyon
Roads--Widening--Utah--Logan Canyon--Citizen participation
Skis and skiing--Utah--Beaver Mountain
Snowboarding--Utah--Beaver Mountain
Utah. School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration
Cache National Forest (Utah and Idaho)
United States. Forest Service
Land use--Utah--Logan Canyon
Winter festivals--Utah--Logan Canyon--Anecdotes
Skis and skiing--Utah
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Oral history
Interviews
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Beaver Mountain (Utah)
Sinks (Logan Canyon, Utah)
Bear Lake Valley (Utah and Idaho)
Mount Logan (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Logan (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1930-1939
1940-1949
1950-1959
1960-1969
1970-1979
1980-1989
1990-1999
20th century
2000-2009
21st century
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections & Archives, Logan Canyon Land Use Management Oral History Collection, FOLK COLL 42 Box 4 Fd. 5
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
Inventory for the Logan Canyon Land Use Management Oral History Collection can be found at: <a href="http://library.usu.edu/folklo/folkarchive/FolkColl42.php">http://library.usu.edu/folklo/folkarchive/FolkColl42.php</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Fife Folklore Archives Curator, phone (435) 797-3493
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Logan Canyon Land Use Management Oral History Collection
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
FolkColl42bx4fd5TedSeeholzer
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
19 November 2008
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2008-11-19
Is Version Of
A related resource of which the described resource is a version, edition, or adaptation. Changes in version imply substantive changes in content rather than differences in format.
Logan Canyon Reflections