Forum
Buying gear? Please use these links to help 14ers.com:

More info...

Other ways to help...

Tom Chapman Announces "New" Resort

Info, conditions and gear related to skiing or riding Colorado Peaks, including the 14ers! Ski/Ride Trip Reports
User avatar
Posts: 713
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 9:46 pm
Location: Nidderdale, North Yorkshire

Re: Tom Chapman Announces "New" Resort

Postby pvnisher » Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:03 am

TallGrass wrote:You don't win at chess by kicking over the board or calling them names; you win by out-playing your opponent.


Yes, but you win at life by doing what is right.

You can play the Epistemology for Liberal Arts 101 "who's to say what is right?" card all you want. Some things are right, some things are wrong. This land-grab-cum-extortion case isn't necessarily one of those unequivocally right/wrong cases, but I think pretty much anyone would say that the guy is a world-class @$$hole.

User avatar
Posts: 2691
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 9:22 am
Location: Glenwood Springs, CO

Re: Tom Chapman Announces "New" Resort

Postby cheeseburglar » Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:48 am

TallGrass wrote:So while it may be unpopular, the only illegal actions I read about this so far are any who trespass.


Seems like I should quote Thoreau here, but I'll go with MLK this weekend.
An individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/keywords/law.html#LS7Y7c0Xm9uAoss7.99
The marmot said “Nobody is perfect and you are not nobody.”

Random FoTH Quotes

User avatar
Posts: 769
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2012 4:25 pm

Re: Tom Chapman Announces "New" Resort

Postby TallGrass » Sun Jan 20, 2013 6:25 am

cheeseburglar wrote:
An individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, ... is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law.

Careful, Cheese, that line of argument can just as easily be used to justify someone putting bananas up tailpipes and mothballs in air vents to keep polluting machines away from wilderness or many other things that would violate your rights. [-X

pvnisher wrote:Yes, but you win at life by doing what is right. ... Some things are right, some things are wrong. This land-grab-cum-extortion case isn't necessarily one of those unequivocally right/wrong cases, but I think pretty much anyone would say that the guy is a world-class @$$hole.


:roll: :yawn: And what does "win at life" mean? No judge is going to determine who "wins" by saying, "Ok, parties, whichever can give me the best witty non-legal quote gets the land." Wouldn't someone have a legitimate beef (legally) if the gov't sold them land to develop or mine, then prevented them from doing so? Most are overlooking that Colorado's history is based on the business of getting a piece of land and getting the most you can out of it -- mining, speculation, etc. Colorado and many of it's skiing areas wouldn't be where it is today without it. Also funny how no one is blaming the ski resort for not securing the land or an easement first before their plans got out.
"@$$hole?" It's not like Chapman needed to dope, get others to dope, and falsely sue others for libel to find an advantage. Image

If you want to be poetic (and legal), why not just find a piece of land he "needs" like to access his ski-in cabin he doesn't want to sell, buy it, offer to trade it with him, and then you can donate the "bacon strip" to the ski resort?
Not sure if I'll do more 14ers. The trip reports are too tiring. :wink:

Re: Tom Chapman Announces "New" Resort

Postby pioletski » Sun Jan 20, 2013 8:23 am

Damn, I hate getting caught up in arguments like this, but here goes.

Per Tallgrass:
pioletski wrote:
If he succeeds, it's extortion. If the current stalemate continues, it's theft of public resources from the public.

Incorrect as "Extortion is a criminal offence whereby an individual obtains money, goods and services, or desired behavior from another by wrongfully threatening or inflicting harm to his person, property, or reputation. [It] involves the victim's consent, but the way in which it is gained is unlawful ... theft is any unauthorized taking of another’s property without their consent with the intent to permanently deprive them of said property."


Mr Tallgrass, I think that the argument being advanced against Mr Chapman is not that what he's doing is illegal, but unethical. Thus the relevant definition of these terms comes not from a legal dictionary but from ordinary English. Webster's 9th: "extortion: the act or practice of extorting..."; "extort: to obtain from a person by force, intimidation, or undue or illegal power.."

In this case the "undue power" comes from the location of the tiny strip of land that he and his business partner own, which allows him to deny other people access to a large area of desirable public land. Denial of public access to public property is the theft part. Of course of TSG coughs up a few million to get him to go away, he'll be happy - that's the extortion part.

And while your suggestion of offering him a land swap would be a nice solution (and has been employed in similar cases elsewhere), given the kind of game that's being played here it simply sounds naive.
The greater danger, for most of us, is not that our aim is too high and we miss it, but that it is too low, and we reach it.
- Michelangelo

User avatar
Posts: 769
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2012 4:25 pm

Re: Tom Chapman Announces "New" Resort

Postby TallGrass » Sun Jan 20, 2013 10:18 am

pioletski: "... not that what he's doing is illegal, but unethical."

You (and others) are committing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy in that you claim it is "unethical" but do/can not define what IS "ethical," or in trying to do so what is "good." A judge will toss a claim you can not or will not back.

Further, "undue power... allows him to deny other people access to a large area of desirable public land" is false on two points: 1. Access is clearly not denied because folks can and do clearly enter unhindered, but then find it more convenient to trespass than go around. If you can hike up then ski down, why not ski down and hike up??? 2. The power comes from location and is no more undue than that which a ski slope has, otherwise you could move Vail Ski area to eastern Colorado so it wouldn't have "undue power."

"TSG coughs up a few million to get him to go away, he'll be happy - that's the extortion part." No, that would be a consensual agreement sans force as Chapman is not preventing current TSG operations. If you read that Hostess was going under, rushed to the store and bought up the remaining boxes of Twinkies to sell at a profit (whatever the market will bear), is that extortion? No, unless you're cramming for finals, you don't need the Twinkie.

Simply put (and best test), if you really think you have a case for "theft" or "extortion," why don't you contact the DA? Why hasn't someone already? My hunch is because there's no sustainable case for either. Unpalatable is not illegal.

It boils down to "a piece of property making it inconvenient for a business to expand," a business that you favor. But would you claim "theft/extortion" if it was a home owner making it inconvenient for WalMart to build a store or refused to let its trucks cross her lawn? Same situation, different nouns. Call them A and B if you like (or P and B for property vs. business).
Not sure if I'll do more 14ers. The trip reports are too tiring. :wink:

Online
Posts: 2049
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 7:44 am

Re: Tom Chapman Announces "New" Resort

Postby Doug Shaw » Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:36 pm

Tallgrass, you must be a real hit at parties.

The point isn't whether what Chapman is doing is illegal or whether it meets the technical definition of extortion, the point is that the things he is doing are perceived as shady and manipulative. They may be legal within the letter of the law, but that doesn't mean people are going to sing his praises.

If you have an opinion on what he is doing, feel free to relate it in the thread. If you just want an excuse to argue semantics and hear yourself talk, go find a forum for pedants.

User avatar
Posts: 769
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2012 4:25 pm

Re: Tom Chapman Announces "New" Resort

Postby TallGrass » Sun Jan 20, 2013 2:20 pm

Doug Shaw: "Tallgrass, you must be a real hit at parties." Depends on the party. If civil and tolerant of diversity, sure! Care for an ale or doppelbock? \:D/

"The point isn't whether what Chapman is doing is illegal or whether it meets the technical definition of extortion, the point is that the things he is doing are perceived as shady and manipulative. They may be legal within the letter of the law, but that doesn't mean people are going to sing his praises." Well there have been many points raised, not just one, but I would agree that your phrasings (sic underlined) are much more accurate than many put forth by those who likely share your general sentiment but choose to paint the activity as criminal or violating an undefined ethic.
If anything, I think this whole thing illustrates the perils of letting one's emotions get the better of them, be it on Class 4 or elsewhere.

"...go find a forum for pedants." Oh, and what parties does that make you "a real hit at," Doug? :-"

I do think it is going to be interesting how the whole thing plays out.
Not sure if I'll do more 14ers. The trip reports are too tiring. :wink:

Re: Tom Chapman Announces "New" Resort

Postby pioletski » Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:27 am

No, Tallgrass, this isn't about some undefined "natural" ethic. Nor, ultimately, does it have anything to do with Telluride's expansion plans. It is about an individual blocking public access to a public resource. Another way to see it is that you and I, as American citizens, are shareholders in most of the land in that valley and as such have a right of access, for which privilege we pay thousands of dollars annually, and which Mr Chapman currently seeks to usurp. The law does recognize and value this right, though it is (appropriately) slower to move to defend it than it is to defend individual property rights. You're right when you say it will be interesting to watch this play out - one possibility that hasn't been mentioned is that the stalemate may continue until either a third party steps in to join the negotiations, or a right-of-way is condemned across the piece of property in question. I'm not saying I favor that, it's at best a messy and hostile process, but it is a potential legal solution to what is a legal problem.

Ironically, condemning an (inconvenient) access is exactly what Mr Chapman was expecting to be done for him, across the base of the T'ride ski area.
The greater danger, for most of us, is not that our aim is too high and we miss it, but that it is too low, and we reach it.
- Michelangelo

User avatar
Posts: 464
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 9:14 am
Location: Colorado

Re: Tom Chapman Announces "New" Resort

Postby Jesse M » Mon Jan 21, 2013 11:40 am

This is an article you might be interested in.
http://www.wildsnow.com/4022/bear-creek-thomas-chapman/
I have enjoyed this thread, thank you all for your intense comments. I would party with any of you all! :)

EDIT: Read the article, he answers all of the criticisms raised in this thread, and that wildsnow.com site is way cool, I just learned about some super socks that I need to try. :mrgreen:
Last edited by Jesse M on Tue Jan 22, 2013 9:03 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Posts: 769
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2012 4:25 pm

Re: Tom Chapman Announces "New" Resort

Postby TallGrass » Mon Jan 21, 2013 1:57 pm

pioletski wrote:No, Tallgrass, this isn't about some undefined "natural" ethic. Nor, ultimately, does it have anything to do with Telluride's expansion plans. It is about an individual blocking public access to a public resource. Another way to see it is that you and I, as American citizens, are shareholders in most of the land in that valley and as such have a right of access, for which privilege we pay thousands of dollars annually, and which Mr Chapman currently seeks to usurp. The law does recognize and value this right, though it is (appropriately) slower to move to defend it than it is to defend individual property rights. You're right when you say it will be interesting to watch this play out - one possibility that hasn't been mentioned is that the stalemate may continue until either a third party steps in to join the negotiations, or a right-of-way is condemned across the piece of property in question.


Wow. :roll: Let's just take a few examples (of many) from the above to show why it can be dismissed.

"American citizens" (300,000,000+) "pay thousands of dollars annually" (let's lowball with the minimum: $2,000) "which Mr Chapman currently seeks to usurp" yields $2k * 300mil or $600,000,000,000. Where does it say Chapman wants 600 billion (0.6 trillion) dollars?!

" ... have a right of access, for which privilege ... " :roll: Hit the books, my friend... "In modern English and European systems of jurisprudence and law, a right is the legal or moral entitlement to do or refrain from doing something or to obtain or refrain from obtaining an action, thing or recognition in civil society. Compare with duty, referring to behavior that is expected or required of the citizen, and with privilege, referring to something that can be conferred and revoked." dictionary source, use the longer Black's Law Dictionary if you like.

Claims of "public access" are mooted by those skiers who've shown the ability to do so legally, rather it's of alternate egress which they subsequently effect via trespass versus hiking a legal route.

And you conveniently leave out the option that the property is transferred via a consensual act (i.e. owner sells/buyer buys) at a profit to the owner (commensurate to any other deal in the Telluride) with due consideration to the additional value trespassing BC skiers have given it.

"Shut your festering gob you tit. Your type makes me puke. You vacuous, toffee-nosed malodorous pervert! ... An argument is a collective series of statements to establish a definite proposition. It isn't just contradiction!" Let me get my hammer and we'll try again. \:D/
Not sure if I'll do more 14ers. The trip reports are too tiring. :wink:

User avatar
Posts: 798
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 12:16 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Tom Chapman Announces "New" Resort

Postby Oman » Mon Jan 21, 2013 5:47 pm

Here's an idea: Buy land next to TallGrass' house. Install the loudest P.A. system known to man and blare "Call Me Maybe" by Carly Rae Jepsen (or maybe Candy Man by Sammy Davis Jr.) on an endless loop. When TallGrass complains, offer to sell him your land and PA system for $5 million, even though real estate appraisers say it's worth only $5,000. When TallGrass complains again, call him an anti-capitalist and turn up Call Me Maybe even louder. Dude, it's the free market.

User avatar
Posts: 2120
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 9:34 pm
Location: Crested Butte, CO

Re: Tom Chapman Announces "New" Resort

Postby ajkagy » Mon Jan 21, 2013 6:59 pm

Carl wrote:
pills2619 wrote:I think it would be pretty sweet to have another Silverton Mountian style ski area in Colorado. I don't know much about this guy who is doing it but at this point it seems like there will either be some houses or a ski area and I would rather have the ski area.


It's just an attempt at a manipulative power play. Check out this article from Nov. 2011 if you want to learn more about the Tom Chapman and Bear Creek. http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/natural-intelligence/Backcountry-Monopoly.html. No comparison to Silverton.


pretty much sums it up...
/thread
http://www.resortbeta.com - An interactive ski/snowboard experience for all your favorite ski resorts.

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests