It appears our new Malan's Basin community benefactor is having vandalism problems again, according to Sunday's John Wright story. It seems a week doesn't go by without some danged trespasser vandalizing the expensive and valuable equipment:
My first question, upon reading John Wright's Sunday story: "Why is Mr. Peterson leaving valuable and vulnerable property out in the open in the first place, especially after earlier acts of vandalism and theft?"There have been three incidents of theft and/or vandalism involving equipment being used to clear vegetation to facilitate planning of the resort, said owner Chris Peterson via e-mail Friday. The resort is planned to be built on 1,440 acres he owns in and around Malan’s Basin.
In the most recent incident, someone hiked more than a mile onto Peterson’s property last week and used heavy rocks to smash $3,600 worth of equipment, he said.
Being the curious type, I phoned the Weber County Sheriff's department yesterday, to obtain a little more information on this serial vandalism story. I spoke with Lt. Jeff Malan, who is familiar with the facts of the case. The vandalized "equipment" in question, it turns out, is portable tree and brush removal equipment, chainsaws and the like. Despite the winter snowpack, Mr. Peterson still has crews working on the Malan's Basin slopes. Rather than packing this portable equipment in and out each day, they've been leaving the equipment out in the open -- "chaining" it together, "hidden" under a tarp. Until now, Mr. Peterson's crews have continued this pattern of behavior, and have thus repeatedly suffered acts of theft and vandalism.
I asked Lt. Malan what security measures an owner of "remote" property such as Mr. Peterson ought to take, to avoid criminal acts of this kind.
He told me it's no different in the back-country than in the city. If you value your property, you don't just leave it lying around. The best approach, he said, is to pack it in and out daily. Second best is to lock it up in a secure place. "If you leave valuable equipment out in the open, it WILL be stolen or vandalized," he said. The problem is aggravated, of course, when property owners keep their properties open to the public as Chris has so graciously done, he added.
I have some experience in this realm, being part-owner of fair-sized outlying ranch spread in Eastern Weber County. The ranch has been family-owned for almost eighty years. And there are a few ancient and hard-learned country propositions I'd like to pass on to our friend, Chris.
- Even "No trespassing signs" are of limited utility when posted on out-back properties. Most people are law-abiding and honorable, but there's a select element of the population who ignore them entirely, especially when posted on properties that are off the beaten track.
- A property's seeming "remoteness" offers only a false sense of security. You'd be amazed at the number of people who wander around in the back country, whether open to the public or not.
- Even a highly competent and professional law enforcement agency like the Weber County Sheriff's Department can't patrol or investigate a crime on your property, if it's snowed-in and inaccessable by vehicle. Even an emergency response can take hours; so it's best to protect yourself. Malicious trespassers have some perception of this.
- If you can't remove your valuable equipment from your property entirely, it should be secured in a locked steel out-building.
- Employment of full-time caretaker is probably the most effective old-fashioned precaution.
- The typical out-back vandalism incident is a "crime of opportunity," Rather than one directed at an individal property owner. An act of vandalism on an out-of-the-way property is thus most likely a purely random act.
We don't get even two paragraphs into the story before the Standard-Examiner begins with the innuendo and finger-pointing.
It’s no secret there are those who don’t like the idea of a year-round resort in Malan’s Basin and a gondola connecting it to Ogden’s east bench.The Std-Ex even went so far as to have contacted contact local Sierra Club president Dan Schroeder, who, naturally, labelled the vandalism "deplorable."
But in the last several weeks, opposition to the proposal may have risen — or sunk, as it were — to a new level.
I think it's a bit early to get into the finger-pointing and labeling. And from the perspective of securing Mr. Peterson's vulnerable equipment, I think Mr. Peterson may be a little bit tardy.
And having been a part-owner of a tree-service company for several years myself, I'll note that I recognize it's a major pain in the rear to haul light but unwieldy tree removal equipment in and out of a remote job site. Nevertheless, it's a practical necessity.
Get smart, I say, Chris. Haul your light equipment out at the end of the day, or lock it up in a sturdy steel box. I'm tired, frankly, of hearing the whining. It's not that I lack empathy. I'd love to see these criminals caught in the act. It's just that it's hard to muster much sympathy for somebody who utterly fails to look after himself.
And what say our gentle readers, if anything, about this matter?
9 comments:
If Malan's basis were annexed into Ogden City then Chris wouldn't have to worry about it. The Ogden City tax payers could pick up the tab.
RudiZink,
You sure know a lot about what is going on up there. hmmm.
Rudi - the chain saw massacre-er.
By day he points out the foibles of pompous politicians,
By night he hikes to the top of the mountain and destroys the tools of the wicked.
On Sundays he rests.
Is Anonymous and Ozboy saying that RudiZink massacre's chain saws?
I agree that Wright's article is irresponsible journalism. If the shoe were on the other foot, and the Sierra Club suffered vandalism of property, would John Wright call Chris Peterson for a comment?
You know, this tendency amongst some locals, now perhaps including the local media, to pit people against one another does not bode well for Ogden's future. If we are to be The Hub, a cosmopolitan Ski and Recreation Capital, with a Thriving Downtown That Attracts Tourism, etc., etc., then we really cannot afford these provincial attitudes, that those who Differ, in whatever way, represent a Threat.
If The Hub gets off the ground and Ogden does get an influx of people, these people will Differ from many here in their ethnic backgrounds, religion, political views, opinions, behaviors, and a myriad of other ways. If the attitude here is that Differences automatically equal Wars, this will be more than a big problem.
If that attitude does not change, maybe people here really don't want a Hub after all. Maybe they haven't thought this through. If we are living in an area where differing opinion on a resort development leads to automatic suspicion of criminal activity in the local mind-set, then those of that mind-set certainly would not want a lot of Outsiders coming in here, some of whom might be sympathetic to the Sierra Club or something--you never know.
You can't have it both ways. Ogden cannot welcome the world while simultaneously refusing to accept the people from it who do not conform to the local mind-set.
Rec centers and movie theatres and ski companies and condos and whatever else, no matter how many or how much or how expensive, are only 50% of the change necessary for the Progress that people are saying they want, if that. The other 50% is this attitude thing. After all, "Ski The Hub in Ogden, Utah--If You're Not With Us, You're Against Us!" is not particularly welcoming or inviting.
Now is it.
Awesome post, Dian.
You're definitely a "chip off the old block, if you know what I mean, and I think you do.
I hope our ever gentle readers will carefully digest what you just said.
Bringing the world here will definitely require local attitude modifications.
"Be careful what you ask for," as the old saying goes, "because you might just get it."
Dian, maybe you been away too long, people in Ogden like a little argument once in awhile. We like to mix it up. Ogden is a town of attitude, always has been, always will be. If you want milk toast and Sunday School decorum you gotta go to Provo.
The vast majority of the people of Ogden couldn't give a squat less about this whole silly notion of turning our town into some ski hub resort at the bottom of the gondola!
The majority of our people are poor, working poor, welfare poor, pension poor, ethnic poor, illegal immigrant poor, and down and out poor. The rest are middle class just getting by, with a smattering of fat cats above Harrison who are clipping coupons.
They all have the same hopes and dreams to have a decent life, raise their kids to be happy and well adjusted, make enough for a decent car and house and be able to pay the ever rising gas bill. Maybe have a little left over to take a vacation once in awhile.
I don't know any real people in town who sit around and wish the place was some damn ski resort. None that is except a few pollyanish twenty somethings, a rich Dermatologist and his Pee Wee son in law, their circle of groupies, and a couple of inconsequental ski companies.
Most people just want a nice town with a competent and honest city government, an efficient and happy police and fire department, a sewer that works when they flush and water that comes out of the pipes without a shit load of rust in it.
Most of us do not give a damn about being a Ski Hub. That is what the last election said if any body was listening.
And to have Larry Miller come up and give some moralistic lecture about us being mediocre and not having big dreams and not taking big gambles is nothing but an insult to all the real people of Ogden.
All the big gamble is easy for him to talk about when it is our tax money that is at risk. Until he ponies up and puts his own money on the line he is no better than our poorest citizen, and he has no right to be up here talking to us like he did the other day.
In spite of the double talk from Pee Wee, we apparently still do not have a firm signed contract from Miller or Boyer. If and when such contracts are signed we need to take a real good look at them. My guess is that neither one of them will be taking any appreciable risk, certainly nothing on the scale that the tax payers of Ogden are taking.
We are taking alll the risk, and if there is any profit Miller, Boyer, Wells Fargo and a bunch of other operators will get all of it. The tax payers of Ogden, who are taking the bulk of the risk, will not get anything if it succeeds except for a bigger city government.
Petersen is a skillful opperator. It is obvious that he is using the recurrent vandalism (which he seems to try to prevent but just can't quite manage to stop) and the tactic of 'not pointing fingers' (via the Standard-Examiner / John Wright conduit) to point fingers at the Sierra Club. What a clever way to get some free publicity AND win sympathy from the preponderance of the populace who will blindly knee-jerk to the side of anyone arrayed against that terrible den of SUV burning hippies and evil-doers....oh wait, sorry, I got carried away there on that last little bit.
10 to 1 says the incidents will continue and our gracious benefactor will reluctantly, tearfully close his mountain to the public. The better to proceed with development in secrecy. Easily by summer '06.
Careful. You're sliding awfully close to the idea that it's Peterson's fault his property was damaged. No, it wasn't. It was the fault of the criminal pea brains who damaged it. Period.
You are right on target though to point out the SE's eagerness to suggest it probably was done by those opposing Peterson's Malan's Basin development. So far as I know, there is to date exactly no evidence to support that suggestion. Some may develop, but in its absence, the SE's slide into inuendo was deplorable.
New comments are not allowed.