Man that’s a lot’a water !

Is this true?

Remember the pictures of Song making snow and the caption about 2,000 gallons per minute ?

OK, So lets look at how much 2,000 gallons of water a minute(GPM) really is.

Well, (no pun intended) at 2,000GPM, in one hour (60 min.) you would use 120,000 gallons. In one 8 hour shift, snowmakers would use 960,000 gallons; just under a million gallons. Running the snow guns for 25 hours would use 3,000,000 gallons. That’s 3 million gallons.

Well, how much is 3 million gallons ?

SRBC approval is required for a 30 day average use of 100,000 gallons per day . So they think 100,000 GPD is a lot of water.

So we take 3,000,000 and divide it by 100,000. That equals 30. So in just over one day of snowmaking, Song would have used the number of gallons that triggers SRBC approval if used over an entire month!

Oh yea, and SRBC says that 22% of snowmaking water is ‘consumptively used’. That means evaporated. Wasted.

So we take 3,000,000 and multiply it by .22 (22%) and we get 660,000 gallons wasted in one day. Divide 660,000 by 30 days and we get a monthly average of 22,000 gallons per day wasted. But in only 1 day of actual snowmaking.

Heck, even the amount wasted is more than the 20,000 GPD consumptive use that triggers SRBC approval. Again, it only takes one day to waste as much water as SRBC thinks is too much to waste in a month.

Remember the old Lottery commercial from the 70’s ? ‘Man that’s a lot’a bread !’

Man that’s a lot’a water !

Now, Song has been able to do all this using just run-off water held in 2 ponds. The well is not hooked up yet. And, oh by the way, doesn't using that much run-off water require SRBC approval with or without the well?

Information pdf's.

SKI RESORT WATER USE IN THE SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN

SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN COMMISSION PROJECT REVIEW FEE SCHEDULE

Susquehanna River Basin Commission home page

Why is Peter Harris trying to shut this web site down? Is it the HUGE snow making well?

Look at the list of things (below) that we require to allow Peter Harris's to use our water, and then one can only wonder. So far, he has spent more money on lawyers trying to shut down this web site then it would have cost him to follow the rules. Why? Following the rules would mean that Peter Harris would only be able to use the amount of water the law allows. Not following the rules would allow Peter Harris to use as much water as he wanted, when he wanted, without consideration of anyone else. But is this what Peter Harris wants to do? Let's look at what he has done in the past about following rules, and see if that gives us any indication of what he might do in the future.

Building permits: In the three years Peter Harris has owned Song Mountain Resort he has never willingly gotten a building permit, not one! He was forced to get a permit for a $10,000 building that was constructed on top of the hill for ski racing, but only after a complaint was made by me. And then that permit, that only cost $45, was for a $2000 building. We have no information if a certificate of occupancy was issued for the building. Peter Harris built other things, including a pump house visible from the road that does not have a permit either.

In a flyer sent out by Peter Harris last fall he stated that, "Song Mountain has invested over $1,000,000 in the last three years in snowmaking alone." There was no consultation with the planning board about this construction, no plans shown and approved, nothing! There were no building permits issued for any of this work and that deprived the town out of about $1,662.00 in fees. With no permits, no plans, and no inspections, nobody has any idea whether anything that was done, was done in a safe and proper manner. Nobody knows anything about this million dollars of construction, nobody! Except Peter Harris.

DEC: When Peter Harris first bought the resort he was ordered by the DEC to remove two dams that the DEC considered illegal and unsafe. He never removed the lower dam and fought the DEC for years until they finally changed the rules to make his illegal dam legal.

I suppose it is possible that Peter Harris can be trusted to follow the rules and do the right thing about the huge snow making well. However, his past record would not support that possibility.

From his history and from other rumblings I've been hearing I believe that Peter Harris has plans to use the well beyond what is legal and getting rid of this web site is part of that plan. He's doing this now, at the end of the ski season, because he believes that all the hubbub will be over before the beginning of the next ski season. It's an old plan that I'm all too familiar with. But it didn't work for Flying J, and it won't work for Peter Harris either.

We will fight tooth and nail to keep this web site and to prevent Peter Harris and Song Mountain Resort from over using our water until we are guaranteed that our lake, our wells and our homes are safe.

Keep in mind:

We live here, -- he doesn't!
We raise our kids here, -- he doesn't!
Our lives are invested in our homes here, -- his isn't!

We will not allow Peter Harris to take that away from us, and he should understand that losing this fight is not an option for us!

JOSEPH J. HEATH'S letter to Bernhard P. Molldrem, Jr., Esq.

JOSEPH J. HEATH
ATTORNEY AT LAW
716 EAST WASHINGTON STREET
SUITE 104
SYRACUSE, NEW YORK 13210-1502
315-475-2559
Facsimile
315-475-2465

February 16, 2004 VIA FACSIMILE and REGULAR MAIL

Bernhard P. Molldrem, Jr., Esq.
333 East Onondaga Street
Syracuse, NY 13202

RE: YOUR February 11th LETTER TO FRANK HOGG

Dear Mr. Molldrem:

Thank you for sending me a copy of your February 11th letter to Mr. Hogg. I agree that my involvement may assist in putting a quick end to this matter.

Initially, I am rejecting your arbitrarily brief time frame for the resolution of this matter; certainly no decision can or will be reached by February 17th. Your letter did not arrive in my office until the 12th and since I was engaged out of my office all day on both the 12th, and the 13th, such a short response time has left no business days in which to respond. Further, I will be out of my office from February 18th until the 25th, so this matter will take more time to resolve. I will continue to work promptly on it, but we reject any such unilaterally set dead lines.

I have been able to do some preliminary research into the Anticybersqatting Act, 15 USC § 1125 (d) and even this preliminary research reveals that your attempt to use this statute in this factual situation is without merit.

If you would be so kind as to respond to these questions, I believe we can move forward towards a resolution of this matter:

1. What facts do you claim exist to support your burden, in 15 USC § 1125 (d) (1) (A) (I), that Mr. Hogg "has a bad faith intent to profit from" the activities complained of ?

2. What facts do you claim exist to support your burden, in 15 USC §§ 1125 (d) (1) (A) (ii) and (1) (E), that Mr. Hogg has "trafficked in" a "confusingly similar mark" ?

3. What facts do you claim exist to support your burden, in 15 USC §§ 1125 (d) (1) (B) (V) that Mr. Hogg's Song Mountain News has been posted for either "commercial gain", or "with the intent to tarnish or disparage [Song's] mark, by creating a likelihood of confusion" ?

4. What steps has Song's taken to protect its mark under 15 USC §§ 1125 (d) (1) (A) ?

5. In what manner is the article complained of "derogatory"? and

6. In what manner does the article complained of "disparage the commercial good will in the Song Mountain [Ski Resort] name" ?

Further, Mr. Hogg is sincerely of the good faith belief that he has First Amendment protected right to write and post newsworthy articles about Song Mountain Ski Resort and its attempt to use its commercial snow making well. These are matters of public concern in the Town of Preble and particular to those Preble citizens who live on Song Lake, whose wells are likely to be negatively impacted by this commercial well. My initial review of the articles on the Song Mountain News page leaves me with the conclusion that all of the facts contained therein are accurate, as they apply to the past activities of Song Mountain Ski Resort and its management.

Additionally, "Song Mountain" is a geographic location, which is used much more broadly in this area to refer to the entire hill that lies to the west of Song Lake; it is used more broadly than the more limited term "Song Mountain Ski Resort". Your client's complaints might have more validity if Mr. Hogg was posting something like: Song Mountain Ski Resort News.

I look forward to your answers to the issues raised herein, so that this matter can be quickly resolved. Please advise.

Sincerely yours,

Joseph J. Heath, Esq.

JJH/pe

cc: Frank Hogg

Click for Bernhard P. Molldrem, Jr., Esq. February 11th LETTER TO FRANK HOGG

Did Peter Harris of Song Mountain Resort hire a lawyer to try to shut down my web site?

Did the lawyer know that what he referred to as Song Mountain is only a pile of dirt and rocks covered by snow and trees?

Did the lawyer know that the real name of the ski resort, as listed in the phone book is: Song Mountain Resort LLC and listed on the resorts own website as: South Slope Development Corporation DBA Song Mountain Resort? I guess I should cut that lawyer some slack because many refer to the resort by it's nick name, but lawyers usually don't use nick names in official documents or threatening letters. But that's just my experience over the years with really high end lawyers.

Did Peter Harris think that after all I've been through fighting Flying J, a multi BILLION dollar company, and WINNING, that he could have thought that I would be the slightest bit intimidated by a pompously written letter from a Syracuse lawyer?

Did Peter Harris think that I would allow him to take away my rights of free speech as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States?

Did Peter Harris ever hear the comment made by a Japanese admiral after the bombing of Pearl Harbor who said: "I fear we have awoken a sleeping giant."?

Did Peter Harris consider the consequences of doing something that would really focus my attention on him, his partners and his resorts?

Stay tuned for the answers to all of these questions and remember that everything put on this site is here for all to see forever. Not just at the end of the skiing season, forever.