Email this article
Seeing the Forest for the Skis
Ski areas graded for environmental efforts (and impacts)
As drought conditions in the Four Corners region continue and the specter of climate change shows its face around the
globe, ski areas are starting to wonder about the long-term snow forecast. A recent report by Environment Colorado
shows a 38 percent increase in carbon dioxide emissions in the state over the last the last 17 years - the fifth
highest increase in the country - and the ski industry's massive energy use is no small part.
With that in mind, Wolf Creek is opting out of coal-powered electricity to lift its skiers into the skies. By
off-setting 100 percent of its electricity with wind power, Wolf Creek claims to be removing the equivalent of 241
cars per year from the road.
"In our opinion," Pitcher continues, "driving power companies to show economic viability in alternative energy is a
good thing. That way they can see that coal-powered energy isn't the only way to go."
Wolf Creek's commitment to green energy is one reason it is leading southwest Colorado ski areas in environmental
performance, according to the 10th annual Ski Area Environmental Scorecard, published by Durango's Ski Area Citizens
Coalition (SACC) in late November. The scorecard used 35 criteria to grade 92 ski areas nationwide on their
environmental performance in four areas: habitat protection, protecting watersheds, addressing global climate change,
and environmental practices and policies. The region's ski resorts scored relatively well this year: Wolf Creek
scored a high "B," Telluride dropped to a "B" from last year's "A," and Durango Mountain Resort (DMR) got a "C." The
"A" grades in Colorado this year went to Aspen, Buttermilk, Aspen Highlands, and Powderhorn. These overall grades are
averages of grades earned in the four categories.
While some in the ski industry decry the scorecard as biased, it remains the only comprehensive, non-industry
assessment of ski area environmental performance, and it raises issues that most skiers don't stop to consider as
they enjoy a day on the slopes. As Paul Joyce of the SACC states, "Skiers [and snowboarders] like to see themselves
as green, as getting out into the woods. The reality is that they are having a massive impact."
Indeed, few recreational activities have such a concentrated impact on the environment that supports them as resort
skiing. From logging fragile, high-elevation forests, to consuming copious quantities of energy, to diverting
mountain streams for snowmaking, ski area operations take a toll on the land. In its comments on the 2000 White River
National Forest plan, home of big resorts like Vail, Breckenridge, Copper, and Aspen, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency noted that ". . . no other land management prescription on the Forest directly results in more
stream-water depletion, wetland impacts, air pollution, permanent vegetation change, or permanent habitat loss . . .
more wetland impacts and stream depletions resulted from ski area expansion and improvement than from all other
Forest management activities combined, including many direct and indirect impacts that are permanent (irreversible
and irretrievable)".
Each of the three large ski areas in Southwest Colorado were docked by the scorecard for past and planned expansion.
The Ski Area Citizen's Coalition maintains that "development on undisturbed forest lands is the single most damaging
ecological impact a ski area can undertake." Opening up pristine forest and alpine habitat to logging, development,
and crowds on skis means losing quality habitat for wildlife and increasing energy use and other impacts. For this
reason, the scorecard weights these impacts with a higher score, reflecting their importance. That the scorecard
punishes ski areas for simply planning expansions before they actually follow through with those plans is a source of
frustration for ski area managers.
"As a ski resort we are in business to provide new terrain and accomodations," explains Beth Holland, public
relations manager at DMR. "The scorecard conflicts with any ski area's business plan unless they want to be stagnant
and accept the status quo." Holland says DMR's 125-acre Legends expansion was done using environmental practices such
as selective tree cutting and leaving downed trees for wildlife habitat, a fact that the scorecard did not take into
consideration. DMR gained points for opting out of the Ice Creek expansion in 2008, but lost points for planning 660
acres of residential and commercial development, scoring a "D" in the watershed protection category.
But Holland's observation begs the question: Do ski areas have to be so focused on expansion? According to Joyce, the
current trend of profit-driven ski area expansion and real-estate development is feeding the industry's growing
environmental footprint. And it's not an increase in skier demand that is pushing expansion, says Joyce. It's
increased competition for a consumer group that is not growing much.
"Expansion has doubled compared to skier numbers," says Joyce. "There is twice as much terrain for the same number of
skiers. Ski areas in the I-70 corridor are vomiting up new terrain." Other resorts then try to compete for the
limited number of skiers by doing the same. "There's a Â?keeping up with the Jones' effect."
The SACC cites big, real estate-intensive resorts such as Vail, Aspen, Breckenridge, and Copper Mountain as driving
this trend. The group claims that, in the White River National Forest where these resorts operate, skier numbers have
increased 28 percent since 1985, yet skier acreage has more than doubled (a 107 percent increase). According to the
2009 Kottke National End of Season Survey, a ski industry report, estimated skier visits nationwide dropped by more
than 3 million from 60.5 million visits in 2007-08. Nonetheless, numerous ski area expansions continue into this year
despite ongoing economic woes.
Telluride's Revelation Bowl expansion in 2008-09 added 50 acres to the area's 400 total acres of expanded terrain
over the past three seasons. New expansion this year includes Gold Chutes 2 through 5 and a reshaped Chute 9, in
which explosives were used to remove boulders and widen the top, reshaping the mountain for easier access to this
difficult terrain.
Sheep Mountain Alliance in Telluride has challenged the resort's expansions and criticizes its impact on the land.
"It's hard to be objective [about Telluride's environmental performance] after all the activities this summer," says
Hillary White, executive director of the Alliance. "They used a massive amount of explosives to make a new road on a
rocky, high mountain ridge. We all heard it down in town, and all of the wildlife were probably affected."
As for the ski area's preliminary investigations into expanding terrain into Bear Creek, White promises strong
opposition from the Alliance if they move forward. "We are very much opposed to the expansion. We will wage the
biggest battle we can to keep that from happening."
Even with all of the controversy over expansion and development, there are other ski area business models that have
substantially less impact on the land. This year's ski area scorecard recognizes "Little Ski Areas that Rock,"
promoting a "small is beautiful" ethos. While too small to be graded, ski areas like Hesperus and Silverton Mountain
get credit for limiting their size and impact. "Unlike ski resorts, they aren't in the real-estate game and they
don't feel the impetus to constantly expand and Â?improve,'" the scorecards explains. "As a result, these ski areas
are good environmental stewards of the public and private lands upon which they operate and deserve recognition as
such."
While larger ski areas can't shrink developed terrain or shut down spendy gondolas, there is a middle ground between
Vail and Hesperus - where ski areas take a more modest approach to growth. Wolf Creek's less aggressive development
model and past opposition to the proposed 2,100-unit Wolf Creek Village has served its environmental record well.
"There's a balance between no growth and a little growth," says Pitcher. "It's very important for the public to feel
comfortable with what we are doing. We're not adamant about anything anymore. If we make a proposal and it gets shot
down for logical reasons, we can live with that. That's a change in philosophy that really needs to take place with
all developers in this country. [Growth] can be incremental and organic."
Wolf Creek has no new terrain this year, but precursory considerations to expand up to 1,000 acres into the San Juan
National Forest's Treasure Mountain Roadless Area lost it points on this years scorecard. Part of those plans include
alternative development methods with a focus on tree skiing. "We are reluctant to fall into the infill development
model by building more and more lifts," Pitcher continues. "That's industrialized, big box skiing." But even with
Wolf Creek's more modest approach to growth, it's clear that the urge to continue expanding terrain is still strong
among the larger local ski areas.
While expansion causes the most obvious environmental impacts, efforts to reduce carbon emissions, waste, and
resource use are easing ski areas' impacts in other ways. Telluride has won several environmental awards including
the National Ski Area Association's (NSAA) Golden Eagle Award for Environmental Excellence in 2002 for environmental
practices used in the Prospect Basin expansion. It buys renewable energy for three lifts, uses biodiesel in some
on-mountain machinery, and donated $5,000 to planning the regional biodiesel production facility. It has a
comprehensive recycling program, waste reduction policies, and improved water and energy efficiency retrofits. These
efforts earned them an "A" in the environmental policies and practices category of the scorecard. As Telluride Golf
and Ski CEO Dave Riley said over email, "We believe that ski areas can operate and develop in a way that protects the
function of the natural resources and alpine environment that people come to the mountains to enjoy - and that is our
responsibility."
Durango Mountain Resort scored a "B" in environmental practices for focusing on alternative transportation to reduce
its carbon footprint. With a new shuttle serving Durango, skiers and snowboarders can leave their cars at home ($10
roundtrip). DMR also provides cash incentives to employees who carpool as well as a free employee shuttle bus. It
uses biodiesel in a majority of on-mountain machinery and recycles its fryer oil for biodiesel production. It has
also retrofitted much of its infrastructure with water- and energy-saving technology and is looking into on-site
renewable energy.
The NSAA's voluntary, nonbinding Sustainable Slopes charter encourages ski areas to adopt such environmental
intiatives. With these efforts is an implicit recognition of industry impacts on the environment and a shared concern
about a diminishing snowpack and its potential effects on the industry. As Telluride's Riley notes, "Climate change
is a big issue for ski areas. If not addressed, it will lead to less snowpack and a shorter ski season."
Despite these efforts, Joyce doesn't see much reason for celebration. "Here's the kicker," he says. "The number one
worst performance category across the industry is protecting the climate. For the ski industry to not address that is
blatant disregard."
The prospect of fewer snowflakes in the future also conjures a situation of increasing ski area impacts, says White.
"With climate change reducing snow levels, ski areas will have to make more snow in order to stay viable, taking more
water out of the natural flow. It will be harder and harder for ski areas to truly be environmental stewards."
Notwithstanding the Ski Area Citizen's Coalition sometimes-harsh criticism for the ski industry, the focus is on
encouraging good stewardship, Joyce insists, as well as informing consumers who want to support responsible ski
areas. "We want to give ski areas credit for what they are doing right. That's what the scorecard is all about. But
we can't do that without talking about the bad things."
Meanwhile, as the Wolf Creek snowcat hauled snow around the mountain to cover up early season bare spots, Pitcher was
staying positive. Despite the 20 percent increase in energy costs to cover renewable offsets, he said that
environmental investments are "absolutely" good for business. "We hear from our customers that they appreciate
it."
"We're staying our course," Pitcher continued. "The ski business is good for communities, but I think it has been
distorted to some degree. It's the same thing that has ruined a lot of things in this country - the drive to
profiteer all the time. [Skiing] has got to be a way of life, then you go from there."
NATHAN RICE writes from Durango, Colo.
Post a comment
insideoutsidemag.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy.
