Mt. Adams ski resort?

From today's Oregonian:<br><br> www.oregonlive.com/search/index.ssf?/bas...30.xml?oregonian?lcg

Yakama tribe gets proposal for Mount Adams ski resort
Mt. Hood Meadows outlines an 11,000-acre project that would include a casino, housing, golf courses and cultural museum
Thursday, September 23, 2004
MARK LARABEE
Mt. Hood Meadows Development Corp. is proposing a destination resort on tribal land on Mount Adams in rural south-central Washington that would have 10 ski lifts and three 18-hole golf courses.

As presented to the Yakama Indian Nation, the 10,000-member tribe that owns the land, the resort would encompass 11,000 acres near Bird Creek Meadows. It's a popular area now used by campers, climbers, backcountry skiers and hikers.

Meadows' proposal includes eight chairlifts, a gondola and a tram that would take skiers as high as 11,100 feet above sea level from 5,400 feet -- the biggest vertical rise for any ski area in North or South America. It also proposes three golf courses, a spa, a casino and 2,500 housing units -- a mix of hotel rooms, condominiums and single-family homes. There also would be ski lodge and golf clubhouse buildings, plus a small village with restaurants and shops.

Meadows has struggled to build destination resorts at Government Camp and Cooper Spur on Mount Hood.

Dave Riley, Meadows general manager, said the project also would include the Yakama Nation Institute of Learning, which is envisioned as an interpretive center for classes and a museum to highlight the tribe's history and culture. He said everything from the building design to food would incorporate Yakama culture.

Although acknowledging opposition from environmental groups, Riley said Meadows will use cutting-edge building practices that focus on sustainability and environmental ethics.

"It's clear that if this resort is developed, the Yakama Nation will insist that it will be the most environmentally sensitive development in the history of resorts," Riley said. "At the end of the day, they are going to do what they think is right for their resources and their people."

At 12,276 feet, Mount Adams is the second-highest peak in Washington after 14,411-foot Mount Rainier. Its massive girth makes it the second-largest Cascade volcano in volume behind 14,162-foot Mount Shasta in California. But Adams is far from major towns, and a resort there would require significant road improvements to handle traffic, Riley said.

Ownership dispute

The mountain is not without controversy. For nearly five decades, the Yakama tribe battled with the U.S. government over its ownership. The tribe said boundary lines were incorrectly drawn after a surveying error. President Richard Nixon ended the dispute in 1972 when he signed over half the mountain to the tribe.

Tribal leaders acknowledge that such an aggressive development would drastically change the character of the mountain they hold sacred.

"Our understanding, even in a contemporary setting, is that if it was not for Mount Adams, the watershed would not be there to provide the nourishment for our timber, and all the food and medicine for our people," said Jerry Maninick, Yakama tribal chairman. "That's part of the commitment the mountain made to the Creator for all of eternity. Her task would be to take care of us and provide for us."

Maninick said some tribal members think the resort proposal fits within that cultural belief. He agrees with Riley that the resort would be a financial boon for the economically struggling tribe. Today, tribal members rely on forest products, a small casino in Toppenish, a juice company, a land-holding company and farms for income.

Benefits for Yakamas

Riley said the proposal would be a partnership in which the tribe would own the land while Meadows would build and run the resort. Tribal members would get jobs and a share of the profits, he said.

Maninick said the tribal council has formed a committee to look at whether such a development is feasible and in its best economic and cultural interest.

Meadows has not yet released its proposal to the public. But similar proposals in the past have gone nowhere, and the tribe shut down a small ski resort on the land after it regained ownership.

So far, Maninick said tribal members seem to be split over the idea. Eventually, all voting members will be asked to weigh in -- a vote Maninick expects to come by year's end. Maninick said the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs also would review the proposal and take testimony.

The resort proposal is drawing critics outside the tribe.

"We will fight the Meadows proposal with everything that we have," said Brent C. Foster, a Hood River attorney with the Gifford-Pinchot Task Force, an environmental group focused on reducing clear-cutting and road density, and preserving wildlife habitat. "This is incredibly important habitat, and the idea of putting thousands of luxury vacation units up there is an outrage, to put it mildly."

Opposition on Hood

Meadows' proposal to build a similar resort on Mount Hood's Cooper Spur continues to have fierce opposition from environmental groups and some Hood River Valley residents who rely on the watershed for drinking and irrigation. The ski company and opponents are in mediation over the plan.

Riley reluctantly acknowledges the political fight ahead. He said many people will try to tell the Yakama Nation what to do.

"Central Oregon has 25 golf courses," Riley said. "Some people think that's a great thing in terms of quality of life, and others would say Central Oregon would be better off it if didn't have any. This is the Yakama Nation's decision, not the Sierra Club's."

Maninick said although he's undecided, he's intrigued by the long-term economic prosperity the resort promises. Even so, he said, the tribe might not be ready to take such a drastic step.

"One of the areas our people have difficulty in is economics," he said. "It's almost always difficult for us to adjust ourselves to the contemporary setting. It's a high-risk area for our people, and they're a little gun-shy."

Mark Larabee: 503-294-7664; marklarabee@news.oregonian.com

&lt;snip&gt;

i better get up there before it gets ruined as a mt.

I e-mailed the Oregonian reporter about some of the boundary issues that have been raised here and elsewhere, basically wanting the developer to be asked about the inherent challenges such a ski area would face (crevasses, choss cliffs, wilderness boundaries). "Where the hell are you going to put lifts and ski runs?" is an important question. The reporter, who kindly replied, said the developer, to the surprise of no one, isn't getting into specifics (no maps).<br><br>I totally agree that the Indians have a right to do what they will with their half of the mountain, but 1.) I have the right to tell them this idea sucks; 2.) Please spare us the 'mother mountain creator' b.s. if you're going to put up snack bars, lift towers, golf courses and condos on it; 3.) We do have a right, and recourse, to ensure that the wilderness boundary stays firm.<br>That said, it's a very good question to put out there, Jeffey. It is their land, but the land west of the line belongs to everyone.

I find it entertaining to read about a bunch of us white guys worrying about the Indians screwing up the environment!<br><br>On a less humerous note .. get used to it. With our rising snow levels, any PNW skiing will have to be done on volcanos in a few years. The pressure to put lifts on non-glaciated volcano routes is not going to go away.

i think more that a few years