Crystal Mtn Environment Report Card: F

The ski area citizens report seems to be too reactionary to me. I've read their reports for a few years now. I do think they are helpful for understanding what kind of attitude a lift-served area's management has towards stewardship of the natural resource they are borrowing from the Public.<br><br>The report flunks any area that has proposed any kind of boundary growth, and that seems to be too uncompromising and unrealistic to me. Allowing and even encouraging responsible growth at existing ski areas--say a restuarant and gondola at Alpental--is generally a better plan than creating an entirly new area--say on Mt. Adams--that would require a brand new infrastructure of roads and services, and with it permanent disruption of the environment.<br><br>Lift-served sliding is a growing sport, and those people need somewhere to go. I'd much rather see Crystal and Summit expand than see new development in wild areas. Don't think that the current political environment wouldn't bat an eye at authorizing new development in pristine areas. The recent application approval at Silverton hints that development on wild lands will be encouraged, or at least not discouraged.<br><br>-cm<br>

Lift-served sliding is a growing sport

<br>What evidence do you have of this? A few months ago Lowell Skoog posted his notes from " Downhill Slide: Why the Corporate Ski Industry Is Bad for Skiing, Ski Towns, and the Environment ". I'm planning to read this book soon. Lowell's notes say , "The ski industry is dying. The number of skier days in the United States has remained flat from 1979 through 1999".<br><br>This claim that skier growth is flat is reiterated by a lot of groups that oppose ski area growth. <br><br>Edit to add, here's another claim that skiing isn't a a growing sport: "Since the 1978/1979-ski season, skier numbers have increased less than 2% over 21 seasons, or less than 1/10th of 1% per year". Source skiareacitizens.com opposal on Snowmaking .<br><br>PS: Welcome to all the new members who spontaneously register just to respond to these types of threads.

<br>PS: Welcome to all the new members who spontaneously register just to respond to these types of threads.

<br>Nice troll, Jeff  <br><br>My $.02 is that the planned removal of mature trees, expansion into wetland, expanding snowmaking, etc. at Crystal are fair reason to mark down their score if the scorecard is meant to measure environmental sensitivity. If you don't care about environmental sensitivity, I guess you can just ignore the scorecard, but it's hard to argue that removing mature trees is in any way environmentally sensitive. I guess the scorecard should include a "will increase skier visits which will show more people the remaining live trees and thus promote greenbonding" row, but that will just get Crystal  back a few points...

Looks like they can get an easy 20 points just by using all that fryer grease in their Cats.<br><br>"Using biodiesel fuel in snowcats and/or other diesel equipment. "<br><br>

Well... It seems that the Book, "Downhill Slide"  is the pivot point for this environmental argument.<br><br>I read a summary at: www.sierraclub.org/sierra/200301/ski.asp

And then I read what seems to be a balanced review at: www.hhh.umn.edu/img/assets/3757/DownhillSlidereview1.pdf

Ok.. the topic of this thread indicates that Crystal Mt. gets an environmental F.  Well, I just don't see it.  I don't see any disaster there.  Crystal is not about clear cutting, it is about making a path through the trees. And there are lots of trees left at Crystal.

I have enjoyed skiing at Crystal and at the mega-resorts at Park City, Deer Valley, etc.  Whistler is cool. especially the village concept.  Once you get there you don't need a car.

We are so fortunate that many years ago, folks had the forsight to set aside places like Mt. Ranier National Park, where we can see old growth.  And I am horrified at the idea of a huge resort in Ashford.  But it seems to me that we are doing pretty good at balancing things.  I flew once to Dallas, Texas, spending hours and hours over the Cascades, the Blue Mountains, the Wasatch, and the Rockies.  There is a whole lot of wilderness out there.  What is wrong about skiing on some of it?

I think that management of the land at Crystal deserves better than an F.   For heaven's sake, it is under constant scrutiny and it is, in fact, managed.

Before I can put any value to this type of rating, I have to consider the credibility of the sources.<br><br>Consider that Crystal Mountain was also rated the #7 ski area in North America, by Skiing magazine. And Aspen or Vail are like 1 or 2 every year. Though, I have never graced either fur lined slopes. I'm sure they deserve the rating like Crystal.<br> <br>And after looking at the Environmentalist, top, worst 10 list, most of those ski areas interest my schussing desires.<br>What is in common?<br>I like to ski areas that are environmental disasters.<br><br>With that vision, I booked my next ski vacations at Chernobyl and Three Mile Island.<br><br>The Crystal Conservation Coalition (or what ever they call themselves) contributes to the survey. They just had their britches whooped, when the US Forest Service, sided with a faint group of Crystal skiers, and dropped some of the EIS boundary restrictions.<br><br>I am always in support of a cause worth fighting. Usually small interest groups don't get me writing my congressperson, whoever that is?<br>But, its time to join this bong making, granola-eating organization. In light of this survey, I have been enlightened, on the dangers, ski areas present to the environment. <br><br>It's all good! <br>Because, I will be resting comfortably on my wind and solar powered chairlifts, waiting for a cloud to clear or a puff of wind. Watching my Crystal Coalition club buddies (or whatever we call ourselves) blasting down my powder run. <br>Ahhh.....But rest assured, I will be admiring the view, looking down the valley, at Joe Chainsaw, evicting the Three Toed Willie Winkie or what ever they call the animals that are close to extinction, from every treed forest in view.<br><br>Knowing that my ski area is environmentally sound.<br><br><br><br><br>