Ski area faces court of public opinion
Copyright 2000, Environmental News Network
December 19, 2000
By John Roach
Crystal Mountain and neighboring ski areas along Washington's Cascade mountain range are well-traveled recreation spots.
Monday through Friday, logging trucks clog Highway 410 east of Enumclaw, Washington — a testament to the Pacific Northwest’s economy. On weekends, SUVs, sedans and mini-vans sit in bumper-to-bumper traffic on their way to Crystal Mountain.
The ski area and surrounding mountains are a favorite day-trip destination for active Seattlelites who love the area for its pristine beauty, views of Mt. Rainier, sublime backcountry recreation and proximity to their homes.
So it comes as no surprise that a proposed multimillion dollar development plan for the ski area has fueled a storm of excitement and criticism from skiers, environmentalists and everyone caught in the middle.
Well before the U.S. Forest Service has even released its statement on the proposal’s environmental impact for public comment, all sides have weighed in on what they view as the appropriate recreational use of this popular parcel of public land.
“There are quite a few issues associated with the project,” said Larry Donovan, who is working on the agency’s statement, originally expected in April 1999. “It has taken longer than planned to gather and analyze the needed information.”
The biggest concern of environmentalists is the proposed development’s size and scale.
“Crystal’s (skier visit) numbers have been flat for the last 20 years,” said Darcy Thompson of the Crystal Conservation Coalition. “They are proposing to do a 50 percent increase on skier numbers, and there is no proven demand.”
Crystal Mountain’s managers believe that some development is needed to handle current weekend skier traffic. They hope the whole master plan, if approved, will attract even more guests, especially regional skiers who currently spend their time and money at nearby Whistler in Canada.
“The Pacific Northwest is expanding, there are a lot of very active, busy people and they have money to spend when they get their free time. Hopefully we can keep them home,” said David Wheeler, a spokesman for Crystal Mountain.
To rein in the locals, Crystal’s proposed development includes a host of chairlifts in coveted backcountry terrain. While within the ski area’s boundaries, the new chairs would abut sensitive, federally protected lands.
“It means those people who want chaiflift-accessible backcountry skiing will push more into Mt. Rainier National Park or adjacent wilderness areas,” said Thompson. The impact of skier traffic and feasibility of avalanche control work in these areas are uncertain.
Chairlifts in the terrain may also spell the end of one of the mountain’s best-kept secrets — stashes of deep, untracked snow. Longtime Crystal skiers wear jackets with “Save the Crystal Backcountry” patches on them. Wheeler says not to worry.
“The improvement would enable the backcountry skiers to access even more backcountry that would be even more awesome than what they can access now,” he said, unfazed by national park and wilderness concerns.
One thing is certain, said Donovan. “The Forest Service has it allocated as a developed recreation area. The goal is to provide for the needs of the public that use the land and still maintain the viability of the ski area.”
Another thing for certain is that skiers, greens and everyone in-between will have plenty of comments when the draft environmental impact statement is finally released, likely by the end of February, said Donovan.