RESOURCE CONFLICTS AND EXPANSION OPPORTUNITIES OF SKI AREAS IN OREGON AND WASHINGTON by KIRBY WAYNE GILBERT A RESEARCH PAPER submitted to THE DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE February 1983 Directed by Dr. Philip L. Jackson TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF TABLES ABSTRACT............................ INTRODUCTION.......................... I EXISTING SKI AREAS IN OREGON AND WASHINGTON.......... 2 Types of Ski Areas..................... 6 DEMAND FOR SKI AREA DEVELOPMENT................ 8 Reasons for the Absence of a Destination Resort...... 10 The Need for a Destination Resort............. 12 BASIS FOR SUCCESSFUL DEVELOPMENT............... 14 DEVELOPMENT/EXPANSION OPPORTUNITIES.............. 16 The Early Winters Pr000sal................. 16 Bluewood'sRecentExample ................. 17 Washington's Local DayAreas ................ 17 The Mission Ridqe Potential ................ 20 The Mt. Bachelor Expansion ................. 20 The Mt. Hood Meadows Attempt ................ 21 The Mt. Bailey Potential..................23 The High Wal lowas! Prospect ................ 23 CONCLUSION.......................... 24 BIBLIOGRAPHY......................... 27 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE I. The Significant Ski Areas inOreqon and Washington. 3 2. Skier Visitations in Oregonand Washington........ 6 3. North American Yearly Numberof New Ski Area Openinqs. 9 4. Skier Visitation at SelectedSki Areas in Washington. 18 5. Primary Market Zones for PuqetSound Local Day Areas. 19 6. Skier Visitation at SelectedSki Areas in Oregon.....22 LIST OF TABLES TABLES PAGE I. Oregon's Ski Areas..................... 4 2. Washington's Ski Areas................... 5 3. The Classification of Ski Areas on the Basis of Market Served........................... 7 4. Basic Factors Involved in Successful Develooment..... 15 5. Ratinqs for Exoansion Potentials............. 28 RESOURCE CONFLICTS AND EXPANSION OPPORTUNITIES OF SKI AREAS IN OREGON AND WASHINGTON ABSTRACT: The ski areas of Oregon and Washington are similar in many resprects, especially in that they are predominately local day areas and are located on United States Forest Service lands. The demand for more ski facilities is apparent yet the number ofnew areas opening has decreased over the years. Due to the specific physical, resource, and economic requirements, onlya few sites have the desirable features for growth.While many of the 22 major ski areas within the two have potential for growth, none will probably ever reach the size and status destination resorts suchas Sun Valley, Idaho and Vail, Colorado are. Mt. Bachelor, Mission Ridge, and the Early Winters site appear to be the areas that have the greatest potential for growth in Oregon and Washington. INTRODUCTION This paper will look at the downhill ski areas of Oregon and Wash- ington along with a recent proposal for a new ski area in terms of expansion opportunities and conflicts. The objective of this study is to compile and present information necessary for evaluating the potential constraints and opportunities for expansion of the ski areas of the two states. This type of assessment is presently done at the local scale for ski areas in the Pacific Northwest, however, since final decisions concerning expansion rest with the regional forester, a region wide study might help in proper management decisions. Due to many physical site constraints, resource conflicts, and competition among other recreational users only a few ski areas are suitable for expansion into a large regional resort. Many factors such as size of oarkina areas, sewage disposal caoabilities, amount of available ski terrain, and land-use conflicts hamper exoansion plans at many areas. EXISTING SKI AREAS IN OREGON AND WASHINGTON Oregon and Washinoton are very similar in terms of their de- velopments in the skiindustry. Around seven percent of Oregon's 1980 population of 2,632,663 are downhill skiers and some seven and one half oercent of Washington's 1980 population of 4,130,163 are downhill skiers (Oregon State Parks and Recreation Branch 1978; Borgersen 1982). Both states have elevan ski areas of significance (Figure l)(Tables I & 2). Virtually all areas within the two states are located on United States Forest Service (U.S.F.S.) land. Itis not all that unusual that ski areas in western states are under U.S.F.S. jurisdiction. What is unus- ual about Oregon and Washington ski areas is that not only are the slopes and lifts on Forest Service lands, but the base areas of each site are also on Forest Service lands (Stonehill 1969). Thus, the final decision for any development rests with the regional forester in Portland for areas on National Forest land in Oregon and Washington. For each state the figures for skier visitor days are similar. In the 1981-82 season Oregon had around 1.2 million skier days while Washington had around 1.6 million (U.S.D.A. Forest Service 1982). The amount of annual skier days has increased over the years with just brief interruptions due to drought (Figure 2). Other similarities between the two states ski areas include mountain topocraohy and winter climates. Indeed, most of the ski areas are found in the Cascades and all can exoerience undesirable rain for brief periods in the winter season. 3 Fiaure I - The Sionificant Ski Areas in Oregon and Washington. Source: adapted from U.S.F.S. Region 6 base map Tbe Mt. OegontHood TimberlSki i AreasfluitorporHoodoo Mt. WI I lamettMt. Anthony Spout High Mt. LOCATION(roadmiles) MeadowsPortland68 - Portland60 - PortlandSki53 Bowl - 92-Eugene86Ski Salem -Bowl22-180-PortlandBachelor Bend PassEugene70 A.hlindAshland229 -(1-5) - Ikec40-42La Grande -BakerPendletonl44-SpringsWaliaMaMaEnterprise76-12Wal -LaGran lowas e125-Eugene85-KlamathF3ai Falls1ev BASEEL.(fEXPOSUREVERTICAL 5,300EAST SOUTH6,000 NORTH3,600 EAST4,668 NORTH6,300 + SOUTH5,141 6,600EAST EAST7,100 4,950SOUTH 4,400NORTH EAST/WEST5,500 II and(feet) TYPE7 2,777Doubles52,000 Double +4 1,400Doubles3 Doubles1,035 4 TrIples1,700 I1,525Double 2 1,150Doubles IDouble900 2 Double550 I3,800Gondola 2B00 (chairliftofVTF LIFTSa 6,860,000I rope 4,233,00(2 ropes 2,744,0002 ropes 22,279,400 ropes 512,690,00 Doubles I1,448,750rope 2,448,375IPoinaT-bar 1,043,720I poma 1,718,4002I 1-barsrope snowcats547,200 "lOO,OOOSnowcats DAILYACREAGESKIINGb 980 1,000 440 85 Prmit3a6Ogroome 360 Permit400 80 304-Permit60 <100 118 650 _SKIINGNIGHTCAPACITYLATEST c 9,600YES BOOsu'nmer2,500YES 2,500YES SOME2,000 10,000NONE SOME900 N(4E3,500 NONE1,000 1,322YES "-ISONONE 20NONE )UTPERCENTTOTALSYEARLY OF STAT 305,21010% -'-152,841 10% ''io%81,109 38,114- 518,74330% -6,973 79,25320% 29,77628% 19,993- 1,30020% 1,20030% SNOWFALL0SEASONLENGTH 165 day 330 130 -'- 120 175 '-l2O 125-145 121 -120110 in.30 -in.base IOU225 In. # ErIPLOYEESLANDAVERAGES Mt.35035 200summer Hoodwintpr in.200.LMt.252 SUfliflIwinterHood In.Mt.300 Hood In..Willarnett120 in.Deschutes50070192 yr.rouu wintei In. IWillamett30030 In. Rogue85IOU - 100 In.Wallowa-60120 in.LJmatilla Wallowa-- Umpqua45 PLANSOWNERSHIP91IONationalYesForest - NationalForestNo ForestNational2Yes chairs- ForestNationalNo NationalForestextensivYes - ForestNationalYes - UverForestNo Nat'iNatWhitmanYesFores - NationalForestNo &Whitman,Yes Private - ForestNationalYes - - FromVerticalAn extensiveestimate U.S.F.S.The Transport White haed Region Rook Feet(Sumon VTF/hr,6Inter-Ski statistics of scope Services,each C based liftsof skiing, 1981hourly on ticket difficultycapacity saleschairlift oftImesandterrain, carit'scounts) &vertical various chairliftrise) abilities of the skiers(from3 rhirc each3 Area)c-halrc_, Tab'e 2 'Mt.- WashinntonsStevens SkiAlpental AreasSnoqualmle-Pac-WestCrystal White MissIon Mt. (roadLOCATIONmiles) BakerBelllnqha56- enatchee55Seattle75Pass - Seattle52 - SkiSeattle53 Acres - Seattle60- 9Mtn. Seattle78--Enumclal46-Seatth159-Portlanl54-YakimaPass 135-SeattleWenatcheeRidge13 - 80-SpokaneChewelah4910- North SpokaneSpokane35- 3-DaytorU6iOOI BASEEXPOSURE EI.(ft NORTH3,600 4,000NORTH EAST3,200 + NORTH3,000 NORTH2,800 EAST4,400 + NORTH4,500 NORTH-EAST4,500 EAST3,928 SOUTH4,367 NORTH4,470 I andVERTICAL(feet) TYPE6 Doubles1,500 2 TrIplesI.800 4 Doubles2,200 2 Triples900 3 1,260DoublerI 2,600Triple 3 Doubles1,500 4 Doubles2,140 4 Doubles1,845 1,514 1,200 (chalrllftof VTFLIFTSa 7,165,6604 ropes 6,884,3406 Doubles4,158,2182I ropesPoma 128,813,418I Doublessingle 2,109,578 10,409,7606 Doubles3,297,390IropePoma (snowmakina4,260,4503 ropes 4,761,9505,161,8605I Doublesrope 2,499,00I Triph CAPACITYACREAGESKIINGDAILY b 1,0005,000 Permit2,2091,0009,000- 2,100Permit700373- 10,000500 2,000371 Prmit41,681 5608,000- 2,750300 3,0002,500 2,100790 3,000320 Permit1,500 LATESTYEARLYKIING________NIGHTC 122,665No 340,205Yes 94,334Yes 342,900Yes 68,393Yes 225,161Some 102,684Some Some99,633 67,848No 100,000Yes 33,919No 0(11PERCENTSEASON OFTOTALS STAT 65% 2% - - - -15% 5% 10% - - O-70 LENGTHAVERAGESSNOWFALL(days) 9500 Full95 in. 120120 in. 160120 In. 170120 in. 140100 in. 204130 in.100-150150-160 in. 60120 In. 120120 in. 192120 In.100-119300 in. fiLANDEIIPLOYEES'It.Snoqualmie35 PakeçPart Snoqualmieup'lt.Baker to 400Nt.Snoqualmie Bakeç- pathee- Private- t1651Ualm1eBaker NationalWenatchee80-90 1enatcheeMDept.Game150 NationalColville- pckaneMt.200 in to 60 EXPANSIONOWNERSHIPPOTENTIALNatiAlmostFully ForesNatCapacityPresentDoubleForesNat'IIchairsor Fores 2 PrivateY None Nat'lPresentDouble ForesInIForestChair permitAPrjvateNew3 chaIrs- Base Forest- tatenone PanneededForestonly if °LANS - FromAnVerticalExpanded