Snow King Mountain Resort On-Mountain Improvements

Home , Attitash Mountain Resort, Bear Mountain (ski area), Blue Knob (Pennsylvania), Blue Mountain Resort, Boreal Mountain Resort, Boyne Mountain Resort

Snow King Mountain Resort On-Mountain Improvements Projects EIS Cultural Resource NHPA Section 106 Summary and Agency Determination of Eligibility and Effect for the Historic Snow King Ski Area (48TE1944) Bridger-Teton National Forest November 6, 2019 John P. Schubert, Heritage Program Manager With contributions and edits by Richa Wilson, Architectural Historian

0 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ...... 4 UNDERTAKING/PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 4 BACKGROUND RESEARCH ...... 7 ELIGIBILITY/SITE UPDATE ...... 8 Statement of Significance ...... 8 Period of Significance ...... 10 Level of Significance ...... 10 Historic District Boundary ...... 12 Integrity of the District ...... 13 Changes in Evaluation of Individual Resources ...... 14 CHARACTER-DEFINING FEATURES ...... 16 District Level Character Defining Features ...... 16 Character Defining Features as Organizational Elements of the Landscape ...... 17 Elk and Grizzly Runs ...... 19 Open Lower Area ...... 20 Exhibition Run ...... 21 Secondary Character Defining Features ...... 23 EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS ...... 23 Actions both within and outside of the Historic District Boundary ...... 25 Actions within the Historic District Boundary ...... 25 South Area Boundary Expansion ...... 28 East Area Boundary Expansion ...... 28 West Area Boundary Expansion ...... 29 Marco Level Effects of Proposed Impacts to District ...... 29 Possible Cumulative Effects to National Register Eligibility ...... 30 CONCLUSION ...... 30 REFERENCES CITED ...... 32 APPENDIX A: SNOW KING MOUNTAIN RESORT MAP ...... APPENDIX B: ALTERNATIVE SUMMARY REPORT...... APPENDIX C: COMMENTS FROM INTERESTED PARTIES ......

APPENDIX D: NATIONAL LIST OF SKI AREAS BY YEAR OPENED ...... APPEMDIX E: LIST OF WYOMING SKI AREAS BY LOCATION AND YEAR OPENED ...... APPENDIX F: SNOW KING & COMMUNITY MEANING ......

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Map of Area of Potential Effect……………………………………………………………………………………6 Figure 2. Snow King, Jackson Hole, and National Reputation for Outdoor Recreation Culture and Access………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………11 Figure 3. Snow King Ski Area Historic District Boundary Adjustments Integrity Update for District Resources………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..13 Figure 4. Changes in Resource Integrity……………………………………………………………………………………16 Figure 5. Comparative Illustration analysis……………………………………………………………………………….18 Figure 6. Map of character defining features for Snow King Ski Area……………………………………….19 Figure 7. Teton and Town Views from the Top of Elk Run……………………………………………………..…20 Figure 8. Open Lower Area……………………………………………………………………………………………………...21 Figure 9. View of Snow King while Entering Jackson…………………………………………………………………22 Figure 10. Ski Run Development Proposals by EIS Alternative………………………………………………….24

ABSTRACT This cultural resource report is for the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) consultation on the first portion of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for proposed major developments at Snow King Mountain Resort (SKMR), which operates on the Bridger- Teton National Forest (BTNF) under a special use permit. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) requires the Forest Service (FS) to consult with SHPO on the proposed project because it is a federal undertaking as defined by the Section 106 regulations (36 CFR 800). The FS is coordinating Section 106 consultation with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis as encouraged under 36 CFR 800.8(a)(1). Additional consultation may be needed when the undertaking is more fully defined in the later stages of NEPA analysis. Two reports - Sladek (2019) and Cannon (2018) - document cultural resources in the project area and assess the potential effects of proposed developments on historic properties. The primary focus of this report is to supplement the Sladek report and two earlier reports, Humstone (2012) and Davis (2014), all of which address the ski area’s eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Sladek (2019) provides an excellent update on the Snow King Ski Area Historic District’s Area of Potential Effect (APE), integrity, and an initial assessment of effects on the District. This report does not aim to replace past cultural resource studies, which the reader is encouraged to review. Instead, it provides additional information to clarify and/or support the FS’s determination on the District’s significance, eligibility, boundary, contributing and noncontributing resources, character-defining features, and assessment of a range of proposed effects.

UNDERTAKING/PROJECT DESCRIPTION This report initiates formal Section 106 consultation with SHPO on a federal undertaking that is broadly defined as the maximum extent of development analyzed under an EIS for Snow King Mountain Resort (See Appendix A for Resort Map). The undertaking, for Section 106 review purposes as of the fall of 2019, consists of the proposed action, the modified proposed action, and the alternative proposed action. The Draft Alternative Summary report, attached in Appendix B, details the range of development that is being proposed at Snow King Mountain Resort.

The purpose and need of the Snow King Mountain Resort On-Mountain Improvements Project EIS is to increase the amount of ski terrain with an emphasis on beginner terrain, increase the quality of on-mountain facilities, and expand use of the resort for summer activities. Major proposed developments include expanding the ski area boundary, installing new lifts and a gondola, construction of a building at the top of the mountain to accommodate visitors and incorporate a planetarium, expanded lighting and snowmaking, new mountain bike trails, and a zipline.

The proposed action was created prior to substantial FS, Town of Jackson, Teton County, and general public input. The modified proposed action incorporates initial concerns from the aforementioned groups. The alternative proposed action (currently under development) incorporates management considerations for cultural resources, wildlife, and recreation. The development of this undertaking in conjunction with Section 106 research is providing FS decision-makers on the Bridger-Teton National Forest (BTNF) insight into a variety of potential effects that the range of development options may have on the Snow King Ski Area Historic District (see Map in Figure 1). The Alternative Proposed Action incorporates the following historic preservation principles: a decrease in the number of new runs within the District, thinning (a uniform reduction in number of trees) and glading (treatment of dense forest that would result in a mix of open areas and clusters of trees) of ski terrain instead of clearing runs outside but adjacent to the District boundary, developing cleared runs further away from the District border, and using the CCC Building for historic interpretation. Notable proposed actions common to all alternatives that would impact cultural resources includes: removal of the Panorama House and Unloading Dock, at least one new run within the District, a new access road, removal of the Cougar Lift, and the construction of a gondola and large building facility at the summit.

Figure 1. From Cannon (2018). Shows area of potential effect for all alternatives. The District boundary is approximate and is further defined below.

At the national level, the FS has identified timely development of the project’s EIS as a priority. To coordinate the EIS with Section 106 consultation, the SHPO and FS agreed that broad consideration to avoid, minimize, and/or mitigate potential adverse effects is appropriate

6 during development of the undertaking under NEPA. Both agencies also agreed that the need for mitigation will be determined after the FS and SHPO have formally consulted on effects. New proposed components of the undertaking will continue to be developed during the NEPA process and will require additional agency review and SHPO consultation. Finally, the FS and SHPO agreed upon the undertaking’s APE, which is detailed in Sladek (2019) and in Figure 1.

BACKGROUND RESEARCH As noted in Cannon (2018), numerous cultural resource surveys have occurred within the APE over the past few decades. The initial surveys of Snow King Mountain did not result in the identification of any historic properties and did not focus on investigation of Snow King as a historic ski area.

Summary of Previous Snow King District Reports The Teton County Historic Preservation Board (TCHPB) hired Humstone Consulting to investigate the history of Snow King in 2011. Humstone (2012) focused on developing a historic overview of the Snow King ski area. The major themes documented include Snow King as being fundamental to the establishment of downhill skiing, recreation, and tourism in Jackson Hole as well as noting the strong connections between Snow King and the Town of Jackson and the Jackson Hole Ski Club. The report identified buildings, runs, and structures that are over 50 years old and suggested that these elements combine into a rural historic landscape that is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places as a district. The report was not prepared for Section 106 consultation and therefore did not include site forms or result in a formal determination of eligibility with SHPO.

Davis (2014) fully recorded the Snow King Mountain Resort, which led to the agency’s 2015 determination that its historic core is a National Register-eligible district (specifically a rural historic landscape). SHPO concurred in 2015. Davis included detailed descriptions of contributing and noncontributing resources on a SHPO site form. Her associated report considered effects of a proposed extension of the Rafferty Lift on the lower east side of SKMR. Davis demonstrated that the northeast area, or Rafferty Lift area, was mainly developed in the 1970s and has undergone substantial alterations that include modern recreation improvements and changes in run configuration. As a result, it does not contribute to the District’s historic significance. The changes were substantial enough that Davis recommended the District boundary exclude the Rafferty Lift area. The substantial development of this new, lower area, separate from the rest of the mountain, had a minimal impact on the view from most of town, the town square, and the main base area. The report and other related FS/SHPO consultation (Schubert 2014) concluded that the proposed extension of the Rafferty lift, new connecting run, development of a ropes course, new mountain coaster, new associated access (all in the Rafferty Lift area) as well as buried snowmaking utility work and lighting changes throughout SKMR would not adversely affect the historic district.

Recent Identification Efforts For the current proposal, the FS made a reasonable and good faith effort to identify historic properties within the APE and to update previously known information. Past tribal consultation about Snow King has not resulted in the identification of any traditional gathering areas, sacred sites, Traditional Cultural Properties (TCPs), or tribal concerns. BTNF invited the Shoshone Bannock Tribes, Northern Arapaho Tribe, Crow Tribe, Gros Ventre/Assiniboine to consult on the proposed project on August 30, 2019. Follow-up calls on October 10, 2019 also helped to ensure the tribes were engaged and understood the project. The Eastern Shoshone Tribe formally responded and noted they do not have concerns about project effects to cultural resources and requested to be involved in the event of any inadvertent discoveries. No other tribal concerns have been identified during initial EIS information sharing with tribes.

Consultants recently produced two cultural resources reports for the Snow King EIS. Cannon (2018) is aimed at a new survey on the back (undeveloped south) side of the mountain and a review of the proposed undertaking’s potential effects to prehistoric cultural resources. Cannon adequately demonstrates that no prehistoric resources exist in the APE. The second report, by Tatanka Historical Associates (Sladek 2019), updates the previous evaluation of the Snow King Ski Area Historic District. The report notes several changes since 2014 such as the removal (Snack Shack and Drive Shelter) or alteration (Panorama House) of contributing buildings and a decline in condition of landscape-level contributing resources (CCC trail and Windbreak Terrace). The report clarifies the District boundary and provides a preliminary assessment of the undertaking’s potential effects.

In addition to these efforts, the Forest Service used the NEPA process to engage with interested parties including the Teton County Historic Preservation Board, the Jackson Hole Museum and Historical Society, the Jackson Hole Conservation Alliance, and interested members of the public. See Appendix C for a list of parties who expressed interest in the historic nature of SKMR and their comments.

ELIGIBILITY/SITE UPDATE This section expands and clarifies existing documentation of the Snow King Ski Area (Humstone 2012, Davis 2014, Sladek 2019) and documents the agency’s determination of National Register eligibility per the Section 106 regulations (36 CFR 800.4(c)). It addresses significance, the historic property boundary, and integrity.

Statement of Significance A portion of the historic Snow King Ski Area is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A and C as a District with 16 contributing and 14 noncontributing resources. Its period of significance is 1935-1971 and the area of significance is Recreation. It is a Rural Historic Landscape, which is defined by National Register Bulletin 30 (Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Rural Historic Landscapes) as “a geographical area that historically

8 has been used by people, or shaped or modified by human activity, occupancy, or intervention, and that possesses a significant concentration, linkage, or continuity of areas of land use, vegetation, buildings and structures, roads and waterways, and natural features.”

The eligible portion, referred to in this report as the Snow King Ski Area Historic District, is locally significant under Criterion A for its association with the development of recreation and tourism in Jackson Hole. It is also locally significant under Criterion C as a representative example of vernacular ski resort established and developed during Jackson Hole’s formative years as a recreation destination. Although its individual components may lack distinction, it is a cohesive and distinguishable entity that embodies the characteristics of a small-scale, locally owned resort that grew organically to accommodate growing community and visitor interest in winter sports. The District encompasses the following resources:

CONTRIBUTING NONCONTRIBUTING

Ski Trails (Sites) Ski Trails (Sites)

Tow Slope / Holy Land Kelly’s Alley Old Man’s Flats / Old Lady’s Flats Upper Exhibition Elk & Lower Elk Return Trail Belly Roll Turn Pike Jump Run Big Horn East & West “S” Chutes Bison Grizzly & Lower Grizzly Slow Trail (Road Network) Cut Off Cougar Exhibition Bearcat Bearcat Glades

Ski Lifts and Associated Resources (Structures) Ski Lifts and Associated Resources (Structures) Summit Double Chair Lift Old Snow King Double Chairlift Unloading Platform Cougar Triple Char Lift

Buildings Buildings

Panorama House Old Snow King Single Chairlift Summit Drive CCC Summit Shelter Shelter Condominium Building

Landscape Features Landscape Features Wind Break Terrace CCC Trail Wireless Communication Tower

MISSING FEATURES Snack Shack Old Snow King Double Chairlift Base Drive Shelter

Period of Significance The period of significance for the Snow King Ski Area Historic District is 1935-1969. Although recreationists used Snow King Mountain for downhill skiing and the construction of ski jumps by 1926, the District does not retain integrity from this first phase of use. Winter use from 1926 to 1935 was informal and based on human-powered uphill access and proximity to town. It occurred at a time when downhill skiing techniques and equipment use and innovation were based in Europe with limited introduction in the United States. Human-powered uphill access and downhill skiing and jumping began establishing the importance of skiing in the area, and the District currently maintains strong association with uphill travel and jumping. However, the ski and ski jumping area from the earliest decade of recreational use (1926-1935) has undergone substantial changes (construction of the Snow King Sports and Events Center and uphill access trail) such that it is not readily identifiable today and is therefore a noncontributing resource as part of Tow Slope/Holy Land at the base. While early use of the lower area may be historically important it is not eligible due to lack of integrity.

The period of significance begins in 1935 when the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) trail was constructed. This marked the beginning of a new phase of use, which included the newly formed Jackson Hole Ski Association’s first meet with slalom and ski jumping (1937). By 1938, the Intermountain Region of the Forest Service publicized Snow King’s amenities, which included a slalom course, downhill skiing, and three ski jumps. A rope tow was installed in 1939- 40, which is currently considered the ski area establishment date by Snow King Mountain Resort. The National Ski Association (Appendix D) also considers the use of mechanized uphill access, such as rope tows or lifts, for ski area establishment dates. The scope of mountain amenities changed again in 1946 when the Jackson Hole Winter Sports Association was formed and installed the first chairlift, which provided access to the top of the mountain.

Davis (2014) identified 1935 as the beginning of the period of significance. Sladek (2019) suggests that the beginning of the period of significance should be changed from 1935 to 1939 due to the diminished integrity of the CCC Trail. Davis suggested the period of significance temporarily ended in 1965, citing the 50-year guidance by the National Park Service. However, Davis and Sladek (2019) noted that the transition to corporate ownership by Western Standard Corporation in 1971 may be a more appropriate end date for the period of significance in the future (post 2021). The 50-year guidance will allow for future evaluations to establish the period of significance based on interpretation of resources in relation to the passage of time, which may include the use of Exhibition and Upper Exhibition Run for the nationally recognized World Championship Hill Climb.

Level of Significance Snow King ski area is clearly eligible at the local level for contributions of establishing Jackson Hole recreation culture and community development. Humstone (2012) provides a useful description of the beginnings of downhill skiing in Wyoming. A more in-depth comparative

10 analysis of the establishment of downhill skiing in Wyoming would provide greater clarity into the importance of Snow King at the state level. A list of the establishment date and location of Wyoming ski areas is listed in Appendix E.

While Snow King does not meet the national significance criteria for the National Register, it is important to note Snow King’s historic role in developing Jackson Hole’s roots as a nationally recognized recreation destination. This reputation began to emerge in the 1920’s with the growing popularity of dude ranches, automobile tourism, the establishment of Grand Teton National Park, and the beginning of downhill ski culture. This status, and the importance of tourism and recreation activities, increased over time with growing numbers of visitors. Millions of international and national visitors currently visit Jackson Hole focused on outdoor recreation and tourism in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. The continuing importance of Snow King and Jackson Hole in recreational culture and events was highlighted with the First Lady’s recent visit to Jackson Hole as part of her “Be Best” campaign to encourage and engage youth in outdoor activities. The intentional focus of her campaign on the town of Jackson within view of Snow King is an example of the current national importance Jackson Hole holds as a symbol of recreation culture and access to the outdoors.

Figure 2. Historic development and use of Snow King ski area has contributed to the national perception of Jackson Hole as a notable area of outdoor recreation culture and access.

Historic District Boundary Davis (2014) identified the boundary of the Snow King Ski Area Historic District as “an irregular polygonal area generally bounded on the north by the baseball field, the Snow King Center building, and the Alpine Cemetery, on the south by Leeks Canyon, on the east by the tree wall forming the east edge of Bearcat, Bearcat Glades, and Exhibition runs, and on the west by the tree wall forming the west edge of East ‘S’ Chute, Cut Off, Grizzly, and Kelly’s runs.” She also outlined the area between the Rafferty Lift and the District as an “optional” boundary (see the left map in Figure 3 to include three noncontributing historic resources (Kelly’s Alley, Re-Turn, and Turn Pike) in the District. The Forest Service and the Wyoming SHPO agreed in 2015 to extend the boundary to include these three resources.

The northern District boundary pertaining to the interface with town was revisited by Sladek (2019) for two reasons. The first reason for boundary reassessment was to provide more technically accurate spatial documentation of the boundary based on the previously established criteria described above. The precise mapping of the Aspen Hill Cemetery at the boundary’s northeastern edge resulted and inclusion of the alternate boundary resulted in a refined northeastern District boundary (see the right map in Figure 3).

The second reason for additional research on the District northern boundary was to clarify the relationship of the historic district to adjacent related resources. The broader base area of Snow King Mountain has historically functioned as an area for community congregation and interaction. The current base area of Snow King Mountain Resort includes many private and public resources the public associates with “Snow King” in a general sense and is presently used for community gatherings such as concerts, farmers markets, and a variety of sports and events. The broader base area contributes to the context for the District setting. Sladek (2019) demonstrated the Snow King Sports and Events Center, Aspen Hill Cemetery, Phil Baux Park, and Town Ballfield are related adjacent resources that do not warrant an extension of the District boundary. This work has allowed the FS to gain greater confidence in the northern District boundary and a better understanding of the APE for cultural resources. The increased documentation of resources outside of the District acknowledges that, while these resources do not have National Register integrity, they provide a spatial context for indirect contributions to high District integrity of association with recreation and community interaction.

Figure 3. The boundary on the left is from Davis (2014). The “alternate boundary” was included as a noncontributing portion of the site during FS/SHPO consultation in 2015. The image on the right (Sladek 2019) precisely documents the change in the lower left portion of the District boundary. It now correctly accounts for the inclusion of the noncontributing portion of the District and the Aspen Hill Cemetery borders.

Integrity of the District The Snow King Ski Area Historic District retains enough integrity to convey its significant historical associations as an important recreation site near the Town of Jackson. Following is an assessment of the seven aspects of integrity. Location: The integrity of location is very high. It remains in its original location and maintains a strong visual connection with the Town of Jackson. Snow King continues to be important as an orienting cultural and geographic landmark. Design and Workmanship: The construction of runs within the District has continued to be organic until the present. The organic design has followed a pattern of expanding and becoming more visually impressionable over time. The design of the runs continues to support challenging skiing and ski racing opportunities. Integration with Town remains high and the connection with the street layout of Town and Town Square has increased with the incremental expansion of

Exhibition to the current extent. The vast majority of the runs as a whole have retained their original outline. The general visual impact, skier experience, and size of the District was not drastically altered with the 1970’s and 1980s developments.

Setting: There have been few changes to the natural landscape of the district except the increase in density of conifers and a decrease in aspen at the base. Annual snow depths have remained sufficient to provide consistent opportunities for powder skiing. The lack of sunshine on the north-facing slopes and low temperature inversions have continued to provide the right conditions for hard packed snow that is ideal for ski racing. Changes to infrastructure include new trail and road alignments constructed and rehabbed inside and outside of the District. New condominiums and a new brewpub at the base have increased the developed feel of the edge of the District, however the setting of the District remains intact as located at the intersection of a residential town and undeveloped National Forest land. Phil Baux park, the ball field, parking lot, and Snow King Sports and Events Center all maintain the space for community related events and social interaction to occur at the interface of SKMR and the town.

Materials: Building and structure materials present have maintained integrity.

Feeling: Many factors contribute to the historic feel of Snow King Mountain Resort, including the color and design of logos, slow lift speeds, the small-scale commercial development at the base, and its historic buildings and structures. The Snow King logo dates to about the 1960’s, making a graphic and stylistic connection with the historic runs, buildings, and structures. The small to medium scale of the resort has been well maintained since the period of significance.

Association: The District maintains high integrity of association, primarily because of its continued use as a ski area and connection to the Town of Jackson and Jackson Hole ski culture. Association is tied to multiple uses (including uphill travel) as well as year-round use of the cultural landscape. This allows it to readily demonstrate its relationship with the historic development of recreation and tourism in Jackson Hole.

Changes in Evaluation of Individual Resources Sladek (2019) reviewed the current integrity of individual resources in the District and recommended updates to their status as contributing or noncontributing resources. This section summarizes changes to resources and compares Sladek’s recommendations with the final agency determinations. Resources with no notable changes since 2015 are not discussed.

CCC Trail – is the original constructed feature that started the period of significance for the District at 1935 (Davis 2014). It has been recorded as the oldest human alteration of the mountain for recreational purposes that contains integrity. The CCC Trail “trail cut” into the side of the mountain is difficult to identify because of the many trails and roads that ascend Snow King and the seasonal timing of past field work. While Sladek (2019) recommends that it may

14 no longer be a contributing resource, it should be considered contributing with low integrity until summer field investigation specifically aimed at investigating the trail and research of national-level CCC references is completed. These two actions would constitute a reasonable and good faith effort to document the precise past location and integrity of this contributing resource and make a determination if it is no longer contributing.

Panorama House – replacement of windows and interior work has decreased the integrity of the building, but it is still a contributing building. The building retains the simple design in which the windows are the primary design emphasis. The architecture and windows are designed to facilitate the direction of visitors’ attention outwards to the spectacular views of Jackson Hole, The Tetons, and the Gros Ventre Range as well as the immediate mountain top environment.

Snack Shack – was located at the top of the mountain at the unloading area for Summit Chairlift. The small building was contributing and has been demolished. The Snack Shack is a missing building and is no longer a contributing resource.

Drive Shelter – was a contributing resource at the northwest base of the mountain and recently used as part of the tubing area on non-Forest Service land. The Drive Shelter has been demolished and is a missing building that is no longer a contributing resource.

Wind Break Terrace – this terraced and treed landscape feature was constructed in 1958 as a method of avalanche mitigation. The constructed terraces and trees are no longer present. The current resource consists of eroded earthen terraces that can be observed from aerial photographs. While still present and included in the District boundary, this landscape feature is not readily noticeable to summer visitors, is completely invisible in the winter due to snow cover, is in poor condition and does not readily reflect the original workmanship, materials, design, and feeling of historic avalanche mitigation landscaping. Therefore, it is no longer contributing to the District’s eligibility. The Wind Break Terrace continues to be a part of the District as a noncontributing historic resource. The aerial photos and description in past District recordings are sufficient to document the resource and no further work is recommended.

Road Network – was created in the 1950’s and has undergone many changes over the years. The road network is difficult to identify, has not been a static resource, and does not clearly convey an important historic connection with recreation and tourism and is therefore a noncontributing resource.

The Kelly/Murie House (48TE1700) was originally recorded (Davis, 2015) as an “adjacent resource outside the District boundary” eligible for the National Register that was used as the Snow King office. The building has been relocated locally and is no longer a historic resource located near the edge of the District.

Changes to some District resources have decreased integrity since the 2015 recording. However, these changes have not notably affected the District’s ability to convey the historic association for which it is significant. While some resources may lack individual distinction, the District continues to demonstrate significance as a whole within its historic context. Comparisons of the Sladek (2019) recommendations and current FS determinations for changes in District resource integrity are outlined in Figure 4.

Resource Name Sladek (2019) Recommendation Forest Service Determination CCC Trail Change from contributing to Retains existing status as noncontributing due to contributing with low integrity continual decrease in integrity. pending additional research. Panorama House FS review of integrity needed Retains existing status as due to significant changes to contributing with decreased building. integrity due to replacement of windows and other interior work. Snack Shack Change from contributing to Change from contributing to noncontributing due to missing resource due to demolition. demolition. Double Chair Lift Base Change from contributing to Change from contributing to Drive Shelter noncontributing due to missing resource due to demolition. demolition. Windbreak Terrace Change from contributing to Change from contributing to noncontributing due to noncontributing due to diminished integrity. continual decrease in integrity. Road Network Newly Recorded as Noncontributing. Noncontributing Resource. Kelly Murie House No comment. Remove from noting as historic resource outside District boundary. Figure 4. Clarification of current changes in resource integrity.

CHARACTER-DEFINING FEATURES A character-defining feature is “a prominent or distinctive aspect, quality, or characteristic of a cultural landscape that contributes significantly to its physical character. Land use patterns, vegetation, furnishings, decorative details and materials may be such features.” (DOI National Park Service, 1996). This section discusses the character-defining features (CDFs) of the Snow King Ski Area Historic District and its prominent resources. District Level Character Defining Features The impression of the ski area on the natural and human landscape is perhaps the most important character-defining feature of the Snow King Ski Area Historic District. The natural backdrop of the District is Snow King Mountain, a timbered “foothill” of the Gros Ventre Range

16 that juts abruptly up from the notably flat plains creating the bottom of Jackson Hole. This southeastern edge of Jackson Hole is partially sheltered from much of the rest of the valley. The town of Jackson is nestled in this sheltered area, and “confined” by the grasslands of the National Elk Refuge to the north, buttes to the west, and the Gros Ventre Range to the east and south.

Intangible and tangible characteristics affect the human landscape that manifests itself in community identity and perception of Snow King. Appendix F, which includes an examination of place names and metanarratives and explores the intangible impressions in more detail. Suffice it to say, Snow King—as an experience, a place, a memory—inspires strong perceptions amongst individuals and the community, which contribute to an understanding of two aspects of integrity that are sometimes difficult to define: feeling and association.

Several of the District’s physical features clearly connect the ski area to its historic context and significance. Snow King Mountain itself is the most imposing and domineering feature that can be seen from the town of Jackson, with Exhibition Run serving as a visual link between the mountain, the town’s main north-south thoroughfare (Cache Street) and northern Jackson Hole. Humans started modifying the mountain’s slope in the 1920s, and over time created a visually distinct landscape characterized by ski runs carved out of dense and dark conifers. Its proximity to Jackson resulted in visual dominance of a human-designed landscape on a mountain that was already the town’s dominant physical feature.

The macro level visual impact of the District, with its distinct pattern of wide and narrow ski runs, is not limited to Town. It is visible throughout much of southern Jackson Hole. This rural historic landscape in the wildland urban interface geographically orients someone looking to understand how the town of Jackson fits into the vast mountainous landscape. Collectively, the runs identify a pocket of human development within a largely undeveloped valley. From views farther off, Snow King is the only clue that a town is present.

Character Defining Features as Organizational Elements of the Landscape Humstone (2012) mentions the character-defining features of a cultural landscape are those features that best represent the character and historic and cultural significance of the property but does not identify particular features other than contributing and noncontributing resources and setting description. This section employs the organizational guidance of the NPS Guildelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes. The methodology below employs guideline direction to place value on land use patterns and organization of landscape features. It describes CDFs through aggregating contributing features to describe and define the use and qualities of the District. CDFs should be both significant and iconic in their own right while also making contributions to the District’s macro level CDFs.

The District encompasses several features that make it readily identifiable as Snow King. These features are the Elk and Grizzly Runs area, the open lower area, Exhibition Run, and some secondary runs, all of which are discussed in detail below. Together, they form a visual pattern that becomes iconographic, as demonstrated in two illustrations (Figure 5). The Snow King Ale image (left) provides clues to Snow King’s cultural modification but it is the second image (right) that clearly shows the spatial relationships that define the District.

Figure 5. Comparative illustration analysis.

The right image further defines the Cougar and Exhibition Runs, the latter appearing as it did before its extension to the mountain top. The Elk and Grizzly Runs and one of the “S” Chutes are clearly visible and shown in relation to the mountain’s peak. The open area in the middle of the runs can be better seen in relation to the rest of the upper treed runs. The visual impact of Bear Cat and Belly Roll are slightly more dominant than they tend to be from most viewpoints.

Figure 6. Character-defining features for Snow King ski area. The three primary CDFs (Elk and Grizzly Runs, Exhibition Run, and the open lower area) are in Red. The blue areas are collectively secondary CDFs that consist of isolated advanced runs.

In summary, the relationship between the three dominant run areas and several secondary features define the District’s historic character (Figure 6). In addition, the three dominant runs are the District’s primary character-defining features: the Elk and Grizzly Runs, the open lower area (the bottom third of the ski area containing numerous runs that is mostly void of trees), and Exhibition Run. The “S” Chutes, Bear Cat, and Belly Roll are secondary CDFs and are described below.

Elk and Grizzly Runs Visually, these two runs are the largest, longest, and most open runs from the top of the mountain (Figure 7). This area is the core upper to middle part of the mountain and can be identified by the “island” of trees between the runs, and historically has been the main run for descending from the top, offering the smoothest and fastest terrain to the bottom. The runs have been used for ski racing during the period of significance. The runs maintain a high level of association with ski racing - events on this slope also include JH Ski Club racing training and competitions, racing lessons for the public, local races in the Margarita Cup, and the steepest north facing FIS (International Ski Federation) capable ski racing run in the continental United States. Further documentation of regional and national downhill ski racing from the historic into the modern period would enrich the historic context Snow King and enlighten use of the Elk and Grizzly Runs and lower open area.

Figure 7. Teton and Town views from the top of Elk Run – one of the most popular runs, accessed from Summit Lift above and Cougar Lift below.

Open Lower Area The open lower area (including runs such as Lower Elk and Grizzly, Old Lady and Old Man Flats, Cougar, Lower Exhibition, and Holy Land) is the main open and visible “heart” of the ski area (Figure 8). Much of this area can be accessed by skiers from all lifts, and the majority of runs on the mountain funnel into this area. This area has not been named in prior studies but is identified as a way to describe the most central part of the District. The open lower area has combined facilitating social congregation with uphill access and ski jumping since 1926. The original tow going up midway on the mountain to the center of the open lower area (currently at about the Cougar Lift area) was installed in 1939, and the original single lift going up to the top of the mountain (currently Summit Lift) were both historically central features in the ski resort. The current location of Cougar and Summit lifts are located in the only two historic tow and lift locations in the District. The location and continued use of these two functional lifts have maintained a high level of association with the original circulation of the District.

The diversity of activities, proximity to Snow King Avenue, and integration of town with the mountain are characteristics of the open lower area. The open area descends directly into town, allowing skiers to ski down to their cars to take their skis off on the street during storms, and passers-by on the street to easily see the action up close. It is currently used for tubing, a small skiing terrain park, large jumps on the upper portion, tubing, and pond skimming during spring events.

Figure 8. Open lower area. The photo on the left shows the beginning of the slope looking uphill at the base. The photo on the right is the view to the east from the center of the lower open area.

Exhibition Run Exhibition Run (Lower and Upper) is perhaps the most visually dominant individual feature of the District. It follows the Summit Lift line straight up the hill to the mountaintop. The run originally went about a third of the way up the mountain until a series of run clearings, consistent with the organic development of the rest of the runs, eventually extended it to the top. The original length of Exhibition Run, which started at the Lower Open Area, was created in c. 1947 and extended c. 1959. The installment of the Summit Lift in 1981 allowed for skiing the lift line from the top and led to the creation of the Upper Exhibition Run in c. 1986, thus marking the full extent of the potential height of the cleared run.

The presence of Exhibition Run substantially defines the view of Snow King from town. The north-south orientation of the run aligns with the main north-south thoroughfare, Cache Street, which passes through the center of town and borders the Jackson Town Square. The Square, listed on the National Register of Historic Places, is home to the famous antler arches and is one of two rectangular town squares in Wyoming. The role of Exhibition Run’s integrating the District with town is strikingly apparent when entering town from the north (one of three main routes into town). The straight line of Exhibition extends from the base area to South Cache Street (Figure 9) and continues northwards towards Grand Teton National Park - combining the District with the town and main Highway of Jackson Hole as an extension of human’s application of Cartesian order on the landscape.

The run unapologetically commands attention and adds to the striking nature of the rest of the runs. It takes the eye, and the outdoor athlete, either straight up to the top of the mountain, or straight down to the edge of town. Newcomers often look up the hill and are amazed that people ski straight down it, and struggle to believe that people hike straight up, sometimes with skis, and also snowmobile straight up.

Figure 9. View of Snow King heading south when entering town. Many of the 3.5 million annual Grand Teton National Park visitors from around the world trail into Jackson along this N. Cache St./Hwy 191 artery.

The substantial change of Exhibition Run in the mid 1980’s of extending it to the top of the mountain near the unloading dock was a significant alteration in the feel and character of the existing Exhibition Run, the ski area, and the entire Snow King Mountain. The importance of Exhibition Run (Upper and Lower) to Snow King is well described by Kristen Pope (https://rootsrated.com/stories/5-scariest-ski-runs-in-jackson-hole) in a February 18, 2016 post:

Exhibition Run is rated the second scariest ski run in Jackson Hole. “Snow King, also known as the “Town Hill” to locals, is known to have the steepest overall slope of any ski hill in North America. Significantly adding to that ranking is the double- black diamond Exhibition Run. This run, located on looker's right when at the base, is long and steep. Facing north, it's also often shaded and icy. And, if a long, steep, icy run isn't enough to make you nervous, Exhibition Run, as its name implies, is in full view of the entire town. Yes, people going about their daily business can witness your epic garage sale if your run doesn't go too well. And the route is so steep (and often icy), that if you take a tumble on this route, there's a good chance you're falling all the way to the bottom. Nearby restaurants offer onlookers a place to grab a beer and a bite while watching people ski (and wipe out in epic fashion) on the mountain. Exhibition Run is the one that snowmobiles race up during the World Championship Snowmobile Hill Climb held each March. Snowmobilers test their mettle and throttle as they try to rocket their machines up this fantastically steep slope. And, of course, not every snowmobile makes it to the top. YouTube is full of videos of hill climb attempts that didn't go so well.”

Upper Exhibition Run is currently notable due to the association with uphill travel including the World Championship Jackson Hole Snowmobile Hill Climb (est. 1975), further continuation of the development of ski terrain with national level steepness (1,500 ft. continual vertical rise), and contribution to and expansion of the visual impact of the historic District design (especially Lower Exhibition) that further solidifies the overall District orientation with cardinal direction and angular alignment with the Town of Jackson.

Secondary Character Defining Features The relationship between the Elk/Grizzly area and Exhibition Run, with the open lower half, are the three primary character-defining features of the layout of the runs. The secondary character defining features are less commonly skied advanced runs that collectively provide a similar advanced skiing experience. The secondary character defining features consist of the Bear Cat area, Belly Roll, and “S” Chutes (Figure 6). They are defined by an isolated or peripheral location and feel, narrow width, lack of central visual dominance, and uneven fall lines (an uneven fall line forces a skier to partially ski sideways against a slope rather than evenly down it) that can be related to more challenging skiing styles. The “S” Chutes currently require a hike and have a wind-blown cornice at the edge that regularly produces slides - all posing a “big mountain” experience. The “S” Chutes are visible from town and a quintessential trademark on the edge of the runs that represent the “top of the top.” The Bear Cat area (Bear Cat and Bear Cat Glades) has an open windblown entry along the mountain ridgetop, and exposure to views to the west and south. Bear Cat enters a tight U-shaped gladed drainage with over story that feels like a tunnel. This run affords the opportunity for tight tree skiing in a long drainage that can feed into other drainages and drops from outcrops. Belly Roll Run is located in the upper center of the District. Despite the central location, the narrow width has a small visual impact minimal and provides an isolated skiing experience with a challenging fall line.

The secondary character defining features are runs with challenging and uneven (non-groomed) terrain on uneven fall lines. They are defined by isolation from the main skiing traffic at the heart of the District and run designs that forces the skier into a more asymmetrical and less developed ski run experience. As a whole, the runs contribute to the challenging and minimally developed character of the District but are secondary in importance to the Primary CDFs (Elk and Grizzly Runs, Exhibition Run, and Lower Open Area).

EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS This section addresses specific impacts that have been proposed in the EIS. The FS decision maker may choose to approve one of the alternatives or combine components from the different alternatives (Figure 10). All no adverse effect determinations below related to new landscape level construction (such as ski runs) have been weighed against the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation of Cultural Landscapes and meet the rehabilitation

Figure 10. Ski run proposals by NEPA alternative from a working draft of the EIS Chapter 2.

24 requirement that “new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.” All adverse effects are described in terms of lack of accordance with the same rehabilitation standards. The following section addresses proposed effects to the ski area in all alternatives.

Actions both within and outside of the Historic District Boundary • Expanding the Permit boundary would not have an adverse effect to the District. - The act of expanding the Special Use Ski Area Permit Boundary does not necessitate that adverse effects will occur. - Historic spatial organization and land patterns have the potential to be preserved if alterations and new use are compatible.

• Development of the access road, zip line, and trail network would not have an adverse effect to the District. - The existing road and trail networks at SKMR have undergone changes, and are not significant or contributing landscape features to the historic district. - The rehabilitation of decommissioned trails and roads would allow for revegetation and possibly recontouring to more closely match the original mountain topography. - The general historic circulation within the District of a main large trail/road with smaller trails would be maintained and adapted for compatible use and not detract from existing significant spatial organization within the District.

• An increase in areas covered by snowmaking and lighting would not have an adverse effect to the District. - Snowmaking and lighting currently exist within and outside of the District and do not detract from National Register integrity.

Actions within the Historic District Boundary • The replacement or removal of Cougar and Summit lifts (which are non-historic noncontributing structures) would be no adverse effect. - While the slow and aging quality of these lifts add to the historic feeling of the District, the structures are noncontributing due to age. - Cougar and Summit lifts are in the historic lift and tow locations. The presence of a lift/tow/gondola in these two general locations would maintain the high level of integrity of association with regards to circulation within the District.

- Removal of the Cougar Lift would decrease the level of integrity of association with regards to circulation of the District though removing the location of historic midway access and only allow mechanized uphill access to the mountain top.

• Changes in the treed edges of contributing runs have the potential to be adverse effect. - Disturbance of contributing runs that would make a substantial change to the design, setting, location and feeling of a run have the potential to contributing resources and/or character-defining features. - The introduction of several new ski runs (9-13) and alteration of contributing ski runs within the District boundary would be a cumulative adverse effect due to a substantial change the spatial organization, circulation patterns, and visuals of the historic contributing runs, loss of a large dense timbered area within the District and increased scale of noncontributing runs in the District as a whole. The following proposals of ski run changes are within the District from west to east: o Clearing Bearcat Glades would result in the run no longer being a thinned and gladed run (effect to contributing run). o Changes to the east and west edges of the noncontributing Upper Exhibition would decrease the linear orientation of the run (effect to noncontributing run). Clearing of the southeast portion of the contributing Exhibition Run would be a change splitting up the edge of the run (effect to contributing run). o The addition of Run 13 and straightening and widening of the bottom half of the contributing Belly Roll Run would change the isolated nature of the contributing run (effect to contributing run). The addition of Runs 9, 10, 11, and 12 would create a substantial amount of new runs and would greatly increase the number of noncontributing runs in the upper middle of the District in an area that has historically been wooded (effect to the District).

• Thinning conifers within the District would not adversely affect the District if the changes maintained the contrast of the forested edge of contributing ski runs. - While the forested vegetation contributes to the integrity of the setting, a reduction in density may facilitate forest heath and help long-term secessional change. Thinning conifers would also decrease the change of a catastrophic forest fire on the timbered slopes that could clearly adversely affect the historic setting.

• Alignment of the gondola with Summit Lift and Exhibition Run would be less of an impact compared to the placement of the gondola base outside of the District in Phil Baux Park. Placing the gondola in the park would cause a more substantial change to the integrity of the historic setting of the base than placement of the gondola base at the current location of the summit lift base that is within the Historic District. The placement of the new gondola at Phil Baux Park would likely and cause a gondola line cut in the eastern edge of the trees on Lower Exhibition Run, a contributing character- defining feature. It would result in a change to the setting of the base area and cause the gondola to be more dominant due to a new and lower location at the base. Placement of the gondola in the summit lift location would result in no change to the historic spatial organization and circulation. While comments about impacts of the gondola base location and alignment are made by the FS, the FS will not make a formal effects determination on this impact because the respective impacts are not on FS land. - The summit Chairlift location and respective alignment of Exhibition Run are character-defining features of the District. A change in the location of these features could also be an impact to the circulation flow of the District and the spatial organization of the lower open area.

• Removal of the Panorama House and the Unloading Dock would constitute adverse effects to contributing resources. - Removal of the Panorama House and Unloading Dock are common to all alternatives because of the project purpose to increase the quantity and quality of visitor services through the development of a gondola and a facility and planetarium at the top of the mountain. - Removing a historic building, building feature or landscape feature that is important in defining the historic character of a historic district setting is “not recommended” in the Secretary of Interiors Standards for Rehabilitation of a historic district setting. - The Unloading Dock is the only remaining contributing structure and the Panorama House is one of two remaining contributing buildings in the District. Both features are notable and dominant at the top part of the District.

• A new building at the summit has the potential to be visually dominant from town and the base area and could be an adverse effect. There would be no adverse effect if building design, color, size, lighting, and landscaping design criteria minimized the visual dominance of the new building and followed the Secretary of Interior Guidelines for construction of new buildings in a Historic District.

- Introducing new construction into historic districts that is visually incompatible or that destroys historic relationships within the setting would create an adverse effect. - Design and construction of new of new buildings can accommodate new use within a historic district. New construction should be compatible with the historic character of the setting in terms of size, scale, design, material, color, and texture.

• Stabilization and use of the CCC Building would improve the condition of the building and provide an opportunity for District education and interpretation. - Stabilization of the building would allow preservation concepts to be become incorporated into the Historic District.

• Temporary ski patrol building located midmountain at the top of Cougar Lift would be no adverse effect. - A temporary ski patrol tent is currently at the top of Cougar Lift. - The temporary building would not have a notable effect on contributing runs or character defining features.

South Area Boundary Expansion • The introduction of new ski runs (16-25) and new Lifts (A-D) on the south (backside) of the mountain are outside the District boundary would be no adverse effect. - New runs on the backside of Snow King Mountain would not be visible at the macro level from southern Jackson Hole nor would they be visible from the base or from over 95% of the runs. - New runs would be visible from the top of the mountain, however the new runs would be clearly outside of the District in a different area of SKMR. The proposed new use of the adjacent setting is compatible with the historic character and would not significantly detract from the District in terms of scale and design.

East Area Boundary Expansion • New cleared ski runs outside of the District boundary would not be adverse effects if they do not significantly overcome the visual dominance of the existing specific character-defining features or dramatically change the scale of the District. - The area outside of the eastern boundary of the District contains more recent ski area developments around the Rafferty Lift area. - Runs 1 and 2 are relatively far away from the historic district boundary, would be not be a dominant intrusion in the surrounding setting, and would not detract from character-defining features.

- Runs 4, 5, 6, 7 are located outside the District boundary and are further east of the non-historic Rafferty Lift area. Glading or thinning these runs would decrease the visual impact of the proposed change on the setting of the District. Clearing the runs would be more impactful than glading but would still not be an adverse effect.

• New cleared ski runs outside of the District boundary can contribute to macro level District adverse effects if they cumulatively overcome the scale and visual dominance of the existing specific character-defining features. - Runs 3 and 8 are outside the District boundary. Clearing of theses runs would have a greater impact on the setting of the District than all other proposed run outside of the district boundary. Construction of Runs 3 and 8 would contribute to macro level adverse effect to the scale of the setting of the District.

West Area Boundary Expansion • The addition of the one proposed run (15) in the western boundary expansion would not be an adverse effect. The run descends relatively far away from the historic district boundary further to the west. The return portion of the trail runs roughly horizontal on the hillslope would partially follow the existing residential street lines and be less visible than a new vertical run adjacent to the ski area boundary. - The western boundary of the District has higher integrity than the eastern boundary due to the more recent developments in the Rafferty Lift area. - Run 15 is spatially removed from the western boundary such that the western District setting would sufficiently maintain the large scale and character of an uninterrupted extensive forested setting on the western boundary.

Marco Level Effects of Proposed Impacts to District The specific nature of effects to the District cannot be readily determined at this time due to the multitude of possible variables that may be in the final EIS decision. However, the following general comments should be used as guidance in future effects determinations to the District as a whole: • Development of new infrastructure would impact the setting and feeling of connection with older infrastructure. If new infrastructure meets the Secretary of Interiors Standards for new building construction within Historic Districts, then new infrastructure would not be an adverse effect. • The cumulative impacts of the recent and anticipated loss of all contributing infrastructure except for one contributing building would be an adverse effect.

• The development of a substantial number of new runs inside and outside of the District Boundary would change the scale and spatial context and setting of a small to medium sized historic ski area defined by a timbered slope that has been largely unchanged since the period of significance. The cumulative impacts of proposed ski run development on components of District integrity of design, setting, workmanship, feeling and association would likely be an adverse effect.

Possible Cumulative Effects to National Register Eligibility Sladek (2019) poses idea that proposed development at SKMR may have a cumulative effect resulting in the District being not eligible. Snow King would potentially become ineligible if the character-defining features were removed or substantially altered and the relationship between the features became significantly diminished. For example, significant alteration to Elk and Grizzly Runs and the island of trees that separate them, change such that the Center Open Area becomes indistinguishable in how it relates to contributing runs, a change to the face of the mountain in which Exhibition Run no longer exhibits the exceptional dominance, or removal of the Advanced Signature runs could directly lead to the District no longer being eligible. Development of the maximum amount of runs within and adjacent to the District boundary along with changing or removing the location of the Cougar and Summit Lift/gondola and removal of the Panorama House and Unloading Dock would make the District not eligible due to cumulative diminished integrity of the District as a whole. The District would continue to maintain eligibility if developed under Alternative 4.

CONCLUSION Jackson Hole has a national reputation for outdoor seasonal recreation, such as skiing, on public land, and is a place enduringly rich in ski culture. This reputation is strongly based on uncommonly steep and challenging terrain and plentiful high-quality powder snow within a context that has a less development and more western character than other ski areas. Snow King has been instrumental in being at the heart of developing that culture and contributing to ski racing culture. Apart from skiers themselves, other residents and visitors to the area are readily aware of the reputation, culture, and landscape that creates a place with a notable connection to high quality and challenging outdoor experiences such as skiing.

The integrity of the Snow King Ski Area Historic District allows these connections to be readily apparent to those observing the District. This report acknowledges that much of the historic value and importance of Snow King is tied to high integrity of association that that can be ascertained the perspective of people who have interacted with the District as well as existing literature. The goal of the character-defining features review is to define and describe the enduring meaning and historic connections the District landscape still transmits to observers. However specifically interpreted, the relationship between the Town and Snow King within the context of the long-standing recreational destination of Jackson Hole remains strong. Given the

30 purpose and need of the project is to substantially increase beginner and other ski terrain along with expanding and upgrading facilities, it appears unlikely that the project could be implemented without an adverse effect to the District.

REFERENCES CITED Davis, Kerry 2014 Snow King Mountain Resort Ariel Adventure Course and Chair Lift Replacement/Extension Projects Jackson, Teton County, Wyoming. Preservation Solutions. Boise, ID. Prepared for Snow King Mountain Resort.

Humstone, Mary 2012 Jackson’s Town Hill: Snow King Ski Area. Survey and Preliminary Evaluation of Historic Significance and Integrity. Humstone Consulting. Prepared for the Teton County Historic Preservation Board.

Santarone, Paul; Kenneth Cannon, and Martin Houston 2018 Class III Cultural Resource Survey for the Snow ing Resort, Teton County, Wyoming (BT-19-1137). Cannon Heritage Consultants. Logan, UT. Prepared for Cirrus Ecological Solutions.

Lyotard, Jean-Francois 1979 The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, Translated from French by Geoff Bennington and Brian Massumi. Manchester University Press.

Sladek, Ron 2019 Snow King Mountain Resort, NHPA Section 106 Historic Resources Documentation and Analysis (BT-19-1138). Tatanka Historical Assocaites, Inc. Fort Collins, Co. Prepared for Cirrus Ecological Solutions.

APPENDIX A: SNOW KING MOUNTAIN RESORT MAP

Appendix B: Alternative Summary Report

SNOW KING MOUNTAIN RESORT ON-MOUNTAIN IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT EIS: DRAFT ALTERNATIVE SUMMARY REPORT

October 1, 2019 Prepared by Cirrus Environmental Solutions and Sean McGinness, Bridger-Teton National Forest

INTRODUCTION This report summarizes the alternatives to be considered in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS): Snow King Mountain Resort On-mountain Improvements Project. Alternatives were developed on the basis of scoping, input from community groups and government agencies, and internal, interdisciplinary review. This summary report is intended to brief interested parties prior to the release of the DEIS. With the release of this report, the Bridger-Teton National Forest is not currently seeking public comment. The formal 45 day comment period will begin with the release of the DEIS. We reviewed all alternatives in accordance with Council on Environmental Quality regulations (40 CFR 1502.13 and 1502.14). Those that we determined would meet the purpose and need for action while reducing adverse environmental impacts will be addressed in detail in the DEIS. Those that did not meet these criteria will not be carried into in-depth analysis. The four alternatives addressed in detail are addressed first, followed by alternatives considered but not carried into in-depth analysis. A list of design criteria developed to avoid or reduce adverse environmental effects concludes the report.

ALTERNATIVES ADDRESSED IN DETAIL The following table summarizes the four alternatives analyzed in-depth in the DEIS in a comparative format, emphasizing differences among them rather than repeating similar elements. They include the no- action alternative required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to provide a baseline for assessing environmental consequences. The figures following the table provide a visual reference for each action alternative and for glading/forest thinning and road/trail obliteration.

Table 1. Summary comparison of elements included in the four alternatives analyzed in depth. Alternative 2 Proposed Alternative 1 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Proposed Action Improvement No Action (See Figure 2) (See Figure 3) (See Figure 1) Permit Boundary Adjustment Yes, same as Alts. 2 East Expansion No Yes, 67 acres. Yes, same as Alt. 2. and 3.

1 Yes, same as Alt. 2 except 1 acre less in west-side area due Yes, same as Alts. 2 West Expansion No Yes, 89 acres. to shifting the and 3. southern boundary back to ridge Terrain Development Summit Ski School/Teaching No Yes Yes Yes Center Yes, same as Alts. 2 and 3 except runs 3 and 8–12 on the front side would be Yes, 117.8 acres dropped and runs 4, across ability levels. 5, and 7 on the front Includes runs 3–14 side would be on the front side, gladed rather than 16–25 on the back No, existing cleared to protect side, Lift B and C New and Modified developed terrain historic landscape. terrain on the ridge, Yes, same as Alt. 2. Ski Runs would remain, Runs 1, 2, and 15 and modifications 135.6 acres. would be added on of existing Moose, the front side to Belly Roll, Upper offset the resulting Exhibition, and loss in trail capacity Bearcat runs. New in balance with the total 253.4 acres. new gondola. Total new terrain 122.2 acres, bringing area total to 257.8 acres. Yes, grading to smooth terrain Grading of irregularities at six No Yes, same as Alt. 2. Yes, same as Alt. 2. Existing Runs locations on the front side, totaling 5.5 acres. Yes, same as Alts. 2 and 3 but with 4.1 more acres due to Glading (See No Yes, about 35 acres. Yes, same as Alt. 2. glading rather than Figure 4) clearing runs 4, 5, and 7. Total 40.1 acres. Summit Access Road/Skiway No, existing access Summit Gondola road would remain Yes Yes Yes Access Road in place.

2 Lifts Yes, but bottom Yes, bottom terminal shifted to No, existing terminal in Phil current Cougar Replace Summit chairlift would Baux Park and top bottom terminal Yes, same as Alt. 3. Lift remain in place. terminal near site, top terminal current location. near current location. Back-side Quad No Yes Yes Yes Lift Teaching Center No Yes Yes Yes Conveyor Lifts Back-side Surface No Yes Yes Yes Tow Removal of No No Yes Yes Cougar Lift Facilities No, existing summit Summit Building structures would Yes Yes Yes remain in place. Removal of No Yes Yes Yes Panorama House Removal of No Yes Yes Yes Observation Deck Removal of Existing Summit No Yes Yes Yes Ski Patrol Shack Ski Patrol Building at Top of No Yes No No Cougar Lift Yurt Camp No Yes Yes Yes Wedding Venue No Yes Yes Yes Snow King Historical No No Yes Yes Interpretive Center Night Skiing Yes, an additional No, existing 27.3 acres, covering coverage of 73.8 Flying Squirrel, Expanded Night acres would remain, Yes, same as Alts. 2 Moose, upper Elk, Yes, same as Alt. 2. Skiing covering all existing and 3. and summit terrain, runs below Slow bringing total to Trail. 101.1. Snowmaking Coverage

3 Yes, 147.1 acres Yes, 135.7 acres, No, existing covering all covering all runs coverage would remaining existing developed or remain, runs, except the S modified under this Additional approximately 90 Chutes, and all new Yes, same as Alt. 2. alternative except Snowmaking acres, including all runs developed or runs 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, existing runs below modified under this and upper 15, Slow Trail and Elk alternative, bringing bringing total to run to the summit. total to 237.1 acres. 225.7 acres. Summer Activities Yes, except landing Yes, paralleling at Rafferty mid- Summit gondola, Zip Line No station. Straight and Yes, same as Alt. 3. landing in Phil three-segment Baux Park. options. Yes, approximately 6.5 miles on front side with access Yes, but moved to from Summit Yes, same as Alt. 2, front side, with 4.4 No, existing trails Mountain Bike gondola and a 110- but without the miles accessed from would remain in Trails acre mountain bike black (expert) trail Rafferty lift and no place. zone on back side, off the summit. back-side mountain accessed from bike zone. Summit gondola and Lift A. Yes, improved 0.6- Yes, same as Alt. 2 No, existing trails mile Stairway Trail except new hiking Hiking Trails would remain in and new 1.5-mile trail realigned and Yes, same as Alt. 3. place. trail in the Bearcat shortened to 1.2 Glades area. miles. Forest Stand Thinning for Yes, 178 acres Wildland/Urban (includes 6.2 acres No No Yes, same as Alt. 3. Interface and that overlap Defensible Space proposed glading). (See Figure 4) Yes, 1.1 miles of roads, including all but the top section Yes, with an of Elkhorn Trail and additional 0.9 miles Obliteration of an unnamed service of roads/trails, Existing Service road and hiking trail including Slow Roads and User- No on the lower front Yes, same as Alt. 3. Trail and Fast Trail, created Trails (See side, made made unnecessary Figure 5) unnecessary by the by removal of proposed summit Cougar lift. access road/beginner skiway.

Figure 1. Alternative 2 – Proposed Action (Recreational Opportunity Emphasis)

5 Figure 2. Alternative 3 – Balanced Recreational Opportunity and Resource Protection.

6 Figure 3. Alternative 4 – Resource Protection Emphasis.

Figure 4. Glading and forest thinning for wildland/urban interface and defensible space.

8 Figure 5. Road and trail obliteration.

9 DESIGN CRITERIA Design criteria are measures to avoid or reduce adverse environmental effects and apply to alternatives 2, 3 and 4. Some are standard practice and identified prior to NEPA review. This analysis incorporates a number of design criteria developed on the basis of experience at Snow King and other ski areas. Reducing soil erosion and adverse effects on water quality, protecting wildlife habitat and other native vegetation, maintaining visual quality, ensuring appropriate access to facilities, and protecting buried heritage resources are the concerns addressed by the following design criteria. They are considered to be in place in the analysis of environmental consequences discussed in Chapter 3. Other design criteria may be identified through the analysis of environmental effects. These will be added to the list presented in the Draft EIS. Erosion Control 1. Snow King ski area will prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that will apply to all authorized elements. The SWPPP is a condition of Wyoming’s Wyoming Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit and will include appropriate BMPs for erosion control, sediment control, site stabilization, operational controls, and provisions for maintenance and inspection. 2. The SWPPP will include appropriate BMPs from National Best Management Practices for Water- Quality Management on National Forest System Lands. Volume 1: National Core BMP Technical Guide (Forest Service 2012a), and Ski Area BMPs (Best Management Practices) Guidelines for Planning, Erosion Control, and Reclamation (Forest Service 2001). Pertinent watershed BMPs are discussed in section 3.4. Vegetation Management 3. Soil disturbance will be minimized, and existing topsoil will be conserved for replacement. 4. Where possible, native vegetation will be retained. 5. In cleared and graded areas, mechanized equipment may be used to fell and remove trees. Disposal will be in accordance with applicable Forest Service permit requirements. 6. Slash created by tree removal will be disposed of either through utilization, burning, chipping, mastication, lopping and scattering, or removal from the site within a specified timeframe. Disposal will be in accordance with applicable Forest Service and state permit requirements. 7. Snow King will follow Forest Service policy (FSM 2070) and use genetically appropriate native materials for any rehabilitation and restoration. A qualified Forest Service botanist will be involved in development, review, and/or approval of plant materials selected for use in site rehabilitation and restoration. 8. All construction equipment and vehicles used will be cleaned and certified free of noxious weeds and their seeds prior to entrance onto the Bridger-Teton. This restriction will include equipment and vehicles intended for both on- and off-road use, whether they are owned, leased, or borrowed by either contractors or subcontractors. 9. Any fill material proposed for the project, including any imported topsoil, will come from an on- site or certified weed-free location. 10. Any straw bales, chips, or other imported mulch used in conjunction with construction or rehabilitation activities will come from a certified weed-free source. 11. Prior to conducting thinning or glading operations, Snow King will consult with the Forest Service to obtain a prescription in order to address forest health issues such as disease or insect infestation. Wildlife Protection

10 12. Do not clear, cut, burn, drive on, or park equipment on vegetation that may harbor nesting birds during the breeding season. If this is not possible, survey for nesting birds no more than 10 days prior to commencing work. If no nests are found, project activities may proceed. If nests are found, contact the Forest Service permit administrator. Scenic Integrity 13. Permanent structures will be designed and built in compliance with the Forest Service’s Built Environment Image Guide (https://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/beig/). Ensuring that architectural style, building materials, size, and color are consistent and meet the adopted scenery objectives. Compliance will be confirmed through Forest Service engineering review prior to construction. 14. The edges of cleared ski runs will be feathered to appear more like natural openings in forest cover, flowing with the topography and blending with the natural vegetation. 15. Lift towers will be acid dipped to reduce reflectivity and visual impact. 16. New construction will comply with pertinent stipulations of Teton County or Town of Jackson, as appropriate, land development regulations or other regulations regarding dark sky maintenance and scenic values. 17. All roads and trails identified for obliteration that lie below the upper leg of the proposed summit access road/skiway will be obliterated within 1 year following completion of the proposed summit access road/skiway. 18. The first segment of Elkhorn Trail above the upper leg of the proposed summit access road/skiway will be obliterated within 1 year following completion of Lift D. Accessibility 19. All buildings will be designed and constructed in accordance with the Accessibility Guidebook for Ski Areas Operating on Public Lands – 2012 Update (Forest Service 2012b). Compliance will be confirmed through Forest Service engineering review prior to construction. Undiscovered Heritage Resources 20. If any previously unidentified prehistoric or historic cultural resources are identified or encountered at any time during construction, efforts shall be made to protect the resource(s) until the Forest Service permit administrator is notified and the Forest Service fulfills its consultation requirements, including consultation with the appropriate Tribal representatives. 21. If unmarked human remains are encountered at any time during construction, all work in the vicinity of the find shall cease, the County Sheriff shall be notified, the remains shall be protected in place, and the Forest Service permit administrator shall be notified immediately to begin proper notification and consultation procedures with the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office, Native American Tribes, and other local officials as needed (e.g., County Coroner) to determine to what time period and ethnic group the skeletal material may be ascribed and the appropriate treatment. 22. If any previously unidentified Traditional Cultural Places or sacred sites are identified or encountered at any time during construction, efforts shall be made to protect the resource until the Forest Service permit administrator is notified and the Forest Service fulfills its consultation requirements, including consultation with the appropriate Tribal representatives.

11 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT NOT ANALYZED IN DEPTH The following alternatives were suggested in scoping comments but will not be carried into in-depth analysis for the reasons noted. It is important to note that, in accordance with our NEPA regulations (FSH 1909.15, sec. 14.4), these alternatives are part of the range of alternatives considered in this analysis.

No Boundary Adjustment or Limited Boundary Adjustment Alternatives Numerous scoping commenters requested an alternative the precluded any boundary adjustment or alternatives that dropped the south or west adjustment. These included “net-zero” alternatives and detailed “balanced” and “wildlife” alternatives suggested by the Jackson Hole Conservation Alliance. These alternatives were considered but not carried into in-depth analysis because of the fundamental purpose and need for the proposed action, which can be outlined as follows: • The ski area needs high-quality beginner and intermediate terrain to remain viable; • The only suitable location for developing sufficient terrain of this type is the summit and the back side of Snow King Mountain; • The lift serving this terrain must be easily downloadable to get beginner skiers to and from the summit; • Given the distance between this new terrain and base-area skier services, new service facilities are required on the summit; • Construction and maintenance of those facilities requires an access road and an “easy way down” from the summit for beginner skiers in the event of a lift failure is a necessity. The access road and beginner skiway have similar design requirements and are logically collocated; • The ski area has comprehensively identified and assessed options for the necessary access road/skiway, and the proposed alignment was identified as the only viable option; and finally, • Industry wide, mountain resorts are developing summer recreation options in response to visitor expectations, climate change, and generation of sufficient operating income, and Snow King is no exception. In terms of a no-adjustment or limited adjustment alternative, the east and west boundary adjustments are necessary to accommodate the access road/skiway, which would otherwise have to switchback continuously up the front side, within current permit boundaries, causing significant impacts in terms of soil disturbance, habitat fragmentation, skier safety, and visual quality. Beyond that, as a result of the continuous switchbacks it would not function well as either an access road or a beginner skiway. The southern addition, which involves land already within Snow King’s special use permit boundary, is necessary to provide intermediate terrain – the next step up for beginners using the summit terrain. The main reason commenters cited for an alternative with no southern addition was concern over impacts on specialized wildlife habitat, particularly deer and elk winter and fawning/calving habitat and wildlife migration routes. However, initial investigations indicated that while specialized habitat does occur in the vicinity, the actual area proposed for development does not include any. The EIS does address potential impacts on specialized habitats in the area, but we concluded that was not an issue warranting a no-southern- expansion alternative. In short, the suggested no-boundary-adjustment or limited-adjustment alternatives were not carried into in- depth analysis because they do not meet the purpose and need for action in terms of providing lower-level ski terrain and summit egress and, in the case of the southern addition, there is no alternative-driving issue.

12 Access Road Alternatives No New Road Several commenters suggested an alternative with no new road, generally in conjunction with improving the existing road and down-sizing the summit building. These alternatives were not carried into in-depth analysis because, in addition to being inconsistent with purpose and need as outlined above, the existing road does need meet the need for an “easy way down” from the summit or from the top of Rafferty lift and is too steep for construction traffic. Use of Leek’s Canyon Road Many commenters suggested using the existing Leek’s Canyon road, with improvements as necessary, to access the summit. This alternative was not carried into in-depth analysis because the Leek’s Canyon road does need meet the need for an “easy way down” from the summit to the base area and because it crosses private land not owned by Snow King and not under the jurisdiction of the USFS, so use could not be ensured. Other Alignments One commenter suggested extending Slow Trail up to Scott’s Ridge. This alternative was not carried into in-depth analysis. We considered this alternative, but due to the topography an alignment at 1ess than 10 percent grade, required for a beginner skiway, could not be achieved. Some commenters suggested an alignment within the current permit boundary, including options identified in past master plans. These options were not carried into in-depth analysis because, as noted above and in the scoping notice, we assessed such alternatives and concluded that alternative routes within the existing permit boundary did not provide appropriate grades for both construction access and a beginner skiway. Beyond that, they would generate the adverse environmental effects noted above. One commenter asked for an alternative that included limiting uses of the access road/skiway and identification of avalanche control measures to be used where it crosses new terrain. This alternative was not carried into in-depth analysis because the proposed action already limits motorized vehicle use of the proposed access road/skiway to the purposes outlined in the scoping notice. The EIS does address avalanche hazard. Some commenters suggested using Leek’s Canyon Road for construction and improving the existing front- side road as a skiway. This alternative was not carried into in-depth analysis because, as discussed above, the existing road does not meet the need for an “easy way down” from the summit or from the top of Rafferty lift. Skiing between Switchbacks Commenters suggested authorizing the proposed summit access road/skiway but not allowing skiing between the switchbacks in the east and west boundary adjustment areas. This alternative was not carried into in-depth analysis because closing this terrain would create substantial boundary management issues and because the proposed runs in the eastern area would provide much of the needed lower intermediate ski terrain necessary to meet purpose and need.

Gondola Alternatives Most of the gondola alternatives identified through scoping are addressed by the preferred alternative’s removal of the Cougar lift and relocation of the bottom gondola terminal to the current location of the Cougar lift bottom terminal. Other alternatives suggested were as follows.

13 One commenter suggested including a mid-station on the gondola to provide easy access to the lower slopes. This alternative was not carried into in-depth analysis because, given the steepness of the slope, the amount of earthmoving necessary to construct a mid-station would be prohibitive. Some commenters suggested a high-speed quad, perhaps with covered chairs, rather than a gondola. This alternative was not carried into in-depth analysis because a high-speed quad would not accommodate non- skiing riders, diverse weather, and night use as well as a gondola, and these are important functions of the proposed lift. Other commenters suggested a tram rather than a gondola. This alternative was not carried into in-depth analysis because no clear benefits were cited or are evident to us, and trams typically require longer wait times, have lower capacity, and cost more.

Lift A Alternatives Commenters suggested a shorter T-bar lift, without snowmaking, used only when natural snow was sufficient, with existing roads providing a return route to the “Saddle.” This alternative was not carried into in-depth analysis because a T-bar would not accommodate mountain bikes, and it would not provide access to the desired beginner and intermediate terrain. The need for snowmaking is addressed in the description of the proposed action. Commenters also suggested not building Lift A and allowing only human-powered activities on the back side. This alternative was not carried into in-depth analysis because it would not provide the lower-level ski terrain necessary to meet purpose and need.

Mountain Bike Trail Alternatives Commenters suggested an alternative mountain bike trail system beginning at the Rafferty mid-station. This alternative was not carried into in-depth analysis because the mid-station area is already highly developed and heavily used due to the siting of the ropes course, alpine slide, and mountain coaster, and because we believe the resulting mountain bike trail system would be too short to be a viable attraction.

Zip Line Alternatives Commenters suggested alternative zip line alignments, specifically adjacent to the proposed gondola on the east side, and adjacent to the Rafferty alignment. In negotiations with the Town of Jackson, Snow King agreed to avoid western base area entirely, precluding the alignment east of the gondola. The terrain traversed by the Rafferty alignment is not suitable for a single-span zip line due to topography. There would not be sufficient ground clearance along the middle of the alignment.

Beginner Area Alternatives Some commenters suggested locating the beginner area in Rafferty pod or elsewhere on the lower front side rather than on the summit, particularly because of concerns about wind, other inclement weather, and snow accumulation at the summit. Examples include the Rafferty Area, the Turnpike run, or vacant land behind the Snow King Resort Hotel. These alternatives were not carried into in-depth analysis because the summit area offers more appropriate topography on the wide, gently sloped area west of the summit, a longer season with good snow conditions due to elevation, more warmth and sun exposure, and better separation from more advanced skiers than lower-elevation, front-side options.

Summit Building Alternatives Some commenters suggested a smaller summit building, including an upgraded Panorama House. These alternatives were not carried into in-depth analysis because they are not consistent with the rationale for the

14 proposed facility as presented in the proposed action description, and because of the small size and deteriorated condition of the Panorama House. Commenters also suggested that a park be provided at the summit building site, with picnic tables. This use would be consistent with proposed functions for the summit building and would not require additional infrastructure. As a result, this suggestion was not carried into in-depth analysis.

Planetarium Alternative One commenter suggested an alternative planetarium site on East or West Gros Ventre Butte. This alternative was not carried into in-depth analysis because we did not believe that these locations would complement or be supported by proposed development on the summit of Snow King.

Wildlife Protection Alternatives Obliteration of Leek’s Canyon Road Some commenters suggested decommissioning and obliterating the portion of Leek’s Canyon Road that is on the National Forest to reduce the likelihood of skiers leaving the ski area and traveling down canyon, disturbing wintering wildlife and finding no legal egress at the bottom. This alternative was not carried into in-depth analysis because the road serves on-going uses, particularly providing access to an important communications site on the ridge. The site operator has a road easement across private and National Forest land. Fencing Wildlife Closure Boundaries Also to protect wintering wildlife, some commenters suggested installing permanent fences where the ski area permit is in close proximity to established wildlife closure areas. This alternative was not carried into in-depth analysis because hard fencing is not a normal Forest Service practice when there are alternative ways to control access. Permitted ski areas typically use rope lines, signage, and ski patrol to keep skiers away from closed areas, and we believe these measures will provide sufficient protection in this situation.

Lynx Alternative The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service spelled out an alternative based on reducing potential effects on Canada lynx: Due to the potential impacts to lynx and lynx habitat as a result of implementation of the proposed recreation activities, we recommend the EIS include at least one alternative implementing the following the NRLMD human use guidelines for developed recreation: HU Gl (maintaining inter- trail islands), HU G2 (providing lynx nocturnal foraging opportunities), HU G3 (lynx movement and habitat effectiveness), and HU G10 (maintaining security habitat when expanding ski areas and trails). Adopting these guidelines would ensure the proposed activities are designed to minimize the fragmentation of lynx foraging and denning habitat. Reducing the number of new graded/cleared areas, ski runs, bike trails, hiking trails, and buildings within currently contiguous lynx foraging and denning habitats would also reduce the fragmentation of lynx habitat. Alternatively, these Project-related activities could be moved to areas that do not contain lynx habitat. In addition, we recommend the Forest minimize the footprint of new lighted, night ski areas, especially in or adjacent to blocks of contiguous lynx habitat to give lynx the opportunity to forage at night. By implementing these measures, the Forest will appreciably reduce the impacts to lynx, lynx denning and foraging habitat, as well as, designated lynx critical habitat within in the Project area. The EIS and associated biological assessment address lynx impacts in accordance with established lynx management protocols, and Northern Rockies Lynx Management Direction (NRLMD) is addressed as

15 appropriate regardless of the alternative. We appreciate this information but do not believe that a lynx- specific alternative is necessary to incorporate it .

Terrain Park Expansion Commenters suggested expanding the existing terrain park into the Rafferty and Old Man’s Flats areas. This alternative was not carried into in-depth analysis because neither Snow King’s proposal nor internal agency review indicated a need for such expansion, and the commenters did not provide any rationale for the suggestion.

Alternative Management Some commenters suggested that the Town take over management of the resort and design their own, taxpayer-funded improvements. This alternative was not carried into in-depth analysis because Snow King operates on National Forest land, under Forest Service special use permit, issued to the current permittee. As a result, this alternative is outside the scope of this EIS.

16 APPENDIX D: SKI AREAS BY YEAR OPENED National List of Ski Areas by year Opened. Documented in September 2016 by the National Ski Association Ski Area State Year Opened Howelsen Hill Ski Area CO 1915 Eaglebrook School MA 1922 Granlibakken Tahoe CA 1927 Mt. Hood Skibowl OR 1927 Seven Springs Mountain Resort PA 1932 Wildcat Mountain NH 1933 Gore Mountain NY 1934 Pico Mountain VT 1934 Stowe Mountain Resort VT 1934 Lookout Pass Ski Area ID 1935 Blandford Ski Area MA 1936 Brighton Ski Resort UT 1936 Bromley Mountain Resort VT 1936 Middlebury College Snow Bowl VT 1936 Mount Peter Ski Area NY 1936 Showdown Montana MT 1936 Sleeping Giant Ski Area WY 1936 Sun Valley Resort ID 1936 Terry Peak Ski Area SD 1936 Cranmore Mountain Resort NH 1937 Granite Peak at Rib Mountain State Park WI 1937 Gunstock Mountain Resort NH 1937 Loveland Ski Area CO 1937 Mountain High Resort CA 1937 Mt. Zion MI 1937 Snow Valley Mountain Resort CA 1937 Stevens Pass WA 1937 Suicide Six Ski Area VT 1937 The Summit At Snoqualmie WA 1937 Timberline Lodge & Ski Area OR 1937 Abenaki Ski Area NH 1938 Alta Ski Area UT 1938 Arizona Snowbowl AZ 1938 Cannon Mountain NH 1938 Hoodoo Ski Area OR 1938 Lost Trail Ski Area, Inc. MT 1938 Mt. Spokane Ski & Snowboard Park WA 1938 Shawnee Peak Ski Area ME 1938 Wilmot Mountain WI 1938 Camden Snow Bowl ME 1939 Catamount Ski Area NY 1939 Monarch Mountain CO 1939 Otsego Club & Resort MI 1939 Ski Ward Ski Area MA 1939 Snow King Mountain Resort WY 1939 Sugar Bowl Resort CA 1939 w 1939 White Pine Ski Area WY 1939 Wolf Creek Ski Area CO 1939 Ski Area State Year Opened Snowbasin Resort Co. UT 1940 Winter Park Resort CO 1940 Little Switzerland WI 1941 Willamette Pass Resort OR 1941 Bogus Basin Mountain Recreation Area ID 1942 Ski Cooper CO 1942 Pajarito Mountain Ski Area NM 1944 Mt. Lemmon Ski Valley AZ 1945 Sky Tavern NV 1945 Snow Ridge Resort NY 1945 Arapahoe Basin Ski Area CO 1946 Bear Mountain Resort CA 1946 Otis Ridge MA 1946 Aspen Mountain CO 1947 Big Boulder Ski Area PA 1947 Boyne Mountain Resort MI 1947 Mohawk Mountain Ski Area CT 1947 Ski Santa Fe NM 1947 Swain Resort NY 1947 Whitefish Mountain Resort MT 1947 Bradford Ski Area MA 1948 Jiminy Peak Mountain Resort MA 1948 Lutsen Mountains MN 1948 Mont Du Lac Recreation WI 1948 Mount Sunapee Resort NH 1948 Oak Mountain NY 1948 Soldier Mountain Ski Area ID 1948 Belleayre Mountain NY 1949 Mt. Holiday Ski & Recreation Area MI 1949 Pebble Creek Ski Area ID 1949 Snow Snake Ski & Golf MI 1949 Squaw Valley / Alpine Meadows CA 1949 Dodge Ridge Ski Area CA 1950 Trollhaugen Winter Recreation Area WI 1950 Sugarloaf ME 1951 Mt. Baldy Ski Lifts, Inc. CA 1952 Sipapu Ski & Summer Resort NM 1952 Snow Summit Mountain Resort CA 1952 White Pass Ski Area WA 1952 Mammoth CA 1953 Buck Hill MN 1954 Mount Snow Resort VT 1954 Treetops Resort MI 1954 Bridger Bowl Ski Area MT 1955 Cooper Spur Mountain Resort OR 1955 Heavenly Mountain Resort NV 1955 Hidden Valley Resort PA 1955 Jay Peak Resort VT 1955 Taos Ski Valley, Inc. NM 1955 Ski Area State Year Opened Burke Mountain Resort LLC VT 1956 Crystal Mountain MI 1956 Dartmouth Skiway NH 1956 Mt. Holly Ski Resort, Inc. MI 1956 Okemo Mountain Resort VT 1956 Ski Brule MI 1956 Smugglers' Notch Resort VT 1956 Wisp Resort MD 1956 Greek Peak Mountain Resort NY 1957 Holiday Valley Resort NY 1957 Solitude Mountain Resort UT 1957 Aspen Highlands CO 1958 Buttermilk CO 1958 China Peak Mountain Resort CA 1958 Detroit Mountain Recreation Area MN 1958 Hurricane Ridge Ski Area WA 1958 Killington Resort VT 1958 Loup Loup Ski Bowl WA 1958 Mt. Bachelor LLC OR 1958 Nub's Nob Ski Area MI 1958 Sugarbush Resort VT 1958 Whiteface Mountain NY 1958 Alyeska Resort AK 1959 Chestnut Mountain Resort IL 1959 Elk Mountain Ski Resort, Inc. PA 1959 Hunter Mountain NY 1959 Hyland Hills Ski Area MN 1959 Indianhead Operations LLC MI 1959 McCauley Mtn. Ski Center NY 1959 Mt. La Crosse WI 1959 The Omni Homestead Ski Area VA 1959 Powder Ridge Mountain Park & Resort CT 1959 Red River Ski & Summer Area NM 1959 Rotarun Ski Club, Inc. ID 1959 Snowy Range Ski & Recreation Area WY 1959 Sunday River Resort ME 1959 Thunder Ridge Ski Area NY 1959 Berkshire East Mountain Resort MA 1960 Mt. Abram Resort ME 1960 Mt. Brighton Ski Area MI 1960 Red Lodge Mountain Resort MT 1960 Windham Mountain Resort NY 1960 Breckenridge Ski Resort CO 1961 Cataloochee Ski Area NC 1961 Hogadon Ski Area WY 1961 Lost Valley Ski Area ME 1961 Ski Apache Resort NM 1961 Snow Trails OH 1961 Sunburst Winter Sports Park WI 1961 Ski Area State Year Opened Timber Ridge Ski Area MI 1961 Alpine Valley Ski Area MI 1962 Alpine Valley Ski Area OH 1962 Anthony Lakes OR 1962 Appalachian Ski Mtn. NC 1962 Cascade Mountain WI 1962 Crested Butte Mountain Resort CO 1962 Crystal Mountain, Inc. WA 1962 Eldora Mountain Resort CO 1962 HoliMont Ski Area NY 1962 Homewood Mountain Resort CA 1962 King Pine Ski Area NH 1962 Mad River Mountain OH 1962 Mt. Ski Gull MN 1962 Ober Gatlinburg Ski Area TN 1962 Powder Ridge Ski Area MN 1962 Song Mountain Resort NY 1962 Stratton VT 1962 Vail Mountain CO 1962 Wachusett Mountain Ski Area MA 1962 Afton Alps Ski Area MN 1963 Arrowhead Recreation Area NH 1963 Blue Knob PA 1963 Boston Mills/Brandywine Ski Resort OH 1963 Camelback Resort PA 1963 Grand Geneva Resort WI 1963 June Mountain CA 1963 Lee Canyon NV 1963 Meadowlark Ski Lodge WY 1963 Park City Mountain Resort UT 1963 Pats Peak NH 1963 Pomerelle Mountain Resort ID 1963 Schweitzer Mountain Resort ID 1963 Shanty Creek Resorts MI 1963 Ski Butternut MA 1963 Ski Cloudcroft NM 1963 Steamboat Ski & Resort CO 1963 Attitash Mountain Resort NH 1964 Boreal Mountain Resort CA 1964 Boyne Highlands Resort MI 1964 Bristol Mountain Resort NY 1964 The Hermitage Club VT 1964 Mount Southington Ski Area CT 1964 Mt. Ashland OR 1964 Mt. Rose - Ski Tahoe NV 1964 Nashoba Valley Ski Area MA 1964 Peek 'n Peak Resort NY 1964 Ragged Mountain Resort NH 1964 Roundtop Mountain Resort PA 1964 Ski Area State Year Opened Yawgoo Valley Ski Area & Waterpark RI 1964 Boyce Park Ski Area/Snow Tubing Area PA 1965 Brian Head Resort UT 1965 Bryce Resort VA 1965 Cannonsburg Ski Area MI 1965 Lake City Ski Hill CO 1965 Liberty Mountain Resort PA 1965 Mountain Creek Resort NJ 1965 Purgatory Resort CO 1965 Test Ski Area CO 1965 Welch Village Ski Area, Inc. MN 1965 Angel Fire Resort NM 1966 Apple Mountain MI 1966 Bolton Valley VT 1966 Diamond Peak Ski Resort NV 1966 Great Bear Ski Valley SD 1966 Jackson Hole Mountain Resort WY 1966 Loon Mountain Recreation Corp. NH 1966 Mission Ridge Ski & Board Resort WA 1966 Powderhorn Mountain Resort CO 1966 Sunlight Mountain Resort CO 1966 Waterville Valley Resort NH 1966 Bear Creek Mountain Resort PA 1967 Bear Valley Mountain CA 1967 Beech Mountain Resort NC 1967 Snowmass CO 1967 Mt. Hood Meadows OR 1968 Sierra-at-Tahoe LLC CA 1968 Silver Mountain Ski and Year Round Waterpark Resort! ID 1968 Grand Targhee Resort WY 1969 Proctor Ski Area NH 1969 Ski Sawmill Family Resort PA 1969 Ski Sundown CT 1969 SpringHill Camps - Michigan MI 1969 Sugar Mountain Ski Area NC 1969 Sundance UT 1969 Wolf Ridge Ski Resort NC 1969 Ausblick Ski Area WI 1970 Keystone Resort CO 1970 Nordic Valley UT 1970 Canaan Valley Resort WV 1971 Cloudmont Ski & Golf AL 1971 Devil's Head Resort & Convention Center WI 1971 McIntyre Ski Area NH 1971 Mount Pleasant of Edinboro PA 1971 Quechee Ski Area VT 1971 Royal Gorge Cross Country Ski Resort CA 1971 Snowbird Ski & Summer Resort UT 1971 Copper Mountain Resort CO 1972 Ski Area State Year Opened Jack Frost Mountain PA 1972 Kirkwood Mountain Resort CA 1972 Northstar California CA 1972 Powder Mountain UT 1972 Sunrise Park Resort AZ 1972 Tahoe Donner Ski Area CA 1972 Telluride Ski & Golf Resort CO 1972 Wild Mountain MN 1972 Big Sky Resort MT 1973 Bretton Woods Ski Area NH 1973 Discovery Ski Area MT 1973 Massanutten Resort VA 1973 Pocono Ranch Lands Property Owners PA 1974 Snowshoe WV 1974 Spirit Mountain Recreation Area MN 1974 Sundown Mountain Ski and Snowboard Resort IA 1974 Eaglecrest Ski Area AK 1975 Shawnee Mountain Ski Area PA 1975 Wintergreen Resort VA 1975 Nordic Mountain Ski Area WI 1976 Ski Big Bear PA 1976 Blue Mountain Resort PA 1977 Mount Kato Ski Area MN 1978 Paoli Peaks, Inc. IN 1978 Ski Bluewood WA 1979 Beaver Creek Resort CO 1980 Deer Valley Resort Company UT 1981 Fernwood Resort and C.C. PA 1981 Perfect North Slopes IN 1981 Ski Snowstar Winter Sports Park IL 1981 Tussey Mountain Ski Area PA 1981 Hidden Valley Ski Area MO 1982 Ski Granby Ranch CO 1982 Hilltop Ski Area AK 1983 The Homestead MI 1983 Timberline Four Seasons Resort WV 1983 Winterplace Ski Resort WV 1983 Giants Ridge Recreation Area MN 1984 Montage Mountain PA 1984 Mt. Shasta Ski Park CA 1985 The Rock Snow Park WI 1986 Snow Creek Ski Area MO 1987 Huff Hills Ski Area ND 1991 Whitetail Resort PA 1991 Mystic Mountain/Nemacolin Woodlands PA 1995 Eagle Rock Ski Area PA 1997 Yellowstone Mountain Club MT 1997 Double H Ranch NY 1998 Deer Crest Home Owners Association Private Trails UT 2000 Ski Area State Year Opened Mount Bohemia MI 2000 Silverton Mountain CO 2001 Crotched Mountain Ski & Ride NH 2003 Tamarack Resort ID 2004 Echo Mountain Resort CO 2005 Liberty Mountain Snowflex Centre VA 2009 Frisco Adventure Park CO 2011 Gateway Parks MI 2011 Cherry Peak Resort UT 2015 APPENDIX E: WYOMING SKI AREAS

Snow King (Jackson) BTNF: 1939

Jackson Hole (Teton Village) BTNF: 1966

White Pine (Pinedale) BTNF: 1939

Grand Targhee (Alta): 1969

Snowy Range (Centennial): 1959

Sleeping Giant (Cody/Wapiti): 1936

Meadowlark (Ten Sleep): 1963

Hogadon (Casper): 1961

Pine Creek (Cokeville): 1960

Antelope Butte (Sheridan/Greybull): ?

APPENDIX F: SNOW KING & COMMUNITY MEANING In line with the concept that the cultural significance of Snow King integrity can best be determined by visitors, residents, and outdoor enthusiasts - the importance and meaning of the Snow King District with regards to National Register integrity (location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling) can be revealed and better understood through an analysis of the main place names of the ski area (Snow King, The King, and the Town Hill). Place name review is specifically employed below as a method for describing the cultural context of the District with regard to National Register association and feeling and character-defining features. The concept of metanarrative assists in demonstrating Snow King’s connection to historic events under Criterion A – namely contributions to the development of outdoor recreation, tourism, and local ski culture in Jackson Hole.

Conversational mention of Snow King often has a unique blend of jovial celebration mixed with seriousness and respect. The names are symbols likely to bring a smile, a positive flash, or some connection related to feelings and identity that tend to relate to celebration and seriousness. The celebration comes from: the joy of experiencing the outdoors, skiing, invigorating activity, ascents, vistas, removal from inside the town setting in a more natural environment, play and learning for children, and community gathering for events; the seriousness and respect from: challenging physical endeavors, the unavoidable presence within town of the culturally modified mountain, the shading influence of the mountain that creates a dark and cold environment in the winter months, and the lifestyle commitment required for passionate pursuit of outdoor recreation.

The name Snow King acknowledges the seriousness and celebration inherent in the sport of skiing and questions the distinction between fiction and reality, all located within minutes of town residents’ homes that everyone viewing the District can ponder. Place name review is a method also conducted with the goal of revealing the Snow King’s relationship to the concept of metanarrative. Metanarrative is defined as: 1. a narrative account that experiments with or explores the idea of storytelling, often by drawing attention to its own artificiality. "Don Quixote is a work of fiction but also a metanarrative." 2. an overarching account or interpretation of events and circumstances that provides a pattern or structure for people’s beliefs and gives meaning to their experiences.

A previously unexplored concept, Snow King’s fundamental relationship to the “Jackson Hole Metanarrative” is an attempt to articulate the “larger than life” role that Snow King holds in the community and is readily absorbable to visitors. The closest articulation of a Jackson Hole Metanarrative description I have encountered is referring to the area as “Peter Pan Land”. The main concept being that Jackson Hole functions as a community based on the pursuit of recreational outdoor adventures in a beautiful place while possibly skirting some of responsibilities of adulthood. While this analogy may seem a bit overboard with potentially negative connotations, in the town of Jackson, working 9-5 on a powder day can feel like the exception rather than the norm, and businesses might be closed. The history of recreation, dude ranches, and tourism in an isolated and wild place provides historic economic precedent for the current cultural fixation on outdoor recreation.

Snow King, The King, and The Town Hill: Geographic Place Names that Communicate Community Identity and Integrity of Feeling and Association The name “Snow King” implies that snow itself might be the supreme authority within outdoor recreation or lifestyle choices, and firmly establishes a place in the Jackson Hole outdoor recreation

1 metanarrative. The distinction made by Lyotard (1979) of metanarrative as a universal truth verses “individual narratives” as a series of relative and personal experiences (that create and define meaning in one’s own life) directly relates to Snow King. Snow King facilitates the development of individual narratives that support the broader Jackson Hole metanarrative through personal narratives. Perhaps the most relevant takeaway point from this discussion of “individual narrative verses metanarrative” is that Snow King is instrumental in facilitating individual development of narratives that support the larger metanarrative that places the pursuit of recreation above other goals. Additionally, the element of humor is present: boastfulness (Snow King is not the not the biggest mountain or ski area in Jackson Hole, and skiing and recreation aren’t the only thing in the world despite the wishes of Jackson Hole residents and visitors.)

The Snow King Ski Area Historic District is most commonly referred to as “Snow King” or simply “The King.” There are several ways in which the Snow King’s character-defining features are strongly in alignment with the part of the name “king” and the Jackson Hole metanarrative. Definitions of king include: the chief authority over a country and people, a thing supreme or preeminent in its class, group, category, or sphere and a man chosen as the winner of a contest or the honorary head of an event. The name implies rulership and dominance. This section explores the connections to this theme through comparing visual and cultural perspectives that are association with specific CDFs and the District as a whole.

Snow King Mountain itself is the most imposing and domineering physical feature that can be seen from the town of Jackson. It is a natural feature well suited for winter recreation. In the 1920’s, Snow King Mountain started to become an anthropogenically modified hillslope. The sum of the runs carved out of the conifers on the mountain over time has resulted in visual dominance of clear cut runs on a mountain that was already the dominant physical feature in town. The dramatic clear cut feeling of the runs is a strong symbol of man’s mark on the landscape. For the skier, the runs are a human mechanism created to facilitate enjoyment of snow, allowing the snow itself to become king. This is no small concept considering many residents have forgone things (like living around family, traditional careers, the ability to own a house, etc.) to live in an expensive place like Jackson Hole and pursue skiing with dedication.

Snow King is visible throughout much of southern Jackson Hole. This rural historic landscape in the wildland urban interface functions to geographically orient someone looking to understand how the town of Jackson fits into the vast mountainous landscape. The mark of the runs identifies a pocket of human development within a largely undeveloped valley. From views farther off, Snow King is the only clue that a town is present. If one anthropomorphizes the mountain and town in the context, the visible King is seen watching over his people in town. The runs have functioned to provide cultural identity and practical geographic orientation.

The view of Snow King from town is substantially affected by the presence of Exhibition Run extending from the base up to the top of the mountain. The north-south orientation of the run aligns with the main North/South running street, Cache Street, which also passes through the center of town and borders the Jackson Town Square. The King and the town are literally in alignment.

The view from the ski area affords views of town, the Teton Range, Gros Ventre Range, and Jackson Hole. This astounding view is enjoyed year-round by visitors and locals alike. Views from Snow King are

2 substantially impactful in size and impression that they certainly seem worthy of a King. The Panorama House was built to facilitate this view and create an emphasis on an elevated view of the famous Teton Range. The unavoidable presence of town in most of the views also keep the presence of the broader landscape, the king, the snow, and his people all in relation to each other.

The District can allow recreators to become a king (such as the photo below) in which the mountain, run, and snow provide a throne for a king, complete with a regal view. Recreators can also feel like royalty by winning one of the many competitions held at Snow King. Contestants compete at the World Championship Snowmobile Hill Climb for the title “King of the Hill.” Uphill athletic contests encourage people to “Conquer the King” as displayed on current signs in the District. Whether uphill or downhill, the concept of triumph and Snow King are connected. On the other hand, the steepness and challenge of the terrain are substantial enough that the human kings are eventually humbled by the mountain.

Photo from snowkingmountain.com. Just as the throne of a King is a place of power and legitimacy, the runs at Snow King hold that role for the skier.

The Town Hill The “Town Hill” name is interesting because it implies town ownership of the hill. This provides an interesting paradox because the mountain operations are owned by a private company, but the public tends to feel very entitled to involvement in management decisions. It speaks to local involvement and passion, a sentiment consisting of local cultural ownership of the hill, and an area for congregation and social interaction and facilitates a sense of belonging and a connection to town. The term “hill” could be seen as referring to acknowledgement that bigger mountains are out there nearby (which can also be seen a jest considering the ski area is still a sizable and challenging landform). Many locals and youngsters think of the hill from the perspective of the Jackson Hole Ski and Snowboard Club kids who use Snow King to train for ski racing several days a week and then focus on freeride skiing out at Jackson Hole Mountain Resort on the weekend. This tradition is continuing the idea of Snow King being a caretaker of children goes back generations. With backcountry being an increasingly popular mode of skiing, the connection with Snow King and town is even more relevant. It can afford relatively quick and relatively urban uphill skinning ski adventures for those who are less interested in a lift access skiing experience. The importance of the Town Hill concept is documented in the specific character-defining features of the Lower Open Area and Exhibition Run described in the main report.