|
Maybe it's global warming, or maybe it's just a hiccup in "normal" weather patterns, but in either case, ski areas around the country aren't taking any chances. Following a couple of winters with below-average early season snowfall, many resorts are expanding their snowmaking capacity.
The trend is evident even in the West, once considered the bastion of plentiful natural snow. Telluride Ski and Golf Company has just announced it will invest $3.1 million this summer to substantially boost snowmaking capacity.
Both Copper Mountain and Vail are asking the Forest Service to approve plans that would more than double the amount of terrain they can cover with machine-made fluff, and Keystone recently won approval to more than double the amount of water if diverts for snowmaking.
Meanwhile, Utah's Snow Basin, preparing for the 2002 Winter Olympics, has a drilled 2,000-foot well to tap groundwater for snowmaking.
And New England resorts, which have long depended on extensive snowmaking, are also expanding their systems.
Once seen as insurance against drought, snowmaking has become much more than that - it's no longer just a matter of ensuring that a few runs are open for Thanksgiving and Christmas.
In discussing a recent move to increase snowmaking at Breckenridge, resort officials talked about their desire to have top-to-bottom skiing on all three peaks, and to have the terrain park and halfpipe open for the early season.
Ski area executives say snowmaking helps resorts capture the crucial early season market - when the demand is there but the snow may not be.
But it takes water to make snow, and some environmental groups and regulatory agencies are worried that snowmaking expansions may be straining aquatic resources.
It's not so much the total amount of water used. That's minimal in the bigger picture, and much of the water eventually goes back into the natural hydrological cycle when the snow melts in the spring.
But since water withdrawals often come in autumn and early winter when stream flows are already low, there appear to be some legitimate questions about potential impacts to aquatic habitat.
Michael Kellett, director of Maine-based RESTORE: The North Woods, says snowmaking is the number one environmental issue associated with ski areas in the Northeast.
With a large number of big resorts clustered in a relatively small geographic area, Kellett says simultaneous withdrawals from multiple headwater tributaries during low-flow seasons can cause artificially induced drought conditions that persist for extended periods of time. That can make it difficult for fish to find suitable spawning habitat and cover.
Low stream flows can also have detrimental effects on the algae and invertebrates at the base of the aquatic food chain.
Kellett's group recently battled New Hampshire's Loon Mountain Resort and the U.S. Forest Service on a snowmaking proposal that would have permitted the ski area to deplete a mountain pond.
The parties faced off in federal court, and Loon ultimately agreed to build storage ponds for snowmaking water, helping to minimizing impacts on the natural ponds and streams in the area.
In addition to water quantity issues, environmentalists cite a litany of water quality concerns. Using treated wastewater - as has been proposed in Utah - or chlorinated municipal water, may also harm aquatic ecosystems in the run-off zone, while the installation of snowmaking pipelines can disturb sensitive wetlands and high alpine tundra.
Toxic heavy metals, stemming from long-abandoned mines, have recently been at issue in Summit County, where proposed snowmaking projects at Keystone and Arapahoe Basin could worsen pollution by raising concentrations of metals and possibly even spreading the pollution to previously untainted tributaries.
Snowmaking proposals at all four Summit County resorts - Copper Mountain, Keystone, Breckenridge and Arapahoe Basin - could also have a cumulative effect on fish habitat, according to Trout Unlimited, a nationwide group dedicated to the conservation of trout and salmon fisheries.
In the watersheds of Utah's Wasatch Range, which harbors another cluster of ski areas, studies are under way to determine whether a biological additive used in snowmaking has any effect on water quality. And plans to pump polluted water upstream for snowmaking have also raised concerns, according to Paul Dremann, with Trout Unlimited.
In California's Lake Tahoe Region, the concerns are less over water quality impacts than the effects snowmaking could have on wildlife. Loud and incessant, snowguns often operate all night, potentially disturbing nocturnal animals that might otherwise use ski area terrain as habitat.
The noise issue also was raised in Colorado recently. When Arapahoe Basin proposed snowmaking, some skiers who enjoy full-moon backcountry skiing at nearby Loveland Pass said the roaring guns would detract from their experience.
The ski industry is well aware of the concerns and has sought to address the issue during an ongoing effort to develop an industry- wide environmental charter.
Geraldine Hughes, public policy director for the National Ski Areas Association, says that a draft version of the charter includes language that recognizes the potential impacts to rivers, streams and lakes, and seeks to minimize them - whenever possible.
Hughes said the issue of snowmaking impacts elicited extensive discussion at a series of meetings held to develop the charter
Manufacturers are working to develop snowmaking equipment that is quiet to operate and uses water more efficiently.
And creating more water storage facilities, as Loon Mountain did, could also go a long way toward mitigating the impacts of withdrawals during the low-flow season. Resorts don't need to store enough water for all their snowmaking needs, but having access to water reserves could help ensure that stream flows can be maintained at healthy levels even at times of peak demand.
Robert Berwyn
P.O. Box 2013
Silverthorne, Colorado 80498
USA
e-mail: [email protected]
|