This past year, Pico Peak, the ski area my father and mother pioneered in Vermont in the mid 30’s, was sold to Killington. A news reporter asked my reaction to the sale. I told him I felt fortunate in having grown up with the history of skiing in this country and that I had seen skiing go from “spontaneity” to “sophistication.” I said I hoped Killington would appreciate, and if possible maintain, a sense of intimacy and family quality that Pico had projected over the years. I said in future ski area expansion it is important, in fact essential, to be aware of, and respond to, environmental concerns with appropriate mitigations.
The reporter’s question brought to mind thoughts I’ve had over time that have formed my point of view regarding skiing and the environment. As we all know, skiing is synonymous with the environment simply by virtue of where it takes place. In building or expanding ski areas we must remember we are offering skiers our mountain environment — not a conversion to another Los Angeles.
If the enthusiasm for development goes on without awareness of what is, or can be eroded, there is an unnecessary loss to the environment and to the potential experience skiers seek.
Expanding on the spontaneous versus the sophisticated idea, recall that early skiers who approached mountains for skiing and recreation did so with a sense of adventure and discovery — both being ingredients of wonder and joy. The expanse and solitude of mountains offered, and still can offer, the opportunity for enlarging and experiencing one’s own inner spaces and sound chambers.
Since the early days, the growth and pace of skiing has been phenomenal. Just as the pace of living and change everywhere has been accelerating, skiing also has become sophisticated and high-tech, partly to survive economically as well as meet skiers’ demands. However, during this time of rapid change, the balance between the intimate quality of skiing I grew up with and today’s skiing world is being lost. As small scale skiing gives way to large scale, it pushes aside a number of other values, including the environment. It is time to reach a new balance that retains the best of both skiing worlds.
I feel that the whole of skiing is larger than the sum of its parts and if we do not control the parts, we could lose the whole. There is more to ski areas than lifts, trails and condos.
If more skiing space is to be developed, the industry must solicit input from the environmental community. It is equally important that the environmental community be forthcoming and state its point of view and specific concerns. There may be instances when this results in a flat “no.” But I feel strongly that if enviromental concerns are incorporated into the early planning process, the end result will be a better project.
In the 60’s, Disney proposed a major new ski area in Mineral King, adjacent to Sequoia National Park. Environmentalists vigorously, and ultimately successfully, opposed it. They argued that existing ski areas with basic infrastructure, dwellings, etc., in place should be built out to an optimum point before going into regions of absolutely no development, where a totally new planned area would have an enormous impact on the environment. I strongly support that conservation principle.
For those who choose to live there, mountain towns are more than just good places to ski. More and more people are moving to ski areas to live and raise their families in a beautiful and friendly environment where they can also ski, fish and hike. They seek a community in the full and rich sense of the word. Such communities depend on the quality and diversity of recreation for their long term economic health, but we must not overload them.
At some point, development in expanding ski areas drives ski towns to exceed their carrying capacities — that is, they lose the ability to give their residents and visitors a unique mountain experience. As these towns become more urbanized, we are defeated in our twin purposes to provide recreation and to preserve our mountain communities.
I don’t presume to know where the optimum point of development is, but I know we must address the problem within the framework of thoughtful land-use policies. It will take coordination with local government, the United States Forest Service, the environmental community and the people who live and ski in the mountains to arrive at a plan that comes close to the optimum point.
Skiing truly is synonymous with the environment, not exclusive of it. When we develop and expand our ski areas, we have to be watchful of limits so we do not destroy the many other important values we have to offer.
