As both an avid skier and a passionate environmentalist, I have experienced a deep sense of frustration in attempting to manifest my environmental ideals in my life while pursuing a lifestyle of outdoor recreation in Colorado. Like countless skiers, hikers, kayakers, climbers, and mountain bikers, I often have to compromise my environmental ethics in order to recreate in Colorado’s incredible natural environments. Perhaps more so than any other activity, skiing demands the development and continued operation of high-impact facilities on public forest ecosystems. The highway expansions, the hotel and restaurant development, the high-speed quads and on-mountain lodges, the expansive network of clear cut ski runs, the water and energy consumption—these inherent aspects of ski resort development demand that skiers and snowboarders contribute to the destruction and degradation of our natural resources and open spaces. It is unfair and unnecessary for environmentally conscious skiers to have to compromise their values in the pursuit of recreation. My thesis aimed at accumulating enough ecological, economic, and social evidence to illustrate the need for reformation in the ski industry so that resort policies emphasize responsible stewardship of the natural environments in which they operate.

Skiing was once considered an environmentally benign industry, one that invariably brought tremendous economic benefits to mountain communities and recreational freedom to its patrons. Technology, romanticism and media once perpetuated a unique perception of skiing as popular culture began to embrace snow sports as an icon of freedom, fashion, and "cool." In 1980, the skiing population of America peaked at 50 million and ski companies were rapidly transforming their small-time operations into world-class resort destinations. Resort communities were booming with economic activity and swelling from rising populations.

Yet, the wealth of socioeconomic benefits that flooded mountain communities in the wake of ski resort growth were soon surpassed by accruing costs. Environmental degradation, traffic congestion, urban sprawl, housing problems, employment shortages—these are the fruits of continued ski resort expansion and growth.

Today, the perception of skiing is rapidly moving away from the idealism of the industry’s inception. As more Americans become environmentally conscious, and as natural landscapes become increasingly scarce, the continued expansion of ski run development into pristine forests and the construction of trophy homes on and around ski mountains is becoming unacceptable to the skiing public. The physical congestion and social degradation that so many resort communities have experienced as a direct result of ski area expansion has stimulated a backlash of opposition from local municipalities.

Yet, ski companies continue to aggressively pursue growth in the face of environmental concerns, public outcry, and—perhaps most alarmingly—a stagnant consumer pool. Since 1980, the American skiing population has hovered around 50 million, sometimes experiencing declines in skier visitation from year to year while the total size of ski areas (in acres) has more than doubled.

The flat skier visitation rates of the past twenty years can be attributed to a variety of demographic and social factors—but it cannot justify the continued expansion of ski resorts. The baby boom generation that gave birth to the ski industry is aging and losing its interest in a physically demanding and dangerous past time. Younger generations are gaining interest in other outdoor activities that avoid sprawling development, large crowds and high expense. The plethora of environmental repercussions and the paucity of mitigation within the industry have given rise to viscous attacks by advocacy groups and a wave of negative publicity by the media. These factors have resulted in an industry crisis and an economic enigma: the demand for ski operations and facilities is falling, but the supply is rising.

The environmental impacts of such unbridled expansion are often dramatic and far-reaching. The conversion of pristine forest into fragmented ski runs, the development of resort facilities, the construction of homes and businesses that seek proximity to resorts, and the sheer numbers of visitors brought to the forest for recreation purposes—these factors result in significant changes to the natural environment. Ski area expansion and operation invariably degrade, and sometimes destroy, forest ecology both within and without the ski area boundaries.

Ski runs are essentially permanent clear cuts on steep slopes. Runs and lodges disturb wildlife habitat. Snowmaking draws water from mountain streams during their driest seasons when fish and other aquatic life are most vulnerable. Ski area expansions spawn real estate development on surrounding land, further disrupting wildlife, increasing water demands, and adding to sprawl.

Because ninety percent of ski areas operate in national forests, the way in which private ski companies manage their operation directly impacts public natural resources. Ski area development is one of a variety of legitimate uses of our public lands, but if the continued expansion of ski areas threatens the integrity and availability of the forest’s other resources, such expansion must be prohibited. Equally important is the fact that ski resorts exist in a social environment of resort communities, an environment that reaps the benefits as well as the costs of resort management.

Continued resort development would spur growth in areas that are already struggling with growth-induced pressures. The impacts to our roads, water treatment plants, schools, police, housing, and air and water quality could be severe.

The costs to local communities from ski resort expansion have begun to exceed the benefits, and the social rift between mountain resorts and the communities that house them is widening.

These ecological and social costs of ski industry growth have given rise to a movement—both within and without the industry—towards sustainable development and environmental responsibility. In the past decade, environmental advocacy groups have become increasingly vocal, and resort communities have sought more active roles in ski area management. The perception of skiing as an environmentally benign industry is being rapidly eroded, and the skiing public is beginning to demand that ski companies change their policies to emphasize environmental responsibility. It is therefore crucial to the survival of the ski industry that mountain resorts minimize the detrimental impacts they have on the ecological environments and social communities in which they operate and to maximize the efficiency of their operations and the quality of the ski-product.

In an era when natural resources are being rapidly diminished, when economic interests are at an all time high, and when society is struggling to understand and achieve harmony with its natural environment, the need for sustainable industry has never been greater. If the American ski industry can take responsibility for its historic mismanagement of the natural resources it depends on and can adopt policies that minimize consumption and waste while maximizing quality and efficiency-- it can serve as an example of ecological economics and sustainability for the world.