I worked at Timberline on Mt Hood & saw lots of snowboarders who would ride from the the lodge parking lot to Gov'y, hitchhike back up to the lodge & do it again, all day long. Living on the mountain & snowboarding for several years was a special & beautiful experience that I'm very thankful for.
Fun fact: at least in some of the ski areas on public land, the resorts are required to shut down either if bears hibernate late or if the bears come out of hibernation early! Also, in my opinion, these multi billion dollar companies take advantage of a cheap system in order to cause an environmental disaster, try to prevent their minimum wage employees from unionizing, and drive everyone except rich people out of the towns (looking at you, Vail).
All great points! I think, for me personally, public access is a big positive for this system. Realistically, there aren't a lot of places that aren't public land where ski resorts (and the public) could go considering historic development patterns in the US. And at least on public lands, environmental concerns can be mitigated/addressed (even if, in practice, this is difficult to do), whereas private resorts wouldn't really have that oversight at all. But yeah, there are big problems, as you mentioned, and definitely things to be improved upon. I guess we have the best of a difficult and complicated situation at this point. Thanks for the counterpoints Rachel!
Which resorts are required to close based on the presence of bear activity? I have heard this and similar claims but not seen actual examples where this occurs. Thanks in advance!
Did some googling after watching this, and apparently many ski resorts here in Japan are also built on public land. Seems like there are sections of the law specifying that resorts can only expand to the minimum amount necessary to handle their expected traffic, as well as regulations around when they're allowed to make artificial snow. That's just a few things I picked out skimming the page I found online though. Hard to say how closely those rules are actually followed. In practice I don't really notice much difference in resorts here or in the USA. In any event I do hope that going forward resorts can find ways to be sustainable as personally I see them as a valuable way to experience public lands in winter, since not everyone is crazy enough to go climb mountains in the dead of winter.
That's really interesting, thanks for the perspective! I'm not super familiar with other countries' public lands systems, so it's always cool to learn about them. Agreed on public access though. No doubt resorts have certain environmental impacts that have to be mitigated as much as possible, but if they can do that and provide the public with accessible downhill skiing opportunities, I'm all for it.
You can find ski resorts in national parks too it turns out like in my Rainier and Olympic national Park but for some reason I've seen a lot of people think you can't dind them there and one of the big concerns with making mt hood a national park is that they would get rid of the ski resorts when they actually wouldn't
Hey there! So I looked into these and I think there's a misconception about the types of ski areas found in National Parks, if at all, and how they're different from those found on USFS land. The one at Mt. Rainier (if you're referring to Crystal Mountain) is not technically within NP boundaries, but rather part of the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie NF. In Olympic, there is a ski area, but it's not what we would think of as a typical "resort" like we see in USFS areas. As for Mt Hood, I'm not very familiar with the National Park efforts there, but I personally don't see those types of ski areas as being in line with the vision for National Parks. In general, the types of ski areas found on USFS land would not be allowed in National Parks, nor would they fit the mission of what these parks should be, but I appreciate your comment.
@@NationalParkDiaries Im not completely for mt hood becoming a national park but I do think Oregon in general needs more national parks because there are plenty of places that could become one and they could just convert a national monument into one because Oregon already has several national monuments you could use like Oregon caves, john day fossil beds, Newberry volcano, and cascade siskiyou
@@NationalParkDiaries I also feel like national recreation areas should be used more and not just used for a reservoir of a dam shure there are a few exceptions around right now but I want more of those exeptions
I don’t understand why we don’t just nationalize these ski resorts on public land, given that they only profit because of publicly owned resources. That would also give us more control over the industry and be able to mitigate environmental impacts while still maintaining long term economic growth.
Gonna piggyback of your comment to post some resources for people interested in that. Not saying I agree with their position, but want to highlight it for those looking to learn more: jacobin.com/2022/12/skiing-snowboarding-nationalize-slopes-vail-new-hampshire www.currentaffairs.org/2020/07/nationalize-all-the-nice-places
Michigan’s DNR recently took over control of a small ski area in the upper peninsula. Prices are very affordable, especially compared to neighboring ski areas. It’s only a single 3-chair and rope-tow and all natural snow, but the runs are great for what you pay for. To the best of my knowledge this is their first season fully managing the area so it’s a solid first test of the idea.
@@jballard2156 With the ski area you're talking about, there are a few problems. One is the shift of management from the nearby community college, which has a large ski area management program. Second is the shift from a local management of the concessions to a non-local manager. That may take a season to figure out how things are run, but I'll e there in a week to see how things are
i had no idea about the impacts of ski resorts on public land! i wonder if my local ski resorts are on public land and i hope that law gets passed to let forest services at least keep the profit from skiing
It's a little weird, right? Despite how wildly popular these ski resorts are, I get the feeling not a lot of people know they're on National Forest Land! Here's a map of all NF ski areas though, if you'd like to see if your local resort is on there: images.app.goo.gl/uKHuN5dr3zKTE8CS7
I have no problem with ski resorts being on public land. I advocated for that in the video. I was simply pointing out that the arrangement is weird and not a lot of people might know about it. Also, uphill arrangements vary by resort, so it's best to check with them about hiking up first.
@@NationalParkDiaries thanks! i looked them up too and they say they're on a combination of public land through a permit like what you described in the video as well and some private land. definitely very interesting
@@NationalParkDiaries Maybe if a given resort wants to get all petty and picayune, they can direct their Ski Patrol to make "traffic stops" upon suspect skiers, to see if they're sporting lift tickets, and if they're not, take pix, and give stern verbal warnings about trespass.
Typically not. They're usually little islands of private/municipal land surrounded by NF land. New development would occur within those boundaries, not on NF land
I'm not actually sure considering how differently public lands systems are in other countries. Apparently, 89% of Canada is public land, so I'm sure there are ski resorts somewhere. As for how they operate, I don't really know. I would imagine Europe is quite different as well given their development patterns, but if anyone wants to chime in on this, feel free! Great question also.
I'm not sure what the percentage is, but it seems many Japanese ski resorts are contained within national parks of some description. (At the very least the government has specific laws for resorts built on public land)
@@NationalParkDiaries To establish baseline knowledge for this issue, what category of land usage would the Matterhorn, be in, for example, or Mount Blanc?
As long as I'm free to ski Kirkwood and Heavenly near Tahoe, I have nothing to quibble nor grouse about, as long as no goofy and stupid Government Edict kicks the resorts entirely off of those mountains. So, I remain happy, until some green meanies succeed in making skiing, ILLEAGAL. The resorts want their clientele to be as happy as is possible, and that works for me, as one of their clients, one of their paying guests.
I worked at Timberline on Mt Hood & saw lots of snowboarders who would ride from the the lodge parking lot to Gov'y, hitchhike back up to the lodge & do it again, all day long. Living on the mountain & snowboarding for several years was a special & beautiful experience that I'm very thankful for.
Very cool!
Thank you for your videos. You do something important on your channel and I'm glad you're the one to do it.
I truly appreciate that Alexander! Thanks so much for being part of the community and supporting the channel!
I had no idea. Thanks for sharing!
You're welcome!
Yup, I love skiing at Copper Mt in CO. They have trails designated for hiking up on your own.
Oh nice! I've never skied copper. Every time we go out, we always end up at Breckenridge, but I've never checked if they have a hike up policy or not.
Fun fact: at least in some of the ski areas on public land, the resorts are required to shut down either if bears hibernate late or if the bears come out of hibernation early!
Also, in my opinion, these multi billion dollar companies take advantage of a cheap system in order to cause an environmental disaster, try to prevent their minimum wage employees from unionizing, and drive everyone except rich people out of the towns (looking at you, Vail).
All great points! I think, for me personally, public access is a big positive for this system. Realistically, there aren't a lot of places that aren't public land where ski resorts (and the public) could go considering historic development patterns in the US. And at least on public lands, environmental concerns can be mitigated/addressed (even if, in practice, this is difficult to do), whereas private resorts wouldn't really have that oversight at all.
But yeah, there are big problems, as you mentioned, and definitely things to be improved upon. I guess we have the best of a difficult and complicated situation at this point. Thanks for the counterpoints Rachel!
Ski resorts are fine for the environment
Which resorts are required to close based on the presence of bear activity? I have heard this and similar claims but not seen actual examples where this occurs. Thanks in advance!
Thanks for the awesome content and great video!
Thank you for watching it! I appreciate the support!
Did some googling after watching this, and apparently many ski resorts here in Japan are also built on public land. Seems like there are sections of the law specifying that resorts can only expand to the minimum amount necessary to handle their expected traffic, as well as regulations around when they're allowed to make artificial snow. That's just a few things I picked out skimming the page I found online though. Hard to say how closely those rules are actually followed. In practice I don't really notice much difference in resorts here or in the USA. In any event I do hope that going forward resorts can find ways to be sustainable as personally I see them as a valuable way to experience public lands in winter, since not everyone is crazy enough to go climb mountains in the dead of winter.
That's really interesting, thanks for the perspective! I'm not super familiar with other countries' public lands systems, so it's always cool to learn about them. Agreed on public access though. No doubt resorts have certain environmental impacts that have to be mitigated as much as possible, but if they can do that and provide the public with accessible downhill skiing opportunities, I'm all for it.
wow thats nuts - i had no idea skiing generated more revenue for the forest service than logging!
I was also very surprised to find that out!
I live I Salt Lake City and pretty much all of the resorts I ski at are in the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest
There are a lot on the Wasatch (five by my count)! Just not Park City!
@@NationalParkDiaries yep! I ski on all the other five, just not park city since it’s not on my pass
Best time of my life was working at Winter Park as a lift operator, pioneer express, my name tag said Pioneer Dave 😎
You can find ski resorts in national parks too it turns out like in my Rainier and Olympic national Park but for some reason I've seen a lot of people think you can't dind them there and one of the big concerns with making mt hood a national park is that they would get rid of the ski resorts when they actually wouldn't
Hey there! So I looked into these and I think there's a misconception about the types of ski areas found in National Parks, if at all, and how they're different from those found on USFS land. The one at Mt. Rainier (if you're referring to Crystal Mountain) is not technically within NP boundaries, but rather part of the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie NF. In Olympic, there is a ski area, but it's not what we would think of as a typical "resort" like we see in USFS areas. As for Mt Hood, I'm not very familiar with the National Park efforts there, but I personally don't see those types of ski areas as being in line with the vision for National Parks. In general, the types of ski areas found on USFS land would not be allowed in National Parks, nor would they fit the mission of what these parks should be, but I appreciate your comment.
@@NationalParkDiaries I also looked into it the ski area on hurricane ridge technically counts as a national park
@@NationalParkDiaries Im not completely for mt hood becoming a national park but I do think Oregon in general needs more national parks because there are plenty of places that could become one and they could just convert a national monument into one because Oregon already has several national monuments you could use like Oregon caves, john day fossil beds, Newberry volcano, and cascade siskiyou
@@NationalParkDiaries I also feel like national recreation areas should be used more and not just used for a reservoir of a dam shure there are a few exceptions around right now but I want more of those exeptions
The wealth discrepancy in the wealthy ski towns is some of the most extreme in the world
For sure. Lot's of issues I didn't touch on lol. Would have ballooned the length of this video by A LOT!
I don’t understand why we don’t just nationalize these ski resorts on public land, given that they only profit because of publicly owned resources. That would also give us more control over the industry and be able to mitigate environmental impacts while still maintaining long term economic growth.
Gonna piggyback of your comment to post some resources for people interested in that. Not saying I agree with their position, but want to highlight it for those looking to learn more:
jacobin.com/2022/12/skiing-snowboarding-nationalize-slopes-vail-new-hampshire
www.currentaffairs.org/2020/07/nationalize-all-the-nice-places
Michigan’s DNR recently took over control of a small ski area in the upper peninsula. Prices are very affordable, especially compared to neighboring ski areas. It’s only a single 3-chair and rope-tow and all natural snow, but the runs are great for what you pay for. To the best of my knowledge this is their first season fully managing the area so it’s a solid first test of the idea.
You can hike up and skii down. The companies just build the lifts and provide skii passes
I don’t want the government operating ski areas, would kill the vibe totally
@@jballard2156 With the ski area you're talking about, there are a few problems. One is the shift of management from the nearby community college, which has a large ski area management program. Second is the shift from a local management of the concessions to a non-local manager. That may take a season to figure out how things are run, but I'll e there in a week to see how things are
i had no idea about the impacts of ski resorts on public land! i wonder if my local ski resorts are on public land and i hope that law gets passed to let forest services at least keep the profit from skiing
It's a little weird, right? Despite how wildly popular these ski resorts are, I get the feeling not a lot of people know they're on National Forest Land! Here's a map of all NF ski areas though, if you'd like to see if your local resort is on there: images.app.goo.gl/uKHuN5dr3zKTE8CS7
@@NationalParkDiaries There’s nothing wrong with resorts being on public land. They let you hike up without buying a lift ticket too
I have no problem with ski resorts being on public land. I advocated for that in the video. I was simply pointing out that the arrangement is weird and not a lot of people might know about it. Also, uphill arrangements vary by resort, so it's best to check with them about hiking up first.
@@NationalParkDiaries thanks! i looked them up too and they say they're on a combination of public land through a permit like what you described in the video as well and some private land. definitely very interesting
@@NationalParkDiaries Maybe if a given resort wants to get all petty and picayune, they can direct their Ski Patrol to make "traffic stops" upon suspect skiers, to see if they're sporting lift tickets, and if they're not, take pix, and give stern verbal warnings about trespass.
Are the towns associated with these ski resorts also on public lands? What about new development in these towns?
Typically not. They're usually little islands of private/municipal land surrounded by NF land. New development would occur within those boundaries, not on NF land
Thanks for answeering my question. I appreciate your time.@@NationalParkDiaries
Are popular international resorts also on public lands?
I'm not actually sure considering how differently public lands systems are in other countries. Apparently, 89% of Canada is public land, so I'm sure there are ski resorts somewhere. As for how they operate, I don't really know. I would imagine Europe is quite different as well given their development patterns, but if anyone wants to chime in on this, feel free! Great question also.
I'm not sure what the percentage is, but it seems many Japanese ski resorts are contained within national parks of some description. (At the very least the government has specific laws for resorts built on public land)
@@NationalParkDiaries To establish baseline knowledge for this issue, what category of land usage would the Matterhorn, be in, for example, or Mount Blanc?
As long as I'm free to ski Kirkwood and Heavenly near Tahoe, I have nothing to quibble nor grouse about, as long as no goofy and stupid Government Edict kicks the resorts entirely off of those mountains. So, I remain happy, until some green meanies succeed in making skiing, ILLEAGAL. The resorts want their clientele to be as happy as is possible, and that works for me, as one of their clients, one of their paying guests.