About the Proposed Mount Ashland Ski Area Expansion

Summary of Proposed Expansion & Its Issues

Mount Ashland is the second-highest peak in the Siskiyou Mountains, located about seven miles southwest of Ashland, Oregon.  The City of Ashland’s municipal water supply originates from natural springs, wetlands and snowmelt that occur on the mountain. 

The Mt. Ashland Association proposes a highly controversial expansion of the commercial ski area (aka “Ski Ashland”) it operates on public land managed by the U.S. Forest Service.  Ski area expansion would remove old-growth forest, destroy sensitive wetlands, displace endangered animals, intrude on an ecologically intact roadless area, and pollute Ashland's municipal watershed with sediment, chemicals and trash.

The Forest Service approved expansion in 2004 nearly as the MAA proposed it, despite fierce opposition from thousands of citizens.  Learn more details here.

Expansion would add 15 ski runs, four mechanized lifts, 200 parking spaces, a second lodge and night lights to the existing 150-acre ski area that locals built in 1963.

Sounds great, right?  Except for the environmental destruction it promises, the expansion area would not get enough snow to operate many years, as climate change ensures more winter rain, and new trails would extend more than 500 vertical feet in elevation below the existing ski area.  Even without climate change, Ski Ashland has suffered financial bankruptcy three times in its history for lack of snow.

The US Environmental Protection Agency under George W. Bush noted serious concerns about the expansion plan and urged the Forest Service not to approve full expansion.

The expansion approved by the Forest Service in 2004 would:

• Clear-cut 71+ acres of old-growth trees (450 log trucks full), fragmenting the McDonald Peak Roadless area, the last intact undeveloped forest in the eastern Siskiyou Mountains.
• Build or rebuild more than a mile of roads, and grade & excavate sections of the mountain’s north face above Ashland Creek.
• Trigger landslides and significantly increase soil erosion, threatening Ashland's already-overburdened municipal water supply with more sediment pollution.
• Remove critical habitat for threatened and endangered animals in a regionally important connectivity corridor.
• Cut down part of the only Engelmann spruce population left in the Siskiyou Mountains after the last Ice Age.
• Place ski runs and infrastructure in and immediately outside of sensitive wetlands.
• Dump 3,000 dump truck loads of fill dirt into tributaries of Beaver Creek on the south side of the mountain to increase parking by 200 spaces.
• Degrade the appearance of the mountain with new linear scars visible from the Rogue Valley.
• Raise the cost of tickets and season passes even more.

Mount Ashland Today	Simulation of Proposed Expansion
Mount Ashland Before Ski Area in 1961

Other considerations

The Mount Ashland Association (MAA) cannot afford expansion--they expect you to pay for it for them by donation (estimated by MAA at $17 million).

Most years the ski area makes only a meager profit, leaving the community-owned ski area very vulnerable to financial fallout of poor snow years.

Ski Ashland depends on corporate welfare.  The U.S. Forest Service has paid most costs of studying the expansion, including 100% of expenses for the 2010 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement.  The State of Oregon gave $500,000 to the City of Ashland’s purchase of the ski area in 1992 (MAA manages Ski Ashland for the City), and gave the MAA another $100,000 grant in September 2003 to cover expansion study costs.  The City of Ashland pays the Forest Service every year what it costs for MAA to operate the ski area on National Forest Lands under a Special Use Permit.  And, as a non-profit, the MAA pays no taxes.  Jackson County plows the dead-end road to the ski area all winter at taxpayer expense.  The City is financially responsible for "restoring" the ski area if MAA goes out of business, and the public will bear the costs of environmental harm and any watershed damage.

If MAA had to pay the costs of expansion, they wouldn't even be considering it.

The ski area claims to be losing market share to other ski areas but has no data to support this claim.  Most businesses complete a thorough investigation of the need and effects of expanding before doing so.  Why hasn't the Mount Ashland Association done this?

Since its opening in 1963, Mount Ashland has gone out of business or required a financial bailout three times, most recently in 1991 after two years of poor snowfall.  Ultimately the people of Ashland are financially responsible for "restoring" the ski slopes should the ski area fail.

Public support for expansion has eroded steadily over the past few years.  A majority of public comments to the US Forest Service in 2000 were opposed to expansion.  Two-thirds of people spoke against the proposed expansion at September's Ashland City Council Public Input meeting.

The proposed expansion will add only 0.32 acres of beginner terrain to the ski area.  One of the stated purposes of expanding was to increase beginner terrain.  The proposal fails in this category.

The ski area has never come close to attaining the visitation levels necessary for the expansion to be financially successful.

For more details on the proposed expansion read A Closer Look at the Proposed Expansion and see photos.

What's Next?

Standing Up for the Wildlands!