Wednesday, September 24, 2003
By KATE MCCARTHY
Special to the News
The Mt. Hood summit held recently at Timberline Lodge was an inspirational gathering of people seeking a vision for Mt. Hood, Oregon’s much loved icon. “Save the mountain from over-development” seemed the overwhelming sentiment from the audience, according to their comments.
Alpine areas are rare in Oregon, and Mt. Hood is the only glaciated mountain in the Mount Hood National Forest. To many, the mountain in its natural state is one of Oregon’s greatest treasures.
With five ski areas on its slopes, more than any other mountain in the United States, Mt. Hood’s resources are already overstressed. Skiing, snowboarding, and developed recreation already have their fair share of the mountain. Enough is enough.
Mt. Hood Meadows’ propagandists would have us believe that the company is environmentally sensitive, wants what is best for the community, and can successfully develop an “ecologically friendly” resort added to the existing burden of commercial interests ringing the mountain.
Today’s ski industry, unlike the ski areas of earlier rope tow days, takes a heavy toll on mountain resources and beauty. Downhill Slide, a book by Hal Clifford, is a study of the current ski industry. Clifford writes, “Skiing has morphed from a more or less environmentally benign outdoor experience into a destructive, extractive industry.” In a chapter titled From Rope Tows to Real Estate, he writes, “... skiing is no longer an end in itself ... ; instead, skiing has been transformed into a come-hither amenity to sell real estate.” And later, “The ski industry appears committed to an aggressive spin campaign to portray itself as environmentally friendly in the face of countervailing facts.”
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, commenting on ski development in 2000, wrote, “No other land management prescription on the forest directly results in more stream depletion, wetland impacts, air pollution, permanent vegetation change, or permanent habitat loss, including direct and indirect impacts that are permanent, irreversible and irretrievable.”
So let’s not buy into Mt. Hood Meadows’ greenwashing public relations.
I have seen the changes to Mt. Hood myself. In the past I have camped for days at a time in the once-beautiful “Glacier Meadows” that became the Mt. Hood Meadows ski area. I know the damage that has been done.
In the beginning the Forest Service permit for the proposed ski area was carefully drawn to provide strict protection of a very special area of unusual beauty and resource value. There were to be no roads above the base area and no bulldozers on the slope. Much work was to be done by hand. A 1965 article in the Hood River News showed a map where the (one!) proposed lift would be located.
But the public was blindsided by what actually occurred.
In spite of the strict regulations in the Forest Service permit, the developers (the same company that still runs the area) came like a herd of bulls in a china shop. The core of the area was gutted. Bulldozers and chainsaws transformed the land. Forest and meadow were scraped bare and recontoured. Ridges and the face of the mountain were blasted and reshaped for ski runs. The hydrology was disrupted, streams plugged, wetlands filled. Beautiful, flowered meadows were buried under many feet of fill; acres of parking lots were built; tumbling, flower-bordered streams were replaced by 3,000 feet of culverts; and roads laced the mountainside. Habitat has been fragmented and destroyed, and mountain forest, including high alpine trees, have been clear-cut.
Many of these changes appear to have been done illegally, and much of the damage is “permanent, irreversible and irretrievable.”
In 1977, the Regional Forester wrote to Franklin Drake, the (then and now) majority owner of Mt. Hood Meadows, “As you know, the Mt. Hood area is probably the most popular and heavily used area in the Northwest. For many types of outdoor recreation the Mt. Hood area is now being fully utilized and, in some cases, overused.” That was more than 25 years ago.
The damage continues, both at Mt. Hood Meadows and Cooper Spur Ski Areas. Mt. Hood Meadows continues to propose big new projects, and to encourage more overuse.
Mt. Hood is more in need of protection than promotion. I believe it is not in the public interest to continue to promote pouring more people onto Mt. Hood, using mass-market commercialism to hammer the mountain. This is particularly true when support is needed for alternative opportunities for recreation, such as low-intensity, low-impact, back-country sports which leave the mountain in its natural state.
The Cooper Spur Proposals
Northside expansion proposals are outstandingly ill-advised. The north side of Mt. Hood is perhaps the worst choice for a destination resort. The snow is marginal and, except for the already developed practice hill at the Cooper Spur Ski Area, the terrain is poor. The area straddles an important wildlife corridor and habitat area. A resort would seriously impact the traditional and treasured back-country use, the adjacent national wilderness area, and the historic area that includes the Tilly Jane Trail and the Cloud Cap Inn. And the destination resort would necessarily jeopardize the Crystal Springs domestic watershed. It is well to remember that water is the most important resource the mountain provides. A resort, with all its impacts, would place our watershed at risk.
Moreover, we have already a fine destination resort: Hood River, with its great variety of available overnight accomodations, restaurants and retail stores.
In short, there are much better places for job creation and intensive real estate development than on the fragile north slope of already overstressed Mt. Hood.
Mt. Hood Meadows’ enthusiasm for crowding more people onto our mountain and for real estate speculation appears to have no bounds: an attitude of limitless expansion, a future of never-ending cumulative damage. The pressures of real estate speculation could turn our valley into a collection of 10-acre ranchettes and hobby farms. I believe this is not the vision most people seek—either for Oregon’s treasured icon, Mt. Hood, or for our beautiful and bountiful valley.
There is no right way to do the wrong thing!
Kate McCarthy lives in Parkdale.
More like this story
- Service Announcement for Feb. 25: Nellie Hjaltalin
- Death Notices for Feb. 25: Roger Justesen, Howard Kinzey and Stanford Harvey
- Ice causes crashes on Dee Highway Thursday
- Letters to the Editor for Feb. 22
- Honoring Loyalty: Oregon rightfully saves the date: Feb. 19: Our necessary ‘Day of Remembrance’
- Legislative Letter: Elliott Forest should have followed Hood River model
- 2017 INNOVATIVE TEACHING GRANTS: Education Foundation announces new funds
- CGCC master plan aims for ‘cost-effective’ degree route, service to Hispanics
- Speech-Debate team readies for busy spring
- ‘Green’ gainers
Parkdale third graders sing "12 Disaster Days of Christmas"
Welcome to your sing-able Christmas gift list. What follows is an emergency rendition of “12 Days of Christmas” – for outfitting your home or car in case of snow storm, earthquake, flood or other emergency. Read it as a simple list, or sing it to the tune of “12 Days” – you know, as in “ … and a partridge in a pear tree…” Not to make light of it, but the song is a familiar framework for a set of gift ideas that you could consider gathering together, even if the recipient already owns items such as a bunch of coats, tire chains and flashlights. Stores throughout the Gorge are stocked up on all these items. Buying all 12 days might be prohibitive, but here are three ideas for checking any of the dozen off your list (notations follow, 1-12.) The gift items needed to stay warm, dry and safe are also coded to suggest items in your abode (A) in your car (C) or both (B). 12 Gallons of Water (A) 11 Family meals (B) 10 Cans of propane (A) 9 Hygiene bags (B) 8 Packs of batteries (A) 7 Spare coats (B) 6 Bright red flares (C) 5 Cozy blankets (B) 4 Tire chains (C) 3 Flashlights (B) 2 cell phone chargers (B) 1 And a crush-proof first aid kit (B) Price ranges? Here’s a few quotes for days Three, Two, Four and Nine: n A family gift of flashlights (three will run $15-30, Hood River Supply, Tum-A-Lum) n Cell phone chargers (two will run $30-60) n Tire chains (basic set, $30, Les Schwab, returnable if unused for the winter) n Family meals ($100 or so should cover the basics for three or four reasonably well-fed days) n The home kit should be kept in a handy place near an exit, and remember that water needs to be replenished every few months. If you have a solid first aid kit already, switch out the gift idea with “and-a-sto-o-u-t- tub-for it-all …” Otherwise, it’s a case of assembling your home or car kits and making sure all members of the family know what the resources are and how to use them (ie flares and propane). Emergency situations are at worst life-threatening, at best deeply uncomfortable if you and your family are left without power for an extended period, or traveling and find yourself in a situation where you need to wait out a storm, lengthy traffic delay, or other crisis. Notes on the 12 gift ideas: 12 – Gallons of water: that’s one per person in a four-member family to last for three days, the recommended minimum to be prepared for utility outages. 11 – Easy-open packaged goods, energy bars, dried food and nuts are good things to include for nutrition. Think of what your family of four needs for three days to stay fortified and hydrated (see number 12). Can-opener also recommended 10 – If you have a propane camping stove, keep extra fuel handy. 9 – Hygiene bags: put packaged moistened towelettes, toilet paper, and plastic ties in large garbage bags (for personal sanitation) Resource list courtesy of Hood River County Emergency Management, Barbara Ayers, manager/ 541-386-1213. The county also reminds residents to Get a Kit, Make A Plan to connect your family if separated, and Stay Informed. See www.co.hood-river.or.us to opt-in for citizen alerts. Enlarge