Mt. Adams ski resort?

Here's the thread, with link to newspaper story. www.cascadeclimbers.com/threadz/showflat...er=392992#Post393017 <br><br>Obviously this would be horrendous. I don't have the topo in front of me and someone can quickly correct this, but isn't an awful lot/all of the south side route National Forest, not Indian reservation? I thought the border was east of Suksdorf Ridge, which would seem to be prohibitive to developement on the South Side. Not that it matters, as anything, anywhere would be extremely bad, IMHO.

The article below is from the<br>Yakima Herald-Republic (WA)<br>September 13, 2004 <br><br>Section: Main/Home Front <br><br><br><br>Destination or Desecration? <br><br><br><br>By PHILIP FEROLITO Yakima Herald-Republic<br><br><br>Despite having the potential of bringing in millions of dollars, putting a resort offering one of the highest ski lifts in the country on Mount Adams would be a desecration to Mother Earth, some tribal members say.<br><br>Recently, Mount Hood Meadows Development Corp., which owns Mount Hood Ski Resort in northern Oregon, approached the Yakama Nation with a proposal to construct a massive four-season resort, which would put 11 ski lifts reaching the 11,100-foot level on the south side of the mountain. It would also include three 18-hole golf courses, a mid-sloped restaurant, casino, night club, and 2,500 lodging units.<br><br>The corporation is calling the project an "eco-resort," meaning it would incorporate the Yakama heritage in theme and design and offer a summer camp for tribal youth with year-round educational courses on Yakama culture, said Dave Riley, vice president of Mount Hood Meadows.<br><br>"Because of our local experience, we understand and appreciate northwest tribal interests and rights, and the importance of the Treaty of 1855," Riley added.<br><br>Developers pitch such ski resort and other outdoor recreation projects to the nation every few years, but the tribe isn't rushing into anything, said Yakama Nation tribal Secretary Davis Washines, who goes by his traditional name Yallowash.<br><br>The full tribal council has yet to hear the proposal, and it would have to be approved at General Council, where voting tribal members decide on major decisions and elect the 14-member tribal council, which oversees daily operations of the Yakama Nation.<br><br>But the idea of putting any kind of development on the mountain located in the closed section of the Yakama reservation has some tribal members up in arms, said Regina Jerry, assistant minister of the White Swan Shaker Church.<br><br>"I feel that that would be a terrible violation of our people if they open that up," said Jerry. "(Tribal leaders) were sworn to an oath to protect the things that are sacred to our people."<br><br>The closed area consists of more than 600,000 acres of wildlife and natural habitat stretching from Ahtanum Ridge to below Satus Pass, and reaching to Mount Adams. There, only enrolled Yakama tribal members are allowed to practice sacred food gatherings, such as berry picking, root digging, and hunting and fishing. Outsiders need tribal permission to enter and must be accompanied by a tribal member.<br><br>Guarded by four main gates, the tribe closed the reservation during the 1950s to protect wildlife and the natural habitat. The only structures there are a fire and ranger station and Camp Chaparral, which consists of a few living dorms and a dining hall.<br><br>"That's the last place we can go and camp and try to get back to our traditional ways," Jerry said.<br><br>The tribe engaged in a 49-year boundary dispute with the federal government before President Richard Nixon in 1972 returned half of Mount Adams to the Yakama Nation.<br><br>Today, remains of a former ski resort are still present on the mountain's south side, where Mount Hood Meadows wants to build. The tribe kicked the resort off after reclaiming the sacred mountain, said tribal council chairman Jerry Meninick.<br><br>The more than 12,000-foot-tall volcano is much more than a mountain to the Yakama, he says.<br><br>"It tells us of the many different disciplines ... reminders of our existence," he said.<br><br>Yakama legends describe the mountain as a living being that's responsible for taking care of the people below, said Johnson Meninick, cultural resources manager for the Yakama Nation.<br><br>"You can't get a queen and climb all over her and dance on her," he added.<br><br>The mountain, like everything else in the arms of Mother Earth, is part of an unwritten law patterned after the natural resources that the tribe has lived on for thousands of years, Johnson Meninick said.<br><br>"The resources don't belong to us, we belong to the resources," he added. "Resources are the giver of life."<br><br>However, the earning potential of such a resort - which tribal members would receive a share in its profits - has some tribal officials weighing cash against culture, Jerry Meninick said.<br><br>"We're talking a multimillion-dollar industry," he said. "It's something that needs to be taken very seriously."<br><br>But the resort would be a hard sell to the tribal membership, Meninick admits.<br><br>"It would be very difficult to present this to General Council and have them pass this resort," he said. "If the tribe didn't have the values on its religious beliefs, according to the feasibility (of the proposal), it probably would have been done by now."<br><br>Though creating more income for the tribe is important, tribal officials don't want to give the impression they're moving ahead with the proposal or ignoring the cultural aspects of Mount Adams, Yallowash said.<br><br>"Even myself, I get up in the morning and that mountain is the first thing I see, and I have these same concerns," he said.<br><br>Also, the legalities of allowing non-Indians into the closed section and getting building permits approved would require legal research since federal law supports the closure, Jerry Meninick said.<br><br>"Do we go back to U.S. Supreme Court and get a clarification?" Johnson Meninick asked hypothetically.<br><br>Questioning who would actually own the resort, Johnson Meninick noted that tremors in the area have been increasing the past five years.<br><br>"Who's going to be responsible for the lives that would be lost in an avalanche?" he asked. "We don't have anyone stepping forward to say, 'This is my project.'" <br><br>Copyright, 2004, Yakima Herald-Republic. All Rights Reserved.<br><br>

The border runs along a line between Piker's Peak and the 9,402 high point of the "Lunch Counter". It looks like you could run a lift up to a spot at 10,400 -- but where would the runs go? -- they can't have a designated run within the wilderness boundary. Staying within the Yakama reservation would require either cliff skiing or skiing the crevassed Mazama glacier.

They would certainly lobby for access accross the boundary, using their multimillions. This makes me sick. And some overpaid punk(s) in a monkey suit probably gets paid 100K/year just to come up with ideas like this one.

You think they could take their development money, buy out Timberline and corner the market.

'Today, remains of a former ski resort are still present on the mountain's south side, where Mount Hood Meadows wants to build. The tribe kicked the resort off after reclaiming the sacred mountain, said tribal council chairman Jerry Meninick.'<br>Anyone know where it is they're talking about?

No, but I sent a note to our resident ski historian, Lowell Skoog. He is also unaware of the resort mentioned.<br><br>Mount Hood Meadows Development Corp. has been acquiring land and development rights to create a hoped for destination resort on the NE side of Mount Hood. They have been unrelenting in the face of local opposition.

Can anyone provide links to the proposed project? I would strongly oppose this, one desecrated mountain per range (hood) is plenty. Is nothing sacred?<br><br>A quick google search reveals nothing.

Nothing about a "lost ski area" anywhere near Mt Adams on this site.<br><br>www.hyak.net/lost/

They have been unrelenting in the face of local opposition.

<br><br>I strongly oppose all MHM development, however what you just said is not correct. Thanks to intense opposition MHM is actually relenting to developing Cooper Spur. The land they acquired (via a dubious land swap) adjacent to CS they now want to trade for land in Government Camp, and they've suggested scaled-down plans for CS. See: <br>www.cooperspur.org/updates.htm

A ski lift to 11,100ft within reservation boundaries seems improbable, so I wonder how accurate the story is. I've emailed the author, Sierra Club, CSWFC to inquire if they have additional details.

I've never heard of a resort on Mt Adams, but the tribe did have a resort on its southern boarder on Satus Pass which is not far from Mt Adams.... I wonder if this is the area they talk about?? I really doubt that anyone would want to re-open the Satus Pass resort since it gets very little snowfall compared to the rest of the Cascades.<br><br>Interesting story..... Funny thing is the Yakima tribe has been fighting the White Pass expansion for 20+ years. Now it would be very intersting to see if they go and build a resort of their own on Adams... <br>

I don't think so! &gt; We don't need any more friggin' ski resorts. My nightmares don't need to come true. What's next? Drinking fountains located throughout popular trails providing your choice of sodas and juices. Let's keep it real and keep technology and lifts out of Adams!!

From today's Oregonian:<br><br>www.oregonlive.com/search/index.ssf?/bas...30.xml?oregonian?lcg

Yakama tribe gets proposal for Mount Adams ski resort
Mt. Hood Meadows outlines an 11,000-acre project that would include a casino, housing, golf courses and cultural museum
Thursday, September 23, 2004
MARK LARABEE
Mt. Hood Meadows Development Corp. is proposing a destination resort on tribal land on Mount Adams in rural south-central Washington that would have 10 ski lifts and three 18-hole golf courses.

As presented to the Yakama Indian Nation, the 10,000-member tribe that owns the land, the resort would encompass 11,000 acres near Bird Creek Meadows. It's a popular area now used by campers, climbers, backcountry skiers and hikers.

Meadows' proposal includes eight chairlifts, a gondola and a tram that would take skiers as high as 11,100 feet above sea level from 5,400 feet -- the biggest vertical rise for any ski area in North or South America. It also proposes three golf courses, a spa, a casino and 2,500 housing units -- a mix of hotel rooms, condominiums and single-family homes. There also would be ski lodge and golf clubhouse buildings, plus a small village with restaurants and shops.

Meadows has struggled to build destination resorts at Government Camp and Cooper Spur on Mount Hood.

Dave Riley, Meadows general manager, said the project also would include the Yakama Nation Institute of Learning, which is envisioned as an interpretive center for classes and a museum to highlight the tribe's history and culture. He said everything from the building design to food would incorporate Yakama culture.

Although acknowledging opposition from environmental groups, Riley said Meadows will use cutting-edge building practices that focus on sustainability and environmental ethics.

"It's clear that if this resort is developed, the Yakama Nation will insist that it will be the most environmentally sensitive development in the history of resorts," Riley said. "At the end of the day, they are going to do what they think is right for their resources and their people."

At 12,276 feet, Mount Adams is the second-highest peak in Washington after 14,411-foot Mount Rainier. Its massive girth makes it the second-largest Cascade volcano in volume behind 14,162-foot Mount Shasta in California. But Adams is far from major towns, and a resort there would require significant road improvements to handle traffic, Riley said.

Ownership dispute

The mountain is not without controversy. For nearly five decades, the Yakama tribe battled with the U.S. government over its ownership. The tribe said boundary lines were incorrectly drawn after a surveying error. President Richard Nixon ended the dispute in 1972 when he signed over half the mountain to the tribe.

Tribal leaders acknowledge that such an aggressive development would drastically change the character of the mountain they hold sacred.

"Our understanding, even in a contemporary setting, is that if it was not for Mount Adams, the watershed would not be there to provide the nourishment for our timber, and all the food and medicine for our people," said Jerry Maninick, Yakama tribal chairman. "That's part of the commitment the mountain made to the Creator for all of eternity. Her task would be to take care of us and provide for us."

Maninick said some tribal members think the resort proposal fits within that cultural belief. He agrees with Riley that the resort would be a financial boon for the economically struggling tribe. Today, tribal members rely on forest products, a small casino in Toppenish, a juice company, a land-holding company and farms for income.

Benefits for Yakamas

Riley said the proposal would be a partnership in which the tribe would own the land while Meadows would build and run the resort. Tribal members would get jobs and a share of the profits, he said.

Maninick said the tribal council has formed a committee to look at whether such a development is feasible and in its best economic and cultural interest.

Meadows has not yet released its proposal to the public. But similar proposals in the past have gone nowhere, and the tribe shut down a small ski resort on the land after it regained ownership.

So far, Maninick said tribal members seem to be split over the idea. Eventually, all voting members will be asked to weigh in -- a vote Maninick expects to come by year's end. Maninick said the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs also would review the proposal and take testimony.

The resort proposal is drawing critics outside the tribe.

"We will fight the Meadows proposal with everything that we have," said Brent C. Foster, a Hood River attorney with the Gifford-Pinchot Task Force, an environmental group focused on reducing clear-cutting and road density, and preserving wildlife habitat. "This is incredibly important habitat, and the idea of putting thousands of luxury vacation units up there is an outrage, to put it mildly."

Opposition on Hood

Meadows' proposal to build a similar resort on Mount Hood's Cooper Spur continues to have fierce opposition from environmental groups and some Hood River Valley residents who rely on the watershed for drinking and irrigation. The ski company and opponents are in mediation over the plan.

Riley reluctantly acknowledges the political fight ahead. He said many people will try to tell the Yakama Nation what to do.

"Central Oregon has 25 golf courses," Riley said. "Some people think that's a great thing in terms of quality of life, and others would say Central Oregon would be better off it if didn't have any. This is the Yakama Nation's decision, not the Sierra Club's."

Maninick said although he's undecided, he's intrigued by the long-term economic prosperity the resort promises. Even so, he said, the tribe might not be ready to take such a drastic step.

"One of the areas our people have difficulty in is economics," he said. "It's almost always difficult for us to adjust ourselves to the contemporary setting. It's a high-risk area for our people, and they're a little gun-shy."

Mark Larabee: 503-294-7664; This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

&lt;snip&gt;

i better get up there before it gets ruined as a mt.

I e-mailed the Oregonian reporter about some of the boundary issues that have been raised here and elsewhere, basically wanting the developer to be asked about the inherent challenges such a ski area would face (crevasses, choss cliffs, wilderness boundaries). "Where the hell are you going to put lifts and ski runs?" is an important question. The reporter, who kindly replied, said the developer, to the surprise of no one, isn't getting into specifics (no maps).<br><br>I totally agree that the Indians have a right to do what they will with their half of the mountain, but 1.) I have the right to tell them this idea sucks; 2.) Please spare us the 'mother mountain creator' b.s. if you're going to put up snack bars, lift towers, golf courses and condos on it; 3.) We do have a right, and recourse, to ensure that the wilderness boundary stays firm.<br>That said, it's a very good question to put out there, Jeffey. It is their land, but the land west of the line belongs to everyone.

I find it entertaining to read about a bunch of us white guys worrying about the Indians screwing up the environment!<br><br>On a less humerous note .. get used to it. With our rising snow levels, any PNW skiing will have to be done on volcanos in a few years. The pressure to put lifts on non-glaciated volcano routes is not going to go away.

i think more that a few years

An inactive group that's firing up an email list fast will be Friends of Pah-to. Contact Darryl Lloyd This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. He recreated this photo/graphic from the BIA map of MHM's plan and it was reprinted in the Hood River paper:<br> Meadows looks for more real estate... <br><br>Fixed this link -- Sorry!<br> Full size photo (500kb) of Resort Plan <br><br>

Would-be resort developers have the gall to call this planned sprawling city stretching to 11,000 feet, proposed for the gorgeous and largely unspoiled Bird Creek Meadows area, an "eco-resort."

<br><br>From Thursday's (9/30/04) Seattle Times:<br>Ron Judd / Times staff columnist<br> Trail Mix: A Northwest Mailbag full of bad news <br><br>Q: What's the buzz we're hearing about a new ski resort on Mount Adams? <br><br>A: It's basically just that at this point &#8212; buzz. The Yakama Tribe, which owns a huge chunk of the east side of Mount Adams, is being pitched by Mount Hood Meadows Development Corp. to build a major, 11-lift ski resort complete with 36 holes of golf, a restaurant, a casino, a spa, various shops, a night club and 2,500 hotel and condominium lodging units, The Oregonian and Yakima Herald-Republic both reported this month. <br><br>Would-be resort developers have the gall to call this planned sprawling city stretching to 11,000 feet, proposed for the gorgeous and largely unspoiled Bird Creek Meadows area, an "eco-resort." <br><br>The pitch hasn't even gone before the full Yakama Tribal Council yet, but it's already being dissed by tribal religious leaders, who call it a blatant, money-grubbing desecration of sacred tribal grounds. <br><br>"I feel that that would be a terrible violation of our people if they open that up," Regina Jerry, assistant minister of the White Swan Shaker Church, told the Herald-Republic. <br><br>Hear, hear. <br>We love the idea of a new Northwest four-season mountain resort as much as anyone else with skis quivering in the garage. And heaven knows the Yakamas have reasons to be tempted by the potential payout. <br><br>But get real, and keep Mount Adams wild. <br><br>To contact Ron Judd: (206) 464-8280 or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

I find it less humorous than some that a bunch of us white guys (not my words) are concerned about what happens here.<br><br>Some of the greatest environmental attrocities are committed on reservations, the best examples coming from extractive industries that prey upon economically-poor-but-resource-rich Native American nations such as this.  Beyond the rhetoric, it's a means of skirting otherwise difficult issues they face on public lands - often to the detriment of the environment.  Call me suspicious, but I tend to question statements like "it will be the most environmentally sensitive development in the history of resorts" when it involves the creation of multiple golf courses, thousands of housing units, and the need for "road improvements".<br><br>When I lived in Wisconsin, where the relationship between the largely white public and Native Americans is much more strained, a unifying battle sparked when a metallic sulphide mine was proposed on/near Native lands.  People from all over the state worked together to ensure the best decision was made for all involved, because no matter whether the mine was on or adjacent Native land, it impacted everyone.<br><br>This may be a less destructive use of lands, but it's destructive nonetheless.  And since this development would impact more than the Yakama nation, I feel we as individuals and/or communities most certainly have a right to voice our opinions to them.  Being respectful and being silent are not the same thing.<br>

One of the greatest human atrocities was the creation of reservations.

As I expected there would be a lot of "knee jerk" reactions to this proposal. The southern climbing route on Mt Adams lies outside the Yakima Indian Reservation. I hike, mountain climb, backpack, am an avid downhill skier, and am of Native American ancestry. I have longed envisioned a ski area on Mt. Adams with a tram climbing to the upper reaches of the mountain reminiscent of the Klein Matterhorn tram at Zermatt, Switzerland. Being father east than Mt. Hood, or Mt. Bachelor; Mt. Adams would have drier snow than other Cascade ski areas. the ski resort would incorporate the Yakima culture in all aspects of the resort. I agree with the Yakima Nation that it be "the most environmentally sensitive development in the history of resorts." with this in mind those behind bringing a ski area have to Mt. Adams have every intention of doing exactly this. I wish Dave Riley and all others involved this proposal Godspeed.

Mr Coldsmoke, are you familiar with the ski resort named in the article that is said to have been dismantled by the Yakima Nation in the early 70's? Through all my research I have heard of no resort, especially in the 60s or 70s that resided on Adams. <br><br>Thanks,<br><br>Jack

Coldsmoke's post is cut-and-pasted from his post on this thread, as skierguy:<br><br>www.cascadeclimbers.com/threadz/showflat...5/o/all/fpart/1/vc/1

...sounds like marketing-speak.

I don't think they'll go for it, I hope they don't. They're currently teamed w/ the Umatillas and the Wanapums and opposing development of Columbia Point.<br><br>On the other hand, the reservations are a system that corners them so they do whatever they can for survival.<br><br>David Lowry, Lumbee

I don't know about the rest of you, but I think it's audacious to construct a ski area on such a beautiful and special volcano as Mt. Adams. It's bad enough that ski areas encircle Mt. Hood, which would be an incredibly aesthetic mountain were it not for all the ski areas. I love skiing, but is it really neccessary to construct a ski area on valuable natural resource such as Mt. Adams. <br><br>Just my thoughts after skiing there two years ago.

It's bad enough that ski areas encircle Mt.  Hood. &lt;snip&gt;I love skiing&lt;snip&gt;

<br>If there were no ski areas on Mt Hood there would be no close lift skiing for Portland area residents. Do you live in the Portland metropolitan area?

Jeff,<br>Am I correctly interpreting your statement to suggest that the venerable Ski Bowl, of Tom Dick fame, fails to meet your criteria for either ski area or close to Portland?

Jeff,<br>Am I correctly interpreting your statement to suggest that the venerable Ski Bowl, of Tom Dick fame, fails to meet your criteria for either ski area or close to Portland?

<br><br>No, but you can infer from my post that I was classifying Mt Hood Ski Bowl as one of the areas that "encircles" (SierraStealth 's term) Mt Hood. I realize this is a broad classification that may or may not be what SS intended. Maybe SS doesn't feel Ski Bowl falls into the "encircling" classification, in which case he'd allow one dinky, low-elevation resort that closes early, opens late, rains often and has highly limited terrain to service the entire metropolitan area (I do *love* Ski Bowl when condtions are right).<br><br>I feel there should be a careful balance between ski areas and wilderness. To me a large resort at Cooper Spurt (MHM's other proposal) would upset this balance, as would a resort that dramatically alters the character of Mt Adams. Hypothetically, if we had no resorts on Mt Hood's edifice that would also not be an adequate balance.<br>

It seems to me that those here who are against the development idea at Adams would be against any development plan of any new area. I read here the same people are against Crystal's plans and I would assume would also be against White Pass's plans to expand as well....<br><br>If any of our volcano's are to have any type of development, I personally feel the Adams plan would make the most sense.<br><br>I doubt it would ever happen anyway, but that is just my 2 cents... I would also like to see White Pass finally get the ok to expand, it is long overdue..