February 18, 2005

Lawsuit seeks to limit expansion, not prohibit it

By Tom Dimitre
Rogue Group Sierra Club

Last month, the Oregon Natural Resources Council, the Rogue Group Sierra Club and Headwaters filed a complaint in Federal District Court to keep expansion of the Mt. Ashland Ski Area (Ski Area) out of the Middle Branch of the East Fork of Ashland Creek (Middle Branch). The suit's sole intent is to prevent destruction and degradation of the City of Ashland's municipal watershed, the fragile Middle Branch, the McDonald Peak Roadless Area and the rare plant and animal species that live there.

Only those activities that are within the Middle Branch, and the parking lot expansion, were covered by the lawsuit.

There are many facets of the proposed expansion that are allowed to proceed. The lawsuit does not prohibit the Ski Area from improving existing facilities like the lodge and adding new buildings such as the proposed Ticket Building, Skier Plaza and Arrival Services Building. Likewise, the Ski Area may go ahead with expanding beginner/low intermediate terrain by constructing the Poma lift and six new trails. The Ski Area may also begin the process of mitigating past Ski Area related environmental damage by proceeding with the 21 watershed restoration projects identified in the Record of Decision.

All three groups oppose expansion into the Middle Branch due to the negative impacts to Engelmann spruce, Mount Ashland lupine, Henderson's horkelia, Arctic Blue Butterfly, northern spotted owl and the fisher. The Middle Branch expansion would also disrupt sensitive and fragile wetlands, seeps, springs, creeks, meadows and natural underground "piping." More than 80 football fields of virgin, old growth forest would be permanently clearcut. The proposed parking lot expansion would excavate nearly 90,000 cubic yards (9,000 truck loads) of material - most of which would be dumped into the headwaters of Cottonwood Creek.

The groups are also concerned about the reported $5.2 to $10 million cost of the proposed expansion. The Final Environmental Impact Statement disclosed an estimated expansion cost of a whopping $5.2 million. At a recent Mt. Ashland Association Board meeting, however, an expansion cost/fundraising goal of an unbelievable $10 million was discussed. How has the estimated cost of the proposed expansion doubled in only a few months? Why hasn't the MAA board been straight with the public and the city council about the real cost of expansion? How will the MAA pay for a $10 million expansion when there are only a couple of hundred thousand dollars in the bank available to pay for expansion?

Both Headwaters and the Rogue Group Sierra Club support alternatives which would keep expansion out of the Middle Branch, while adding new lifts and ski acreage. The plans also would create a shuttle service to minimize the number of cars on the steep and dangerous access road. The Ashland City Council also asked the Forest Service to fully analyze the "Community Alternative" which would have protected the municipal watershed in the Middle Branch. All of these ideas were rejected by the Forest Service.

ONRC, the Rogue Group Sierra Club and Headwaters all continue to be willing to work with the Mt. Ashland Association and the city council to work out an expansion plan that is both biologically and financially sustainable.

We'd also like to request that the MAA abide by their bylaws and notify the public (not just their members) in advance of their monthly meetings. The public should not be required to "check in" by calling the MAA office prior to attending these public meetings.