Is the report card issued by a Colorado group, grading Utah's ski areas on environmental policies, a "fair measure" or a "farce."
Wednesday, Ski Area Citizens Coalition, headquartered in Colorado, released its environmental report cards on more than 50 of the country's ski areas, Utah's included. A member of the coalition is Utah's Save Our Canyons.
Under the group's grading system, Sundance was awarded an "A," while Snowbasin, The Canyons and Deer Valley all received failing marks. Alta and Park City were given "Bs," while Brian Head, Brighton, Snowbird and Solitude were given "Ds."
Utah ski areas countered that the groups involved in the judging have had a long history of objecting to ski-area improvements, "which has resulted in a terribly flawed report by a biased source."
They point out, for example, that while Snowbasin received a failing mark, its sister resort, Sun Valley, which is under the same ownership and practices the same environmental policies, received an "A."
"It's merely an attempt to try and embarrass those resorts they have disagreements with," said Kip Pitou, president of Ski Utah.
"We are very environmentally conscious here in Utah. I think it's safe to say that Save Our Canyons is being greatly influenced by an extreme environmental group in Colorado called Colorado Wild."
Gale Dick, president of SOC, said the report cards are a result of ski areas congratulating themselves for their environmental work, "without answering important questions, such as management and expansion.
"Also, it is not the intention of this study to look at the past, but what is happening now. We view the loss of public land to the ski industry or any other industry with great concern. Especially when you realize the ski industry is a very small contributor, only about 2 percent, to the gross state economy."
The latest report showed the Utah ski industry contributed $740 million to the state's economy, "Which is 25 percent of tourism, which is the No. 1 industry. I wouldn't call that small."
Several resorts also questioned Save Our Canyons objectivity in judging. The organization has, in fact, been involved in lawsuits involving Alta, Snowbird and Snowbasin, and current has a lawsuit against the U.S. Forest Service over its approval of a day lodge atop Snowbird's Hidden Peak.
Fred Rollins, marketing director at Snowbird, said the grade was an attempt to promote environmentalists' agenda, "which is to inhibit the ski industry in every way possible."
"They hit us heavy for our expansion, but 100 percent of the expansion has been on private, not public land. Also, they failed to look at all the work we put in to heal the scars that were here when we came or the open space we set aside, almost to the point where it hurts us as a ski area, or the tremendous amount of money we've spent in revegetation," said Chip Carey, vice president/director of marketing at The Canyons. "They also didn't look at the fact we gave 80 acres of land to a park and set up a conservation easement of more than 400 acres."
In a release issued Wednesday, Gavin Noyes, program director for SOC, called the scorecard, "an objective and fair measure of the environmental policies and management of ski areas throughout the West."
Groups involved in SACC include SOC, Colorado Wild, California's Friends of the Inyo, Washington's State's Crystal Conservation Coalition, Greater Yellowstone Coalition and Environmental Media Services. Dick said all of the groups were involved in rating Utah's ski areas.
The coalition goes on to ask skiers to support those resorts with high grades and not those with poor marks.
The group does, however, concede that skiers are "environmentally inclined." It cites a 1994 Roper Starch survey that found that 38 percent of skiers compared to 21 percent of the public cast votes based on a candidate's environmental position, and that 58 percent of skiers versus 42 percent of the public contributed to environmental organizations.
"Contributed, interestingly enough, to the very groups that would like to put the ski industry out of business so they can have the mountains all to themselves," said one area operator.
Under the SACC's scoring criteria, resorts were judged for avoiding expansion; avoiding commercial and residential development; not altering terrain, by not putting in snowmaking equipment; through wildlife habitat improvements; and by doing things like recycling, water conservation and pollution reduction.
The ski-area report also points out that resorts were penalized by judges for building employee housing, doing avalanche control work, making snow, removing debris from trails that could prove a safety and fire hazard and by making any noise outside a resort's boundaries.
Dick said plans are to make the report card an annual happening.
E-MAIL: grass@desnews.com