USFS chief upholds Snodgrass rulings

But the window isn’t totally closed for Snodgrass skiing

The head office of the U.S. Forest Service is backing up the overall decision and process by two foresters to not allow ski lifts on Snodgrass Mountain as requested by Crested Butte Mountain Resort (CBMR). But he clarified that the agency must inform CBMR how skiing can be accommodated on Snodgrass or take the mountain out of its skiing permit boundary in the Forest Plan…a move that would likely require a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review.

Forest Chief Tom Tidwell and his reviewing officer, Gloria Manning, announced late Wednesday that his office supports the course of action and ultimate rejection of lifts on Snodgrass that took place by Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and Gunnison (GMUG) National Forest Supervisor Charlie Richmond and the appeal reviewing officer (ARO) Jim Peña of California. “I am affirming the ARO’s appeal decision,” the letter from the chief’s office states. It also says “the Forest Supervisor was not required to conduct environmental analysis to support his decision.”
The top administrators were concerned by one element of the decision. “I am troubled by the Forest Supervisor’s finding in his decision letter that “it is not in the public interest to continue to consider development on Snodgrass Mountain any further,” the letter states. “The finding as stated appears to reflect a conclusion about the suitability of Snodgrass Mountain for any skiing development, rather than just for the proposal made by CBMR.”
So, the chief’s office did instruct Richmond to “provide guidance to the Appellant on how they should submit a proposal to provide downhill skiing on Snodgrass Mountain that the authorized officer would find acceptable and consistent with the Forest Plan,” the decision letter states. “If no such alternative exists for downhill skiing on Snodgrass Mountain that is consistent with the Forest Plan, the GMUG Forest Supervisor is instructed to apply the direction…to consider whether a change to the Forest Plan is needed to reflect current suitability determinations for Snodgrass Mountain and, if so, to determine the most appropriate time and means for changing the Forest Plan guidance.”
Ironically, this could result in the Forest Service having to go through a NEPA process to take Snodgrass out of the ski resort’s permit area.
While it wouldn’t necessarily address the purpose and need for downhill skiing on Snodgrass, it would likely be an analysis for inclusion in the management area. CBMR has been pushing for a NEPA review of its expansion plans. The decision letter notes that the agency’s schedule for land management plan revisions calls for the GMUG to update the plan starting in 2012 with a final decision to be implemented in 2014.
It is the final administrative appeal for the agency. CBMR executives have stated in the past that if the Forest Service appeal process did not work in their favor, they would seriously consider taking the matter to court.
The proposed Snodgrass Mountain expansion would increase the amount of intermediate and advanced terrain at CBMR with 276 acres of skiing served by three lifts, a beginner carpet, and a connector gondola from Crested Butte Mountain. Snodgrass is adjacent to Crested Butte Mountain. The resort has been working with the Forest Service on-and-off for decades over the proposal and has spent millions of dollars on the project. And it appears they aren’t yet done spending money on Snodgrass.
Given the timing of the decision letter, neither CBMR nor the regional Forest Service office had time to fully digest the decision before the News went to press. CBMR President Tim Mueller said the company had hoped for a different decision. “Of course we’re incredibly disappointed with this decision,” he said. “The Forest Service has decided it is appropriate for one Forest Service employee to decide the future of an entire community with no public process whatsoever. Colorado Governor Bill Ritter, U.S. Senator Mark Udall, other elected officials and thousands of citizens have asked the Forest Service to allow public review through a NEPA process. The Forest Service has refused. As far as next steps we’ve just received the decision and have not yet received the attachment. We are considering all of our options.”
Richmond did comment that “This has been a long process and filled with much passion on all sides of the issue,” he said.  “I am pleased that the Chief’s review agreed that we complied with the intent and requirements of federal law and Forest Service regulations.  Now, we can focus on further strengthening our relationships within the community and work toward a sustainable future for the Gunnison Valley…economically and environmentally.”
To see the decision letter and extended comments, please click here and here .