By Jim Stanford on February 11, 2009
This view, north-facing steeps and the occasional powder day make the King a locals' haven. For lift riders, full-day tickets cost just $30.
The economic collapse has been rough for unemployed factory workers, corporate executives forced to survive on $500K a year, and skiers.
Grand Targhee announced a stimulus package this week, slashing pass prices for the last five weeks of the season to $199 for adults and $99 for kids and seniors. Targhee also will give $10 discounts to carpools of three or more (on Sundays) and is giving away $7,000 in grants to promote energy efficiency and help Protect Our Winters.
Of course, the skids who are tapped out at the Pawn Shop and already advanced their next paycheck can always walk over to Snow King and hike up the mountain for free. Or maybe not.
Snow King Resort has been surveying hikers in recent weeks, asking if they would be willing to pay for access.
Tom Fortune, who took over as the resort’s director of recreation last year, said he has been impressed by the number of people hoofing it up the 1,571-vertical-foot hill in summer and winter.
The resort is examining whether “it’s possible to try to charge some minimal fee,” Fortune said. “We feel users are using some of things that other paying guests use.”
The survey cites parking, base area facilities and access to groomed terrain as amenities hikers enjoy for free.
The locals' Stairmaster is a stiff workout.
Snow King has discussed the matter with the Forest Service, Fortune said. Part of the resort’s concern is safety, as the last two switchbacks of trail above the Elk slope are narrow, and downhill schussers could have trouble avoiding a skier or boarder skinning up.
“There are some safety issues, and we need to educate everyone out there,” Fortune said.
Snow King Resort owns some of the land at the base of the ski lifts. The national forest boundary begins about a third of the way up the mountain. The Town of Jackson also owns a large parcel at the base of the Exhibition slope, according to Teton County GIS records.
The resort has established a policy in recent years that allows the public to hike up the mountain while lifts are operating, provided that people stick to the summer trail that switchbacks up a service road, use the bootpack on the far skier’s left of Exhibition, and go no farther than the halfway point during morning avalanche control. Dogs are not permitted on the slopes while chairlifts are running.
Some of the survey questions:
- Are you aware that Snow King has a policy for uphill traffic and dogs?
- Do you see safety issues or concerns with the current policies?
- What can Snow King do to ensure that animal waste is removed from ski runs?
- Should there be a fee or cost when travelers have the benefits of skiing groomed terrain, base area facilities, parking and avalanche hazard reduction?
- How much is a fair price for an annual pass?
Fortune said one idea would be to give uphill skiers and snowboarders a wristband or pass to show they have been made aware of resort policy and safety guidelines. Season pass holders likely would be exempt from any fees.
Fortune came to Jackson after working at the Schweitzer resort in Idaho and Stevens Pass in Washington, where earning one’s turns was not as popular.
He is a randonnee skier, though, and is not necessarily looking to crack down on hikers at Snow King. “I think it’s pretty cool,” he said. “We want to make sure that whatever we do, it’s done right. If we do anything, it may not cost a cent.”
Every now and then, the King gives up the goods to early risers.
Many of the people surveyed so far, mostly diehards who hike five times a week or more, have indicated they are willing to pay a small fee, Fortune said.
Allowing hikers to cross resort land to access the Bridger-Teton National Forest fosters goodwill for Snow King and fitness for the community. The Town Hill is much beloved and is the busiest summer trailhead in the forest.
Snow King also receives used to receive a break on its snowmaking water bill from the town. (Updated 2/24: Fortune reported that the deal with the town is no longer in place, and Snow King pays full price for water; the resort may receive other perks for keeping lift-ticket prices low and being the community-friendly “Town Hill.” For instance, Snow King Center, used by the resort for conferences and other events, sits on town land.)
I asked two occasional King skinners if they would be willing to pay, and both emphatically responded something along the lines of “Hell, no!”
Fortune said he welcomes input. His e-mail address is Tom.Fortune(at)SnowKing.com.
Posted under Economy, Environment, Ski Resorts, Sports
I wouldn’t have a problem with paying something like $20 for a season of hiking on the King. Jeez, doesn’t it cost that much just to PARK at Teton Village? The dog shit is definitely a problem on the king but even more on the glory bootpack. If people can’t be bothered to pick up dog shit, then dogs should be banned from high traffic areas like mt glory. (At least throw it off the trail into a tree well.) I also think the forest service and wydot should charge a reasonable fee for winter parking on teton pass. That money could go towards good stuff like paying Jay the pass ambassador. High avy danger has made things more mellow this year, but last year parking on the pass was ridiculous. So… people will pay $150 for plastic and foam goggles, but zero for access?
If the King didn’t exist, we’d all be bummed. We park in their lot, skin up the maintained cat track, and ski the groomed run down. I’m ok with them charging a modest rate. I skin the King because it is safe, reliable, and consistent (when compared to the b/c). And those three items cost money to maintain. Fair is fair.
As someone who skins the King multiple times a week in winter and have for many years, I don’t disagree with the idea of getting everyone on the same page from a protocal/rules standpoint. It’s been good in recent years that the King established a standard uphill route to prevent potential conflict with downhill skiers.
I do cringe at the ‘fee’ idea, not because I can’t afford a minimal fee for this, but because – just like the ‘user fee’ program in national parks – I dislike the idea of charges for self-propelled recreation on public lands, whether it’s a ski area or not. I think it helps continue to set a precedent of paying to access public lands that is a dangerous one – namely that Congress doesn’t have to fund the management of public lands and can shift those costs to the public, which ends up resulting in unequal access. That’s a slippery slope. Public land should be public land. It’s a totally different situation when you’re paying to use lifts on public land, because there’s private investment to put those lifts there. I also recognize that it’s somewhat of a different situation here, because – one would assume – the fee would go to Snow King, not the forest service.
And to play devil’s advocate with my own previous comments, it’s not a cut-and-dry situation here, because the whole mountain is not forest service land (something many people don’t know is that the bottom roughly third of Snow King Mountain, up to about Old Man’s Flats, is actually privately owned, though more people probably know that now following the tunnel dig). So you are accessing public land across private land. Plus there’s definitely effects to the King as a business in terms of people who aren’t paying for lift access but who are using their parking lot. However, even if the whole mountain were national forest land, I will add that it’s generous of Snow King to let people skin up the hill, since many ski areas entirely on forest land prohibit it entirely during open hours. You can’t skin up Jackson Hole Mountain Resort when it’s open.
Basically, there’s not an easy answer. I think we all agree that the King is a great community amenity and everyone wants to see it succeed. But if there is a fee, I’d like to see it done in some way that doesn’t imply that it’s for access to public land, solely because of the precedent that helps establish. Regarding the previous comment about a fee to ski on Teton Pass, I couldn’t disagree more, given that it’s all national forest land up there. I thnk most skiers think Jay Pistono’s position is extremely valuable and needed, and he does a stellar job, but that post should be funded with forest service dollars, not user fees. If someone wants to start a private foundation to encourage donations to support that position, great, but there shouldn’t be a forest-imposed fee that implies you are paying to access public land, whether it funds a position like that or not. If paying for people on the ground to manage activities on public land isn’t a valuable use of forest service funding, I don’t what is.
Finally, if education is part of the goal with a potential fee at the King, I would also say the whole thing could use more public awareness in general, not just with uphill skiers. I actually got chewed out recently by a guy skiing downhill (not anyone affiliated with the resort) when the King was open. He thought me skinning up the hill while the resort was open was dangerous to people skiing downhill, even though I made him aware that there is a standard protocal and route for doing so, and that I was following those guidelines. He said he knew all this, and claimed to skin up the King himself, but he said he only did so when the resort was closed – his own self-imposed rule. I wished afterward I’d thought to ask him whether he wanted to assess my downhill skiing skills as well, to decide if my technique was good enough in his book that I wasn’t endangering others.
Whatever transpires, kudos to the King for allowing a great community activity to take place when they don’t necessarily have to. The King rocks – for uphill and down.
I have a BS in Nat. Resource Mgt. minor in Recreation and Tourism management. The last post is a great educated position. I couldn’t agree more and hope they will consider every issue that was raised. There will always be some kind of conflict with multiple use land; the answer is what is best for all involved as a whole not the radical outliers. Snow King deserves props for even considering non customers in there plans great job SK.
Thanks for writing this Jim. I appreciate everone’s feedback. The idea with this is really to get our arms around the safety and guest impacts with this activity on The King. As I told Jim, I am impressed with the passion and enthusiasm of all the hard core people who skin, hike, run up the mountain everyday. Last Sunday I even saw someone biking up the last pitch toward the Patrol hut when I was skiing out at Stanley’s Knob!
Please let us know your thoughts and ideas and rest assured whatever we decide on policy it will not be a dramatic change…just improvements for all our users of the mountain!
Tom
If the king needs some scrilla to access public land, then I am sure the National Forest would appreciate the cash as well. Then let’s do a Cache Creek Trail Pass, a Game Creek Trail Pass, a Teton Pass Trail Pass… a dog crap pass, a skateboard pass, a horsey pass, a runner pass, a mountain bike pass, a twin tip reverse camber rando skier pass, a multiple dogs with one owner pass (that will sell out rather quickly), and a graduated pass for parking at each of the above mentioned trailheads; big trucks pay the most, crappy suzarus pay the least. Oh and since I made this up, I declare myself exempt from my rules – I’ll offer mself a lifetime pass! HAHAHA!