Snowbowl's Artificial Snow debate is HEATING UP!

Photo by Charles Seiverd/Background Photo by Cy Wagoner

Yesterday I posted SNOW IS ON THE MOUNTAINS! which included a little side note about how pissed off I was about why Snowbowl can't make artificial snow (read the post for my argument).

Well today I got an interesting email from someone who works for Howard Shanker's campaign party who touts a victory against Snowbowl's artificial snow case and its impact to "environmental integrity, public health and cultural survival". Howard Shanker is a Flagstaff attorney who represents several of the native tribes against Snowbowl and is running for Arizona's Congressional District 1 in 2008.

The email reads as follows:

hi

I encourage you to look a little deeper into the crap snowbowl is
handing you.

They are lying when they tell you Sunrise uses wastewater to make snow. We proved it in court already.

and

The water that Snowbowl uses wants to make snow with really is bad for you, it's toilet water mixed with industrial waste. They say it is clean enough to drink, but it does not even need to be free of feces for Flagstaff to sell it to them. It also contains pharmaceuticals that have been known endocrine disruptors once they enter the waterways.Also it will slowly bioaccumulate known carcinogens in the ski area if used for many years, making the place very deadly to skiers.

Rudy

Deadly to skiers? FECES? Rudy is making some bombastic claims! I want Snowbowl to start making artificial snow as bad as you do but I don't want an arm growing out of my ass just to have it. He makes it sound like they are going to turn the place into Chernobyl.

I wrote him back:

Rudy,

Thanks for writing me. You have an interesting point of view and it brings to light this case isn't as one-sided as I may have originally thought. To be fair, I will blog both sides of the coin but I few questions I hope you can answer:

1.) What about the double standard of other native indian tribes who are plaintiffs against Snowbowl but who are using their religious lands for an economic boost (such as the Hualapi tribe building the Grand Canyon Skywalk)? Does their argument about Snowbowl impacting native indian religious lands really hold water?

2.) In your opinion, is the White Mountain Apache's (Sunrise) objection to Snowbowl making artificial snow more heavily weighted on religious grounds or their predicted economic loss (because of Flagstaff's closer proximity to Phoenix)? Are Sunrise's ski slopes located on what WMAs consider "holy land"?

3.) In today's litigious and "sue-happy" culture, why would Snowbowl knowingly use water that would be "deadly to skiers" instead of properly treating it to healthy standards? In your opinion, would Snowbowl use this contaminated water because (a) they haven't done the proper research about its health effects? (b) it cuts the costs treating of the water? (c) they don't have other options? (d) something other reason?

4.) If it could be proven beyond a doubt that Snowbowl would use properly treated A+ water to make artificial snow, would Howard Shanker's camp still petition against them? Why or why not?

On a side note: In the articles I've read, I've never interpreted Snowbowl claiming that Sunrise uses poor quality water (or wastewater) to make their artificial snow, however, I have read articles that say it is less than A+ standards. To Sunrise's credit, my friends and I have skied and boarded there over a dozen times and I've eaten A LOT of snow, especially during my learning curve, and I've never heard one complaint about anyone getting sick.

Thanks again for writing me. I am eager to read your responses on this issue.

Sincerely,

Zega

Of course I will keep you updated on what he says. ALSO, I will be writing Snowbowl representatives to respond to Rudy's grandiose claims about shitting where I ski.

P.S. I don't expect Snowbowl to respond, "Who cares if there is feces in the snow? It turns to fertilizer in the spring....."