Tools

Feds acknowledge withholding permits for Arizona resort

By Felicia Fonseca, Associated Press Writer

FLAGSTAFF, Ariz. – The U.S. Forest Service said Nov. 25 it was withholding snowmaking permits for a northern Arizona ski resort as a way to promote settlement talks in a long-running dispute between American Indian tribes and the resort’s owners.

The permits were delayed despite a U.S. Supreme Court decision in June that upheld the Arizona Snowbowl’s right to spray man-made snow on San Francisco Peaks.

In addition, Snowbowl owner Eric Borowsky said talks aimed at reaching a deal had ended a month ago.

“So far, there have been no new ideas, so we’re just waiting for the notice to proceed,” he said.

The stalemate marks the latest development in the dispute in which tribes insist making snow with wastewater would desecrate land they hold sacred and infringe on their religious beliefs.

Snowbowl officials counter the man-made snow is necessary to ensure the survival of the ski area, which opened in 1937 on Forest Service land and has struggled with short seasons because of a lack of snow.

Sen. John McCain and other members of the Arizona congressional delegation have been pressuring the Forest Service for months to explain why the permits haven’t been issued.

The Forest Service said in a brief prepared statement that it hoped ongoing talks between the tribes and the Snowbowl’s owners would end in a mutually beneficial agreement.

“Ongoing conversations be-tween Native American tribes and the ski area operator may resolve outstanding concerns for the more controversial aspects of the Snowbowl improvement request,” the statement said.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees the Forest Service, did not answer several phone calls seeking additional comment.

Borowsky said his talks with Navajo President Joe Shirley Jr. have ended and no further discussions were planned. Even so, he said he expects to have the necessary permits “in the very near future.”

The Forest Service is allowing the Arizona Snowbowl Limited Partnership to move forward with plans for conveyor belts to take skiers up the beginner slopes. Other improvements, however, including clearing about 100 additional acres of forest at the 777-acre resort, remain on hold.

Boronsky’s talks with tribes included a possible sale of the resort. He maintained Snowbowl is not for sale but added he has an obligation as a general partner to present any valid offers to the limited partners for a vote.

The current owners purchased the Snowbowl in 1992 for $4 million. Any sale price could be much higher.

Navajo lawmaker Raymond Maxx said he and other tribal lawmakers were encouraged by the Forest Service’s delay in granting permits.

“We’re glad that there are some people that are still respectful of our Native culture within the United States and trying to help us preserve what’s sacred to us,” he said.

McCain, Sen. Jon Kyl, and Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick said the USDA is simply dragging its feet in permitting the improvements upheld by the courts.

“There doesn’t appear to be any defined point when the USDA will move forward,” said McCain spokeswoman Brooke Buchanan.

A pending lawsuit in federal court in Arizona seeks to halt the project, saying the Forest Service failed to consider the human health risks of ingesting artificial snow.

Copyright 2009 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Thursday, Dec 10 at 1:13 PM pirana de plata wrote ...

i don't think there is any choice but to take back the whole sacred area, sometimes talked about as a church at least in understanding. there is now religious persecution against the 13 'tribes'. it looks like more protests, demonstrations, even declaring the state of arizona illegal, writing titles and deeds to land belonging to natives during 1491.

33440826
Inappropriate? Alert Us!

Wednesday, Dec 9 at 5:06 PM severe drought navajo wrote ...

the 13 native groups including navajo have to get around to the idea of claiming all of dokoooslid. this means complete ownership. there is also religious persecution against indigenous peoples waged by U.S.

33390726
Inappropriate? Alert Us!

Friday, Dec 4 at 4:24 PM Religious Extremism wrote ...

Even though I pray toward those sacred Peaks every day, and try to live in beauty, one woders whether it is best for mankind to allow any religion to tell others what to do. Even if it is my own. Religion should not have that power, any religion. If crosses shouldn't be up in put up in public, and kids not pray in school, why should others tell us where we can walk, run , or ski? If the bilagaanas are crazy enough to play in pee-snow, let 'em.

33109124
Inappropriate? Alert Us!

Add a comment

Name:

Comment: 1000 Characters Left

By posting a comment, user agrees to all Terms Of Use. Comments may also appear in other website locations and in other Indian Country Today products, without notice and at the discretion of Indian Country Today.

Indian Country Today and its affiliated companies are not responsible for the content of comments posted or for anything arising out of use of the above comments or other interaction among the users. We reserve the right to screen, refuse to post, remove or edit user-generated content at any time and for any or no reason in our absolute and sole discretion without prior notice, although we have no duty to do so or to monitor any Public Forum.

This content requires the latest Adobe Flash Player and a browser with JavaScript enabled. Click here for a free download of the latest Adobe Flash Player.

On Demand