Last time I brought up the Mt. Spokane ski expansion debate, I took a beating by commenters, further underscoring the controversy of the proposal. Proponents argue the ski expansion is in keeping with the park mission to “acquire, operate, enhance and protect a diverse system of recreational, cultural, historical and natural sites” in an effort to leave a valued legacy to future generations.”  The Lands Council and Save Mt. Spokane believe a proposed expansion into old growth and native forest on the northwest side tips the balance against that mission.

Here is your last chance to weigh in:

• A public meeting for public comment on the proposed action is set for Wednesday, 7 p.m.-9 p.m. at Spokane Falls Community College in the Student Union Building Lounge.
• On Thursday, the commission will consider the proposal during a meeting starting at  9 a.m. at Center Place,  2426 N. Discovery Pl. in Spokane Valley.

Outdoors editor Rich Landers had a great blog post highlighting both sides of the debate, in case you missed it:

 

BACKCOUNTRY SKIER COUNTERPOINT

While most backcountry skiers and snowshoers have sided with conservation groups opposing the ski area expansion, veteran skier Dan Schaffer of Spokane had a different viewpoint.  Here are excerpts from his formal letter to the Spokane Mountaineers.

While I agree with your contention that Mt. Spokane has a lot of work to do on its current infrastructure, especially the lodges, I think it is a natural part of managing a community resource as valuable as the Mt. Spokane ski area to consider expanding it to accommodate current and future use. 

The area of concern cannot be considered, by anyone's criteria, to be a pristine wilderness.  It already has roads, has been logged, is immediately adjacent to an operating ski area, and, by your own admission, is actively used by skiers who have purchased lift tickets who then use the lower road to return to the bottom of Chair 4. 

I have worked with the Mt. Spokane ski patrol as a physician and been informed that the area does create periodic problems for the entirely volunteer patrol.

Those whose primary interest is unspoiled backcountry terrain would not consider this parcel to be of any attraction, and those who just want untracked powder are welcome to hike the entire mountain on Mondays and Tuesdays when the lift operations are closed.

 

An additional advantage to the expansion would be thinning of the current vegetation to lower the risk of forest fires.  Proper forest management also makes the area more conducive to species habitation and migration.

 

I am a strong advocate of wilderness, a backcountry skier, and I love Mt. Spokane.

I am not an advocate for the expansion, but neither do I oppose it.  I can live with whatever the state decides to do.