Why it’s become so expensive to ski in Washington state

This winter has been an emotional rollercoaster for skiers in the Pacific Northwest. After what powderhounds dubbed “Dry January,” an atmospheric river just crowned Washington ski resorts the “snowiest in North America,” but the good times aren’t expected to last.

That unpredictability is becoming the norm for skiers, particularly west of the Cascades, where the coastal climate keeps temperatures higher than other mountain areas. And unpredictable ski seasons may be to blame for the ever-rising cost of lift tickets. On this week’s episode of Booming, we unpack why skiing has become so expensive.

Ski areas have always been financially tricky to operate. It’s expensive to build and maintain chairlifts, and the licensing and permitting process can be complex. But climate change is making a difficult business harder, especially for smaller, less expensive community ski hills.

Average annual snowfall is decreasing, and when there’s less snow, fewer people head to the slopes to spend money on lift tickets and refreshments.

One or two bad seasons of revenue can put a small ski operator out of business, and they often get scooped up by one of the industry giants when that happens. Combined, Vail Resorts and Alterra Resorts now rake in about 54.8% of the venue in the ski and snowboarding resort industry.

Their dominance is felt here in the Pacific Northwest. Vail owns Stevens Pass and Whistler’s ski facilities, while Alterra owns Crystal Mountain.

RELATED: Volunteers keep skiing affordable at Badger Mountain

Of course, climate change doesn’t discriminate between big and small companies, but when large ski conglomerates suffer low snowfall in one region, they can offset the losses with revenue from another.

“ If California has a bad year, but the Rockies have a great year, and New England has a great year, the company offsets,” said Daniel Scott, a professor at the University of Waterloo who studies the effect of climate change on skiing. “And then they've changed. They've shifted away from economic dependence on daily lift tickets to more of a subscription model, where you buy the Epic Pass, and you buy that before the season starts. They have your revenue, whether it's a good year or a bad year.”

The rise of season passes is the other factor driving up the cost of single-day lift tickets, experts say. Companies like Vail have incentives to push skiers to buy season passes, which bring in revenue regardless of snowfall.

They accomplish that by making single-day passes so expensive that they don’t pencil out for skiers who hit the slopes more than 3-4 times a season, according to Scott. The result is daily lift tickets that can cost up to $250 or more during peak season.

But Vail says the majority of its visitors are not buying those single-day tickets. About 75% of skiers buy one of Vail's Epic Pass options ahead of the season, according to Amanda Bird, communications manager for Stevens Pass.

"Because 75% of our visitation is locked in ahead of the season – and 65% of our revenue, we can continue to reinvest in these special places that before passes, some of them were struggling to survive," Bird said. "We give the best deal to skiers and riders who commit in advance. We cannot and should not go back to an environment where weather variability is making or breaking the vitality of a ski resort."

Chris Porter thinks there could be an alternative that doesn't price out families and casual skiers.

“The solution, I believe, is the community investment model,” he said.

Porter is the co-founder of Mt. Bachelor Community Inc., a grassroots effort to buy the Mt. Bachelor ski area from its corporate owner and hand control over to the locals in nearby Bend, Oregon, who comprise about 80% of its customers.

“Make the enthusiast the owner,” he said. “You can make skiing more affordable by keeping ownership and pricing local. When the ownership is local, the incentives are local, and they're putting people over profits.”

RELATED: Locals spearhead effort to buy Mt. Bachelor resort

Porter says Mt. Bachelor Community Inc. has put in a competitive offer to Powdr, the current owner. Powdr announced it would put the ski area up for sale last fall.

If the offer is accepted, Porter said the organization intends to allow individuals in the community to become part owners and receive some type of dividend to offset the cost of lift tickets.

Asked whether this type of model could withstand the risks associated with climate change, Porter was unconcerned. He said Mt. Bachelor is a profitable ski area and that while climate change is part of the reason prices are rising, there’s more to the story.

“If we look at it in the past, resorts priced their lift tickets based on operational costs, not complex, dynamic pricing models that charge whatever the market will bear,” he said. “Today with the big resorts, they use an algorithm to drive the pricing where the peak season tickets can be like $250.”

Porter said that big ski corporations also have incentives to turn small local mountains into luxury resort destinations. The companies that operate the lifts often also own lodging and restaurants surrounding the facilities.

“These small family-owned ski areas were community driven, and focused on making skiing accessible way more than they were maximizing profits,” he said. “And those owners that had to saddle up at the local watering hole next to the folks that they saw in the chairlift? They kept prices low. They encouraged locals and families to participate, and they didn't really cater quite as much to these high-end tourists because the mountains were all separated.”

RELATED: A Tahoe Ski Resort Ditches Its Name, Saying It's Racist And Sexist

The community ownership model has been tested throughout Europe, with some success and some failure, according to Scott. But here in the U.S., Mt. Bachelor Community Inc.’s bid is seen as a longshot.

Porter said he hasn’t heard back from Powdr on whether the company is considering the offer. Powdr did not respond to an interview request or questions for this story.

But there is one other way to slow down the pace of ski inflation, says Michael Childers, author of "Colorado Powder Keg: Ski Resorts and the Environmental Movement." Like hiking trails, ski facilities were once seen as part of the federal government’s mandate to help the public access land that’s publicly owned. Many of them were built on U.S. Forest Service or National Park land.

“ Until 1979, the Forest Service could regulate the cost of ski passes in various forests,” Childers said, but he added that ended with the era of deregulation in the 1980s.

Childers admits that the scale of the industry, and current political environment, make it unlikely that national agencies could re-establish that control.

“They have really struggled with their responsibility in terms of regulating this industry,” he said. “I would argue that, especially the Vail Resorts and Alterra Resorts, are almost too large for the for the Forest Service to regulate. We're almost back to a point, like in the 1990s, with the timber industry, where the Forest Service is really struggling to deal with this outsized economic giant on its own lands.”

RELATED: Wildfire experts in Washington state warn of fallout from Trump’s Forest Service cuts

EDITOR'S NOTE: This story was updated on Feb. 27 to include a response from Vail about more expensive daily lift ticket prices.