As of this writing, every river basin across the entire Western U.S. has below-average snow. Colorado, Utah, Washington, Oregon, California, and Nevada – the workplaces of thousands of ski area employees like me – are sitting at 15 to 65% of average snowpack for this time of year. Some ski areas closed in the middle of the season, and others decided to close early this year. Many cut employee hours.
“This year was a catastrophic year,” said Auden Schendler, who shepherded the Aspen Ski Company’s sustainability program for 26 years.
Winter enthusiasts know that bad years happen. But “in a climate-changed world, you’re more likely to see multiple years of aberration stacked together,” Schendler said.
Many mountain communities rely on winter sports as the centerpiece of their economies and way of life. As the climate warms and snow becomes increasingly unreliable, skiing and snowboarding are on thin ice.
But surprisingly, the snowsports industry has not mounted an aggressive campaign for climate action.
Ski areas have taken some steps to trim their climate pollution, but a Yale Climate Connections analysis of a recent report shows that their efforts don’t match the scale or urgency of the threat posed by climate change.
And even as the industry publicizes its sustainability programs, “none of it had anything to do with solving a global systemic problem like climate change,” Schendler said.
Dwindling snow
As the climate warms, snowstorms have turned to rainstorms, snowy seasons are shorter and less consistent, and extreme weather is more frequent. Justin Mankin, a Dartmouth scientist who studies snowpack, said that the accelerating loss of snow will likely put some ski areas out of business.
“It will be a loss that will ripple through communities,” Mankin said in a report.
Between 2000 and 2019, U.S. ski areas collectively lost more than $5 billion due to shortened ski seasons, fewer skier visits, and an increasing need for artificial snowmaking. That price tag will keep rising as the climate continues to warm.
The amount of snow that falls varies from place to place and year to year, but the trend is unmistakably moving toward lower snowfall on average.
This winter, the East Coast has enjoyed consistent snowfall, though several storms dropped snow on the coasts rather than in the mountains. Meanwhile, the entire Western U.S. has been suffering from a monthslong snow drought and persistent warm temperatures. By late March, the mountain snowpack across the West usually stores large quantities of water that will slowly melt to feed rivers, recharge aquifers, and sustain mountain ecosystems. But not this year.
Ski areas are taking some action, but …
The National Ski Areas Association developed a framework called the Climate Challenge, which organizes ski areas to voluntarily track and reduce their climate-warming pollution. The data is published in an annual report.
Alongside my climate writing, I’m a professional ski instructor at one of the ski areas that participates in the Climate Challenge. I was curious to dig deeper, so I analyzed the results of climate action so far and found some major gaps.
- Transportation to and from the mountain isn’t counted
The climate scorecard doesn’t measure the emissions from travel or commuting to and from ski areas. For some resorts, the climate pollution from transportation is larger than that from the operations of the resort. Because these emissions aren’t being measured, a substantial amount of pollution is slipping below the radar. - Most resorts aren’t publicly tracking their emissions
Only about 7% of the 492 ski areas operating in the United States participated in the National Ski Areas Association’s Climate Challenge program. In addition to that program, both Vail (with 34 ski areas in the U.S.) and Aspen (with four ski areas) track their emissions publicly. Alterra, which operates 16 U.S. resorts, publishes an annual sustainability report, but it doesn’t include emissions data. - Claims of renewable energy use are largely based on credits
Suppose a ski area gets its electricity from a coal power plant. That ski area can buy credits from another company that is generating renewable energy, and then the coal-powered resort can say it’s running on clean energy. This is called a renewable energy certificate. Sometimes these programs result in less pollution overall, but critics point out that they may not lead to significant additional renewable energy production.
To date, around 85% of the emissions reductions reported to the National Ski Areas Association are from offsets and credits, rather than direct action to reduce climate pollution.
Aspen was an early adopter of renewable energy certificates until Schendler began to doubt that they were effective. “I started asking questions about them,” he said.
After that, Aspen stopped using carbon credits and offsets – they focused only on direct reductions of climate pollution.
‘You shouldn’t call that sustainability.’
Schendler spent much of his career pioneering sustainability practices in the snowsports industry, but now he realizes that many common responses, such as installing energy-efficient lighting, are missing the larger point.
Essentially, while these practices make a business run more efficiently, save money, reduce waste, and generate local goodwill, they don’t address climate change at a scale that’s needed to save the snowsports industry.
“You shouldn’t call that sustainability. You should call it business management,” Schendler said. “It’s not how climate change gets solved.”
That’s because climate change is a global problem that requires large-scale, systemic solutions. In Schendler’s view, individual actions, even when implemented by large companies, are not enough.
The missing element, says Schendler, is a powerful public voice: “You need a large, publicly traded company like Vail to publicly lobby, advocate, use their voice, and use trade group pressure to push on change,” he said. “And that just hasn’t happened.”
Some ski areas meet with policymakers, but advocacy may be a touchy subject
In the most recent National Ski Areas Association Climate Challenge annual report, only 19 ski areas reported that they directly met with their energy providers or political leaders to push for climate solutions, cleaner energy, or energy conservation measures.
In a three-part series about Colorado winter sports and climate change, the Denver Post reported that the sport’s two largest companies, Vail and Alterra, declined to be interviewed about advocacy activities. A Colorado trade group that promotes skiing and snowboarding also declined to speak about its advocacy efforts.
Similarly, the National Ski Areas Association did not make itself available for an interview with the Denver Post or Yale Climate Connections.
The outdoor industry could be a powerful lobby
The snowsports industry is only one of many weather-dependent industries, such as fisheries, agriculture, and outdoor recreation. Collectively, these industries represent a substantial economic force.
The outdoor recreation economy in the U.S. generated $1.3 trillion in economic output in 2024. For context, outdoor recreation adds more economic value to the GDP than oil and gas, agriculture, and motor vehicle manufacturing combined, according to Headwaters Economics, a nonprofit research group.
Climate change is causing serious economic impacts to outdoor industries, and policy solutions could help protect them.
“Business knows what forceful activism and lobbying is; they know how to do it on other stuff. They can do it on climate,” Schendler said. “We need some aggressive risk-taking.”
“I’ve been arguing that it used to be risky to talk about climate,” he added. But now, “it’s risky not to.”
Climate action is popular
Fossil fuel companies and divisive politics have made climate change feel like a controversial subject, but the reality is that most people want action on climate change.
According to the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, the publisher of this website, 68% of Americans think corporations should do more to address climate change, and 63% are worried about climate change.
“Yeah, some people get mad at you,” said Schendler of his outspoken stance, “but it’s kind of obvious for a ski resort to care about climate.”
How individuals can amplify their efforts
Traditionally, people who love the outdoors have been asked to do things like carpool or use reusable water bottles. These actions are good and important, said Schendler, but they put the emphasis on small changes, rather than larger-scale impacts and systemic actions. Here’s what you can do instead:
- Join an advocacy organization. Climate Voice, where Schendler serves on the board of directors, helps people put pressure on corporations. Protect Our Winters organizes winter sports enthusiasts and works with policymakers on climate change. Patagonia leads multiple policy-based advocacy campaigns.
- Contact your favorite outdoor company or resort and ask them to do more on climate policy. Social media can also be a powerful tool for pressuring companies. “If a CEO of a ski resort gets 12 different letters from people asking about climate change, that’s a big deal,” Schendler said.
- Engage in local and state policy. Contact elected officials, show up at town meetings, and write letters to the editor.
- Be part of the efforts to protect democracy, “because good governance leads to good climate policy,” Schendler said.
Would it be easier to just skip the advocacy, grab your backpack, and head out for a hike without a care in the world? Of course it would. These actions take some work.
“You’ve got to show up or write a letter or come to a town hall,” Schendler said. “But that pressure is how change happens in society.”
“The individual action you can do is be part of a movement, which is what has always changed the world,” he added.
The author would like to thank Raini Helmstadter for his contributions to the analysis of the National Ski Areas Association’s Climate Challenge report.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
