• Women skiers, this is the place for you -- an online community without the male-orientation you'll find in conventional ski magazines and internet ski forums. At TheSkiDiva.com, you can connect with other women to talk about skiing in a way that you can relate to, about things that you find of interest. Be sure to join our community to participate (women only, please!). Registration is fast and simple. Just be sure to add [email protected] to your address book so your registration activation emails won't be routed as spam. And please give careful consideration to your user name -- it will not be changed once your registration is confirmed.

Why is everything so crowded if skiing is losing popularity?

Christy

Angel Diva
Serious question. I see quotes like this, from the NY Times article Wendy was quoted in:

As a sport, skiing is struggling to maintain a toehold, with the number of skiers falling to 6.8 million in 2016-17 from 7.3 million 20 years ago, according to a survey from the National Ski Area Association.

But everything is more and more crowded each year. We've spent so many threads here talking about how to avoid crowds. So I don't get it. My guess is that small areas have closed and those skiers aren't traveling to other ski areas to ski (maybe they can't, maybe these small areas aren't near anything else). But that is purely a guess. As someone that lives in a population center near mountains, the idea that skiing is struggling is laughable.

Thoughts?
 

marzNC

Angel Diva
Consolidation.

Fewer and fewer people are skiing small mom and pop hills, which are going out of business while more people are converging on the popular destinations.
Perhaps. But according to the info I found, there were 507 ski areas/resorts in 1996-97 and 481 in 2016-17. There were a lot of places that closed in the 1970s and 1980s, well before the 1990s.

Since the data in Post #1 is from NSAA, perhaps that's literally the number of skiers in the U.S., not the number of people on the slopes. That means that for most ski areas/resorts, snowboarders are not included.

I read somewhere about ski resorts that choose not to participate in the NSAA survey. So that's another factor in terms of what the numbers really represent.
 

marzNC

Angel Diva
Found the skier/snowboard statistics starting in 2000-01. Note that these are estimates of the number of skier visits, not hard numbers. Needless to say, the dip in 2011-12 was due to poor snow conditions more than anything else. Revenue is a completely different metric that cannot be estimated from these numbers. That's the number that Vail Resorts shareholders care about. The Epic pass was created in 2008. That certainly has changed the crowd levels at VR destination resorts in the last 10 years.

Screen Shot 2018-11-27 at 9.16.22 PM.png
 

altagirl

Moderator
Staff member
Utah's all time skier day record was in 2016-2017. It was down last year but we were were only at 60% snowpack. Are there regions seeing a decline even with favorable snow years?
 
Last edited:

marzNC

Angel Diva
Utah's all time skier day record was in 2016-2017. It was down last year but we were were only at 60% snowpack. Are there regions seeing a deadline even with favorable snow years?
You meant "decline", right? :smile:

The regions I know best are the southeast and Mid-Atlantic. When the snow is good, or at least it's cold enough for decent snowmaking, most SE/MidA ski areas seem to be doing fine. What hurt the most was having a few seasons in the last decade when the Christmas holiday period was really poor because slopes were barely open. So even if the overall numbers were okay for the season, missing out on holiday revenue from one-trip travelers was a bit hit to the bottom line. As well as the cost of having to completely re-cover slopes in Jan or Feb because almost everything melted.

The seasons are noticeably shorter by a few weeks compared to 20 years ago. The resorts that are doing well in general were or have become 4-season resorts with mountain biking, zip lines, disc golf, etc. when there isn't snow on the slopes. Those are the resorts that have spent major money on more snowmaking infrastructure or replacing lifts since 2012 or so. They were all just holding on for a few years after the 2008 recession.
 

liquidfeet

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
I think the OP's question is a very good one. The groomed slopes are more crowded. Groomers are getting ridiculously crowded at the mountains where I ski.

Fast detach lifts that deliver 4 people on each chair, and trams and gondolas that deliver far more skiers per hour, both sound like good reasons. Compare how many people they deliver to the summit per hour to slow doubles.

Fast skiing groomer-zoomers may have an effect too. If skiers speed back to the lift faster than they used to, they will circle around more times per day. So that may be increasing the number of people on the trail at any minute.
 

altagirl

Moderator
Staff member
Here though, everything is more crowded, not just groomers. Parking is insane and can actually be full, which never used to happen.
 

RachelV

Administrator
Staff member
The greater Denver area has been growing SO fast, there's no way in the world that growth wouldn't be reflected in nearby ski areas. I think Seattle is growing at a similarly insane clip, right? Not sure if SLC is in the same category right now or not.

My guess is that skier visits are consolidating around the same metro areas that are blowing up - so skier visits in those areas are up, while smaller hills and / or resorts in less popular areas are flat or down.
 

altagirl

Moderator
Staff member
I think I also forget that most ski resorts here in Utah have always closed well before the snow melts (except Snowbird). So even when we have bad snow years it's rarely changing the season length much since we had that cushion built in with USFS mandated closing dates.
 

Christy

Angel Diva
Here though, everything is more crowded, not just groomers. Parking is insane and can actually be full, which never used to happen.

Ditto. It's actually with parking, base and lunch crowds that I'm basing my judgments on. I've seen huge changes just in the 12 or 14 years I've been skiing. You couldn't pay me to go to Stevens Pass on the weekend anymore. And, I mean, people complain about crowds backcountry skiing now.

The greater Denver area has been growing SO fast, there's no way in the world that growth wouldn't be reflected in nearby ski areas. I think Seattle is growing at a similarly insane clip, right? Not sure if SLC is in the same category right now or not.

My guess is that skier visits are consolidating around the same metro areas that are blowing up - so skier visits in those areas are up, while smaller hills and / or resorts in less popular areas are flat or down.

Right, and most western cities are growing tremendously. Even smaller ones. So it makes sense that Western ski areas are going to feel the heat. But I know that there are a ton of ski areas in the Northeast. Is the Northeast losing population? Are those ski areas losing skiers? I suppose when you have as many ski areas as New York State does, and so many people to draw from, if those are down skier visits and that might have an impact on the sport as a whole.

But if that's the case, then I don't think it's correct to say that the sport is suffering/losing popularity, which is what I have read so many times and it's always presented as a problem that we urgently need a solution to. I wonder if it's correct to say in a certain region of the country, skier visits are down. But in the West I just can't believe that's true.
 

mustski

Angel Diva
I wonder if the decline is in the number of people identifying themselves as skiers? I agree that resorts are more crowded than ever before, during weekend and holidays anyway. It's not just on the slopes - its also the parking lots, restaurants, shuttles, etc. However, skiing has become more expensive so I think there may be a reduction in the number of people taking up the sport or taking their one week a year ski vacation. Probably day pass purchases are down. Sport enthusiasts probably buy season passes or the multi resort passes.
 

marzNC

Angel Diva
Right, and most western cities are growing tremendously. Even smaller ones. So it makes sense that Western ski areas are going to feel the heat. But I know that there are a ton of ski areas in the Northeast. Is the Northeast losing population? Are those ski areas losing skiers? I suppose when you have as many ski areas as New York State does, and so many people to draw from, if those are down skier visits and that might have an impact on the sport as a whole.

But if that's the case, then I don't think it's correct to say that the sport is suffering/losing popularity, which is what I have read so many times and it's always presented as a problem that we urgently need a solution to. I wonder if it's correct to say in a certain region of the country, skier visits are down. But in the West I just can't believe that's true.
Good questions. My sense is that from 2009-2012 the snowsports industry was feeling the impact of the 2008 recession in multiple ways. The most obvious difference was how few lifts were upgraded or replaced for several years. The number of lift installations in the last couple years is significantly higher in all regions of N. America. Not just for large destination resorts either. Small places like Magic (VT) or AZ Snowbowl or Beech Mountain (NC) has spent big bucks on buying and installing new lifts. Presumably they think business will be increasing, not decreasing.

People who read online ski forums are the minority of people who ski/board. Even more so when considering people who travel for only one ski vacation per season. Getting a feel for those who ski only at a home mountain because they get a season pass, or people who ski less than 10 days a season is not easy. Are the season pass holders adding a trip to a destination resort because of a multi-resort pass? Are there more or less families starting an annual tradition of a holiday weekend ski trip in the flatlands?

Pretty sure the NSAA "survey" is not a random sampling of people on the slopes, but is based on answers providing by ski resorts.

Looks like the decrease in population in the northeast is for a specific age group. Found an article about the likely decline in the size of the work force in the next decade in both the northeast and the midwest. That's exactly the target market for Vail Resorts and Alterra for tips to their western resorts.

Many Northeast, Midwest States Face Shrinking Workforce
 

Obrules15

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
I used to live in Michigan's UP, Pine Mountain was five minutes away from me Norway Mountain twenty minutes and Ski Brule an hour and a half.
They are clearly suffering and the traffic that they used to get is nothing to what they get now. Michigan used to have the most ski areas of any state but recently they were overtaken by New York (yes MI used to have more ski areas than NY).

It's not the east or west that's losing skiers.............
 

marzNC

Angel Diva
I used to live in Michigan's UP, Pine Mountain was five minutes away from me Norway Mountain twenty minutes and Ski Brule an hour and a half.
They are clearly suffering and the traffic that they used to get is nothing to what they get now. Michigan used to have the most ski areas of any state but recently they were overtaken by New York (yes MI used to have more ski areas than NY).

It's not the east or west that's losing skiers.............
But at the same time, Boyne Mountain, Boyne Highlands, and Nub's Nob are spending money on improvements. I had a chance to walk around the bases during the summer. I presume they are gaining numbers during the winter as well as for summer programs. Vail Resorts bought three ski areas in the midwest several years ago. Are the improvements at those places and the lure of an Epic pass drawing people away from small independents in Michigan?
 

Obrules15

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
But at the same time, Boyne Mountain, Boyne Highlands, and Nub's Nob are spending money on improvements. I had a chance to walk around the bases during the summer. I presume they are gaining numbers during the winter as well as for summer programs. Vail Resorts bought three ski areas in the midwest several years ago. Are the improvements at those places and the lure of an Epic pass drawing people away from small independents in Michigan?
Boyne has always been the Vail of Michigan (places where whole families go for big vacations) what has been disappearing is the every weekend skiers at the small hills.

Back in the 70's, I don't remember anybody going out west or out east. The doctors and lawyers children had weekly ski school locally, but went to Boyne for vacations. One of the small feeder hills Vail bought in MI is the first place I ever skied. I do think that motivated people to buy an epic pass and start going out west for vacations. Mostly though people just aren't skiing the way they were there.

Michigan currently has 40 ski areas. The fact that four of them are gaining numbers really doesn't significantly change the big picture.
 

Christy

Angel Diva
I guess the next question in, have enough feeder hills in places like Michigan closed (or, have enough people stopped skiing) to account for the loss of 500k skier visits in 20 years?

And if that's right, it's a really different picture painted by the kind of quote in my first post. There's currently an 18 page thread going over at Pugski about how to grow the sport of skiing, where everyone is operating under the assumption that the sport is dying. Which, of course, seems crazy from the perspective of someone in Seattle or Denver or a lot of places in the West or NE.

Which also makes me think about the economies in places where skiing is booming, and where it isn't booming. There seems to be a logical tie there.
 

Latest posts

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
26,237
Messages
497,686
Members
8,503
Latest member
MermaidKelly
Top