When I was called upon to design and implement a revegetation and erosion control program for a major ski area in the Lake Tahoe area, it was apparent that there were more questions than there were answers in the field of erosion control. To me, those questions meant an opportunity. My approach was to look beyond the current program and try to use a holistic approach to the erosion problems associated with ski area development. A handful of ski areas in the Western U.S. were making serious attempts at revegetation and erosion control, with varying degrees of success. Even the experts were busily asking questions. The most common approach to erosion control I found was an emphasis on revegetation. Reclamation grasses with some interplanting of native shrub species and occasionally some use of erosion control blankets, straw mulch and fertilizer seemed to be common. These treatments were usually effective in stabilizing disturbed sites. Yet it seemed that revegetation efforts were just one part of a complex system and that too often important parts of the system were overlooked or given low priority. In attempting to formulate a program that not only produced adequate plant growth but that ultimately produced acceptable water quality, a picture began to emerge. That picture contained two main elements: 1) Any effective watershed plan should consider all potential water flow. 2) The road system is a common source of severe problems. In many ski areas, roads are an often overlooked aspect of the erosion control plan.

The choice of these elements was based on careful field observations during run-off periods. It was obvious that much of the turbidity being contributed to the the stream was coming from dirt roads, with stream crossings being the worst culprit. We prepared the program like this: An aerial photo of the entire mountain produced at a scale of 1"= 500'. All the watercourses were carefully mapped. All roads and ski runs were mapped with their related drainages. This allowed us to: 1) Identify and correct inadequate drainage. 2) Begin planning a filtration and settling pond system could be planned. (This filtration basin component also provides valuable clues to the origin of turbidity.) In an initial cost/benefit analysis, focusing resources on the roads and streams seemed to provide a high return, and when a strong revegetation element was included, an effective overall program was the result. An obstacle to developing a strong revegetation and erosion control program for a ski area is the lack of specific Best Management Practices. Most of what is used in ski areas is borrowed from forest management practices. Some is applicable and some is not. Still, planning the program as a system can give very good clues as to which practices are effective, so that eventually, along with the emerging cumulative watershed effects analysis for ski areas (see W.M.C. Newsletter, Vol. 3 No. 4), specific BMPs can be developed. The questions now being asked about revegetation and erosion control in ski areas have provided the opportunity to begin to provide some answers. With good monitoring data, and a systems approach to formulating the erosion control plan, more pieces of the puzzle will come into focus. The overall benefit will be realized in cost savings of initial project development and reduced clean-up costs, as well as the indirect cost savings resulting from improved water quality.

Mike can be reached at (916) 525-4366.