Grand Targhee Expansion Proposal

The U.S. Forest Service has released a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the proposed expansion of Grand Targhee Resort in Alta, Wyoming. Many alternatives in the proposed expansion plan would dramatically increase the resort’s size and operations, with major consequences for wildlife, public lands, and the neighboring community. Residents and visitors who value the Tetons’ wild landscapes, vibrant ecosystems, and small-town character must speak up during the public comment period.

The DEIS presents five alternatives for the future of Grand Targhee Resort. The resort may desire updates and additions to its existing structures, but expansion beyond its current boundary is unnecessary and would be too costly to the environment, our community, wildlife, and public land access.

• Alternative 1: No Action. No new development or upgrades within the current ski area.
• Alternative 2: Maximal Action. Full approval of Targhee’s request, including two major expansions:
  • South Bowl Expansion: Would add 266acres to the resort boundary, plus new ski runs, an access road, a lift, a ski patrol building, a vault toilet, a rescue cache, and two avalanche launchers.
  • Mono Trees Expansion: Would add 600 acres to the resort boundary, plus new ski runs, access roads, a lift, and a mountaintop cabin.
  • All proposed upgrades within the current ski area.
• Alternative 3: All proposed upgrades within the current ski area, with no boundary expansion.
• Alternative 4: All proposed upgrades within the current ski area, and the South Bowl expansion.
• Alternative 5: All proposed upgrades within the current ski area, and the Mono Trees expansion.

Speak up. Join the Jackson Hole Conservation Alliance and tell the US Forest Service not to allow Grand Targhee Resort to expand into South Bowl or Mono Trees. Here’s why:

1. 1. Wildlife

The proposed boundary expansion would fragment critical wildlife habitat, threatening sensitive species such as grizzlies, wolverines, boreal and flammulated owls, northern goshawk, and peregrine falcons.. Increased human activity, year-round operations, and expanded infrastructure would displace wildlife, escalate human-wildlife conflicts, and undermine decades of successful conservation work in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. A key wildlife mineral lick and high-quality forest habitat would be lost or degraded.

1. 1. Environment

The DEIS outlines extensive environmental damage, including increased water withdrawals for snowmaking, loss of old-growth forests, erosion risks, and impacts to threatened whitebark pine ecosystems. New construction would strain water resources already stressed by climate change and agricultural use. The visual impacts from expanded ski runs, lodges, and lifts would mar the iconic scenic beauty of the Tetons and reduce the wilderness experience on adjacent public lands.

1. 1. Community

The Grand Targhee expansion threatens to overwhelm Alta, Driggs, and the broader Teton Valley community. Traffic congestion on Ski Hill Road would intensify, creating serious safety concerns. Affordable housing pressures would worsen, displacing local workers and residents. Public access to beloved backcountry trails would be reduced, and the quiet, rural character of the valley would give way to commercialized, year-round tourism pressures that local infrastructure cannot support.


Before June 20, 2025: SUBMIT COMMENTS HERE

• A comprehensive traffic impact study that assesses year-round congestion and safety implications for Ski Hill Road, past the Wyoming border, into the adjacent residential area.
• Detailed housing impact analysis to show how expanded lodging and employee demands would affect local housing affordability and availability.
• Analysis of the long-term water availability under different climate change scenarios to ensure that snowmaking and resort operations are sustainable.
• Detailed studies of public recreation displacement impacts, such as the loss of access to traditional hiking, biking, and backcountry skiing areas adjacent to the resort.
• Assessment of cumulative regional impacts from growth and tourism.
• Comprehensive housing and community service impact evaluations.
• A study of the cumulative effects of this development combined with other regional growth pressures facing Teton County, Idaho.

Without this data, the true scale of harm from the expansion cannot be fully understood or responsibly mitigated.

1. 1. Targhee has not shown an adequate need to privatize more public lands. The costs of an expansion would be born by wildlife and the neighboring community. 
   2. Boundary expansion will eliminate secure habitat for grizzly bears, resulting in increased human-grizzly conflict and increased probability of grizzly removal (death).
   3. Bighorn Sheep, a small vulnerable, population would: lose 54 acres of high quality winter habitat essencial for survival-lose access to the Apostle mineral lick, an important resource
   4. In the case of expanding into South Bowl, wolverines would lose denning habitat a detriment to their survival.
   5. In the case of expanding into Mono Tree, the Canada lynx would lose more than 200 acres of habitat a serious detriment to their survival.
   6. Proposed tree clearing and lift installation will impact many protected species — GTR is  seeking Forest Plan amendments to impact known nesting territories for peregrine falcons, boreal owls, flammulated owls, and American goshawks (and habitat for three-toed woodpeckers)
   7. Expansion requires a re-zoning of both South Bowl and Mono Trees (from visual maintenance to special use permit for private economic activity).  Let’s not privatize our precious public lands.
   8. The proposed boundary expansion would eliminate critical secure habitat for grizzly bears, increasing human-bear conflicts and raising the risk of bear mortalities.
   9. Construction and operation in the Mono Trees areas would fragment lynx travel corridors and diminish habitat.
   10. Expansion of the resort boundary in South Bowl would destroy high-quality winter habitat essential for the survival of the vulnerable Teton bighorn sheep herd. Increased activity in this area would deter bighorn sheep from critical access to the Apostle mineral lick, which is vital for their survival.
   11. Any Alternative that expands resort capacity would increase traffic congestion on Ski Hill Road, creating safety hazards and deteriorating the quality of life for Alta and Driggs residents. Existing infrastructure will be overwhelmed, particularly in winter months when road conditions are already hazardous.
   12. Resort expansion would worsen the critical shortage of affordable housing for workers in Teton County, Idaho, displacing long-term residents. And, escalate second-home purchases, driving up real estate prices and further marginalizing local families.
   13. Any Alternative that expands resort capacity would put unsustainable pressure on community services like emergency response, fire, and medical care, none of which are scaled for this level of growth.
   14. The proposed water withdrawals for snowmaking would diminish local aquifers already stressed by agricultural and residential use, with downstream impacts to the community.
   15. Visual impacts from large-scale new development would erode the scenic values that residents and visitors cherish, undermining the rural identity of Teton Valley.
   16. Expanded resort boundaries would limit public access to favorite backcountry skiing, hiking, and biking trails traditionally available to the community.
       
   17. Waste management from increased visitation is likely to strain the capacity of local landfills and create new litter and pollution problems.

The 90-day comment period ends June 20, 2025. Submit a substantive and clear comment to the US Forest Service about the DEIS before then. You can submit multiple comments or write a long one.

Substantive comments matter. They force federal agencies to respond in writing and are required to gain standing for future legal objections.
A substantive comment should:
Identify specific (environmental, wildlife, or community) concerns in the DEIS
Reference data or missing research in the DEIS
Suggest modifications or mitigation measures to address the concerns you identified
Share your personal connection and experience

“Based on the DEIS report, expanding the resort beyond its current boundary would be tragic for wildlife, the environment, and our community. I support Alternative 3, keeping Targhee inbounds, without the restaurant on Fred’s Mountain. The mountain-top restaurant would be an eyesore. Resort boundary expansions in Alternatives 2, 4, and 5 all violate conservation priorities in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. I live in Driggs on Ski Hill Road. I have a family and regularly access the wilderness adjacent to Grand Targhee Resort. Privatizing that land at the expense of wildlife would be a loss for me and others in my community. Please keep Targhee inbounds.”