A Lutsen Expansion onto public lands: At what cost?

Lutsen Mountain ski resort in Northeastern Minnesota proposed an expansion of its winter recreation area that, if approved, would convert nearly 500 acres of the Superior National Forest into new ski runs and chairlifts. While it may sound exciting to some to think about a bigger ski park in Minnesota, it would come at significant cost to local people, public lands, and sacred landscapes. 

The expansion is proposed on federal lands within the 1854 Treaty territory that are home to old-growth, undisturbed forests populated by northern white cedar stands over 140 years old as well as other unique and sensitive plant life and water sources. Expanding into these lands would impact rare ecosystems of deep economic, cultural and ecological significance, as well as important treaty rights and obligations. 

This is why MCEA, along with hundreds of others, filed comments about the proposal with the US Forest Service on Dec. 9, 2021 urging the agency not to grant the Special Use Permit. With the support of valued local partners, we emphasized that the process must recognize and uphold treaty rights, account for impacts to water quality, include measures to reduce those impacts, and consider that clear-cutting 140-year-old old growth forest could be an irreversible result of the development. Our comment emphasized that this would be a one shot deal, because this precious ecosystem is difficult – if not impossible – to regenerate.

In May 2023, the Grand Portage Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, and the Bois Forte Band of Chippewa entered into an important memorandum of understanding with the US Forest Service that implements co-stewardship of treaty resources across the Superior National Forest. In July, Lutsen acknowledged an “overdue shift” at the Forest Service in honoring tribal rights in our region, and requested that the agency hold off on making a decision on the permit. 

In August 2023, the Forest Service officially denied Lutsen’s application for the Special Use Permit. The Forest Service found that Lutsen’s proposal would unacceptably reduce the amount of, and restrict access to, resources protected by the 1854 Treaty; cause potentially irreversible loss of mature northern white cedar and sugar maple forests; harm water quality in areas downstream of the development; and displace hikers and backcountry skiers.