2026 Project Proposal

Sipapu is proposing to expand its Forest Service permit area by about 915 acres. The proposal adds about 200 acres of new trails, three new chairlifts, expanded snowmaking, a summit restaurant, new parking, and summer activities like mountain biking, a zip line, and hiking trails. See the project map and the “What’s Being Proposed” section for details.

Sipapu has grown steadily in popularity, serving about 54,000 skiers in the 2024/25 season, but our terrain and lifts haven’t kept pace. Busy days bring long lift lines and crowded runs. The proposal spreads skiers out, improves the beginner and family experience, and builds a year-round business that’s more resilient in low-snow years.

No. Sipapu first sought to expand in 1990. The Carson National Forest accepted Sipapu’s Master Development Plan in 2012 and an amended plan in 2019, and every project in this proposal comes from that accepted plan.

The October 2025 presentation showed an interim, reduced version of the proposal. The proposal submitted to the Forest Service in May 2026 carries forward the full set of projects in the 2019 Master Development Plan Amendment, which the Forest Service had already accepted. This lets the Forest Service evaluate every component, including alternatives, in a single review. The final approved project may be smaller depending on the outcome of that review.

Not until the Forest Service completes its environmental review and makes a decision. After that, projects would be built in phases over several years, so any increase in visitation would be gradual.

No. Snowmaking under this proposal relies only on Sipapu’s existing, adjudicated water rights, administered by the New Mexico Office of the State Engineer. Sipapu would divert the same amount of water from the Rio Pueblo that it does today, and diversions can’t exceed the rate or total allowed by those rights. Usage is metered and reported to the State, and those records are public.

Sipapu is always looking for additional snowmaking water when it becomes available, regardless of this proposal. Any new water right would go through a separate review by the State of New Mexico and is not part of this proposal. If Sipapu acquires one in the future, it would provide the Forest Service with an updated water information analysis at that time.

Flexibility and efficiency. More snowmaking pipe lets us make snow in more places when temperatures are right. Ponds let us store water when river flows are appropriate and avoid drawing from the river during low-flow periods. Stored water also stays cold, which makes snowmaking more efficient.

Studying all three in one review lets the Forest Service analyze the environmental effects of the siting options now rather than through a later amendment. The number of ponds actually built will depend on available water.

About 72 percent of the water used for snowmaking returns to the river during spring melt, acting as delayed runoff rather than permanent removal from the basin. Sipapu funds voluntary water quality monitoring, and results to date show no measurable impact from resort operations. Sipapu is working with the Forest Service to make that monitoring a formal part of its permit. Effects on streamflow, aquatic habitat, and downstream users will also be analyzed in the Forest Service’s environmental review.

Drinking water options include treated water from the snowmaking system, a line from the base area, or a small on-site well. Any option would require approval from the State of New Mexico. Wastewater would be treated by an on-site septic system engineered to State of New Mexico standards.

Trees would be cleared for about 200 acres of new trails, lift lines, and facilities. Between trails, Sipapu would thin small trees and remove dead, dying, and diseased trees to improve forest health and create tree skiing. Sipapu proposes to offer removed trees to the local community for firewood and other uses.

Cleared areas would be revegetated, and the Forest Service’s review will analyze hydrology, drainage, soils, and stream health. Erosion control, stormwater management, and limits on ground disturbance are built into the proposal.

Yes. Most of the expansion area is within the Comales Canyon Inventoried Roadless Area. Federal rules prohibit new road construction in these areas but allow tree removal that’s incidental to an approved activity such as skiing. No new roads would be built inside the roadless area. The only new road segment, about 1,000 feet, is outside it. Construction and maintenance access would use ski trails, which would be revegetated and are not roads. The Forest Service will evaluate effects on the area’s roadless characteristics as part of its review.

Professional biologists have conducted preliminary surveys for wildlife, raptors, sensitive plants, and wetlands, which will be finalized under Forest Service direction. The proposal includes measures such as nesting bird surveys before spring and summer tree cutting, seasonal timing limits, avoidance of sensitive areas, revegetation, and noxious weed control.

Yes. Initial cultural resource surveys have been completed, and no cultural sites or traditional cultural properties have been recorded within the existing ski area. The Forest Service will conduct formal government-to-government consultation with Tribes, as well as consultation with land grants and acequia associations. Sipapu has engaged with the Picuris Pueblo, whose Governor provided a letter of support.

Sipapu has hired Bohannan Huston, a professional traffic engineering firm, to conduct a traffic study to New Mexico Department of Transportation (NMDOT) standards. The study covers access points, sight distance, peak traffic volumes, and the need for turn lanes. Final parking and access design will depend on that study and on NMDOT approval. Because projects would be built in phases, any increase in traffic would be gradual.

Five new parking areas along NM 518 would add about 1,200 spaces. Lots would be gravel with engineered drainage and erosion control, and lots next to the highway would be separated from traffic by a physical barrier. One lot would use the former highway alignment, with a shuttle to the base area. Sipapu will also continue to provide parking for non-ski-area summer users of the Tio Maes Trailhead.

No. Sipapu doesn’t authorize parking on the state highway. The new lots are intended to bring all parking off the road.

Emergency services in southern Taos County have improved significantly since 2023, when a county tax dedicated to fire and EMS took effect. The Peñasco EMS station is now staffed 24/7, and response times to the resort area have dropped from 30–45 minutes to about 15 minutes. Sipapu contributed about $370,000 in county gross receipts taxes in the 2024/25 season, which helps fund these services. Sipapu has also met with Taos County EMS and the Sheriff’s Department about the proposal. Increased visitation would be gradual as the improvements are built over several years which will allow emergency services to scale as needed.

Sipapu’s ski patrol handles most on-mountain incidents, and the proposal adds a ski patrol post in the summit building. Sipapu reviews and updates its emergency response, lift evacuation, and fire plans every year, and those plans will be updated as the resort grows.

During the 2022 Calf Canyon/Hermits Peak Fire, Sipapu used its snowmaking system to protect the mountain, the lodge, and surrounding areas, and to support firefighting crews. New snowmaking infrastructure and ponds would expand that capability. Sipapu’s cell tower also supports FirstNet, the communications network for first responders.

No. On October 15, 2026, the Carson National Forest accepted the proposal for environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Acceptance starts the review; it isn’t an approval. The Forest Service will decide whether to approve the project, in whole, in part, or not at all, after the review is complete.

The Forest Service will prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA), which analyzes effects on water, wildlife, scenery, traffic, cultural resources, and more. If the EA identifies potentially significant impacts, the Forest Service can elevate the review to a more detailed Environmental Impact Statement. The review also includes an amendment to the Carson National Forest Land Management Plan to reflect the expanded permit area.

1. Public notice and 30-day comment period. The Forest Service will publish a legal notice describing the proposed action. A draft Environmental Assessment will be released and the 30-day comment period will commence.
2. Environmental Assessment and draft decision. The Forest Service completes the EA, considering the comments received, and releases a draft decision.
3. Objection period. People who submitted specific written comments during the comment period may file an objection before a final decision is made.
4. Final decision. The Forest Service issues its decision on whether to approve the project.

Please continue to check the Carson National Forest Projects page for updates and ways to formally participate in the NEPA process https://www.fs.usda.gov/r03/carson/projects/447841?utm_source=MarketingCloud&utm_medium=email

To ask MCP a question about the proposal, email us at [email protected] (please note any comments sent to this email are not formal comments on the proposal – see above for how to officially comment on the project).