Stakeholder Analysis

665 Words3 Pages
Alex Kihslinger Peggy Farrell Section 5 Stakeholder Analysis Conflict The conflict in the described in the article involves Arizona Snowbowl, a ski resort based out of Flagstaff, AR and their desire to expand their slopes and their business season. The problem arises when their plans include clear-cutting 74 acres of land and using 100% treated sewage effluent for the making of fake snow. The mountain has sacred value to the surrounding Native American peoples, and certain eco-friendly groups see the use of sewage as snow as a threat to both skiers and the fragile mountain ecosystem. How can Arizona Snowbowl expand and stay afloat while satisfying the needs of native people and assuring the sustainability of their practices? Stakeholders, positions, interests, value orientations, and attitudes One of the stakeholders involved in this debate include Eric Borowsky, the owner of Arizona Snowbowl. Due to the fact that it is either “expand or go out of business” Mr. Borowsky’s position is that of to allow for the expansion of his resort and the use of treated sewage effluence as fake snow. His main problems are that the ski resort industry is very competitive and the changing climate and snow patterns. These two factors are what are driving Mr. Borowsky and Arizona Snowbowl towards the drastic changes they are trying to make. One value orientation that seems to be motivating their position is utilitarian. One of the consequent attitudes that arise could be that he positively views the clear-cutting of the acreage and the use of sewage for snow. Another stakeholder is Klee Benally, a member of the Navajo Indians. Mr. Benally’s position is that there should be no cutting or use of sewage allowed. His position probably arises from the tribe’s belief that the mountain is sacred, and any man-made change is desecration. The native peoples often use the mountain for
Open Document