Oregon Tackles Snowsports Liability Insurance Crisis With ORCA Act Of 2026

Oregon lawmakers have introduced the Outdoor Recreation Coverage Assurance (ORCA) Act of 2026, comprehensive legislation designed to address a mounting liability insurance crisis that threatens the viability of ski resorts, outdoor recreation providers, and adventure tourism businesses across the state.

The bill, unveiled this week at the state capitol in Salem, represents the legislature's most aggressive attempt yet to confront insurance market conditions that have forced some outdoor recreation businesses to close or drastically curtail operations due to unaffordable or unavailable liability coverage.

"Oregon's outdoor recreation economy generates billions in economic activity and supports thousands of jobs, but that entire sector is at risk if businesses cannot obtain reasonable liability insurance," said the bill's lead sponsor in announcing the legislation. "The ORCA Act provides solutions that protect both businesses and consumers while stabilizing a broken insurance market."

The insurance crisis has been building for several years as carriers have either exited the outdoor recreation market entirely or imposed dramatic premium increases—sometimes tripling or quadrupling costs—on ski areas, guided adventure companies, equipment rental operations, and outdoor education providers. Several smaller ski areas in Oregon have struggled with insurance costs that now represent their second-largest operating expense after labor.

Mount Hood's ski resorts, which operate on U.S. Forest Service land under special use permits, have been particularly impacted. The combination of federal liability requirements and shrinking insurance markets has created situations where resorts face six-figure annual premium increases with limited ability to pass those costs to consumers in an already competitive market.

The ORCA Act contains several key provisions designed to address different aspects of the insurance crisis:

Liability Standards Clarification: The legislation establishes clear standards for outdoor recreation liability, defining the responsibilities of both providers and participants. The framework clarifies that participants assume certain inherent risks while operators maintain duties to warn of known hazards and maintain equipment properly. This legal clarity is intended to reduce frivolous litigation and provide insurers with more predictable risk profiles.

Insurance Pool Creation: The act authorizes creation of a state-backed insurance pool specifically for outdoor recreation providers who cannot obtain coverage in the private market. The pool would offer basic liability coverage at rates tied to industry benchmarks, providing a backstop against complete market failure while incentivizing private insurers to remain competitive.

Tort Reform Elements: The bill includes modified comparative negligence provisions for outdoor recreation activities, limiting damages in cases where participants knowingly engaged in inherently risky activities. These provisions mirror successful approaches implemented in Colorado and other states with significant outdoor recreation sectors.

Premium Transparency Requirements: Insurers would be required to provide detailed justification for premium increases exceeding 25% annually, including actuarial data supporting the rate changes. The Oregon Insurance Division would gain enhanced oversight authority over outdoor recreation insurance markets.

Claims Data Sharing: The legislation mandates creation of a centralized database tracking outdoor recreation liability claims, settlements, and verdicts. This data would be available to insurers, potentially reducing the information asymmetries that contribute to market dysfunction.

Industry representatives have largely welcomed the legislation while noting that some provisions may require refinement during the legislative process. The Pacific Northwest Ski Areas Association called the bill "a crucial step toward ensuring ski areas can continue operating affordably for Oregon families."

However, consumer advocacy groups have expressed concerns about liability limitations, arguing that injured parties should not see their legal remedies restricted to address insurance market problems. "We support making insurance more affordable, but not at the expense of Oregonians who suffer genuine injuries due to operator negligence," said a spokesperson for a consumer rights organization.

The insurance industry's response has been cautiously positive, with carriers indicating that clearer liability standards and better claims data could help them price risk more accurately. However, insurers note that broader market forces—including reinsurance costs and climate-related risks at mountain resorts—will continue influencing premium levels regardless of state legislation.

Oregon's insurance crisis reflects national trends affecting outdoor recreation providers. Vermont, New Hampshire, and Montana have all grappled with similar issues as insurance carriers reassess their exposure to outdoor recreation risks amid changing climate conditions, evolving legal standards, and occasional catastrophic claims.

The climate dimension adds complexity to Oregon's situation. Ski resorts face increasing weather volatility that affects both operational risks and long-term business viability—factors that make insurers nervous even beyond traditional liability concerns. The ORCA Act does not directly address climate-related insurance issues, though lawmakers acknowledge these concerns may require separate policy responses.

Small and medium-sized outdoor recreation businesses have been disproportionately impacted by the insurance crisis. While large, well-capitalized resorts can absorb dramatic premium increases, smaller operators—including backcountry guide services, equipment rental shops, and outdoor education programs—have fewer options when insurers demand unsustainable rate hikes or exit the market entirely.

The legislation includes provisions specifically designed to help smaller operators, including simplified insurance requirements for low-volume businesses and a grant program to help with compliance costs for enhanced safety systems that might reduce premiums.

Economic impact studies cited by the bill's sponsors estimate that Oregon's outdoor recreation economy generates over $16 billion in annual consumer spending and supports more than 170,000 jobs. Destabilization of the liability insurance market threatens that economic foundation, particularly in rural mountain communities where outdoor recreation represents the primary economic driver.

The ORCA Act faces a complex legislative path, with hearings scheduled before multiple committees addressing insurance, commerce, and tourism issues. Passage would require balancing competing interests of insurers, outdoor recreation providers, consumer advocates, and local governments that depend on outdoor recreation tax revenues.

If enacted, Oregon would join a handful of states that have implemented specialized insurance frameworks for outdoor recreation. Colorado's approach, widely viewed as successful, served as a partial model for Oregon's legislation, though the ORCA Act includes provisions specific to Oregon's unique mix of coastal, mountain, and high desert recreation opportunities.

The bill's sponsors hope for passage before the summer recess, allowing implementation before the 2026-27 ski season. However, contentious provisions—particularly those limiting liability—may require extended negotiation and possible amendment to secure the votes needed for passage.

For Oregon's ski areas and outdoor recreation providers, the ORCA Act represents hope that sustainable insurance markets can be restored before more businesses are forced to close or drastically scale back operations. Whether the legislation can thread the needle between industry needs, consumer protection, and insurer profitability will determine its ultimate success in addressing one of the outdoor recreation economy's most pressing challenges.