I am Not Excited for Ski Season :(

[marzNC]

Isn't there at least one established org? Maybe started by the parents of a child that was killed? I'm not finding it online.

I think you're thinking of the Snow Angel Foundation.

Snow Angel Foundation – Ride Another Day

snowangelfoundation.org

EDIT: catching up with posts

 

[Jilly]

WIth all the years that I've skied, I can only think of 1 time I saw a speeder chased down. That was at Whistler.

At Tremblant the ski patrol are first aid only. They have a separate group that are supposed to be doing "speed control". With over almost 20 years of skiing there, I don't rememeber ever seeing them chase anyone or pull a ticket. There is so much recklessness out there.

 

[MissySki]

It could be--I'd love to hear a lawyer's perspective. I can't help but think of other places where conduct is policed, though. For example at a Seattle Mariners game if you are vaping or screaming expletives security will ask you to leave. (Other fans text them and yes this probably sounds crazy to people in, say, Philadelphia). And the business model is somewhat similar (season tickets/season passes) and so are the demographics (skews male, plenty of families...). So let's say there is something about the idea of using speed guns or having a safety patrol that puts the ski area at risk--could they still police for conduct (coming to a lift too fast, cutting lines, hitting someone)? Why are the Seattle Mariners so ready to kick people out but Vail and Alterra etc aren't?

Well.. I know this happens as well because I've seen people removed from Patriots games for vaping and know people who were caught smoking and thrown out too. Yelling expletives.. definitely not lol, but... This is the policing part... Howver, these are not things that put others around you in imminent danger of injury or death and no one signed a liability waiver to go into the game either with inherent risk including other spectators. So I'm not sure it's an apples to apples comparison for what I was trying to get at on the legal side. Other than the PR piece. But many (most??) stadiums actually have their own jail cells inside for rowdy fans until they can be arrested if they need detaining, and they can and will remove people, so they are definitely not afraid of any PR stuff in that regard. Of course, the rules you need to break to be removed from a sporting event are usually the type you are not going to go tell people you got caught for at a game on social media because it would be embarrassing, and you would look stupid. I got caught vomiting in the stands and was removed, I got caught in a no smoking facility (in and outside) and was removed, I started a fight and was removed, I was belligerent and removed... lol

I would also love to hear a lawyer's thoughts on this topic overall though.

 

[Christy]

You're right, that conduct doesn't pose a physical risk (usually), but it seems like ski resorts could police conduct in a way that other private businesses do, and in the end it keeps us safer, without the liability of saying, here are the safety measures we take, which could open them to liability. All sorts of businesses police conduct, and sometimes they deal with blowback (guy gets kicked out of a restaurant, goes on Twitter). But they deal with it. Why do ski areas care more about the bad actors being unhappy customers when their pass is pulled, us (people concerned about safety) being unhappy customers?

 

[contesstant]

Actually I will answer my own question here. It's because they decided they want a family friendly environment where no one feels unsafe or even uncomfortable. This was a decision by a for-profit business. Any ski area could decide to be like this. They choose not to.

That sums it up 100%. It's a choice, and so far, the choice is to put into place measures that are not that effective but allow the resorts to say, "see, we take safety seriously!" It frankly follows the general trend in the past 30 years of profits over people that has proliferated our society. I think there is a direct line from the decline in customer service and the "me first" attitude that seems rampant.

This has me thinking that a petition to the resorts could be effective. The question is, do we want to target individual resorts, with a smaller pool or petition signatures, or have a larger, national-scale petition? It's easy enough to gather signatures online these days. It's easy to hit social media to gather signatures.

@RachelV, is this something we could do that could draw more women to The Ski Diva? Have The Ski Diva circulate a petition? This is out of my wheelhouse. I just know that I am fed up as are so many others with the lack of accountability being taken by the resorts. I don't know if this is something that should be taken to a congressional level? State laws need to change? (I won't hold my breath in Utah.) Are there certain states that have stricter laws regarding resort liability, or individual liability?

I can work around parking and traffic issues. I can work around not being able to get a lunch table at noon. I can work around lift lines at certain lifts. I can't work around negligent behavior by other skiers and riders. I mean, I try my best but I can't get far enough ahead of the straight-liner going 60mph to stay ahead of them. It's up to the resorts to make this behavior completely unacceptable. Because yes, snow sports are a privilege, not a right.

 

[contesstant]

WIth all the years that I've skied, I can only think of 1 time I saw a speeder chased down. That was at Whistler.

At Tremblant the ski patrol are first aid only. They have a separate group that are supposed to be doing "speed control". With over almost 20 years of skiing there, I don't rememeber ever seeing them chase anyone or pull a ticket. There is so much recklessness out there.

Snowbasin has "mountain safety" teams, but frankly they are not skilled enough skiers to catch someone speeding away. They just stand there and wave their arms and tell people to slow down. (That's all I ever see them do.) It sounds like other resorts do the same. They need to hire cranky retired people who are former racers or **cough cough** instructors. I know a LOT of those.

A massive, front facing PR campaign by the resorts announcing that certain negligent behavior will be punished with a suspended pass, then a revoked pass, to include revoking IKON privileges at all IKON resorts, for example, would go a LONG way. People will get on social media and whine and complain, but at the end of the day, the quiet folks who just want a safe and fun time skiing will be thrilled.

Now my squirrel brain is wondering if pushing IKON to take accountability for their direct effect on mountain safety would be an approach to take.

 

[Jilly]

Snowbasin has "mountain safety" teams, but frankly they are not skilled enough skiers to catch someone speeding away. They just stand there and wave their arms and tell people to slow down. (That's all I ever see them do.) It sounds like other resorts do the same. They need to hire cranky retired people who are former racers or **cough cough** instructors. I know a LOT of those.

A massive, front facing PR campaign by the resorts announcing that certain negligent behavior will be punished with a suspended pass, then a revoked pass, to include revoking IKON privileges at all IKON resorts, for example, would go a LONG way. People will get on social media and whine and complain, but at the end of the day, the quiet folks who just want a safe and fun time skiing will be thrilled.

Now my squirrel brain is wondering if pushing IKON to take accountability for their direct effect on mountain safety would be an approach to take.

First I wouldn't blame just IKON. EPIC has a stake too. At WB they used to hire off duty RCMP's manned with radar guns. Otherwise you just see the people waving their arms. And fencing doesn't help either.

The other issue is the park attitude outside of the park. The park is a safe area to take jumps etc. The side of the trail is not.

 

[snoWYmonkey]

The NSAA would be a place to start for national impact. I suspect that most resorts belong to the National Ski Areas Association. National Ski Patrol, PSIA, and of course the businesses themselves, resorts and mass pass corporations. I do actually understand how difficult both the liability issue is and the speed control crews having to make a decision that has an element of judgement versus actual clocked speed. A few euro resorts had speed guns and of course it became a race to get the fastest time. It would have to be hand held speed guns. The liability component became a huge issue at my home resort for the forest service. If they closed the gates on high risk days then the assumption became that it was safe on lower risk days when the gates were open. The decision became to never close the gates and place the burden back on the back country skier. It is a different issue, but does shine light on some potential issues. Nonetheless, I feel that current steps seem like lipstick on a pig, a pig they can't wait to slaughter and profit from.

 

[contesstant]

First I wouldn't blame just IKON. EPIC has a stake too. At WB they used to hire off duty RCMP's manned with radar guns. Otherwise you just see the people waving their arms. And fencing doesn't help either.

The other issue is the park attitude outside of the park. The park is a safe area to take jumps etc. The side of the trail is not.

Oh, absolutely EPIC has accountability, too. And the park attitude outside the park is a huge issue. It's how my husband about got his head chopped off a few years ago.

What would everyone like to see on a short list of recommendations we could collectively have on a petition? I'll start:
*No straight lining or excessive speed
*No park style riding outside of the park
*No jumping over blind rollers

 

[BlizzardBabe]

It could be--I'd love to hear a lawyer's perspective. I can't help but think of other places where conduct is policed, though.

This isn't my area of legal expertise, but in general, if an establishment sets a policy/rules and then fails to enforce the rules , they could be held liable depending on the circumstances. Similarly, if there are established rules and there is an accident, the establishment runs the risk that the injured party will sue them b/c their enforcement was inadequate. In other words, if the ski area had been policing their own rules properly then the accident wouldn't have happened. It is a hard thing to prove or disprove either way but I imagine that a lot of areas simply don't want any additional liability exposure.

Now if you want to ask me about hazardous waste or hazmat transportation, I could give you a more definitive answer . . .

 

[MissySki]

This isn't my area of legal expertise, but in general, if an establishment sets a policy/rules and then fails to enforce the rules , they could be held liable depending on the circumstances. Similarly, if there are established rules and there is an accident, the establishment runs the risk that the injured party will sue them b/c their enforcement was inadequate. In other words, if the ski area had been policing their own rules properly then the accident wouldn't have happened. It is a hard thing to prove or disprove either way but I imagine that a lot of areas simply don't want any additional liability exposure.

Now if you want to ask me about hazardous waste or hazmat transportation, I could give you a more definitive answer . . .

Thanks for that, as this was exactly my line of thinking with the path I went down there. Just wasn’t sure if it was appropriate in this case or not.

Though it also makes me wonder about for example the case of McDonalds where the customer burned themselves with hot coffee and sued. One of the things noted was that the company had complaints about the temperature of the coffee in the past on record, internal discussions about it with pros and cons for the different temperature ranges used, and did nothing to “remedy” the situation that led to severe burns in what most would think should have been a personal responsibility issue and not on the company. I mean, isn’t it common sense and inherent risk to handle hot liquid?? Could that also be the case here where if lots of people complain about the safety issues we are seeing to mountains and they do nothing about it, that it could show a negligence on their part to address the problem that then results in injuries and/or deaths down the road? Just because they choose to ignore the problem doesn’t mean it isn’t a problem, and it’s pretty frustrating that the laws on the books really all seem in their favor in this regard with “inherent risk”. I do not think inherent risk should be labeled as other skiers on the mountain in a way that mountains get to disregard any liability of enduring the mountains aren’t ALSO so overcrowded that it really ups the risk for this variable. This isn’t a naturally occurring risk, it is being amplified by the bottom line as always. There should be safe operating levels established for each individual mountain by a third party regulatory body for safety since they can’t seem to manage it on their own in an appropriate way.

Just me ranting lol.

 

[skivet]

Love all these thoughts and this thread. I agree with all that has been stated about saftey issues and would also be interested in supporting a group "call to action". The joy of teaching my daughter to ski was greatly diminished by my absolute fear of others around me. So many times I found myself yelling at boarders and other skiers for flying by at high speed barely missing her. And we would ski super defensive, at the edge of runs using tight turns with me right behind her as "protection".

 

[elemmac]

With the state’s ski hills posting record visitation in the past two seasons — reaching 14.8 million in 2022-23 — it would appear that the increasing frequency of injuries coincides with the rising number of visits. We say “appear” because, unlike just about every other industry in the country, the resort industry does not disclose injury data. …The ski resort industry keeps a tight grasp on even national injury data. Since 1980, the National Ski Areas Association provides select researchers with injury data for peer-reviewed reports issued every 10 years by the National Ski Areas Association.
...
When Colorado state Sen. Jessie Danielson crafted a bill in 2021 that would have required ski areas to publish annual injury statistics, the industry blasted the plan, arguing it would be an administrative burden and confuse the skiing public. It died in committee.

“When we approached the ski areas to work on any of the details in the bill, they refused,” Danielson, a Wheat Ridge Democrat, told The Sun in 2021. “It makes me wonder what it is that they are hiding. It seems to me that an industry that claims to have safety as a top priority would be interested in sharing the information about injuries on their mountains.”

I hadn't heard about this proposal from the Colorado state senate...thank you for sharing, it makes me start to think about this in a different light. I do think this needs to come from a government level...which led me down a rabbit hole of thought and Googling...

OSHA was created and has managed to reduce workplace injury from an employer-employee relationship. So, I started thinking, is there anything in place that protects skiers from negligent behavior on the slopes (either skier to skier, or skier to ski area). Bottom line is no, there are laws in place on the state level to do the exact opposite...protect the ski area. Most notably: "Colorado Ski Safety Act".

I found this article pretty informative about the logistics of these protections, and how they came to be:
Colorado ski industry enjoys protection from law, waivers

In summary, this was put into place to protect local family-owned mountains from being sued and needing to escalate the price to skiing due to liability insurance. However, this was put into place before huge multi-billion-dollar companies owned many of the resorts. With protections like these in place, I doubt that any resort is going to push for more rules and regulation that could in turn put the liability on them. I'm certainly being a bit pessimistic, but I think it's also a realistic viewpoint (Vail, Alterra, and others have deep pockets, and money speaks volumes).

 

[Christy]

This isn't my area of legal expertise, but in general, if an establishment sets a policy/rules and then fails to enforce the rules , they could be held liable depending on the circumstances.

I do actually understand how difficult both the liability issue is and the speed control crews having to make a decision that has an element of judgement versus actual clocked speed. A few euro resorts had speed guns and of course it became a race to get the fastest time. It would have to be hand held speed guns.

With protections like these in place, I doubt that any resort is going to push for more rules and regulation that could in turn put the liability on them.

So what I'm saying is, other private businesses make subjective decisions about conduct all the time in order to keep other patrons comfortable and feeling safe, so why can't ski resorts? I don't see how liability enters into it, if they take this tactic. So instead of saying, you can't ski over 50 mph, and giving others the expectation that no one there will be skiing 50 mph, and using speed guns to prove a person is breaking the rule before enacting consequences--instead a ski patrol person sees someone straight lining where they shouldn't be, or coming in too hot to a lift, or passing people too closely, and they make a subjective decision to penalize that person by pulling their pass for the day. Bars and restaurants are in the business of serving alcohol, but they can decide you've had too much and are starting to cause problems, and kick you out. A baseball fan might have season tickets but if they get too obnoxious and are interfering with other fans enjoyment of the game, they can be kicked out. Any retail business can kick you out and ask you not to come back. And that's because they are choosing to provide a certain kind of environment to keep customers and employees comfortable. I can't see why it would be legally difficult for ski resorts to also do this.

 

[VickiK]

I was on a chair recently over an expansive, uncrowded groomer watching a very good skier carving fast turns down the slope. Was amazed he had all the space he could want yet he came in so close to a young snowboarder, turning only an inch or two away from her (assuming her 'cause pink outfit). His arrogance in maintaining his line, not changing it even though it would have been both easy to do and considerate, was infuriating.

 

[elemmac]

So what I'm saying is, other private businesses make subjective decisions about conduct all the time in order to keep other patrons comfortable and feeling safe, so why can't ski resorts? I don't see how liability enters into it, if they take this tactic. So instead of saying, you can't ski over 50 mph, and giving others the expectation that no one there will be skiing 50 mph, and using speed guns to prove a person is breaking the rule before enacting consequences--instead a ski patrol person sees someone straight lining where they shouldn't be, or coming in too hot to a lift, or passing people too closely, and they make a subjective decision to penalize that person by pulling their pass for the day. Bars and restaurants are in the business of serving alcohol, but they can decide you've had too much and are starting to cause problems, and kick you out. A baseball fan might have season tickets but if they get too obnoxious and are interfering with other fans enjoyment of the game, they can be kicked out. Any retail business can kick you out and ask you not to come back. And that's because they are choosing to provide a certain kind of environment to keep customers and employees comfortable. I can't see why it would be legally difficult for ski resorts to also do this.

As far as I know...they do pull passes for certain dangerous behaviors, and issue warnings for others. However, I really don't know how common it is. It would be interesting if there were any patrollers here that would chime in (I'm sure it varies mountain to mountain).

I would think most of the behaviors that would get your kicked out of a baseball game, a bar, or a store would also get you kicked off the mountain too. I feel like they draw the line pretty high, and maybe the bar does need to be lowered. As you said...it is subjective, I think that's the toughest part.

I spent a few years working as a lifty, and there definitely were times that patrol would describe a person to us and ask that we don't let them back on (this was before RFID) because they needed to have a talk with them, or their pass was pulled. It didn't happen often...but it did happen.

 

[elemmac]

I did just stumble upon a Reddit thread about "Has anyone ever had their pass pulled? What did you do?"

Top Response:



I'm sorry..."disregarding direction not to ski carrying an actual human baby in arms"...what?

 

[Christy]

I feel like they draw the line pretty high, and maybe the bar does need to be lowered. As you said...it is subjective, I think that's the toughest part.

Yeah those instances you listed are really egregious so if that's the bar, it's very high. The hitting of a kid has to be deliberate? Being reckless and hitting a kid, or deliberately hitting an adult, isn't bad enough? And the person pulls "multiple" passes a season...like, 3? Or 300?

I don't really think the subjective nature is tough. If other businesses can do it, so can ski resorts. It just takes some balls I guess, and some willingness to deal with online complaints, which they deal with already (about parking, open terrain, all sorts of things). They have to know that some people will be happy to know a person was sent home for coming in too hot to the lift line for example. And in most cases we are talking about sending someone home for the day, not sending them to jail. It's pretty low stakes.

 

[dloveski]

For the first time ever, I am not excited for ski season. IKON has taken my home resort, Snowbasin, and turned it into an experience akin to Disneyland during Thanksgiving break. It used to be that there would be at the very least Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday where it was blissfully quiet. No longer, especially on powder days--powder skis are good for one run if you're lucky, so I don't even own any now! Skiing was my escape during the dark days of winter when I typically get SAD (seasonal affective disorder) and the solitude of those few blissful days are gone. I relied on skiing to ease my midwinter anxiety, but last winter, it gave me more anxiety than anything. I have looked at other options but unless I drop $1600 on another season pass at Powder Mountain (ouch!) there are no alternatives.

Anyway, I've been pretty quiet lately because as an introvert who craves peace and tranquility, my winter haven is vasty different and not in a good way. I have tossed around backcountry, but between my boot fit woes that would make touring boots a nightmare, and my medical diagnosis that makes me more prone to strokes, I am hesitant to venture too far on my own. I can take up snowshoeing, but will have to go somewhere besides the Snowbasin trail system for that since parking by the resort is a joke anymore.

I know, first-world problems. I waited decades as an Air Force spouse to finally arrive at the destination I had dreamed of during his entire career, only to have it turned into a place I no longer recognize. So, it's heartbreaking and yeah, I'm not excited for ski season.

I get it. My ski life has radically been altered as the Wasatch has become overrun and ski days have to revolve around parking and traffic jams. I have lived and skied (and hiked) these mountains since 1969 and beginning in early 2000's, crowds, costs, congestion, complaints have darkened the bliss I used to feel. My son works year-round at Brighton (chief lift mechanic) and he claims since COVID, there is more rudeness, anger, and general lashing out by guests at employees who are just doing their jobs. In the 70s and 80s, the vibe was so chill and laid back, but the new wave of those on the hill seems more aggressive and entitled (maybe because crowds, high prices, and waits are to blame?). But backcountry is even overrun---if you can get parking at a trailhead that is. I know I'm whining, forgive me.

Top it off---we are in a horrid high pressure bubble with smog in valley, limited snow in mountains, and a few groomers are crowded.

Happy New Year---PRAY FOR SNOW.

 

[dloveski]

I did just stumble upon a Reddit thread about "Has anyone ever had their pass pulled? What did you do?"

Top Response:

View attachment 24037

I'm sorry..."disregarding direction not to ski carrying an actual human baby in arms"...what?

When I hosted at Solitude, two fathers got into a fight on the slopes (one was from Boston) and their sons were pleading for them to stop. What a world.