The $1,000 Ski Run


Post by WildSnow.com blogger | March 31, 2006      

“$1,000 to duck a rope — dude, since when is that illegal?” Or so ill-informed people are yammering about on internet chat forums. Since 1972 Colorado has had a law called the Ski Safety Act. The Act codifies things such as skiing under control and not skiing in marked closed areas, as well as sometimes being the law used to close ski area boundaries (which are mostly open, more on that below). The current fine is $300.00 (I know, I’ve paid it.). The proposed law in Colorado simply changes the Skier Safety Act fine from $300 to $1,000. That’s it — nada mas.

Summons and complaint for backcountry skiing.
My Colorado Summons and Complaint for violation of Skier Safety Act in Highland Bowl. This cost $300 in 1982, proposed new law would change that to $1,000. In this case I knew I’d screwed up, and I also understood the law, so it got paid with no complaint.

The amount of confusion this engenders is amazing. It’s as if Colorado resort boundaries were suddenly being slammed shut like lockdown at a federal prison. Let’s get things straight: Ski resort boundary policy in Colorado is to generally allow passage on to public land across ski area boundaries, with occasional boundary closures that block access to public land where accidents (usually of the avalanche kind) are too common, or wildlife (ostensibly) needs protection.

I’ve never met a public land closure I liked, but can live with the few that exist in Colorado (gotta give the ‘crats a bone now and then). Such closures are usually done by agreement between the ski resort, the Forest Service, and other public officials. Again, they are rare.

Confusion arises because according to the Ski Safety Act, Colorado ski resorts can close areas WITHIN their permit boundary, and to block travel outside their permit boundary they can mark a “buffer” of closed land by moving their marked boundary back from their actual permit boundary, thus creating a strip of closed land that’s illegal to cross. Since the 1980s wide use of this buffer method has been discouraged by the Forest Service. More, Colorado ski resorts have been encouraged to install “gates” in their boundary fences that funnel backcountry traffic. This prevents the creation of “sucker tracks” unwary tourists might follow, and also leads people past warning signs. Again: While there are places where access to public land has been closed by ski resorts, such are rare and it’s safe to say that Colorado ski resorts have mostly open boundaries.

So, if Colorado ski area boundaries are generally open, what are the issues here? Several things:

-As always, high profile accidents that cost taxpayer money sometimes result when folks cross CLOSED resort boundaries that are illegal to cross (as opposed to open boundaries that are marked, and legal to cross). While such accidents are rare compared to hunting, hiking and climbing accidents, government folks such as law enforcement and legislators frequently pick on the skiers involved in these accidents — a funny thing since Colorado is such a big ski industry state, but perhaps it’s that western backwoods influence saying “huntin an fishin are the lifeblood, skiin is foo foo, we got better things to do than rescue them bozos.”

In the case of boundary crossing, I say increasing the skier’s safety act fine is indeed unnecessary — but I still think it’s a good idea for another reason. Read on.

-There is no doubt in my mind that our ski resort slopes have become more dangerous. I’m frequently on runs where the majority of skiers are on the edge of control, skiing way over their limit in terms of stopping quickly or avoiding a collision. My gut feeling is that severe skier collisions are happening more frequently, and the person at fault in such collisions is often leaving the scene of the accident to avoid taking responsibility (and likely punishment).

The irony here is that the Ski Safety Act absolved the ski resorts of much liability and put responsibility for accidents on the skiers themselves. A good thing on the whole (it’s what gave us open boundaries), but really quite different than other industries. Downside: There is less incentive for resorts to regulate skier traffic. They do so for public relations and to save work dealing with accidents, little else.

Some skiers who hit others get away with it, some are caught. While it could be argued that increasing the fine will make skiers more likely to run from an accident, I believe it’s the message sent by the increased fine that’s important. When people know it could cost them $1,000 if they run down 6-year-old kid, perhaps they’ll be slightly more careful. When ski resorts know we take this issue seriously, perhaps they’ll feel it is important PR to be seen keeping things under control. Money talks. I believe it’s worth a try.



IF YOU'RE HAVING TROUBLE VIEWING SITE, TRY WHITELISTING IN YOUR ADBLOCKER, OTHERWISE PLEASE CONTACT US USING MENU ABOVE, OR FACEBOOK.

Comments

4 Responses to “The $1,000 Ski Run”

  1. Jarrett Luttrell March 31st, 2006 10:05 am

    I miss having the old access gates like the ones in Winter Park. Wish CB had one to the Brush Creek TH.

  2. Steve Young March 31st, 2006 10:44 am

    I agree with you on the issue of more skiers being out of control. I think that the equipment is so good now that it lets people get way beyond the edge of their abilities. I’ve had several close calls this season and have witnessed several collisions. The common thread seems to be too much speed and a lack of technique,plus a healthy dose of “hooray for me and screw everyone else” attitude. All the more reason to ski the backcountry.BE AWARE,SKI WITH CARE! Defensive driving isn’t just for the highway anymore. The same attitude seems to be prevalent at the resorts as well.

  3. Walt B March 31st, 2006 4:25 pm

    its only wrong if you get caught

  4. Patrick Odenbeck April 1st, 2006 7:56 am

    I have also seen a decrease in control etc. So what you can through an inverted 720. Can you actually pick a line through the bumps or trees. I know that a lot of those laws had to do with some accidents on Aspen and other areas that have mines in the out of bounds areas. Lou you probably know this better than I do. I know some kid fell into a mine skiing out af bounds in the 70s. They made us watch a safety video about the accident in school. Yes I am a culprit too Ive ducked my fair share of ropes. But I guess the safety of the “tour-ons” is at stake.

  Your Comments


  Recent Posts




Facebook Twitter Google Instagram Youtube

WildSnow Twitter Feed



 



  • Blogroll & Links


  • Welcome to Louis (Lou) Dawson's backcountry skiing information & opinion website. Lou's passion for the past 50 years has been alpinism, climbing, mountaineering and skiing -- along with all manner of outdoor recreation. He has authored numerous books and articles about ski touring and is well known as the first person to ski down all 54 of Colorado's 14,000-foot peaks, otherwise known as the Fourteeners! Books and free ski touring news and information here.

    All material on this website is copyrighted, the name WildSnow is trademarked, permission required for reproduction (electronic or otherwise) and display on other websites. PLEASE SEE OUR COPYRIGHT and TRADEMARK INFORMATION.

    We include "affiliate sales" links with most of our blog posts. This means we receive a percentage of a sale if you click over from our site (at no cost to you). None of our affiliate commission links are direct relationships with specific gear companies or shopping carts, instead we remain removed by using a third party who manages all our affiliate sales and relationships. We also sell display "banner" advertising, in this case our relationships are closer to the companies who advertise, but our display advertising income is carefully separated financially and editorially from our blog content, over which we always maintain 100% editorial control -- we make this clear during every advertising deal we work out. Please also notice we do the occasional "sponsored" post, these are under similar financial arrangements as our banner advertising, only the banner or other type of reference to a company are included in the blog post, simply to show they provided financial support to WildSnow.com and provide them with advertising in return. Unlike most other "sponsored content" you find on the internet, our sponsored posts are entirely under our editorial control and created by WildSnow specific writers.See our full disclosures here.

    Backcountry skiing is dangerous. You may be killed or severely injured if you do any form of ski mountaineering, skimo randonnee and randonnée skiing. The information and news on this website is intended only as general information. Due to human error and passing time, the information, text and images contained within this website may be inaccurate, false, or out-of-date. By using, reading or viewing the information provided on this website, you agree to absolve the owners of Wild Snow as well as content contributors of any liability for injuries or losses incurred while using such information. Furthermore, you agree to use any of this website's information, maps, photos, or binding mounting instructions templates at your own risk, and waive Wild Snow owners and contributors of liability for use of said items for ski touring or any other use.

    Switch To Mobile Version