Colorado court: Ski resorts not liable for avalanches

[dlague]

Avalanches are the inherent risks of skiing! Makes sense.

http://www.koaa.com/story/32104652/colorado-court-ski-resorts-not-liable-for-avalanches

 

[thetrailboss]

Avalanches are the inherent risks of skiing! Makes sense.

http://www.koaa.com/story/32104652/colorado-court-ski-resorts-not-liable-for-avalanches

Key distinction:

Colorado's top court says ski resorts can't be held liable for avalanches within their boundaries.

Here's why:

The ruling came in a lawsuit brought by the widow of Christopher Norris, who was killed in 2012 after being caught in a slide on a designated run in the Winter Park ski resort. She says it should have been closed because of the high avalanche danger.

I can understand the other side--resorts are (theoretically) supposed to do control work. But the reality is that regardless Mother Nature will do what she pleases.

 

[thetrailboss]

SAM's take on it:

http://www.saminfo.com/headline-new...t-rules-avalanches-an-inherent-risk-of-skiing

 

[Domeskier]

If I'm skiing on open, in-bound terrain with a valid ticket, I'd like to think that the resort made a reasonable effort to make sure I'm not going to die in an avalanche. Never really thought I'd need a beacon and shovel skiing Winter Park. I wonder if they result would have been the same if the avalanche had taken out a lift.

 

[dlague]

Well I think that most recreational skiers ski on groomed inbound areas. Those that are interested in skiing bowls, walls, trees or hike to inbound terrain are in fact or at least should be aware of risks with avalanches being one of them. On heavy snow days it is impossible to have 100% preventative measures to protect against the risks. If there were then no one would die inbounds. According to the other article only 11 deaths due to avalanche since 2000 happened inbound. That is a small number and speaks to what resorts do right. There are more deaths from collisions with people or objects inbounds. There are also more deaths inbounds from tree wells.

 

[Domeskier]

Groomers are not necessarily protected from the paths of inbound avalanches either. The fact that resorts cannot 100% prevent them does not necessarily mean that laws shielding them from 100% of the consequences are a good idea. Sounds like 2 of the 7 judges agreed, at any rate.