Protecting Us From Ourselves?

[highpeaksdrifter]

Why do you think some ski areas let you ski trees boundary to boundary while other areas have a much stricter policy?

Not enough patrol to sweep?

Insurance liability varies by state?

Is it just a different mind set from ski area to ski area?

 

[2knees]

Probably more of a mindset then anything else. Within vermont, the areas that openly promote boundary to boundary skiing include Jay, Magic and MRG. Obviously Stowe doesnt stop anyone either. Mt Snow, i believe allows boundary to boundary but at the very least, they have the new "woods are neither open or closed" policy enter at your own risk thing.

at any rate, i think it has everything to do with the mindset of the people running it and nothing to do with insurance or patrol. Magic isnt exactly overstocked with patrol and all of the above areas are in the same state.

 

[Beetlenut]

Is it possible that insurance rates vary for ski areas due to terrain, pitch, type of trees, clearing of trees, etc... for their gladed areas?

 

[tjf67]

I think it has to do with whoever is in charge. May be we are in for good things.

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

Probably more of a mindset then anything else. Within vermont, the areas that openly promote boundary to boundary skiing include Jay, Magic and MRG. Obviously Stowe doesnt stop anyone either. Mt Snow, i believe allows boundary to boundary but at the very least, they have the new "woods are neither open or closed" policy enter at your own risk thing.

at any rate, i think it has everything to do with the mindset of the people running it and nothing to do with insurance or patrol. Magic isnt exactly overstocked with patrol and all of the above areas are in the same state.

Vermont as a whole does have a very liberal policy which I think is great.

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

Is it possible that insurance rates vary for ski areas due to terrain, pitch, type of trees, clearing of trees, etc... for their gladed areas?

What I've always found both interesting and frustrating at the same time is that both Gore and Whiteface are both operated by ORDA, yet Gore has a more liberal policy then WF when it comes to off trail.

The Slides for example, though dangerous, could be open more IMO.

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

I think it has to do with whoever is in charge. May be we are in for good things.

Could be, plus I think they'll want to showcase the new glades.

 

[GrilledSteezeSandwich]

Why do you think some ski areas let you ski trees boundary to boundary while other areas have a much stricter policy?

Not enough patrol to sweep?

Insurance liability varies by state?

Is it just a different mind set from ski area to ski area?

Almost everywhere lets you ski in the woods now in New England..at Blue mountain if you ski one tree over from the trail, you will get yelled at..I am for boundary to boundary but it's impossible for ski patrol to sweep every nook and cranny everyday so the skier is at their own risk. I think what the fine print on the back of the lift ticket talks about hidden hazards and other things for legal reasons..yet in our society..you can sue for anything.

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

Almost everywhere lets you ski in the woods now in New England...

Not SNE. I was talking to an instructor at Jiminy one time and he told me on the rare occassions they have enough natural there are some real nice stashes in the trees. He also said that if he got caught he could lose his job.

 

[Glenn]

I'm wondering that if the standard disclaimer printed on the back of lift tickets and trails maps is enough to cover any woods skiing people may do. Given current policies, I'm going to assume "yes".

 

[GrilledSteezeSandwich]

Not SNE. I was talking to an instructor at Jiminy one time and he told me on the rare occassions they have enough natural there are some real nice stashes in the trees. He also said that if he got caught he could lose his job.

south of Sugarbush doesn't count..l

 

[riverc0il]

I think it has a lot to do with how trees grow in the various parts of the region. Trees grow differently in NoVT than a lot of other places in New England and the Northeast. Sure, even Jay has had a lot of folks maintaining trees on the mountain. But when it comes right down to it, that is because the forest in NoVT is a lot more conducive to opening up lines by cutting back smaller vegetation whereas New Hampshire and Maine forests are a LOT more dense. It helps VT areas that they have lower base elevations so the spruce trees start at a higher elevation. Naturally occurring spruce glades are extremely rare whereas naturally occurring birch glades can happen without the human hand being involved. NoVT just gets more snow too which gives a better base for boundary to boundary. The simple fact is promoting boundary to boundary outside of VT from Route 4 northward would be mostly a joke. Sorry Magic, I love ya, but boundary to boundary at Magic means you can ski lines that have exclusively but hacked out of the mountain. It is a lot different than ducking in between any random two trails and hacking it out with the saplings to get some hard fought powder tracks in the pucker brush that has definitely not been maintained.

 

[deadheadskier]

Even though some areas allow boundary to boundary; I believe the only areas that openly advertise between trail skiing in their acreage totals are Smuggs and Sugarloaf. Well, Sugarbush somewhat as well with their claim of 4000 acres in some bits of literature.

 

[kcyanks1]

Why do you think some ski areas let you ski trees boundary to boundary while other areas have a much stricter policy?

Not enough patrol to sweep?

Insurance liability varies by state?

Is it just a different mind set from ski area to ski area?

I think there are relevant differences in the law at least between NY and VT. Do any NY areas officially allow boundary-to-boundary?

 

[tcharron]

Something else to be taken into consideration I suppose is, given the area, if someone got lost out there, how likely *cough expensive cough* will it be to go out there and find them.

 

[takeahike46er]

I think there are relevant differences in the law at least between NY and VT. Do any NY areas officially allow boundary-to-boundary?

You would be correct.

No NY ski areas allow boundary-to-boundary. I have been told that Article 18 is the reason why. NY ski areas are made responsible for rescue anywhere within their boundaries. Thus, having an open boundary greatly increases the amount of terrain for which the ski area is responsible for.