EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Rope off powder slopes to inhibit diagonal crossings?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rope off powder slopes to inhibit diagonal crossings? - Page 2

post #31 of 51
Nice examples Ms AltaGrrl,
What works at one area may not work at another. It requires a pragamatic approach, some effort of the part of the ski patrol and some education of that weeks skiers.
post #32 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunion
Martin, you are certainly entitled to your opinion and I to mine.
The teraain controlled in this manner in my area is not expert terrain, it is beyond what is double diamond at most ski areas. The hikiking serves as a limiting factor. You would need to see it and to ski it to understand. BTW, you are from Taos eh? You happen to know a kid who grew up there name David Dobbs?
Sorry, bunion, don't know David - I only moved to Taos 7 months ago, before that I was living in Vail for 6 years.
Which is your area? Hopefully one day I will get a chance to see the terrain you are referring to - personally, I don't mind hiking!
post #33 of 51
post #34 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seven
I can understand you disgruntled demeanor ...you obviously need more powder in your life.

Once you have satisfied that requirement, then this discussion will take on a more ...how should I say... emotionally meaningful tilt in your life.
As a born-and-bred Eastern'er, I fall into the category of "needing more powder in my life" as well. I must admit I've never understood these "oh, my powder has a track in it" discussions. This doesn't seem to be a "somebody traversing above me is increasing the avy hazard 2000%" problem -- that I can understand. This doesn't seem to be a "somebody traversing just about creamed me". As far as I can tell, this is 100% about "my powder has a track in it". So what? I think some people need a little more ice in their life to understand how good they have it.
post #35 of 51
It is a matter of "eddy cut" Isn't it. Eddy cut right across the good stuff and now everyone after him has lost 100 feet of vert 'cause when you hit that little "cat track" it's just going to ruin everything.
I think it must be our zeal to get across to the far "untracked" goods that makes good skiers and boarders do dumb things. Fortunately, in the East, this is not a problem. But I've blown up big time at Alta and Vail Bowls because to many have gone too low to traverse. In bad light, or while it's snowing, it's really hard to see these cross paths.

To plagerize the soaring community:
Get high, Stay high!

I've thought it would be good to post signage to express the concept to those who have no clue, and also have the patrol establish the highest practical traverse first thing on opening the area. Two "tracks" are required to allow overtaking ;-) Drop anytime you like, just don't cross after you do.

CalG
post #36 of 51
This reminds me of a song:
"sign, sign everywhere a sign, blockin up the scenery breakin my mind, do this don't do that can't you read the sign.....

Good song but BAD idea!! Just what we need, more of do this don't do that...
post #37 of 51
It's funny that places with a lot of snow and pow (Whistler, Alta, Moonlight Basin etc) have powder conservation and etiquette fans but the ones who don't seem to get it are from powder - challenged places .
post #38 of 51
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeeLau
It's funny that places with a lot of snow and pow (Whistler, Alta, Moonlight Basin etc) have powder conservation and etiquette fans but the ones who don't seem to get it are from powder - challenged places .
I actually expected it which is why in the original thread post I wrote "...This type of complaint is nothing new to we Western skiers concerning boarders and ...". It was predictable rule haters especially from the East would chime in regardless of any idea's merit if it immediately provokes a threat towards their freedom to go wherever they want. Unfortunately absolute freedom to go wherever for users even on our ski slopes is not necessarily better for the overall enjoyment of resort customers.

...David
post #39 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinF
As far as I can tell, this is 100% about "my powder has a track in it". So what? I think some people need a little more ice in their life to understand how good they have it.
Well said Kevin... now as I prepare to hit Alta, Bird, and the rest of Utah in 3 days time (for the first time), I am prepared to start buying into the hype! I'm ready to get off the PA Ice!

post #40 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunion
So I presume you're referring to the Headwaters bowl? I will be in Montana later this month and I hope I get a chance to ski Moonlight. Looks great.
post #41 of 51
Headwaters is the frosting, the rest of the area is the cake. The N. Summit is the cherry on top.

Bring your beacon, shovel & probes. Between MLB & Big Sky, they can get you a lot of places that those without may not go.
post #42 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_SSS
I actually expected it which is why in the original thread post I wrote "...This type of complaint is nothing new to we Western skiers concerning boarders and ...". It was predictable rule haters especially from the East would chime in regardless of any idea's merit if it immediately provokes a threat towards their freedom to go wherever they want. Unfortunately absolute freedom to go wherever for users even on our ski slopes is not necessarily better for the overall enjoyment of resort customers.

...David
"Even on our ski slopes"... I like that.

The guys I skied with at Whistler bent the rules from time to time. They were Western skiers (well Canadian). I'm from the East and I don't look for 'absolute freedom' when I ski. I think you are asking alot of tourists if you think stringing a rope across the initial section will stop lazy skiers and boarders. This is espcially true when the good stuff starts to track up.

If people think the rope is going to come down then you'll see the socially less adjusted break ranks and go for it.

I was thinking a wooden baracade or something more substantial would work better.

Overall the idea still makes sense.
post #43 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cgrandy
But I've blown up big time at Alta and Vail Bowls because to many have gone too low to traverse. In bad light, or while it's snowing, it's really hard to see these cross paths.
Anyone who's blindly hit a cut-across traverse knows exactly what he's saying. After a line of people make the traverse, it becomes a hazardous obstacle to anyone coming down from above if it's not visible (and often it's not). On the kind of slopes we're talking about, when you go down, you can slide for a lo-o-o-ng time and injury is possible. So, there is a safety concern here.

Easterners who aren't familiar with what the discussion is about can think about it in different terms: Ever been skiing along and suddenly hit a cat track that's cutting across the trail? You'll blow right out of your bindings. This usually happens in flat light or heavy snow when visibility is low. Now think what would happen if you were in a wide-open, above-treeline, steep bowl when that happened.

Thatsagirl
post #44 of 51

Skier Safety too

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seven
Copper Mountain has tried over the years at the bequest of OHG members to allow access to Union Bowl by way of a skiers right traverse from the top of Sierra Lift towards Kaboom. Every time they "try" it it ends up with the ugliest traverse lines accross the bowl.

Traditionally, the access route to Union Bowl is to hike from the top of Sierra Lift an additional ~200 vertical feet up and then another 75 yards east to access the Union Bowl. That hike keeps the Bowl well preserved.
More importantly Kaboom is not generally avalanche prone. With the steepness increasing as you cross from Kaboom into Union Bowl the danger definitley increases, especially with the very steep pitch at the top of Union just to the Union side of the rope-right where a lot of the early season releases occur in Union. Skier safety, not just traverse lines, is also a consideration with the placing of these ropes.
post #45 of 51
I gotta agree with Kevin. I may be from the east, but I've hiked all the stuff at copper that the ski school would take me to when I was invited to join in their morning clinics, I've lived and taught out west, and I'm more than willing to hike, but I'm also sometimes going to take the easy route.. Sorry if that pisses you off. You don't own the snow. And if you think that traverse line is dangerous and have "blown up" hitting one, you need to do two things; 1) open your eyes, and 2) learn to ski. These traverses are not blind. If you see a traverse you have to cross, maybe you should know how to ski well enough to not blow up when you hit it. Oh yeah, and be glad the people who are willing to hike higher than you don't get the whole thing closed off to you, so that only those select people get to ski it. Just be glad your first 10-20 turns have fewer tracks. Make everyone start up top, and it'll be tracked out from the top a lot sooner.

This kind of holier-than-thou attitude is incredibly annoying. Ropes should be there fore safety reasons (avalanche hazard, boundaries, etc), not because someone might track up the bottom of the slope more than the top. Quit your whining and grow t.f. up.
post #46 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thatsagirl
Ever been skiing along and suddenly hit a cat track that's cutting across the trail? You'll blow right out of your bindings.

Umm.. No! If you're doing that, then you are being unsafe and better pray that the "thing" you don't see isn't a person.

I find it interesting that some people find their lack of abilities are more acceptable than other people's. Those people cutting the traverse may be much stronger skiers than you and can handle crossing a traverse, but don't have the lung capacity to hike very far. But your ability to hike somehow outweighs their skiing ability? get over it!
post #47 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnH
Umm.. No! If you're doing that, then you are being unsafe and better pray that the "thing" you don't see isn't a person.
You cannot compare a cat track or traversing track with a person or other large object. In flat light, you cannot see ice, bumps, cat tracks and other changing snow conditions. You do not have to be skiing out of control to hit changing conditions, lose balance and fall/blow out of your bindings. People who are skiing powder runs are, generally speaking, skiing in low light or snowing conditions, and can not always see traverses cutting through their path until it is too late.

Even the best skiers fall. It has nothing to do with their ability.

Thatsagirl
post #48 of 51
This kind of holier-than-thou attitude is incredibly annoying. Ropes should be there fore safety reasons (avalanche hazard, boundaries, etc), not because someone might track up the bottom of the slope more than the top. Quit your whining and grow t.f. up.


Bwwwwhahahahahahaha.................. right back at ya
post #49 of 51

hmmmm

It's interesting the different points of view presented on this topic.

Some feel that it is a hike or leave situation, some feel it is a "turf" and exclusive untracked topic.

Some, an East Vs West "attitude" adjustment.

For me, I read the simplicity in the first posting.
'
If there is a useful high traverse to the goods (No lung power needed) why not take it?

Acknowledging a reminder such as a rope or a sign, or a gentle word from a ski buddy, 'shouts from some avid local, or just about anything will add to YOUR skiing pleasure and the enjoyment of all who follow.

I guess the question is, Except for the land rush fervor of taking a faster traverse to the distant untracked?( Beating all those considerate "lesser skiers" what is the reason for making multiple cuts across a delightful expanse of skiable terrain, fresh powder or not?

It's interesting to hear the several "standards" of skiing control and the expectations on visibility and conditions. On snow days, I have to keep up a bit of speed to stay up in the deep stuff. That is a definate compromise to the ability to pull up short on a cross track. I have learned to "unweight" i.e "suck it up" when it comes to displaying displeasure over the undesired "breaks" in the rhythm. The darker shadowy figures of fellow skiers are very easy to define.

Just to say, I will never object to lines cut down the fall line by those who have gone before. "You snooze, you loose." I only ski on about 8 inches of snow width per pass. The rest is yours!



CalG
post #50 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnH
Umm.. No! If you're doing that, then you are being unsafe and better pray that the "thing" you don't see isn't a person.

I find it interesting that some people find their lack of abilities are more acceptable than other people's.
I bet she can ski just fine. Thatsagirl is from Jay and that is a challenging mountain with conditions to match.

On a nice sunny day you can see all sorts of stuff. I spent a lot of time at W/B with plenty of powder days in the soup. The light was so flat you didn't know which way was up. I hit those traverses and it was not fun. You can get hurt in a situation like that. Maybe I should have slowed down a bit but the snow was deep and it's hard to pass up.

Maybe the ski patroll should deal with that!
post #51 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by freeskinow
I bet she can ski just fine. Thatsagirl is from Jay and that is a challenging mountain with conditions to match.
Freeskinow, what a fine young man you are, coming to my defense. I simply ignored the personal insult, since I know exactly how I ski and felt no need to defend myself. But it's nice to see chivalry still lives. I dare say, that is the first time I've ever been accused of skiing dangerously. Many people here probably think of me as the "safety girl" because I am married to a patroller. I'll have to speak to my husband and tell him he needs to reign me in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by freeskinow
On a nice sunny day you can see all sorts of stuff. I spent a lot of time at W/B with plenty of powder days in the soup. The light was so flat you didn't know which way was up. I hit those traverses and it was not fun. You can get hurt in a situation like that. Maybe I should have slowed down a bit but the snow was deep and it's hard to pass up.

Maybe the ski patroll should deal with that!
I agree. There is a safety issue that perhaps shouldn't be ignored. How big is that safety issue? I don't know. Certainly worthy of debate, and I'm not coming from a "snob" perspective of "people who don't want to hike shouldn't be there." I am not familiar with the particular location that prompted this discussion, but there might be good reason to have everyone funnel in from the same place. And since other resorts, such as Alta, have policies in place, it makes sense that other resorts may also need to consider addressing such situations. But it may also be true that this kind of action is not warranted in this case.

Thatsagirl
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Rope off powder slopes to inhibit diagonal crossings?