or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Mountains that don't allow Snowboarding: The survey thread.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mountains that don't allow Snowboarding: The survey thread.

post #1 of 101
Thread Starter 
This is a spin-off from the thread about resorts that don't allow snowboarding.

I'm just wondering..... All you people who think resorts should not allow snowboarders, or think that they should be segregated from skiers....Why?


And please, don't embarrass yourself by sounding like a Prejudice Redneck. Only post a reply if you have a good reason.
post #2 of 101
post #3 of 101
Thread Starter 
Thank you for that lovely bit of fact-less propaganda. :
post #4 of 101
post #5 of 101
There are lots of reasons. If you don't know, then you wouldn't understand.

But I think to be fair, snowboarders should be offered their own resort as well - think of all the reasons you would dig that snowboarder rep dude. I think snowboarders could have: Ski Cooper, Buttermilk, or anywhere in the Midwest.
post #6 of 101
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Franknj229:
This is a spin-off from the thread about resorts that don't allow snowboarding.

I'm just wondering..... All you people who think resorts should not allow snowboarders, or think that they should be segregated from skiers....Why?


And please, don't embarrass yourself by sounding like a Prejudice Redneck. Only post a reply if you have a good reason.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A snowboarder riding correctly ploughs a furrow in the powder about twice as wide as a skier's track. A snowboarder sideslipping in powder---well, there ought to be a bounty on them. :

Ken
post #7 of 101
I both ski and ride, and I would applaud a snowboarders only mountain. But I don't think every resort should be segregated. So 5 places don't allow snowboarding, that's probably around 1-2% of the total acreage of lift serviced terrain in north america (if that). I'm totally guessing on the stats, anyone have hard facts?

I'm sure that a mountain area could be designed with only snowboarders in mind (ie. lift loading/unload, trail design, etc.)...then when the skiers show up, everyone could point out how they just aren't fit for said mountain. ("Look at those skier's....oh my god are those MOGULS!?!?!?")
post #8 of 101
What folks forget in their passionate debate about this subject is that ski areas are private companies - they can allow or disallow anything they want. Some folks in their arguments over mountains like Taos, Aspen, MRG and such have made it sound as if its in the same league as racism and sexism to disallow snowboarding! Most ski areas do not allow snowbikes, most don't allow snowmobiles, most don't allow sledding or inner-tubing on open slopes . . . and etc. "Right" or "wrong", its at the ski areas discrection!
post #9 of 101
Alta
Deer Valley
Taos
Perfect North (Indiana)
Mad River Glen

Hmmn, I've heard that all of these areas suck, but if you were going to try to fight the ban, I think Perfect North would be the place to start! The others aren't worth the effort.
post #10 of 101
Todd - the question wasn't are resorts allowed to ban snowboarders (of course they are if they own the land), it's should they...

Anyways, I'd say no they shouldn't ban them- I mean there are just as many gaper skiers out there who screw the mountain up, so why would you not allow snowboarders? I know tons of snowboarders who rip more than 95% of the skiers on a hill. This weekend it hit me... most of the people who suck on the hill are skiers (usually in over their heads). Plus the whole snowboarder attitude thing is blown way out of proportion. My $.02
post #11 of 101
"Should they" is pretty subjective! Is there a celestial judge that decides the "should"? Taos and Deer Valley representatives have commented that they have benefited from their respective bans by actually attracting skiers not wanting to be around boarders.

I snowboard some too incidentally, so I'm not a snowboard basher - I simply think that in the land of opinion there are few true "facts" or "right and wrongs" when it comes to things such as banning snowboarding. Most likely simple economics will eventually force all areas to open their borders to boarders <g>.
post #12 of 101
Llama, Perfect North is owned by people who don't like boarders and have tons of skiers. They are the only game in town near Cincinnati and turn a total deaf ear.
post #13 of 101
By the way, there is a snowboard only place. It's called Los Angeles. :
post #14 of 101
Word.
post #15 of 101
Thread Starter 
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Exit 154:
Hmmn, I've heard that all of these areas suck, but if you were going to try to fight the ban, I think Perfect North would be the place to start! The others aren't worth the effort. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That was sarcasm, right? Ok, just checking.


<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Todd Murchison:
Taos and Deer Valley representatives have commented that they have benefited from their respective bans by actually attracting skiers not wanting to be around boarders. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Where's the "benefit"? Everybody pays the same price for a lift ticket. If Taos opened it's doors to snowboarders tomorrow, every skier who goes there simply because they don't allow boarders, would be replaced by a boarder. No loss.
post #16 of 101
I've skied Deer Valley, it sucks, period. However, at Alta, they limit the number of skiers their on a daily basis anyway, so why not allow snowboarders? They will never get up in time to hit the slopes. There that should get some response...

My opinion is just that, an opinion. And yes, my experience is that most of the people who really suck on the hill are skiers. Did I mention that I have a pass to Alta?

There are a few places that will never change, and Alta and Deer Valley are two of them. Ever been to either? Deer Valley is full of rich people who pay not to be with snowboarders. Do you really think that the management will change their mind, they would lose customers. Alta is one of a kind, and people their are resistant to change. I heard complaints this year about the new detachable and three person chairs there. Imagine what allowing snowboarders would do there, people would protest.

Snowboarders are people to, and they have the right to ski any mountain that is owned by the public. But the ski area on that mounain does not have to let the boarders on their chairs. The opposite could also apply.
post #17 of 101
some skiers don't like boarders...this has been hashed about quite a bit. i have, at times, hated boarders going down a narrow trail making slow turns from edge to edge of the run. and they definitely have a different impact on the snow than skiers.

most stereotypes are founded on an element of truth. this holds for the image of snowboarders being rude. there's a whole subculture centered around snowboarding, and this subculture seems to promote diversity and independence, much like skateboarding. good things, usually, but teenagers often seem to turn diversity and independence into rebellion and...well...rudeness - two very different things. this isn't the fault of what's strapped to their feet, nor does it mean snowboarders are rude as a rule. (or, indeed, that skiers aren't aren't rude) many...even most...may not be. but that doesn't mean that the stereotype isn't legitimate. whining about it isn't going to change the stereotype, that'll happen when enough boarders make a legitimate effort to be courteous on the slopes. it takes time to overturn a stereotype....

my answer to your question, in short, is that sadly, as long as they can legitimately afford to, ski areas DO have reasons to disallow snowboarding on their hill. it's the same kind of thing as not allowing bicycles on the freeway, or jet-skis at isle royale, or pets at some parks.... you can't compare it to sexism, or racism. it isn't an -ism. and don't imply that i'm ignorant to think that there IS reason to disallow snowboarders. besides - it's practically a non-issue, at this point. 5 resorts...? whatever will you do... this isn't a violation of anybody's civil rights.
post #18 of 101
what you do isn't who you are. i often say i'm a skier, but being a skier doesn't give me any kind of rights or worth. the issue isn't no boarders. it's no boarding. anybody can ski at alta.

i can't run through wal-mart??? but i'm a runner!!!!!!

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ December 20, 2001 05:02 PM: Message edited 1 time, by Auxcrinier ]</font>
post #19 of 101
Ok I am going to jump in here. First I have nothing aganist snowboarders and think that a skilled rider is amazing to watch.This is not a rant about snowboarding.Infact I hope in some small way that this message helps improve the quailty of snowboardering. Many riders learn the basics and think they now have the skills to ride the whole mountain.from blue cruisers to double black diamond runs.I don't know of any skiers that would attempt to or think that snowplowing a Black diamond run was good skiing.Yet I see low level Boarders do it all the time,side slipping down a steep run.Personaly i would be ashamed of myself for doing an advanced run in that manor.
Did you know that about 12 years ago Alta allow snowboarders? The reason they banned snowboarding was that the snowboards were ruining the powder.Chutes were being scraped to bare rock with in a day or two of a 24 inch dump.It's a sad fact that a an unskilled snowboader can side slip a steep face.I over hear it all the time some guy bragging how he rode scotts bowl or some other double diamond run and yet he can barly carve a turn on mellow blue run!I have watched as they Push snow and ruin moguls as they slip down the face, Good Boarders need to start embrressing that low level boarder.Show them That there is a proper way to ride and carve a turn! That there is a lot more to it then being able to surviving a run and really riding a run.
to me it's about preserving quality snow and great bump runs. Deer Valley and Alta both have some great mogul fields evenly spaced rythmic runs.Park City doesn't have that since they lifted the ban on Boarders.I love skiing Alta and Deer Valley becuse they don't have boarders,Yet I have my season pass at Park City and I love to ski at the Canyons to both allow boarders and the Canyons I would say even encourages Snowboarding.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ December 22, 2001 11:23 AM: Message edited 1 time, by Utah49 ]</font>
post #20 of 101
Deer Valley has some nice areas. But the Rich people there don't pay to ski. They pay to be seen skiing. ALTA was one of the first areas open to boarders, but it didn't work out.

As far as having areas for boards only, thats OK. They can have Brighton and PCMR. Sounds good to me. [img]smile.gif[/img] [img]smile.gif[/img] [img]smile.gif[/img]
post #21 of 101
I'm with Utah49! Boarders do two things:

- Mess up the powder for skiers.
- Spend all of their time doing tricks in the terrain park.

Neither of those activities belong at a ski resort. Keep them at Brighton!
post #22 of 101
Its not about hating snowboarders, or who rips, or who is cool etc.etc. It is really about GREED. GREED for uncut snow, Greed for the good powder to last more than a morning, and I will admit I AM GREEDY.

I have skied JH for the last 24 seasons, the last 12 or 13 with a season pass. I average 30-40 days a season, and I have a real Monday through Friday job.

There is not a spot on the mt any more that does not get trashed instantly by snowboarders after any kind of dump. I am absolutely sure that was not the case just 10 years ago and for sure not 20 years ago.

It is not unusual to see the Hobacks full of low level boarders. You occaisonally will see low level skiers in the Hobacks, but they are not having a good time, and they are not moving tons of snow by sideslipping.

Snowboarding has probably saving the "sking" sport. But it has come at a cost, and that cost is less snow to go around.

Most likely it will never happen but I would like to see parts of Mts. segregated. No skiers on some parts, no boarders on others and most of the Mt open to all. It could easily work out at some big western Mts.

I don't hate boarders, I don't find 14 year old boarders to be any less in awe of age and experience than 14 year old skiers.

I doubt that a first year skier will ski the Hobacks, or the Moran faces at JH. A first year snowboarder will. I doubt there is a solution.
post #23 of 101
Wow, I think Auxcrinier did the best job I have ever heard of why boarders are all such A-holes [img]tongue.gif[/img]

By the way, Mountain high resort, while not actually having a ban, is almost ENTIRELY snowboarding.
Every skier I have talked to who has been there said it was an unplesant experience. All of the bad snowboarder stereotypes amplified times 10.
post #24 of 101
Oh, and ryan, that page you posted was complete garbage. most of what Mark Greenstein was just false.
post #25 of 101
Did you guys eat paint chips as a kid or something? This anti-boarder crap is pathetic... they only do tricks?? they ruin the snow?? How far does your head fit up your ass? Boarders belong on the hill just as much as skiers do. There are easily as many bad skiers as boarders, and they do as much to hurt the snow quality and mountain experience as anyone else.
post #26 of 101
sure, you can say that, llama. but it isn't true. nor do scatalogical comments make people think "wow, it must be true, she said my head was up my ass." if you have a point, feel free to state it. if you don't have a point, but have an opinion, you can feel free to state that, too. but if you don't have facts, or at least some form of reasoning to somehow support your opinion, don't substitute facts or reasoning for insults -- oddly, it doesn't further your views, just makes you look kind of small.
post #27 of 101
Into the deep end I dive! :
I teach skiing, and am a lapsed snow board instructor-lapsed as in gave my board a decent burial.
I love riding-but the whole ethos has changed-too many angry young men, too much us-v-them mentality.
To other instructors here-"who scares your students more, skiers or snowboarders??" The answer, in my experience, will be almost 100% snowboarders.
To add to the mix, we are seeing, IMHO, an even more dangerous component in the skiing model. I refer to the twin-tip afficionados. These males(I have yet to see a female twin-tipper), suffer from the 'Young Male Immortality Syndrome', and are gruesomely dangerous.
They may be able to do tricks in the terrain park, but getting there they have ZERO skills or interest in learning how to turn and stop, avoid people, or do anything other than get to the park at the highest possible speed. They scare the living daylights out of me, the accidents I've witnessed are really bad.
Ergo, I tend to agree with those who posit that it is more of a generational thing, than an equipment thing. Basically, all males between 16-25 are brain dead! (a joke, already).
The solution? Do like the Auto Rental companies-charge more for under 25ers. (another joke, jeez).
post #28 of 101
Who said I was trying to get anyone to see my way? More than most people I'm willing to embrace a multitude of viewpoints. I was just pointing out the stupidity of over generalizing an entire winter sub-culture. Look at the quality of arguments above ... you would get the impression snowboarders are all angry young men intent on destroying the precious powder snow that belongs to the high and mighty skier while at the same time flipping off your mother.
post #29 of 101
nobody said all people on snowboards were angry young men nor that they were intent on destroying anything. there is a stereotype. it exists. a stereotype is valid if there is a significant percentage of people who fulfill it. you can't argue with that. it has to be proven that its invalid. you can't do that, no matter how much you whine about it. you aren't trying to get anybody to see your point? i'll ignore that -- the fact that you are here, throwing out insults, and emphaticially repeatedly restating your point prove otherwise. snowboarders do different things to snow conditions too. intentionally or not, that's a fact. when a resort says 'no snowboards' they are NOT discriminating against anybody. they're saying 'no, you can't go down that way.' and that is their perfectly reasonable prerogative. snowboarders are people, people aren't snowboarders. this is a trumped up non-issue.

also...i submit that publicly owned land or not, the resort operators have the right to disallow snowboards. i frequent isle royale national park. there are miles and miles of trails at isle royale, but no mountain biking is allowed. why? because it screws up the trails. i wish i could take my bike there, but i don't question their right to prohibit it.

i think i've pretty much beaten this topic into the ground...
post #30 of 101
Auxcrinier said
"nobody said all people on snowboards were angry young men nor that they were intent on destroying anything. there is a stereotype. it exists. a stereotype is valid if there is a significant percentage of people who fulfill it."
Good point, Imagine that and from a yooper even. [img]tongue.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img]
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 › Mountains that don't allow Snowboarding: The survey thread.