or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

No more parks? - Page 2

post #31 of 42
It's been reported as a 25 foot table with a 75 foot lz, i.e. perfectly average medium-sized tabletop. The judge did reduce the award by more than half iirc to reflect the fact that the kid was primarily responsible for the accident.
post #32 of 42
As a patroller I hate parks. All my serious injuries two years ago came from 'gap' jumps and 'table top' jumps. I got so angry about it that I spent the summer doing statistics on injuries and severity of injuries on the park and presenting it to the area owner. He was unimpressed, until I showed him the costs to build and maintain a park compared to the number of people who use it.

I'm proud to say, the area eliminated all gap/table top jumps this year. He did loose a few riders/double tipers to other areas, but we had only a few accidents in last years park and none of them involved back injuries.

In my mind for small areas ROI is every thing.

However, for areas like Heavenly that take two of their best trails for terrain parks just so that they can say they have them is incredable. I was out there for a week earlier this month and I rode the Canyon lift over these parks every day. And they spent a fortune in snowmaking and construction for a small number of riders/skiers. Glad they can afford it. Even on a bad snow year. Glad I don't work there.
post #33 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevensMan View Post
Yes, those jumps are just huge. I rarely go to park and when I do I only take some upper part jumps and skip big ones.


So some people saying that park was not designed to be safe.... I'm just curios if anyone have ever seen any park which is designed to be 100% safe? It is possible at all?
I'm amazed that they put heavy metal in a place where someone is going to do a maneuver where it's likely they're going to fall. That's why we call them trauma parks. I wonder if skateboard parks get this kind of scrutiny. What about the federal government, carelessly putting a handrail next to a set of stairs, with no regard for a runout.
post #34 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2-turn View Post
I'm amazed that they put heavy metal in a place where someone is going to do a maneuver where it's likely they're going to fall. That's why we call them trauma parks. I wonder if skateboard parks get this kind of scrutiny. What about the federal government, carelessly putting a handrail next to a set of stairs, with no regard for a runout.
http://www.skatersforpublicskatepark...pic.php?t=5812

good summary regarding liability laws and skateparks.
post #35 of 42
All I'm saying is that I bet everyone here, if they ended up paralyzed by whatever event and faced with a choice of -
A. Suing whover they could so that they and their family could lead as "normal" a life as possible.

B. Having their family spend every single extra dollar and every spare minute on medical care just so that they wouldn't be called names by people they don't even know.
-would choose A.

Also, realize that a nonskiing400lbOprahwatchingcouchsymbioticDMVworker would probably look at that picture of Philpug hucking his sweatered carcass of a cornice and call him an idiot who deserves the Darwin Award. So there you go.
post #36 of 42
Big Sky finally did a good job with their parks this year. They put the landings for their biggest jumps in places where the run starts getting steeper so if the jump is overshot the rider doesn't smack into a flat area. They built all their biggest jumps with manmade snow & groomed them with machines so the take-offs and landings don't disintegrate as the day goes on. They used machines to pack & groom the take-offs and landings on their smaller jumps. They replaced all their boxes & rails with new gear. The boxes have metal frames with rounded edges. The rest of the box is made of a teflon like plastic which holds up well and is easy to skid on. Their rails are well coated so they remain slick & have rounded edges. Parks are inherently dangerous so its nice to see a resort make an effort to make sure operator error is the main cause of injuries.
post #37 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by MilesB View Post
All I'm saying is that I bet everyone here, if they ended up paralyzed by whatever event and faced with a choice of -
A. Suing whover they could so that they and their family could lead as "normal" a life as possible.

B. Having their family spend every single extra dollar and every spare minute on medical care just so that they wouldn't be called names by people they don't even know.
-would choose A.

Also, realize that a nonskiing400lbOprahwatchingcouchsymbioticDMVworker would probably look at that picture of Philpug hucking his sweatered carcass of a cornice and call him an idiot who deserves the Darwin Award. So there you go.
There's always c) Have insurance. Sometimes insurance forces you into a) to avoid b). There's certainly a recent litigation in the snowboard community where this seems to be why a manufacturer was sued (the insurer demanded that everybody be sued). Take away the ability to bring suit, make the insurer pay up, problem solved.
post #38 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryan View Post
As a patroller I hate parks. All my serious injuries two years ago came from 'gap' jumps and 'table top' jumps. I got so angry about it that I spent the summer doing statistics on injuries and severity of injuries on the park and presenting it to the area owner. He was unimpressed, until I showed him the costs to build and maintain a park compared to the number of people who use it.

I'm proud to say, the area eliminated all gap/table top jumps this year. He did loose a few riders/double tipers to other areas, but we had only a few accidents in last years park and none of them involved back injuries.

In my mind for small areas ROI is every thing.

However, for areas like Heavenly that take two of their best trails for terrain parks just so that they can say they have them is incredable. I was out there for a week earlier this month and I rode the Canyon lift over these parks every day. And they spent a fortune in snowmaking and construction for a small number of riders/skiers. Glad they can afford it. Even on a bad snow year. Glad I don't work there.
And thats what gives lots of patrolers a bad rap. If you want to talk about ROI, does your ski area want to have any patrons in 20 years??????

Education goes a LONG ways to providing a SAFE park enviroment, and I am not just talking about educating the public, but also the park building crew and PATROL (wich you clearly demonstrate that needs to be done.

Every study that I have EVER seen on park use statistics has been biased.

Table top jumps are by FAR the safest form of a terrain park jump, there also the most used. Maybe thats why there is more injuries on them :

Think about it, with out parks, kids are going to be way more likely to build unsafe jumps all over the hill, by buildign a park you concentrate this ussage to one area and can migrate the dangers by having the jumps etc professionally built. plus with it all taking place in a concentrated area, from a patrol standpoint, it lessens the requirment on patrol by alowing htem to place a few patrolers in the park, and then actually need less covering the entire mountian, plus you can then station your medical resources close to the top of the park for quicker responce times to truama.
post #39 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtbakerskier View Post
by buildign a park you concentrate this ussage to one area and can migrate the dangers by having the jumps etc professionally built.
I think that is the key. While there is no way to remove all risk, IMO "professionally built" implies some basic standards of design and most likely basic standards of engineering. Even if this is reduced to a crib card or a design rule-of-thumb calculator on a handheld.

I just do not see why so many people object to profit making ventures (often operating on public lands) selling services to the general public being required to uphold some simple and basic design and construction standards (and maybe informational ones) -- and then allow individuals to be accountable for their judgment and their actions within those bounds? Or alternatively, to disclose whether or not they design and build to specific standards - and then let the customers decide. My suspicion is that you'll end up with a similar result either way...

The situation right now is almost the worst of all worlds.
post #40 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post

I just do not see why so many people object to profit making ventures (often operating on public lands) selling services to the general public being required to uphold some simple and basic design and construction standards (and maybe informational ones) -- and then allow individuals to be accountable for their judgment and their actions within those bounds? Or alternatively, to disclose whether or not they design and build to specific standards - and then let the customers decide. My suspicion is that you'll end up with a similar result either way...

The situation right now is almost the worst of all worlds.
They are, most ski areas that have parks are REQUIRED by there insurance companies to build and maintian them to certian specifications, wich the jump in questions was.
post #41 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTKook View Post
There's always c) Have insurance. Sometimes insurance forces you into a) to avoid b). There's certainly a recent litigation in the snowboard community where this seems to be why a manufacturer was sued (the insurer demanded that everybody be sued). Take away the ability to bring suit, make the insurer pay up, problem solved.
Anyone here have 23 million in insurance? And even if you did, the potential for that much money buys alot of ethical rationalization!
post #42 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by MilesB View Post
Anyone here have 23 million in insurance? And even if you did, the potential for that much money buys alot of ethical rationalization!
Temptation and rationalization I definitely understand. But they are a poor underpinning for policy.

If I didn't have insurance I wouldn't go in the park, or do a lot of other things.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion