or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Something I don't get about this snowboard/ski controversey
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Something I don't get about this snowboard/ski controversey - Page 3

post #61 of 97
"Why don't they do what skiers did 2 generations ago and invest their energy in expanding into NEW territory."

3 of the locations that still prevent boarding have the most legendary characteristics in skiing today in the US.
Wether it be snow, character or terrain, or a combination of the three, these resorts remain committed to the true skiing experience. You can argue that I have missed the point, but as long as this remains the case, the battle has not been won..... And they will not stop.

If all of these areas were small pimples, not relevant to the heart of North American skiing culture, we would not be having this dialogue.

" There will ALWAYS be some terrain that closed to boards. Will Alta always be on that list? Taos? Deer Valley? I don't know, but MRG always will."

And statements like this will just incite their ire......

That's my opinion, may be wrong, but as they say, we all have em.....
post #62 of 97
Thread Starter 
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cheap seats:

nakona, if i'm not mistaken, you just did.

No. I didn't. But now I will.

I can't believe you actually had the gall to compare yourself to the people who fought for civil rights.

Nobody denied your right to vote.

Nobody burned an alpine ski on your lawn.

Nobody hung took your father outside, horsewhipped him then lynched him because he had the temerity to ride a board.

Nobody treated you like chattel property.

That you would even THINK to compare YOUR pitiful complaint to what real men and women went through in the last century disgusts me.

And you disgust me for saying it.
post #63 of 97
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by gonzostrike:
Black folks don't decide to be Black.
Women don't decide to be women. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly! I mean, it's just bad luck. We should feel sorry for them, right?


Holy cow, gonzo! Can you make it any more apparent what kind of person you are?
post #64 of 97
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nakona:
I can't believe you actually had the gall to compare yourself to the people who fought for civil rights.


That you would even THINK to compare YOUR pitiful complaint to what real men and women went through in the last century disgusts me.

Ummm, nakona, please calm down. It's not his plight -- from his posts it's clear that Cheap seats is a skier.
post #65 of 97
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Franknj229:

Exactly! I mean, it's just bad luck. We should feel sorry for them, right?


Holy cow, gonzo! Can you make it any more apparent what kind of person you are?

Frank, if you think you can decide my entire personality based upon a few posts, then I apologize for underestimating your powers, and commend you for your omniscience.

Oh, and by the way, your son Jesus had a birthday recently. I think it was about 9 days ago. I hope you didn't forget. Fathers are so forgetful about such stuff.
post #66 of 97
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by gonzostrike:
Nice spin, Rev Sharpton... or was it Katha Pollitt?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Maybe it's like Casey says. A fellow ain't got a soul of his own, just little piece of a big soul, the one big soul that belongs to everybody, then -

Then it don't matter. I'll be all around in the dark. I'll be everywhere, wherever you can look. Wherever there's a fight so hungry people can eat, I'll be there.

Wherever there's a cop beatin' up a guy, I'll be there. I'll be in the way guys yell when they're mad. I'll be in the way kids laugh when they're hungry and they know supper's ready and where people are eatin' the stuff they raise and livin' in the houses they build. I'll be there, too.

-Tom Joad [Steinbeck]
post #67 of 97
Hey gonzo......

....Oh, nevermind.

I'm off to Disney World. It's my way of killing time before my ski trip to Tahoe.

If this topic is still on life-support when I get back, I'll try to pick it up where we left off.

By the way, thanks for remembering my little Jesus's birthday. He is getting to be quite a handfull though. He's in that stage they call the "Terrible Two-Thousands". Maybe I'll just make the wife quit her job, and hire some black guy to do all the work around the house... eh, gonzo?
post #68 of 97
Mmmmmmmmmmhhhhh, intersting. In the European Alps as far as I know there aren't any ski areas that don't alllow snowboarders. Although it would be an interesting thing to do so. I don't really have a problem with boarders - I have a couple of pals that can rip it pretty good on w/ the board. I really get pi**ed off though at the boarders that plow the fresh powder w/o really ripping it. In Europe in the resorts (and most of the accessible backcountry) the powder is gone by 11 a.m. because everyone (and 80% of 'em are boarders) are out to catch a little patch. I'm just wondering how much longer the powder would last were there only the skiers?!? Oh well, we'll share it anyway...
post #69 of 97
I understand your point thoroughly.

The answer to the question “Well Why?” is what you are looking for correct?

I guess the best I can come up with is it’s like girls wanting to play football, most just want to do it because people say they can’t, it has nothing to do with there desire or ability to play football, or all the other sports that are normally offered to girls. I am sure somebody knows some great girl football player and thinks she is an inspiration, but it is so funny how upset most of these people get when they hear about the 6’4” guy playing field hockey in a Western Mass High school crushing girls with his body and slap shots. This is a perfect example of what happens when people lobby for things before weighing the consequences. By giving all kids equal rights to play all sports you get a ridiculous situation like the one in Western Mass, if each sport was evaluated on a sport-by-sport basis this wouldn’t have happened.

My point is if snowboarding doesn’t fit a mountain or it’s cliental why force it on them just because you think you should. The mountains that are closed to boarders do so because they don’t like what they bring to the table, just like most girls don’t like what guys bring to playing field hockey. To summarize, they only want to board there for the simple reason that they can’t
post #70 of 97
Flounder, it's common knowledge that in terms of quality and quantity Alta gets the best snow around -- 550" of very dry powder. In New Mexico, trying to compare any other lift-served terrain to Taos is an absolute joke.

...Not to disagree, because what you say about human nature is true (and has probably contributed to some rather incredible human achievements). I just thought maybe you didn't know all about Alta and Taos.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ January 04, 2002 03:28 PM: Message edited 1 time, by ShiftyRider ]</font>
post #71 of 97
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rio:
Well, I will get back to the original subject then. Why don't snowboarders put their energies into developing new terrain like our skiing forefathers did. There are multiple reasons.

1 - 2 generations ago our country was still operating under the aura of manifest destiny. Nature was there for our usage and exploitation of nature for business was encouraged. Now days you have to deal with environmental statements, length review processes & legal challenges up the wazzo. If someone manages to get past those you have various environmental vigilantes ready to put sugar in gas tanks and set fire to lodges.

2 - Developing on public land is almost impossible anymore and what little private land might be suitable is going to be very expensive now days.

3 - Any new area is going to be very expensive to develop. If someone is going to develop an area he is going to have to come up with a viable financial statement to pass before investors. The investors will want to fully exploits the areas potential by opening it up to skiers, telemarkers and whatever else they can think of.

The only viable option for boarders is to buy out existing areas that are having financial problems. This option scares me since many of those areas are local areas, not destination resorts. Their going boarder only will harm the local skiers that don't have the option of traveling.

PS - Lambast was definitely too strong a word to use....sorry.
OMG. "Manifest Destiny", Okey dokey. Yes. It's hard to start up a new area. Aaron Brill seems to be doing pretty well with Silverton now, though, doesn't he? No, you can't do it. It's Impossible. Really. No, I'm not kidding. You can't haul your lazy knuckle-dragging, lunchtray-riding ass off the couch and try and get something done. Hell, If Burton put all the money they've put into those damn "open minds, open mountains" and "Learn to ride" full page color cover ad campaigns, they probably could be well on the way to opening a "Burton Resort" that could be only boarders. I doubt you'd hear jack from the skiing community. I sure as hell wouldn't care. So don't hand out this "it can't be done crap. It has been.
post #72 of 97
Screw the boarders.
I, and many other skiers, spent years getting kicked out of terrain parks because they were restricted to boarders. I have no sympathy for them not being allowed at three or four places when 90%+ of the parks and pipes used to be snowboard only.
Besides, they still haven't learned to not post-hole along traverses and how not to block access when sitting on their butts messing around with their bindings.
post #73 of 97
I can't believe I read the whole thing. arggh, shows the excess of time on my hands. It is so tiring to see a potentially good initial post turn into a platform for so many tired, tunnel vision-like(proctologically speaking) rants. Once I started reading I had to read it all just to see if it went anywhere useful, guess my conclusion.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ January 05, 2002 11:04 PM: Message edited 1 time, by joel ]</font>
post #74 of 97
I always liked Aspen's Ajax the way it was - no boards allowed. I was skiing there last April on the first day that boards were allowed and decided that it was a non-event. There weren't many boarders, and most of them were older and pretty skilled riders. I watched a group of skiers and boarders coming down the face of Bell and was pleased to see that the riders knew what they were doing and were not messing up the bumps like they do at some areas.

I think Ajax will continue to attract a somewhat older demographic whether they are on one plank or two, and the riders will blend in pretty well with the skiers. I don't think that the terrain will appeal to the less skilled boarders who will probably spend most of their time at Aspen's other mountains.
post #75 of 97
I really can't say much in regards to Toas New Mexico. However there's little merit to your argument of being deprived of Utah's legendary powder, becuse you can't ride Alta. If you want the same 500 or so inches Of Utah Powder just buy a ticket to Snowbird.Or go one Canyon over and ride yourself silly at Brighton or Solitude.All four areas get about the same amount of snow per season.Brighton, goes out of it's way to welcome Snowboarders.My guess is that on any given day there are far more boarders at Brighton then skiers.Your argument sounds like " The snow is always deeper on the other side of the fence."
post #76 of 97
There was a time, only a few years ago, that there was terrain at H.V. that didn't alow snowboarders because it was designated a slow skiing/family only area. For those of you who have been to Holiday Valley, it was the Tannenbaum lift and the surrounding trails. But, management caved to the fear of declining skiers and opened it up for beginner boarders, and now to anyone. Guess where most of the accidents and trouble is now?

My Wife and youngest Son snowboard. But, since they were also excellent skiers first, taught by educated skiers and Instructors, they know and obey the Safety Code. If the majority of boarders were like them all areas would be open to boarders.

The majority of new boarders are taught by their friends who never had a lesson in their lives. Which means they don't have a clue about the Safety Code, or how to be courteous to others.

Try this one. Put a couple hundred boarders on a steep nicely groomed slope, and they'll have it scrapped to the base in no time. Side slipping on their heel side taling all the pow with them down the hill, depositing it in piles where they decide to sit and rest or light up a dube or whatever.

Or, they bunch up on their butts in the middle of the lift drop off areas, to buckle up their bindings leaving no room to go around causing accidents so the lift attendent has to shut down stranding me on the lift while I could be shredding the pow.

The list could go on. I do feel sorry for the good people out there who board, and a few bad apples always spoil the rest of the bushel basket because there are some truely nice people who board and are considerate, but the majority of boarders are thugs who only care about their own personal satisfaction, and don't care how they get it, or who they have to run ruffshod over to get it. Until this fact changes there will always be places like Alta and Deer Valley that keep the boarders away. Like it or not.
post #77 of 97
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lars:
the majority of boarders are thugs<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lars, you're a Safety Patroller, right?

I couldn't help reading into your message that you feel it's better to ban people before they violate the Responsibility Code, not after. Am I right?
post #78 of 97
keep it up, Shifty. you're doing a fine job of spinning things to suit your PC agenda.

Are you sure you're not the Rev Al Sharpton or a guest writer for The Nation?

post #79 of 97
This has been fun. Joel, you should join the fray. The funny thing is I really don't have any objection to Alta being skier only & as a skier I have selfish reasons for keeping it that way. I was just responding to nakona's second post on this thread asking why do the boarders keep on fighting.

Anyway, Hopped - I stated the aura of Manifest Destiny. 'Spirit' probably would have been a better word but I've spent too many of my years in Ashland, Oregon (you can find other threads on that subject). I realize Manifest Destiny dealt more with the expansion of the United States from coast to coast but it spirit continued to be a driving force out west. In the 40s, 50s & 60s there really was a feeling that the vast resources of the west were there for us to exploit & it was our destiny & duty to do such. The damming of rivers, irrigating of deserts & draining of wetlands were all seen as both progress & something that was done for future generations. I had a constant diet of films in grade school celebrating such. In this atmosphere the development of ski areas was encouraged & facilitated by almost all facets of government.

Your choice of Silverton as an example is an interesting one. Silverton has gone through great pains to be environmentally friendly. It didn't cut trees for runs or lifts, it didn't build roads for lifts & it discouraged sprawl except for by the highway. It is not a classic ski area but about the only type of new one that will be allowed today. Silverton is for a small group of fanatics, not for the masses. And if you notice it is for both skiers & boarders. I'm sure if one or the other factions had been excluded it would have had a harder time with financing plus it would have met stiffer resistance.

Utah49 - Yes boarders can get Utah powder at other resorts. But Alta is seem as the best of the lot & because of that boarders will want to go there. Because of its reputation the battle for Alta will be more symbolic than practical. If you look at the posts nobody is arguing over Deer Valley because it doesn't have the reputation or notoriety of Alta.

Lars - My old mountain, Mt. Ashland, was overrun with boarders, many of them thugs but most not. There was a lot of animosity between sides but that has changed significantly the past few years for a couple reasons. First, the older boarders became part of the establishment & made a concerted effort to clamp down on the worse behaviors of boarders. It almost brought tears to my eyes the first time I heard a boarder scream 'Carve, don't slide!!!' to a group of boarders sideslipping down the chairline to get to a jump. It really makes a difference if the boarders that work at the area take the time to let other boarders know what behaviors are not allowed on the slopes & in the lift lines.

The other big change was the caving in of the mountain to the boarders requests for a half-pipe & terrain park. These have had two effects. First, most of the adolescent boarders now hang around the park & pipe all day watching each others do tricks (it is amazing how few actually do anything). This has removed a large portion from the slopes. Second, the number of adolescent boarders that take up the sport for life has dimished significantly.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ January 07, 2002 10:18 AM: Message edited 1 time, by Rio ]</font>
post #80 of 97
Shifty Rider,

Absolutely not. This is America. Home of the free and where one is innocent until proven guilty. Also the same land where criminals rights are more protected than victims rights.

Ya got to know that i've been doing this for almost ten years now. Just when I think i've seen it all, something else happens to make me shake my head. All boarders are not thugs. (my Wife and Son snowboard)so do a lot of nice people. Some my friends and fellow patrollers. Maybe I should say "most of the thugs are snowboarders". Either way it's a fact.Should they be prevented from the slopes before they break the code? It's not for me to say. What do you think?

try this one? Four guys pull up in the parking lot. It's full. Instead of going to another parking lot or park on the side of the access road, they double park someone in. Now they finnish the beers they were drinking, light up a couple of joints and smoke em while everyone packs their gear. Oh ya, you see them put a few more cans in their back packs. They grab their boards and head toward the lifts, discarding the empty beer cans along the way. Two of them head for the ticket booth to buy passes, the other two don't. They all get on the lift and head up the hill. Are these the kind of guys you want around your or someone elses family? Should I have stopped them before they got on the hill?

Next scenario, an hour later, I get a radio call from Ski Patrol needing slope control at an accident sceene. One of these guys had just ran into a lady and both went into the trees causing serious injury to both. Am I going to mention that i saw this guy drinking and smoking dope earlier but let him on the slope anyhow? sorry about your Wife sir. What would you do?

Next scenario, Security calls, the lift attendent at Yoedler lift needs help. Two boarders cut line creating an incident and the passes they have don't look right. When I get there, they take off running for the parking lot. Should I have stopped them before? What would you have done.

You see where i'm comming from? You guys are letting some bad people make all of the boarders look bad, reguardless without saying or trying to do anything about the image. If there were enough boarders that cared enough about their image to try and make a difference, it would be a start. Skiers get the same treatment but there are enough of us who care about our sport to police it ourselves without the help of the Yellow jackets, without confrontation.

A rational human being will treat another with the same kindness and respect one deserves, which makes a peaceful coigsistance. Thugs will still be thugs!
post #81 of 97
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lars:
criminals rights are more protected than victims rights<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There's a reason for that. The full power (and money) of the state is not about to be used to prosecute (take away the freedom of) the victims. You misunderstand the word "rights" in this context.

Back to the snowboarders in the car, it sounds like they broke several rules before they even stood up. I'da booted them before I even knew they were snowboarders.
post #82 of 97
it is amazing how few actually do anything
LOL!! That is so true! Most of them wait 10 minutes before getting up the courage to try a jump. Then they sideslip the approach, and get up just enough speed to land on the tabletop and flop over!
post #83 of 97
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by milesb:
it is amazing how few actually do anything
LOL!! That is so true! Most of them wait 10 minutes before getting up the courage to try a jump. Then they sideslip the approach, and get up just enough speed to land on the tabletop and flop over!

Heh! I laugh when I see a knuckledragger bragging about "huge air" and "a rail grab" when I just finished watching that same primate catch about 6" of air and just barely swipe at his foot with one hand.

The chasm between reality and perception seems broadest and murkiest among the knuckledragging segment of snow riders.
post #84 of 97
Thread Starter 
As the thread originator, I'm invoking my right to step in and remind people of what this thread is about.

It is NOT about the classic "board vs. ski" argument.

It's about reaching the point of diminishing returns.

I postulated that at this point there aren't any "skier only" areas remaining where boarders can reasonably expect to get access.

The question is, when you're fighting a battle and you reach the point where you have gotten as much territory as you are going to, when (how?) do you stop and refocus on a more productive strategy.

Obviously, skier only mountains are catering to a niche market.

Obviously, when business do that and the niche market shrinks, some businesses either fail or expand their market base. (allow boards)

Just as obviously, the number of providers in this niche market will shrink until a balance is reached.

I'm simply suggesting that the number of skier only mountains has shrunk to the point where it's a sustainable business model.

You have ONE skier only mountain in the east (Vermont).

Two in the Utah and another in New Mexico, a significant distance away. (as a practical matter, it's a days travel for most people)

Oh, and at least one in the upper midwest with most likely a smattering of other local hills around the country.

So, if I'm right, and the expansion into skier only territory is essentially over, what now?

What will boarders do now?

Stop complaining? I doubt it.

Expand into new territory? Judging by shifty's reply, that's too much like work.

So... what?
post #85 of 97
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nakona:
Expand into new territory? Judging by shifty's reply, that's too much like work.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You lost me there, nakona. Which reply?

Is there one that suggests that I don't work?

Or is it just that you want to be the one to choose the work I do?
post #86 of 97
I fail to see a need for the creation of new areas for boarders. Ridership of skiers & boarders has been declining yet many ski areas keep expanding. This is leading to a surplus of capacity most of the season (don't let the recent holiday crowds fool you). The interesting question will be whether anyone will try to create a niche market here with boarder only hills. In Japan some hills already have switched to boarder only as a marketing ploy.

Don't expect the big boarder companies to lead the initiative since they have been championing shared slopes for years plus many are making money off of skiers through their clothes & accessories (not to mention the ones that own ski companies). The push will have to come from resorts that are trying to differentiate themselves from the crowd.
post #87 of 97
LOL! I can safely say that you will never see a boarding only area. Not unless lift tickets went for $10 a day. Sure as heck wouldn't last long anyway. The resort would be banckrupt in a year.
post #88 of 97
Or is it just that you want to be the one to choose the work I do?

Another nice spin, Shifty. How about this: you are demanding access to the remaining 0.1% of areas that don't allow boarders, yet aren't willing to work to open an area for boarders only. That seems pretty consistent with what nakona posted. Of course, you can't read it without your crazed paranoiac spin, can you?

What's with your paranoia about people trying to control you, your thoughts and your actions?

Do I detect a psychological issue in search of a cure?
post #89 of 97
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by gonzostrike:
aren't willing to work to open an area for boarders only<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Damn straight!

In my first message in this thread I wrote, "No snowboarder wants to see skiers banned."

What part of that don't you understand?
post #90 of 97
what don't I understand? simple.

your crazy non-sequiturs. HINT: something that's obvious to you, using the internal knowledge of your thoughts that ONLY YOU possess, isn't necessarily conveyed when you post non-sequiturs.

try beefing up your communication skills, Spin Doctor.
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 › Something I don't get about this snowboard/ski controversey