Mt Bachelor being sued over death of 9yr old

[fatbob]

Sign says top "yes" and midway "please don't.' Not a clue what this means and could be an issue if there was an accident.

Doesn't it mean unload at the top and not midway? Though can't remember it having a mid station so I guess it's a joke meaning don't jump off the chair.

Guess it's an example of poor signage if it has fields that the lifties don't actually have data to fill in. You'd have to ask ASC whether they intended snow depth or temps to go in those fields.

 

[dbostedo]

Doesn't it mean unload at the top and not midway? Though can't remember it having a mid station so I guess it's a joke meaning don't jump off the chair.

Guess it's an example of poor signage if it has fields that the lifties don't actually have data to fill in. You'd have to ask ASC whether they intended snow depth or temps to go in those fields.

Hmm... it's an interesting point if people aren't familiar, but I think at most resorts I've been to, those standing boards are turned over to the lifties to do what they want with (at least to some extent). I've frequently seen them be jokey like the examples, or have fun facts, or fake answers/data. And I don't think of them as official signage or warnings - just what the lifties want to tell folks, which can also sometimes be helpful. But this has me wondering if that can be a problem in some cases....

 

[James]

There was a sign on the t-bar shed at Breck in May.
Something like, IYCRIGTFO
If You Can’t Ride It…

 

[crgildart]

I truly do feel for the family, but we're looking at the distinct possibility of the entire ski industry in the US being severely impacted in their ability to operate if potential liability on icy days outweighs our own responsibility to mitigate risk.

Again, I've had to bail on plans to drive to the mountains a couple times when the last check at 6am reveals the resort or most of it is closed due to an ice storm or wind holds. The former seems to be suggesting that either the place isn't truly skiable or they have no electricity.

I don't think the answer is shutting down.. But I also don't think there is any level of "acceptable" collateral damage like this in the interest of keeping the game going for everyone at affordable rates. The answer lies in the middle of continuing to find better ways to communicate info that enhances and improves the experience for all of us. What exactly those better ways are probably depends on the situation and location. However, if withholding useful information about legit dangerous conditions is the chosen path so as to avoid some perceived increased lawsuit exposure we're back to the acceptable collateral damage question..

 

[markojp]

Again, I've had to bail on plans to drive to the mountains a couple times when the last check at 6am reveals the resort or most of it is closed due to an ice storm or wind holds. The former seems to be suggesting that either the place isn't truly skiable or they have no electricity.

I don't think the answer is shutting down.. But I also don't think there is any level of "acceptable" collateral damage like this in the interest of keeping the game going for everyone at affordable rates. The answer lies in the middle of continuing to find better ways to communicate info that enhances and improves the experience for all of us. What exactly those better ways are probably depends on the situation and location. However, if withholding useful information about legit dangerous conditions is the chosen path so as to avoid some perceived increased lawsuit exposure we're back to the acceptable collateral damage question..

FWIW, wind holds are about the safe operations of lifts, nothing more, nothing less. Sometimes this can and does impact avy mitigation, but not always by any means. The area, or at least our atea, is plenty ready to go. This one's from our hill. Winds were calm to 5mph in the parking lot:

 

[slowrider]

There was a sign on the t-bar shed at Breck in May.
Something like, IYCRIGTFO
If You Can’t Ride It…

Saw one at Snowbasin.
Trees 3
Skiers 0

 

[crgildart]

FWIW, wind holds are about the safe operations of lifts, nothing more, nothing less. Sometimes this can and does impact avy mitigation, but not always by any means. The area, or at least our atea, is plenty ready to go. This one's from our hill. Winds were calm to 5mph in the parking lot:

Even when the lifts still run, brutal cold windy days I'll be getting off at the mid station or skiing the other side of the place. My point was that they can and do close down part or all of the mountain when something isn't safe to operate.. Lifts, trails, a bathroom, whatever.. Shutting down one notoriously bad trail (even if it is the beautiful scenic summit) should be doable without severe economic failure overall. This one apparently gets shut down regularly for other reasons so..

Or leave it open with a big sign at the corral that says WICKED BAD ICE DOODS! when it's nasty like that. If we can't do that for fear of increased litigation exposure i.e. get sued when someone falls when it's skiing good and no sign is up.. then we need to re evaluate our motives as a society..

 

[slowrider]

When it's windy,real windy you don't want to be around the trees.

 

[markojp]

Even when the lifts still run, brutal cold windy days I'll be getting off at the mid station or skiing the other side of the place. My point was that they can and do close down part or all of the mountain when something isn't safe to operate.. Lifts, trails, a bathroom, whatever.. Shutting down one notoriously bad trail (even if it is the beautiful scenic summit) should be doable without severe economic failure overall. This one apparently gets shut down regularly for other reasons so..

Or leave it open with a big sign at the corral that says WICKED BAD ICE DOODS! when it's nasty like that. If we can't do that for fear of increased litigation exposure i.e. get sued when someone falls when it's skiing good and no sign is up.. then we need to re evaluate our motives as a society..

We do close slopes when conditions are dangerous or involve avy control. We rarely close slopes just because they're icy. That's what the "Long Slides Possible" signage is for.

 

[skiJ]

I haven't kept close track of this thread, but I am saddened to see the claim about ' someone falling when the skiing is good ' drift - or attempted drift ;

That does not appear to be the situation here -
rather , a nine year old child died in dangerous conditions.

This isn't about a fall under good conditions -
This is about the death of a child.

I have been skiing for a long time - more than fifty years ;
I was a skier for a long time - almost forty years...

in another thread, The (skier's) Responsibility Code is debated at-length ;

... some thoughts -

skiing is not-Safe.
on a perfect public slope, one at least is at-risk of being involved in a collision - even if standing - still at the edge of - or the base of the trail...

Conditions are unpredictable, and weather conditions are uncontrollable
( unless one is skiing indoors - and then, surface conditions are still unpredictable.

when I fill-out an incident report, I Always report Conditions as 'variable' , because in my assessment , Conditions are variable ;

laws protect ski areas from a lot of liability ( I believe this is accurate ) ;

similarly, liability waivers add a layer of (liability) protection. ( look for the phrase, ' the undersigned waives liability in the event of negligence ' .
look for it - ... ) ;

The Hard part -
are parents responsible for their children.
... children under what age (?)

as I understand the situation , I can imagine the parent's complete devastation. and I cannot imagine the parents' devastation. ;

in this situation ( in my opinion ) , everyone loses.
lawyers get paid. and the law gets tested - and everyone loses.

so.
This situation was not about someone falling in good conditions.

This situation is about the death of a child.

Risk management -
people die - and people die in the mountains - every year ;
children die. every year.

This is a sad tragedy. and nothing will bring this child back --

some think a monetary award will offer compensation

( I don't think so. )

my Condolences to the family and to the friends of the child -

my Condolences !


... peace... tj

 

[crgildart]

We do close slopes when conditions are dangerous or involve avy control. We rarely close slopes just because they're icy. That's what the "Long Slides Possible" signage is for.

Nobody's saying close a trail "because it's icy". Everything gets a little or even a lot icy. What makes sense though is to communicate to patrons the situation when a trail marked as a blue trail is skiing so difficultly that no true intermediate skier belongs on it period.. That's the problem here. Closing the trail is probably the worst way to resolve that. Either reclassify it as the level of difficulty it skis on a bad day or find a way to give intermediate skiers a heads up that they should NOT go near that trail on days when it's nasty.

 

[sparty]

Saw one at Snowbasin.
Trees 3
Skiers 0

Seen at Red Lodge Mountain:

Hopefully Montana defines hitting rocks as an inherent risk of skiing, otherwise I'd hate to be the defendant's lawyer after someone hit a rock and got hurt. They had a similar message on the sign the day that I found a submerged one and broke my leg, and I was a little nervous that my health-insurance company would try to find someone else to pay for the associated costs. However, once they heard that it was single-person ski crash, they stopped asking further questions (I'm guessing their threshold for putting more effort into investigating is higher than the cost on my injury).

I would assume there's a fine line between reducing liability by clearly communicating risks associated with an activity and increasing liability by acknowledging serious risks that you have not chosen to mitigate beyond a warning sign.

 

[markojp]

Nobody's saying close a trail "because it's icy". Everything gets a little or even a lot icy. What makes sense though is to communicate to patrons the situation when a trail marked as a blue trail is skiing so difficultly that no true intermediate skier belongs on it period.. That's the problem here. Closing the trail is probably the worst way to resolve that. Either reclassify it as the level of difficulty it skis on a bad day or find a way to give intermediate skiers a heads up that they should NOT go near that trail on days when it's nasty.

When you figure a way to develop a uniform method of trail ratings, let us know. There are blue runs in our region that are steeper than anything in the midwest with the exception of Mt. Bohemia.

 

[James]

When you figure a way to develop a uniform method of trail ratings, let us know.

All black?
“We told you it was bad”

 

[skiJ]

guys -

the trail rating system ( which I believe dates to the 1970s ) is designed and intended to rate trails by difficulty wiithin the boundaries for an individual ski area -
meaning
they are the Easiest, More Difficult, and Most Difficult runs or trails at that specific area.

there are some commonalities -
Easiest slopes are supposed to have gradients under 15% ;
More Difficult slopes may have gradients from 25% to 40% ; and
Most Difficult slopes may be slopes above 40 % ;

This trail rating system applies to terrain.

trail Conditions are a separate, independent issue.

... and I find this discussion in this thread ,,, disappointing.

I will leave this post up overnight - and I'll be glad to start a trail And Conditions rating thread tomorrow and ask that this post be deleted.


Thank you. skiJ

 

[Shawn]

I also don't think there is any level of "acceptable" collateral damage like this in the interest of keeping the game going for everyone at affordable rates.

Unfortunately, that's fantasy.

-It's possible that you may be in denial about the inherent risks in a sport like skiing. Injuries and death, however tragic, will occur. We're a bunch of great apes who get our kicks by strapping on wooden planks with metal edges and sliding down a snow-and-ice-covered mountain. Sometimes volcanos. The whole idea of the sport is ludicrous! Picture chimps on skis and that's basically not too far removed from what we are.

-Once you accept that skiing has inherent risks, the question becomes who should bear those risks? Or more specifically, who should bear the risk of injury or death from snow conditions? You seem much more inclined to make ski areas liable for injuries or deaths due to snow conditions. But I have not seen any practical suggestions for how ski areas could bear liability for snow conditions and make things safer. Just because you think "there has to be a better way" doesn't mean it exists, and any answer almost certainly is not "in the middle."

 

[crgildart]

We are discussing was to prevent this kind of thing and some of these suggestions will likely be brought up by the plaintiffs in the case.. RELEVANT to the topic.
How about the NEW blacks square trail rating? They went with that on Gunther's Way at Sugar Mountain far right..

 

[crgildart]

We do close slopes when conditions are dangerous or involve avy control. We rarely close slopes just because they're icy. That's what the "Long Slides Possible" signage is for.

This is probably as close to "something more that can be done" as anything. I'd like to hear from people who frequent Bachelor and especially @slowrider because he was there that day. Is there any reason why putting up this same signage there on days like that would be a problem? Might it have appropriate on that day?

Honest answers please. That is 100% of my beef here. There is something more that can be done of they were/are not already doing that there..

Out with this post, I promise!!

 

[James]

How about the NEW blacks square trail rating?

What about it?
Makes zero difference.

Looks like Sugar could just make the whole thing black with a green zone.

 

[slowrider]

This is probably as close to "something more that can be done" as anything. I'd like to hear from people who frequent Bachelor and especially @slowrider because he was there that day. Is there any reason why putting up this same signage there on days like that would be a problem? Might it have appropriate on that day?

Honest answers please. That is 100% of my beef here. There is something more that can be done of they were/are not already doing that there..

Out with this post, I promise!!

Yes "another" warning sign never hurts. But how many signs need to be posted before someone gets it. Some never will. It was very hard icy conditions that day and anyone with any experience should of expected bulletproof snowpack. You could see the sunlight shining off the ice.
I'm saddened that any family would have to endure an accident of this nature. As for the lawsuit. I will keep my personal opinions to myself.