Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Summit at Snoqualmie revised uphill travel policy
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
snoqpass
Member
Member


Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 351 | TRs | Pics
snoqpass
Member
PostWed Dec 01, 2021 9:38 pm 
altasnob wrote:
Alpental doesn't have to seek USFS approval to institute this policy. Their lease allows them to restrict uphill travel for safety reasons. If the public really doesn't like this policy, the time to challenge it would be when USFS is renewing Alpental's special use permit.
They have to get USFS approval to do this and they did "Before making plans, read on to learn more about our Uphill Travel Pass, as well as resort specific rules and restrictions for uphill travel to help keep uphill and downhill travelers safe. This policy was developed in partnership with the United States Forest Service."

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
snoqpass
Member
Member


Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 351 | TRs | Pics
snoqpass
Member
PostWed Dec 01, 2021 9:50 pm 
Malachai Constant wrote:
My Economics professor always asked the rhetorical question, “and why do the do this?” he then answered his own question, “ To Make Money!”. This explains most actions in a capitalist society. Face it downhill skiing is a dying industry except destination resorts. Between global warming, exorbitant lift prices, switch to season tickets, rise of XC/AT skiing, and loss and consolidation of venues ski schools on weekends for school kids has become almost extinct. You have to hook them when they are young, young adults do not want to look like idiots on the slope learning to ski. Ski areas are forced to do anything to make a buck. Do you think the price of “grooming” stickers on SnoParks near ski areas is a coincidence. Ski areas are adding MTB parks, fancy summer diners, and scenic gondola rides to try and make up.
The problem has been overwhelming numbers of people seeking to use ski areas for uphill travel. Ski Areas around the country have had to implement of modify their policies in the last few years. Skier safety has become a leading factor, having witnessed it in the last few years it's becoming an issue. People were traveling in large groups up open runs right up the middle not in single file and with their dogs running loose, people were going uphill while patrol was doing avalanche work with explosives and traveling into the slide zones, people were going into terrain that wasn't open yet while patrol was doing control measures in the Backbowls of Alpental, traveling into the paths of Winch Cats, as mentioned by another poster the parking is becoming an issue and when you break down the costs of grooming a run, the cost of the machine, operator, fuel, parts and maintenance it adds up quickly as does plowing the lots. Most ski resorts really don't make that much money especially these days with the rising cost of evrything

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
kw
Member
Member


Joined: 30 Sep 2020
Posts: 84 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bellevue
kw
Member
PostWed Dec 01, 2021 9:54 pm 
My concern is less with uphill restrictions in general, which I understand are common and necessary, but rather with the strictness of these restrictions. I believe Alpental already prohibits uphill travel during operation hours and when avy control was being conducted, but banning uphill travel for the entire winter 24 hours a day seems like an overly-restrictive solution to the problem of idiots ignoring the existing restrictions. I'm not sure why they believe people stupid enough to skin up during avalanche control will now listen to these closures, or buy their $5 bureaucracy pass. I suppose part of my abrasiveness to this though is that the area they are closing extends far beyond the traditional confines of the ski area, they're ultimately just drawing a line through a forest quite far from where lift infrastructure ends.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
snoqpass
Member
Member


Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 351 | TRs | Pics
snoqpass
Member
PostWed Dec 01, 2021 9:56 pm 
treeswarper wrote:
Couldn't find any uphill restrictions at the Loup.
They do.... Mountain Safety In-Season Uphill Policy Loup Loup Ski Bowl recognizes the enthusiasm of the public to be outdoors enjoying the mountains while participating in different activities. The ski area has experienced a rapid increase in winter snowshoeing, snowboard hiking and the use of alpine touring equipment as a means of uphill travel to access terrain in and outside the resort’s Permit area. This type of recreational use raises safety concerns during operating hours and during off-hours maintenance operations. Maintenance operations routinely occur on the mountain during all non-operating hours. Machinery can be found working anywhere on the mountain at any time. This policy mitigates safety concerns of recreational use during maintenance operations, while allowing recreational access to public lands. As the Permit holder for the Loup Loup Ski Bowl area, the Loup Loup Ski Education Foundation (LLSEF) has a responsibility to maintain and secure the area for the intended permitted use. To that end, the LLSEF has determined that there will be no uphill or downhill traffic on or between the designated active runs of the Loup Loup Ski Bowl on non-operational days prior to or during the ski season, and that uphill traffic is allowed during operational days only on designated uphill routes as determined by the Loup Loup Ski Patrol and LLSEF Management. On normal operational days, all uphill traffic MUST sign in at the Administration office each day, and begin their downhill descent by 3:45pm. Uphill route(s) are displayed on our website (www.skitheloup.com/mountain-safety), at the Loup Loup Ski Bowl ticket office ski area map and on our ski area trail map brochure. Uphill route trailhead signage will also be provided at the entrance gate of the ski area. Loup Loup Ski Bowl accepts no liability or responsibility for accidents that occur as a result of uphill travel. RCW 4.24.210

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
snoqpass
Member
Member


Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 351 | TRs | Pics
snoqpass
Member
PostWed Dec 01, 2021 9:59 pm 
kw wrote:
I suppose part of my abrasiveness to this though is that the area they are closing extends far beyond the traditional confines of the ski area, they're ultimately just drawing a line through a forest quite far from where lift infrastructure ends.
Negative, everything is within the permitted ski area boundary as designated by the USFS.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
snoqpass
Member
Member


Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 351 | TRs | Pics
snoqpass
Member
PostWed Dec 01, 2021 10:14 pm 
kw wrote:
I believe Alpental already prohibits uphill travel during operation hours and when avy control was being conducted, .
Last few seasons uphill travel was allowed only during operating hours when the lifts were open to the public and after checking in with patrol before ascending

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
jaysway
Member
Member


Joined: 16 Jul 2020
Posts: 347 | TRs | Pics
jaysway
Member
PostWed Dec 01, 2021 10:44 pm 
snoqpass wrote:
kw wrote:
I suppose part of my abrasiveness to this though is that the area they are closing extends far beyond the traditional confines of the ski area, they're ultimately just drawing a line through a forest quite far from where lift infrastructure ends.
Negative, everything is within the permitted ski area boundary as designated by the USFS.
Exactly. While that terrain lacks lift infrastructure, it is not only part of Alpental's permit area but is actively patrolled and mitigated, albeit not to the same extent as the rest of the ski area. The reason for the existing access restrictions (getting a free pass from patrol at the top of Chair 2) is to make sure that skiers are informed and have the equipment and skills to safely navigate the terrain. You can learn more here: https://summitatsnoqualmie.com/alpental/alpental-back-bowls. Personally, I don't get the backlash against ski areas enforcing reasonable restrictions on uphill travel. The reason that people travel uphill within ski area boundaries is a combination of: 1) avalanche mitigation, 2) grooming, 3) parking, 4) riding the lifts before/after touring, or 5) touring while friends/family ride the lifts. Even if the ski areas are located on public land, all of the above cost ski areas money, and it feels reasonable that ski areas can charge a fee - and $5 is a pretty modest fee, let's be clear - for uphill access. What percentage of decent touring terrain in Washington is located within ski area boundaries? Very, very little. Like many places, what prevents more terrain from being "decent touring terrain" for most mortals is access - roads and parking.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
jaysway
Member
Member


Joined: 16 Jul 2020
Posts: 347 | TRs | Pics
jaysway
Member
PostWed Dec 01, 2021 10:50 pm 
Longer term, I have mixed feelings about whether the Alpental back bowls should remain the way they are, or eventually be incorporated into the rest of the ski area with new lift(s) and increased patrols/avalanche mitigation. I love the way the ski area treats the area currently, but all ski areas in Washington are bursting at the seams. Malachai, I am going to have to respectfully disagree with you about skiing being a dying industry if we narrow our focus to Washington. To the contrary, I wouldn't be surprised if the ski areas here could increase prices by 25% across the board and see little drop in peak attendance. I'm torn between wanting expanded/new ski areas to help spread out crowds, and also wanting to preserve as much of the nature we have here as possible. If Alpental eventually does expand its lift infrastructure into the back bowls, that might be a good compromise of allowing more uphill capacity while not expanding current ski area boundaries or infringing on areas within ski area boundaries where people currently enjoy uphill travel (see Crystal).

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
snoqpass
Member
Member


Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 351 | TRs | Pics
snoqpass
Member
PostWed Dec 01, 2021 11:02 pm 
Managing the Backbowls with a gate system allows them to not have to rope off and mark each run like the designated runs in the rest of the area as well as not having to mark every hazard with bamboo, signs, ribbons etc..but with the new chair being in the pipeline there's probably going to be some changes how some of the terrain is managed. Peoples time would be better spent working with the USFS for more winter trailhead access and parking instead of getting twisted up about developed ski areas uphill policies especially in the greater Puget Sound area. Part of the problem at the Pass and areas nearby is a fair amount of property next to roads isn't public land. There is some options but it will require different user groups getting together and developing solutions that don't turn into a "our land" and "your land" thing and realize that they are going to have to share public lands for recreation

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Malachai Constant
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 16093 | TRs | Pics
Location: Back Again Like A Bad Penny
Malachai Constant
Member
PostWed Dec 01, 2021 11:14 pm 
Hey I admit that I am a bit of an old curmudgeon at times but I think the current crowding is largely due to COVID. Back in the day the areas at Snoqualmie were filled with school kids on lessons. Now not so much, trite as it may seem the future is with the young. We bought season passes when our kids were in school and spent Xmas at Crystal. Then they raised prices and Whistler was better and cheaper due to overbuilding. For training we did laps at Hyak when closed. XC at pass snoparks was fun when kids were older. Then they introduced grooming permits and never did much grooming. Snow droughts did not help. Now just have a wild card pass at Crystal and park our pop up in the parking lot. I agree it is as idiotic to skin up a downhill area in operation as riding a MTB up the downhill trails at Whistler. I still think the downhill areas are trying to kill off public access to XC AT areas that are accessible.

"You do not laugh when you look at the mountains, or when you look at the sea." Lafcadio Hearn
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
snoqpass
Member
Member


Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 351 | TRs | Pics
snoqpass
Member
PostWed Dec 01, 2021 11:25 pm 
COVID-19 probably had some influence but the skier visit numbers have been going upwards in the last few years and not just at the Pass. The population in the area has increased a lot in the last 10-15 years as well as demand for recreation.There's still a lot of kids coming up to get lessons which are mostly sold out before the snow fly's. The Tubing Center is reservations only and is usually sold out as well. The Pass is overflowing on mid-winter weekends even some weekdays are seeing crowds that never used to happen mid-week. I could start a pretty good thread on the highway shutting down every time there's a little new snow due to poor driving of the masses. The number of people living up there has gone up as well and will continue once the Sewer Plant completes it's expansion adding to the congestion. The Hyak area as a example

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Randito
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 9513 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
Randito
Snarky Member
PostWed Dec 01, 2021 11:53 pm 
I don't know the Alpental Pro Patrol's exact reasoning on the season long closure -- but I'm sure they have some good reasons that are based on prior experience. Both the inbounds and back bowl terrain feature numerous narrow passages, rollovers and blind spots. So there is greater risk of collisions between uphill and lift served skiers than is present for other Summit At Snoqualmie areas. At the other Summit at Snoqualmie areas the designated uphill routes all follow relatively moderate terrain. Based on my knowledge of the inbounds terrain at Alpental -- It would be challenging to create a designated uphill route at Alpental without areas with significant uphill / downhill skier collision risk. If there is an officially designated route and there is a collision -- there is potential liability to the ski area.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
snoqpass
Member
Member


Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 351 | TRs | Pics
snoqpass
Member
PostThu Dec 02, 2021 12:54 am 
I believe most of the liability would be on the skiers. The RCW is a little dated in regards to uphill traffic and the skier responsibilities it is pretty clear if you are on foot or a sliding device but not so clear if you are skinning uphill generally it's the responsibility of the uphill skier to avoid the person below them but that's more so that you don't run someone over from behind when they can't see you as opposed to a person facing and heading uphill

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!



Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 11279 | TRs | Pics
Location: Don't move here
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!
PostThu Dec 02, 2021 8:10 am 
Snoqpas, did you find that on their websits? I failed. I have seen a sign prohibiting use on days when the hill is closed, but since that hill is closed so much due to broken equipment, I can't see them enforcing it all the time. I got an evil eye when I hiked past the crew just going along a road in the area. Nothing was said, and the hill was not opened yet.

What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Randito
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 9513 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
Randito
Snarky Member
PostThu Dec 02, 2021 8:47 am 
snoqpass wrote:
I believe most of the liability would be on the skiers. The RCW is a little dated in regards to uphill traffic and the skier responsibilities it is pretty clear if you are on foot or a sliding device but not so clear if you are skinning uphill generally it's the responsibility of the uphill skier to avoid the person below them but that's more so that you don't run someone over from behind when they can't see you as opposed to a person facing and heading uphill
The issue is whether a designated route creates areas where a collision is "foreseeable" -- or more specifically whether someone could argue in court that it was. A number of years ago there was a fatality at Central in the terrain park and the ski area was successfully sued. Park of the settlement was the creation of the "park pass", the educational videos and the guy in the booth at the top checking that folks entering the terrain park had a "park pass" I'm not saying that such a lawsuit would necessarily succeed, but the disruption and costs of defending any lawsuit are considerable. If the Alpental ski patrol doesn't feel like a reasonably safe designated uphill route can be devised at Alpental, that would be reasonable argument to the USFS for a season long closure under terms of the special use permit.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 Reply to topic
Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Summit at Snoqualmie revised uphill travel policy
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum