Snowboarder Suit Dismissed

[Baaahb]

I have no interest in supporting Alta's behavior but it does not meet the standards of discriminating against people.

Ihe question is not whether this is discrimination based on race or religion or another protected class, but whether it is unreasonably restricting people's access to public land which should be a tougher standard. Though I understand that Alta does not precisely prohibit snowboards from shredding its slopes, it's prohibition is narrower and limited to snowboarders riding its lifts. If you want to hike up with your board, you are free to do so, to the same extent as uphill ski traffic.

From the TGR thread, I thought they didn't target Deer Valley because private land.

That's precisely the case. Same for Mad River Glen.

BTW, I think the most legitimate reason to exclude snowboarders is the idiots who sideslip down a powder slope. That's a waste of a precious resource. There are idiot skiers, too, but they don't wreck the wholesale destruction that lies in the wake of JONG boarder.

[Tele 'til You're Smelly]

when it operates on public land under a forest service lease it should need to have a good reason when it excludes someone for an activity that normally is accepted at ski resorts.

but it doesn't- there is no law which says this. You could apply to the FS for a permit for a resort for green-shirted people, and all red-shirted people could be excluded. That is what Alta has done- they run a ski resort and that's what they got a permit for. They don't want sneeches without stars upon thars, and that is permissible because no law says you can't discriminate against people on the basis of their shirt color, belly tattoos or mode of snow travel.

[Baaahb]

You could apply to the FS for a permit for a resort for green-shirted people, and if your resort was in some of the best and most accessible front-range ski terrain in the US, the FS would deny it.

Fixed 4 u. I agree that it comes down to what the permit says, and, back when Alta got its permit, ain't nobody heard of no snowboarders. So, like to so many things in government, you have to interpret broad and general language drafted decades ago and challenged by modern life.

[polemonium]

Green shirts and red shirts is not a good analogy because it's arbitrary and doesn't serve a purpose. It's more like, you can't expect to go to a park and play baseball on the tennis court, even though it's public property.

Most ski areas have all sorts of restrictions on behavior. You can't go tubing or traying, etc. Obviously snowboarding is a lot closer to skiing than to tubing or traying, but there is no general principle that says an area has to allow something, nor a principle that it should be allowable because most other ski areas allow it. Clearly Alta wants to keep doing this because it provides them a marketplace distinction. I suspect they care about that more than powder preservation.

Ski areas that prohibit or restrict uphill traffic restrict public access to public lands and this is a much more common issue than Alta; I don't think fighting them on snowboarders leads to any useful precedent about allowing access to public land. The FS appears to give permit holders (for all sorts of things, not just ski areas) a lot of leeway.

[Todd Eastman]

Why can't I use my Ski-Doo at ski resorts?

Exactly where is the clear line?

[RobRoyMeans]

LOL...for the same reason they don't allow Apine boots and skis on former olympic skijumps or motorcycles on piste, even if they have onboard machine guns....

[Baaahb]

I'm waiting for a resort not to allow one-piece suits, aka fartbags.















Then I'll sue.

[fogey]

Would anyone here have a different opinion if Alta banned tele skiing?

I don't know what the reason would be, but one can imagine. We could be a safety hazard (well not us, because tele skiers on this forum obviously ski better than people with locked heels--but other tele skiers) by not skiing as fast, making wider radius turns and getting in people's way. Or we could just be offensive in the dirtbag tradition: smell bad, dress ugly and irritate people on the lifts by being cooler than they are.

[jibmaster]

The one and only time a boarder wanted to fight me, was at Alta - earning some pre-season turns.
That was funny.

Here ya go:

http://snowbrains.com/mad-river-glen-buys-snowboard-only-ski-resort/

[polemonium]

I would have a problem (figuratively) if Alta banned tele skiing, but I don't think a federal court would give me relief, same as here. It would seem even more arbitrary, but I don't think it would rise to the level of discrimination, legally defined. It would certainly be appropriate to bring either ban up during their permit renewal process. If you get enough people to complain the FS probably has to at least come up with a rationale for their decision when they make it, and _that_ can be challenged.

Chez mentioned upthread that JH used to ban telemarkers, which I had not known.

[dschane]

Green shirts and red shirts is not a good analogy because it's arbitrary and doesn't serve a purpose. It's more like, you can't expect to go to a park and play baseball on the tennis court, even though it's public property.

That's basically my understanding of this situation. The Forest Service approves Alta's operating plan which includes the right to exclude those whose "skiing device" creates a risk to themselves or others and, importantly, is inconsistent with Alta's business management decisions. Alta apparently believes, and has anecdotal evidence to support its belief, that skiers love the resort because there are no snowboarders there; therefore, it maintains the exclusion of snowboarders as a business management decision.

[Sugarloafer]

Clearly Alta wants to keep doing this because it provides them a marketplace distinction. I suspect they care about that more than powder preservation.

This is what this is all about…..nothing to do with hating snowboard culture or scraping snow off the mountain. They sell a LOT of "Alta is for skiers" sh*t.


BTW, quite a few snowboarders have accessed Alta through Snowbird, but they can't ride the lifts. I could be wrong but I think this is ok under a technical interpretation of their policy. They could just take a shuttle bus back down to Snowbird and repeat, if they've got nothing else to do with their day.

[Matt J]

I agree with SL. I would add that I think it's less about merch and more about lodging and lift ticket packages. There are a lot of destination guests that appreciate Alta's charm. Those guests are getting to be harder and harder to attract. I've heard several employees say that the owners would shut the place down before opening it up to snowboarders though.

[Matt J]

Fixed 4 u. I agree that it comes down to what the permit says, and, back when Alta got its permit, ain't nobody heard of no snowboarders. So, like to so many things in government, you have to interpret broad and general language drafted decades ago and challenged by modern life.

Kind of.

Other than that they update their permit every few years with new descriptions of their Op's, snow safety, lifts, etc.

[chamonix]

Cesare wrote,

Back in the day, telemarkers were not allowed at Jackson Hole.

Well I was telemarking there in 1976, a year after college. I spent the whole winter season there; living in Victor, and skiing Teton Pass (cheaper rent on the Idaho side).