Uphill traffic at Stevens Pass Ski Area

So it sounds like the official policy at Stevens Pass may be going towards no uphill traffic within ski area boundaries during the operating season (November-late April). This would not affect anything on the north side of the highway (i.e. Skyline Ridge), nor would it limit people from heading up from the nordic center to access anything in Mill Valley (Jim Hill, Josephine, etc...).

What do people think about this?

Since the PCT runs through the ski area can they deny access?

I watched a party of 4 at Crystal skin right up the middle of a groomer on chair 9 , downhill skiers zinging all around them. I mentioned that they might want to hug the edge and they were a bit put off. If this is the attitude ski area managers are getting from non paying customers using their slopes then a ban is inevitable. They don't want to see accidents and lawsuits

I really like to think of them as our slopes as it is Forest Service land.

The Crystal site does ask that skinners stay to the side.

I really like to think of them as our slopes as it is Forest Service land.

The Crystal site does ask that skinners stay to the side.

Agreed, but it is LEASED land so the responsibility lands on the leaser, in which case would be the ski area(s). There's enough litigation out there, so why subject yourself to a very potential lawsuit? The probability of getting hit by a downhill slider is rather high in a ski area, especially if you are skinning out in the middle of a intermediate slope, like Downhill run.
I'm not going to go mountain biking up a FS road where there are active logging operations and trucks hauling down the hill.
The responsible party, in this case the ski area always seems to have to make decisions on, "What would the person with the lowest mentality do?"

"What would the person with the lowest mentality do?"

I think the answer is - Skin up an operating ski run!

Agreed, but it is LEASED land so the responsibility lands on the leaser, in which case would be the ski area(s). There's enough litigation out there, so why subject yourself to a very potential lawsuit? The probability of getting hit by a downhill slider is rather high in a ski area, especially if you are skinning out in the middle of a intermediate slope, like Downhill run.
I'm not going to go mountain biking up a FS road where there are active logging operations and trucks hauling down the hill.
The responsible party, in this case the ski area always seems to have to make decisions on, "What would the person with the lowest mentality do?"

Usually they have a lease to operate a downhill ski concession and negotiate an access policy with the FS land managers. I don't think you would be more likely to get hit skinning up a ski resort than if you were to stop on the side of a run to wait for partners. The ski area should have no more liability for a user accessing public land than any other obstacle.In the case of the Okanogan-Wenatchee National forest the land managers have refused to limit access to the public land. Using common sense goes a long way, most people seem to lack that these days though. In the case of logging operations the FS usually closes roads with active logging and it's illegal to use those roads. I feel that if any public land is open for recreational use, the non paying public should have open access. Of course this doesn't mean they should be able to use the facilities(lifts, lodges, bathrooms etc.) operated by the lease concession.

" I don't think you would be more likely to get hit skinning up a ski resort than if you were to stop on the side of a run to wait for partners."

Sorry man, but I gotta call this one out.  Setting a skin track on a ski run while folks are zipping down is downright dangerous; I've poached through the Timberline ski resort before (while skinning from Government Camp to the top of the Palmer) and was scared the entire time.  People skiing down are not looking for people skinning up and while assending you put yourself in some blind spots (rollovers, bottome of jumps, blind corners, etc).   

On Hood you have to stay outside the roped off ski area boundaries to assend the south route on skis or just hoofing it.  If you're allowed to skin up Crystal, Steven's, Baker.... what's keeping the hikers, snowshoers or sledders from exercising their "This is my land" rights and trompping straight up to the top of Green Valley?

If you want the pleasure of skiing at an open resort - PAY FOR IT, if not, there are thousands of acres of which to play in for free.

" I don't think you would be more likely to get hit skinning up a ski resort than if you were to stop on the side of a run to wait for partners."

Sorry man, but I gotta call this one out.  Setting a skin track on a ski run while folks are zipping down is downright dangerous; I've poached through the Timberline ski resort before (while skinning from Government Camp to the top of the Palmer) and was scared the entire time.  People skiing down are not looking for people skinning up and while assending you put yourself in some blind spots (rollovers, bottome of jumps, blind corners, etc).   

On Hood you have to stay outside the roped off ski area boundaries to assend the south route on skis or just hoofing it.  If you're allowed to skin up Crystal, Steven's, Baker.... what's keeping the hikers, snowshoers or sledders from exercising their "This is my land" rights and trompping straight up to the top of Green Valley?

If you want the pleasure of skiing at an open resort - PAY FOR IT, if not, there are thousands of acres of which to play in for free.

Uh, that's why I said a little common sense goes a long way. Unfortunately, most people lack the requisite common sense to find a safe up track through a resort. Skiers and boarders stop in blind spots all the time on slopes, is it okay for them? As far as jumps go, are you not supposed to spot the jump and make sure you don't collide with any user that may be downhill in the landing or run out zone? Or are huckers immune to that responsibility? I would not want to skin up a busy ski run during operating hours, but some people access back country areas through the resort. Should we deny access to adjacent public land? I do pay for ski resorts even when I don't use them. Where do the tax dollars come from to keep the road open, even if the resort is closed? Who pays for administration of the Public Land? If a private corporation can come onto public lands and alter the landscape and erect structures at a very attractive lease cost, why shouldn't anyone be able to access public land in a safe manner? I don't see any reason hikers and snowshoers can't access public land safely if uphill traffic corridors were defined. Sledding is a different story, most ski slopes do not allow for safely mixing skiers and snowboarders with uncontrolled sledding. A lot of ski areas provide a sledding area for just that reason.

"Uh, that's why I said a little common sense goes a long way. Unfortunately, most people lack the requisite common sense to find a safe up track through a resort."

Sorry - I jumped the reply button  :

"I don't see any reason hikers and snowshoers can't access public land safely if uphill traffic corridors were defined"

I completely agree and if said corridors are established/promoted by the resort - by all means - get you skin/snowshoe/hike on, but when people feel empowered to access public lands by using the resort runs as the throughfair then we have problems. 

You can't bicycle/hike on I5 and that's paid for by public funds.  I do wish common sense was more common, but it isn't, so we need rules to keep things civil.

You can't bicycle/hike on I5 and that's paid for by public funds.  I do wish common sense was more common, but it isn't, so we need rules to keep things civil.

Actually, you can bicycle on some portions of the interstate, at least where there is not any alternate routes.  I-90 between exits 38 and 47 comes to mind.  I-5 over the grapevine may be another. 

Anyway, I'm surprised no one has mentioned Mt. Bachelor's  recent blanket closure for uphill travel.  I understand and respect closures for avalanche control, and I also agree that skinning up the center of a crowded groomer is for gapers (but not really any different than sitting or standing in the middle of a groomer, is it?), but if the result of these closures is that we can't ski one of our own Cascade volcanoes, well, that's pretty messed up.

"Mt Bachelor and Deschutes National Forest have designated all areas within the special use permit as closed to uphill traffic except for a designated corridor for access to the cone using Leeway run."

"These restriction will not apply during the off season when ski operations are not underway (ok to hike then) except for areas in snowmaking or grooming operations."

Not blanket closure, but controlled access and no - someone skinning up a ski run isn't the same as a paying customer who is sitting or standing on the same run (at least from a legal stand point). The resorts have the right to protect their customers and employees by controlling public access.

There are new signs along the traverse to Source Lake at Alpental now. Spoke with patrol and sounds like the FS is working to establish another track to avoid downhill traffic. Probably a good idea to set a seperate uphill along there, I know coming down that thing on a pow day the last thing I want to do is play chicken (not that I haven't been guilty before).

I had to do a little diligence and inquiring on this topic. Seems like it's not a liability issue per se, rather a safety/theft of services issue. The concept that resorts are responsible for collisions/injuries has been debated in court over and over (anyone remember the terrain park suit at the Summit). There is no doubt that resorts want to minimize their liability, (and rightfully so) The purchase of a ticket is an agreement that skiing and boarding can be dangerous and an agreement to hold the resort harmless. Inbounds resort touring access provides a nice groomer to skin on the way up as well as the same on the way down, and use of restrooms and other infrastructure to boot. I find the argument of Public Free Access in a resort environment to be somewhat ludicrous. Someone is paying for that parking lot and groomed snow. Stevens like many other resorts looked to minimize theft of services, hence the adoption of RFID passes. Alta has installed RFID scanners at most mid mountain lifts for exactly this reason. Not saying that all skinners/ shoers would "earn" their way to the first available (uncontrolled) lift but it does happen. Crystal has had a concern with skinners heading up well before lifts open while Patrol is still dealing with explosives. Think up tracking Kellys gap and passing under Rock Face, think Lucky Shot under Powder Bowl with patrolers throwing explosives from the top. Both of these scenarios  have occurred this year. I personally would like to think that backcountry skiers and riders are a little more savvy and risk adverse compared to the general skiing public. Unfortunately that is not always the case.  I am not in favor of acts of civil disobedience  to try and resolve this issue. I do endorse the concept of community action and education to mitigate the impact of resort touring. The fact that this issue has cropped up in NW should be a motivator to ski safely whether trekking up or down and to share information in a cooperative fashion. I firmly believe that ski area management has far more important issues to address than hasseling touring types, the fact that this HAS cropped up should indicate the perceived importance. On a side note Whistler has added a one ride backcountry pass to their ticket menu which allows the holder one trip to the top per day. Simply show up with beacon, shovel etc and purchase the pass. Good day to ski, be well.

I really don't care if the ski areas allow up hill travel or not. For me, bc skiing is more about the solitude and getting away from the hords of people in everyday life. Ski areas don't get me there.

I feel that if any public land is open for recreational use, the non paying public should have open access. Of course this doesn't mean they should be able to use the facilities(lifts, lodges, bathrooms etc.) operated by the lease concession.

So taking your argument to it's ultimate conclusion, it should be OK to take a snowmobile up since snowmobiles are allowed on some public land..... right.?
I have no problem with skiiner who keep to the sides and give downhill skiers the right of way but I saw some idoiots march right up the middle of a groomer and act indignant at the skiers that where carving around them. IDIOTS.

Big, Big  kudos to Crystal for letting us skin up through the resort  to silver basin ,big kudos to those who stay way off to the side and diverge from downhill run once pass Quicksilver. Been doing it for years,why would anyone want to be skinning up in the middle of run ? Checking in with Crystal ski patrol is always a good idea and often helpful to not only to avoid avy and avy control but also get tips on where the best skiing might be . Common sense

I saw some idoiots march right up the middle of a groomer.  IDIOTS.

Last Friday, on Stevens intermediate Showcase run, two snowshoers hiked directly up its center during the peak afternoon period.  IDIOTS + 2.

So taking your argument to it's ultimate conclusion, it should be OK to take a snowmobile up since snowmobiles are allowed on some public land..... right.?
I have no problem with skiiner who keep to the sides and give downhill skiers the right of way but I saw some idoiots march right up the middle of a groomer and act indignant at the skiers that where carving around them. IDIOTS.

I don't think that would be okay, that's why I gave the example of segregating sledders. High marking snowmobiles and downhill skiers mixed together would be mayhem and the snowmobiles would destroy the snow surface rendering it unsafe for skiers. On the subject of snowmobiles, what the difference between a lift ops or patroller racing up hill on one and a skinning skier? I would say the snowmobile is a more dangerous obstacle. I agree that skinning straight up a groomer is stupid and I would not want to do it. Mission ridge has an uphill travel policy for snowshoers and skiers, and people still can't get it right. I sometimes utilize areas in the permit boundary to access off piste snow, only when they're closed mid week or after the season is over. The problems they have at Mission are with people that aren't really touring skiers. These people are skiers who bought an AT setup and are just looking for exercise. They skin up and ski down groomers and under control routes and have no rescue equipment. I wouldn't want to do that. I'd rather take a run.

Crystal Uphill Policy

1. Uphill travel within “closed” terrain is not permitted; Avalanche control work—including explosives use—may occur at any time.
2. Closures are posted only at the TOP of trails; those entering from below shall be considered to be trespassers. Uphill travelers may check in with Ski Patrol for current closures, recognizing that status may change at any time.
3. Traveling above No Hiking Above This Point signs is prohibited. These signs indicate sufficient avalanche hazard exists to warrant closure to all, regardless of whether one hiked up from the bottom, or whether one has or hasn’t used a lift ticket.
4. The absence of the “no hiking above this point” signage at the top of operating lifts indicates that uphill travel is permitted in ‘open’ terrain.
5. When the resort is not in operation, hiking IS allowed within the ski area, but avalanche hazard may exist, and control work may be in progress, without warning. Explosives and heavy machinery may be in use.
6. Anyone boarding or attempting to board a lift without a valid lift ticket or pass shall be considered a trespasser.
7. Accessing Silver Basin is permitted following checking in with Ski Patrol; Avalanche control, explosives, and heavy machinery may be in use at any time without warning.
8. Uphill traffic must keep to the side of ski trails and well out of the way of downhill skier traffic.
9. Pierce County leash laws apply in the developed ski area; unrestrained dogs’ handlers will be considered trespassers.

See Backcountry Safety for more information about your responsibilities when accessing terrain other than by lifts.

Crystal Mountain accepts no liability or responsibility for accidents that occur or as a result of uphill travel. RCW 4.24.210

I was turned around while skinning this weekend over an hour before the lifts were due to open. I am a season's pass holder who frequently skin's up in the area before the lifts are open for exercise when the terrain out of bounds is not great for skinning. Although the person who turned me around was very polite and explained the reasoning they seemed more concerned if I was planning to buy a lift ticket as if I was trying to skin to the backside and ride the lifts all day since there are no RFID machine on Tye Mill or the backside to scan passes.

I understand they don't want to worry about people on the hill while they have equipment running but most of the grooming is done during the night at Stevens and there isn't much of an issue with people skinning up the middle of the run while the lifts are open. It almost felt like the area changed the policy because it's worried they are loosing money from people who would skin to the area's where there are no RFID readers to scan tickets. I am super bummed they have decided to abruptly change the policy over what sounds like one incident when there were some people in the way while avalanche control was underway.

I am super bummed they have decided to abruptly change the policy over what sounds like one incident when there were some people in the way while avalanche control was underway.

I would be super bummed if I was doing avalanche control in a developed ski area and hosed some people because they made a poor choice.

www.justgetout.net/Wenatchee/17934

Not sure if this has been posted here before.

I think conditions were extremely hazardous that day.  The skier probably had a false sense of security since she was at a "controlled" resort.

It's a victory for me to get up for first chair.

Didn't someone die in an inbounds/closed slide at Alpental a few years back?   

Didn't someone die in an inbounds/closed slide at Alpental a few years back?   

seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews...70_avalanche13e.html

Skinning inbounds is like skiing down your skin track

:'(

Skinning inbounds is like skiing down your skin track

Hopefully you didn't copyright this, I could use this phrase.

Didn't someone die in an inbounds/closed slide at Alpental a few years back?   

The guy a few days before opening, who sat down with his buddy for a break under the cliffs at Lower I? Slough rolled off the cliff and kicked off a slab. There were signs that day about the avy danger but I don't think the area was closed, but maybe those signs said closed? Young guy, very sad.

I'm torn on the issue of inbound uphill. I'm pro-capitalism, but hate the idea that public land access can be restricted by private for-profit companies. I'd like to think the lift ticket pays or the lift, and the grooming is a service provided to attract people to buy the lift tickets.

And Aaron's argument that skinning up the side of a run is no more dangerous than stopping on the side of a run is completely sound. If it is safe enough for tens of thousands of users to stop on the sides of ski runs, it is safe enough to skin up.

Lastly it seems ridiculous that the PCT isn't always accessible regardless of the operation of a ski area (barring active avalanche work, of course)

But the ski area has a right to protect access to their lifts, and they should be able to take measures to protect that access. I hate to feel like my dime is subsidizing someone else's free ride. If everyone paid it would either be cheaper to ski, less crowded, or both. And not to sound elitist but the people sneaking into ski areas to steal lift access all day tend to be less regulated in the rest of their behaviors too and are more likely to run over kids, blow smoke on you, etc.

Come to think of it earning your turns in the BC cures many ills

Not sure RFID's are the answer. A student recently told me that 30 girls in her sorority pool their fund on 5 or 6 passes that are then at the ski area basically every day of the season. Passes at Stevens get shared like this regularly, which makes me dubious about whether the RFID's actually help the bottom line.

Anyway public access to public land is an important right that on principle shouldn't be handed over w/o a fight. Set precendents are everything in gray-area debates like this.