Uphill policy in Ski areas

Hi all;
Backcountry skiing is popular. Getting to our beloved backcountry via the established access points like mountain passes and ski areas is also very popular because, well, you can actually get there.
Sometimes this creates a bit of conflict because bc skiers want to recreate on public lands and feel that seemingly restrictive uphill policies from various ski areas infringe on their basic rights of roaming the land.
I would like to speak to that.
When a ski area obtains a "Special Use Permit" from any Forest Service District, they have to go through a pretty painful process of submitting an Operating Plan among other things. Owning a guiding service, I am familiar with these hurdles. In this Operating Plan you have to state most and foremost how you are going to keep the resource intact and keep the public safe. Once this document has been approved, the Forest Service entitles the concessionaire to enforce the agreed upon rules on their terms and this is important to remember. This may mean that in order to ensure public safety during avalanche control, there have to be temporary closures of certain areas.
This makes a lot of sense, since this is the most efficient way to assure access for the recreating public as quickly as possible when (for example) doing avalanche control. If now the Dept of L and I gets involved because a ski area cannot assure safety for the public while doing avalanche control, you are uncorking a potential chain of events that we do not want to mess with.
It could mean that suddenly ski areas don't get to use explosives and have to therefore close areas for a longer time to ensure safety.
Furthermore, the Federal Land Management agencies hate the prospect of getting sued and I have personally seen them make very non-nuances safety decisions in order to avoid that potential. It could mean that they could just categorically shut down all uphill travel period in a particular Special Use Permit Area.
I really don't think that the bc community wants to go there.
Personally, I would like to advocate for strong communication with the various ski areas and trying to partner in increasing safety for all. This means basically that we need to be compliant on their turf. Remember, it is their Special Use Permit. It is crucial to realize that there would no bc ski industry in Washington without the ski areas. No shop would survive without the important ski culture contribution that our local ski areas bring to the bigger ski industry picture.
One thing that I agree with is that we could use more access to back country ski terrain. Here is where I would love to focus our energy. Washington State offers literally thousands of square miles of skiable backcountry terrain and only a small portion of it is accessible with a reasonable effort. If we could convince the Forest Service to keep a few more access points open (speak plow a few more roads), we would be a lot further along.
I have flown over our beloved Cascade Range for many hours during the making of the Washington ski touring book and I can assure you that the possibilities are endless.

Martin, thanks for this post. I think it's very important that we respect the safety measures put in place by the ski resorts, even if it means we have to go a little more out of our way to earn our turns.

Do you have a suggestion for who we can contact to lobby for more plowing?

Probably the best way to do it would be to contact Mike Schlafmann. He works out of the District office in Mount Lake Terrace office I believe. Before this happens we should maybe organize ourselves and come up with a common message.

I think the community needs to organize itself more for this kind of initiative to succeed, in order to focus the message and eventually focus funds. There are some nice examples of this happening on the East Coast. The densely forested terrain there means ski touring is only really possible on gladed runs and a few natural avy paths in the White and Adirondack mountains. The initiatives I know of are:

granitebackcountryalliance.org/
www.rastavt.org/
the last has been incorporated into an older organization for nordic/backcountry skiers in VT:
catamounttrail.org/

These initiatives could be models for some of the advocacy groups skiers in the PNW need. For us, it would be less focused on trail building and more on road access during the winter months.

I'd love to get involved in something like this.

I'd like to see a group effort put forth to get a spot or 2 opened up. I think getting people to agree on one or two places would be the biggest hurdle at this point. What are the places you would suggest Martin?

If we could convince the Forest Service to keep a few more access points open (speak plow a few more roads), we would be a lot further along.
I have flown over our beloved Cascade Range for many hours during the making of the Washington ski touring book and I can assure you that the possibilities are endless.

Yes, indeed. We do need a collective effort of conscientious backcountry skiers to organize for road access/plowing. It's been done before with other mountain sports around here.... With the popularity of bc skiing in one of the more wealthy areas of the world, the possibility for perhaps even a co-op to form to assist the state in accomplishing such a goal seems feasible. Growth is inevitable, we are seeing it everywhere including the hills, and this state is overly tight about recreational expansion/huts/etc. I lean rather on the side of conservationist for sure, but there is room to open.

Yes, indeed.  We do need a collective effort of conscientious backcountry skiers to organize for road access/plowing.  It's been done before with other mountain sports around here....  With the popularity of bc skiing in one of the more wealthy areas of the world, the possibility for perhaps even a co-op to form to assist the state in accomplishing such a goal seems feasible. Growth is inevitable, we are seeing it everywhere including the hills, and this state is overly tight about recreational expansion/huts/etc.  I lean rather on the side of conservationist for sure, but there is room to open.   

Absolutely. Well stated and couldn't agree more. However, in addition to the original post, and in having the honor to spend years touring with some truly awesome people and backcountry skiers/splitboarders from this community, I would add this: There are also countless touring options from a ski resort's base that allow a group to avoid a ski area's patrolling, essentially mitigating the "uphill traffic" scenario altogether. It would help if as a collective, we were to put emphasis on this aspect.

Here is an old thread discussing where we might like to see improved winter access.

Freeski, you are trolling.

From realistic to unrealistic:

Plow to Sunrise.

Plow Mountaineers Creek road to Stuart Lake TH.

Plow Icicle Creek Rd to the end.

Plow Chinook Pass.

Plow Washington Pass.

Plow Smith Brook Rd over to Lake Wenatchee. Plow Spur up to Little Wenatchee River TH.

Plow Chiwawa River Road to Trinity/Spider Meadow road spur.

How about a euro style tram to 6000' anywhere in those areas.... that would really help the BC access.

It wouldn't just be a matter of plowing more roads. The roads would either have to be totally out of potential avalanche paths, or would have to be controlled for avalanches. It would be killer to have any of the roads that WoodyD listed be open in the winter, but it's unlikely due to avy danger (at least of the roads he listed that I know). More realistic would be the White River Campground or Mowich Lake roads. The NPS could make their money back from visitors to the park and camping permits, and decrease the numbers at Paradise.

I hear things like "don't listen to ski patrol, you have just as much right to be there as they do" or "it's public land, they can't kick you off" all too often. Educating to eliminate or decrease that attitude might be more realistic than getting more access in avalanche prone areas. Even without opening more roads, there are plenty of places that we can currently go. Some of them are popular enough that you might cross a few ski tracks on the way down.

How does your company ensure the public safety in the bc areas in which you have a special use permit to operate. Do you do avy control work,ie ski cut the avy start zones while out with clients or prior to a client tour?

I'm guessing that you are experienced enough to ensure that the path is clear of other users, and that your skin tracks are located in as safe a location as possible, but what action would you take if one of your guides ski cut an avalanche down on another touring group?


Also, do you report any avalanche near miss incidents on your business web pages so that potential clients can make informed decisions on whether or not they want to hire your
company's services?

I know you have an axe to grind with guided skiing operations, but perhaps you could put it away while the original questions are addressed.

Going back 20 years now, the issue at Snoqualmie Pass is that language of the Use Permit that allows the ski area to exclude any person for any reason from all areas covered by the permit. This language is far too broad and has been the subject of multiple attempts to implement onerous rules that required Access Fund attorneys (I think it was Matt Stanley) to jump in at least once (the year they said you couldn't park in any of the Alpental lots without a lift pass, which meant the only allowed parking was south of I-90...not functional or safe for accessing Chair Peak, Snoqaulmie Mountain, the Tooth, Bryant, etc).

They've also repeatedly tried to bar uphill travel on the west side of the creek going up to Source Lake.

The parking lots and BC access are on public land and I, personally, don't think the Use Permit should allow the operator such leeway in barring access.

As far as skinning up in-bounds downhill runs at ski areas go, it's not something I find fun or important or safe, so I don't do.

       I have been  doing Silver Peak regularly and have no trouble skinning up the groomed area: my thing is a free lift pass for seniors ( I am 88 y .o. )  ;D   But I do not advocate pursuing that pass.  Stay young.

From realistic to unrealistic:

Plow to Sunrise.

Yes.

From realistic to unrealistic:

Plow to Sunrise.

Plow Mountaineers Creek road to Stuart Lake TH.

Plow Icicle Creek Rd to the end.

Plow Chinook Pass.

Plow Washington Pass.

Plow Smith Brook Rd over to Lake Wenatchee. Plow Spur up to Little Wenatchee River TH. 

Plow Chiwawa River Road to Trinity/Spider Meadow road spur.

How about a euro style tram to 6000' anywhere in those areas.... that would really help the BC access.

On Monday I was talking with one of the climbing rangers from MRNP about plowing the road to Sunrise or having it open to sleds. He said it probably wouldn't be unreasonable to have the road open to sleds but it's not getting plowed. They don't have the resources and they're are two very large avalanche paths to cross. Likewise most of the other roads you're talking about would require so much money to keep clear and safe it wouldn't be tenable. Where is the money going to come from?

More realistic would be the White River Campground

Even then, you're crossing "Big Bertha" - a PHENOMENAL ski and simultaneously a massively active avy path.  The problem that will arise next if more plowing IS actually entertained, is how to control the areas in question and best mitigate potential for injury/death.  As soon as the access exists, it will also welcome those who are unprepared for backcountry travel and inexperienced with the conditions they may face.

I hear things like "don't listen to ski patrol, you have just as much right to be there as they do" or "it's public land, they can't kick you off" all too often. Educating to eliminate or decrease that attitude might be more realistic than getting more access in avalanche prone areas. Even without opening more roads, there are plenty of places that we can currently go. Some of them are popular enough that you might cross a few ski tracks on the way down.

Total agreement.  I personally, feel fortunate to have had some great mentors and partners with a good understanding of etiquette, technique a stewardship which is what I can only hope to continually convey.  Unfortunately, this "toxic" attitude as stated above, infiltrates the purity of a sport (lifestyle?) that so many people are joining.  I think some of the responsibility in addressing this lies in the recreationalists who choose to involve themselves in this community, but ALSO in the guides, mentors, friends and partners of those who are becoming involved.  We can lecture or offer classes or post on websites, but hands-on education is going to have the most impact.  All backcountry users, from beginners to guides, need to take some ownership in this.

From realistic to unrealistic:

Plow to Sunrise.

Plow Mountaineers Creek road to Stuart Lake TH.

Plow Icicle Creek Rd to the end.

Plow Chinook Pass.

Plow Washington Pass.

Plow Smith Brook Rd over to Lake Wenatchee. Plow Spur up to Little Wenatchee River TH. 

Plow Chiwawa River Road to Trinity/Spider Meadow road spur.

How about a euro style tram to 6000' anywhere in those areas.... that would really help the BC access.

I would add the road to Esmeralda Basin but stop around Bean Creek

Snow removal takes a lot more work than most people realize especially when parking areas are involved. I used to work extensively with snow removal for ski areas and was able to see how Rainier and Olympic NP crews work. And quite frankly am amazed how well Rainier does with so little equipment. Most road operations are more or less plow then blow. Push the snow to the side of the road then blow it over the bank. On roads that are not plowed as often then a grader is needed to pull up the snow that gets super compacted and too hard for plows to scrape.

Some of the issues that the snow removal guys from DOT, Park Service, Forest Service will bring up will probably be:
- Overnight parking. A frustrating point for a lot of planners. On some of the smaller turn-arounds and pull outs a single parked car can keep plows from clearing 2-5 spaces and in some cases plowing the whole turn around as the truck has to do a 3 point turn around. Also cars left for several days in heavy snow fall may create piles that are too big for plows and will have to be blown by snowblower. (Ski resorts use front end loaders because they have significantly more power and don't run into this problem). Also wood (firewood is very a common issue around parking areas) will break the sheer pins in snow blowers and can do serious damage.
- Staffing Issues. Self explanatory.
- Equipment shortages. Snow blowers are notoriously unreliable. Even the new ones. I can't even begin to explain how hard snow is on equipment; plows, front loaders, graders, blowers. Most operators agree that the snow tears up their machines faster than anything they do in the summer.
-Avalanche danger to the road and operators.

All that said I see a lot of places in the Cascades where a little extra work, just one or two extra passes by plows, would create a fair amount of additional parking. I believe that it would easiest to identify areas where road side parking can be easily plowed out and maintained and focusing on those spots first. Dare I say start working with the snowmobile clubs because I hear similar rumbling from my sled-neck friends.

Where is the money going to come from?

And that's why it's all a pipe dream.

I think in someways a tram or gondola type thing to treeline off an already plowed highway is more realistic than more plowed BC skiing turnouts.

Oooh I love Slednecks! Volume 19 is available now!

www.slednecks.com/

There are also countless touring options from a ski resort's base that allow a group to avoid a ski area's patrolling, essentially mitigating the "uphill traffic" scenario altogether.  It would help if as a collective, we were to put emphasis on this aspect.

I couldn't agree more with this. I see a "want" a whole lot more than a "need" when it comes to winter access so long as the ski areas don't mess with parking. If there were a couple places where a minimal amount of plowing would make for a meaningful difference, great.

Otherwise, I do agree that you're going to have to come up with a funding mechanism, and that might very well require collaboration with other users...like snowmobilers.

Aside: Let's all just ignore Freeski please. It's for the best.

Quote-
The only way to fight prejustice is through education.

It used to be the only way to fight poor spelling too. "prejudice", "waiver"

Quote- ''Dare I say start working with the snowmobile clubs because I hear similar rumbling from my sled-neck friends.''
unquote] i can see why you would say 'dare i say' on this site given the prejustice and bias that permiates TAY toward, as you call them 'sled-neck', which could be a consided a slur word onto itself.

Well, i'm a sled-neck and many of us build your houses, build offices, plow your roads, log, mine (where do you think copper and wood comes from), keep your ski areas working and do much of the physical labor that is required to sustain our communities, and we love what we do and why we do it.

We take that overabundance of energy that was gifted to us and we rip on our days off.

The only way to fight prejustice is through education.

Relax. That was a friendly jab towards the anti-motorized guys. I have two sleds, one for me and one for anybody who wants to tag along and they get used almost as much as my skis. In my neck of the woods a lot of guys embrace the name especially after some of the land management meetings and internet bashing. And if you read my post I am a blue collar guy also.

Back on topic:
Don't forget about the Washington Winter Recreation Program that runs the Sno-Park areas. This program provides great services to all forms of recreation (motorized and non-motorized) and probably will be the most likely group to be responsive with our ideas. If you don't think that will work look at the group who worked with Olympic National Park to provided funding to open the Hurricane Ridge road several extra days during the week. And that was just skiers, no snowmobile or snowbike guys.

Relax. That was a friendly jab towards the anti-motorized guys. I have two sleds, one for me and one for anybody who wants to tag along and they get used almost as much as my skis.

I'm down almost anytime that I can get time off.

Avy control on the slide paths that cross those sections of 410 and the Sunrise Road would be apart of that equation of plowing to White River Camp Ground and/or Sunrise. 

I believe in the possibilities and that the money does indeed exist; I don't buy into governmental claims of lack of funding.  That's all code-speak for get active and make them do it.

A conscientious movement is needed.  These times of social-media reactivity, and ubiquitous distractions from devices, news, advertising, etc leads to a lot of finger pointing and apathy.  It's been documented that we receive more education on operating a motor vehicle than we do on applying the art/science of listening (Daniel Goleman, Emotional Intelligence ).

An example of a non-profit funding plowing operations: www.hyalite.org/what-we-do/winter-road-plowing

Doesn't cross any avalanche paths, but it does give the idea of what is possible with funding from a much smaller community.

It seems to me that the first step towards beginning to address any of the problems discussed here is finding a unified voice with which to advocate for our community of users (as suggested by Martin, Kamtron, ~link~, and many others).

By my eye, TAY is about as close to this as currently exists (even with what seems to be a recent drop-off in use), but is not really formalized in any way, beyond whoever shows up to the forum. It has always baffled me that the backcountry skiing community in Washington has not organized in a more formal manner in order to advocate for themselves, as so many other local recreational groups have (see: Washington Climber's Coalition , Evergreen Mountain Bike Alliance , Washington Trails Association among many others).

Obviously, there are many conflicting opinions even among our own community on what this advocacy would look like, but why not hash that out in the context of a unified organization? Everyone here is on this site because they enjoy skiing in the mountains, which I would think is enough to get us going in the right direction.

This sport is growing at an undeniably rapid rate, and it would stand to reason that access problems aren't going to get any better as long as there are more and more people trying to access the backcountry through the same limited access points. If (when) we, as a community, want to advocate for some kind of improved access - be it more parking, more plowing, better dispersion of users, whatever - we will have a more effective voice if it is unified.

Just my thoughts.

For comparision to what other regions have"
backcountrymagazine.com/uphill-travel-gu...t-skinning-policies/

Does any of this 'safety' talk have anything to do with guide outfitters partnering with ski areas for paid guided tours accessing the  ski resort side backcountry?
How do those programs work exactly? Is uphill ski area access to the bc going to cut into profits for these types of tours?
Nice touch on all that L & I shutting down explosives use at ski areas because of uphill traffic stuff. Really? Any Facts?
I would love to focus at least some energy on safety measures that would put an end to guides getting themselves and clients killed.
Let's start with transparency shall we?   

For comparision to what other regions have"
backcountrymagazine.com/uphill-travel-gu...t-skinning-policies/

Freeski, it seems like everyone else on this thread is discussing skinning in resorts and more access to more terrain for bc skiers. But you seem determined to keep trying to change the discussion to the same old worn out drum that you have been beating on for years implying that all professional guides are incompetent and/or killers.
Martin obviously took a lot of time to contribute to this topic with good and helpful information to add, which was on topic. But you have repeatedly quoted him and then made disparaging comments regarding guides and their safety practices. I think Martin is a pillar of our community and deserves better. And I have heard of nothing of him killing himself or his clients. If you want to rip on the guiding community at least have the decency to start your own thread so you can at least stay on topic. You have had a lot of you posts deleted in the past for good reason. This forum does not exist solely for you to conduct your personal war with the professional guide community. If you continue the way you at going you can again expect to see a lot of your posts disappearing.