Most important safety feature

ScottyJack wrote

if you are into your season ending in feb!

So bromley ends it's season in Feb? LMAO

PeeTex wrote

PowderAssassin wrote

You don't need to remove fencing to groom snow. People are skiing inside the fences. Also, snow making equipment can be put inside the fences obviously and lines can be run through holes in the netting.

You have no freak'n clue do you.
How do snow makers get to the hydrants, how do they walk back and forth to test snow quality?
If the groomers can't get to the side of the trail the snow builds up, they can't risk getting the tillers in contact with the fencing. So just admit it is not a well thought out idea and that you a simpleton.

Snow quality sucks on fake snow..they need to test nothing...LOL
As far as multiple layers of fencing, they need to test it out. How many layers do you need. One layer would obviously greatly slow someone down and is better than just face planting into a tree....duh
You sound like a person a long time ago arguing against the modern guardrail which has saved thousands of lives! Ski areas never used to pad ski towers either. Now they do. Because it works. It's called progress. Cars never used to have airbags/basic safety features. Thousands have been saved. It's all about reducing risk. Under your logic, none of this progress would have been made.

Glade kind of gave away the hidden agenda. He basically said he hopes more people die on the slopes to "thin the herd out". Sick and disgusting. You guys want your skiing to seem dangerous and extreme for your ego.  The only reason many of you even wear helmets is because pro's do.(they're forced to) You don't want skiing to seem like an amusement park ride. Your own selfish ego means you're willing to let people die and get maimed to maintain that image. That's the real deal!

I should add the skiing on wide trails at moderate speed and staying away from the edge is what I always do for safety. And I love wide trails anyway. They're fantastic to ski. You can make huge turns.

PowderAssassin wrote

PeeTex wrote

PowderAssassin wrote

You don't need to remove fencing to groom snow. People are skiing inside the fences. Also, snow making equipment can be put inside the fences obviously and lines can be run through holes in the netting.

You have no freak'n clue do you.
How do snow makers get to the hydrants, how do they walk back and forth to test snow quality?
If the groomers can't get to the side of the trail the snow builds up, they can't risk getting the tillers in contact with the fencing. So just admit it is not a well thought out idea and that you a simpleton.

Snow quality sucks on fake snow..they need to test nothing...LOL
As far as multiple layers of fencing, they need to test it out. How many layers do you need. One layer would obviously greatly slow someone down and is better than just face planting into a tree....duh
You sound like a person a long time ago arguing against the modern guardrail which has saved thousands of lives! Ski areas never used to pad ski towers either. Now they do. Because it works. It's called progress. Cars never used to have airbags/basic safety features. Thousands have been saved. It's all about reducing risk. Under your logic, none of this progress would have been made.

I brought up two specific points:
1) How do snow makers get to the hydrants, how do they walk back and forth to test snow quality? 
2) If the groomers can't get to the side of the trail the snow builds up, they can't risk getting the tillers in contact with the fencing.


Address how this is managed without removing the fences or SHUT THE FUCK UP

PowderAssassin wrote

Glade kind of gave away the hidden agenda. He basically said he hopes more people die on the slopes to "thin the herd out". Sick and disgusting. You guys want your skiing to seem dangerous and extreme for your ego.  The only reason many of you even wear helmets is because pro's do.(they're forced to) You don't want skiing to seem like an amusement park ride. Your own selfish ego means you're willing to let people die and get maimed to maintain that image. That's the real deal!

One person says one thing, so that's the whole board's view? I'm not against netting because it "thins the heard". Five people a year dying from skiing doesn't make lift lines any shorter or the pow any less tracked out. Me wearing a helmet has nothing to do with pro skiers, and outside of ski racing, pros aren't required to wear helmets.

Skiing should never, ever be an amusement park ride. It's is a form of expression. Everyone has their own style and interpretation of it. Put everyone on one track, and it takes that uniqueness away. Skiing is (well, not including clear-cutting mountain sides, burning millions of gallons of diesel fuel for groomers, having obnoxiously loud snow guns everywhere, and motors and structures all over mountains for chairlifts and lodges) a very natural sport. It's about going up a natural structure, and using gravity to gracefully fall back down it. Keep it that way. That has nothing to do with my ego or wanting people to die to maintain that image. That has to be in the top few most ridiculous things you've ever said.

It's been said plenty of times now, skiing is a choice. According to you, driving to work isn't a choice, so that has been made as safe as possible solely due to the percentage of people who "need" to be exposed to it. Is there one specific spot that has caused multiple fatalities due to skiing off-trail into the trees? Then yeah, maybe put up a fence there. Otherwise, stop trying to bubblewrap the entire world.

tBatt wrote

One person says one thing, so that's the whole board's view? I'm not against netting because it "thins the heard". Five people a year dying from skiing doesn't make lift lines any shorter or the pow any less tracked out. Me wearing a helmet has nothing to do with pro skiers, and outside of ski racing, pros aren't required to wear helmets.

Skiing should never, ever be an amusement park ride. It's is a form of expression. Everyone has their own style and interpretation of it. Put everyone on one track, and it takes that uniqueness away. Skiing is (well, not including clear-cutting mountain sides, burning millions of gallons of diesel fuel for groomers, having obnoxiously loud snow guns everywhere, and motors and structures all over mountains for chairlifts and lodges) a very natural sport. It's about going up a natural structure, and using gravity to gracefully fall back down it. Keep it that way. That has nothing to do with my ego or wanting people to die to maintain that image. That has to be in the top few most ridiculous things you've ever said.

It's been said plenty of times now, skiing is a choice. According to you, driving to work isn't a choice, so that has been made as safe as possible solely due to the percentage of people who "need" to be exposed to it. Is there one specific spot that has caused multiple fatalities due to skiing off-trail into the trees? Then yeah, maybe put up a fence there. Otherwise, stop trying to bubblewrap the entire world.

There's a lot of crap in a forum. And if you are lucky, some gold.

PeeTex wrote

PowderAssassin wrote

PeeTex wrote

PowderAssassin wrote

You don't need to remove fencing to groom snow. People are skiing inside the fences. Also, snow making equipment can be put inside the fences obviously and lines can be run through holes in the netting.

You have no freak'n clue do you.
How do snow makers get to the hydrants, how do they walk back and forth to test snow quality?
If the groomers can't get to the side of the trail the snow builds up, they can't risk getting the tillers in contact with the fencing. So just admit it is not a well thought out idea and that you a simpleton.

Snow quality sucks on fake snow..they need to test nothing...LOL
As far as multiple layers of fencing, they need to test it out. How many layers do you need. One layer would obviously greatly slow someone down and is better than just face planting into a tree....duh
You sound like a person a long time ago arguing against the modern guardrail which has saved thousands of lives! Ski areas never used to pad ski towers either. Now they do. Because it works. It's called progress. Cars never used to have airbags/basic safety features. Thousands have been saved. It's all about reducing risk. Under your logic, none of this progress would have been made.

I brought up two specific points:
1) How do snow makers get to the hydrants, how do they walk back and forth to test snow quality? 
2) If the groomers can't get to the side of the trail the snow builds up, they can't risk getting the tillers in contact with the fencing.


Address how this is managed without removing the fences or SHUT THE FUCK UP

Get a groomer who knows how to drive...lol He has to follow a line along the woods...just pretend the fence is the woods. Parts of the netting can be taken down at times if need by snow making crew as well.

Nevermind. This guy's not 15. He's 8. No other way to explain the complete incompetence.

PowderAssassin wrote

I should add the skiing on wide trails at moderate speed and staying away from the edge is what I always do for safety. And I love wide trails anyway. They're fantastic to ski. You can make huge turns.

This is good.  I'm glad I will never be near you while skiing. Even if, heaven help me, I am actually skiing at the same hill as you.

I think we need a snowstorm real bad!

PowderAssassin wrote

Glade kind of gave away the hidden agenda. He basically said he hopes more people die on the slopes to "thin the herd out". Sick and disgusting. You guys want your skiing to seem dangerous and extreme for your ego.  The only reason many of you even wear helmets is because pro's do.(they're forced to) You don't want skiing to seem like an amusement park ride. Your own selfish ego means you're willing to let people die and get maimed to maintain that image. That's the real deal!

Glade Runner wrote

 So what there are a few deaths a year.  Who cares?  And if it is me one day then so be it.

Probably the parents who lost a child or the kids who lost a parent or anyone who lost someone they loved care. You are an idiot.

PeeTex wrote

PowderAssassin wrote

You don't need to remove fencing to groom snow. People are skiing inside the fences. Also, snow making equipment can be put inside the fences obviously and lines can be run through holes in the netting.

You have no freak'n clue do you.
How do snow makers get to the hydrants, how do they walk back and forth to test snow quality?
If the groomers can't get to the side of the trail the snow builds up, they can't risk getting the tillers in contact with the fencing. So just admit it is not a well thought out idea and that you a simpleton.

 
It is true that grooming as we know it could not exist with netting everywhere. There's no way it could be put up and taken down every day and night as would be necessary.

I think someone mentioned the possibility of law suits. If you have netting one place, but not the place for someone dies that's a real liability problem for the mountain.

So there are certainly inherited  risks to skiing as there are with countless recreational activates people enjoy. That said, I find the cavalier attitude about people getting killed or seriously hurt at a ski area that some people in this tread are demonstrating troubling.

Highpeaksdrifter wrote

Glade Runner wrote

 So what there are a few deaths a year.  Who cares?  And if it is me one day then so be it.

Probably the parents who lost a child or the kids who lost a parent or anyone who lost someone they loved care. You are an idiot.

I think he's making the point here that I make for gun control arguments: if everyone wants guns to be readily available, able to be purchased on the internet with lax regulations (as in a lot of states that aren't New York), on some level, we're just going to have to accept the fact that there will be lots of gun deaths, suicides, and school shootings that wouldn't happen if we had stricter laws (see: Australia). Newtown happens because we create an environment where it can happen. And yes, it's horrible for the parents, but as a society, we've decided that "freedom" is more important than children's lives (I personally disagree, but not much I can do).

If we want skiing to remain a sport free of bumper-bowl style pads on the sides of every trail, on some level, we're just going to have to accept the fact that a few people per year are going to ski into a tree and kill themselves. I agree this time. The tradeoff is worth it. As I said earlier in this ridiculous thread, it's dumb to make enormous, counterproductive changes in response to vanishingly rare events (and the 4-5 people who die in skiing accidents per year pale in comparison to 30,000 gun deaths).

I'm sure people have died sledding before. Should we ban all sleds?

Yes, "Who cares?" wasn't the best way he could have put it. I agree that the wording was clumsy.

I assumed it was like the comment that Noah made about beating your kids. Made in jest

Thacheronix wrote

I assumed it was like the comment that Noah made about beating your kids. Made in jest

Yeah, the part about cutting down the crowds was obviously a joke.

mattchuck2 wrote

Highpeaksdrifter wrote

Glade Runner wrote

 So what there are a few deaths a year.  Who cares?  And if it is me one day then so be it.

Probably the parents who lost a child or the kids who lost a parent or anyone who lost someone they loved care. You are an idiot.

I think he's making the point here that I make for gun control arguments: if everyone wants guns to be readily available, able to be purchased on the internet with lax regulations (as in a lot of states that aren't New York), on some level, we're just going to have to accept the fact that there will be lots of gun deaths, suicides, and school shootings that wouldn't happen if we had stricter laws (see: Australia). Newtown happens because we create an environment where it can happen. And yes, it's horrible for the parents, but as a society, we've decided that "freedom" is more important than children's lives (I personally disagree, but not much I can do).

If we want skiing to remain a sport free of bumper-bowl style pads on the sides of every trail, on some level, we're just going to have to accept the fact that a few people per year are going to ski into a tree and kill themselves. I agree this time. The tradeoff is worth it. As I said earlier in this ridiculous thread, it's dumb to make enormous, counterproductive changes in response to vanishingly rare events (and the 4-5 people who die in skiing accidents per year pale in comparison to 30,000 gun deaths).

I'm sure people have died sledding before. Should we ban all sleds?

My gun argument: Guns don't kill people, people kill people. I've had a loaded shotgun in my closet for years now and it's never killed anyone. We need better  people control, not gun control. Criminals will always get guns not matter what laws are put out there!!