Serious Accident at Gore

Here's the decision:

http://vertumnus.courts.state.ny.us/claims/search/display.html?terms=brust&url=/claims/html/2016-032-505.html

Wow. Thanks for sharing this. It is an interesting read.

Given all the he flat spots at Gore that necessitate tucking to carry speed I'm surprised there are not more collisions

The run over to Burnt Ridge where this happened and the traverse to get back to Sno bowl right past the north ridge quad chair come to mind as being especially sketchy

John carbone comes across as either a liar or idiot or both. He has never even seen a tuck in 30 years of skiing at gore?! If you don't tuck at gore you are probably still out there walking because you're too exhausted from skating. Unfortunately, this highlights that even the mundane and routine chores that paid and volunteer staff perform can have serious consequences if implemented incorrectly. It was a tragedy for all involved.

Anyone know how the person who was hurt is doing?

I think Carbone said he hadn't seen tucking in 30 years in Gore Gully.  That's a bit of an odd thing to say as for most of that 30 years it was a learning hill not a traverse to Burnt Ridge.

What do you guys think, should tucking be against mountain rules?

You gotta tuck that, especially on warm days. It wouldn't have been a problem if the patrol closed Gully with a more visible rope.
They should put a 2 way surface lift between Burnt Ridge and the East chair.  If it's good enough for Alta, it should be good enough for Gore.

mm

Can't ban tucking, especially in areas with long flat spots. Patrol has to be very mindful of where they place ropes and signage. I'm not expressing an opinion on this particular incident, just generally. A good idea would be using a break-away anchor on one end of the rope and to use the orange ribbon that breaks more easily where they can. Both these things would be less secure and require more babysitting from the patrollers then a good firm knot though. Most bigger mountains have park staff and volunteer ambassadors floating around nowadays. Maybe they can help out.
In the end though, it's on you as a skier to use your own eyes and brain to avoid hazards...

So the guy skied into a rope that was marking a closed trail and got hurt, then sued Gore/NYS and won?

Does that sum up what happened?

Not sure who won yet. I think he technically won, but in the end it depends on the size of the award.

I think what happened was that Twisters Little Sister was open. The "primary" (but not only) use for that trail is to access the traverse to Burnt Ridge.  So in a way opening TLS sort of implies that Gore Gully is open.

You could use TLS just to ski the bottom of Echo, but very few do that. Normally I'd think patrol would want to open things from the bottom up?

I feel really bad for the guy and it could easily have been me. Actually it was once.  We'd been lapping Twister and using the Tower 6 cutover to get back to the Gondola. After 3 laps through Tower 6, on the fourth time there was a rope across (it wasn't the end of the day). I noticed it at the last minute, couldn't stop and hit the deck.  I tore myself up pretty good, nothing serious but there was some blood.  IMO that was my fault. I was skiing beyond my headlights.

The breakaway ropes make a lot of sense IMO.  

I think banning the tuck would be hard to enforce, but if this settlement is big it might be done as a lawyer move.

Ban the tuck? Sure, why not and while you are at it let's ban apple pie, songs written by Johnny Cash, and tree skiing! We need netting along the edges of all ski runs too!

Or, let's ban judges that award people money for hurting themselves.

Banning the tuck is patently ridiculous, especially with the flat sections at Gore . The wise move would use breakway florescent tape and much better signage UPTRAIL a  few hundred yards  or so before a skier gets to the critical zone  junction.

Harvey wrote

Not sure who won yet. I think he technically won, but in the end it depends on the size of the award.

I think what happened was that Twisters Little Sister was open. The "primary" (but not only) use for that trail is to access the traverse to Burnt Ridge.  So in a way opening TLS sort of implies that Gore Gully is open.

You could use TLS just to ski the bottom of Echo, but very few do that. Normally I'd think patrol would want to open things from the bottom up?

I feel really bad for the guy and it could easily have been me. Actually it was once.  We'd been lapping Twister and using the Pole 7 cutover to get back to the Gondola. After 3 laps through Tower 6, on the fourth time there was a rope across (it wasn't the end of the day). I noticed it at the last minute, couldn't stop and hit the deck.  I tore myself up pretty good, nothing serious but there was some blood.  IMO that was my fault. I was skiing beyond my headlights.

The breakaway ropes make a lot of sense IMO.  

I think banning the tuck would be hard to enforce, but if this settlement is big it might be done as a lawyer move.

I found it interesting that other skiers with the claimant managed to go under the rope.

"At the time of the accident, claimant was 72 years old, had been skiing for over 40 years, and was certified to teach alpine and adaptive skiing.(2) Claimant testified that, prior to going to Gore Mountain on the morning of March 7, 2013, he checked the internet for the ski conditions and noted that they were very good (T: 544).(3) He arrived at Gore with his partner, Jan McCann, and met Harold Stackhouse, Susan Rollings, and Paul Maguire, whom he knew from a mountain club (T: 538, 545). Claimant stated that, on that particular day, the group planned to ski Twister to Twister's Little Sister to Echo to Gully to Cedars Traverse, eventually returning to Burnt Ridge Quad (T: 545-546). He estimated having skied that precise route approximately 100 times in the past (T: 549)."

"Stackhouse further testified that he, claimant, Rollings, and about 8-10 other skiers then started down Twister's Little Sister, with Stackhouse in the lead (T: 423). He stated that there was a high overcast that day and the light was flat, meaning that, without sun, it was difficult to see contrasts in the snow (T: 413). As he approached Gully, Stackhouse was skiing in a tuck position at approximately 30 miles per hour because the last stretch of Echo before Gully is steep (T: 418-419, 422). At the left turn from Gully onto Echo, Stackhouse was skiing just to the right of the center of the trail (T: 420; Claimant's Exhibit 29). He stated that he first saw the rope across Gully from less than 100 feet away, and upon seeing it, he "instinctively" skied to the far left of the trail, where the rope was highest, so that he could ski under it (T: 424). Stackhouse testified that the rope was located below "a little hump" at the beginning of the Gully trail and that there were no warning signs or lollipops indicating that the trail was closed (T: 425-426).

Rollings testified that, as the group skied down Twister's Little Sister, she followed behind Stackhouse, who she knew had skied the trail before (T: 501). As she approached Echo, Rollings was skiing in a tuck position to the left of the center of the trail, when she observed Stackhouse "do kind of a weird left turn" (T: 502). When asked to elaborate, Rollings explained that she saw Stackhouse "turn[] in a way that didn't seem quite right," and then "sort of disappear[] from view . . . so [she] presume[d] he went down the trail" (T: 503). Rollings then saw the rope across Gully from about 50 feet away (T: 505). She testified that, although she did not have time to react, she maintained her tuck position and was able to ski under the rope (T: 505)."

Harvey wrote

Not sure who won yet.

Gore was found to be 100% liable. So, they lost. Bigly.

The court will hold another trial to determine the amount of damages. From what was originally reported about his injuries, it looks like the award will be substantial.

billyymc wrote

So the guy skied into a rope that was marking a closed trail and got hurt, then sued Gore/NYS and won?

Does that sum up what happened?

Not quite. Burnt Ridge trails were open to start the day, then closed when the BRQ had mechanical issues. When the BRQ was up again, a patroller dropped the rope at Twister's Little Sister, indicating to the skiers waiting right there that the trail to the BRQ (Gully) was open. Due to faulty or total lack of communication, a patroller had just put a rope across Gully, where it was difficult to see for a skier approaching from the left side in a tuck.

Thanks for the details Sponge. I knew some of that but not all.

Spongeworthy wrote

billyymc wrote

So the guy skied into a rope that was marking a closed trail and got hurt, then sued Gore/NYS and won?

Does that sum up what happened?

Not quite. Burnt Ridge trails were open to start the day, then closed when the BRQ had mechanical issues. When the BRQ was up again, a patroller dropped the rope at Twister's Little Sister, indicating to the skiers waiting right there that the trail to the BRQ (Gully) was open. Due to faulty or total lack of communication, a patroller had just put a rope across Gully, where it was difficult to see for a skier approaching from the left side in a tuck.

So was Gully the only trail option once you start down Twister? I don't know Gore that well, and just trying to understand.

If you are skiing the East Side and you want to move to Burnt Ridge you take Twister down and cut over to Echo on Twister's Little Sister.  You then go down Echo to Gore Gully to Cedars to the BRQ.  This saves half of the skate.  If you totally bomb it, which we all do, you can save 80% of the skate.

Originally TLS was just a spot where Twister and Echo come close to each other and everyone cut through. It just mades sense to "pave it." TLS was less probably than 60 feet long.

You COULD use TLS to cut through to Echo and ski it back to the base but I'm guessing that almost everyone uses it to bomb the flats to BRQ.  So while there were two routes with only one roped off, I can fully understand why someone who saw TLS open would assume that Gore Gully was open too.

Here's an image. Twister is the trail with the solid blue line on it:



Banning the tuck is not without precedent. I believe tucking is currently banned in the yellow zones above.

Why don't they get rid of Gully and cut a new trail that cuts out some if the flats. Since no uses Gully anyway it would make much more sense.  It never made sense to me how they connected Brunt Ridge.

Coach Z wrote

Why don't they get rid of Gully and cut a new trail that cuts out some if the flats. Since no uses Gully anyway it would make much more sense.  It never made sense to me how they connected Brunt Ridge.

Topography.

And careful commenting on Gore's quirks Coach. Per Harv, Gore's faithful don't complain and per moi, are about as tolerant of it as Face guys are of .......traversing.  

There is no way to cut off the flat spot any more than they already have or it would be uphill.  That's why I want there to be at least 3 more trails on Burnt Ridge to make it so Sagamore isn't the only trails without a long runout at the bottom.  Echo is one of my favorite trails, but I hate the long runout that you end up on every time.