ski patrol lurking in Bubba's Gulch

PeeTex wrote

Face4Me wrote

Amongst, LOTS of other things in this law, section 18-105 begins:

§ 18-105. Duties  of  skiers.  All  skiers  shall  have  the following duties:
    1. Not to ski in any area not designated for skiing;

Given your interpretation any area not marked as an open ski trail ANYWHERE in the state of NY would be illegal to ski, including your own property.

Haven't read the law, so I speak from a position of ignorance.....but, when does someone become subject to that statute?  If compliance with the statute is required in conjunction with the purchase of a lift ticket......you don't buy a ticket to ski your own property or BC areas.

Skidds wrote

PeeTex wrote

Face4Me wrote

Amongst, LOTS of other things in this law, section 18-105 begins:

§ 18-105. Duties  of  skiers.  All  skiers  shall  have  the following duties:
    1. Not to ski in any area not designated for skiing;

Given your interpretation any area not marked as an open ski trail ANYWHERE in the state of NY would be illegal to ski, including your own property.

Haven't read the law, so I speak from a position of ignorance.....but, when does someone become subject to that statute?  If compliance with the statute is required in conjunction with the purchase of a lift ticket......you don't buy a ticket to ski your own property or BC areas.

Skidds says he's ignorant. but he is absolutely correct.

PeeTex said "If they pulled a pass for that then they have broken the law, not you." So, we're talking about what would lead patrol to pull your pass because you breached the agreement, including what the statute adds as a matter of law, that you entered into when you purchased the lift ticket. That's not relevant anywhere else, including your own property, where you don't need to purchase a lift ticket.

It's pretty simple. Gore is saying "obey the rules, or you're out of here." They can do that. It's the law.

Spongeworthy wrote

It's pretty simple. Gore is saying "obey the rules, or you're out of here." They can do that. It's the law.

We are talking about WF, not Gore and for this diversion we are discussing Article 18. In the Gore thread it was stated that an employee was fired for skiing unmarked terrain, if that was a condition of employment than that was within their rights. Here we are discussing pulling a persons lift pass for skiing unmarked terrain. Under your interpretation, if I bought a season pass and decided to hike/ski the toll road, WF legally could take my pass. I think you need to carefully read Article 18 as well. You might say I was not riding a lift, but what if I road the Lookout triple and walked over to the toll road on the hiking trail and skied it down, could they take my pass. I think not and as I (carefully) read  Article 18 it would not give them the authority to do so.

A bit more ignorance on my part, because I don't know the history of, or impetus for, the statute.  I suspect a large part of the reason it was instituted was to protect ski areas, including State run facilities.  If that is the case, it's most likely the requirements of the statute only pertain to what a skier does within, or from within, the boundary of the ski area for which they bought a lift ticket and entered into a contract/agreement.  So WF would have no jurisdiction over what one does on the Toll Road, so long as someone didn't access the Toll Road from within the WF ski area boundary.

PeeTex wrote

what if I road the Lookout triple and walked over to the toll road on the hiking trail and skied it down, could they take my pass. I think not and as I (carefully) read  Article 18 it would not give them the authority to do so.

Skidds wrote

WF would have no jurisdiction over what one does on the Toll Road, so long as someone didn't access the Toll Road from within the WF ski area boundary.

Skidds is correct.  Neither Gore nor Whiteface have gates that allow skiers to legally access terrain beyond the ski area boundaries.  If you are within the ski area, Article 18 requires you to remain within the ski area and not cross the ski area boundary.  

I'm curious why you are obsessing over this matter and attempting to split hairs.

Adk Jeff wrote

Skidds is correct.  Neither Gore nor Whiteface have gates that allow skiers to legally access terrain beyond the ski area boundaries.  If you are within the ski area, Article 18 requires you to remain within the ski area and not cross the ski area boundary.  

I'm curious why you are obsessing over this matter and attempting to split hairs.

I am not obsessing about anything, I am just finding the discussion comical. I ski both inside and outside the ski area boundaries and do so without violating Article 18. I will defend my right to do so particularly in the Adirondack Park. When I am within a Ski Area as defined by Article 18, I will follow Article 18 and if I choose not to I will be glad to suffer the consequences without protest - that includes skiing a trail that is marked (per Article 18) as closed. Now it is a ridiculous statement that " Article 18 requires you to remain within the ski area and not cross the ski area boundary", if it did I would be living (or dead by now) on the ski trails of WF.

Skidds wrote

A bit more ignorance on my part, because I don't know the history of, or impetus for, the statute.  I suspect a large part of the reason it was instituted was to protect ski areas, including State run facilities.  If that is the case, it's most likely the requirements of the statute only pertain to what a skier does within, or from within, the boundary of the ski area for which they bought a lift ticket and entered into a contract/agreement.  So WF would have no jurisdiction over what one does on the Toll Road, so long as someone didn't access the Toll Road from within the WF ski area boundary.

Ask and ye shall receive ...

§ 18-101. Legislative  purpose.  The  legislature  hereby  finds  that
  alpine or downhill skiing is both a major recreational sport and a major
  industry within the state of New York. The  legislature  further  finds:
  (1)  that  downhill  skiing,  like  many other sports, contains inherent
  risks including, but not limited to, the risks  of  personal  injury  or
  death  or  property damage, which may be caused by variations in terrain
  or weather conditions; surface or subsurface snow, ice,  bare  spots  or
  areas  of  thin  cover,  moguls,  ruts,  bumps;  other persons using the
  facilities; and rocks, forest growth, debris,  branches,  trees,  roots,
  stumps  or other natural objects or man-made objects that are incidental
  to the provision or maintenance of a ski facility in New York state; (2)
  that downhill skiing, without established rules of conduct and care, may
  result in injuries to persons and property; (3) that it is  appropriate,
  as  well  as in the public interest, to take such steps as are necessary
  to help reduce the  risk  of  injury  to  downhill  skiers  from  undue,
  unnecessary  and unreasonable hazards; and (4) that it is also necessary
  and appropriate that skiers become  apprised  of,  and  understand,  the
  risks  inherent in the sport of skiing so that they may make an informed
  decision of whether or not to participate in skiing notwithstanding  the
  risks.    Therefore,  the  purpose  and  intent  of  this  article is to
  establish a code of conduct for downhill skiers and ski  area  operators
  to  minimize  the  risk  of  injury  to  persons engaged in the sport of
  downhill skiing and to promote safety in the downhill ski industry.

http://law.onecle.com/new-york/general-obligations/GOB0A18_A18.html

By the way, the law ALSO includes the obligations and responsibilities of ski area operators, not just the obligations and responsibilities of skiers.

It's actually interesting stuff, if you have the time to read through it. It makes clear why a lot of things "are the way they are" at ski areas in New York as opposed to ski areas in other states.

PeeTex wrote

Now it is a ridiculous statement that " Article 18 requires you to remain within the ski area and not cross the ski area boundary", if it did I would be living (or dead by now) on the ski trails of WF.

I assume we all realize that the ski area boundaries provide for established points of ingress/egress, i.e. the base area(s).

Yes it does make interesting reading. There are a lot of twists and turns. For example, you can buy a lift ticket anywhere, go to the resort and if you don't like what you see, or you just bought an extra ticket, just say it's too dangerous to ski today and they have to refund your ticket in full, no voucher for another day bull crap, and that goes for any ski area in NY.

PeeTex wrote

Yes it does make interesting reading. There are a lot of twists and turns. For example, you can buy a lift ticket anywhere, go to the resort and if you don't like what you see, or you just bought an extra ticket, just say it's too dangerous to ski today and they have to refund your ticket in full, no voucher for another day bull crap, and that goes for any ski area in NY.

As long as it's unused!

Adk Jeff wrote

I assume we all realize that the ski area boundaries provide for established points of ingress/egress, i.e. the base area(s).

Assume anything you wish, Article 18 says nothing about where you can or can't cross or even gates and egress points. What it says is a skier can't ski in areas not designated for skiing. But there is more to it than just that. Read it carefully.

Whoa

When I last posted on this thread 12 hours ago it was on the 1st page.  I agree with TJF back on page one if there were passes pulled at Nysef there would gave been some serious noise that I have not heard.

My other observation is that the new guy peeeeetex is being a bit of a troll and picking silly fights.  Please don't make Face or the others quote the NYS statutes as it puts most people to sleep.

Final thought is let's not make a big deal of this topic so that the mole head does not get whacked if you know what I'm saying.  

Move on people nothing to see here.

Coach Z wrote

My other observation is that the new guy peeeeetex is being a bit of a troll and picking silly fights.  Please don't make Face or the others quote the NYS statutes as it puts most people to sleep.


Move on people nothing to see here.

CrotchZ, you brought up the silly imperfections of mtn management, and Face4me brought up Article 18. My contribution was try to get people to read the stupid thing, if your going to quote it - read and really understand what it says and does not say. The one thing you said that I agree with is that we have said enough on this topic, it has gone from comical to boring. I will stick to my delusional beliefs, you can stick to the groomed trails.

gorgonzola wrote

I hear camp knows a bit about article 18

yeah, you get these really cool little tickets

I have a picture somewhere of us at the bar holding them up.....that was a funny day

Where the hell is Noah when you need him!

campgottagopee wrote

gorgonzola wrote

I hear camp knows a bit about article 18

yeah, you get these really cool little tickets

I have a picture somewhere of us at the bar holding them up.....that was a funny day

Sounds like there may be a great story here ... any chance of details?

this thread minus the potential of Camps story = Hot Poker Insert into Eye....  

well Camps potential story, His dependence on Depends, and the crotchZ thing was funny too!  

ScottyJack wrote

this thread minus the potential of Camps story = Hot Poker Insert into Eye....

We could go back to discussing jump turns, or was it hop turns, and snow tires!

ScottyJack wrote

well Camps potential story, His dependence on Depends, and the crotchZ thing was funny too!

Are you saying you've never shit your pants??? LIAR LIAR pants on fire