Alta is for Nazis

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DasBlunt

Aaron, there is no reason why Snowboards can't ride the lifts. Private resort, sure, no issue. Public land, all access for approved devices.

---

Can't snowmobile either... and the FS leases the land to Alta. You can whine about it all you like but there's no legal justification for your complaint. And by making "class discrimination" comparisons you just embarrass yourself by comparing fucking not being allowed to snowboard at Alta to say, women being banned from voting, or black people being unable to own property.

Keep on posting though. I'm sure this is only one of the myriad ways in which you cleanse the world of injustice :rolleyes2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DasBlunt

Aaron, there is no reason why Snowboards can't ride the lifts. Private resort, sure, no issue. Public land, all access for approved devices.

---

See, that's what you don't seem to get. The lifts are private property, along with the other facilities. Technically they can't keep you off the public land but they don't have to let anyone ride the lifts. Aren't the bottoms of some lifts at Alta on private property too? I don't care if snowboards ride Alta or not but the lifts are private and they hold a lease. Alta isn't preventing snowboarders from accessing public lands, they're saying that snowboarders can't ride THEIR lifts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mbillie1

Can't snowmobile either... and the FS leases the land to Alta. You can whine about it all you like but there's no legal justification for your complaint.

---

Snowmobiles are a different class of device, different impact, safety concerns etc. A2Oj in terms of using it for comparison's sake. The crux of the issue is that Alta violates the spirit of the lease in refusing access to approved devices. If you are in bounds at Alta on one plank you'll be lucky to leave without either a sheriff visit or a threat to see the sheriff. So the contention that splitting around Alta is ok is kind of bs and again, a disingenuous effort to sidestep the actual issue of an operator ignoring the spirit of guidelines to meet a specific, exclusionary business objective.

Alta is able to get away with this because the courts leave it to the discretion of the USFS as it's not a protected class issue. So the USFS has solid ground to say either "no" or "fine" to the existing ban on snowboards. It has been deemed by the courts to be their prerogative what is compatible or incompatible with the USFS land use guidelines and how orgs operating on USFS land conduct business.

So the people saying "your're not a protected class idiots!!" are really being obtuse by missing the fact there is a grey region in the regs around the issue. The snowboarders, including me, have put some shaky arguments forward, but in the end there is no safety issue for Alta and they've been lying/hiding behind that faleshood for several decades. As this argument has been empirically refuted, they shift to "business decision for clientele." All well and good, their right to be yet another dbag operator twisting the regs to achieve their desired ends.

More than anything it's just tiring being lied to by a company that profits off USFS land, and watching them use a cozy USFS relationship to fall back on as the courts, for good reason, ignore an argument between skiers & snowboarders.

Personally, LCC is only good for touring alpine and spring corn harvests. BCC is where my $ goes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bromontana

As this argument has been empirically refuted, they shift to "business decision for clientele." All well and good, their right to be yet another dbag operator twisting the regs to achieve their desired ends..

---

It's always been a business decision, and a good one at that. Whether they claimed otherwise publicly, internally it's always been good business.

For me it personally sucks because the wife snowboards and eventually we will have to go to BCC because Snowbird sucks for little kids. So yes, skiers do fucking care, and the old skiers who hate snowboarders need to get old and die soon so there is a positive change. Until then, first world problems.

Das Kunt is wrong as usual....Vail is for Nazis


https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=35sfp9k5avI

would a loophole be splitboard? ski up to lift, ride it and snowboard down

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by muted

the old skiers who hate snowboarders need to get old and die soon so there is a positive change. Until then, first world problems.

---

pretty much, good old fashioned yawner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by digitaldeath

would a loophole be splitboard? ski up to lift, ride it and snowboard down

---

it's kind of like gay marriage. At alta, marriage between man and snow must go via two sticks and not one. One is bad, and not good for the land, its people, or the religion. Splitters like me aint welcome. It's a blessing on many days though as LCC gets the traffic and greybird while BCC is more open, more easily accessible land etc.

Monoboards

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elkhound Odin

Monoboards

---

Haha excellent
But seriously do they allow monoskiers??

And fwiw I always figured the anti snowboard thing would die out as the people that feel threatened by them die out
But does stink to have to potentially wait that out

I have also snowboarded at mad river glen
I think that ups my rep at least 0.25%

skifishbum and i saw tele mono boarder at alta, i believe there are pics in the wasatch thread

Wow a tele monoski

I hope it was some type of gaper day thing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AaronWright

See, that's what you don't seem to get. The lifts are private property, along with the other facilities. Technically they can't keep you off the public land but they don't have to let anyone ride the lifts. Aren't the bottoms of some lifts at Alta on private property too? I don't care if snowboards ride Alta or not but the lifts are private and they hold a lease. Alta isn't preventing snowboarders from accessing public lands, they're saying that snowboarders can't ride THEIR lifts.

---

This is where their arguement falls apart too though. They aren't selling skiing any more than they are offering snowboarding. They are selling rides up the mountain and maintained runs - nothing else. You are sitting on your butt while you are riding a lift, not skiing or snowboarding. It's what you do when you get to the top of the lift that they are prohibiting and THAT is done entirely on leased USFS land.

"So what?" You say? Just ask the folks on the other side of the hill what your lift rides are worth without that permit. All of the other USFS permits allow snowboarding. It is a weak arguement that Alta should be allowed to restrict that use with theirs.

Just because they are a business that does not have it in their business plan to serve one kind of recreational device and not another does not mean that they get to decide.

Even though I don't snowboarder hope the suit wins, because its bullshit that I can't bring my red plastic saucer up to Prima Cornice and if they win then I can bring whatever device I choose to any national forest lessee and they have to let me in.


https://www.tetongravity.com/images/...de1__forum.jpg
https://www.tetongravity.com/images/...de2__forum.jpg

craig kelly was an uber stud and the 420cats bro still is
shane was the motherfuckin man
and in the big picture aint even in the book that bears rosa parks name let alone page
get a fuckin clue jong
snowlerblades, tourons adorned w/ starter jackets and jeans, extreme side country families, minnasodian misfits, even the most revered and most holy gsa
every day at the a l t a gots some gaper to it
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y19...ps1c47cc84.jpg
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y19...psraboekn2.jpg
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y19...psbmy5hdvr.jpg
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y19...pssosjisxt.jpg

#xoveraltabonicsemojistyle
:fm::cussing::fuckyou::eek::the_finge:FIREdevil:pa rty::cool::smoking::yourock:::biggrin::hunter::jes us::fm:

from the Alta special use permit with the USFS. Whatever the acting USFS leader says is law, effectively. Everything else is irrelevant. Any change needs to go through the USFS, and not the courts. They own the decision and have a peculiar patchwork of rationale that consistently excludes the whole "non-competing use" spirit of equipment regulation. That is, 1 & 2 planks aren't competitors but perfectly ok to mix and share same space. If you don't have a safety concern you need explicit agreement from the USFS to impose a restriction on use.

Saucers, snowmobiles and shitty logic don't meet this criteria, but one plank does. If you want a copy of the permit I can email or send a telegram.


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-pz9cl3i4xG...s1600/Alta.JPG

fyi - very boring day. Any time you end up reading a special use permit for a ski area, you're probably better off going home and hitting the grass.... time for me to go!

Hey, I skied Alta once

Attachment 172030

Are you saying that Alta has closed National Forest Lands to snowboarders?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bromontana

from the Alta special use permit with the USFS. Whatever the acting USFS leader says is law, effectively. Everything else is irrelevant. Any change needs to go through the USFS, and not the courts. They own the decision and have a peculiar patchwork of rationale that consistently excludes the whole "non-competing use" spirit of equipment regulation. That is, 1 & 2 planks aren't competitors but perfectly ok to mix and share same space.

Saucers, snowmobiles and shitty logic don't meet this criteria, but one plank does. If you want a copy of the permit I can email or send a telegram.


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-pz9cl3i4xG...s1600/Alta.JPG

fyi - very boring day. Any time you end up reading a special use permit for a ski area, you're probably better off going home and hitting the grass.... time for me to go!

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kinnikinnick

Are you saying that Alta has closed National Forest Lands to snowboarders?

---

Do you consider calling police for trespassing an effective 'closure of USFS land' to a legal and compatible use of non-exclusively leased land? That's what has happened several times in the past. The reactions are variable, but the general policy at alta is to issue GTFO warnings to knuckledraggers and splitters on sight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bromontana

Do you consider calling police for trespassing an effective 'closure of USFS land' to a legal and compatible use of non-exclusively leased land? That's what has happened several times in the past. The reactions are variable, but the general policy at alta is to issue GTFO warnings to knuckledraggers and splitters on sight.

---

If you hike up under your own power on a route that allows access to hikers, snowshoers, uphillskiers, etc. and you descend without entering any area that is closed to such uses and then they call the cops, then yes...

But if you're just coming in from Snowbird against the posted rules and/or trying to get on the lifts, then no...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kinnikinnick

If you hike up under your own power on a route that allows access to hikers, snowshoers, uphillskiers, etc. and you descend without entering any area that is closed to such uses and then they call the cops, then yes...

---

Like many resorts, Alta is closed to uphill traffic during the operating season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kinnikinnick

If you hike up under your own power on a route that allows access to hikers, snowshoers, uphillskiers, etc. and then they call the cops, then yes...
But if you're just trying to make a scene getting on the lifts, then no..

---

So if you use a hypothetical corner case you can potentially fool a dullard into believing the inaccurate representation that ingress/egress in downhill and uphill areas of Alta are open to snowboarders. So there's that. Meanwhile public access is effectively denied day after day and all but eliminates use of the area by a legal and compatible user group. In summary, an exclusive operation operating on a nonexclusive permit.

It's not an issue of if the ban is legal or not, because the permit itself is clear on how it can be legal or illegal. Its legality is 100% subject to the whims of the USFS middle management. If the USFS lead changes tomorrow and rejects the next season's operating plan on the basis of unfounded access restriction, Alta will have itself in an awkward spot legally. And just like that the dickwads on one side will eat their words and those on the other will take the baton of cacophonous, snark-laden blathering about how right and smart and betterer they are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bromontana

So if you use a hypothetical corner case you can potentially fool a dullard into believing the inaccurate representation that ingress/egress in downhill and uphill areas of Alta are open to snowboarders. So there's that. Meanwhile public access is effectively denied day after day and all but eliminates use of the area by a legal and compatible user group. In summary, an exclusive operation operating on a nonexclusive permit.

It's not an issue of if the ban is legal or not, because the permit itself is clear on how it can be legal or illegal. Its legality is 100% subject to the whims of the USFS middle management. If the USFS lead changes tomorrow and rejects the next season's operating plan on the basis of unfounded access restriction, Alta will have itself in an awkward spot legally. And just like that the dickwads on one side will eat their words and those on the other will take the baton of cacophonous, snark-laden blathering about how right and smart and betterer they are.

---

What you say is true, but if Alta were to be forced to allow splitters and snowboarders to recreate in the permit area they could still deny access to THEIR lifts. I'm not saying it's fair, it's really pretty silly, but it could turn out that way.

If Alta said go ahead and skin up on your split and/ or ski down from the bird anytime the hill isn't closed for uphill traffic or control work but you still can't use OUR lifts, what would be your argument then?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AaronWright

What you say is true, but if Alta were to be forced to allow splitters and snowboarders to recreate in the permit area they could still deny access to THEIR lifts. I'm not saying it's fair, it's really pretty silly, but it could turn out that way.

If Alta said go ahead and skin up on your split and/ or ski down from the bird anytime the hill isn't closed for uphill traffic or control work but you still can't use OUR lifts, what would be your argument then?

---

Maybe a lawyer could chime in on the application of the non-exclusive use to real property like a lift. My understanding is that restrictions to accessing operations are bound by reasonable person standard on matters of safety and the integrity of the operation. To that extent, it's a specious argument to say that snowboards in any way endanger their operational well being. Having your core business of extremist pricks die up isn't an excuse for imposing a blanket restriction on equipment accepted in every other public-land ski area in the country.

But this agreement between Alta and the USFS on excluding snowboards, plus one other parameter outlined in the lawsuit, are imo the salient points that define whether or not the ban is legal and sustainable long term.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bromontana

Maybe a lawyer could chime in on the application of the non-exclusive use to real property like a lift. My understanding is that restrictions to accessing operations are bound by reasonable person standard on matters of safety and the integrity of the operation.

---

No thanks, other than to say that the objective reasonable man standard would not apply to the interpretation of a USFS SUP. AFAICT, the lawsuit was premised on allegations of a civil rights violation, not re an interpretation of the SUP. The latter would start with an admin action to the USFS, which would be given broad deference via principles of primary jurisdiction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big Steve

No thanks, other than to say that the objective reasonable man standard would not apply to the interpretation of a USFS SUP. AFAICT, the lawsuit was premised on allegations of a civil rights violation, not re an interpretation of the SUP. The latter would start with an admin action to the USFS, which would be given broad deference via principles of primary jurisdiction.

---

Nice - more or less affirming it's an issue/decision for the USFS. The complaint's seriousness doesn't rise to the level of warranting court action - yet. If all USFS based resorts banned snowboarding indefinitely on grounds of aesthetics (like alta), then industry would lobby and elevate the level of importance so that court action could be pressured. But even then, there's no clear legal path for snowboarding. It just reverts to the USFS discretion on SUP approval and management. Unless a judge decides to play liberal and start making new rules.

Way back off topic. When I patrolled in Utah we called the locals the Powder Nazis.

Some of them may have skied at Alta so, there ya go.

I think this entire thing is silly, but it does appear to me that if the Knuckledraggers prevail then it opens the way for Mtn Bikers to sue for equal protection to pursue our right to access areas that have been closed to us.:fm:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bunion

I think this entire thing is silly, but it does appear to me that if the Knuckledraggers prevail then it opens the way for Mtn Bikers to sue for equal protection to pursue our right to access areas that have been closed to us.:fm:

---

Fuck yes, please.

I don't get all this shit and why peps can't board there. So freakin whatever

Unbelievable I know, but look at what I found in my Clif Bar today:

http://s33.postimg.org/iv0ixs3b3/golden_ticket_alta.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bunion

Way back off topic. When I patrolled in Utah we called the locals the Powder Nazis.

Some of them may have skied at Alta so, there ya go.

I think this entire thing is silly, but it does appear to me that if the Knuckledraggers prevail then it opens the way for Mtn Bikers to sue for equal protection to pursue our right to access areas that have been closed to us.:fm:

---

Luckily Steve doesn't have the snow to justify an alpine start so he can stay up all night writing amicus briefs.

Quote:

---

"Once the government decides what it’s going to do, they don’t get to decide what kind of people they like," Schofield said in his rebuttal arguments.

"You say kind of people like it’s an immutable characteristic?" Judge Phillips asked.

"There are many people that snowboarder is who they are, how they identify,"

---

I am inclined at first to say that since Alta is a business and has a business permit (ie FS lease) that they have expressly limited in the permit to a SKI area and therefore that the boarder lawsuit stands no chance in hell.

But then this whole "identify" term used by the plaintiff's attorney makes me think - yeah maybe it is a bit like sexual orientation ala Transexual. Yes boarders who won't ski at Alta physically could ski, but Transexuals born male could physically be men and physically penetrate women with their cocks, but they don't IDENTIFY as male so they get full rights to change their appearance and for all purposes instead be women. Maybe snowboarding is sort of the same and we should just let them board, just like we let men become women.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kinnikinnick

But then this whole "identify" term used by the plaintiff's attorney makes me think - yeah maybe it is a bit like sexual orientation ala Transexual. Yes boarders who won't ski at Alta physically could ski, but Transexuals born male could physically be men and physically penetrate women with their cocks, but they don't IDENTIFY as male so they get full rights to change their appearance and for all purposes instead be women. Maybe snowboarding is sort of the same and we should just let them board, just like we let men become women.

---

Zoolander wasn't an ambi-turner and some of us aren't ambi-snow sliders.

People who want to experience Alta are not being kept from doing that. They just need to leave their Board at home and Ski.

See how easy that is?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bunion

People who want to experience Alta are not being kept from doing that. They just need to leave their Board at home and Ski.

See how easy that is?

---

Yeah but by that logic transexuals could just keep their penises and be men. They don't IDENTIFY as skiers

What if they are female Trannies? how can they ever keep their penis?

I guess those transsexual boarders will just have to suck it up.:fmicon:

Lemme just take two decades of snowboarding experience and just transpose it in my muscle memory to fit skiing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bunion

People who want to experience Alta are not being kept from doing that. They just need to get a splitboard and shut the f*** up b/c post-closure conditions are generally pretty good for a while. Otherwise, accept it and rent a pair of skis.

---

fify

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bromontana

Lemme just take two decades of snowboarding experience and just transpose it in my muscle memory to fit skiing.

---

ifin it weren't for the words of the wise mr. w miller
"if ya don't do it this season
you'll only be a year older when ya do"
i'd still be in chitown
my freeheeled og touring partner who rips harder than i ever will
was a boarder and someone ganked his splitter from the silver fork hood
and he never replaced it
granted he dialed it in at the goldminers school of ski your ass off
he actuallly lived w/ a maggot 13 sumthin that season
lookin forward to spinnin a bcc lap or 2 w/ ya this season
reguadless of gear
solis a fairly board friendly especially if fants open

won't be quite as fast but the split is good for keeping up on ib/ob days. Lift only and no problems, got a newish gigi ruf directional that is a blast to ride. I don't ride park much and love the trees, aesthetic lines more than # of laps. I've toured around the boundary of Soli but never been in bounds off a lift. Very excited to learn a new mountain and have the bc access that much faster. 12 years since the last season pass.