Interresting post on Silverton (x-post)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hutash

Can some one explain Colorado law to me. Why is it illegal to leave a ski resort onto public land, in this case BLM. If you hiked up from the road onto this same land, with out going onto resort land, would it still be illegal? I understand about not going onto private land, trespassing and all, but why on Fed land? I don't know if this is unique to Colorado, but in California you can duck ropes anywhere along a boundary as long as you are going on to public land. There are specific area closures with in a resorts operating permit that you can not enter without consequences, but that does not apply to boundaries. Of course once you duck a rope you are on your own, no avi control, no patrol, no rescue from the resort, et cetera.

---

Entering an area marked closed - no matter what is on the other side - is illegal in California.
http://www.earnyourturns.com/article...p?articleID=38
The article discusses Colorado law as well.

Alternatively you can read the Colorado ski safety act:
http://www.dora.state.co.us/tramway/SkiSafetyAct.pdf
All that is legally required to designate a closed trail is a sign.
Violating that is a petty offense - a fine of not more than $1,000 and NO JAIL TIME

gonehuckin - just stop. please.

Aaron Brill! These questions are for you AND ONLY YOU.

Do you run this ski area called Silverton Mountain in Colorado? Are you the owner of this company or do you have investors with decision making abilities in the day-to-day operations of your company? Did you have the ultimate decision in pressing charges against this crew? Do you work with the Forest Service/BLM directly on your Management/Operational Plan or do you do so through an agent on your behalf? Are you telling us in this forum today that the Forest Service/BLM made you institute and enforce a "zero tolerance" policy with regards to poaching a closure/restriction signage display? Did the Forest Service/BLM manager assigned to your permit give you the suggestion of this "zero tolerance" policy? Did the Forest Service/BLM manager for your particular quasi ski area make you enter this "zero" policy within your Operational/Management Plan for Permit even though it is his/her job to act as a representative for all citizens and potential users of this land? He/She did not offer/suggest a plan of action with regards to a person/group poaching a closure/restriction signage display? He/She did not ask you, or your company, for what your plan would be in response to such an act? He/She made you press charges on this group when you argued on thier behalf of the mistake which you earlier agreed was a mistake? He/She made you press charges when you argued on your own behalf of the apparent "slip" in management in not assuring/mitigating that one of your customers knew exactly where they were located on your mountain when they were paying guests at your operation? Are you saying here today that the Forest Service/BLM has a specific person to handle your operating/mamangement plan on a daily basis with daily visits to your ski area? Are you saying that your per guest permit fee that is charged to your company by the Forest Service/BLM covers a specific and applied person to your ski area every single day of your operation? In your area(Silverton/Durango Colorado) is the local Forest Service/BLM office so adequately staffed that a person is designated soley to your operation? Does your ski area markedly distinguish from the ski area boundary and a closure/restricted area?

Please answer all of these questions. I work with the Forest Service/BLM myself on many occasion and have decide to step forward in this forum to help out other citizens in explaining this occurence at your ski area.
Thanks,
Addicted2ColdSmoke

Addicted2ColdPole, These questions are for you AND ONLY YOU.

Did your mother change your diaper this morning?
Did we interrupt your nap time?
Were you busy smoking pole when you were alerted to this thread.
Are you the stud flirt master flash that wrote the following???...

Quote:

---

We were there in March of 2004. We had a good group of healthy skiers and managed to clock in 7 unbelievable runs. But one of them was a nightmare. We had a cute guide and I was hitting on her all day. She was new to the Silverton team and was assigned to our group as her first tour on her own.

We proceeded to get busy and made some unbelievable schralp sessions.

---

You sound like a real winner.

split kook.

Addicted2ColdSmoke, why/don't/you/go/fuck/yourself/little/man?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gonehuckin

nope i caught that part. i also caught the part where the ticket and charges are being pursued by the brills and not the BLM. i also understand that a government agency cant force you to press charges.

---

I guess I'm going to have to explain it to you - the Brills operate largely on BLM-permitted land. If the Brills don't follow the Operating plan that was filed - as a condition of the permit - then their permit is in jeopardy. The government can force you to follow the conditions of the permit.

The Brills have had a long struggle to get BLM to allow unguided skiing. The BLM was very disinclined to allow unguided skiing, and (though I don't know for sure) I would think that the zero-tolerance clause was put in to get BLM to let up on their opposition to unguided skiing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tippster

The land in question that they trespassed on isn't public, I think. The owner is a bit of a hard ass and if he complains that BLM land use is facilitating the trespass onto his property then that can get the Brill's permit yanked.

---

Can that can be confirmed somehow? I thought the Brills had gotten control of all the private land within the permit area. And a large percentage of the land under Silverton Mtn is BLM-owned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by addicted2coldsmoke

Aaron Brill! These questions are for you AND ONLY YOU.

Do you run this ski area called Silverton Mountain in Colorado? Are you the owner of this company or do you have investors with decision making abilities in the day-to-day operations of your company? Did you have the ultimate decision in pressing charges against this crew? Do you work with the Forest Service/BLM directly on your Management/Operational Plan or do you do so through an agent on your behalf? Are you telling us in this forum today that the Forest Service/BLM made you institute and enforce a "zero tolerance" policy with regards to poaching a closure/restriction signage display? Did the Forest Service/BLM manager assigned to your permit give you the suggestion of this "zero tolerance" policy? Did the Forest Service/BLM manager for your particular quasi ski area make you enter this "zero" policy within your Operational/Management Plan for Permit even though it is his/her job to act as a representative for all citizens and potential users of this land? He/She did not offer/suggest a plan of action with regards to a person/group poaching a closure/restriction signage display? He/She did not ask you, or your company, for what your plan would be in response to such an act? He/She made you press charges on this group when you argued on thier behalf of the mistake which you earlier agreed was a mistake? He/She made you press charges when you argued on your own behalf of the apparent "slip" in management in not assuring/mitigating that one of your customers knew exactly where they were located on your mountain when they were paying guests at your operation? Are you saying here today that the Forest Service/BLM has a specific person to handle your operating/mamangement plan on a daily basis with daily visits to your ski area? Are you saying that your per guest permit fee that is charged to your company by the Forest Service/BLM covers a specific and applied person to your ski area every single day of your operation? In your area(Silverton/Durango Colorado) is the local Forest Service/BLM office so adequately staffed that a person is designated soley to your operation? Does your ski area markedly distinguish from the ski area boundary and a closure/restricted area?

Please answer all of these questions. I work with the Forest Service/BLM myself on many occasion and have decide to step forward in this forum to help out other citizens in explaining this occurence at your ski area.
Thanks,
Addicted2ColdSmoke

---

Pathetic.

Closed area, closed case. Instead of a $30 fine, the offenders should be made to spend a year in Ohio (what a shitty place to live, btw, avoid at all costs).

Seeds

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gonehuckin

buster-
correct me if i'm wrong but you just reiterated the original complaint that the Brills are willing to pass-up doing the right thing in order to continue to operate.

-aaron

---

What is the "right thing"?

From the descriptions, the issue is that M. Sciortino failed to recognize a marked closure. We can go on about what a marked closure should be, but the interesting thing is that most SM customers have no problem recognizing the closure, something like 98% of them.

For SM, the right thing is to continue to operate and provide some of the best lift served skiing experience in the US.

For Warren the Third, it's all about righteous big mountain riders being free to rip the BC unfettered by the man and oppression of the pure alpine spirit.

But the point is that when your in somebody else's space or in another country or within the confines of a business, you play by their rules. If you can't play by their rules, suffer the consequences. Or at least be smart enough to not get caught and shut up when obviously in the wrong.

Big lauditory article on Silverton in the "T" magazine section of this week's NYT.

Being from the other side of the pond, I find this bitching and lack of personal responsibility pathetic. He guys closed a market boundry, they were briefed (atleast in print) that boo's and signs are used to marked closed areas & boundries (and as pointed out, a sign is all you need, according to CO-law).

Mebbe those that bitch and support that twat should grow a spine. You make choises. And if you fuck up, you pay what's coming.

And yes, I have never skied on that side of the pond...

Oh, and Seeds has a point... But Ohio is way too close to the rockies and way too high above the sea... I'm thinking somewhere around Netherlands... Like, altitude -10 feet :fm: and not be allowed to go to the Alps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by addicted2coldsmoke

I work with the Forest Service/BLM myself on many occasion

---

Impersonating an employee or contractor of the state and/or federal government is a felony.

Shut the fuck up.

Hmm. Went into a marked closed area, caught, fined $30.

Whoopdeefucking do. Suck it up and as you suggest, avoid the intense complication of figuring out the signage at Silverton by sticking to the mainstream resorts or backcountry (where not paying attention carries no fine usually, just a much higher possibility of death via suffocation). I mean noting the locations of a few poles is far easier than assessing slopes for avy potential. They are asking you to do the easier of the two in exchange for them taking care of the other.

This just seems like too much worry over a parking ticket like fine. I can see being pissed off a bit that Silverton has to have this zero tolerance policy and that you were bitten by it, but sheesh, they do have it - simple as that - and your ability to prosecute this perceived unfairness has been short ropped by what seem to be intellectually challenged posts. Any sympathy I had for your poaching incident went out the window on pages four and five.

The idea of sentencing this guy to Ohio makes me laugh though. Good funny! That would have been too much, making this thread worthy of the axe grind. $30:rolleyes:

I've gotten traffic tickets that I thought were a bunch of bullshit. Yet I paid them, and still drive my car. That's just life. There are rules and government intrusions in your life that suck, and if you get caught doing something "wrong" whether it's really right or wrong is irrelevant, (half the time even if you did it or not is irrelevant). You can fight it all you want, but 99.9% of the time you just end up paying the fine and moving on. It would be great if the Brill's could do whatever the hell they want at Silverton and let everyone else do whatever the hell they want once you buy a lift ticket, but that's not how businesses are allowed to run in this country.

I think it's great if you want to push for change on how the government affects your life - but I don't think Silverton is the source of the problem and the anger is being misdirected at them for having to enforce policies they have to follow in order to stay open.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hemas

Oh, and Seeds has a point... But Ohio is way too close to the rockies and way too high above the sea... I'm thinking somewhere around Netherlands... Like, altitude -10 feet :fm: and not be allowed to go to the Alps.

---

Highest point in Ohio: 1,549 feet. Average is closer to 100 feet. No real ski areas to speak of. No hot dutch lesbians at every bar. The Netherlands is WAY, WAY, WAY more fun than anywhere in Ohio.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hemas

Being from the other side of the pond, I find this bitching and lack of personal responsibility pathetic. He guys closed a market boundry, they were briefed (atleast in print) that boo's and signs are used to marked closed areas & boundries (and as pointed out, a sign is all you need, according to CO-law).

I'm thinking somewhere around Netherlands... Like, altitude -10 feet :fm: and not be allowed to go to the Alps.

---

Holland won't work either, he could just hang out in a Dutch coffee shop and stay legally stoned for the year, only venturing out to visit the red light district.

But, I agree about personal responsibility, you Yuros are way head on that..."If you want to ski off-piste, go a head, just don't whine when you fuck-up"

I dont see what the issue is. if I ski a permanent closure at pretty much any resort, I should expect to receive whatever consequences the resort deems appropriate. personal responsiblity also applies to making decisions about whether or not to follow the rules. ignorance of the rules (in this case markings) doesnt count as an excuse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hutash

Holland won't work either, he could just hang out in a Dutch coffee shop and stay legally stoned for the year, only venturing out to visit the red light district.

---

word. Plus, all winter you get to skate around and put your finger in dykes...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meadow Skipper

Can that can be confirmed somehow? I thought the Brills had gotten control of all the private land within the permit area. And a large percentage of the land under Silverton Mtn is BLM-owned.

---

We're talking about land that was outside their boundary. I also am relatively certain that they did NOT get access to all the privately held land on that mountain, but could be very wrong.

Nice to see that "addicted2coldsmoke" managed to make this thread even retardeder. Kudos, inbred.

Wow, I think I sustained brain damage reading through this entire thread. Whew.

Personal responsibility. Some lack it, some more obviously than others. I think that's about the only thing I come away with here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jfost

word. Plus, all winter you get to skate around and put your finger in dykes...

---

sweet, sign me up.:D

If the cops hadn't been called, this situation could have been resolved much better. Sounds like SM didn't even attempt to talk to the skiers first? Reminds me of my lame ass neighbor that calls the sheriff everytime a dog is running around or somebody has a car parked on the street instead of contacting her neighbors like a normal human. This is the type of attitude/management that ruined resort skiing for me.

If the cops hadn't been called, this situation could have been resolved much better. Sounds like SM didn't even attempt to talk to the skiers first? Reminds me of my lame ass neighbor that calls the sheriff everytime a dog is running around or somebody has a car parked on the street instead of contacting her neighbors like a normal human. This is the type of attitude/management that has ruined resort skiing for me.

You might find my questions quote... "retarded" as you speak. I'll explain.

I work with the Forest Service for a certain company's public land uses. On a yearly basis, that usually spans the better part of one-plus months of intense negotiations, back & forth red tape and dotting "i's". I do back and forth to make our roperational plan a success for both parties.

There!!! To the person who say's I impersonate.

I personally find what Aaron Brill suggests; that the Forest Service/BLM made his Operational Plan state, and furthermore enforce, a "zero tolerance" policy... a complete line of bull on his part... or... on the part of a out-of-touch Federal employee. If a Forest Service employee said this then he is overstepping his bounds in guiding/directing the issuance of this permit. He has just decided to fine everyone for treading on public land. Notice that other ski areas usually take your pass which is something that they can do to enforce the issue because you didn't listen to thier recommendation and or house-rules.

I asked the rest of the questions to see what his response would be. I want to get to the bottom of this because I do have a land use permit task on my plate and find his accusations about his Forest Service Plan to be "out there". And would like to know for myself. You see... what is said by one Forest Service employee usually can set a precedence for others to say the same.

Let's see what comes from each question. That's all.

I have one more question. Was this person (supposed violator) issued a summons from a Federal Employee? A Forest Service Police Office, all of whom tend to be Federal Marshalls? They usually drive around in the white trucks with the Forest Service "green" bands that say Law Enforcement on the back and sides.

I'm starting to smell the attitude... The Forest Service made me do it!

SM operates on private and BLM land, not Forest Service land. The zero tolerance policy is a requirement of the permit. Denny Hogan is the BLM representative who oversees SM and makes sure that they adhere to the permit agreement. He is there most days. The only other ski area that operates on BLM land is Sun Valley.

It's that simple. Why you folks are making this into a personal matter is unclear. SM has no desire to bust people or have some power agenda, that's all part of your imagination.

You can find most of this stuff out by reading readily available information.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by addicted2coldsmoke

If a Forest Service employee said this then he is overstepping his bounds in guiding/directing the issuance of this permit.

---

It's not an individual that does this. It's the BLM as a Federal agency. You can argue that they are overstepping their bounds. Feel free to bring that up in court with the BLM while you try to establish an experts only ski area.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by addicted2coldsmoke

I'm starting to smell the attitude... The Forest Service made me do it!

---

This is really vacuous and immature hyperbole.

This whole argument boils down to,"were the closed areas adequately marked." If yes, the citation is well deserved, if not then he should get off and SM should improve their signs. I am sure there was "attitude" on both sides, but that is not really the issue. From the pictures so far posted, I would favor SM, since the boundary appears well marked.

Here is a copy of the info sheet each skier is supposed to read and acknowledge before getting a lift ticket. It may help clarify what we are trying to convey to skiers at the mtn. This was a part of the sign up procedure on the day in question, and every day day we operate unguided.


"Silverton Mountain Basic Info You Must Know Before Skiing

1. You must observe, read and understand all posted signs before skiing.
2. This is not a regular ski area. It is an Extreme Terrain only area and operates much differently. You could die here today. Cliffs and other hazards are not marked. Please respect that.
3. The only markings on the mountain indicate “CLOSED” areas.
4. Red/Orange poles and/or “CLOSED” signs or ropes are used to define “CLOSED” areas. There is a zero tolerance policy for any poaching, rope ducking, or entering into “CLOSED” areas and a $1,000 fine. WE ARE REQUIRED TO CALL THE SHERIFF FOR ANY POACHING INFRACTIONS. Help us keep it the mountain open and safe.
5. Only skiers accompanied by a Silverton Mountain guide may enter “CLOSED” areas, or leave the ski area boundary, or duck ropes. If you see skiers entering a “CLOSED” area that are not with a Silverton Mountain guide call them out. Guides can be hired at the base for $30 a run.
6. If it appears to be “CLOSED”, it is. The whole run or zone, top to bottom. Looking for a sneak route into a closed area will not fly here. We can't keep the mountain open for unguided skiing if people poach.
7. You will need to pay attention and it is your responsibility to be sure you are in an area open for unguided skiing.
8. You are skiing avalanche paths. Minimize your time spent in them. Avalanches run through the thick trees here. Do not spend extra time or eat lunch in bowls, chutes or terrain traps, especially near creeks and cliffs any longer than necessary. It could save your life.
9. You are required to have a working avalanche beacon, shovel, probe, and sign a liability release before purchasing a ticket. You can rent those items.
10. Don't forget to have fun. Our goal is to have as much terrain as possible open and gradually expand the unguided boundaries and backcountry access points if people cooperate by following our safety rules.
11. We recommend skiing with a partner.
12. If you are tired of waiting for a shuttle you might want to walk or ski back to the base. Please walk or ski on the edge of the road.
13. If you return again to ski, you do not need to sign a waiver again if you get a frequent skier card (no charge).
14. Your lift ticket must be attached to you pants and pants only.
15. The ONLY toilets are by the white tent at the bottom of the lift
16. Please have patience and try to relax.

I the undersigned have read, understand, and will abide by the rules and information written above.
.

____________________________________ _____________________________________ ___
Printed Name of PARTICIPANT Signature of PARTICIPANT Date

____________________________________ _____________________________________ ____
Printed Name of Parent/Legal Guardian Signature of Parent/Legal Guardian Date

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hutash

This whole argument boils down to,"were the closed areas adequately marked." If yes, the citation is well deserved, if not then he should get off and SM should improve their signs. I am sure there was "attitude" on both sides, but that is not really the issue. From the pictures so far posted, I would favor SM, since the boundary appears well marked.

---

if the area is marked on a map and the skiers were made aware of the closed areas prior to heading out, its the skiers responsibility to make sure they dont head into those closed areas. thats what unguided means. unguided skiing doesnt mean free for all. obviously these skiers lack the ability to guide themsleves. if its not marked and your unsure, give patrol a quick call on your radio and ASK. most patrollers are more than happy to answer questions like that. the whole argument really boils down to the guy with the permit and the liability enforces the rules.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silverton Mt

3. The only markings on the mountain indicate “CLOSED” areas.

---

In other words, if you see ANY MARKINGS AT ALL, you are at a closed area. It's totally irrelevant whether or not there was a sign saying closed on every 5th boo vs. every 19th boo. The fact that there were bamboo markings of any kind is more than enough.

ANY MARKINGS AT ALL.

Really, how much clearer can this be? Let's read it again, just to be sure!

"The ONLY markings on the mountain indicate CLOSED areas."

So, I think that pretty much settles the basis for this entire discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silverton Mt

4. ...WE ARE REQUIRED TO CALL THE SHERIFF FOR ANY POACHING INFRACTIONS...

---

And that pretty much settles the outcome. Again, no judgement; just the rules.

Like it or not, SM did exactly what they said they'd do, and they said clearly what they'd do at the outset.
If the skiers in question didn't like the rules of the game, they should have gone somewhere else.

Simple as that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silverton Mt

Here is a copy of the info sheet each skier is supposed to read and acknowledge before getting a lift ticket. 3. The only markings on the mountain indicate “CLOSED” areas.
4. Red/Orange poles and/or “CLOSED” signs or ropes are used to define “CLOSED” areas. There is a zero tolerance policy for any poaching, rope ducking, or entering into “CLOSED” areas and a $1,000 fine. WE ARE REQUIRED TO CALL THE SHERIFF FOR ANY POACHING INFRACTIONS. Help us keep it the mountain open and safe.
5. Only skiers accompanied by a Silverton Mountain guide may enter “CLOSED” areas, or leave the ski area boundary, or duck ropes. If you see skiers entering a “CLOSED” area that are not with a Silverton Mountain guide call them out. Guides can be hired at the base for $30 a run.
6. If it appears to be “CLOSED”, it is. The whole run or zone, top to bottom. Looking for a sneak route into a closed area will not fly here. We can't keep the mountain open for unguided skiing if people poach.

---

Looks clear cut to me - you signed that you acknowledged the rules - specifically "Red/Orange poles and/or “CLOSED” signs or ropes are used to define “CLOSED” areas."

Having read that you should realize that any poles or signs are an indicator the terrain is closed and if you dont realize that its your fuck up b/c you either didnt read the form (never sign anything without reading it) or more likely simply chose to ignore the closure to nab some additional terrain.

Aaron - I do think you should just set up ropes on hard boundaries cause there are simply too many idiots and this will continue to be a pain in your ass.

sheesh.. this whole thing would never have happened if more people just voted libertarian.

-steve

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steve

sheesh.. this whole thing would never have happened if more people just voted libertarian.

-steve

---

True true, cause then there would be no publicly owned land to worry about in the first place.

This thread is....DUMB.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cj001f

Entering an area marked closed - no matter what is on the other side - is illegal in California.
http://www.earnyourturns.com/article...p?articleID=38
The article discusses Colorado law as well.

Alternatively you can read the Colorado ski safety act:
http://www.dora.state.co.us/tramway/SkiSafetyAct.pdf
All that is legally required to designate a closed trail is a sign.
Violating that is a petty offense - a fine of not more than $1,000 and NO JAIL TIME

gonehuckin - just stop. please.

---

Good stuff. On the one hand Silverton's rules sheet should have been followed. On the other hand Silverton's pictured sign certainly didn't meet all the state requirements, which were extremely simple.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EZB

On the other hand Silverton's pictured sign certainly didn't meet all the state requirements

---

how do you figure that? A bamboo pole that says "closed" isn't a sign?

I still don't understand why putting up rope is so tough. I'm sure the BLM frowns on people going into closed areas whether Silverton has met their closure criteria or not. It would lessen the amount of people entering those areas, thus having a positive effect on the BLMs opinion of Silverton....not to mention it's pretty hard to duck a rope and lie about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlurredElevens

I still don't understand why putting up rope is so tough. I'm sure the BLM frowns on people going into closed areas whether Silverton has met their closure criteria or not. It would lessen the amount of people entering those areas, thus having a positive effect on the BLMs opinion of Silverton....not to mention it's pretty hard to duck a rope and lie about it.

---

Well one thing, If this area is where I think it is, I think it is heavilly prone to avy activity. So it would prolly end up in a tangled wad at the bottom quite often.

Edit to add:
I think it's the left side of this pic.
http://www.silvertonmountain.com/alb.../aad.sized.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlurredElevens

....not to mention it's pretty hard to duck a rope and lie about it.

---

Yep, I learned that the hard way at Loveland last week. :nonono2: