Just in time for the FL spike?Quote:
Originally Posted by Norseman
Just in time for the FL spike?Quote:
Originally Posted by Norseman
Passes get scanned just past the Enumclaw Safeway as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Northway
Yep, no skiing this weekend while it is good (uphill travel ban) and we will open up just in time for skiing in the rain!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Dromond
meh, temps on the edge, could dump up high
might duck the gnarly windstorm from the earlier fx, too... could've been a big power outage with leaves still around.
back to cold by wednesday, hopefully
some scenes
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...1075b622_b.jpg
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...c1b9200a_b.jpg
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...9ef75887_b.jpg
brave soul left squigs on east pk... looks to have nailed the route actually, ha
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...3c1cd926_b.jpg
softly touched tails to the ground a few times today, bare minimum for this guy but it skied fkn great.
choice quality snaps per rigeur, m'sieur.Quote:
Originally Posted by Norseman
couple from the mobile
Attachment 347605Attachment 347606Attachment 347607Attachment 347608
So is Crystal planning on bombing and setting the cat road to Silver Basin this weekend? Otherwise, why won't they let the public up that area this weekend? They normally let people hike Silver Basin early season. At a minimum, they should allow people to take the summer trail up/down to Hen Skin Lake and ski the area below Three-Way that is not in-bounds terrain. I would say they can't stop you from doing this but to access this summer trail one has to hike briefly up Gold Hills, although I assume they are not prepping Gold Hills for opening. When did I miss the memo that Vail owns Crystal?
Would love to know what delineates "upper mountain". So everything below green valley is cool?
Sent from my SM-G973U1 using TGR Forums mobile app
Their twitter says everything within ski area boundary is prohibited.
Beginning 11/13: Uphill travel is prohibited within the ski area boundary. Extensive avalanche mitigation work, equipment operation and maintenance is occurring before opening. During the season, uphill travel will be occasionally permitted following our Uphill Travel Policy.
I just watched Trial of Chicago 7 and am inspired for a good protest skin.
RCW 79A.45.070Quote:
Originally Posted by altasnob
As some one who practices regularly in Pierce County District Court (where such charge would be filed) they don't have time for prosecuting that shit. Have you been to Spanaway?
Anyway, not saying people should be touring where they are avy bombing, but this trend of banning uphill travel both before and after the ski area is open is bullshit. It didn't used to be this way at both Crystal and Stevens. I get keeping people off everywhere other than South Back. But (assuming) they aren't opening South Back for weeks so what is the problem with people skinning up Quicksilver and skiing Silver Basin. This is the first time I can think of where they are saying you can't skin up Quicksilver and then tour out the boundary adjacent to Silver Basin. And yes, there are other out of ski area boundary options around Crystal but in bounds ski area touring is always the best early season for low brush approaches. Fuck these private equity corporate overloards.
There didn't used to be that many people touring prior to opening.
A lot was full yesterday.
Want to guess how many would turn up on a weekend. And want road and parking lots plowing. Ski patrol to unstick their skins. Deal with injuries.
All while short staffed and dealing with 3 foot storm prior to opening on Monday.
If they didn't... lower mountain open only on Monday while they do get everything done.
I know you know your shit and would safely navigate around the control work and not ski a closed area... you want to bet on all the others?
seemed like a lot of folks and activity at the base but only two other parties I saw skiing in 5hrs... maybe yesterday was busier on the mtn but I bet a lot of cars belonged to employees
not that it changes the gripe
Sucks that more people = less access. And what happened to this idea that uphill policy was a "collaboration" between users. Sounds like uphill travelers get shafted for the next four days so that downhill skiers get a better Monday opening. Their twitter post says "uphill travel will be occasionally permitted." If they are trying to cut off Quicksilver access it is time for civil disobedience. I am not aware of any law that requires you to identify yourself to any employee of Crystal. In 2013 Crystal was trying to skirt paying tax by claiming since they didn't have exclusive use of the land, they shouldn't have to pay the tax. The court concluded that Crystal does not have exclusive use of the land, but still has to pay tax.
https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/p...%20Opinion.pdf
This law is inapplicable to snowboarders and splitboarders as they are not "skiing:"Quote:
Originally Posted by PNWbrit
RCW 79A.45.070
Skiing in an area or trail closed to the public—Penalty.
A person is guilty of a misdemeanor if the person knowingly skis in an area or on a ski trail, owned or controlled by a ski area operator, that is closed to the public and that has signs posted indicating the closure.
Kircher testified in support of that law when it was passed in 2011. I noticed in the House Bill report it says:
"The bill does not affect backcountry or out-of-bounds skiing, but it would apply to federal lands that are leased."
I greatly dislike the law, but I seriously question the logic regarding the Crustal permit area not "affecting" bc skiing.
Virtually all access to "bc" areas around Crustal goes through their leased land.
If you park in a lot, you're on their leased land.
You are correct, the House Bill report is not the law, it is just the legislative history. Just pointing out that if Crystal actually attempted to have someone prosecuted under that law who was hiking up Quicksilver to access non-ski area terrain you could point out the legislative history gave the legislature the impression the law would have no affect on backcountry skiing. In other words, this law is about rope ducking in bounds, not uphill travel to get to the out of bounds.
Here's some more legislative history:
"Currently, if a sign says an area of the ski area is closed, the person skiing in the closed area can have their pass pulled. Persons are not taking the signs seriously. This bill will let people know that we are serious."
Why anyone would think it is a good idea to spend the public resources to criminally prosecute a rope ducker, appoint them a public defender paid by the tax payers, and potentially have them serve jail is beyond me. You would have to ask Kircher and Crystal Patrol that question because they are the main sponsors of that law. Why not just ban the person from purchasing a ticket or pass at Crystal for life? That would be a pretty big punishment that would deter the behavior that they are trying to prevent (but that would cost Crystal their customer, so better to throw the scofflaw in jail). As far as I know, no person has been charged with this crime in Washington State history. I get fired up at all these stupid criminal laws we have on the books.
I don't read the law that way at all. Nor would I assume Alterras lawyers would be so soft.Quote:
Originally Posted by altasnob
"Backcountry" skiing outside of permit areas and access within permit areas are the two differentiated issues. The law makes the distinction between these and fails to distinguish between uphill and downhill. Moreover, given the dynamics of the avie boogy man, it has the same set of risks and consequences.
I argued against the law, both here against other locals who supported it as well as in letters to state reps. I don't think it's a good law, so your argument there is mute as well, but I'll be happy to whine in harmony with you anytime.Quote:
Here's some more legislative history:
"Currently, if a sign says an area of the ski area is closed, the person skiing in the closed area can have their pass pulled. Persons are not taking the signs seriously. This bill will let people know that we are serious."
Why anyone would think it is a good idea to spend the public resources to criminally prosecute a rope ducker, appointing them a public defender, and potentially have them serve jail is beyond me. You would have to ask Kircher and Crystal Patrol that question because they are the main sponsors of that law. Why not just ban the person from purchasing a ticket or pass at Crystal for life? That would be a pretty big punishment that would deter the behavior that they are trying to prevent (but that would cost Crystal their customer, so better to throw the scofflaw in jail). As far as I know, no person has been charged with this crime in Washington State history. I get fired up at all these stupid criminal laws we have on the books.
I was party to the injunction that stayed the ban from NPS Rainier as well. Hopefully that will stand, despite the CCC.
I once again fail to trust your logic here and will be sure to seek other counsel should I require it. But for now, I'd rather not risk getting banned from Crustal again, when last time it was merely words, not actions.
Me, either. I would assume it means you can't go uphill or downhill within their permit area if that area is signed as being closed regardless of whether your intended destination is outside the permit area or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster Highmen
Alterras lawyers play no role in whether someone gets criminally prosecuted, other than Crystal initially reporting the case to the sheriff. Crystal is in unincorporated Pierce County, which means any charging decision decision would be made by the Pierce County Prosecuting Attorney. If Crystal was in an uppity jurisdiction like Bellevue, ya, you would probably get charged, because Bellevue has never seen a criminal charge they do no like. But Pierce County deals with real shit.
I'll try to walk you through my logic again. The legislature passed that law. When passing the law, the legislature (who has probably never skied a day in their life) reads the bill report. The legislature gets told by the bill report that this law they are passing would "not affect backcountry or out-of-bounds skiing." Legislature says, great, I'll vote for this law so long as it doesn't have any affect on backcountry skiing. Crystal uses this law to say people can't uphill travel through Gold Hills and Quicksilver, which means you can not realistically access Three-Way, Morse Creek, Crystal Lakes, ect (i.e. places outside Crystal's permit area). This would be an example of Crystal using this law to affect backcountry skiing. If you were charged with this crime skiing out to Chinook Pass, you could argue that the prosecutor and Crystal are misapplying the law because the legislature only passed the law with the assumption that it would not affect backcountry skiing. The judge would decide if this argument is correct.
Also, this law does not apply to the "permit area" but instead applies to areas "controlled by a ski area operator." Crystal's permit area is huge, the entire valley (East Peak, Bullion Basin, Pickhandle Basin, North side of Three-Way). But one could argue Crystal does not "control" all the area in their permit area.
Even if that specific criminal law does not apply to uphill travel, Crystal can still tell people they can't hike uphill and yank their pass for doing so. There is also the more general Criminal Trespass Second Degree that could possibly be charged, but that is tricky because although Crystal leases the land, they do not have exclusive use.
Historically, Cyrstal has been pretty cool with uphill access. I always wondered with more skiers skinning Quicksilver whether they would force uphill traffic to use the summer hiking trail instead. Years ago, I skinned the summer trail just for the hell of it and it is way slower and more convoluted than skinning Quicksilver. So nice that they let uphill travel use the groomed Quicksilver run and I hope that continues.
Too many people and not enough parking. We can jerk ourselves off talking about civil disobedience and sticking it to Crystal Mnt or we can push for forest thinning projects and new snow parks.
Sent from my LM-G820 using Tapatalk
You keep arguing your side, which is somewhat sophomoric sophistry and expected, except it's just not true that in the last 5 years they've been cool about access. Nor is the distinction between control and permit salient.or tested. Alterras lawyers may do what they're paid to do, including advising the prosecutor. Tell me that never happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by altasnob
The law was sponsored by a Crustal volly patrol who may not ski well, but has a presence.
But it is reasonable that an argument would be made that people, in accessing bc areas, will enter areas under avalanche control, which __is__ the goal of the law. That has happened to boot.
Moreover, the language in the law fails to make the distinction you're trying to extend between uphill and downhill skiing, permit and control, sidecountry or backcountry.
You keep going back to the exclusive use issue. If that were the case, I guess we can all just park in A lot? Again, this just seems to be an academic point which we can happily quibble over while we attempt to pry the boot off my car.
The judge would decide your argument is correct? Presumptuous a bit?
As the sagacious M. Clark points out, we need more access. And lifts and ski areas. I just want to go skiing.
You know, you could keep your mouth shut about all the restrictions and legal bullshit but go quietly about your business, staying out of the way of mountain prep and avalanche mitigation work. You know, out of sight, out of mind. I’ve used this approach for years when the mountain is “closed” for uphill travel. I’ve never been hassled, but I don’t act like a clueless and/or entitled asshole.
They do have work to do, and some of it is dangerous. They don’t need to have to worry about clueless and unaware ski tourers getting in the way. That’s what these policies are really about.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
If your lifestyle requires discretion, be discreet about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn
Skinner up Stump farm?
Not enough people smoked weed in high school.Quote:
Originally Posted by glademaster
OK, point conceded on a technicality.Quote:
Originally Posted by altasnob
Also:
Things are shaping up nicely.Quote:
Heavy snow continues in the Cascade
passes with Snoqualmie pass reporting 9 inches of new snow and
Stevens Pass 6 inches in the last 6 hours. Mount Baker reporting
over a foot of new snow since late Thursday afternoon.
Aaaaaaaaanyways...
It is snowing. 18" at the base of the truck stop ski area this morning. Currently nuking on the hill above Duck Town.
Attachment 347699
I must interrupt this legal discussion thread with the fact that it is currently windy AF at Crystal which is not the best indicator of skiing in the short term.
But, it’s good for the base...
Looks like a significant fire hazard. Need to remove some trees.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mofro261
Sent from my LM-G820 using Tapatalk
Any one want to show me- a PNW newb- around something within 90 minutes of seattle on Monday or Wednesday. Only 2 days off in 15. Former avy worker in CO for many years, nothing too crazy maybe 1-2 hour approach and a couple laps, maybe 1/2-3/4 day route? Shoot me a PM.
Oh, don't worry. I am sure there will be about 800 people being "discreet" and ignoring the uphill travel ban this weekend. Hard to be discrete in an area with 4.2 million people and another mil arriving in the next 20 years. This twitter commenter applauding the uphill ban sums up the direction of my ire:Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn
Attachment 347704
I am sure these private equity bean counters at these corporate PNW resorts are getting pissed that more and more of their leased parking lots are being filled with non-paying customers. I've been a Crystal paying customer more or less consistently since 2005, with various stints in the 80s as well, but I will always advocate for those non-paying customers right to access their land. We've all been clueless at some point in our life.
Tell me more.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Greydon Clark
Sent from my SM-G973U1 using TGR Forums mobile app
Here is Crystal Mountain's permit area, granted to Crystal by the Forest Service in 1960. It is essentially the entire valley, including all the modern day backcountry areas and access to areas outside the permit area (save Goat Lake). Backcountry skiers are right to push back on this power grab. Crystal's current permit expires in 2032.
Attachment 347707
Oh, so Crystal should keep the lots plowed for free for the non customers?Quote:
Originally Posted by altasnob
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Just here to point out that you used discreet/discrete incorrectly.Quote:
Originally Posted by altasnob
With nearly all good winter access to national forest land in our state controlled by ski areas (unless you have a sled), yeah it should be part of the deal to use our public land for profit.Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn
And I90 is closed again due to “ multiple spin outs blocking the highway”
This is a problem that needs a real fix.
Should the state plow 410 to the boulevard and do summer maintenance on the boulevard for Crystal for free? Crystal getting the state to pay for road maintenance to their for profit use of public land is getting the better part of the bargain.Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn