interesting read:
http://www.summitdaily.com/news/whit...-ski-industry/
Printable View
interesting read:
http://www.summitdaily.com/news/whit...-ski-industry/
Wow. Well written and hard hitting from, of all papers, Summit Daily. I would expect this from the Denver Post.
Meh. Opening was pedestrian, kind of like starting an essay with a definition of a word as defined by Websters. Lost me. Overdrama.
And please, great colorado reporting died with rmn. RIP the big tab.
Fine idea for a story tho.
Sad for the family, but WTF kind of bullshit, phoning it in reporting was that - that this couple's son died because he chose to ski at Keystone, that disclosure about Summit County resorts will change anything ???Quote:
Originally Posted by - from the article:;
I stopped reading after that.
... Thom
I don't get it
Not sure what the point is? People die skiing, so what? It's tragic that it has to happen. But it does. This article would have been better suited to come out over xmas break, the shock and awe for toursits, maybe vail will ask for a written apology for making they look bad if they don't get it they will threaten to pull their advertising from the paper.
The numbers are higher for summit because we have more resorts, we have more tourists, more beginners, more people etc. is that something ground breaking? There is a sort of a cover up by the resorts to limit the information about how exactly people died, etc, but that cover up is due to hipaa not necessary the resorts trying to hide info. The daily has some sort of grim fascination with ski resort deaths. Kind of odd. But they love to make it front page news all year long.
The summit daily is nothing short of rag, they have a constant turn over of reporters every 2-3 years. The reporting usually consists of scanning facebook and social media and then plugging that into an article. I swear that they hand all the new reporters a sheet of stories they can write about and they just go through the list. So the same shit is written about in two to three year cycles. Skier deaths is one of those, in a few months they will recycle the deaths of two girls who disappeared hitching to alma thirty years ago. The reporters back in the day had contacts at the resort, sheriffs department, they'd hang out in the bars and get the scoop. It's a small town, it's easy to know someone who knows the truth about something and you can get the low down. I've heard more f'd up shit over the years from first hand accounts than I'd care to know. Today it's nothing more than scanning someones facebook profile for info. Kind of sad.
I always thought Keystone was the most dangerous ski resort.
This was pretty unbelievable to read. There is very little that is inherent about Keystone/Summit county that would have killed this guy. Its almost like they are suggesting that had they known their kid was going on vacation in Syria they would have tried to talk him into going to London instead since it is relatively safer.Quote:
Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un
I don't know what the law is in Colorado, but I doubt it's up to the ski area to decide whether a coroner's autopsy is done. In California all deaths--accidental, in a hospital or nursing home, all deaths--must be reported to the county coroner who decides whether or not an autopsy is done.
The "human toll" of skiing? The number of skiers who die yearly in the US is about 1% of the number who drown and a 1/3 of the number who die riding horses--and a lot more people ski than ride horses.
If you go skiing at Keystone, yer gonna die!
#SchoolmarmSlaughter
Put me in the "I don't get it" camp as well. I can't figure out the point the reporter is attempting to make.....they're certainly not uncovering any damning evidence like the headline would lead you to believe. News flash....skiing is an inherently dangerous sport.
As other's have stated, to suggest that the 27 year old that died at Keystone, should have been possibly steered to another resort because of the fatality rate at Keystone is laughable. Yes, improve your odds of dying on the slopes from 1 in 600,000 to what?.......1 in 800,000! LOL. Other than raising some general awareness it's a total garbage story.
Bad way to start the day, especially since I'm flying in tonight.
I just went through the interactive map of deaths in Pitkin County and I knew at least half.
Most died in avalanches and two were patrollers.
RIP my Fallen Friends.
At least one was a maggot and another guy posted on Epic the day before, asking how to adjust his bindings. Threw a shoe and hit a tree.
Well, to summarize, the reporter has found out that there are no laws or regulations that govern the data gathering of inbound skier deaths in Colorado. That's pretty interesting in itself, considering the size of that industry, and how important it is to the state's economy. Hell, as mentioned, there is much more transparency around backcountry avi deaths.
But, we do know the numbers, and, I suppose, in the next two articles, the reporter may try to figure out why so many die in Summit County. I have my own opinion, as I'm sure all others here do, but, let's see what he comes up with. This does take a ton of balls for that newspaper company to publish this, since they essentially survive off the economy that those ski areas, re: Vail Inc., operate within. I'll bet some phone calls were made. It is a surprise to see this, since, as Fred said above, the Summit Daily is not exactly a place you go to for good writing about local issues - just a place to check rental and RE prices, and the local dispensery deals.
put me in the shitty reporter with a broken grinding stone trying to grind an axe with shitty gonzo journalism camp
the equating the ski industry with the auto industry is fuckin laughable
ya know even the addicts aint being forced to partake in high risk activities
dont wanna die or be injured skiing?
well not going skiing is the surefire way to that zero fatality goal
when you ascend and descend a mountain, you can die
Don't go skiing! You're gonna die!!!
My takeaway is that skiing into trees can kill you.
Summit Daily Bullshit
What a bunch of bottom feeding reporting.
They are making it out like there is some conspiracy and they are hell bent on scaring the crap out of the tourists that bring money to the community. They've been on a kick for about a year... I think it is new ownership. They've become very political, very partisan, and all about the muck racking dram infotainment articles like this trip.
Why don't they do an article on how the mountains aren't Disneyland, so don't pretend they are, but still enjoy them?
Instead we get a 3 part series on how there is some vague conspiracy when there isn't.
FUCK THE SUMMIT DAILY NEWS
(I do not nor have I ever worked for a ski resort).
Because Summit County has more skier days than the entire state of Utah?Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny Profane
WHERE IS MY FUCKING PULITZER PRIZE, BITCH?
the writer of this piece doesn't do the best job getting his point across, but it seems the point trying to be made here is that ski resorts try really hard to keep deaths on the slopes quiet (the article doesn't address this, but a number of resorts have gag rules for employees about on-mountain deaths), and promote the idea that resorts are disneyland with no danger. It does seem a little more honesty on this issue could result in more awareness of dangers and better overall safety. But yes, some of the premises, like choosing another resort over Keystone would save your life, is kinda ridiculously over the top [insert keystone joke here].
you forgot the part about the extra 150" of potential obstacle and hazard coveragesQuote:
Originally Posted by Summit
gotta give bro props for hitting the notes that resonate to his clickbait urinal cake audience of
bunny fluffering tourons whom personal responsibilities for there own actions dont matter.
Well, so much for reasonable discussion. Major reason that this country is fucked. Everybody's shouting. Put your dicks back in your pants. Although it's good to see that hippie fishbum has been nudged out of his drug stupor to type some bad poetry. With one finger, of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by Summit
As far as your simple "most ski days evah" argument, since you didn't read the article, I'll tell you to go back and check out the stat that the Aspen mountains actually have a higher death rate per "capita", or total visit numbers. Maybe somebody can find what that number is for Utah. Oh, wait, first there's that dangling dick problem.....
for 160$ a day they better pad all the trees and foam all the rocks
the resorts have lots of stats on injuries etc, I don't know why the public needs to know the details, I'm not sure what is to be gained
patrol has daily stats of how many taxi rides they give to people, how many minor injuries they cart off the mtn, and how many major traumas are carted off the mtn, again not sure the point of knowing these stats
I have heard lots of gruesome stories over the years but cannot remember one at this minute, a few years ago a seasonal resort employee "died" vail went way above and beyond anything they should do for the family, it was pretty crazy to hear what they did and there was not one peep in the news other than the constant repeating of this kids untimely self inflicted death.
A few years ago the daily did some sort of article, cannot remember the jist, but it was around xmas and it was shitting on the resorts, vail pulled all their advertising for a week or two until the paper apologized, it was pretty sad.
Colorado seems to be where one-week-a-year eastern and midwestern skiiers wind up. Utah, Montana and Wyoming seem to attract more hard core skiers (enthusiasm if not ability). You would think Squaw would have a lot of deaths, but when you consider the fact that it's never open . . .Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny Profane
I think that's someone pretending to be SFB--because I can understand him.
Yup.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skistack
Fuck trees.
Just one more reason to go above treeline.
A business doesn't want to have a lot of death associated to it? No way.
This article is a huge reach.
All the warnings and education and statistics and safety measures in the world aren't going to keep people from being stupid or from being unlucky. Some safety measures keep the resorts from being sued. That's it.
Now, try using that statement about backcountry avi risk.Quote:
Originally Posted by old goat
I've read many an account of mistakes made in the backcountry by lucky survivors, and non profit agencies that immediately jump in and study those accidents are the reason we know as much as we do. Why not in bounds? Just, you know, for kicks? Afraid of what you'll learn? Why?
The 5 o'clock news will pick it up:
"Tonight on FOX31: Hitting this simple common hard object at high speed can kill you! But ski areas don't want you know! Find out what it is after the break!"
Anchor: "Thanks for staying tuned to FOX! Now, Teresa with our main investigative expose: TREES: FRIEND OR FOE?"
Teresa: "Though they turn snow-melting-CO2 into breathable oxygen, trees have been secretly murdering skiers and their crimes have been covered up by the ski areas... why you may ask? Is it because the ski areas are so afraid of global warming that they consider killer trees a necessary evil? We asked professor Den I. Dob-Vious of Colorado Christian University and W.R. Hearst III, owner of the Scummit Daily Skews."
Prof. Dob-Vyus: "Well these ski areas are run by a bunch of deluded liberals who believe in so called 'human caused global warming.' They actually think that trees make snow. But we know that only Jesus can make snow."
Hearst III: "Well not sure how Jesus got into this, but..."
Prof Dob-Vious: "Jesus is in everything?"
Hearst III: "I think I'll have a reporter do a 29 part series about how Jesus is getting into things uninvited... it will sell some real estate ads!"
Teresa: "Professor, do you think the ski areas are guilty of something?"
Prof Dob-Vious: "They are going to burn in hell... and let me tell you... there is NO snow down there... just salt peter, Hitler, and Democrats!"
Hearst III: "... and a 9 parter on how global warming might cause hell to freeze over... this is great!"
Teresa: "Uh... OK... that's all we have time for... up next Donald Trump flips on another issue when he discovers that pretending that bad is good doesn't actually make it good."
I remember talk like this when the car makers tried to pad dashboards. Furgetabout airbags.
Compared to what?Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny Profane
Smacks of conspiracy theory/smoking gun BS...
Skiing is an inherently dangerous activity - Just getting off a lift for instance.
And you don't think ski area risk management types aren't all over this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny Profane
You're kidding yourself - What insurance underwriter wants people to be unsafe at a ski area, let along die from an accident?
No.Quote:
Originally Posted by ACH
I used to think so, until they started building parks, and then I thought, wtf?
Quote:
Originally Posted by blazes_boylan
Of course, we all prognosticate about why Breck & Keystone are "killer" resorts, and the single fair point in the article (I finally forced myself to read through) relates to coroner record keeping requirements for inbounds skiing deaths. I get that, but this reporter is trying to come off as the second coming of Gary Webb (San Jose Mercury News and the Iran Contra Affair for you young 'uns). Ah, to be a fly on the wall int the Vail Resorts board room.Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny Profane
Yes, I'll bet a few discussions went on about how to approach the article and I'm as surprised that they published it in Summit County as I am with the fact that the editor allowed such lazy, cliched reporting to go to print.
Now, our aging infrastructure and ski lifts - there's a story. That might take some work, however.
... Thom
Groomers kill. They should only groom cat tracks and green runs. Skied keystone against my will last weekend. Scary shit. Icy as fuck, double fall lines, bottle necks. Multiple trails merging at a time, and crowded full of "advanced intermediates" who think they have to go as fast as possible at all times. God I hate that shit anymore. That is not skiing to me, it is surviving a trip down the hill. Not surprised at all that people die regularly under those circumstances.
Give Bunny a break here. Skiing in Summit is dangerous and I'd say given his history he knows this better than anybody! But to be fair, people don't die regularly at keystone or breck or really any ski area. Let's just assume all 137 deaths occurred at breck/keystone. Then take the annual average skier visit of those two areas of ~3.3 million people over that same period and less than .0005% of the people who show up to ski die doing it. That's just using breck/keystone visits and the total deaths. The actual percentage of people dying versus total visits is way less if you consider the other resorts visits as well. But yeah, great in depth reporting!
I concur. But, I never skied Keystone. Why were you there? Too late for Abasin parking?Quote:
Originally Posted by shredgnar
The 2nd part is out too now.
http://www.summitdaily.com/news/crim...f-a-ski-death/
This is some terrible journalism. Sensationalism.
Surprise, Surprise the business don't want to make it front and center that a few people die doing an action sport like skiing. What do you expect? The ski areas would want to publish a 10 page warning manual with lists of and photos of each and every fatality that visitors to their web pages have to e-sign before even getting trail maps, snow reports or booking rooms and tickets?
My favorite absurd lines:
Yeah if only they had known they would have steered him to a safer resort like Buttermilk or Ski Grandby Ranch. Preposterous. Like you'd convince a young guy to go to some lame resort because "its safer"Quote:
maybe they'd have been able to steer Jay, an expert skier who lived in Boulder and loved heading to the mountains whenever he could, to a different resort.
His fucking skull was caved in. You need an autopsy so that you don't feel bad that he couldn't have been saved? Well that sucks but getting an autopsy would have exactly 0 impact.Quote:
"I want to know if he was still alive after he hit," she said. "They said for sure he died instantly, but I can tell you the following two weeks after wouldn't have been as hard if it wasn't for that unknown. Why not do an autopsy? I don't get it."
What does the author think that there is some secret conspiracy where people are being murdered by injections of poison but then thrown into trees so it looks like an innocent ski accident? What the fuck could they likely discover? Oh this guy actually had a heart attack which caused him to eat shit at high speed and crash into a tree. Oh I feel a lot better about it now.
It reads like a hit piece against the Summit coroner. What's this "journalist" have against her?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kinnikinnick
Gustafson knew where the guy hit the tree and didn't go back to help once she realized there was a problem? WTF? You ski in the trees with a buddy for this reason. Maybe they aren't right next to you and you lose visual contact, but you don't abandon them after you think something is wrong.Quote:
"It's been hard on all of us," said Gustafson. "I just can't explain the feeling of him being there one second, and then us standing at the bottom waiting, with my gut telling me to go back up and look. They tell me he died on impact, but what if he didn't? What if he was just unconscious and something could have been done? The thought of him being out there all night by himself, it's shattered me."
"It's haunted me, because I was 100 feet from him and I could have hiked back up," she said. "These are the questions as friends that we just don't understand. He was such a good skier, and I've seen the guy get out of some hairy situations, so can't imagine him hitting a tree. It just doesn't make sense to me."
"I want to know if he was still alive after he hit," she said. "They said for sure he died instantly, but I can tell you the following two weeks after wouldn't have been as hard if it wasn't for that unknown. Why not do an autopsy? I don't get it."
It was on the inflation of snow reported to actual.Quote:
Originally Posted by fastfred
Why do you assume those two mountains are safer? Because they're lamer? But, how would you know? There's no real data. Which is sorta the point. Keystone is fucking lame. But, deadly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kinnikinnick