Skier Only Mountains

[wyowindrunner]

"coffin dodging")

Oh thats GREAT!!-

 

[skibob]

I hope to someday ski Alta very badly, but in no way is that because they don't allow boarders. I don't care about the other two at all and plan on never skiing at either. Mainly due to location (MRG) and cost (The illustrious Deer Valley)

I hope to someday ski Alta very well!

 

[slowrider]

My drill instructor told us, "10% of any group of people are assholes; keep that in mind, avoid them, and you will complete the mission and enjoy your life."
Now, he was a bastard (that, after all, was his job) but the longer I live, the more those words ring true.

Corp?
I could care less what you slide down the hill on. Adapt & overcome. Snowboards, heel side rider. Problem solved.

 

[Fishbowl]

Being predominantly a college town, I would guess that AZ Snowbowl has close to a 50/50 mix of skiers and snowboarders. The resort also has two or three park areas and hosts several “rail jam” events a year, which adds to the snowboard traffic. The boarders here have fun, but their style of navigating the resort definitely conflicts with a skiers style. Causing seated log jams where the trails merge, poor lift chair seating and crossing the trails at 90 degrees off banks and out of trees are the most infuriating. We find that both skiers and snowboarders are equally guilty of buzzing your tower at speed.

We ski early, whilst most of the boarders are still making their way to the resort, then head out when it gets too busy.

We always enjoy the skier only atmosphere st Alta and have no issues with their snowboard ban.

 

[Freaq]

Well geez, I just read this whole thread on a Saturday morn. I'm pretty sure I could have learned to snowboard in that time and surely that would have been better use, eh?

What I did learn this morning is that I'd prefer to share a chair, a hill or a meal with a bunch of boarders than with folks who would have them segregated.

Powder to the people.

 

[Goose]

Well geez, I just read this whole thread on a Saturday morn. I'm pretty sure I could have learned to snowboard in that time and surely that would have been better use, eh?

What I did learn this morning is that I'd prefer to share a chair, a hill or a meal with a bunch of boarders than with folks who would have them segregated.

Powder to the people.

And why is that? So now you are descrimijnating against people who prefer to ski without boarders on the same hill? Are such people poorly behaved? Are they bad people? Are they somehow less worthy people?

You know who Id like to share a hill, chair, and meal with? Anyone who is enjoyable to be around and maintains a friendly respectful and safe atmosphere/environment.

 

[dbostedo]

You know who Id like to share a hill, chair, and meal with? Anyone who is enjoyable to be around and maintains a friendly respectful and safe atmosphere/environment.

There's no reason that can't be a boarder. Painting a whole group with the same brush doesn't usually lead anywhere good. Better to communicate and try to make things better, than push for segregation.

 

[David Chaus]

You know who Id like to share a hill, chair, and meal with? Anyone who is enjoyable to be around and maintains a friendly respectful and safe atmosphere/environment.

It’s called The Gathering.

 

[Jacob]

firstly just to clear up to anyone , I don't ski with a state of mind that I despise boarding in such a way that it ruins my time. Nor in such a way where as its all I think about and look for nor look for reasons to make it upset me. In fact as Ive mentioned in earlier post, I accept that its there and I treat everyone with same respect and etiquettes regardless which sport they participate in. I blame the individuals and even stated its not the art or sport of boarding itself but is only the fact that there are more (from my experiences) of those groups and/or individuals within boarding who tend to display less than better behaviors and etiquettes.. But because of that it then results in more unpleasant feelings about boarding.

Picture kind of like having an even at any given place involving the public. Lets say that even is a music venue. Now lets suppose in one place was Tony Bennett or perhaps Adel or something of that nature where as the general audience could be a high percentage of older and/or also perhaps a bit more refined (for lack of a better word) by nature,. While in another similar place was a newer up and coming popular rock band where as the general audience could be a high percentage of much younger and far less refined crowd. The later of the two will indeed require much more security and the general behavior will be much more lacking in general good etiquettes. Thats a fact and I know this because I happen to work at a place that occasionally offers a venue of similar nature to those mentioned. And there is absolutely a need for greater security and many more problems that arise even with the greater amount of security. This is not discrimination. Its just fact and the nature of the beast that one type of thing brings with it a higher percentage of a given demographic while the other not so much. Is it fair the better behaved and non problematic people at the rock band performance have to be subject to higher security and more rules and regulations and be more watched over? And also generally be labeled or considered/stereotyped a rowdier far less behaved crowd? Its just truth because that's what it is.
So while not nearly to the same extremes I just used to make a point, the same (on a lessor scale) holds true imo with boarding vs skiing. One leans noticeably enough more in one direction than the other does. And that one imo is boarding.

Nothing about that is discriminatory at all (even the hypothetical more extreme examples I gave) nor a wrong way of thinking. Its just fact obtained via personal experiences and history. Im not trying to push my opinion per say but only trying to defend against those who feel the need to force this opinion out as though its so wrong and also not fair and is discriminatory. Its not any of those at all. Imo its simply an assessment based on factual experiences.

The difference between your analogy and snow sports is that, if you were to ban snowboarding altogether, then those young, rowdy people wouldn't stop going to the mountains. They would just go back to skiing, and their behavior wouldn't change a bit. And if you only ban snowboarding in certain resorts, then you'll still get young, rowdy skiers in those resorts if they have the type of terrain that such people like to slide down.

In a ski resort, the type of crowd you're surrounded by has less to do with skiing/snowboarding preferences and more to do with overall characteristics of the mountain and the resort.

Try skiing Alta on a bluebird day, also known as the running of the bulls. Then, go to a mellower, more family-friendly resort that allows boarding. You'll see the difference between the skiing equivalent of a mosh pit and a Barry Manilow concert, and the mosh pit will be the one that doesn't allow boarding.

 

[Goose]

The difference between your analogy and snow sports is that, if you were to ban snowboarding altogether, then those young, rowdy people wouldn't stop going to the mountains. They would just go back to skiing, and their behavior wouldn't change a bit. And if you only ban snowboarding in certain resorts, then you'll still get young, rowdy skiers in those resorts if they have the type of terrain that such people like to slide down.

In a ski resort, the type of crowd you're surrounded by has less to do with skiing/snowboarding preferences and more to do with overall characteristics of the mountain and the resort.

Try skiing Alta on a bluebird day, also known as the running of the bulls. Then, go to a mellower, more family-friendly resort that allows boarding. You'll see the difference between the skiing equivalent of a mosh pit and a Barry Manilow concert, and the mosh pit will be the one that doesn't allow boarding.

imo many of those boarders would do nothing because it was the boarding that attracted them to the hills and not the skiing. We can only speculate what you say because there is now both sports in existence. So because of that we can then say if boarding was now eliminated that many these people would be skiing. But this is only because they are already going to the hills as boarders and see and are familiar with skiing. But if boarding never existed I doubt all too many boarders would ever took to the hills in the first place. They had no interest in skiing before and never took to the hills before and the only reason they ever came to the hills was/is the attraction of boarding. So a lot of people who board would not be involved in skiing imo.

But over all and regardless of that debate, I dont appreciate any those who are problematic and in fact Ive always maintained through my posts that I in no way suggest there are not also skiers who display the poor and even poorest behaviors and etiquettes. Im not fond of people in general who ruin things for the rest or makes for a less than pleasant experiences for the rest. .But what we do have in reality are both sports in existence and among the two sports (whether anyone thinks its wrong to notice or not) I still maintain opinion from my experiences that there are more boarders (a noticeable enough higher percentage among them vs skiers) who fit the bill of people who display poorer behaviors and etiquettes. Ive also explained the possible reason why I believe its the case. And imo there is nothing at all wrong with telling it like it is. Nothing wrong with realizing a difference for the better or worse. Its not something looked for but if something presents itself as such than so be it.

As for different places carrying different types of general personalities among their customers? I can certainly believe that to be what you speak of. And I can also understand that could be a place with no boarders. But the fact that you can distinguish and differentiate between people at one place vs another is imo no different at all vs myself distinguishing differences between boarders and skiers within my experiences as for where/when I ski and have skied. Fwiw I never suggest its a landslide either but its noticeably there imo.

 

[Seldomski]

I've had friends switch from skiing to boarding, and from boarding to skiing. If the choice wasn't available, they would likely have quit snow sports. I've personally tried boarding in the past and thought it was OK. I may go back to it someday since it loads the body differently - it may be a way to slide on snow as I get older with less pain. I know others who have swapped for that reason.

The problem lies in the pilot of the instrument. Ban the person/behavior from the resort, not the instrument.

 

[Ogg]

Is it just me or is there a general eastern/midwestern vs western attitude about snowboarders. It seems to me that western skiers, in general, have far less problem with snowboarders. Maybe it's the fact that there is far more terrain available to explore.

 

[Goose]

Is it just me or is there a general eastern/midwestern vs western attitude about snowboarders. It seems to me that western skiers, in general, have far less problem with snowboarders. Maybe it's the fact that there is far more terrain available to explore.

at times in this thread I gave thought to some of that as well. Partly why Ive always mentioned the terms....."imo" and/or "in my experiences"

 

[Jacob]

imo many of those boarders would do nothing because it was the boarding that attracted them to the hills and not the skiing. We can only speculate what you say because there is now both sports in existence. So because of that we can then say if boarding was now eliminated that many these people would be skiing. But this is only because they are already going to the hills as boarders and see and are familiar with skiing. But if boarding never existed I doubt all too many boarders would ever took to the hills in the first place. They had no interest in skiing before and never took to the hills before and the only reason they ever came to the hills was/is the attraction of boarding. So a lot of people who board would not be involved in skiing imo.

But over all and regardless of that debate, I dont appreciate any those who are problematic and in fact Ive always maintained through my posts that I in no way suggest there are not also skiers who display the poor and even poorest behaviors and etiquettes. Im not fond of people in general who ruin things for the rest or makes for a less than pleasant experiences for the rest. .But what we do have in reality are both sports in existence and among the two sports (whether anyone thinks its wrong to notice or not) I still maintain opinion from my experiences that there are more boarders (a noticeable enough higher percentage among them vs skiers) who fit the bill of people who display poorer behaviors and etiquettes. Ive also explained the possible reason why I believe its the case. And imo there is nothing at all wrong with telling it like it is. Nothing wrong with realizing a difference for the better or worse. Its not something looked for but if something presents itself as such than so be it.

As for different places carrying different types of general personalities among their customers? I can certainly believe that to be what you speak of. And I can also understand that could be a place with no boarders. But the fact that you can distinguish and differentiate between people at one place vs another is imo no different at all vs myself distinguishing differences between boarders and skiers within my experiences as for where/when I ski and have skied. Fwiw I never suggest its a landslide either but its noticeably there imo.

Maybe my experiences are different from yours, but most of the snowboarders that I've seen seem to be people who would be skiing if snowboarding wasn't an option. They also tend to board in mixed groups with skiers. I don't get the impression that they're only on the mountain because of boarding. It seems to me that they had the desire to slide down the mountain, were given two different options, and happened to choose boarding. And, I bet quite a few of them tried both before choosing boarding over skiing.

Anyway, you can blame boarding all you want, but I don't think the cause and effect are working the way you think they are. I also think you'd be sorely disappointed with the results if board bans were more prevalent. Most likely, if snowboards didn't exist, you'd be complaining about twin tips, fat skis, etc., and how such things should be banned.

As someone who likes fat twin tips, maybe I should be happy that you're ire is directed at snowboarders. One more reason for me not wanting boards to be banned.

 

[Josh Matta]

I like how this thread assume that snowboards are young and rowdy, and that it is still a popular sport. Most snowboards I know are older than me, and at least at Stowe, snowboarding and snowboard lessons are on the decline. Maybe 1/4 people snowboard here.

 

[Jim McDonald]

Boarders are all parents now, and their (rowdy) kids don't want to be seen with them on a board

 

[Goose]

I think many are making more out of my opinions than what I am implying. I don't "want" to nor ever set out to blame boarding for all things negative on the mountains we visit. I don't believe boarders are the only causes of all things negative. I don't believe all boarders are younger and rowdy. And I don't at all believe skiers are exempt form anything.

All I ever really implied is that (and sorry for being repetitive but people keep putting words in my mouth) but Ive only ever implied that there is from my experiences a bit more people displaying the negatives (that most don't appreciate while at the resorts) coming from the boarding community than the skiing community . You may not agree and your experiences may be different but its really not complicated to understand without having to make it sound as though Im saying a whole lot more than that.
I believe within the boarding community there is a higher amount of a given demographic (not at all is it all but only a percentage) but is one of which by nature tends to lack some the behaviors and etiquettes most people prefer and expect on the ski hills in general.

In my experiences there are noticeably more groups of 4,5,6 or even 7,8 of relatively younger (late teens. 20 something's) arriving and boarding together than I see those same amount of groups via arriving and skiing together. Usually that demographic (just about anywhere when together) by nature tends to lack better behavior etiquettes and tends to display less than desirable ones. Never all of them of course but in general groups of that demographic will most likely behave a certain way.

Just for example look at just about anything anywhere that consists of perhaps a college crowd vs other forms of crowds. Its no secret you will in general experience much more display of poorer etiquettes and behaviors from them. That's just a fact. Well all Im implying is that there is a higher percentage of a given demographic of similarly aged groups participating in boarding and imo is a reason why I see more of that less than desired behavior (or even at times problematic behavior) coming from the boarding community than I do from the skiing community. Please don't put words in my mouth that I am suggesting all boarders are bad and rowdy and disrespectful etc,,.. all skiers are great. I personally know and come across the best and worst people among both boarders and skiers. But all Im doing is calling things like I experience them and I see more of the negatives from boarders than from skiers and I think I have the reason why that is as those things are (not always but) usually from a given demographic that seems to be at a higher percentage within boarding. Its a long explanation but its not really saying anything more than that simple experience driven observation.

 

[Mike Thomas]

So your point is all 15 to 25 year Olds should be banned, or there should be ski areas that exclude an age demographic. Got it.

I have no idea why you keep saying "boarders" when what you really mean is "get off my lawn".

 

[Goose]

So your point is all 15 to 25 year Olds should be banned, or there should be ski areas that exclude an age demographic. Got it.

I have no idea why you keep saying "boarders" when what you really mean is "get off my lawn".

again, please don't put words in my mouth nor give to me my own meanings to my own thoughts.
There is a big difference between implying that there are more of such groups in snow boarding who arrive and board together vs to imply that entire age group should be excluded. Thats two completely different things being said. So no, with due respect you don't "got it" at all. What you seem to have is ability to over estimate and twist what it is Ive implied to suit what it is that you want to say ive implied. Or there is a misunderstand here which happens via written text conversations. But I don't how else I can explain more specifically and I already been too repetitive. maybe Im not getting it out the way its needed to be better understood. It doesn't have to be agreed with but perhaps its just not being understood quite the way I am trying to explain it.

 

[Seldomski]

Not sure why you are carrying on with this argument @Goose . You are trying to explain an observation -- that on a percentage basis, more snowboarders are unruly/unfavorable/deplorable vs. skiers. Understood. However, I am not sure why you would bring this up if it is not a reason why you prefer skier only mountains?

I think many are arguing here against the idea that even IF your observation/opinion is true, it's not a 'good reason' to ban snowboarders from a resort. Nowadays snowboarding is much less common. In many cases you would probably keep MORE 'idiots' off the mountain by banning all skiers from a resort.