The Responsibility Project^®. Exploring what it means to do the right thing

Responsible Sporting: Off-trail skiing

13 Comments

January 29, 2009 by Kathy McManus

13 Comments

What do you think? Leave a comment

• January 29, 2009 by Vix

  What about charging the Ski Resort? I bet that would get the attention of the resorts perhaps enough to keep the players inbounds.

  Reply

• January 30, 2009 by

  For those of us who don't get up to the hills that often, skiing is expensive enough already. I don't think it's a good idea to bill the ski resorts for a rescue unless one of their attendants knowingly allowed the out of bounds skiing. Perhaps, however, you could purchase optional "skiing insurance" that covers rescues, etc. And if you've ever been caught out of bounds, etc - that insurance is a mandatory part of your pass.

  Reply

  • February 3, 2009 by Vix

    I hear you. It used to be something the family could do together, now the family can only do that if they are well off. I gave up skiing in 1985 as I could not afford it. When I got to where I could afford it again, I couldn’t see paying that much. I think the threat of being charged for rescue may cause regular people to re-think their actions, but then regular people stay in bounds. How to keep the others in bounds is the issue.

    Reply

• February 4, 2009 by Derek

  The out-of-bounds skier should be charged for his own rescue. If you wanna break the rules, then you--not anyone else--should take the consequences if there are any.

  Reply

• February 5, 2009 by Jillian

  Many of the resorts out west freely open the ropes to back country skiing after a storm (and after avalanche control). So the resorts play a part in controlling/patrolling those areas and should be held partially accountable for safety. With that said it's more about the resorts and individuals being educating in the back country. You have to be a strong skier and bring gear (beacon, shovel, probe, PB&J's, water) and ski with at least one other person. Those skiers and boarders that don't comply and really do ski "rogue" should be held accountable - maybe not to pay for the rescue but should be fined by the state for their irresponsible actions. I'm all for back country skiing as long as you're smart about it.

  Reply

• February 9, 2009 by Sally G

  Jillian and Dereck have it right; if you know enough to ski out of bounds, and many do, then you should be able to—and take the responsibility for paying for your rescue, if needed. I like the idea of "back country skiing insurance" as an option, not a requirement, until you have been rescued once. If you have been rescued, then it should be mandatory. Definitely don't charge the resorts; as many have mentioned, skiing is already much more expensive than it used to be, and any charges to the resorts will somehow be passed along to skiers, either as higher lift tickets, more expensive food/gift shop purchases, etc. Let those who take the risk foot the bill—but don't ban the experts from the thrill of back-country skiing.

  Reply

• February 9, 2009 by Stephen R

  As others have said, back country skiing is fine if you have the ability and the means -- but it's a matter of personal responsibility. If you need to be rescued, you should have to pay for it yourself. The responsible back country skiers (despite their experience) should get the insurance -- which would probably only be obtainable by people with proper training or experience. If some dope goes under a rope and off into the wilderness, he made a choice and should pay for the consequences. (I remember years ago when my brother in Colorado jumped a rope and skiied down a long hill of beautiful fresh powder. He later said it was a great run, but he was bitten by consequence: when he go to the bottom he found it was a basin with no route out -- he had to walk back up the mountain....

  Reply

• April 8, 2009 by RPills

  I think that people who go, to the back country to snowmobile, should really think about what they are doing. Not only are they in harm of themselves but also to others in the same vicinity. Another problem that can occur is that they're far from people who can rescue them when needed. No one wants to hear that their son or daughter is dead so, anything that can be done to prevent deaths, should be done.

  Reply

• April 8, 2009 by Brandon

  In my opinion, if a person strays off a known path into the back forrests to find more excitement, they are putting themselves in more danger than is necessary and they should take extra precautions if they choose to do so. Items such as a GPS and flares should be brought at all times to make rescue easier if and when it is needed. I believe that if laws were put in place to force this on people, more people may be inclined to bring such items if they were subject to a fine or some type of punishment.

  Reply

• April 22, 2009 by Stephen Hinkle

  I am not against back-country skiing. However If it is resort property they have the right to enforce their rules. I agree with one of the other posters that people going back-country skiing should take the proper equipment and need to respect that there is no guarantee that one will be safe doing it and doing it is at your own risk. I would not mandate insurance but one should be aware that not all areas provide search and rescue services and some areas may charge for them.

  Reply

• June 17, 2009 by David JD Johnson

  As a British skier who skies almost entirely in Europe I am confused about the rules on Out of Bounds skiing in North America. Several people commenting on here seem to assume that out of bounds skiing is against the rules but I had thought it was merely regulated. If I am right, does every resort have its own rules or are there general rules about when one can and cannot ski out of bounds? How can I find out these rules if I ski in North America? (I found this site simply by Googling the question) In Europe there is no distinction of in-bounds and out of bounds: all off-piste (ie off the marked trails) skiing has the same status. Off piste is not secured against avalanche and you ski there at your own risk. The resort generally has no responsibility for what happens to you off piste. Conversely you are not forbidden from skiing anywhere you like - it is just at your own risk. Ropes, if there are any, simply let you know you are leaving the piste or there is a specified hazard such as a cliff, and it is perfectly normal to duck them. You can jump the cliff if you wish to risk your life but you may be breaking a condition of your insurance. If you have to be rescued you are charged for the cost of the rescue, just as you are if you break a leg off piste. However your insurance will pay the cost. It is your responsibility to insure yourself for the type of skiing you wish to do. If you wish to ski off piste you should take an insurance which includes this. Some policies will only cover you if you ski with a properly qualified guide while others allow you to ski off piste without a guide but may exclude glaciers, or may stipulate that you take safety equipment (avalanche transcievers, shovel, probe etc. But any frequent off piste skier will have these anyway, plus guides usually lend or rent them to clients if necessary). Personally I ski almost entirely off piste - often down sides of the mountains or into into valleys which nobody else skis. Some of the often huge area accessible from the resort lifts, perhaps with a short walk or climb, may require a taxi or train to return to the resort, but more usually the use of lifts (possibly including those in other resorts you may ski to) are all that is necessary. I normally do this with a regular group of friends (usually 6 of us) and most of the time with a guide (normally about €350 or so for the group for a day).

  Reply

  • June 17, 2009 by David JD Johnson

    I miss-typed a word in my comment above: it should have read "If you have to be rescued you are charged for the cost of the rescue, just as you are if you break a leg ON piste". There is no resort boundary in European resorts.

    Reply

• March 24, 2010 by Axel

  as David says, resort boundaries are not enforced in europe. But there are usually signs warning of alpine dangers and anything off-piste is on one one's responsibility. It's also here a problem that some people with no experience and gear get lost out of bounds. As far as I know, they have to pay for their rescue, but there are no additional legal persecutions or charges. For me that is a good system. I like to ski in the back-country, either from ski resorts or by hiking up elsewhere (ski-touring). I pay an equivalent of around 30 dollars a year to the swiss heli rescue http://rega.ch/ as kind of an insurance: should I get caught in a dangerous situation they will get me out. If you are not a member you pay for your rescue. The yearly fee is so low because almost everybody here buys in. Also several medical insurances or mountain clubs provide rescue insurance. I think that would be a good system for North America: people should have to pay for their rescue themselves but there should be affordable insurance and no legal threats. Skiing in the back-country is a great experience and it should never be forbidden. Nature belongs to us all. But people should also be made aware that being in the mountains in general and especially in winter is a serious issue and one needs to be educated or have a guide.

  Reply

Tell us what you think.