Grays On Trays

Snowboarding and skiing, like just about every activity you can think of these days, might end up in legal action one way or the other.

The Utah Bar Association has published an analysis by David S. Kottler of the state of Utah ski law. It focuses primarily on legal actions that might result from accidents or collisions, putting them into one of five categories:

• Collisions with other skiers/snowboarders, with immovable objects (e.g., trees), or with movable objects (e.g., runaway skis or snowboards);

• Ski lift accidents due to negligent design, maintenance, or operation of the lift, or due to the negligence of other skiers or passengers on the lift;

• Accidents caused by ski area negligence such as failure to mark a known hazard, improper slope maintenance and/or grooming, or inadequate avalanche control;

• Accidents caused by ski instructor negligence, such as leading ski school students into overly challenging terrain or failing to provide safety instructions; and

• Accidents or injuries resulting from faulty equipment, most commonly alpine bindings that fail to release properly.

Meanwhile, a law firm in Denver offers a survey of the ski laws in 27 states. Though it’s old (published in 2006), it’s comprehensive.

One of my relatives once posed the following question: “What is a dog?” You could talk about four legs, fur, playing catch and so forth, but he went on to describe the various laws regarding dogs. (You have to understand, he sells stuff to law firms, so he’s got law on the brain.)

Likewise, skiing and snowboarding are concepts bounded by the law. Check out your lift ticket. It’s probably filled with legalese that references, in one way or another, state laws. Here’s one example:

The purchaser or user of this ticket agrees and understands that skiing, snowboarding and tubing can be hazardous. Trail conditions vary constantly because of weather changes and individual use. Ice, rocks and debris, lift towers and other obstacles and hazards, including other skiers, snowboarders and tubers may exist throughout the area. Be aware that snowmaking and snowgrooming may be in progress at any time. Always stay in control.

In using the ticket and skiing, snowboarding or tubing at the area, such dangers are recognized and accepted whether they are marked or unmarked. Ski, snowboard and tube on slopes of your ability and read trail maps.

The user realizes that falls and collisions do occur and injuries may result and therefore assumes the burdens of skiing, snowboarding and tubing under control at all times.

This ticket is revocable by management or Ski Patrol if holder hereof commits any act which endangers himself or others or which constitutes a public nuisance.

The user of this ticket assumes all risks of personal injury or loss or damage to property.

This ticket must be visibly worn at all times while on the premises.

Here’s a ticket from Colorado:

Warning: Under Colorado law, a skier assumes the risk of any injury to person or property resulting from any of the inherent dangers and risks of skiing and may not recover from any ski area operator for any injury resulting from any of the inherent dangers and risks of skiing, including changing weather conditions; existing and changing snow conditions; bare spots; rocks; stumps; trees; collisions with natural objects, man-made objects, or other skiers; variations in terrain; and the failure of skiers to ski within their own abilities.

In addition, there are a lot of legal questions off the slopes. Ski area owners and managers deal with health and safety regulations (OSHA) governing the workplace, equal-opportunity and anti-discrimination laws governing the workforce, and dram laws (Jim gets drunk at the chalet, plows into Bill, who in turns sues the resort for serving Jim alcohol beyond what he was able to handle), for starters.

While the mountains we ride on may be natural, they’re shaped by the human environment of business models (lift tickets), engineering (snowmaking equipment) and the law (liability and land use).

The only ski area within the St. Louis, Missouri metropolitan area may shut down soon. The reason? A legal dispute between the owner of the area and the city council. There are a number of issues, including a demand by the city council that the ski area set aside a certain amount of land for “public use.”

Thanks to Shayboarder for the tip. I’m doing some research into the matter and may report back later.

It’s no secret that some “Green” groups don’t like ski areas. But here’s a relatively new–to me, at least–threat to the ability of snowboarders and skiers to enjoy their winter sport.

Arizona Snowbowl, near Flagstaff, sits high in the mountains. But it doesn’t get much snow, so the management would like to put in snowmaking operations, using recycled water.

Will ski operations be crippled by religious claims?

The June 8 edition of the Wall Street Journal has an article (“Tribes Invoke Gods to Block Wastewater Snowmaking”) about a lawsuit that has stopped the operation. (Subscription required; this temporary link will work for a while for non-subscribers).

Thirteen Indian tribes say that the god-like mountains would be offended by snowmaking, and have filed suit under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

That seems a far stretch. The RFRA was implemented to keep governments from forbidding the free exercise of religion. If the Snowbowl can make snow, that doesn’t prevent the Indians from holding religious ceremonies. It does, however, defile land that they hold sacred. That land, by the way, is now owned by the tribes or the resort, but the U.S. government.

Eric Borowsky, an owner of the resort, says “Every federal project is now going to be held hostage to any Native American saying, ‘Boy, that area is significant to me.’” Howard Shanker, a lawyer for the tribes, dismissed the claim that “we’re going to run out and claim every mountain to be holy.”