How do people feel about having specific backcountry access points/”gates”, versus an open boundary policy? Some feel that backcountry gates are an attractive nuisance, and open boundaries are better because they don’t attract the type of skiers and/or boarders that see an access point and want to go out and “get rad.” Others feel that open boundary policies don’t protect enough the unskilled and unwary, and are an invitation to get people killed, injured or lost. And still others even feel that we should all be protected from ourselves, and any “gates” leading into the potentially dangerous backcountry are a bad idea in general.
Presently, the Telluride Ski Area has two backcountry gates: one at the top of Gold Hill proper above Lift 14, leading into upper Bear Creek, and one in the saddle near Bald Mountain off of Lift 12, going down into the Alta Lakes area. Additional gates in the Contention and Regular Route areas have been recently suggested, but adding these access points has not yet been formally discussed.
Many years ago the ski area had a “mellow yellow” policy of open boundaries, where you could access the backcountry anywhere by crossing under a ski area boundary rope, recognizing that you were off of the ski area and own your own. This policy was changed after a knee-jerk reaction to several avalanche deaths, and, for several years, there were no backcountry access points at all. When the ski area expanded a few years ago, part of the expansion agreement was to again provide access points into our public Forest Service-managed lands.
Despite several deaths in off-limits areas such as Temptation, skiers and boarders continue to ignore the ski area’s rules and venture daily into terrain such as Contention, Regular and other routes leading down into lower Bear Creek. In years past, this was a federal offense with a federal Forest Service closure, even though the FS rarely enforced it due to personnel and funding issues. This year, the FS decided they had more liability by not enforcing it, and dropped the federal closure altogether. The ski area’s Level 1 closure is still in effect, and one can lose their pass for 2 years and possibly face county trespassing charges if you get caught. But few get caught, and many enjoy fresh powder and sick lines without any extra effort of hiking or skinning. A few unlucky ones do get caught, and some even get injured or killed in these avalanche-risky areas.
What do people think about this continued boundary closure policy, the existing ski area backcountry gates, and possible new access points? How do the relative dangers of ducking ropes into lower Bear Creek compare with the legal access points into upper Bear Creek? And do gates indeed attract the unprepared, or would open boundaries just invite more skiers & boarders into potentially dangerous situations?
0 responses so far ↓
There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.