

Snowboarders sue Alta ski resorts
#21
Posted 04 February 2014 - 04:33 PM
#22
Posted 11 February 2014 - 01:03 PM
Opinion: Alta should be for everyone
Editors Note: This article contains the views and opinions of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinions of KSL.com.
SALT LAKE CITY — Alta and Deer Valley should be for both skiers and snowboarders. Snowboarding is a positive, family sport. 60 percent of snow sport families include both skiers and snowboarders. Snowboarders are your doctors, teachers, neighbors, brothers, sisters, and even your grandparents.
"No-snowboarding" policies perpetuate an "us versus them" mentality that has no place in the Utah snow sports community. It is time for Utah to move past discriminatory attitudes and actions on the snow. It is time for Alta and Deer Valley to step up and join all the other resorts in welcoming both snowboarders and skiers.
Promotion of Alta and Deer Valley's "no-snowboarding" policies by Ski Utah and Life Elevated disenfranchises Utah residents and tourists alike. Why does a place that welcomed the world with the Olympics not allow snowboarding at all of its resorts? Why can't our own Gold medalist Sage Kotsenburg not ride at Alta or Deer Valley? Could you imagine the ski associations of Colorado or California promoting a "no-snowboarding" policy? Why does ours?
Alta operates on USFS public land and a few private individuals should not be allowed to exclude snowboarding based solely on animus. The USFS is already on record in support of snowboarding. When a similar battle was being waged at Aspen regarding their "no-snowboarding" policy in the late 90s, Erik Martin, a White River National Forest representative said "[For SkiCo] to not allow snowboarding, you'd have to have a very strong rational, say a safety or operational issue. If it is not in those categories it is kind of hard to justify."
Shortly thereafter, Aspen opened their slopes and facilities to snowboarding without incident. Alta's USFS operating permit clearly states that "the lands and waters covered by this permit shall remain open to the public for all lawful purposes". Snowboarding is lawfully permitted on USFS land and Alta needs to open its doors to snowboarding.
Snowboarding isn't any more dangerous than skiing. The National Ski Areas Association, of which Alta is a member, reports "that alpine skiers are three times more likely to be involved in a collision with other people than snowboarders." Snowboarding does not present any unusual safety issues at any of the other ski areas that operate on USFS land, so what really makes Alta so different?
The facts are that snowboarding has been proven safe, does not harm the snow and that allowing snowboarding does not lead to sledding, tubing or snowmobiling at USFS permitted ski resorts. Did you know that a snowboard is classified as a type of alpine ski? Mono skis, telemark skis, teleboards and snow blades are also classified as alpine skis and all are allowed at Alta — why isn't a snowboard?
Snowboarding deserves better from the ski community. I believe snowboarding rejuvenated skiing at a time when skiing needed it most. Skiing has been around for thousands of years and modern skiing hundreds of years, but it took snowboarding less than 20 years to figure out that wider widths ride powder better and that different sidecuts and lengths can actually improve your riding and skiing.
Snowboarding is responsible for terrain parks and halfpipes — both of which are becoming increasingly popular with skiers and are now even Olympic sports for skiers. Snowboarding has undeniably contributed positively to the sport of skiing and skiers should welcome snowboarders on the slopes of Alta and Deer Valley.
Forrest Gladding is the Vice President for Wasatch Equality. Wasatch Equality hopes to ride, ski and share smiles with friends at all Utah Resorts in the future. Wasatch Equality encourages everyone to check out the website WasatchEquality.org.

Read more at http://www.ksl.com/?...G029OIV4Mw4M.99
This post has been edited by Skiing#1: 11 February 2014 - 01:04 PM
#23
Posted 11 February 2014 - 02:15 PM
https://www.youtube....TimeQueenOfRome
#24
Posted 11 February 2014 - 08:15 PM
This post has been edited by boardski: 11 February 2014 - 08:24 PM
#25
Posted 11 February 2014 - 11:36 PM
DonaldMReif, on 11 February 2014 - 02:15 PM, said:
You have never done AltaBird. They won't let you through the Baldy-Loaf gate. There is a shack there and you have to scan a ticket to be let through. The way to cross as a boarder is to hike Baldy (about an hour) or to take the high baldy traverse (sucks a lot).
#26
Posted 01 April 2014 - 11:09 AM
US Forest Service Asking To Dismiss Lawsuit Against Alta
(KUTV) The U.S. Forest Service is asking a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit against Alta Ski Resort.
A group of snowboarders filed suit against Alta back in January, claiming the resort’s ban on snowboarding is unconstitutional.
In a motion filed with the court, the Forest Service says Alta’s approved operating plan gives the resort the right to exclude any “skiing device” deemed a risk, harmful to snow quality, or not consistent with its business decisions.
The Forest Service also argues that due to federal immunity, the court does not have jurisdiction to hear the case.
#27
Posted 01 April 2014 - 11:10 AM
Feds want Alta snowboarding lawsuit dismissed
SALT LAKE CITY — The U.S. Forest Service has asked a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit filed over Alta ski resort’s snowboarding ban.
In court papers filed late Monday in U.S. District Court here, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for Utah asked a judge to dismiss the case. The government says it has sovereign immunity and the group Wasatch Equality has “failed to state a claim on which relief can be granted” under the Fifth Amendment right to due process.
Read the U.S. Forest Service filing here.
In the filing, the federal government also said it has discretion about what activities can take place on public lands.
“For example, the United States may decide to allow fishing within a wildlife refuge, but it may choose to limit particular waters within that refuge only to fly fishing, which necessarily excludes other type of fishing,” assistant U.S. Attorney Jared Bennett wrote.
Wasatch Equality is suing Alta ski resort and the federal government over its snowboarding ban, claiming it violates their rights to equal protection under the U.S. Constitution. In a filing last week, Alta said snowboarders are not a protected class of people.
A hearing in the case is expected in the coming weeks.
This post has been edited by Skiing#1: 01 April 2014 - 11:11 AM
#28
Posted 01 April 2014 - 11:12 AM
#30
Posted 01 April 2014 - 09:52 PM
ALTA — A group of snowboarders filed a lawsuit in January claiming Alta discriminates against them while operating on federal property.
But this week, the Forest Service sided with Alta and filed court papers asking a judge to dismiss this lawsuit.
At Alta Tuesday, you'd have a tough time finding someone not using words like epic and gnarly.
"The best winter conditions we've had all year,” Draper resident Tom Folmsbee said.
The snow was coming down Tuesday and skiers loved it, but only skiers could enjoy it.
"You know, it's a public area, but it's privately owned,” Folmsbee said.
Folmsbee has skied Alta for 30 years and said he wouldn't care if snowboarders were allowed.
In U.S. District Court Monday, though, the Forest Service agreed with Alta, filing a request to dismiss a lawsuit brought by snowboarders saying they "have failed to show that the federal defendants’ treatment of them was irrational."
The attorney representing the snowboarders released a statement, saying:
"We believe that Alta's and the Forest Service's motions mischaracterize our complaint, confuse applicable law, and entirely avoid certain key issues."
For skiers Tuesday, though, the lawsuit was all "court stuff," and on a snow day like this, it was the farthest thing from their minds.
"There's really no animosity there,” Folmsbee said. “It's just the snow, the people, the kindness of the whole area. It's just fun."
The attorney for the snowboarders said they would file a response to keep the case going. They also said that when it goes to court, it'll be hard for the other side to explain why this isn't discrimination.
The Forest Service, the U.S. Attorney's Office and Alta ski resort declined to comment Tuesday, saying they will after it's all settled.
#32
Posted 11 August 2014 - 08:12 PM
SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — A reignited culture clash between snowboarders and skiers didn't get an immediate resolution Monday after boarders suing one of the last ski resorts in the country to prohibit their hobby argued in a Utah courtroom that the ban is discriminatory and based on outdated stereotypes.
U.S. District Judge Dee Benson didn't rule on the resort's request to throw out the lawsuit, and there's no deadline for him to do so.
The Alta ski area, which sits on mostly federally owned land in the mountains east of Salt Lake City, said a snowboarder-free mountain is safer for skiers. The sport is a choice so boarders shouldn't get special protection under the Constitution, resort attorney Robert Rice argued.
Alta says it is a private business and its permit with the U.S. Forest Service allows it to restrict ski devices it deems risky. Resort attorneys contend snowboarders can be dangerous because their sideways stance leaves them with a blind spot.
But snowboarders claim the resort bans them because it doesn't like their baggy clothes, overuse of words like "gnarly" and "radical," and perceived risky behavior on the slopes.
"This case is not about equipment, it's not about skiing and snowboarding," attorney Jon Schofield argued. "It's about deciding you don't like a group of people, you don't want to associate with that group of people, and you're excluding them."
Under questioning from the judge, Schofield conceded that there is little legal precedent for the case but said the lawsuit should have a chance to be heard.
Outside the courthouse, plaintiff Rick Alden said the ban inflames tensions between skiers and snowboarders in a way that doesn't exist elsewhere.
Ten years ago, Alden said an Alta ski patrol officer used an expletive toward him in front of his then-12-year-old son when Alden tried to cross onto public land leased by the resort without using Alta's chairlift, something he thought was legal.
"It sounds silly to come here and try and argue about a different way to recreate, but at the end of the day there really are people who are hurting by just simply being talked bad about," Alden said.
The Forest Service agrees with the resort about the risks of snowboarding and says the suit could open up the floodgates for people who don't like recreational rules on public lands, including sometimes controversial all-terrain vehicle laws.
The four plaintiffs bought tickets to Alta knowing they would be turned away and could then sue, which they did in January. One even sneaked onto a lift using "split boards" — a snowboard that resembles skis — but was intercepted and escorted down the mountain.
Two other U.S. resorts, both on private land, ban snowboarding: Deer Valley, also in Utah, and Mad River Glen in Vermont.
This post has been edited by Skiing#1: 11 August 2014 - 08:12 PM
#33
Posted 12 August 2014 - 07:46 AM
Utah ski resort Alta seeks to uphold ban on snowboarders
Courts » Attorney says ski resort has unfair bias that may violate the 14th Amendment.
By Tom Harvey
| The Salt Lake Tribune
First Published Aug 11 2014 06:53 pm • Last Updated Aug 11 2014 10:11 pm
The Alta Ski Resort bans snowboarders not for any rational reason but because the operators think they’re rude and obnoxious. For that reason, snowboarders deserve protection under the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, which historically has been used on cases involving discrimination based on race, gender and sexual orientation.
That was the crux of the argument Monday in federal court where snowboarders are trying to keep their lawsuit against the Utah ski resort from getting tossed out of court.
But attorneys for the resort and the Forest Service argued that the plaintiffs, a group of snowboarders who claim they were unfairly turned back when they tried to board Alta lifts, didn’t meet the thresholds for suing under the 14th Amendment, part of which seeks to guarantee basic rights under the nation’s laws for all citizens.
U.S. District Judge Dee Benson heard oral arguments Monday over Alta’s motion asking him to dismiss the case that was filed in January.
Robert Rice, an attorney for Alta Ski Lifts Co. that operates the resort, told Benson the snowboarders were trying to bend the protections of the U.S. Constitution too far by saying it applied to "people who chose one form of entertainment over another."
"The 14th Amendment does not contain a right to snowboard," he said, pointing out that anyone can strap on skis and buy a lift ticket because it’s only certain equipment that’s not allowed on the slopes.
The resort, one of Utah’s most popular, made a "rational" decision to exclude snowboards as part of a business plan aimed at attracting a certain clientele and for safety and terrain concerns, said Rice.
An attorney for the Forest Service, which issues operating permits for the resort’s public lands, said allowing the lawsuit to proceed could open up federal courts to a "flood of lawsuits" by people seeking approval for certain activities on federal lands, such a four-wheeler owners wanting access to the restricted Slick Rock Trail at Moab.
That would "make the courts the ultimate decider of what activities are allowed on federal lands," Bennett said.
But Jonathan Schofield, an attorney for the snowboarders, told Benson that his clients were not asserting a right to snowboard but rather to equal protection under the laws and in their treatment by the Forest Service.
"It’s about deciding you don’t like a group of people," he said, referring to attitudes about snowboarders who have a reputation among skiers as "riff-raff" and "dirt bags" on the slopes.
Schofield said Alta had no rational reason for the prohibition, citing a claim that snowboarders have a blind spot because of how they are attached to their boards. But he pointed out skiers are allowed to ski backward.
"All these reasons are pure pretext," said Schofield, citing a "private bias" by the owners and operators. "It just comes down to who they don’t want on the mountain."
Benson appeared skeptical that the claims would fit under the 14th Amendment, pressing Schofield several times to come up with a similar previous case. Schofield admitted his case was unusual but argued there are similar ones that might stretch the 14th Amendment to cover the snowboarders’ concerns.
Alta and Deer Valley in Utah and Mad River Glen in Vermont are the only resorts in the United States that prohibit snowboarders. But Alta is the only one that operates on public land, the lawsuit says.
Benson took the motion to dismiss under advisement. He gave no indication of when he might rule.
tharvey@sltrib.com
This post has been edited by Skiing#1: 12 August 2014 - 07:48 AM
#34
Posted 23 September 2014 - 09:08 PM
Judge dismisses lawsuit demanding snowboarders access to Alta Ski Resort
SALT LAKE CITY — Snowboarders don't have a constitutional right to the slopes of Alta Ski Resort, a federal judge ruled Tuesday.
U.S. District Judge Dee Benson rejected arguments from four snowboarders and a group called Wasatch Equality that Alta's arrangement with the U.S. Forest Service requires it to comply with the equal protection guarantees in the 14th Amendment.
In throwing out the lawsuit, Benson said the plaintiffs made no allegation and presented no evidence that the Forest Service had anything to do with the Little Cottonwood Canyon resort's ban on snowboards.
"The decision was Alta’s, and Alta’s alone, operating as a private business. The Forest Service did not encourage the rule, discourage the rule, agree with the rule, or disagree with the rule; nor was the Forest Service consulted on the appropriateness of the rule," the judge wrote.
Alta and the Forest Service asked Benson to toss the lawsuit because the Constitution doesn't guarantee anyone the right to snowboard.
Benson dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning the plaintiffs can't refile it in federal court. They could appeal the decision to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver.
The snowboarders' attorney, Jonathan Schofield, said they're evaluating the court's ruling and their appeal options.
"We continue to believe that the case has merit," Schofield said, "and regardless of the ultimate outcome, we hope Alta and the Forest Service will voluntarily reconsider their policy and allow skiers and snowboarders access to public lands."
The resort operates under a Forest Service permit on 2,130 acres — 1,802 acres or 85 percent of which is on public lands.
Schofield also argued that Alta bans snowboarders simply because it finds them obnoxious and doesn't like them. He said the case isn't about equipment or skiing or snowboarding but whether a group of people are being treated differently.
Benson said those allegations were based on second- and third-hand hearsay from YouTube videos with virtually no direct evidence linking Alta management to hostility toward snowboarders.
"It is undeniable that Alta’s snowboard policy bans only snowboards from Alta, not people. It is an equipment restriction only," he wrote.
Benson said the case failed because there is no law to support it, and the plaintiffs' view of the 14th Amendment is "misplaced and mistaken."
"The equal protection clause is not a general fairness law that allows everyone who feels discriminated against to bring an action in federal court," he wrote.
"There are many forums plaintiffs can resort to in an attempt to accomplish their goal of snowboarding down the Baldy Chutes at Alta. Seeking an injunction from this court is not one of them."
Acting U.S. Attorney for Utah Carlie Christensen said she was pleased that Benson found the federal government has the discretion to make decisions on public lands use.
"Land management agencies simply could not function if every land-use decision gave rise to an equal protection claim under the Constitution," Christensen said in a statement.
This post has been edited by Skiing#1: 23 September 2014 - 09:09 PM
#35
Posted 23 September 2014 - 09:13 PM
Judge rejects snowboarders’ suit over ban from Alta
Judge rules federal court is not the right forum for plaintiffs’ argument.
By Tom Harvey
The Salt Lake Tribune
First Published 7 hours ago • Updated 1 hour ago
A federal judge on Tuesday dismissed snowboarders’ claims that Alta Ski Resort banned them because of stereotypes that they are "undesirable people with obnoxious habits and characteristics."
Instead, U.S. District Judge Dee Benson said there are rational reasons for Alta to ban snowboarding, one of only three resorts to do so in the United States.
Benson wrote in a 30-page opinion that federal court was not the right arena for the snowboarders to argue they should be allowed on the Utah resort’s famed runs such as Baldy Chutes.
"There are many forums plaintiffs can resort to in an attempt to accomplish their goal of snowboarding down the Baldy Chutes at Alta," Benson wrote in his decision. "Seeking an injunction from this court is not one of them."
The boarders had sued Alta and the U.S. Forest Service in January, arguing they were being irrationally discriminated against and deserved protection under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which historically has been used on cases involving discrimination based on race, gender and sexual orientation.
Jon Schofield, a Salt Lake City attorney who represented by snowboarders, said he and his clients were evaluating a possible appeal, but "we hope that Alta and the USFS will voluntarily reconsider their policy and provide skiers and snowboarders equal access to public land."
Drew Hicken, a snowboarder who was a plaintiff in the lawsuit, said that Alta allows all kinds of equipment on the slopes but not those of snowboarders, who make up 35 percent of ski resorts’ customers.
"It looks a little goofy if you’re a ski resort allowing mono skiers, telemarkers, teleboarders — which are on one ski as well — snow blades that you don’t use ski poles . . . and every other device under the sun except snowboards," he said.
Rick Thaler, a Salt Lake City attorney who represented Alta, said the ban on ’boarders "was simply a business decision that Alta made in order to provide a unique recreational experience for its customers. Its customers have loyally supported this decision for many years."
Benson ruled there was no basis for the lawsuit’s claim that the ban was "based on Alta’s belief that snowboarders are undesirable people with obnoxious habits and characteristics."
This post has been edited by Skiing#1: 23 September 2014 - 09:16 PM
#38
Posted 24 September 2014 - 03:32 PM
Peter Pitcher, on 24 September 2014 - 04:27 AM, said:
It likely wouldn't be as drastic at Alta since there are other large areas very close.
#39
Posted 19 April 2016 - 05:45 PM
http://www.ksl.com/?...alta-ski-resort
2 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users