5 replies to this topic

[ssstturns]

The other day I was thinking it would sure be nice if say the US National Forest Service placed a few lifts from highway areas up to areas that we backcountry users always climb to. I'm an older mostly resort skier myself though increastingly skin up slopes into the backcountry because powder seems to disappear so quickly these days at resorts and in the spring corn is often an outstanding experience here in the Sierra. A lot of places bc users go are in designated wildernesses. I'll elliminate the notion of putting any lifts in those places. Rather just consider places that are ordinary national forest lands, where a highway is conveniently close, where there are known good backcountry slopes to ski.

So for example let them put a cheap fixed grip lift from down at the bottom of highway US395 about 7000 feet up to the top plateau of McGee mountain elevation 10200 feet. So over 3000 feet of expert vertical over a horizontal map distance of about a mile and one half.

http://www.topozone.com/map.asp?z=11&n=416...d83&layer=DRG25

Now here is the deal. In order to use the lift, a person would have to show a bc photo id card showing they had passed a bc and avy test within say a two year period and had standard bc gear like transceivers etc with them. There would be a single person controlling the lift at the bottom with a video feed showing the top. Each chair would have an integrated audio mike that a person on each chair could turn on if necessary to communicate to the attendant at the bottom. Though this sounds hi-tech believe me I am talking something way simple here. There would be no insurance issues as each person receiving a bc id card would have had to sign off on accepting all legal responsibilities. If someone wanted a rescue or search it would be up to the individual to pay for such. Pretty much the same responsibility that we who use the bc today have. In other words just because the forest service provided access would in no way make them responsible just like it is when a person steps out of their car and starts skinning up a mountain.

In order to pay for the lift attendant and lift, users would have to pay some nominal fee per ride like $5 that might be keyed to their card as a charge. The lift would only operate when snow conditions were viable and avalanche dangers were reduced enough that at least some routes down were possibly ok but in any case that was each individuals responsibility to figure out whether that meant digging a pit or relying on some report or whatever. Such lifts might operate at just an hour or three at most on given days say when those operating the lift felt conditions would be worthy. They might post the latest information on when such a lift might run during a given day on the internet, at forest service stations, and on a designated recorded phone number.

...David

This post has been edited by ssstturns: 23 January 2006 - 07:38 PM

[poloxskier]

So somewhat similar to what silverton does without guides?

[ssstturns]

poloxskier, on Jan 23 2006, 07:41 PM, said:

So somewhat similar to what silverton does without guides?

Quite so. In fact the idea came to me after I was reading a recent report on current goings ons at the resort and thought there might be a place for even less structure. ...David

[poloxskier]

This April Silverton is going to something more like that, depending on conditions you will have the option of going without a guide if you choose.

[liftmech]

Devil's advocate position:

What about liability? You would have to draw up a bombproof waiver and make signing it a condition of riding the lifts. I'm quite certain there are lawyers who would argue and perhaps win a suit claiming that since you provided a way up the mountain, you should make it safe for the way down. I don't agree with that position, but it is a mindset held by many.

The Forest Service isn't in the business of running lifts. There would most likely have to be a subcontractor or concessionaire operating the lift, along with all the details that would require.

Popular backcountry areas obviously have many users, who would most likely be against the whole idea.

Just some points to ponder.

[coskibum]

liability aside, lifts cost a lot of $$$ even for used ones. The forest service doesn't have that much $$$. but it would be cool.

somethings are better left to 'earning your turns' though