|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|04-04-2014 07:26 PM|
|SnowDogWax||Rational who needs rational, thats why we have attorney's…|
|04-04-2014 07:20 PM|
Just to be clear folks this is NOT a court decision. The snowboarders sued the gov; the gov responds. These quotes are just from the government attorney's response to the lawsuit. If the government had agreed with the snowboarders, the forest service would have likely just made Alta allow skiers.
Now the Court will review the arguments from both sides and make a decision. Believe me, just because the government pleadings claim the policy is rational does not automatically make it rational! The Court can still disagree.
Edited to add: yeah, what he said!
Originally Posted by jtg View Post
|04-04-2014 03:45 PM|
I don't buy the "just ride somewhere else" argument.
Alta is an amazing mountain, of which there are only a handful in any geographic area, and only a handful of areas that have comparable resorts. It's consistently rated as one of the top 5 resorts in North America on several different criteria, and often rated #1 in North America for snow quality.
"Keeping the skiers on that mountain" is a confusing one, because it's not like any other mountain doesn't have skiers as the majority, so I don't think it's to anyone's advantage.
Even though snowbird is next door, Alta averages 530" a year compared to snowbird's 459". The only place that gets more snow is Mt. Baker, and Baker snow is heavy wet shit in comparison. So not only do they basically get the most snow, but also the best snow. Snowboarders are also at an economic disadvantage because skiers get a pass that covers all of the terrain on both mountains.
So it's pretty much bullshit that they are denying access to public, national forest land, that is arguably the most desirable place on the continent for this recreational activity, over nothing more than petty snobbery.
Also, note that this is just the forest service backing Alta. The forest service are also defendants in the lawsuit. The snowboarders haven't lost yet.
|04-04-2014 03:06 PM|
Originally Posted by mhaas View Post
|04-04-2014 12:57 PM|
Originally Posted by hardasacatshead View Post
|04-04-2014 12:18 PM|
There are enough great mountains in Utah that surely it makes no difference if Alta opens to boarders or not. I'm picking up that this is a case of proving a point rather than the plaintiffs actually having a vested interest in the outcome.
At the end of the day Alta is losing money by reducing their potential customer base. Their loss. I'd probably boycott the joint anyway because if the cock bags running it are that old school and set in their ways, it's probably got a fucked vibe anyway.
|04-04-2014 09:55 AM|
Originally Posted by td.1000 View Post
|04-04-2014 09:42 AM|
"It demeans the Constitution to suggest that the amendment that protected the interests of former slaves during Reconstruction and James Meredith and the Little Rock Nine must be expanded to protect the interests of those who engage in a particularized winter sport"
I'm no politician, but isn't that basically saying the constitution is out-dated?
still don't get their argument tho. are they saying snowboarding is dangerous for skiers? shouldn't they have to prove that first? otherwise you're back at square one with that big ugly word called "prejudice"
|04-04-2014 08:36 AM|
Feds Back Alta's Snowboarding Ban
No snowboarding at Alta.
Feds Back Alta's Snowboarding Ban | News from the Field | OutsideOnline.com
|01-21-2014 05:07 PM|
Originally Posted by RightCoastShred View Post
Let skiers have Alta. It's one mountain, and it keeps the mountains we go to less crowded. Besides, who cares about one particular mountain (especially one so unremarkable as Alta) when there are hundreds of great mountains/resorts for us to enjoy in the US?
This is such a non-fucking-issue that it's almost laughable.
I'm actually jealous of those fighting for Alta to allow snowboarders though because they must not have any real problems in their life to focus on. Must be nice.
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|