Feb 16 Crystal Mountain

Hey JP, good points all, and without the 'I'm gnarlier than you' attitude exhibited by some (my biggest objection most of the time), even though you are way gnarlier than I!



As I stated previously I agree in principle but abhor the attitude and smugness that arises in these discussions sometimes. It makes me want to advocate for the other side regardless of right or wrong.

People skiing in front of us happens, they rarely look up and/or yield, but we still have a responsibility to avoid them if we're overtaking, but that's splitting hairs.

I'll leave my pontificating with the thought that many of us who ski a lot don't like many of the behaviors we see from those less experienced. It's just part of the resort skiing experience, and yeah, it can be a real drag. Last but not least (and I don't mean to get all biblical on y'all but I like the quote), let he who is without sin cast the first stone. That's really the bottom line for me.

And, on a lighter note, some Video from yesterday

Oft- I fully agree and understand that the person overtaking has the responsibility to be in control enough to avoid the person below, it's just that the point from the responsibility code I quoted isn't often brought up, so I thought I'd raise it in this instance, because no-one crossing looks up.

If someone is getting far to rad through the chute above to adjust their line a few feet to avoid a collision with someone polling across the basin, maybe they are pushing it a bit too far.

On the other hand, aren't these areas the best place to be pushing yourself?? There, just talked myself through another reason to close the traverse: provide proving ground for the next generation!

I've used the gate plenty to access the trees just beyond the gate, but I'd give that up in a heartbeat if it meant I never saw the full-basin traverse again!

Oh, and CMSkier, thanks for the vid, looks awesome, wish I was there instead of here!

I use it to get those trees a lot too. I love that little area and used to poach it a good bit and probably still would if it were closed. I have to wonder though, if they closed the gate would it really end the traverse across the bowl? I suspect - as I mentioned before - that there would stil be those that would ski the south side of the throne, drop in at the saddle or Sasquatch or even come out of the lines off the top of the king and still take that high right line in search of those few more turns.

I'm certainly not saying that's good, or right or anything of the sort, just that I don't think closing the gate would accomplish much more than stopping the traverse only as far as maybe the saddle. Maybe I'm just old and cynical!

Kinda sorry sort of about this thread...not really...but I'd vote really big for J_Phillips one point - "Before this, the lower gate was typically used to access the trees just beyond the rope, or the apron just below the east face of the throne, and typically ended when you lost enough vert that skiing fall-line to the bottom of A basin made going further not worth it. If it was still used this way, fine, but going all the way across is a newer phenomenon, and ridiculous.".....All I’ve ever wanted was a well reasoned purpose for the location and policy on openness of the gate and location of the rope line, the reasons should be totally obvious in their correctness....I dont traverse to the bottom of Braindamge from the low gate, I’m not that stupid – I’d definitely rather do it from the top, but I want those dang trees below the end of the Throne...put a permanent closure line down just passed the Trees and shoot anyone that is stupid enough to cross it....problem solved.