Riding out of bounds, “sidecountry,” and “slackcountry” have all become more popular in recent years, and some skiers and riders make the mistake of thinking these areas are safer than the backcountry. They aren’t.
The quote from legendary ski film, “The Blizzard of Aaahs,” was right on when it was released in 1988. “Liability laws had driven us from the United States—land of the lawyer, home of the insurance company—to France. Here, the concept of recovering money for ski injuries is laughed at.” However, times have changed in America. In fact, you could argue that nowadays ski area boundaries in the U.S. are going in just the opposite direction from where they were when Greg Stump and Scot Schmidt exposed North American skiers to Chamonix in this film classic. Instead of U.S. resorts closing their boundaries for liability reasons, they’re installing access gates to the backcountry and letting customers shred out-of-bounds as they wish. The evidence is everywhere, with labyrinths of ski and snowboard tracks leading out of bounds at Jackson Hole, East Vail, Breckenridge, Alta, Snowbird, Mt. Baker, and now even Squaw Valley.
Do all these tracks mean it’s safer to ride O.B. (out of bounds)? Not at all. In fact, there’s a movement afoot in the resort world to dispel this very misperception: to ban the word “sidecountry” because it implies something between “resort” and “backcountry,” where it’s wilder than skiing inside the resort, but purportedly safer than skiing in the truly uncontrolled backcountry. There’s even an idea being floated by the National Ski Areas Association to call these points “exit gates” instead of “access gates,” to reinforce the idea that you’re clearly leaving the safety of the ski resort when you cross that line.
Misperceptions about out-of-bounds skier traffic (“hey, there are tracks, so it must be safe”) are similar to the misperceptions about tree skiing (“hey, it must be safe over here in these nice aspens”). Lots of tracks—and lots of trees—often give riders a false sense of security that the terrain is less likely to slide. In reality, however, if the skiing is sweet, then it’s probably too good to be true. Generally speaking, trees are only safer if they’re too tight to ski. Likewise, skier traffic only reduces the avalanche hazard if the snow has been beaten down to hardpack. Heck, even hardpack can slide under the right conditions (usually spring “wet slab” conditions).
Why is it that resorts are opening their boundaries even though it’s not any safer out there? Because the laws have changed. The Colorado Ski Safety Act, enacted in 1979, clearly defines the responsibilities of both the skier and the resort. The resort is only responsible for avalanche control inside the ski area boundary. Once you pass through that boundary, you’re on your own. This law has been tested and upheld, most notably at Arapahoe Basin where a federal judge summarily dismissed a lawsuit nearly 20 years ago involving a fatality in a well-known O.B. zone called the Beavers. Many other states have followed suit with their own versions of the law.
As anticipated, with more access gates, the O.B. fatality rate has also gone up. Recent examples include avalanche deaths in well-known O.B. stashes at East Vail, Stevens Pass, Jackson Hole’s Pucker Face, and Telluride. Unfortunately, at least for backcountry riders, as more of this terrain gets skied and more fatalities happen, there’s more pressure for the ski areas to expand into this terrain and control it. Telluride and Breckenridge have expanded into formerly heavily skied O.B. terrain. Mt. Rose opened its exciting Chutes back in 2004. A-Basin will be expanding into the Beavers in 2016.
This brings up a final question: assuming you know you’re on your own when you ski out of bounds, how safe are you when you’re skiing in-bounds? In the past 5-10 years, we’ve seen avalanche fatalities in-bounds at a rate unheard of in the previous decade, with fatalities at Snowbird, Jackson, Squaw, A-Basin, and even Winter Park. With the explosion of digital beacons, airbags, fat, rockered skis, hybrid alpine/AT boots, and beefy AT bindings like the Marker Duke and Salomon Guardian, skiers are itching to ski powder the minute the resort is open for business. And more and more, resorts have been accused of opening terrain before it’s stabilized and ready for the public. Avalanche pros acknowledge that snow science is inexact and the risk is never zero. They’re increasingly encouraging resort riders to pack their avy equipment when skiing in-bounds, mainly on steep, ungroomed terrain on powder days. Is this necessary?
Times have truly changed since Schmidt, Plake, and Hattrup packed their bags (and their one-piece suits) and left Squaw to ski the unregulated off-piste couloirs in Cham. So here’s a quick primer on the new rules of engagement.
For more infoor more info and training videos, visit www.backcountryaccess.com/education.