I almost got nailed by two skiers this weekend....

bikehikeskifish said:

I have two NH lawyer acquaintances who are avid cyclists and skiers and if I run into them skiing this weekend, as I do most, I'll ask....

Click to expand...

If you run into them you'd better hire your own lawyer quick ... then call the medics!

Grouseking, I think the incident described in the original post is a microcosm of everyday society. You're out doing something you enjoy, not hurting anyone, and, snap, just like that, a couple of jerks can ruin (or at least lessen) your good time. It can be an obnoxious drunk, someone blasting his (probably crappy) music, a less than courteous driver, or in this case two ill-mannered skiers. These people think the world revolves around them, and no amount of parsing of legal documents will change their behavior. Whenever these people have their selfish actions challenged, the response is always something like, "...loosen up man, we're just having fun..." They're too stupid/selfish to know/care that their good time is ruining yours. You have every right to be ticked off, and don't let anyone convince you otherwise. But take satisfaction in knowing that you had to be with them for only about 5 seconds, but they have to spend the rest of their lives with themselves. Miserable company, indeed.

Next time something like that happens, say/do something nice to the next stranger you see. It will defuse your anger like you wouldn't believe.

Falling is part of skiing.

If I see you on the trails, I promise to smile as I fall past.

grouseking said:

I guess if this is widely accepted, maybe I'll start hiking down the middle of ski trails. Better views that way....

Click to expand...

Expect to get sprayed with snow!! (especially if I see you! )

TDawg said:

Expect to get sprayed with snow!! (especially if I see you! )

Click to expand...

I weigh as much as a small moose, and am about as agile as one too....so if you run into me, be prepared for broken bones!

grouseking

"I was curious about who would be held responsible if you had been injured? Could the skiers be held liable for your medical bills if you were injured? "
(Sorry, never have figured out the quote thing)

Not to be taken as legal advice, but fyi, many states have "skier laws" that protect resorts and other skiers from liability based on "assumption of the risk" which includes assuming the risk of the terrain and other skiers who may run into you. Unless the conduct is grossly negligent or beyond the scope of normal activity (drinking and skiing, for example), there usually won't be any liability.

A little research on the net should give you a pretty good picture of the law in your state. I am aware of a number of suits where skiers have run into trees, lift towers, or been hit by other skiers and sued the resort or the other skier and lost on appeal based on assumption of the risk. Some states, like Colorado have skier responsibility laws as well that do impose liability for deliberately reckless conduct. Where the skiers on the trail would fit into this picture would be a factual issue. If the trail was closed to skiers, then I would think that alone could be a determinative factor. If not, then the answer would be more situationally based.

Just a heads up if we should ever get some real snow this winter, be careful hiking up the Kinsman Ridge Trail from the Cannon Tram parking lot, as three years ago the State of NH thinned out lots of trees to open up a sizeable portion across the steep section of the KRT for glades skiing. Three winters ago, when we had more natural snow, there were lots of near collisions between skiers and hikers on this section. And, because the State opened up this area to skiing, I doubt that a skier would be held liable for a collision, unless the skier was found to be reckless, just as on any area ski trail.

I guess that I am ambivalent about who is right or wrong, just as I am reluctant to get run over by a speeding car just to prove a point that I had the right-of-way in a cross walk (in Massachusetts, anyway). Watching for out-of-control skiers is just as important to hikers as watching out for falling rocks, avalanches, or any other hazards in the mountains.

While this incident was unfortunate and all you have to remember that it is winter and a lot of people like to use trails for skiing. They are all purpose trails, not just deligated for hiking. Concidering the cost of a ski pass these days, its much cheaper to hike or skin up these trails and ski down. I myself am starting to get into this type of backcountry skiing for the simple fact its free. Unless someone starts marking these trails as "Hiking Only" or something to that effect, then enforcing this rule, they are free to all to use as they please.
Something else i was thinking about, you should have had plenty of warning someone was coming down the mountain ahead of you. Its not like skiers come down silently with the brushing aside of snow. Just a thought....

Tim Seaver said:

I have to respectfully disagree with that, simply because many times it is simply not possible to "step aside". I will do my best to be alert for the presence of skiers, but when a skier chooses to ski down a narrow trail at high speed with short sight distances that is heavily used by hikers, the responsibility lies soley with the person barreling downhill with long metal edged objects attached to his feet, IMHO. And I think if it ever came to a lawsuit by a hiker who was injured by a skier in this example, I can't see how the hiker would be liable in any way for not being able to "get out of the way" in time for an out of control skier.

Click to expand...

I'm with Tim on this - hikers on a hiking trail should not have to 'step aside' for skiers. There's a reason we have snowmobile trails, ski trails, hiking trails, etc. A multi-use area does not mean that all 3 uses are interchangeable on each trail.

Like Tim, I've have multiple near-misses with skiers on the Monroe trail at Camels Hump, and with snowboarders on the Long Trail on the eastern side of Mansfield. There's a section of the LT that boarders use as a half-pipe, and if you're a hiker on snowshoes there's almost no where to escape - consequently, I never hike that side of the mountain in winter any longer.

So you mean that if I am walking on a ‘hiking’ trail and a cross country skier comes up behind me and wants to pass or if they come down the trail toward me, I’m not obligated to step aside? I’m supposed to stand there and force them off the trail on general principles? I don’t think so.

Personally, yielding the right of way is like a lot of life’s circumstances; it depends. I’m going to yield to a skier coming downhill all the time unless there is nowhere for me to go in which case I’ll hold up my hands and yell for him to stop. Maybe I might have to brace for a collision but I’ll know he’s coming because in winter, particularly on trails where I suspect skiers would be present, I make it a point to keep my head up. Like Kevin, I’ll avoid trails where collisions are more likely. I went up Tecumseh a couple weeks ago but I went when the skiers would not be there. I started real early and got down before the lifts put skiers out onto the mountain. Conflict avoided.

Lots of people ski on the ‘hiking’ trails these days and even the hiker’s bible, the WMG, states that. It’s just something hikers and skiers have to get used to. The key is to use the trails responsibly and safely no matter what your mode of travel is.

JohnL

Pardon my rant, please ...

Unless someone starts marking these trails as "Hiking Only" or something to that effect, then enforcing this rule, they are free to all to use as they please.

Click to expand...

I must respectfully -- but vigorously -- disagree with this statement, especially the "to use as they please" part. Neither skiers nor hikers (nor anyone else) are free to use shared trails strictly as they please.

All are under considerable social, if not legal obligation to be very aware of the impact their own activity has on others and adjust their behavior accordingly. That impact includes the threats their activity may pose to safety, especially the safety of others. All have an obligation to behave responsibly so as to minmize those threats. Common sense dictates that the greater the safety threat your activity poses, the heavier your burden of obligation. Period.

The situation becomes particularly acute on narrow trails (no maneuvering room) with short sight distances and blind spots. Under those conditions it is irresponsible to the point of being reckless or outright negligent to ski, sled, snowboard, glissade or butt-slide downhill in a manner that exceeds one's capacity to literally stop or veer away on a dime in order to avoid a collision with another trail user. No if, ands or buts about it. It is your responsibility alone to always be in control.

Likewise, it is both supremely foolish and irresponsible for a slower moving user to obstinately refuse to give "track" if he sees the other guy bearing down on him and has a safe chance to get out of the way.

... you should have had plenty of warning someone was coming down the mountain ahead of you. Its not like skiers come down silently with the brushing aside of snow.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but this is quite wrong, also.

Now, I have no particular sympathy for iPod users who block out the sounds of the world (by replacing them with other noise) as they walk. They are acting somewhat irresponsibly, I think, by impairing one of their senses. On the other hand, I suspect a lot of hikers (and skiers, etc.) are, like myself, naturally hearing impaired to one degree or another. So the noise skiers make -- whether it be the natural sound of their slats on snow or their shouts of warning or exuberant "whoopeeeees" -- is not sufficient to warn and protect me by avoiding collisions with them. At the least, I need good visual clues.

The old rule with visual warnings is this: If you can't make eye contact with the other guy, never assume he sees you and knows you are there.

G.

Is this not a lot like the hunters-and-hikers issue? Does it not also essentially come down finding responsible ways to have fun in shared space?

It's been pretty hashed out by now and neither Grumpy nor the Metsky camp are in error in their analyses (which also means that their points of view are not incompatible): this is a case of inappropriate skiing behavior in an increasingly crowded area, not a trespassing question (per se). Grumpy, you should (hopefully) feel no further need to defend your position, though you're obviously free to do so. These guys got in a little over their heads in a public area. I'm glad, incidentally, that no one was seriously hurt. Sherpa Kroto's experience, while predictable on a statistical level, was a disturbing event when it hit this particular community.

My two cents....

By the way, I love the eye-catching headline; good drama!

--M.

Is this not a lot like the hunters-and-hikers issue?

Click to expand...

In the sense that one of the parties has a potentially deadly weapon, and the other is potentially a sitting duck, there certainly are some parallels.

Skiers have the responsibility to avoid the downhill skier. Anyone who has skied at a downhill ski area would have a hard time not knowing these rules.

Skier's Responsibility code:


With that said. Any hiker, hiking up a trail, would be challenged to not hear a skiier coming down the hill with a fair amount of warning. A skiier will not have that same advantage of adavanced notice of an oncoming hiker. Given this, any hiker would be wise to attempt to remove themself from the likely path of an oncoming skier until they esablish eye contact.

Bobcat said:

With that said. Any hiker, hiking up a trail, would be challenged to not hear a skiier coming down the hill with a fair amount of warning. A skiier will not have that same advantage of adavanced notice of an oncoming hiker. Given this, any hiker would be wise to attempt to remove themself from the likely path of an oncoming skier until they esablish eye contact.

Click to expand...

I have kept silent up till now but I STRONGLY disagree with this above statement. The two times I have almost been collided into by a skier coming down a trail I was hiking up, I didn't hear them . . . actually one of the times I heard some noise uphill but thought it was just another hiker or group of hikers. Both times, it wasn't until they were barrelling down towards me that I saw them and flung myself out of the way.

Also, frequently while hiking I am looking at the trail or my feet, it hurts my neck and causes me to trip and fall to be looking uphill all the time. So, please don't assume that one would have to be "challenged" to not hear a skier . . . what makes skiing noise so obvious from just general people noise (unless they make an effort to identify their descent?

sli74

Skiers have the responsibility to avoid the downhill skier

Click to expand...

As I said, ultimately, it is the resposibility of ther skier to avoid anyone downhill;be it a skiier or a hiker. I personally pay very close attention to my surroundings when I hike. Unless it is very windy; it would be hard not to hear a skier cruising down the hill.

Bobcat said:

As I said, ultimately, it is the resposibility of ther skier to avoid anyone downhill;be it a skiier or a hiker. I personally pay very close attention to my surroundings when I hike. Unless it is very windy; it would be hard not to hear a skier cruising down the hill.

Click to expand...

Unless one is deaf -and I do know some deaf hikers. I think the skier is responsible because he is uphill.

Grouseking- I'm curious if you ever did notify the WV resort. I personally feel that putting a "Hikers Only" sign will attract more skiers to try the trail.

I'll point out that this weekend I was skiing down Livermore Road (skate skiing) in the skate lane and staying right, and came around a slight bend to see a hiker, walking up the skate lane, or possibly on the tracks themselves without snowshoes, with his iPod earbuds in. I said 'hi' and kept going. He stepped outside the tracks when he saw me.

I would never say it was a close one or anything. Not sure if he could hear me or not. It was above the WVAIA trails, where one does not typically encounter foot traffic.

Livermore, being a green trail, often has newbie skiers on it, and they are often 3 or 4 wide and stumbling over themselves, so I am always cautious, even on such a wide open and not-very-steep trail.

On the few spots where the corners are blind, I always yell "TRACK" on the approach, just to warn folks... assuming (a mistake on my part) that they can actually hear me... over Eminem...

Tim


Tim

bikehikeskifish makes a good point... on nordic gear, the downhill skiier usually has the "right of passage", owing to the generally less maneuverablility. On shared trails, hikers are typically advised not to walk in the track where possible.

Man, this thread has taken on a life of its own!

I had to call the Pemi ranger station for another matter and in passing asked if the Livermore Road & Trail are restricted to hikers in the winter. She assured me that hikers have every right to hike the trail as do skiers. She just added that we should make every attempt to stay off their tracks if at all possible, which I’m positive that any hiker here would do anyway.