Grouse 2010/11

The fact that you're so fixated on how bad grouse is is kinda funny. I mean really, who gives a fuck if grouse is worse, the more people that ski it the less you have to deal with. Are you trying to compensate for something by showing everyone how much better you are than them?

Also, bias.
 
man there is no better feeling than just getting up the mountain with your friends and catching some airs feeling some turns thats what skiings all about man you just gotta get out and find yourself and progress to new levels of progression and tricks and i love every minute of it i couldnt ask for anything more just the true soul of the sport buried deep within the powder and its just you and your friends you know thats what its all about its the best job in the world and i couldnt ask for anything more i mean you look at the progression of the trricks and the jumps its just always progressing toward progress and each year its something new just from the progression of technology and the tricks its the best job in the world just out with your friends skiing thats what its all about man i couldnt ask for anything more its the best job in the world man there is no better feeling than just getting up the mountain with

your friends and catching some airs feeling some turns thats what

skiings all about man you just gotta get out and find yourself and

progress to new levels of progression and tricks and i love every

minute of it i couldnt ask for anything more just the true soul of the

sport buried deep within the powder and its just you and your friends

you know thats what its all about its the best job in the world and i

couldnt ask for anything more i mean you look at the progression of the

trricks and the jumps its just always progressing toward progress and

each year its something new just from the progression of technology and

the tricks its the best job in the world just out with your friends

skiing thats what its all about man i couldnt ask for anything more its

the best job in the world man there is no better feeling than just getting up the mountain with

your friends and catching some airs feeling some turns thats what

skiings all about man you just gotta get out and find yourself and

progress to new levels of progression and tricks and i love every

minute of it i couldnt ask for anything more just the true soul of the

sport buried deep within the powder and its just you and your friends

you know thats what its all about its the best job in the world and i

couldnt ask for anything more i mean you look at the progression of the

trricks and the jumps its just always progressing toward progress and

each year its something new just from the progression of technology and

the tricks its the best job in the world just out with your friends

skiing thats what its all about man i couldnt ask for anything more its

the best job in the world man there is no better feeling than just getting up the mountain with

your friends and catching some airs feeling some turns thats what

skiings all about man you just gotta get out and find yourself and

progress to new levels of progression and tricks and i love every

minute of it i couldnt ask for anything more just the true soul of the

sport buried deep within the powder and its just you and your friends

you know thats what its all about its the best job in the world and i

couldnt ask for anything more i mean you look at the progression of the

trricks and the jumps its just always progressing toward progress and

each year its something new just from the progression of technology and

the tricks its the best job in the world just out with your friends

skiing thats what its all about man i couldnt ask for anything more its

the best job in the world
 
google image search: Grouse Mountain.
images

images

images

images

url

url

images

Yeah, sweet mountain Brah.
 
fuck i read half of that before realizing that you were repeating yourself.
but who cares, every mountain has pros and cons
 
cant handle my high action progressive retrospective of the factors pushing skiing today?

seriously though grouse isnt that bad when trint does the park, he had a sick mini setup at paradise going on. it was definitely shitloads better than what seymour had going on the ropetow park

i feel for the grouse crew though, sidecut is just a shit run to build a park on as its basically too steep and then too flat and then too steep again so almost all of the features are destined to suck and get rutted out and chopped up fast

if either mountain could maintain a sick ropetow park they would have my love, these 15 minute laps for two good features is what keeps pushing me back to skating
 
shit i posted that too early.
what i meant to say is that you can find what you want to find
there is no need to post stuff like that up and we know that you hate Grouse
and oh look seymour has a bear too!
mount-seymour06.jpg

can't we just all get along and have fun skiing wherever we do it?
 
Grouse's Bear is in a cage. They have a reindeer on a leash! ZipTrek, logger shows, computer-timers for their hiking trail, a wind-mill that serves no purpose but to suck in gas guzzling tourists, what-10 restaurants?, starbucks, theater in the sky, multiple over priced gift shops, a barbarically commercialized representation of first nations culture, a laughably incompetent ski patrol force, Santa Clause with an imported 25 person gospel choir...
I could go on, but I'll leave it at that. Grouse Mountain is a fake mountain for fake people. For Gordons and all their little Gordon Children.
I'm stoked to ski their Tram-Line this year, right after I ski Thrasher Creek.
 
I'm not here to get into a E-argument I just think that you don't lay out everything in an impartial way...
Both of Grouses bears mother were killed and were unable to survive on their own if they left out in the wild, so would you have preferred that they died instead? Grouse doesn't actually own the reindeer, its from a zoe if i believe correctly so otherwise it would be in the city (in an odd way by getting up the mountain it is more in it natural environment for a very brief time). Ziplining is a sustainable form of eco-tourism, Whistler does it as well and I don't see people hating on them for it?. By using a watch people are doing the same thing every day when they going hiking and check and better their times, the difference is pretty minimal besides the fact that you are then able to compete against fellow hikers. Isn't competition part of human nature?. The wind mill doesn't use any gas... It will provide 100% of grouses summer energy and 25% of its winter needs. So I guess its a bad thing to do something for the environment?. They actually just have 4 restaurants, which is only two more than Seymour and Grouse does market its self for summer as well as winter events and so they are able to create these higher end restaurants. From my understanding the starbucks is a completely different entitiy Every mountain has some form of retail or another.They use the Hiwuss house (First nations) as an educational tool to teach kids about first nations in the region (although i agree they do charge a redic amount for it). You have your own vendetta with the patrol so i won't even get into that. It is Christmas, please god don't tell me you're hating on Christmas.... Bother Mount Seymour and Cypress take roads to get up to their resorts instead of a tram line like Grouse. Not only is the road, salt and sand incredibly damaging for the Environment but is dangerous to the animals that get hit every year on the road (also to idiots that don't know how to drive in snow). Furthermore the amount of gas that every car uses to get up the mountain is ridiculous every day of the year averaging between an eighth or to a tenth of a tank which is quite odd when you were just complaining about the windmill being a gas guzzler.
Once again i'm not trying to start a fight i'm just recognizing the other side of the coin.
 
$250 for a seymour student seasons pass is pretty sick, you can almost buy two for the cost of a grouse y2play

i liked the grouse park setup last year and the vibe, but the lift lines suck so hard id rather spend half the money and ride seymour and maybe make a few trips up grouse rather than the other way around

ill wait until the season starts to pass judgement though
 
Not sure what you're trying to do here, but I don't think it's the brightest idea. You skied it, and got served. Ok it's a good area and you may have been justified from your point of view, but there's another side to it as well and at the end of the day you're just causing trouble. That doesn't end well for you, or the mountain.

You may think you're just hooking skiers up with a great stash, but you're also putting them in danger and encouraging the kind of behavior that got you kicked off the mountain in the first place. I say just take it maturely, and move on. Don't bother the subject any further, not going to help anyone.
 
First of all, people are going to ski out of bounds regardless of whether I provide map information or not. People continue to ski out of bounds at Grouse and they are better equipped and SAFER if they have extra knowledge about access and exit routes than if they do not have this information.
You seem to presume that being kicked off the mountain was the correct course of action. Do you ski Whistler? Do you ski Silver Star, Revelstoke, Big White, Kimberly, Kicking Horse, Seymour, or any number of other mountains in BC? In BC, the accepted standard is that you enter the backcountry at your own awareness and risk. Most resorts actually advertise their access to backcountry and out of bounds terrain. Grouse's actions were not consistent with this standard, and if you did your research or knew about search and rescue policy, you know would that GROUSE's actions are the ones that endanger skiers.
Search and Rescue policy is to NOT charge for rescue. If you followed the story from two years ago, you would have noticed that North Shore Rescue declined to attempt to charge us for rescue. Search and Rescue societies, such as the Coast Guard, do NOT charge for rescue because:
1. People who are in danger and need rescue may not call for rescue because they fear the financial burden and may instead die trying to exit on their own.
2. People who do NOT need rescue (such as myself during the Grouse incident) will not want to pay for rescue they do not need and will hide from search and rescue which will waste resources and which will endanger the searchers.
You can look up these FACTS on the North Shore Search and Rescue website.
Knowledge is power. Providing backcountry users with the right information enables them to make better decisions. If you had the right information, you might understand the hypocrisy in Grouse's actions. I hope this helped, but you might not appreciate it until you graduate from the rail garden and want to start exploring the actual mountain.

grahamcliff2.JPG


^ Just on the backside of Olympic chair. Get some.
 
Let me get this

straight… you just summed up why NSR doesn’t charge for rescues … and stated

one of the reasons is because people will hide from NSR/ waste their time/ endanger

them……. but you also say “I encourage everyone to visit this map of grouse and SKI THE ZONES”…

so knowing that grouse ski patrol might call out NSR in this instance and waste

their time, resources and possibly put the volunteers at risk ....you still think it’s

cool to encourage people to ski there?

I’m all for backcountry skiing, but seeing as Grouse reacts

this way wouldn’t it just be better to go elsewhere and stop fixating on skiing

thrasher creek again?
 
You need to wait a bit and live life before you start coming off so mature. It's all fine and well, but you can't lecture people with MUCH more experience who are that much older than you about giving people safe backcountry advice or telling people where the local mountain's stashes are.
James isn't putting anyone in danger, he's just putting it out there that there is great skiing on the locals. It's the riders that put themselves in danger if they chose to heed his advice.

 
no, he is providing information in case someone decides to take it upon themselves and go into the grouse backcountry. think of it like learning about sex, drugs, or alcohol, when you start learning about it in school you arent being encouraged to go have sex, smoke meth, or drink until your shit can blackout, the school is providing you with information so youre prepared should you encounter such a situation and you can make informed decisions about what youre about to do.
 
the MoT highway sign says: Grouse Mountain; Tourist Attraction

The MoT highway signs for Cypress and Seymour say: Ski and Recreation Areas.

It's that simple. I know some of you have had a great portion of your life spent on side-cut, and that's fine. I did too. But, please don't defend them as a legitimate mountain. They are the Disneyland of Vancouver.

If I do return to ski there, I will skin up mountain highway and access Thrasher from pipeline pass and not deal with any part of their tourist attraction whatsoever. But Thrasher is that good of a zone to want to session once again... we didn't even get started in there! So many sick lines.

 
"I've gone through many pages of documents and heard the opinions of the skiers involved as well as Grouse Mountain Resort (GMR)'s story and the perspective of two North Shore Search and Rescue (NSR) team members, one of which was directly involved in the incident.

From there, I've tried to fit together the pieces and I think I have a pretty good account of what happened but for the sake of length I'm gonna stick to the bare minimum.

But first, the facts:

+ The men involved had all the necessary backcountry equipment, ie. shovels, probes, beacons, transeivers etc.

+ The skiers were on terrain considered "expert", but had the skill and knowledge to safely ski the area.

+ The general North Shore area was evaluated to be at "Considerable" avalanche risk by Peter Marshall, a local CAC forecaster and the former head of Grouse Mountain Ski Patrol. However, the skiers allege that the terrain they were skiing on, after numerous tests conducted on site testing snow stability they judged the avalanche risk at "moderate".

+ The skiers were NOT rescued. In fact, the RCMP chopper Air 1 was dispatched ONLY TO CONFIRM THE POSITION OF THE SKIERS. A statement by Tim Jones, Operational Manager of SAR, states:

* The goal was for Air 1 see if they had turned south through the saddle exit to Mtn Hwy

* AIR 1 quickly ID'd the group which by this time was spilt into 2 groups of two

* AIR 1 confirmed they had turned south and were heading for a Grouse Patroller stationed on a snowmobile on Mountain Hwy. Air 1 gave me Lat/Long which I confirmed on my map.

* Very quickly the first two were intercepted by the Grouse patroller with the other two later on intercepted by Grouse Patrol

* At this point our operational involvement ceased as well as AIR 1's

Never during the incident was anyone "rescued" by the chopper, as evident in the rest of the post available here: https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=34822214&postID=8415375020977796384&pli=1

Now that we've got some hold on what really happened, I turn my attention to the real problem at hand.

Grouse Mountain, I believe, acted accordingly and appropriately by calling RCMP and subsequently NSR, given the circumstances. However, the actions that they took afterwards was truly uncalled for and unfair, if not morally wrong. By publicly stating that "the skiers will be charged with the full cost of the rescue operation", Grouse; whether or not it was meant in this way, implies that:

"IF YOU ARE LOST IN THE BACKCOUNTRY AND YOU REQUIRE HELP, WE'RE NOT WILLING TO BEAR THE COSTS AND YOU WILL BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FINANCIALLY FOR THE COST OF YOUR RESCUE OPERATION."

Furthermore, by associating itself with NSR and RCMP the public gets the idea that if you ever need a rescue regardless of location, you better fucking be ready to pay for it yourself.

This sets an extremely dangerous precedent, as rescues often depend on the individual requiring help or their families to contact them for assistance. However, people will remember this incident and if a family or individual decides that they are not able to handle the financial consequence it is possible that they will not call for rescue, in a situation where they might have before. This could cost lives, and possibly initiate amature or family rescue operations which would endanger more lives than if a proper search was called.

I believe that Grouse Mountain is directly responsible for this public misinformation and massive overreaction that they have stirred for their own PR and monetary benefit. Grouse Mountain has made many mistakes in dealing with this incident, and I hold them at fault for the situation we now have, where BC's Solicitor General is considering putting a bill in place where Backcountry skiers could be charged if found violating ski area boundaries.

The skiers made a bad decision to go out in the worst possible time especially with the recent deaths in Fernie. However, although Grouse initially seemed like they were heading in the right direction, their final response was irresponsible and could have some very serious consequences in the future."

 
i agree with andrewh, grousemtn is dumb. i hope it snows enough that wolves and bears walk out of cage and eat grouse people. that wood be cool. bet that wood be on the news. that wood be cool.do you think so too?
 
^ That's an excerpt from a short report I put together since I wanted to get the right story out to my friends that all believed the news reports. I'm sorry if I have some details wrong, but I've done my research into the matter so I'm definitely aware of what your situation was, and likely as knowledgeable about SAR policy as you.

That being said, Grouse can/does whatever it wants, since its [apparently] private property. Whether they choose to follow industry standards or not is their decision, but if you're skiing there you're going to have to follow whatever rules they set. I'm not siding with either one of you, and what Grouse is doing/has done may not be morally just, but legally I'm pretty sure they're in the clear.

Providing information is great, but I'm hesitant to say what you're doing counts as helpful information. A google map of the area which may or may not be accurate by an undefined measure, doesn't help anyone when they're actually out there. Like you, they need to be scoping it out many times beforehand, hiking it in the summer, learning from someone with experience, and preparing themselves adequately.

Encouraging on the other hand, is definitely something I would stop.

"I encourage every to visit this MAP OF GROUSE and ski the zones:

http://www.mowgli.ca/zones/grouse.html

Sick life."

If people have the skills/tools/equipment/experience to ski the lines, the will either a) do so on their own, b) come to you for more information. No need for you to be encouraging behavior or action that could put someone's life in danger, waste resources, and create further conflict with Grouse.

I would also keep the condescending tone to a minimum, does nothing to support your argument and makes you come off as arrogant.

 
The information he is providing is NOT enabling anyone to make safe, "informed" decisions about skiing in the backcountry. Using your comparison, what he's doing is akin to giving kids in school a list of available drinks in the liquor store and calling that education.
 
...Thanks?

That may be, but I CAN "lecture" someone for putting others in unsafe situations that could have serious consequences. I don't care if he's older, and experience in the backcountry in this case doesn't matter because I'm not discussing the specifics or technicalities of off-piste skiing. I'm all for backcountry and getting out of the "rail garden", but I also believe that it should be done in a safe, responsible manner.

What James is doing is encouraging behavior that got him into trouble in the first place. We have excellent and accessible backcountry at Seymour, Cypress and Whistler, so why go through the risk of being banned, fined, etc. to ski Grouse?
 
-You're welcome.-No you can't (he's not putting anyone in danger. He is mightier than thou.).-James isn't encouraging anyone, he's posting sound information.
Thanks for your imput, Mr. Captain of the Debate Team.

/end shitstigate
 
I'd dispute "sound information" as well, but I think I've already proved my point enough.

I'm not, but hey it's a good skill to have. E-fights matter in real life...right?

 
For someone who suggests that I keep my "condescending tone to a minimum", you sure like to dish it out yourself. Be consistent with what you preach young sir.
I had prepared a proper rebuttal to your multiple retorts, but my browser lost it. But in short:
By your own account "+ The men involved had all the necessary backcountry equipment, ie. shovels, probes, beacons, transeivers etc. + The skiers were on terrain considered "expert", but had the skill and knowledge to safely ski the area."
We did not make a bad decision. It is well without our legal rights to ski out of bounds. If they don't want us going there, they should mark it as closed.
Grouse is the faulty party whose "public misinformation and massive overreaction that they have stirred for their own PR and monetary benefit." They are the bad guy, remember?
Furthermore, "Grouse Mountain, I believe, acted accordingly and appropriately by calling RCMP and subsequently NSR, given the circumstances." Wrong. Grouse called NSR first, who declined to launch a search because it was too soon and launching under the circumstances at the time would have been against search and rescue policies. Grouse then overstepped NSR authority and called in the RCMP chopper. This is not consistent with NSR policy and was the wrong decision. Despite your research, you are still missing important facts and there are still important issues not discussed in this thread.
Indeed, because Grouse continues to label Thrasher Creek and The Ridge as out of bounds, skiers are still well within the legal rights to access the terrain. The fault continues to lie ENTIRELY with Grouse for their self-righteous and sanctimonious actions.
Our group did nothing wrong, ex ante, there was no way for us to know that Grouse would have reacted as ridiculously as it did. We acted within our rights to access out of bounds terrain and we took all proper precautions in this action. I will continue to support and encourage others to exercise their right to access the great bounty of powder beyond the boundary ropes at Grouse. This encouragement does not endanger responsible backcountry users or search and rescue teams. It is Grouse's ignorance of proper search and rescue policy and their reckless punishment mechanism that endangers backcountry users.
Why are defending them and implicitly supporting their reckless and dangerous policies?

 
How is my comment at all condescending? I told him to shut up because he's annoying.

Like I said, I don't have all the details but I have a lot more background information than most people, and I think my opinion is a pretty fair one. From what I know Grouse was legitimately worried, and contacting the appropriate parties "given the circumstances" is the correct course of action. They then made the mistake of taking it one step further, then escalated the situation. The specific details may be incorrect but doesn't change my opinion, or what I said previously.

I specifically mentioned before that I'M NOT SIDING WITH ANYONE. I'm not saying, that Grouse's policies are fair, justified, or decent. But what I'm discouraging, is you encouraging people to do something that you know will get them into trouble, and will indirectly end up endangering backcountry users or search and rescue teams.

It may not be right, but you know what course of action Grouse is going to take. So why force it? There are no benefits to what you're doing and to me it just seems like your way of taking "revenge" for your personal disagreements with Grouse.

"It is Grouse's ignorance of proper search and rescue policy and their reckless punishment mechanism that endangers backcountry users." Right. So stay away from Grouse and go ski areas that doesn't implement "reckless punishment mechanism(s) that endanger backcountry users".
 
Obsessedwski, I agree with your opinion! Additionally, I

think what happened to hucksplat and his friends was an unfortunate situation.

At the same time, I think it is irresponsible to encourage people to ski thrasher

creek knowing the outcome of their experience. The nature of their actions in encouraging

others to do the same may result in a similar situation to theirs this winter

but with a different group of skiers and subsequently they will have

participated in blatantly disrespecting the volunteers and

the services NSR provides to this community. That is- by perpetuating Grouse to act in a

similar manner and ultimatley involving NSR in situations such as this which waste their time and resources.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top