Mad River Glen Skiing Mag article

[joegm]

i stopped subscribing to both ski and skiing magazines a while back...but for some reason i keep getting skiing in the mail...normally, i have as much use for the mag as a hole in the head... or a groomed out , peg ladden, GS run :wink: ,...
however, the current issue of skiing magazine , the one with the nonsensical question about whether freestyle is really skiing, has a fascinating article on Mad River Glen...the article is shockingly with substance... i say that because 99% of the magazine is usually without substance...
anyway, the article gave me a new way of looking at mad river glen and shows how the place is , apparently, not necessarily one cohesive cum by ah happy family, in terms of how it is run...kind of scary and somewhat disturbing , considering the place is without a doubt one of the top three places to ski in the east and arguably the best , when the snow and weather is right.
my guess is anyone on this site who is not privy to the inner workings of the place would not be disappointed by buying the mag and reading the story...it is quite a story that sounds like it has not been completed... i've got a few questions of my own as a result of the article but i'll wait and see if any comments are made by anyone who might read the story and be able to comment more on some of the players and characters cited in it...

 

[ChrisC]

I'll look for the story.

I like SKIING a bit.
Especially the section when they take a photo of some piece of prime ski terrain and dissect it. For example, last month is was Fantasy Ridge at Solitude. Before that, the backside of Mt. Blanc from Courmayeur Italy. I find these mini-guides useful.

 

[Tony Crocker]

For us old farts the 60-year anniversary issue does have some interesting pieces. In my case maybe middle aged because I didn't start akiing until 1976.

 

[Patrick]

For us old farts the 60-year anniversary issue does have some interesting pieces. In my case maybe middle aged because I didn't start akiing until 1976.

I bought this weekend, but I didn't have time to look at it. \/ I'll definitely take a look at it.

There is also an article on the TGR forum.

 

[Patrick]

Hi Joe,

I finally read the article. Yes, I think it did a pretty good description of the inner dynamics behind the Coop from my point of view (I am by no means privy on everything happening at MRG). I don't know what you find scary? It think many ski areas are living in dangerous times. I have an impression that the tensions from within were more important in the first few years, there seems to be a greater consensus nowadays (I might be wrong).

 

[Patrick]

Something and surprised me, I noticed the liberal use of the F-word in that article on MRG and the one on the TGR forum. Times they are changing (or the censure was on Holidays). I'm sure Skiing is going to be get a few letters to the editor because of that.

Really fucked.

 

[Tony Crocker]

It's hard to write a complete article about TGR without liberal use of the F-word :lol: .

 

[chucky]

. . . not necessarily one cohesive cum by ah happy family, in terms of how it is run...kind of scary and somewhat disturbing . . .

I'd be surprised if it wasn't somewhat "disturbing", considering "it is run" according to a policy of bigotry and discrimination.

 

[Patrick]

I'd be surprised if it wasn't somewhat "disturbing", considering "it is run" according to a policy of bigotry and discrimination.

Please explain?

 

[Admin]

Someone apparently doesn't understand the meaning of the term "discrimination." MRG (and Alta and Deer Valley, for that matter) doesn't discriminate against snowboarders, they don't allow snowboarding. Anyone and everyone is welcome to ski at MRG...on skis.

In fact, IIRC they'll even rent a snowboarder a pair of skis for free. So I guess that if anything, they discriminate against skiers who actually have to pay to rent gear. :lol:

The irony is that at viewtopic.php?f=10&t=6198&p=36190#p36190 chucky writes:

Objections to Burton's poaching campaign demonstrate support for bigotry and discrimination. The campaign advocated non-violent protest against long-standing prejudices marring the ski industry. It worked well. Failing to realise this is ignorant.

Many older skiers don't really have an issue with snowboarding per se, they actually have a problem with (the stereotypes they form of the) people who ride them - people who for whatever reason (age, socio-economic background etc.) they simply don't understand. Failing to realise this is ignorant.

Failing to realize the difference between discrimination against a legally protected class of people and banning the use of a specific product is "ignorant." Failing to realize that you've just been swept up by the Burton marketing machine in the name of "anti-discrimination" is "ignorant." :roll:

 

[chucky]

Someone apparently doesn't understand that the majority of bigotry and discrimination is deliberately distilled into the context of legitimate acts so as to hide its genuine intent. :roll:

Ignorance is bliss, so have a nice day.

 

[chucky]

I'd be surprised if it wasn't somewhat "disturbing", considering "it is run" according to a policy of bigotry and discrimination.

Please explain?

In a veiled effort to exclude the "type of people" they view as the stereotypical snowboarder, MRG bans the equipment snowboarders use. Only those so delusional as to support the actions of resorts such as MRG fail to see the truth for what it is.

 

[riverc0il]

Someone apparently doesn't understand that the majority of bigotry and discrimination is deliberately distilled into the context of legitimate acts so as to hide its genuine intent. :roll:

Ignorance is bliss, so have a nice day.

C'mon. If you are going to engage in a discussion or argument, there has to be common points and agreed upon usage of words. The definition of discrimination is an action or lack thereof due to a quality of a PERSON. Snowboarding and skiing are not qualities that define people but rather actions people do. Snowboards and skis are items that people use in specific manners. You can argue against snowboarding bans at Mad River Glen and else where very easily and with many good points. But arguing that this is discrimination automatically eliminates your argument from being valid and worth discussing because it just is not so.

A golf course that does not allow certain spiked shoes or ripped jeans is not discriminating against people who wear certain clothing but rather anyone can play golf at that course if they adhere to the rules of the course. Do golf courses discriminate against skate boarders and punk musicians because of their "culture" and preferred type of dress?

Do night clubs that have no sneaker and collar requirements (lame!) discriminate against people that like to wear sneakers and jeans? As much as I don't appreciate those rules, they are not discrimination.

Some lakes have motor boat restrictions (certain size boats or engines not allowed or no motor boats allowed at all in favor of paddle craft). Discrimination against boaters? No.

We could go on all day with examples in which institutions have rules that do not allow their customers to perform certain acts or dress in certain ways or use certain equipment at their venue. Many of these rules I do not agree with but thems-the-breaks. Institutions make rules for how their customers are allowed to use their facilities. They do not discriminate against a protected class of people because all people are allowed to use the facilities. But they must use the facilities according to the rules that allow everyone to use the facilities, no exceptions on who can or can not pay to use the facilities.

 

[chucky]

C'mon. If you are going to engage in a discussion or argument, there has to be common points and agreed upon usage of words. The definition of discrimination is an action or lack thereof due to a quality of a PERSON.

Look into the history of these bans and you'll see these resorts ARE discriminating against PEOPLE. However because they couldn't get away with doing this openly, they focused on the equipment the "type of person" they objected to typically used. To believe otherwise is simply naive.

Thankfully as familiarity increases, ignorance decreases - to the point where there are now only three bastions of ignorant bigotry left in North American resorts.

 

[Patrick]

Look into the history of these bans and you'll see these resorts ARE discriminating against PEOPLE. However because they couldn't get away with doing this openly, they focused on the equipment the "type of person" they objected to typically used. To believe otherwise is simply naive.

I think you're the one that is believing in conspiracies theories. :roll:

There are a few things that you don't understand. Do you really think that MRG and Deer Valley ban on snowboarding for the same reason? These two places are at total different end of the spectrum. I cannot speak about Deer Valley, but if you think that the ban at MRG is due to the type of person, you are dead wrong. No discriminating, however some people might fell out of place if they don't have any duck tape on any part of their equipement. :wink:

I guess you could also say that MRG discriminates against snowmaking, HQ lifts and manufacturer ski runs. The place has it niche, it's called pre-80s skiing and conditions. It's dependant on what Mother Nature provides, skiing the way it used to be...snow or Mud Rocks and/or Grass.

Admin could speak at lenghts why Snowboarding isn't allowed at Alta.

Thankfully as familiarity increases, ignorance decreases - to the point where there are now only three bastions of ignorant bigotry left in North American resorts.

Would you say that private ski areas are also discriminatory? Why only 3 ski areas in North America?
Some areas would allow you to use their lifts without a lease on your board? Is that discrimnation?
How about not allowing skiing with kids on a child carrier?
How many ski areas would allow someone on a snurfer?
I guess crazy carpet are banned from ski areas because they don't want that type of people or their hill.

 

[Admin]

By chucky's logic Raging Buffalo Snowboard Park is also run by "bigots" who practice "discrimination". I don't, however, hear chucky or the Burton marketing machine railing against them.

 

[Patrick]

Here is an article from the Connecticut Post (Jan, 2007)

Burton's crusade could pay off
By JAMES D. SHAY

http://www.connpost.com/jimshay/ci_7904120

Here is the main part of the article.

That's the mantra of snowboarding pioneer Jake Burton Carpenter's new crusade to "liberate" ski areas that ban snowboarders.

You can hear Burton's clarion call to "sabotage stupidity" (...) With the beat of patriotic drum ruffles in the background, Burton says: "Until snowboarders everywhere are free to ride where they want to ride. Until the snow and slopes of this great nation have been purged of this scourge of segregation. Until the four elitist and fascist resorts lift their Draconian ban, there should be no rest, no justice.

"In the face of this blatant aggressive disregard of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States of America, poaching isn't simply a peaceful form of protest, it's your patriotic duty. Power to the poachers!"

Burton's employees had a successful poaching last month at Mad River. Wearing white clothing and hiking up the mountain before dawn, a group of Burton riders dropped into the MGR base area just as it was dedicating its restored 1948 single chair. The Burton dudes smiled, posed for photos and gave out doughnuts before leaving on a bus.

" They were incredibly respectful of the dedication ceremony," says Mad River's Eric Friedman. Since then, several other snowboarders have poached the area, including one dressed as Santa Claus. He said Mad River isn't calling out the Border Patrol just yet, "they just can't ride the lifts."

As a marketing director, Friedman knows the value of a publicity stunt. "This is really about Burton trying to remain edgy. The snowboard industry has matured so much and they've got a huge percentage of the market, but they still need to stay edgy."

What does annoy Friedman, a Jew who had relatives killed in the Holocaust, is Burton's "patriotic" argument that it's an equality issue against the "fascist" resorts. "To associate this with civil rights is a stretch and an insult to the civil rights movement," Friedman says.

Mad River's snowboarding ban goes back to 1991 when shredders were blocked from using the single chair. Because the ride ends on a flat surface, boarders often pushed off the old chair, causing it to become cockeyed as it entered the turning cogwheel. A total ban came when then owner Betsy Pratt had a verbal confrontation with snowboarders and kicked them out for good.

Unlike other areas, Mad River is owned by a non-profit cooperative of skiers. To join the cooperative, people must buy a share (costing $2,000) to have a say and vote on how the area is run. The skiing public can buy lift tickets, but shareholders get price breaks and incentives.

The co-op, Friedman says, saved the area from closing when it purchased it from Pratt in 1995.

And while finances are tight, he said the co-op still doesn't want snowboarders, which could bump up revenues 10 percent.

"The bottom line: Mad River Glen's decisions, like snowboarding, are made by the shareholders, not by someone in an ivory tower or by a corporation." Friedman says. "If they want to be involved, buy a share."

To Friedman, that's democracy.

The fact that MGR is on privately owned land shoots down one of Burton's key arguments that resorts on national forest property should be open to all taxpayers, not just elitist skiers.

Yet the 53-year-old Burton says there are other issues. "We have been snowboarding at major resorts for over 20 years now and in the process, we have demonstrated our sport to be real and of no threat to society," he says. "If you have spent as much time in the mountains as I have, you would know that every mountain has a personality, and while they can be brutally cruel at times, discrimination is not in their DNA."

Friedman thinks MGR was poached first because it's in Burton's backyard. "I know Jake Burton likes to play golf, but we don't play crochet on a golf course."

 

[riverc0il]

C'mon. If you are going to engage in a discussion or argument, there has to be common points and agreed upon usage of words. The definition of discrimination is an action or lack thereof due to a quality of a PERSON.

Look into the history of these bans and you'll see these resorts ARE discriminating against PEOPLE. However because they couldn't get away with doing this openly, they focused on the equipment the "type of person" they objected to typically used. To believe otherwise is simply naive.

Thankfully as familiarity increases, ignorance decreases - to the point where there are now only three bastions of ignorant bigotry left in North American resorts.

Care to speak towards the examples I posted and defend them as well? Because I think I drew some pretty interesting parallels and comparisons with other industries that "discriminate". After all, only ultra rich people golf so it is clearly discrimination not to allow ripped jeans on a golf course. :roll:

 

[Patrick]

After all, only ultra rich people golf so it is clearly discrimination not to allow ripped jeans on a golf course. :roll:

You mean like Jake Burton??? He's one of them after all. How ironic. Free Golf courses from discrimination against ripe jeans and crochet. :twisted:

I'm sure, MRG wouldn't have any issue if you showed up in riped jeans to ski. I believe one of the regular posters' son skied in jeans at Alta? He wasn't discriminated against... :lol:

 

[chucky]

Do you really think that MRG and Deer Valley ban on snowboarding for the same reason?

Absolutely - initially anyway. Betsy Pratt initially banned all snowboardING in "her" resort simply because she objected to the "attitude" of a small group of snowboardERS. :roll: