Originally Posted by Kid Charlemagne
The safety issue is irrelevant. The onus is on the resort to figure out how to groom the run without, a)restricting access, and b)hurting anyone. A simple solution would be to have a flag person guard the crossing for the few moments that the groomer is active in the area. A more complicated solution would be a pedestrian overpass. The point is, it's up to the resort to figure that out. In the mean time, they're not legally entitled to restrict access. That should be challenged in court immediately.
As soon as you start discussing the "safety" argument with them, you're validating what amounts to an illegal act on their part. Involving "stakeholders" such as SAR in that conversation further validates the bullshit.
I guess we don't disagree on most counts, I already made that crossing guard suggestion and I also illustrated that the crossing was safe.I also suggested this back country pass they make people get ought to be abolished.
I don't disagree that a court challenge might eventually be needed either.
They also are restricting access up the mountain road prior to 7 am, which I also consider an infringement of rights, access should be 24-7-365, which I also have said. Mt Seymour, btw, is also doing the same on their park road.
That leaves the whole 9 am restriction, which is both an infringement of our rights and a safety issue. I was not implying it was the primary issue, just a significant part of it, but I can agree to disagree on that.
The 9 am part just makes it that more egregious.
Update, I have been advised again by the ministry that they are still working on a solution, so for now I am waiting to hear back.