Letters to the Editor, Dec. 2-4, 2015
Punishment is too harsh for the crime
I was born and raised in Park City and we have raised our four children here. Like many locals, I was saddened to see Park City Mountain Resort sold to Vail Ski Resorts. I was hopeful that my trepidation would dissipate; however, it has increased to new heights. To begin, I was slightly irritated when I had to sign a liability release form to run through their parking lot during an educational fundraising race, but again, tried to be hopeful. My latest interaction with the resort and their policies has left me angry and disheartened.
Vail Ski Patrol stopped my fifteen-year-old son for skiing out of bounds. A picture of his pass was taken, and he was allowed to continue skiing for the remainder of the afternoon. The next day, I received a phone call informing me that my son was not allowed back on the mountain for 28 days. As a responsible parent, I am willing and ready for my son to suffer a consequence for skiing out of bounds. However, there were no warnings and no other methods of resolution–except the 28-day restriction. The 28-day policy is not stated in the signed application we completed when we purchased our pass. We have attempted to communicate our concern with the resort, to no avail.
While officials claim this is for my sons’ safety, a more appropriate lesson might include apology notes, donated service hours to the resort, and safety education. Instead, Vail is taking local children off a mountain they love, taking away exercise they need, and denying them the sport that they have participated in the majority of their lives for an inordinate amount of time. Vail is really saying that they cater to tourists and prefer our local teenagers to be kicked off the mountain rather than to be accountable for their mistakes.
* * *
Dog owners need to be more responsible
This is a response to a letter in the Nov. 28 edition of The Park Record titled, "Where Dogs Don’t Run Free"
I have just finished reading an article on The Park Record editorial page regarding a person’s concern over the leash laws for dogs being enforced by police stationed at Round Valley and other locations. Officers ticket offender of off-leash dogs.
My husband and I are not dog owners and use the trails regularly. Aggressive dogs are a concern, but so are dogs that are off-leash and come up eagerly jumping up on you during one’s run, setting you off balance. Additionally, issues of off-leash dogs using the trail while bikers need to stop or work around them to avoid a collision. Dog owners are unaware of many of these little issues that come with dogs being off-leash. Owners are often unable to call the dog into control, as the dogs often have a fair lead on their owners.
The argument used in the editorial was that dog owners are in the majority in our county, and therefore should have their rights acknowledged. I say, their choice to be a dog owner in an area with a law to protect all of its citizens should be acknowledged. If they own two dogs and cannot ride their bikes and handle the dogs on-leash, they have a choice to exercise their dog in areas that allow this activity.
* * *
We thought dogs were man’s best friend
Thank you Bart Nichols for your spot-on piece about dogs in Round Valley.
For all you long time locals, let’s face it: Park City has been taken over by part-time extremely rich people who now own all the influence in this town. How else to explain this all-of-a-sudden crackdown on leash laws in the last few years? In coincides with a large influx of second home owners. Full-time residents are now a minority in Park City.
I’m always astounded at people who come here for our lifestyle and then want to change it.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.
Two readers advocating for voters to approve a South Summit School District bond measure to fund a new high school say it’s a small price to pay to secure the future of the Kamas Valley.