That's quite the interpretation. You have a legal basis for that?
Legally, I have no idea. As a non lawyer, I think I could make a case that the sign means no skiing as part of the ski area. Not no skiing ever. Maybe the sign means no skiing because it's too difficult for most people. The only words used are to tell you it's not patrolled. There's an easy case to make that the two are linked, instead of skiing is forbidden. Besides forbidden under what authority? Federal, State? This is a legal cya for the ski area it seems.
This is why I think the whole thing just gets off the rails.
Yes, it's all very clear in the
Colorado Ski Safety Act.
The design and purpose of that closed sign are clearly identified in Colorado law:
(e) Closed trails or slopes, designated by an octagonal-shaped sign with a red border around a white interior containing a black figure in the shape of a skier with a black band running diagonally across the sign from the upper right-hand side to the lower left-hand side and with the word "Closed" printed beneath the emblem.
The illegality of skiing on a closed slope is also clear. Note this doesn't say it's illegal to duck a rope. It says it's illegal to ski on a closed slope or trail like that one was:
(3) No skier shall ski on a ski slope or trail that has been posted as "Closed" pursuant to section 33- 44-107 (2) (e) and (4).
For anyone that argues that duty doesn't apply because the slope isn't part of the ski area, "ski slope or trail" is defined to include adjoining skiable terrain:
(9) "Ski slopes or trails" means all ski slopes or trails and adjoining skiable terrain, including all their edges and features, and those areas designated by the ski area operator to be used by skiers for any of the purposes enumerated in subsection (8) of this section.
Also, it's illegal to enter upon public lands posted as closed like that was:
(11) No person shall knowingly enter upon public or private lands from an adjoining ski area when such land has been closed by its owner and so posted by the owner or by the ski area operator pursuant to section 33-44-107 (6).
Violation of these duties of skiers is unlawful as defined in this section:
(12) Any person who violates any of the provisions of subsection (3), (9), (10), or (11) of this section is guilty of a class 2 petty offense and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars.
In addition to being criminally liable, violating these duties creates default civil negligence in this section:
33-44-104. Negligence - civil actions. (1) A violation of any requirement of this article shall, to the extent such violation causes injury to any person or damage to property, constitute negligence on the part of the person violating such requirement.
Finally, snowboarders and riders of other ridiculous contraptions don't get off the hook for these duties:
(8) "Skier" means any person using a ski area for the purpose of skiing, which includes, without limitation, sliding downhill or jumping on snow or ice on skis, a toboggan, a sled, a tube, a snowbike, a snowboard, or any other device; or for the purpose of using any of the facilities of the ski area, including but not limited to ski slopes and trails.
Did I miss anything?