Anybody Committed to a 20/21 Season Pass?

[javajive]

On 7/10/2020 at 4:06 PM, jng said:

Will probably miss my annual trip to Sun Peaks as I don’t expect Canada to welcome yanks. 

I am guessing stats would have to be pretty close to a wash before the border is open to non-essential travel. We also have a federal 2 week quarantine period for anyone that does cross. 

[Dan]

15 minutes ago, javajive said:

I am guessing stats would have to be pretty close to a wash before the border is open to non-essential travel. We also have a federal 2 week quarantine period for anyone that does cross. 

That makes sense to me, which makes me think it's going to be a long time before I get to go back to Canada. Pretty sure it won't happen any time this year. 

[bumpyride]

Not looking particularly promising.  This is Britain, and they're much closer to reasonable than the US.

Conspiracy theories and misinformation, spread widely on social media platforms, have fueled distrust of a coronavirus vaccine. As a result, regardless of when a coronavirus vaccine becomes available, an even bigger challenge may be getting the public to embrace it.

Nearly one-third of Britons may refuse to take a vaccine for coronavirus, according to a poll released last week.

The survey, conducted by YouGov for the Center for Countering Digital Hate, found that 6% of respondents would definitely refuse a vaccine, and a further 10% said they would “probably not” accept it. Another 15% said they were not sure.

[lowrider]

Just wondering if the isolation or the realization of the stupidity of the situation is causing myself and others the most grief. Been doing things right since March and where did it get us ???

[Corey]

9 hours ago, lowrider said:

Been doing things right since March and where did it get us ???

That's a common sentiment. You seem to be alive, so that's a pretty good start. There are no sensational articles about people not dying or becoming seriously sick, so it's easy to miss how good practices can keep more people alive. 

This time will be best viewed with calm minds, looking back from the future. 

[lowrider]

Your right Cory but how far in the future if people refuse to wear the mask is my calm mind willing to wait ?

[Keenan]

I bought a pass and 2 social distancing boards, a Thirst 195 and 202. I saved money by not riding this spring, not paying for summer camps, cancelled spring break, filling the gas tank about 75% less than usual, no dining out.  The list goes on.

[Corey]

1 hour ago, Keenan said:

2 social distancing boards, a Thirst 195 and 202

I laughed out loud at that. Well done! 

[b0ardski]

17 hours ago, Keenan said:

I bought a pass and 2 social distancing boards, a Thirst 195 and 202. I saved money by not riding this spring, not paying for summer camps, cancelled spring break, filling the gas tank about 75% less than usual, no dining out.  The list goes on.

so, you thought the 195 might be too small?

[softbootsurfer]

Had snow shoes years ago for Early/Late season...maybe time to get a split board set up

 

https://www.aspentimes.com/news/local/aspen-skiing-co-s-kaplan-gives-glimpse-into-the-ski-season-ahead/

[bumpyride]

From the NY Times.  The is the most accurate treatise that I've seen on Masks.  Worth a read. 

 

Yes, the Coronavirus Is in the Air

Transmission through aerosols matters — and probably a lot more than we’ve been able to prove yet.

By Linsey C. Marr

Ms. Marr is a professor of engineering.

July 30, 2020

A sneeze. And what it spreads. Just how much does the new coronavirus circulate in the tiny airborne aerosols we spew out by just breathing?Credit...Bettmann, via Getty Images Plus

Finally. The World Health Organization has now formally recognized that SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19, is airborne and that it can be carried by tiny aerosols.

As we cough and sneeze, talk or just breathe, we naturally release droplets (small particles of fluid) and aerosols (smaller particles of fluid) into the air. Yet until earlier this month, the W.H.O. — like the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or Public Health England — had warned mostly about the transmission of the new coronavirus through direct contact and droplets released at close range.

The organization had cautioned against aerosols only in rare circumstances, such as after intubation and other medical procedures involving infected patients in hospitals.

After several months of pressure from scientists, on July 9, the W.H.O. changed its position — going from denial to grudging partial acceptance: “Further studies are needed to determine whether it is possible to detect viable SARS-CoV-2 in air samples from settings where no procedures that generate aerosols are performed and what role aerosols might play in transmission.”

I am a civil and environmental engineer who studies how viruses and bacteria spread through the air — as well as one of the 239 scientists who signed an open letter in late June pressing the W.H.O. to consider the risk of airborne transmission more seriously.

A month later, I believe that the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 via aerosols matters much more than has been officially acknowledged to date.

In a peer-reviewed study published in Nature on Wednesday, researchers at the University of Nebraska Medical Center found that aerosols collected in the hospital rooms of Covid-19 patients contained the coronavirus.

This confirms the results of a study from late May (not peer-reviewed) in which Covid-19 patients were found to release SARS-CoV-2 simply by exhaling — without coughing or even talking. The authors of that study said the finding implied that airborne transmission “plays a major role” in spreading the virus.

Accepting these conclusions wouldn’t much change what is currently being recommended as best behavior. The strongest protection against SARS-CoV-2, whether the virus is mostly contained in droplets or in aerosols, essentially remains the same: Keep your distance and wear masks.

Editors’ Picks

A Two-Bedroom Rental in Long Island City for $3,000? One New York Couple Test Their Budget.

What Does It Mean to ‘Look Like a Mom’?

Tailors Know New Yorkers’ Pandemic Secret: ‘Everybody Got Fat!’

Continue reading the main story

Rather, the recent findings are an important reminder to also be vigilant about opening windows and improving airflow indoors. And they are further evidence that the quality of masks and their fit matter, too.

The W.H.O. defines as a “droplet” a particle larger than 5 microns and has said that droplets don’t travel farther than one meter.

In fact, there is no neat and no meaningful cutoff point — at 5 microns or any other size — between droplets and aerosols: All are tiny specks of liquid, their size ranging along a spectrum that goes from very small to really microscopic.

(I am working with medical historians to track down the scientific basis for the W.H.O.’s definition, and we have not found a sensible explanation yet.)

Yes, droplets tend to fly through the air like mini cannonballs and they fall to the ground rather quickly, while aerosols can float around for many hours.

But basic physics also says that a 5-micron droplet takes about a half-hour to drop to the floor from the mouth of an adult of average height — and during that time, the droplet can travel many meters on an air current. Droplets expelled in coughs or sneezes also travel much farther than one meter.

Here is another common misconception: To the (limited) extent that the role of aerosols had been recognized so far, they were usually mentioned as lingering in the air, suspended, and wafting away — a long-distance threat.

But before aerosols can get far, they must travel through the air that’s near: meaning that they are a hazard at close range, too. And all the more so because, just like the smoke from a cigarette, aerosols are most concentrated near the infected person (or smoker) and become diluted in the air as they drift away.

A peer-reviewed study by scientists at the University of Hong Kong and Zhejiang University, in Hangzhou, China, published in the journal Building and Environment in June concluded, “The smaller the exhaled droplets, the more important the short-range airborne route.”

So what does this all mean exactly, practically?

Can you walk into an empty room and contract the virus if an infected person, now gone, was there before you? Perhaps, but probably only if the room is small and stuffy.

Can the virus waft up and down buildings via air ducts or pipes? Maybe, though that hasn’t been established.

More likely, the research suggests, aerosols matter in extremely mundane scenarios.

Consider the case of a restaurant in Guangzhou, southern China, at the beginning of the year, in which one diner infected with SARS-CoV-2 at one table spread the virus to a total of nine people seated at their table and two other tables.

Yuguo Li, a professor of engineering at the University of Hong Kong, and colleagues analyzed video footage from the restaurant and in a preprint (not peer reviewed) published in April found no evidence of close contact between the diners.

Droplets can’t account for transmission in this case, at least not among the people at the tables other than the infected person’s: The droplets would have fallen to the floor before reaching those tables.

But the three tables were in a poorly ventilated section of the restaurant, and an air conditioning unit pushed air across them. Notably, too, no staff member and none of the other diners in the restaurant — including at two tables just beyond the air conditioner’s airstream — became infected.

Similarly, just one person is thought to have infected 52 of the other 60 people at a choir rehearsal in Skagit County, Wash., in March.

Several colleagues at various universities and I analyzed that event and in a preprint (not peer-reviewed) published last month concluded that aerosols likely were the dominant means of transmission.

Attendees had used hand sanitizer and avoided hugs and handshakes, limiting the potential for infection through direct contact or droplets. On the other hand, the room was poorly ventilated, the rehearsal lasted a long time (2.5 hours) and singing is known to produce aerosols and facilitate the spread of diseases like tuberculosis.

What about the outbreak on the Diamond Princess cruise ship off Japan early this year? Some 712 of the 3,711 people on board became infected.

Professor Li and others also investigated that case and in a preprint (not peer reviewed) in April concluded that transmission had not occurred between rooms after people were quarantined: The ship’s air-conditioning system did not spread the virus over long distances.

The more likely cause of transmission, according to that study, appeared to be close contact with infected people or contaminated objects before the passengers and crew members were isolated. (The researchers did not parse precisely what they meant by contact, or if that included droplets or short-range aerosols.)

But another, recent, preprint (not peer reviewed) about the Diamond Princess concluded that “aerosol inhalation was likely the dominant contributor to Covid-19 transmission” among the ship’s passengers.

It might seem logical, or make intuitive sense, that larger droplets would contain more virus than do smaller aerosols — but they don’t.

A paper published this week by The Lancet Respiratory Medicine that analyzed the aerosols produced by the coughs and exhaled breaths of patients with various respiratory infections found “a predominance of pathogens in small particles” (under 5 microns). “There is no evidence,” the study also concluded, “that some pathogens are carried only in large droplets.”

A recent preprint (not peer reviewed) by researchers at the University of Nebraska Medical Center found that viral samples retrieved from aerosols emitted by Covid-19 patients were infectious.

Some scientists have argued that just because aerosols can contain SARS-CoV-2 does not in itself prove that they can cause an infection and that if SARS-CoV-2 were primarily spread by aerosols, there would be more evidence of long-range transmission.

I agree that long-range transmission by aerosols probably is not significant, but I believe that, taken together, much of the evidence gathered to date suggests that close-range transmission by aerosols is significant — possibly very significant, and certainly more significant than direct droplet spray.

The practical implications are plain:

Social distancing really is important. It keeps us out of the most concentrated parts of other people’s respiratory plumes. So stay away from one another by one or two meters at least — though farther is safer.

Wear a mask. Masks help block aerosols released by the wearer. Scientific evidence is also building that masks protect the wearer from breathing in aerosols around them.

When it comes to masks, size does matter.

The gold standard is a N95 or a KN95 respirator, which, if properly fitted, filters out and prevents the wearer from breathing in at least 95 percent of small aerosols.

The efficacy of surgical masks against aerosols varies widely.

One study from 2013 found that surgical masks reduced exposure to flu viruses by between 10 percent and 98 percent (depending on the mask’s design).

A recent paper found that surgical masks can completely block seasonal coronaviruses from getting into the air.

To my knowledge, no similar study has been conducted for SARS-CoV-2 yet, but these findings might apply to this virus as well since it is similar to seasonal coronaviruses in size and structure.

My lab has been testing cloth masks on a mannequin, sucking in air through its mouth at a realistic rate. We found that even a bandanna loosely tied over its mouth and nose blocked half or more of aerosols larger than 2 microns from entering the mannequin.

We also found that especially with very small aerosols — smaller than 1 micron — it is more effective to use a softer fabric (which is easier to fit tightly over the face) than a stiffer fabric (which, even if it is a better filter, tends to sit more awkwardly, creating gaps).

Avoid crowds. The more people around you, the more likely someone among them will be infected. Especially avoid crowds indoors, where aerosols can accumulate.

Ventilation counts. Open windows and doors. Adjust dampers in air-conditioning and heating systems. Upgrade the filters in those systems. Add portable air cleaners, or install germicidal ultraviolet technologies to remove or kill virus particles in the air.

It’s not clear just how much this coronavirus is transmitted by aerosols as opposed to droplets or via contact with contaminated surfaces. Then again, we still don’t know the answer to that question even for the flu, which has been studied for decades.

But by now we do know this much: Aerosols matter in the transmission of Covid-19 — and probably even more so than we have yet been able to prove.

Linsey C. Marr is the Charles P. Lunsford Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Virginia Tech. @linseymarr.

[lowrider]

The best example i can relate to as far as understanding how far particulates travel is all the snow i see a mile away on the other side of the road when the local bump is trying to make snow. Never seems to settle where you want on need it. Glad to be living in a drafty old house and far away from other people. 

[b0ardski]

just bought my Schwietzer pass last day of the extended sale with the option of a full refund or bump to next year by Nov. 15th

[dredman]

Passes bought. MCC is a go, registration opening soon. 

[barryj]

Passes still off sale at one of the local hills, Loon Mtn.   ....but I did hear Cannon Mtn passes are still on sale!

Latest update is  - As of June 16, 2020 from Loon Mtn.

"All New England Pass and resort-specific winter season passes are off sale until further notice. As we further develop our operating plans for next season, we may limit the total number of season passes we sell. An update will be made at the end of summer regarding further season pass sales".

[Corey]

Commentary from Aspen: 

https://theknow.denverpost.com/2020/07/29/apsen-ski-season-2020-2021-coronavirus/242570/

Aspen Skiing Co. CEO tells skiers to temper their expectations for the 2020-21 season

By Scott Condon, The Aspen Times Jul 29, 2020, 11:35 am

Aspen Skiing Co.’s top official advised customers in a letter Tuesday to temper their expectations but not curb their enthusiasm for the 2020-21 ski season.

Skico President and CEO Mike Kaplan wrote that skiers and snowboarders will likely have to readjust their sights for the season because of the coronavirus pandemic. Racking up a bunch of laps at Highland Bowl and amassing impressive totals on vertical feet won’t be as easy. Chairlifts and gondolas won’t be loaded to capacity, so waits will be longer.

He acknowledged that there would be new procedures — “some of them annoying.”

“Loading and riding lifts and gondolas will have guidelines that limit contact between unrelated individuals,” Kaplan wrote. “Social-distancing measures and facial-covering requirements will be in place in all restaurants, ticket offices, ski school facilities and other indoor or congested areas. We are looking at expanding outdoor seating, adding coverage and heat where possible.”

 

[bumpyride]

Season's pass sale has ended at Big Sky.

I just put my Condo up for sale.

[dredman]

2 hours ago, bumpyride said:

Season's pass sale has ended at Big Sky.

I just put my Condo up for sale.

Good time to sell, out of state people are buying up stuff like crazy in MT.  Big Sky has been over run with the shared pass (Epic/Icon).  There are quieter and better places scattered in the west.  

[lowrider]

3 hours ago, bumpyride said:

Season's pass sale has ended at Big Sky.

I just put my Condo up for sale.

Is it the 5 br for 2.9 m or the 6 br for 3.7m ?

[Bentnail]

I have my purchased my pass for rlm. I have my fingers crossed and have not started to look for a snowmobile. Cheers winners coming!

[TVR]

Very hard to comment on this topic, as it has become so political. What I can say that,  however it is viewed, on one side or the other, is you should do what you feel makes you feel safe. Many of us have bought passes, and will go as often as possible while others will not feel safe and will not. 

I have bought all my passes, but this is due to how deadly I see the pandemic is (not the transmission rate), and the affect I see it will have on myself and my kid due to the data I have researched. Others would disagree and have their own view based upon their data. Ultimately, it will all come down to your decisions, and I have made mine based upon the data I have. 

[Corey]

26 minutes ago, TVR said:

you should do what you feel makes you feel safe

Evidence disagrees with this sentiment. 

[David Kirk]

My home mountain is Bridger Bowl in Montana. Bridger is not sure exactly what the operating plan will be for the season at this point and they say that if you buy a pass and don't like the plan when announced that you can get a refund up until late November. That seems more than fair so I committed to a pass.

I expect that most areas will be operating at a different level this season....or until a vaccine is introduced. I wouldn't count on food service, group lessons, pubs/bars....etc. I imagine that many will set limits on the overall number of people on the hill at any given time. I wouldn't be surprised to see lottery systems put in place to limit the number of people on the hill. I assume they will all require face coverings and will keep it to one person on a double chair and no more than 2 on triples and quads.

It's going to be 'interesting' to say the least.

dave

[JohnE]

It seems unlikely that the 20 - 21 season will start with the situation being "completely safe". There will be risks (on the slopes as well as in every other aspect of life). 

Can anyone conceive of a plan such that a ski area could operate at any capacity and keep the transmission rate low?

No gondolas? Only 2 persons per chairlift at opposite ends? You can't ride the lift with anyone except the people you drove up with? Lodge is closed or open with much reduced capacity? Six feet apart in the lift lines? Other scenarios? 

[TVR]

1 hour ago, Corey said:

Evidence disagrees with this sentiment. 

I would state evidence disagrees with this statement....

Perhaps we should have a "COVID" topic discussion board? Put some rules in place and can in there present evidence? I think the key issue I have is calling one persons statements (like Dr Fauci's statements) 'evidence' vs cdc.gov's total death statistics 'evidence' and weighing them equally. There is also the difference of 'death with COVID' vs 'Death by COVID' and why evidence needs to be looked at for it';s purity.  

How many people are not getting screened for cancers due to fear of COVID? How many other ailments will cause additional deaths due to not seeing the doctors? Lets also not look at COVID with a singular lenses and contribute all harm to the human population to it. Needless to say, this might need a topic all of its own.