CO Code § 33-44-109 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 33 - Parks and Wildlife|Article 44 - Ski Safety and Liability|§ 33-44-109. Duties of Skiers - Penalties

  Each skier solely has the responsibility for knowing the range of his own ability to negotiate any ski slope or trail and to ski within the limits of such ability. Each skier expressly accepts and assumes the risk of and all legal responsibility for any injury to person or property resulting from any of the inherent dangers and risks of skiing; except that a skier is not precluded under this article from suing another skier for any injury to person or property resulting from such other skier's acts or omissions. Notwithstanding any provision of law or statute to the contrary, the risk of a skier/skier collision is neither an inherent risk nor a risk assumed by a skier in an action by one skier against another.    Each skier has the duty to maintain control of his speed and course at all times when skiing and to maintain a proper lookout so as to be able to avoid other skiers and objects. However, the primary duty shall be on the person skiing downhill to avoid collision with any person or objects below him.    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).    Each skier shall stay clear of snow-grooming equipment, all vehicles, lift towers, signs, and any other equipment on the ski slopes and trails.    Each skier has the duty to heed all posted information and other warnings and to refrain from acting in a manner which may cause or contribute to the injury of the skier or others. Each skier shall be presumed to have seen and understood all information posted in accordance with this article near base area lifts, on the passenger tramways, and on such ski slopes or trails as he is skiing. Under conditions of decreased visibility, the duty is on the skier to locate and ascertain the meaning of all signs posted in accordance with sections 33-44-106 and 33-44-107.    Each ski or snowboard used by a skier while skiing shall be equipped with a strap or other device capable of stopping the ski or snowboard should the ski or snowboard become unattached from the skier. This requirement shall not apply to cross country skis.    No skier shall cross the uphill track of a J-bar, T-bar, platter pull, or rope tow except at locations designated by the operator; nor shall a skier place any object in such an uphill track.    Before beginning to ski from a stationary position or before entering a ski slope or trail from the side, the skier shall have the duty of avoiding moving skiers already on the ski slope or trail.    No person shall move uphill on any passenger tramway or use any ski slope or trail while such person's ability to do so is impaired by the consumption of alcohol or by the use of any controlled substance, as defined in section 18-18-102 (5), C.R.S., or other drug or while such person is under the influence of alcohol or any controlled substance, as defined in section 18-18-102 (5), C.R.S., or other drug.    No skier involved in a collision with another skier or person in which an injury results shall leave the vicinity of the collision before giving his or her name and current address to an employee of the ski area operator or a member of the ski patrol, except for the purpose of securing aid for a person injured in the collision; in which event the person so leaving the scene of the collision shall give his or her name and current address as required by this subsection (10) after securing such aid.    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).    [ ] 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.   [ ] Any person who violates subsection (3), (9), or (11) of this section commits a civil infraction and shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars.    Any person who violates subsection (10) of this section commits a petty offense.       Editor's note: This version of subsection (12) is effective until March 1, 2022. Editor's note: This version of subsection (12) is effective March 1, 2022.  History. Source: L. 79: Entire article added, p. 1243, § 1, effective July 1. L. 82: (9) amended, p. 255, § 17, effective May 3. L. 90: (1) and (2) amended, p. 1542, § 5, effective July 1. L. 2004: (6) and (10) amended, p. 1384, § 4, effective May 28. L. 2006: (12) amended, p. 130, § 1, effective July 1. L. 2012: (9) amended,(HB 12-1311), ch. 281, p. 1631, § 85, effective July 1. L. 2021: (12) amended,(SB 21-271), ch. 462, p. 3274, § 605, effective March 1, 2022.    Editor's note:   Section 803(2) of chapter 462 (SB 21-271), Session Laws of Colorado 2021, provides that the act changing this section applies to offenses committed on or after March 1, 2022.   Cross references:   For the legislative declaration contained in the 1990 act amending subsections (1) and (2), see section 1 of chapter 256, Session Laws of Colorado 1990.   ANNOTATION   Annotator's note. The annotations to this section include a case decided prior to the 1990 amendment of subsection (2).   The Ski Safety Act of 1979 does not establish negligence per se when an uphill skier collides with a downhill skier. Hendrickson v. Doyle, 150 F. Supp. 3d 1233 (D. Colo. 2015 ).   The term “responsibility” encompasses the legal concept of “fault”. In effect, the statute creates a rebuttable presumption that the skier is at fault whenever he collides with other skiers and objects, and “fault” may be defined as the equivalent of negligence. Pizza v. Wolf Creek Ski Dev. Corp., 711 P.2d 671 (Colo. 1985).   Given the connection between “responsibility” and “negligence”, in the context of a skiing accident case, the term “responsibility” may be equated with the concept of “negligence” for purposes of applying the presumption contained within this section. Pizza v. Wolf Creek Ski Dev. Corp., 711 P.2d 671 (Colo. 1985).   The phrase “natural object” is not unconstitutionally vague. Pizza v. Wolf Creek Ski Dev. Corp., 711 P.2d 671 (Colo. 1985).   Skiers as a group do not constitute a suspect class, and being free from a legislatively imposed rebuttable presumption of negligence is not a fundamental right. Pizza v. Wolf Creek Ski Dev. Corp., 711 P.2d 671 (Colo. 1985).   Evidentiary presumption places upon skier the burden of rebutting the presumption by presenting evidence of the ski area operator's negligence which outweighs the presumption of the skier's sole negligence. Pizza v. Wolf Creek Ski Dev. Corp., 711 P.2d 671 (Colo. 1985).   Presumption is not unconstitutionally vague in describing rebuttal burden. Pizza v. Wolf Creek Dev. Corp., 711 P.2d 671 (Colo. 1985).   Traversing is not equivalent to continuously re-entering the slope from one side or the other for purposes of subsection (8). Hendrickson v. Doyle, 150 F. Supp. 3d 1233 (D. Colo. 2015 ).