Health & Welfare | Daily Report

Flickr photo by Jasmic

When Jim Robertson, president of the Conejo Ski and Sports Club, hits the slopes, he likes to find out-of-the-way runs on the back side of the mountain, avoiding both trees and crowds.

He doesn’t wear a helmet while skiing, but his grown children, who snowboard, have since they were young. Robertson said not wearing a helmet has not been an issue because of the runs he chooses.

Now, with state lawmakers considering a proposed law to require children to wear helmets when skiing or snowboarding, Robertson acknowledged the wisdom of such a safety precaution – certainly for kids, perhaps even for himself. “It’s a great idea,” Robertson said. “Maybe it should be required for everyone.”

California may be the first state to require at least children to wear helmets on the slopes.

Studies by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission show head injuries represent 14 percent of all ski and snowboarder accidents, and more than half of the deaths on the slopes each year are due to head injuries.

The percentage of serious injuries has increased significantly along with the rising popularity of high-speed runs, jumps and acrobatics on the slopes. The study estimates more than 7,000 head and brain injuries could be prevented each year through helmets.

According to a study by the National Ski Area Association, helmet use increased by 19 percent in the most recent ski season, with 57 percent of skiers and snowboarders using them. The highest percentage of helmet wearers were children. The California Ski Industry Association estimates the state’s average percentage of helmet users is higher than the national average.

“One of the things we are very proud of is that we’ve made significant strides in increasing helmet use, particularly in the past seven to eight years, without a single piece of legislation requiring helmets,” said Dave Byrd, director of education and risk for the National Ski Area Association.

Byrd attributed the increase to ski resorts leading by example. All resorts in California have helmets available for rent, and most require employees to wear helmets when out on the slopes.

Olympians and professional winter athletes wear protective headgear in competition, mainstreaming the use of helmets.

“Helmets are becoming a standard piece of equipment,” Byrd said. Yet for all the progress made in safety awareness and voluntary helmet use, Byrd supports the proposed helmet law. “It makes it easier for a parent to say to a kid to put their helmet on.”

Sen. Leland Yee, D-San Francisco, is the author of SB 880, which would require those under 18 to wear helmets while downhill skiing or snowboarding. The bill, which passed the Senate in June and is awaiting action in the Assembly, is modeled after the law that requires all minors to wear protective headgear while riding bicycles, scooters and skateboards. Parents would be responsible for the enforcement of SB 880 and be subject to a $25 fine if a child is cited for not wearing a helmet.

“When the data is so conclusive that helmets save lives and reduce severity of injuries, California should set minimum standards for safety,” Yee said. “We correctly do not allow parental choice for car seats and seat belts or basic vaccinations for children attending schools. Nor should a helmet for kids on ski slopes be optional.”

Bob Roberts is executive director of the California Ski Industry Association and worked with Yee to draft SB 880. He said “the primary concern is if you are going to have a bill that mirrors the bike bill, then you have to keep the enforcement with the participants and their parents. We don’t have an effective way of enforcing the bill otherwise. Minors don’t carry IDs.”

SB 880 has no formal opposition and was approved by the Senate on a 21-13 vote, with the late Republican Sen. Dave Cox of Sacramento joining 20 Democrats in support.

The bill, however, is tied to another ski-safety measure that has generated resistance. The two measures are legally joined, so if one fails, both will.

In January, Assemblyman Dave Jones, D-Sacramento, introduced AB 1652, which originally would have required ski resorts to enforce the helmet law and allowed violators to be charged with a misdemeanor.

The national and state ski resort associations, along with most California ski resorts, support SB 880 but oppose AB 1652. “It would increase liability exposure, and resorts don’t have the manpower to enforce it. It would divert ski patrols into mountain police,” Byrd said.

AB 1652 has undergone several revisions. The current draft, approved by the Assembly in June, requires ski resorts to inform patrons on helmet safety, prepare an annual safety plan and create monthly summary reports of accidents. Although there is currently no statewide standardized system in place, most ski resorts already have those practices.

Final action on both bills is expected before the Legislature adjourns for the year Aug. 31.

This story first appeared in the Ventura County Star.