Straddling the border between Austria and Switzerland, the Ischgl ski resort is sometimes called “Ibiza of the Alps.” With over 30 lifts and a lively après-ski scene, Ischgl is now facing a lawsuit by over 2,500 skiers for knowingly exposing them to the coronavirus. As of March 19, roughly 40 percent of Norway’s coronavirus cases could be traced back to the Austrian resort, as well as cases in Germany, Sweden, and Denmark.

In early March, some travelers returning from vacations at the Austrian resort began testing positive for COVID-19. On March 4, the Icelandic government added Ischgl to its list of COVID-19 hotspots, also included China, South Korea, Italy, and Iran. Still, the town and slopes remained open for another nine days, until March 13. Bars were up open until March 9.

Ischgl is just one of a number of ski resorts that has become a hotspot for the virus in the last few weeks. Blaine County, Idaho, home to the Sun Valley ski resort, has the highest number of infections per capita in the United States—even higher than New York City. In Colorado, one in seven of the state’s current cases can be traced back to a county with a ski resort.

“The actual sport itself is not the major risk factor, but primarily it’s the lodging and the restaurants and the other social spaces where people from different areas interact,” says Glen Mays, a professor and public health expert at the University of Colorado. “Ski towns funnel people from different areas into places of social interaction and that’s kind of the recipe for being a super-spreading location.”

By now, ski resorts in North America and Western Europe have closed. Austria closed theirs on March 15 and neighboring Switzerland on March 1 as part of a regulation banning all events or gatherings with 100 or more expected attendees.

However, some Swiss resorts, such as Adelboden-Lenk, Grindelwald, and Gstaad waited an extra day, a move the minister of the interior, Alain Berset called “illegal.” France closed its resorts on March 15 as well, resulting in 30,000 British ski tourists needing to leave the country. Many resorts in the United States quickly followed suit.

It feels obvious now that places designed for partying and socializing where dozens of people are packed into gondolas became prime locations for a virus to spread. Yet, even after countries began banning large gatherings of 500 or 1,000 people, depending on the country, ski resorts remained open for business.

So why didn’t the ski resorts close sooner?

Public health expert Mays says he understands the conundrum local governments face. Without enough epidemiological information and case counts, he says there could have been a strong backlash against decisions to close the resorts. If people don’t understand why they’re being asked to do things, they may not do them.

In addition, be it in Switzerland or Austria or Colorado, skiing is big business and an important tourist draw. One recent study reported the coronavirus could cost Switzerland $6.2 billion in tourism dollars.

“Hindsight is always 20-20,” says Mays. “In retrospect, there certainly would have been benefits to closing earlier.”

Alfredo Magri, a resident of Switzerland’s Engadin Valley, where St. Moritz is located, was aware of the risks even before the resorts were closed, but still continued to ski. “I became worried,” he says, “but I still went on skiing and tried to take fewer gondolas.”

So should the ski resorts be held responsible? In Tyrol, Austria, that question could be answered in court.

“It is good that anyone can present facts to the public prosecutor’s office and that these facts are going to be examined,” the office of Günther Plattner, the governor of Tyrol, told POWDER.

“However, we would like to point out that many countries and regions in the world are in an exceptional situation, something that was unimaginable just a few weeks ago. It will be important afterwards to put all measures worldwide, including those in Tyrol, to the test, on the one hand, to see if and where mistakes were made and, on the other hand, which structures need to be changed.”

The resort of Ischgl also asserts that it acted as best it could with the information it had at the time. According to a statement on Ischgl’s website, “We can guarantee that we in Ischgl have taken the measures specified and have been in discussions with state and federal authorities…We must recognize worldwide that what is known about this virus changes and broadens every day… We will of course analyze procedures and clarify what could have been done better, so we can learn for the future.”

However, according to the call for plaintiffs from Austria’s Verbraucherschutzverein VSV (Consumer Protection Association), “keeping ski resorts open, even though authorities knew or should have known of a threat of mass infection, is certainly a reason to consider claims for damages.”

In the meantime, Sweden is now grappling with similar issues. While most of Europe closed its resorts weeks ago, the Scandinavian nation’s ski resorts were open until April 6.

However, cases recently spiked and Sweden is now following the lead of its neighbors. But many fear it may be too late, and it’s hard not to see parallels with Ischgl, which less than a month ago had no idea it would become a hotspot for what is now a global pandemic.