WMC Update 2012

Let's try to keep this from devolving, if we can. No need for mudslinging -- it's a heated enough topic without making it more personal than it needs to be.

We will point out that the reality is that one use- snowmobile riding- dominates the largest portion of Forest outside of Wilderness. That includes many of the Forest areas accessible from plowed-road. USFS provides some excellent non-motorized areas which we appreciate and use. These are a tiny fraction of the Forest. So yes, sir, you and many snowmobile riders support one use over the other. We are asking for new USFS Management that will balance these incompatible uses fairly.

As I understand this statement, you would also be willing to exclude certain areas from skier access and snowmobile only? You guys hog up parking and should also be banned from "wilderness"?! Where do we draw the line? I'd be interested to hear a point from this group on offering something to someone else instead of just claiming your own rights.....

In the meantime, I'll offer free rides to the back country to be sure you get first tracks before sledders "ruin" your area....

First, good will to all.  Even, nay, especially those that aren’t going to like what I have to say.  There’s more to being in the backcountry than just powder (I know-Blasphemy!).  Personally, the thing that gets me about snow mobiles is the noise and the exhaust.  When I interact with folks, in the backcountry or otherwise, I typically don’t blow smoke in their faces and scream in their ears, but that is the affect that snow mobiles have on my backcountry experience.  This is air and noise pollution.  When I’m on the Coleman Glacier, the sledders on the Easton can’t hear me, but I can hear them.  It sucks.  Perhaps someone can explain to me why they need to be so loud.  My point is that I’m quite sure my impact on the sledders’ backcountry experience is significantly less than their impact on mine.  Snow mobiles have a greater impact on both the resource and the other users than do other user groups.  I think that this is the gist of the reason that snow mobiles are already (rightfully) restricted to less turf than other user groups.  Unfortunately for us all, the more sledders, the more impact.  I would hazard that this is also the reason that (some) skiers may feel more entitled to the resource, or at least a strong desire for more places without the noise and the smoke.  Oh, and I hate it when snow shoers stomp up the skin track too, but at least they’re quiet and don’t smell bad.  Most of them anyway.

As well, has anyone ever tried and/or had any success reporting wilderness boundary or non-motorized violators?

Cheers,

Educating the groups to share(like I do my 7-9 yo boys) is truly the only answer.

As in "you have a legal shot at all the cookies on the plate, but I'm faster than you and am going to lick them all quickly first and then start chowing!!" :

If all sledders were as nice as you, and gave lifts and offered first tracks to skiers and such, I'd not respond as I just did. But frankly, I'm pretty sure we've not run across each other yet out there, as I've yet to see this amazing degree of generosity on display.

First, good will to all.  Even, nay, especially those that aren’t going to like what I have to say.  There’s more to being in the backcountry than just powder (I know-Blasphemy!).  Personally, the thing that gets me about snow mobiles is the noise and the exhaust.  When I interact with folks, in the backcountry or otherwise, I typically don’t blow smoke in their faces and scream in their ears, but that is the affect that snow mobiles have on my backcountry experience.  This is air and noise pollution.  When I’m on the Coleman Glacier, the sledders on the Easton can’t hear me, but I can hear them.  It sucks.  Perhaps someone can explain to me why they need to be so loud.  My point is that I’m quite sure my impact on the sledders’ backcountry experience is significantly less than their impact on mine.  Snow mobiles have a greater impact on both the resource and the other users than do other user groups.  I think that this is the gist of the reason that snow mobiles are already (rightfully) restricted to less turf than other user groups.  Unfortunately for us all, the more sledders, the more impact.  I would hazard that this is also the reason that (some) skiers may feel more entitled to the resource, or at least a strong desire for more places without the noise and the smoke.  Oh, and I hate it when snow shoers stomp up the skin track too, but at least they’re quiet and don’t smell bad.  Most of them anyway.

As well, has anyone ever tried and/or had any success reporting wilderness boundary or non-motorized violators?

Cheers,

Great points and a great tone! Yes, we have been reporting for years. We have even been on the cell talking to both the Sheriff and USFS personnel while we watch snowmobiles ridden in Wilderness. It is not a few who violate Wilderness, there is regular, intentional riding of snowmobiles in the Alpine Lakes Wilderness. USFS personnel will explain as they have to us that they know about the areas that we report that have snowmobile Wilderness trespass, and usually have told us about others. USFS will also talk of their inability to enforce this problem, even transmitted these very words while asking for compliance to snowmobile folks who posted the emails on Snowest and on BackcountryRebels. USFS folks are very patient and kind in discussing this, including the USFS Law Enforcement Officer. But the LEO has other matters to deal with.

Again,we restate that there are clearly many more non-motorized winter recreationists than there are folks who own the snowmobiles that cost $9k to $12k new that can climb the areas proposed by WMC (see original post please) for non-motorized designation. So our point is, we ask USFS to manage the resource for both uses. At this time, the general Forest in winter is without question dominated by snowmobile riding.

As I understand this statement, you would also be willing to exclude certain areas from skier access and snowmobile only? You guys hog up parking and should also be banned from "wilderness"?! Where do we draw the line? I'd be interested to hear a point from this group on offering something to someone else instead of just claiming your own rights.....

In the meantime, I'll offer free rides to the back country to be sure you get first tracks before sledders "ruin" your area....

Yes, sir you are indeed claiming it all for your use- snowmobile riding. Do you ski? We are familiar with your posts on Snowest as an avid snowmobile rider and see that you are going on there and here right now.

As far as Sno Parks, a vehicle that has displayed a valid Permit may park there. Perhaps sir you could share here some of the sentiment on this topic that is expressed on your usual forum? Sharing, eh?

WMC is seeking areas for non-motorized winter use so that skiers (etc) may have a shot at quiet recreation on untracked snow in some reasonable balance of the Forest total area. WMC has never stated that we seek prohibition or regulation of snowmobiles outside of non-motorized areas.

I wrote:

Sledders don't "self police" because any form of policing is simply antithetical to sled culture.

Then you wrote:

I report to no one but my own heart and family.

I wrote:

The sad fact of the matter is that the very nature of the sled makes it the only viable access option for the litterers, drinkers, the noisy, the destructive, and the reckless.

Then you wrote:

You'd be one of those people I would warn my boys about. And suggest they leave you some yellow snow to melt for drinking water....

Thanks for proving my point about sledding culture.

I am here simply whitewash the sledding crowd, even though my own responses, which include instructing my children to urinate in places where you might seek drinking water, prove your point about sledding culture quite nicely.

I'll be sure to print these forum pages and let everyone see what the sled culture is all about. I'm sure you'll be quite happy to take ownership of your words in a public meeting.

Aren't sled-free or wilderness buffer zones going to be a tough political sell in most cases, given that the sled heads seem more numerous and so far, better organized than backcountry skiers.  Even with bigger budgets and better equipment, it's hard to imagine ever having enough law enforcement on the snow to keep up with snowmobiling's rate of growth, even if no-go areas or buffer zones are achieved.

Wilderness boundary law enforcement and motorized closures might be much improved if State and federal agencies required permanently mounted vehicle tracking GPS technology for off-road machines such as sleds & ATVs.  Maybe it could be sold to the manufacturers as a safety/navigation aid?

I'm lucky to now live next to a National Park, but I spent a lot of time in southern BC, and Cookie is right, most places outside their Parks were tracked out, even decades ago.  Though it's not as overun as the east side of the Cascades, a friend here refers to the Gifford Pinchot NF (southern WA) as 'Snowmobile National Park'.  I hear sled & ATV incursions are pretty common in both the Goat Rocks and Mt. Adams wildernesses.  I'm also curious how that new sled-free corridor at St Helens is working out?

Even areas supposedly dedicated to skiing may not be very quiet.  Several experienced locals have called the Mount Tahoma huts "a snowmobile club posing as a ski trail system", because of all the 'grooming' and very frequent service runs to the huts by insiders.   

WMC believes that now may be a good time to advocate for more non-motorized winter recreation designation here. There are successful examples of similar division of Forest for motorized winter use and non-motorized winter use in Idaho, Montana, Colorado, perhaps others.

As we have been told by USFS personnel, unless we citizens call attention to this and define the problem, it will not be addressed. WMC and TSP are a start, many questions arise, but we must get started. Skiers have lost the competition for snow recreation on Forest land. Some of us who snowmobile out to skitour 40 days per year, and some of us who have skied this terrain in the Proposal in the '80s and one we know in the 70's, we see perhaps or understand many examples of this problem.

Let's take another dive into sled culture. If you're curious as to why WMC wants to remain as anonymous as possible, well ... here is a thread where they posted the name and address of people opposed to sledding, and where they encouraged hostile phone contact.

backcountryrebels.com/showthread.php?t=7167&page=2

Jim Oker, do you want to know why you were sprayed? A lot of sledders actively encourage what amounts to DANGEROUS and ILLEGAL mistreatment of skiers.

This is only the tip of the iceberg. YammaDog, would you care to make a comment? Perhaps you can produce similar materials from the backcountry skier side of this argument?

I like to know what land on the OWNF is being closed to snow mobiles as claimed by Yammadog?

It does no good to impugn the character of your opposition.  It hurts your credibility and makes it harder to reach any compromise.  Please stop. (CookieMonster, I'm talking to you.) 

I've posted in support of the WMC proposals, but now I'm going to shift gears.  While I agree with the ideas being suggested here, I find it hard to take this project seriously.  I don't think it can succeed as it has been presented here.  I'm going to offer a few suggestions. 

First, WMC will eventually have to shed its cloak of anonymity.  As Antonin Scalia said yesterday, "Running a democracy takes a certain amount of civic courage." I don't think you'll be able to generate the political support you need if you stay anonymous.  I can't put my support behind an anonymous campaign.  We will all need to step forward. 

According to WMC, the new organization has no website, no funds, just an email address.  That's not going to cut it.  As I'll discuss below, you've got some serious communicating to do.  A website is a first step toward crafting your message. 

You need to document the historical use by skiers of the areas you're concerned about.  Having visited a few snowmobiling areas, I'm not so sure that backcountry skiers outnumber snowmobilers anymore.  There are a lot of sledders out there!  Unless you can prove that skiers far outnumber snowmobilers, your defense of skiing will have to be framed in terms of the traditional use of the areas you're concerned about.  You need to show that skiers have been using these areas for a long time, and that the growth and evolution of snowmobiling has been crowding them out.  This is fundamentally a conservative argument.  Respecting such traditions is a conservative value.  Use this to your advantage. 

You need to explain why federally designated wilderness does not meet the needs of the ski community.  That's the first thing that the skeptical listener is going to ask.  You need to explain that federal wilderness was established primarily with summer use in mind.  Neither snowmobiling nor backcountry skiing were given much consideration when our state's wilderness areas were designated.  Most wilderness areas are too remote for regular winter use by skiers (although they serve well for summertime use by hikers and horse riders).  You need to illustrate the problem with concrete facts and examples. 

You need to be very specific about which areas you are proposing for non-motorized management.  You need to provide maps.  Verbal hand-waving with reference to topo maps is not good enough. 

You need to be specific about which areas will NOT be managed for non-motorized use.  Again, the maps must be explicit.  Snowmobile enthusiasts will justifiably distrust you unless you clearly tell them which areas will remain open to them.  They're going to disagree with you no matter what you do. Don't give them a reason to distrust you as well. Writing off these areas for skiing may be painful, but I don't see any alternative if you want people to accept the plan. 

This thread is a nice way to kick off discussion of the issue.  But the proposals that WMC has offered are much too vague.  I can't throw my support behind the proposal at this point, and I doubt that you'll get 100 letters, let alone 1000, unless you get more serious and organized about this project.  My two cents... 

It does no good to impugn the character of your opposition.  It hurts your credibility and makes it harder to reach any compromise.  Please stop. (CookieMonster, I'm talking to you.) 

I've posted in support of the WMC proposals, but now I'm going to shift gears.  While I agree with the ideas being suggested here, I find it hard to take this project seriously.  I don't think it can succeed as it has been presented here.  I'm going to offer a few suggestions. 

First, WMC will eventually have to shed its cloak of anonymity.  As Antonin Scalia said yesterday, "Running a democracy takes a certain amount of civic courage." I don't think you'll be able to generate the political support you need if you stay anonymous.  I can't put my support behind an anonymous campaign.  We will all need to step forward. 

According to WMC, the new organization has no website, no funds, just an email address.  That's not going to cut it.  As I'll discuss below, you've got some serious communicating to do.  A website is a first step toward crafting your message. 

You need to document the historical use by skiers of the areas you're concerned about.  Having visited a few snowmobiling areas, I'm not so sure that backcountry skiers outnumber snowmobilers anymore.  There are a lot of sledders out there!  Unless you can prove that skiers far outnumber snowmobilers, your defense of skiing will have to be framed in terms of the traditional use of the areas you're concerned about.  You need to show that skiers have been using these areas for a long time, and that the growth and evolution of snowmobiling has been crowding them out.  This is fundamentally a conservative argument.  Respecting such traditions is a conservative value.  Use this to your advantage. 

You need to explain why federally designated wilderness does not meet the needs of the ski community.  That's the first thing that the skeptical listener is going to ask.  You need to explain that federal wilderness was established primarily with summer use in mind.  Neither snowmobiling nor backcountry skiing were given much consideration when our state's wilderness areas were designated.  Most wilderness areas are too remote for regular winter use by skiers (although they serve well for summertime use by hikers and horse riders).  You need to illustrate the problem with concrete facts and examples. 

You need to be very specific about which areas you are proposing for non-motorized management.  You need to provide maps.  Verbal hand-waving with reference to topo maps is not good enough. 

You need to be specific about which areas will NOT be managed for non-motorized use.  Again, the maps must be explicit.  Snowmobile enthusiasts will justifiably distrust you unless you clearly tell them which areas will remain open to them.  They're going to disagree with you no matter what you do. Don't give them a reason to distrust you as well. Writing off these areas for skiing may be painful, but I don't see any alternative if you want people to accept the plan. 

This thread is a nice way to kick off discussion of the issue.  But the proposals that WMC has offered are much too vague.  I can't throw my support behind the proposal at this point, and I doubt that you'll get 100 letters, let alone 1000, unless you get more serious and organized about this project.  My two cents... 

Thank you for taking the time to add to the discussion.

We feel that individuals deciding to ask the Forest Supervisor for more non-motorized winter recreation areas has more importance than any organization, website, marketing, etc. There is plenty of that type of thing out there now such as Winter Wildlands Allliance and several other organizations. We are not asking for money, we are asking for skiers to advocate for themselves and recognize that as the valid influence. There is nothing else out there for Washington skiers to support for this purpose specifically, so we created this. We have good reason to believe that the Forest Supervisor may prefer to hear the heartfelt concerns and logical requests of citizens, Forest users, rather than to get another elaborate marketing packet or flashy website to view.

We are not asking anyone to endorse us personally, we are trying to illustrate the problem and trying to encourage skiers to speak up. The issue is important, skiers collective voices are important.

We would not expect, ever, any support, concession, or agreement from snowmobile riders in regard to creating new designated winter non-motorized areas.

USFS personnel are quite sharp and knowledgeable and do not need this to be explained so much, as are many skiers who understand much about these issues. We are very aware that many in USFS are knowledgeable of the extent that Wilderness is meeting the needs of unlawful Wilderness snowmobile trespassers, and the buffer concept does not need to be explained to USFS, clearly.

If the Forest Supervisor wished to implement this type of non-motorized winter recreation areas it could occur. Non-motorized designations have been done in this fashion on other Forests, as well as have been done previously on the Wenatchee National Forest. The lines that will be drawn exactly would be drawn by USFS. Currently many Boundaries are drawn on ridgetops or along drainages or roads, as we have discussed. We are not anonymous in our contact with USFS, that is what matters, we are Forest users advocating our position. We do not seek anyone's endorsement, we seek others to join in advocacy of the issue.

Great discussion, thanks all!

We feel that individuals deciding to ask the Forest Supervisor for more non-motorized winter recreation areas has more importance than any organization, website, marketing, etc.

Those individuals are going to have to feel pretty strongly about this issue to help you. If you want 1000 letters, then the vast majority of the people you want to participate will not be familiar with the areas they're writing about, at least not in winter. My sense is that you're taking a very passive approach to this project. Without communicating better what stands to be gained or lost, I can't imagine that you'll get the support you say you're seeking. Not everybody knows or cares about these areas as much as you do. How are you going to motivate them to write?

Those individuals are going to have to feel pretty strongly about this issue to help you. If you want 1000 letters, then the vast majority of the people you want to participate will not be familiar with the areas they're writing about, at least not in winter. My sense is that you're taking a very passive approach to this project. Without communicating better what stands to be gained or lost, I can't imagine that you'll get the support you say you're seeking. Not everybody knows or cares about these areas as much as you do. How are you going to motivate them to write?

Yes good points. Perhaps we can work with some of your suggestions. We would accept technical assistance for mapping! It is somewhat sad that the snowmobile riders know this great terrain better than the population of skiers here.

We are not telling folks what to do, we are asking their support for non-motorized winter recreation areas. We threw in what we like specifically in our area, and we could do a better job in describing that, agreed. If all that they would support is the concept of more non-motorized areas for winter recreation on the Forest, that is a huge endorsement. We have spent considerable time thus far communicating and gathering information. Some here have spent many hours for many years on this topic in efforts and Committees unrelated to WMC/ TSP. We think it is time to be more specific, but we hear you, you would like more details than we have provided. We cannot say who may or may not write, we know that we would estimate starting with nearly 200 contacts in the Wenatchee Valley and Kittitas Valley who express interest in these issues.

We are making an effort to achieve a goal that would greatly benefit skiers who wish to ski tour these great places.

It does no good to impugn the character of your opposition.  It hurts your credibility and makes it harder to reach any compromise.  Please stop. (CookieMonster, I'm talking to you.) 

I've posted in support of the WMC proposals, but now I'm going to shift gears.  While I agree with the ideas being suggested here, I find it hard to take this project seriously.  I don't think it can succeed as it has been presented here.  I'm going to offer a few suggestions. 

First, WMC will eventually have to shed its cloak of anonymity.  As Antonin Scalia said yesterday, "Running a democracy takes a certain amount of civic courage." I don't think you'll be able to generate the political support you need if you stay anonymous.  I can't put my support behind an anonymous campaign.  We will all need to step forward. 

According to WMC, the new organization has no website, no funds, just an email address.  That's not going to cut it.  As I'll discuss below, you've got some serious communicating to do.  A website is a first step toward crafting your message. 

You need to document the historical use by skiers of the areas you're concerned about.  Having visited a few snowmobiling areas, I'm not so sure that backcountry skiers outnumber snowmobilers anymore.  There are a lot of sledders out there!  Unless you can prove that skiers far outnumber snowmobilers, your defense of skiing will have to be framed in terms of the traditional use of the areas you're concerned about.  You need to show that skiers have been using these areas for a long time, and that the growth and evolution of snowmobiling has been crowding them out.  This is fundamentally a conservative argument.  Respecting such traditions is a conservative value.  Use this to your advantage. 

You need to explain why federally designated wilderness does not meet the needs of the ski community.  That's the first thing that the skeptical listener is going to ask.  You need to explain that federal wilderness was established primarily with summer use in mind.  Neither snowmobiling nor backcountry skiing were given much consideration when our state's wilderness areas were designated.  Most wilderness areas are too remote for regular winter use by skiers (although they serve well for summertime use by hikers and horse riders).  You need to illustrate the problem with concrete facts and examples. 

You need to be very specific about which areas you are proposing for non-motorized management.  You need to provide maps.  Verbal hand-waving with reference to topo maps is not good enough. 

You need to be specific about which areas will NOT be managed for non-motorized use.  Again, the maps must be explicit.  Snowmobile enthusiasts will justifiably distrust you unless you clearly tell them which areas will remain open to them.  They're going to disagree with you no matter what you do. Don't give them a reason to distrust you as well. Writing off these areas for skiing may be painful, but I don't see any alternative if you want people to accept the plan. 

This thread is a nice way to kick off discussion of the issue.  But the proposals that WMC has offered are much too vague.  I can't throw my support behind the proposal at this point, and I doubt that you'll get 100 letters, let alone 1000, unless you get more serious and organized about this project.  My two cents... 

Great post. WMC...I would listen to this guy.. The arguement is certainly lost without the details. here's a site that might help with some of the details....www.snowmobile-alliance.org/


Monty_B....noise and exhaust are both being addressed by the manufacturers. the new sleds are significantly quieter and much lower on the exhaust. We are finally seeing the technology get implemented and getting performance with it. Hopefully it will be more common place in the next couple of years to see but not hear a sledder.

Great post. WMC...I would listen to this guy.. The arguement is certainly lost without the details. here's a site that might help with some of the details....www.snowmobile-alliance.org/

Well, sir, we are certain that there is no argument, justification, demographic. sense of fairness or ethics, anything that will convince Yammadog or nearly all snowmobile enthusiasts to consider another user group. There is no evidence that any snowmobile rider is interested in leaving one square foot of untracked snow for skiers or for snowshoers.

During one day of a five hour ski tour last January three of us climbed 1000 ft. slopes on skis on a peak and got first tracks on three different aspects, in nice powder. The 14 snowmobile riders that I mentioned previously not once but twice shared the resource by following us twice, then tracking the slope beside us that we had manged to get a run on, when there was much more open slope away from us. The ruts from the  snowmobiles rendered those areas unusable for skiing for weeks after. That is a great example, Mr Yammadog, of sharing, the type of sharing that you tell us you are teaching to your children.

Snowmobile Forum opponents claimed to email Becky Heath with automatic opposition very quickly- with just the statement of opposition and no logic other than "we oppose."

WMC has in common with Mr Skoog the active intellectual consideration of our use and others' uses. Mr Skoog has valid points which in the end may serve to strengthen WMC and TSP.

We would accept technical assistance for mapping!

A humble low tech suggestion - get yourself a topo map (or a set of them) and draw on them with a pencil, and if you don't have your own scanner (very cheap at Office Max, Staples, etc.), I'm pretty sure you can scan your results at a local Kinkos. Or perhaps even easier, buy this , which would allow you to select an appropriate magnification level, and if you can't do what you want with the internal map modification tools, read in their manual about how to "export" your map, and export it as a .tiff or .jpeg and pull that into whatever "paint" program you have on your computer (if on Windows, check programs:accessories - you probably have what you need right there) and do your drawing there. Perhaps I'm underthinking this, but I don't think you need a cartographic lab for your purpose.

Some investments such as this and documentation of historic use would demonstrate to me that you're going to put energy in here, and are not simply trying to take the easy route to rabble rousing via a few web posts. W/o such a demonstration of your own commitment, and w/o your coming out from the shadows, like Lowell, I'm not eager to sign onto the effort.

A humble low tech suggestion - get yourself a topo map (or a set of them) and draw on them with a pencil, and if you don't have your own scanner (very cheap at Office Max, Staples, etc.), I'm pretty sure you can scan your results at a local Kinkos. Or perhaps even easier, buy this , which would allow you to select an appropriate magnification level, and if you can't do what you want with the internal map modification tools, read in their manual about how to "export" your map, and export it as a .tiff or .jpeg and pull that into whatever "paint" program you have on your computer (if on Windows, check programs:accessories - you probably have what you need right there) and do your drawing there. Perhaps I'm underthinking this, but I don't think you need a cartographic lab for your purpose.

Some investments such as this and documentation of historic use would demonstrate to me that you're going to put energy in here, and are not simply trying to take the easy route to rabble rousing via a few web posts. W/o such a demonstration of your own commitment, and w/o your coming out from the shadows, like Lowell, I'm not eager to sign onto the effort.

Thanks. We are working on mapping.

We ask skiers to advocate on their own behalf. We are not instructing skiers to do this or that, we are asking skiers to advocate on their own behalf for designation of non-motorized winter recreation areas on the Forest.

Much more effort is in email circulation of the message through our networks, again asking individual skiers to send comments to the Forest Supervisor asking for designation of non-motorized winter recreation areas.

Well, sir, we are certain that there is no argument, justification, demographic. sense of fairness or ethics, anything that will convince Yammadog or nearly all snowmobile enthusiasts to consider another user group. There is no evidence that any snowmobile rider is interested in leaving one square foot of untracked snow for skiers or for snowshoers.

During one day of a five hour ski tour last January three of us climbed 1000 ft. slopes on skis on a peak and got first tracks on three different aspects, in nice powder. The 14 snowmobile riders that I mentioned previously not once but twice shared the resource by following us twice, then tracking the slope beside us that we had manged to get a run on, when there was much more open slope away from us. The ruts from the  snowmobiles rendered those areas unusable for skiing for weeks after. That is a great example, Mr Yammadog, of sharing, the type of sharing that you tell us you are teaching to your children.

Snowmobile Forum opponents claimed to email Becky Heath with automatic opposition very quickly- with just the statement of opposition and no logic other than "we oppose."

WMC has in common with Mr Skoog the active intellectual consideration of our use and others' uses. Mr Skoog has valid points which in the end may serve to strengthen WMC and TSP.

To begin with skiers and snowshoers in Washington have 4,423,676 acres that should have 0 snowmobiles. And in the summer it should have 0 mountain bikes/motorcycles or atv's for the hikers

Secondly, let's see the proposal on what and how much you are talking about and then we can have a real valid conversation. Until then, you look like a bunch of self riteous haters....

And, I can't speak for the 30,000+ sledders in WA that pay to have groomed trails, that you also get to use, but I can say that when I have the opportunity to make a difference in how sledders ride and respect others in the area, particularly skeirs/boarders on slopes..I do. I also speak my mind on taking care of the BC so that the future generations can enjoy the area as well.

If some yahoo wrecked a slope that you were actively using, say something to them. We need to rebuild common courtesy in this country instead of infighting for the same space by creating sides to fight over a patch of land that we should be sharing.

Yammadog - I appreciate your intent to persuade fellow riders to respect other recreationalists as well as the environment. I also appreciate your call for common courtesey.

I've had multiple pleasant encounters with snowmobilers while out skiing, including sharing food (and being offered beer from their full case) with a pair on a ridge  a few years back, where we discussed avalanche safety gear (they thought beacons were a rip-off and didn't want to buy them; we encouraged them to go for it given what they described liking to ride). Some snowmobilers also slow down to pass us on the trail.

I've also been given the finger and purposefully sprayed with snow (this despite our having gotten ourselves and our dogs off the snowmobile trail while they were still in the distance - something we always do for our own safety), and often had riders accelerate right before passing us. I've had my vehicle vandalized at a trailhead. I've been threateningly yelled at at the trailhead for using up parking space (despite having the same sno-park pass, and despite having allowed plenty of room for their unloading and pulling their vehicles out). So to be frank, I'm not super optimistic about being able to widely spread common courtesey, and in many cases I don't know if the riders I'm watching paint a slope are the kind that would trade food, or break my passing mirror and give me the finger, and I'm not eager to push the wrong kind over the anger edge. A search on "skier" on Snowest provides plenty of additional evidence of riders who have zero intention of offering me any common courtesy (and who offer up threats instead, at least on the net). On top of this, how do I even get their attention when they're so focused on the path ahead of them, and their machines are so loud? 

I've done what I can to reach out and be commonly courteous in the past decade and a half, and yet the loss of useful (and quiet)  ski terrain is increasing, not decreasing. I will continue the reaching out, but I do not expect it to help with the primary issues raised by this thread.

You guys hog up parking and should also be banned from "wilderness"?!

This is pretty funny. If you proposed that sno-parks have half the parking reserved for snowmo trailer rigs, and half (by square footage) for vehicles w/o trailers, I'd likely jump at the offer. I won't hold my breath.

As for all those acres, as noted above, a key issue is how few of them are accessible to day-touring skiers.

To begin with skiers and snowshoers in Washington have 4,423,676 acres that should have 0 snowmobiles. And in the summer it should have 0 mountain bikes/motorcycles or atv's for the hikers

Secondly, let's see the proposal on what and how much you are talking about and then we can have a real valid conversation. Until then, you look like a bunch of self riteous haters....

And, I can't speak for the 30,000+ sledders in WA that pay to have groomed trails, that you also get to use, but I can say that when I have the opportunity to make a difference in how sledders ride and respect others in the area, particularly skeirs/boarders on slopes..I do. I also speak my mind on taking care of the BC so that the future generations can enjoy the area as well.

If some yahoo wrecked a slope that you were actively using, say something to them. We need to rebuild common courtesy in this country instead of infighting for the same space by creating sides to fight over a patch of land that we should be sharing.

Thanks, but there is no sharing. That is a fantasy byline. Snowmobile riding is unregulated and we observe riders seek every square foot of untracked snow. Snowmobile riders will continue to work cutting new trails into areas to find more untracked- because it is fun, great sport! We understand.

The riders who tracked our skiing beside us were actually very nice middle aged and older folks. We chatted a few times. They were just having fun, not trying to do anything against us. We do not believe that snowmobile riders realize the effects on a skier and on skiing of a passing snowmobile. We also believe that snowmobilers will not acknowledge that snowmobile impacts on snow renders it largely unsuitable for skiing. Snowmobile riding and skiing are incompatible on the same terrain, therefore we need areas designated for each use.

We are asking to set aside some snow for skiers and snowshoers.

Thanks, but there is no sharing. That is a fantasy byline. Snowmobile riding is unregulated and we observe riders seek every square foot of untracked snow. Snowmobile riders will continue to work cutting new trails into areas to find more untracked- because it is fun, great sport! We understand.

The riders who tracked our skiing beside us were actually very nice middle aged and older folks. We chatted a few times. They were just having fun, not trying to do anything against us. We do not believe that snowmobile riders realize the effects on a skier and on skiing of a passing snowmobile. We also believe that snowmobilers will not acknowledge that snowmobile impacts on snow renders it largely unsuitable for skiing. Snowmobile riding and skiing are incompatible on the same terrain, therefore we need areas designated for each use.

We are asking to set aside some snow for skiers and snowshoers.

Well, it's been entertaining...but if you don't believe in a compromise or have the ability to communicate effectively then we're done talking until it gets to the "official" stage.

And remember, that you do have designated area that sleds cannot enter...cheers.

Well, it's been entertaining...but if you don't believe in a compromise or have the ability to communicate effectively then we're done talking until it gets to the "official" stage.

And remember, that you do have designated area that sleds cannot enter...cheers.

Thank you for your comments and for your civility. We do not expect that snowmobile riders will consider the needs of another user group- non-motorized winter recreationists. We do not expect any support at any time from snowmobile riders.

We ride snowmobiles, we are not trying to ban snowmobiles or regulate them outside of non-motorized areas.

The Wenatchee Mountains Coalition and the Thousand Skiers Project seek USFS Designation of new Non-Motorized Areas for winter recreation.

Have fun out there and all the best!

Has it ever been considered to maybe look at trying to get more winter access for Non-motorized usage without taking area away from a specific user group? Snowmobilers would probably support this, and if there is enough support for something like this from ALL or MOST winter users it would have a higher likelyhood of being done.

Has it ever been considered to maybe look at trying to get more winter access for Non-motorized usage without taking area away from a specific user group?  Snowmobilers would probably support this, and if there is enough support for something like this from ALL or MOST winter users it would have a higher likelyhood of being done.

Thanks for commenting here. Ruffryder is a familiar name on Snowest and on Backcountry Rebels and he sounds like a great guy!

We believe that snowmobile riding on the same terrain as is used by skiers makes it largely unsuitable for skiing because of the rutting and packing of the snow. And also the noise really ruins the experience for skiers and snowshoers. Then are safety issues, snowmobiles' performance is very very impressive, but very scary and potentially hazardous to the pedestrian when a snowmobile passes a skier on a climb or fast.

Terrain designated for non-motorized use is the only way to provide for skiing and snowshoeing recreation.

Thanks Ruffy!

Thanks for commenting here. Ruffryder is a familiar name on Snowest and on Backcountry Rebels and he sounds like a great guy!

We believe that snowmobile riding on the same terrain as is used by skiers makes it largely unsuitable for skiing because of the rutting and packing of the snow. And also the noise really ruins the experience for skiers and snowshoers. Then are safety issues, snowmobiles' performance is very very impressive, but very scary and potentially hazardous to the pedestrian when a snowmobile passes a skier on a climb or fast.

Terrain designated for non-motorized use is the only way to provide for skiing and snowshoeing recreation.

Thanks Ruffy!

When you make your map, would you also indicate the areas that you would not be interested in eliminating snowmobiles and even perhaps for your safety, show the areas that you would not visit...say, a skier safety zone, where sledders don't need to worry about a skier being in "danger"?

Terrain designated for non-motorized use is the only way to provide for skiing and snowshoeing recreation.

If that is your stance then fine, but you did not answer my question.

Why is the emphasis on taking motorized access and making it Non-motorized? Why is the emphasis not on getting NEW access for Non-motorized use that does not impact motorized access?

Why is the emphasis on taking motorized access and making it Non-motorized?  Why is the emphasis not on getting NEW access for Non-motorized use that does not impact motorized access?

OK, I'll bite. Can you provide an example of what you're talking about?

I always figured that the important thing about real estate is that they aren't making any more of it.

On what lands would new access for non-motorized use be possible? Don't be cagey, tell us what you're referring to.

On what lands would new access for non-motorized use be possible? Don't be cagey, tell us what you're referring to.

I guess I should have clarified by stating new access for DAY use. As I understand from this discussion, it isn't an issue of the TOTAL AMOUNT of area that is available to skiers, the issue is the AMOUNT that can be utilized for SINGLE DAY adventures.

Correct?

As I understand from this discussion, it isn't an issue of the TOTAL AMOUNT of area that is available to skiers, the issue is the AMOUNT that can be utilized for SINGLE DAY adventures.

Correct?

Yes, I think that's the main focus of this WMC project.