|
|
|
|
|
|
Turns All Year Trip Reports
(1) Viewing these pages constitutes your acceptance of the Terms of Use.
(2) Disclaimer: the accuracy of information here is unknown, use at your own risk.
(3) Trip Report monthly boards: only actual trip report starts a new thread.
(4) Keep it civil and constructive - that is the norm here. |
|
|
|
|
Author
|
Topic: WMC Update 2012 (Read 29630 times)
|
yammadog
Member
Offline
Posts: 145
|
Here's an example of how motorcycles are being managed. One of the very few places west of the crest for orv use....I put in bold the similar concerns with the WMC proposal.
HELP SAVE REITER NOW!
THE DNR HAS CLOSED REITER AND HAS NOT SAID WHEN IT WILL RE-OPEN
IF AND WHEN IT RE-OPENS THE DNR PLANS TO MAKE IT MUCH SMALLER
The Washington State Department of Natural Resources has released its Draft Reiter Foothills Forest Recreation Plan. While the Northwest Motorcycle Association supports making Reiter an official ORV area, we have serious concerns about the current plan.
About 4,000 acres of the 10,000 acre area being studied have been used by ORVs for the past 30 years. The new DNR plan proposes limiting ORV use to only 1,100 acres. That is 72.5% less land for ORV use than what has historically been available.
The DNR admits that 1,100 acres is inadequate to accommodate existing ORV use, and their own research has identified additional area suitable for ORV use. Still they refuse to increase the area available to ORVs.
Although DNR research shows that offroad motorcycling is the most popular use (60% of user groups surveyed), the plan contains no specific mention of facilitating it.
Because the plan does not explicitly identify motorized single track trails, there is no guarantee that there will be any single track trails open to motorized use.
So far, the DNR has refused to listen to reason. They claim that part of the reason for shrinking the ORV area is to make room for trails for people that don’t like ORV use. These same people have legal access to land adjacent the Reiter Foothills, which is land that PROHIBITS offroad motorized use.
If you think that this stinks, now may be your last chance to make you voice heard!
YOU can help correct this injustice by writing to the Commissioner of Public Lands, Peter Goldmark, telling him what you think of this plan and asking him for a detailed reply on how he plans to solve the problem.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
yammadog
Member
Offline
Posts: 145
|
another section of the information about orv use.....is this your idea of management? Exclusion to the extreme?!
The overall fabric of recreation in Washington includes prohibitions on motorized trail recreation in all National Parks, all Wilderness Areas, all Natural Resource Conservation Areas, all State Parks (except the 600 acre Riverside facility near Spokane), the Mt Baker/Snoqualmie National Forest, and the vast majority of county and city parks. At a statewide level motorized trail use is prohibited on over 80 percent of the trail mileage. In the areas adjacent to the Reiter Foothills, that prohibition is 100 percent.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
WMC
Member
Offline
Posts: 263
|
As mentioned WMC started a thread at Snowest Forum saying the same as was posted here. It just got going and was pulled-
"Private Message: Thread Deleted
06-04-2010, 06:30 PM
X2Freeride
Currently: Trying to attain what I had, lost and want to have again
Moderator: Premium Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Age: 25
Posts: 445
Thanks: 36
Thanked 65 Times in 46 Posts
Rep Power: 3274559
Thread Deleted
Hi WMC,
Please note: This is an automated message.
You are receiving this message because I had to delete a thread that you started.
================================================== ========================
Thread: Asking for riders' input about winter non-motorized areas
Forum: Washington
Reason: Proposal Negatively Impacts Riding area's for Washington State users...
================================================== ========================
We hope you understand that our goal is not to offend or cause contention in our actions as moderators. But after review it was determined that this thread needed to be removed from the SnoWest Forums and was therefor deleted. If you have any questions, please feel free to reply to this message and I'll be happy to explain in more detail.
If you'd like to review the general guidelines that we as moderators use to help determine when these types of actions are necessary, please review them here: http://www.snowest.com/forum/showthread.php?t=38399
But please also understand that not all of our actions are black & white and we do have to occasionally make judgement calls.
Thanks for your understanding."
(end cc)
Too bad, WMC was trying to have a discussion restating what is here. WMC had already let USFS know to read that thread as well, so apologies to USFS.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
yammadog
Member
Offline
Posts: 145
|
Sorry WMC, guess we have to keep it over here. The mods at SW have been under fire this past several months for the limited ability to keep it an open forum, thus the BRC site is where lots of people migrated to.
I left for an hour and a half for a kid function and it was pulled....I'll be voicing my opinion about the thread being pulled.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
WMC
Member
Offline
Posts: 263
|
Sorry WMC, guess we have to keep it over here. The mods at SW have been under fire this past several months for the limited ability to keep it an open forum, thus the BRC site is where lots of people migrated to.
I left for an hour and a half for a kid function and it was pulled....I'll be voicing my opinion about the thread being pulled.
Thanks for that, it was an attempt. This is a tough discussion. Our goal other than getting support and accomplishing our proposal is to try to have a dialog with all users, supporters or opponents. We do not expect common ground with snowmobile riders, but if we keep trying perhaps common ground could be found?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
yammadog
Member
Offline
Posts: 145
|
Thanks for that, it was an attempt. This is a tough discussion. Our goal other than getting support and accomplishing our proposal is to try to have a dialog with all users, supporters or opponents. We do not expect common ground with snowmobile riders, but if we keep trying perhaps common ground could be found?
With your proposal as it sits, I doubt you find much common ground. If you are going to make any headway you'll need to offer something other than just simply closure of most all the prime area as you've discussed previously. You'll need to incorporate information and the consideration of the sledders for quality riding area.
Like I said earlier, I'm only a single rider and probably don't fit the majority.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ruffryder
Member
Offline
Posts: 125
|
Don't worry WMC.. we got some new mods over there that are a little proactive these days. Maybe the mods just think us snowmobilers are a sensitive bunch.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
WMC
Member
Offline
Posts: 263
|
Some discussion over at Snowest with the snowmobile folks-
"Originally Posted by hurleyboarder21
This can only be described as a selfish elitist minded screw everyone else landgrab.
THAT is all it is.
Go to tay and read all of wmc posts. and the ones on here also.
it is all about wmc pow stash private skiing club.
i feel sorry for the forest service to have to be burdened with the actions of such a misguided selfish effort to lock out the general public for the benefit of a "special" few. total bs
like the forest service has any extra resources as it is.
regards
hurly
WMC comment:
Thanks for the comment. You unquestionably defend your use as we do our own. There may be a similar counterpoint view.
Folks who do not ride snowmobiles along the Teanaway/ Ingalls divide may very well see an "elitist minded screw everyone else landgrab." and "actions of such a misguided selfish effort to lock out the general public for the benefit of a "special" few. total bs." USFS never planned and never designated that area for snowmobile recreation. Even though Federal Law requires and USFS asks for snowmobiles to stay out of the Wilderness there, in winter when we ski to those summits the highest concentration of snowmobiles that we see many times are over the Wilderness Boundary. We looked over at seven snowmobiles in the Wilderness from Earl Peak last March. We have reported similar observations for several years.
Another view held by many would ask is it more elitist to ride a $10k snowmobile to the Wilderness Boundary and beyond, elitist compared to skiers or snowshoe hikers walking and sweating for hours using a few hundred dollars worth of gear? One snowmobile may use the entire slope in an hour or two, how many hikers campers and skiers could use the same area if it were quiet and untracked? More than snowmobile riders and they could have peace and privacy even with a large crowd of skiers, hikers, or campers! Skiers and snowshoe and overnight travelers often travel that far in a day, but would not go there now in winter with all of the snowmobile traffic.
The Teanaway is a popular destination for skitouring, after the snowmobiles are not around anymore. Here is one of several recent TRs-
http://www.turns-all-year.com/skiing...?topic=16810.0
Here is the OP answer on that TR when asked, "See any snowmobilers?"
"None actively, probably because their approach via King Creek/Shaser Creek (gated roads) has long since melted out. But we could still could see many older snowmobile tracks throughout all the open slopes this deep in the wilderness. See photos below. There is a bright red wilderness boundary sign at the Falls Creek/Negro Creek divide with tracks going past it . I will also note that there were many tracks that also turned around at the divide and stayed in legal terrain. My synopsis is most stayed legal but those who entered the wilderness new they were doing so, new exactly which terrain in the wilderness they sought, and purposedly disregarded the law with intent.
Photo 1: old tracks lower right of skier on NE gully Navaho.
Photos 2 and 3: tracks in basin, east slope Navaho, below Falls divide and climbing toward saddle"
Thanks for the discussion.
Last edited by WMC; 06-05-2010 at 06:27 PM."
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ruffryder
Member
Offline
Posts: 125
|
So, this is the discussion you were after?
I guess the point of going over there was to try and get some comments to use in your cause.
Glad that a good faith effort was put forth on your behalf....
And people wonder why snowmobilers are hesitant to get involved in any discussion..
Nice to see this was posted over at NWHikers as well.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 06/05/10, 06:39 PM by ruffryder »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
WMC
Member
Offline
Posts: 263
|
So, this is the discussion you were after?
I guess the point of going over there was to try and get some comments to use in your cause.
Glad that a good faith effort was put forth on your behalf....
And people wonder why snowmobilers are hesitant to get involved in any discussion..
Is there a problem with point-counterpoint?
The purpose is to stimulate discussion, similar to your and Yamma's cross posts to various Forums. WMC stated at Snowest that WMC believes that these threads are watched by decision-makers including USFS, and commented that folks there should speak as if they were speaking to USFS.
Here is the last direct question asked at Snowest that has never been addressed by Ruffy Yamma or snowmobile riders-
"So, here it is asked of snowmobile riders: If sooner or later USFS divides up non-Wilderness Forest between snowmobiles and non-motorized use what are your ideas and suggestions?
Consider the large areas with open slopes for snowmobile riding in the Entiat and Chelan Mountains? Why or why not are those areas significant for snowmobile riding? Consider Mt St Helens and Mt Baker, and the Gifford-Pinchot NF- all have huge and significant good snowmobile riding opportunity."
Some commented that WMC should reach out to snowmobile riders, and that has been done done exactly as WMC has reached out to skiers and hikers, on the various Forums.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 06/05/10, 06:50 PM by WMC »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ruffryder
Member
Offline
Posts: 125
|
Here is the last direct question asked at Snowest that has never been addressed by Ruffy Yamma or snowmobile riders- So the WMC is calling me out for not answer one of your general questions when the WMC hasn't answered many questions over on snowest? And calling me out for not answering the question in less then 1.5 hrs after the committee posted it?
Consider the large areas with open slopes for snowmobile riding in the Entiat and Chelan Mountains? Why or why not are those areas significant for snowmobile riding? Consider Mt St Helens and Mt Baker, and the Gifford-Pinchot NF- all have huge and significant good snowmobile riding opportunity."
As to Helens and Baker. Yah, they are both good riding areas. Though they are about 4 or 5 hours away from the locations we are talking about here. Never been to the Entiat of Chelan mountains. I think those areas are about 4 or 5 hours away too. Interesting that the WMC claims to seek areas that are day accessible for non-motorized users, but yet their idea of snowmobile areas is for 8 hr round trip drives? I guess that is the 'parity' the WMC desires.
Some commented that WMC should reach out to snowmobile riders, and that has been done done exactly as WMC has reached out to skiers and hikers, on the various Forums.
I thought that's what the point was, to say you did it, to say you "engaged the opposition" while never even listening to anyone elses point, nor answering questions, nor engaging in a workable solution. It wasn't a discussion, it was a justification.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
yammadog
Member
Offline
Posts: 145
|
Is there a problem with point-counterpoint?
The purpose is to stimulate discussion, similar to your and Yamma's cross posts to various Forums. WMC stated at Snowest that WMC believes that these threads are watched by decision-makers including USFS, and commented that folks there should speak as if they were speaking to USFS.
Here is the last direct question asked at Snowest that has never been addressed by Ruffy Yamma or snowmobile riders-
"So, here it is asked of snowmobile riders: If sooner or later USFS divides up non-Wilderness Forest between snowmobiles and non-motorized use what are your ideas and suggestions?
Consider the large areas with open slopes for snowmobile riding in the Entiat and Chelan Mountains? Why or why not are those areas significant for snowmobile riding? Consider Mt St Helens and Mt Baker, and the Gifford-Pinchot NF- all have huge and significant good snowmobile riding opportunity."
Some commented that WMC should reach out to snowmobile riders, and that has been done done exactly as WMC has reached out to skiers and hikers, on the various Forums.
CC is fine if it's in context and as well not the extreme of the responses...you're only fishing on SW for that type of response from the less sympathetic to your position.
The Entiat and Chelan MTNs are too far for a day trip for me and lots of seattle area riders, thus the large number of users in the corridor over i90 and around to us2. As for the Baker riding area which I do visit each spring 4-6 times or less(also a long haul) is only a small portion of the mountain most is non-motorized and wilderness.
Now how about you answer the direct question?
Where do you forsee legal off road snowmobiling with similar terrain to what you are proposing closed? Do you acknowledge that you have available to you although some may be less desirable all areas of the forest totalling 100%?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Micah
Member
Offline
Posts: 113
|
And from your perspective where would that location [of designated snowmobiling area containing high-quality, open alpine terrain] be?
This I think is the $1M question which you have posed here several times and to which you have received no answer. I thought about trying to compile a list, but it is a big task, and my knowledge is insufficient. I envision perhaps 10 areas of significant size distributed through the mountainous regions of WA. Hopefully at least one along each of I-90 and US 2. I think it would be great if snowmobilers would submit a list (you know what areas have the most value from your perspective). For starters, I would probably look at areas with heavy snomo use now.
Again, it seems that non-motorized areas were reviewed in the late 90's which would have in it's consideration the modern capability of sleds, I think what has changed is the ability of the riders. Much like ski and snow board recreationalist taking much more difficult lines in the most recent years.
This is very interesting and something I had not considered before.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
yammadog
Member
Offline
Posts: 145
|
This I think is the $1M question which you have posed here several times and to which you have received no answer. I thought about trying to compile a list, but it is a big task, and my knowledge is insufficient. I envision perhaps 10 areas of significant size distributed through the mountainous regions of WA. Hopefully at least one along each of I-90 and US 2. I think it would be great if snowmobilers would submit a list (you know what areas have the most value from your perspective). For starters, I would probably look at areas with heavy snomo use now.
This is very interesting and something I had not considered before.
Well, that's why I'm here. This is one of those areas and the populus of the puget sound puts most folks in the I90 corridor. It's easy to say, go to baker or other high reward areas like Whistler but the fact is a day trip puts most people in this region of proposed closure. there's really not as many areas that sled can truely go that doesn't bump in to wildrness or some other off limits boundary or terrain obstruction particularly with this type of terrain.
Just like yourself, you don't want to be in the resorts with 1000 other folks pounding out every inch of slope, we search for the same untouched pow without all the rookies and inconsiderate yahoos..not to mention when we do shut off the sled it's in areas that provide a sweet view.
No doubt we(sledders) do have limitations in terrain and territory and this is the challenge with the WMC position of not recognizing the EXISTING opportunities of 100% of the forest including wilderness and non-motorized areas to the non-motorized folks.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
hurleyboarder21
5Member
Offline
Posts: 10
|
from cookie
"Physical fitness and skill are important barriers to entry if we're talking about deboning a 1000 metre alpine line by hand. Does anyone here really believe that an $8000 sled turns your average poke into a mountaineer? Exactly how much mountain sense does that $8000 buy? The equivalence is as follows: 8000 money dollars = -8000 mountain sense dollars.
Do you really want to share the slope with morons riding $8000 avalanche triggering machines? Do you really think they care if they have to ride above you ... when they don't even care if they kill their own friends?"
wow !
http://revver.com/video/310519/a-dozen-more-turns/
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 06/08/10, 09:42 PM by hurleyboarder21 »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
hurleyboarder21
5Member
Offline
Posts: 10
|
you may be suprised "cookie" that you or I will be just as sweaty and sore at the end of the day gettin to the same stash as a backcountry snowmobiler. or skiier...but hey i guess when the doc s say the best in shape of any athlete is the motocross racers...who whoulda thunk it? or understand.
experiance?
been skiin since i was 3.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
hurleyboarder21
5Member
Offline
Posts: 10
|
"If any here have a powder stash, as we have, "
this was posted by wmc on pg 1 or 2 i forget ..
pretty much sums it up.
i stand by my statement. As originally posted HERE by WMC
Some discussion over at Snowest with the snowmobile folks-
"Originally Posted by hurleyboarder21
This can only be described as a selfish elitist minded screw everyone else landgrab.
THAT is all it is.
Go to tay and read all of wmc posts. and the ones on here also.
it is all about wmc pow stash private skiing club.
i feel sorry for the forest service to have to be burdened with the actions of such a misguided selfish effort to lock out the general public for the benefit of a "special" few. total bs
like the forest service has any extra resources as it is.
regards
hurly
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 06/08/10, 06:35 PM by hurleyboarder21 »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
hurleyboarder21
5Member
Offline
Posts: 10
|
i wish my fishin holes that were just mine...were still mine...
i wish my favorite sushi joint still had instant seating...i wish my favorite trail was still unknown...i wish my taxes were still low...i wish my...secret lake was still secret...i wish puget sound was still good for fishin... i wish the foerst service had funding to enforce the wilderness boundries... i wish we could all get along and appreciate each others passions... i wish we all had jobs and contribited to the well being of our world... i wish i had access to some killer scenery and riding on my snowmobile in the wilderness... i wish that my great great grandparents who came to washington bought a chitload of land.... i wish my parents can still do what they love till there dead....
i wish for fairness from wmc
thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
yammadog
Member
Offline
Posts: 145
|
Wow WMC....looks like it's not just about your private stash in the teanaway and blewitt....you're just a motorized hater going for all of WA riding areas.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Micah
Member
Offline
Posts: 113
|
i wish my fishin holes that were just mine...were still mine...
So if someone showed up at your fishing hole and installed a bunch of nets and started using dynamite to harvest fish you would just shrug your shoulders and say, 'oh well, it was good while it lasted.' and move on?
BTW: I thought your post on the snowest thread comparing untracked powder to heroin was a very eloquent and correct assessment of the situation. You should repeat it here.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
yammadog
Member
Offline
Posts: 145
|
So if someone showed up at your fishing hole and installed a bunch of nets and started using dynamite to harvest fish you would just shrug your shoulders and say, 'oh well, it was good while it lasted.' and move on?
BTW: I thought your post on the snowest thread comparing untracked powder to heroin was a very eloquent and correct assessment of the situation. You should repeat it here.
Isn't that what the indian tribes get/got to do?.....both in fishing and having to move on.......
Hurly is one of the more entertaining and colorful guys on SW not sure how many times he's been banned and got new user names, but you couldn't find a better human in the non-forum world....heroin and pow....I can see the relationship....hahaha....
So if the proposal as it sits and won't be discussed for change is sumbitted, what position does that put the less staunch of your group? do you generate a new proposal or support the only one offered? Or not suppot it? Is WMC getting to speak for all of you?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
WMC
Member
Offline
Posts: 263
|
Wow WMC....looks like it's not just about your private stash in the teanaway and blewitt....you're just a motorized hater going for all of WA riding areas.
The name calling is unacceptable.
USFS is interested in knowing which areas are used by skiers, many of which are as yet untouched by snowmobiles. USFS planning is currently ongoing regardless of whether or not WMC or anyone else is involved, and unaffected by WSSA's or yammadog's objection.
We hope that skiers will give input to USFS about which areas are important for skitouring (see above post for contact information). Thanks.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 06/09/10, 03:18 PM by WMC »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
yammadog
Member
Offline
Posts: 145
|
The name calling is unacceptable.
many of which are as yet untouched by snowmobiles.
hahahahaha......Why else you would you promote closure in all areas of non-wilderness forest?
Answer my question.
40%+ wilderness and non-motorized is untouched.....100% available to skiers/non-motorized....
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
hurleyboarder21
5Member
Offline
Posts: 10
|
lmao
namecalling
Do you really want to share the slope with morons r
uh .....that quote would be from cookie monster
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you to our sponsors!
|
Contact turns-all-year.com
Turns All Year Trip Reports ©2001-2010 Turns All Year LLC. All Rights Reserved
The opinions expressed in posts are those of the poster and do not necessarily
reflect the opinions of Trip Reports administrators or Turns All Year LLC
|
Turns All Year Trip Reports | Powered by SMF 1.0.6.
© 2001-2005, Lewis Media. All Rights Reserved.
|
Page created in 0.309 seconds with 21 queries.
|
