O HE!! NO I'm calling bull sh!t. The envio want you too feel guilty because our sport isn't as "PURE" as theirs ie. crosscountry skiing, downhill, snowshoing ect. They never have enough, they have an area where I ride where no snowmobiles are aloud then they come over the summit (GELENA)and b!tch about hearing snowmobles in the valley. They don't what to share an area, they want it ALL for their sport. I do not want too quit snowmobiling because of cost, addiction, ect. but am tried of being treated like i'm a piece of dirt because i ride. IT WILL NOT STOP ME THOUGH!!!!!
After reading the latest Saws editorial...
- Thread starter jsledder
- Start date
O HE!! NO I'm calling bull sh!t. The envio want you too feel guilty because our sport isn't as "PURE" as theirs ie. crosscountry skiing, downhill, snowshoing ect. They never have enough, they have an area where I ride where no snowmobiles are aloud then they come over the summit (GELENA)and b!tch about hearing snowmobles in the valley. They don't what to share an area, they want it ALL for their sport. I do not want too quit snowmobiling because of cost, addiction, ect. but am tried of being treated like i'm a piece of dirt because i ride. IT WILL NOT STOP ME THOUGH!!!!!
They drive vehicles to get to those areas plus the ski lifts run on some form of energy .... and I don't see any windmills on the slope to get cheap clean fuel.
Also the groomers run on fuel ... and the slopes I see use quite a few groomers.
Personally I see no advantage over saying ... one sport causes less damage than yours to the land.
Looking at the big picture it seems here in California Wilderness areas are visted by less people, the surrounding communities get less business. And with all the granite around here lightning strike happen all the time. The lightning strikes start fires and the state of California and the federal government spend BILLIONS of dollars fighting fires in a wilderness. Then the ash goes into the waterways and kills much of the marine life. Children, elderly anyone with a respiratory ailment suffer from these out of control fires. Plus people get ill and die when the smoke and ash clouds go into populated areas.
Also, how is the wilderness being preserved when it burns and erodes away? I understand this is "naturally" but is this wise when we can cultivate the forest where the forest and mankind benefits? Some trees / vegitation need the fire to germinate ... but won't it help to control this and maximize the growth while minimizing the destruction? If there is clear cut areas (lumber sold and some proceeds pay for forest care) and trails (created by OHV taxes) would the forest be healthier in the long run?
Are there any studies to support human interaction with the forest is better than not touching the forest?
Last edited:
ha guys, this is why we have turbos and nos and things to improve our sleds!
this way we can ride wherever we want and the forest people can't catch us
this way we can ride wherever we want and the forest people can't catch us
I think it's called Consumer Guilt. I agree with what your saying, that's how the greenies try to guilt trip people into quitting.
I'm not talking about the hard core riders. I'm talking about the majority of riders, the 6 times a year riders. The ones that go out because their friends or family go, or they feel they have too, because winter isn't that long, or are scared. But, go anyways. I know a lot of people that just shrug their shoulders, and say that when sledding is gone, they'll just find something else to do. They really don't care, and almost wish they could move on to another sport. But, have a lot invested in this one. It's just a theory.
Ok I hear what your saying but these are also the riders that seem to never venture more then 200 yards from the trail. So closing an area but leaving the trail open will not affect them very much so they don't seem to care either way. To each his own but someday that trail will be closed too, but then again their hearts aren't really in it. I'm not talking ALL trail riders.
if you close all but trails i will say screw this as soon as i get near fresh pow and i would be wandering like no tomorrow
Hey, been there done that. I watched them close the forests back east. People said it would never happen. Same thing is happening here, that happened there, wilderness (or defacto wilderness) is only good for growing illegal drugs. Even drug growers won't mess with motorized. Lots of them carry. Hikers, they get scared of the booby trap pretty quickly.
Similar threads
