Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
..............During the public comment and appeals process, SAWS, WSSA, and etc, will have an opportunity to $pend on lawyers etc. those funds raised to use in obstructing a legitimate lawful process of Federal land use management yet again................
what is the bold?but help protect the areas we ALL share, then your time here is very limited.
what is the bold?
You have to be kidding me with these statements. You know very little about these organizations, and yet you claim to know about their funding? The WMC should know better to make accusations like these. Snowombilers are interested in discussing the needs of all users. Is the WMC is no longer interested in this discussion?WMC said:Which "we" are you representing? Snowmobile groups are well organized in groups such as WSSA and SAWS, certainly, a very well-funded special interest group.
True? Based on what? A good share of the Wilderness? These baseless accusations and statements are getting tiring.WMC said:It is true that a small user group on snowmobiles is taking most of the available resource of snowy Forest slopes accessible outside of Wilderness...and a good share of the Wilderness also.
The proposal, not the group... jeez....WMC said:Scotsman and some snowmobile advocates wish to cut WMC "off at the knees."
The proposal, not the group... jeez....
FYI, Scotsman I don't think even snowmobiles. Many people who are against this proposal don't either. They are against the proposal because it isn't needed, because during their many backcountry visits, there is no conflict that can be found. I believe Scotsmans point was that it is not appropriate for one special interest group (WMC) to make a proposal on its own without having input from the rest of the user group. The public land is just that, public. All peoples opinions and considerations should be heard and acknowldged. This is something that the WMC has consistently failed to do, and the reason for the statement above..
This is OUR land, we ALL should have a say in how it is used, not just one small group, pretending to speak on the behalf of all non-motorized users, especially when their methodology is to get everything that they can.
Help from big players, not big help from players. Please take care in reading others responses before posting.OK, thanks, I am still laughing about your statement about all of the big help we are getting!
Its called due process, its both sides legal right...BY LAW. You are doing the same thing in your own way. If you continue to slander highly respected organizations (SAWS, WSSA, etc) that have served and operated for years in efforts to not only preserve snowmobilers rights, but help protect the areas we ALL share, then your time here is very limited.
I will ask you again to answer the simple questions that have been posed to you. Step out from behind your veil in Kennewick, your "group" persona as WMC and talk to us as the "person" you claim to be........ a concerned citizen wanting the best for your sport.
From Kennewick? WMC has NEVER mentioned Kennewick. That is a problem, and I did try to resolve this with a pm. Our internet service is through Kennewick, therefore that statement appears to be very suspicious in regard to how this Moderator treated our privacy!
Some of you call WMC out to give our names and locations-why? Our identities have nothing to do with the discussion, do some of you want to post our telephone number and address so that you may call/ harass/ threaten us- as has been done before to others? Such was done most recently by 'Lake Cle Elum' on BCR. We have observed how on the Forum there are direct threats, veiled threats, some edited, some not. We have copied and forwarded to law enforcement the direct and indirect threats posted here in the past toward 'skiers' and discussed with same, the story by 'powderminer' about punching a skier then re-educating, The stories of intimidating skiers in Sno Parks, stories of scratching skiers' cars. It is not possible to know if it is all just internet talk, but it is intended to intimidate. My WMC partner in the past was subjected to phone call campagins to his home telephone and also email campaigns. We talked to a guy- another local skier- who was targeted here and had some very aggressive pms intending to threaten. WMC and law-abiding folk will not be intimidated, as as mentioned, we discussed these issues with law enforcement long ago.
This community would be well-served by cleaning up this behavior. WMC is here try to draw out this group in a meaningful discussion and invites this group as well to step up as citizens and advocate for your interests. The behaviors of oppositional defiance, threats, aggressive language, do not help your cause nor does it help the discussion of Forest recreation management.
This will probably be it after RMK2112 hits the delete button, goodbye and all the best.
WMC, I dont ride the area that is in discussion here, but I would comment on this....I understand that some outdoor enthusiest dont like to pursue their activities around sledders and thats fine, but as has been said many times over...these are public lands..set aside to provide activity for all groups..non motorized activities are open to using all areas already where motorized is limited to less then 1/2 of all availably areas....If you truely are interested in accessing areas that dont have motorized activites then rather then try to shutout even more area to motorized,wouldnt it be far easier and cheaper to simply utilize the areas you already have available?..rather then concentrate on closing areas to other users, why dont you work with the forest service, other like minded outdoorist, and manufacturers to make easier access to the areas that are available to nonmotorized?how hard/expensive would it be to get /keep roads plowed into the areas you already have? I am sure if as many people as you say want this type of area access then someone knows/has the equipment nessaccary to acomplish this, and a small access fee(just as we sledders pay for sled license's to be able to ride,which pay for access plowing/grooming/maintanince) should easily cover the cost of this..and I am sure the forest service would have no problem with a privately funded access method on pre-exsisting infrasturcture ..and this would alleviate all the issues you are here claiming...Man up and put your efforts into something that acomplishes your goals for access without destroying someone elses...in the end everyone will be happy and all get equal access to their hobbies without infringing on others...
Thanks for discussion, There is a lot in the discussion that perhaps you have not read.
Wilderness is not accessible easily, it was not made for skiers it was made for Wilderness. We do go there, sometimes overnight. We do go to Wilderness on someday ski trips, through lots of snowmobile traffic, and then have found the Wilderness that we seek to ski to have snowmobile tracks. By default of management- no plan for snowmobiles here but no Regs prohibiting it- and now because of technology, snowmobiles are really going everywhere and expanding their areas of use all of the time. So skiers are getting squeezed, fewer areas for untracked winter recreation.
The area in question borders the Wilderness- a quite unique and world-famous area here that has a ton of Regulations for hikers in summer, that area has a lot of snowmobile traffic- and we will stipulate this since we are aware of the degree of knowledge of the general public and USFS here of the Wilderness problem.
So basically snowmobiles and skiers have the run of all of the Forest, and a skier or snowshoer cannot compete with a snowmobile, therefore we say the non-Wilderness Forest has become dominated by one use, snowmobile riding, in winter, one that degrades or eliminates other uses. Not multiple-use at all- mostly snowmobile riding.
WMC folks ride some old snowmobiles to go skitouring, we do not want to close the Forest or prohibit snowmobiles offroad, other than in the areas that we ask for for quiet winter recreation. We are fine with riders having their highmark areas, and we have our touring areas.
Our proposed areas connect to an existing small non-motorized areas, to ski area, to Wilderness.
Thank you.
it sounds to me like some want a handicap-like parking spot in front of the store because they think its to far to walk from the main parking lot like everybody else does.?
How far do you have to walk? Handicap- how many hours does it take for you to access theses areas? Not even an hour, just push the throttle and lean and you are there.
It is rich indeed to hear from folks who harshly complain if they do not have 15 feet behind their trailer so that they do not have to move to load. We suggested some huge alternate huge areas for open-slope riding, undisturbed by skiers, and the response was "too far to drive" (another hour)! Handicap? that is good for a laugh to hear tough guys who sit on soft seats or stand and push a throttle talk how they are tougher than skiers!
I have read it all..and once again the simple answer is the same..the wilderness area is open to nonmotorized use..which means you can access it..which gives you the access you are wanting..without distubing other users right of use..the time you have spent on here alone if spent getting sponsors would already have this issue taken care of..rather then make excuses, why not try ? what do you have to lose by making a few phone calls/ sending a few emails to local snow removal/construction companies and to ski gear manufacturers/dealers to ask for help? Why not ask the forest service if you can come up with funding/equipment if this is a viable alternative?or is it simpler to get others rights denied? Is it to limit/end other public users rights to enjoy the same country as you want to?bottom line is compromise by all users so all have as equal of access as possible..and this solution does that for all users...
Wilderness Areas Found: 31
Total Acreage Sum: 4,489,780 Acres
Sure sounds like civilized conversation here....It is rich indeed to hear from folks who harshly complain if they do not have 15 feet behind their trailer so that they do not have to move to load. It is entertaining to read the whining about Subarus parked at Sno Parks, what you may have to park a few hundred feet further away and ride for an extra two seconds? We suggested some huge alternate huge areas for open-slope riding, undisturbed by skiers, and the response was "too far to drive" (another hour)! Handicap? that is good for a laugh to hear tough guys who sit on soft seats or stand and push a throttle talk how they are tougher than skiers!