Going to have to pay to ride Buff Pass

[icerider600]

Parking

I dont have a problem with paying if its going to help keep these places open, but yes again its just like another tax I just dont understand why they couldnt set up a trail somewhere so you could ride from town, allmost all the other places we go you can ride from town. I am sure that all the skiers would freak over that one, but it would solve alot of issues. Have the snowmobile clubs or any other type of organisation try this yet??

 

[rotax]

Put simply; If the money were being put towards something..anything positive for SNOWMOBILERS I'd have far less of an issue with it. But, its not..
The $$ is used to regulate and hurt us (in the long run).

We're paying to put rangers in the lots to test the volume of our sleds...really? Is this what we want to be paying for.
We're being made out to look like fools...
Pulling the trigger on the gun pointed at our own feet...
Fail...

Now, if the $ really were put towards plowing/blowing of parking lots..and possibly assisting with parking..great, that'd be awesome, and actually help our image. But it'd be niave (sp?) to think thats whats going on IMO.

 

[rotax]

I dont have a problem with paying if its going to help keep these places open, but yes again its just like another tax I just dont understand why they couldnt set up a trail somewhere so you could ride from town, allmost all the other places we go you can ride from town. I am sure that all the skiers would freak over that one, but it would solve alot of issues. Have the snowmobile clubs or any other type of organisation try this yet??

This would actually bring MORE problems upon sledders.
Having snowmobiles in Steamboat..riding around a bunch of plank pushers? NO way.

One thing I've noticed, there is always one sledder that has to be an idiot and make our whole lot look bad. This would just make it that much easier for some bozo to rip up and down the streets in town and draw more attention to us..

Now, Walden or Kremmling may be a diff story..but way too far away to ride from town.

Snowies has a much better "ride from your door" atmosphere.
Grand Lake has riding from your door as well.

 

[Zoomie]

To clear up some misconseptions:

The new fee would apply to everyone. i.e. snowmobile, backcountry skier, snowshoeing, dog walking, running on the groomed trail, etc ...everyone.

The parking lot is cleared by the County. The County (Routt) has to clear the road because it's a county road, and they clear the parking lot as a courtesy to the Forest Service and us, the users. They do the same up to and including the gravel pit up north in Columbine.

Actions everyone needs to take. Take the five minutes to call, write, fax, or e-mail (writting / mailing is the most effective) your state Rep.(s) and Sen.(s) in Washington, and the Sec. of the Dept. of Ag. (Forest Service), and the Routt National Forest Ranger (I forget her name?). Tell them that public lands need to be open and accessable to us, American citizens Without a Fee! Our taxes pay for the USFS to manage the land that we own (as U.S. Citizens). We don't want to be charged to access our public lands.

 

[rotax]

EDIT: Found the map related to this: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/mbr/news/2006/11/Permit_Area_Blowup_2006_07.jpg - So...if this designated area is SKIER only..and not even driven through by snowmobilers, why would a snowmobiler pay said fee for an area they are not even using? Unless they are saying the 5? miles of the PUBLIC ROAD that runs through their "DESIGNATED BC AREA" is also classified under their fee system. Also, why is it there is never snowmobile ONLY terrain marked? There is all this SKIER only terrain being designated.. Yet they have NO boundries what so ever? </rant>

EDIT2: Found another map, actually one of the best maps I've found showing the RE-Buff trail system. http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/mbr/recreation/winteractivities/Winter_Rec_20....pdf

http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/mbr/projects/rec/adobepdf/key messages_rec_fees_buff_pass.pdf

The Routt National Forest is proposing to begin charging a $5 fee to enter the
4,980-acre Buffalo Pass Backcountry Winter Recreation Area, beginning in 2007.
A $50 annual permit is also being proposed. No other new recreation fees are
being proposed for the remainder of the 1.1 million-acre Routt National Forest.
......
The fees will be used for providing the public information about backcountry
etiquette, avalanche danger and sharing groomed trails. Fees will also be used to
administer the permit system and provide backcountry patrols and delineate trails
and boundaries, resulting in a quality recreation experience for winter
recreationists.

So, i'm not sure what the 5k acres is exactly...or what the 1.1m is.. Anyone have the details on this?

Providing "information", and explaing how to *share* groomed trails?
Aminister the permit system? (you mean put rangers on the hill to check registration, right...they already do that...why do i have to pay extra for them to do it?)
BC patrols? (you mean to have rangers telling sledders "no no" for boundry breaks)
"...resulting in a quality recreation experience for [skiiers and boarders using the area]"

...Yep... GG!

/sigh...

I understand everyone that uses the said area has to pay, BUT, to me it appears everyone but the sledders are going to get anything remotely positive out of this..

Edit3:

Failure to abide by the winter recreation regulations can result in fines of up to
$5,000 and/or six months in jail.

LOL?

 

[idareyou]

Update from the paper today. Sounds like typical government around here. Add fees and then spend the money collected where they see fit.

http://www.steamboatpilot.com/news/2009/dec/20/our-view-buff-pass-fee-makes-sense/

 

[rotax]

"Forest spokeswoman Diann Ritschard said if fees were approved, the money would be used to improve and possibly expand parking at Dry Lake Campground, provide toilets and additional signage and fund extra patrols of the area."

Why is a fee required to do the above?

Shouldn't their current budget already allot money towards these issues or "possibilities"?

MC has toilets already, did they charge a fee in the past to build and upgrade that lot?

Should public recreationlist be PAYING wages for these rangers? Why?

While Ritschard acknowledges that the tension between motorized and nonmotorized users seems to have dissipated in recent years, it probably never will go away completely.

Well, its a positive that "tension has dissipated" between the 2 groups, so why is there a need for more regulation and babysitting?

Leslie Lovejoy, director of the Friends of the Routt Backcountry skiers and snowshoers group, says nonmotorized users aren’t the problem and therefore shouldn’t have to pay.

What is the "problem" exactly. This said group dislikes motorized vehicles and wants to ***** & whine until *their* recreation spot is free of motorized vehicles.
I can't believe such an immature comment like that would even be written, as it shows how childish the group really is.

Its obvious why and how this 'fee' is going to get used already, no matter how polite the media [and green team] tries to treat it.




And of course, a Steamboat newspaper supports the fee...go figure.

 

[bushy]

Read the article. The skiers complain "they're not the problem"? wtf does that mean? Prove it! Give me examples! I can say that skiers are the problem just as easy.

If a user group wants exclusive use of an area, then they are a problem and should be the ones who pay for that privaledge. Sledders have no exclusive areas and most, besides the sled-skiers, will pass through that area, so why should they pay to support an area they are prohibited from using?

Registered to leave a comment in the Pilot, but they require you be verified with a phone call. waiting on a call..

 

[bushy]

I could see them having issues with that "limited" motorized area right off. You'll get yahoo's with ski's strapped on their sled jumping off the "desiganted" routes and pizzing off the other sled-skiers. lmao I can see how they want more regulation in this concentrated use area, but if you don't have ski's strapped to your sled and just ride on by, then your not part of that problem in the first place.

Charging any private citizen to use the Nat. Forest is kinda stinky and it looks like they're taking advantage and grabbing money because they can. From the numbers, it looks like they'll have plenty of funds to build a toilet and upgrade the parking lot within a few seasons. Fees should end or be lowered then, right? Rigggghhhht...

 

[idareyou]

MC has toilets already, did they charge a fee in the past to build and upgrade that lot?

I believe the snowmobile club (Routt Powder Riders) got the toilets and the parking lot at muddy creek. It was supposed to be bigger but were limited on the amount of trees they could cut down. Guess the pine beetles solved that problem now.