Heads UP - Hog Loppet XC Event at Blewett Feb. 25th

[Wapow]

Those who ride Blewett know there is an annual XC ski event called the Hog Loppet which is scheduled this year for SATURDAY, FEBRUARY. 25th. We sledders are doing ourselves a huge favor by either (1) avoiding riding that day between the Blewett snopark and Mission Peak (the course is basically all on the FS 9712 road) that day, or (2) if you absolutely must ride the course area that day, by being conscientious and respectful of the event. There have been numerous complaints in the past about snomos behaving aggressively to skiers participating in the event. I suspect that those skiers were mostly just ignorant about sleds (e.g. "they came at me really fast", "tried to run us down" etc.), but we can avoid conflict (real or imagined) by taking a few simple, common sense steps:

- Go super slow and give them a wide berth when passing (off the groomer entirely, being ideal).
- Avoid high marking (especially onto the road) in the area of the Rock Slide, while they are passing through.
- Use a different snopark that day (e.g., Reecer), if possible. The Blewett summit snopark is where they'll be finishing and their friends and family will be waiting. There will be a lot of single cars up there, and most will not know about sledder's expectations regarding maintaining space between rigs.
- Get the word out to other sledders.

The Forest Service has specifically requested that we accommodate this event, and we need to demonstrate that we're capable of cooperating with other users in the areas that we like to ride. We need to "own the high ground" in the access debate, so, let's try not to act like A-holes on this one day per year, OK?

 

[Lushbomb]

Good Post.. IMO.. Its best to avoid the whole area. Parking is a nightmare and the trails in are packed with skiers. Its actually a pretty cool race. Mission ridge to blewitt.

 

[yammadog]

Good Post.. IMO.. Its best to avoid the whole area. Parking is a nightmare and the trails in are packed with skiers. Its actually a pretty cool race. Mission ridge to blewitt.

it's just going to get worse once they close down the teanaway...should go over with protest signs and be sure they are aware of it...

 

[Wapow]

it's just going to get worse once they close down the teanaway...should go over with protest signs and be sure they are aware of it...

Don't get ahead of yourself YD. I seriously doubt that the Teanaway will be closed, at least not based on the current proposal. The FS put out multiple options, one of which was meant to appease WMC, who's been relentlessly bugging them. The rationale for the closure is to prevent boundary incursions by snomos. But, I'm sure they're aware that moving the boundary won't work, because the guys who have been poaching in that area don't care where the boundary is. They know they can ride wherever they want without fear of being caught, because there has historically been zero enforcement, and none is planned. The good news is that boundary encroachment is way down this year, so current efforts (improved signage, public awareness campaigns, etc.) seem to be working. We need to keep it that way.

Converting that section of forest to wilderness makes even less sense when you consider that they've been actively logging it, which brings in very hard to find $ to the state. Add to that the difficulty of forcing the required legislation through the US congress (which is what would be required). Not saying it's impossible, but it's hardly the highest priority for the environmental orgs that would try to push for such legislation. Fact is, the FS in the area is probably mostly on our side, and that proposal would likely never have been included, if it wasn't for the recurring incursions done by a just few individuals.

I ride and ski tour in the Teanaway all the time, so I really don't want this closure to happen. And I'm a lawyer, so I promise it won't without a fight. But, we need everybody to play by the rules if we want to keep our access rights.

 

[blindman]

Don't get ahead of yourself YD. I seriously doubt that the Teanaway will be closed, at least not based on the current proposal. The FS put out multiple options, one of which was meant to appease WMC, who's been relentlessly bugging them. The rationale for the closure is to prevent boundary incursions by snomos. But, I'm sure they're aware that moving the boundary won't work, because the guys who have been poaching in that area don't care where the boundary is. They know they can ride wherever they want without fear of being caught, because there has historically been zero enforcement, and none is planned. The good news is that boundary encroachment is way down this year, so current efforts (improved signage, public awareness campaigns, etc.) seem to be working. We need to keep it that way.

Converting that section of forest to wilderness makes even less sense when you consider that they've been actively logging it, which brings in very hard to find $ to the state. Add to that the difficulty of forcing the required legislation through the US congress (which is what would be required). Not saying it's impossible, but it's hardly the highest priority for the environmental orgs that would try to push for such legislation. Fact is, the FS in the area is probably mostly on our side, and that proposal would likely never have been included, if it wasn't for the recurring incursions done by a just few individuals.

I ride and ski tour in the Teanaway all the time, so I really don't want this closure to happen. And I'm a lawyer, so I promise it won't without a fight. But, we need everybody to play by the rules if we want to keep our access rights.

wapow

if mrs heath recommend the teanaway to closure, then you may start to see some occupy type chit.

And i am pretty sure the forest service is going to go ahead with the closures

 

[blindman]

really

quote from wapow

"And I'm a lawyer, so I promise it won't without a fight. But, we need everybody to play by the rules if we want to keep our access rights."





thanks for your help so far mr lawyer..............

really??????

 

[yammadog]

Whether is makes sense to close it or not. the opposition got it on the table and it has traction. If we wait to fight until after it's closed and no one is around, then it will be too late.

Over the last 12 years of being in the sport, I've heard over and over. pack it in, pack it out, check avy conditions and play nice...

..and where's the fruit of that effort? it's in a list of possible revisions closing down the riding areas....I'd bet not that many of the group of skiers at this event is aware of the closure suggestions and the impact it will have on that area and event in the future if it happens...it would be a public service message..in person....

 

[CleElum Sledhead]

I ride and ski tour in the Teanaway all the time, so I really don't want this closure to happen. And I'm a lawyer, so I promise it won't without a fight. But, we need everybody to play by the rules if we want to keep our access rights.

Too bad we have had no volunteer legal help for SAWS in the last five years to help keep snowmobile riding areas open. It has been a very disgusting losing battle these days. Just saying...

 

[Matte Murder]

It would be great if no one rode that road on that day. I wouldn't want to suck exhaust in a race like that. Wonder if a local snomo club member could baby sit the parking lot that day and let people know to not ride there on that day and give them options of places to ride near by? Would get us huge respect by MOST of the participants. Some are just total douches but we will never even get a smile out of one of those guys.

 

[off road rider]

Don't get ahead of yourself YD. I seriously doubt that the Teanaway will be closed, at least not based on the current proposal. The FS put out multiple options, one of which was meant to appease WMC, who's been relentlessly bugging them. The rationale for the closure is to prevent boundary incursions by snomos. But, I'm sure they're aware that moving the boundary won't work, because the guys who have been poaching in that area don't care where the boundary is. They know they can ride wherever they want without fear of being caught, because there has historically been zero enforcement, and none is planned. The good news is that boundary encroachment is way down this year, so current efforts (improved signage, public awareness campaigns, etc.) seem to be working. We need to keep it that way.

Converting that section of forest to wilderness makes even less sense when you consider that they've been actively logging it, which brings in very hard to find $ to the state. Add to that the difficulty of forcing the required legislation through the US congress (which is what would be required). Not saying it's impossible, but it's hardly the highest priority for the environmental orgs that would try to push for such legislation. Fact is, the FS in the area is probably mostly on our side, and that proposal would likely never have been included, if it wasn't for the recurring incursions done by a just few individuals.

I ride and ski tour in the Teanaway all the time, so I really don't want this closure to happen. And I'm a lawyer, so I promise it won't without a fight. But, we need everybody to play by the rules if we want to keep our access rights.

All you have to do is look at the dirt bike community and what riding areas we have lost in the last few years. Then realize that they want a buffer for the buffer zone.. I hope your right, but I'm thinking your blinded with optimism..Its pretty tough to see the glass half full on this issue..

 

[Wapow]

Hey Wendell - I'm just getting involved, and the time for "lawyering" is just about to start. Thanks for the support

 

[Wapow]

Too bad we have had no volunteer legal help for SAWS in the last five years to help keep snowmobile riding areas open. It has been a very disgusting losing battle these days. Just saying...

I'm willing to volunteer my services on this issue, but keep in mind, you can't win by suing the FS while they're making proposals for study/consideration. And, we need to pick our battles. If this goes to litigation, we will need a lot of (paid) help.

 

[Wapow]

Whether is makes sense to close it or not. the opposition got it on the table and it has traction. If we wait to fight until after it's closed and no one is around, then it will be too late.

Over the last 12 years of being in the sport, I've heard over and over. pack it in, pack it out, check avy conditions and play nice...

..and where's the fruit of that effort? it's in a list of possible revisions closing down the riding areas....I'd bet not that many of the group of skiers at this event is aware of the closure suggestions and the impact it will have on that area and event in the future if it happens...it would be a public service message..in person....

It's not the skiers at the Hog Loppet who are the enemy here YD, it's some of us sledders. The trigger issue is a long history of intentional wilderness boundary violations, and the FS has been aware of it all along. If those don't stop, we've got no chance of saving our access privileges.

 

[yammadog]

It's not the skiers at the Hog Loppet who are the enemy here YD, it's some of us sledders. The trigger issue is a long history of intentional wilderness boundary violations, and the FS has been aware of it all along. If those don't stop, we've got no chance of saving our access privileges.

Not identifying them as the enemy, just folks that need to be informed of the coming challenge of the "shared" use areas. You will notice that the "enemy" accesses all forms of mountain use groups to help in their fight. We should do the same. If we win just a few with showing our faces to help argue that area needs to be preserved, then we win. if we don't show up we get no one.

The wilderness violations are an item that get's highlighted, but it's not the key to these guys closing the areas. if it were, then they would ask for funding to capture them and many of use would help make that funding happen. it's easier to close it than to manage it. and the group that is most vocal are the close it group.

The years and years of being cordial and working other angles are over. This needs to come to a head. Just like the story of the start of the environmental movement, when they tied themselves to the trees and stood in front of bulldozers. It's time for us to fight back with more than words and avoiding conflict.

And when I say conflict I mean, verbal/mental, not physical.

 

[Wapow]

I haven't been in the fight as long as you YD, so I don't share your sense of frustration (yet). That said, I agree the boundary issue is a "red herring" used by WMC to justify set asides for him and his friends to get easy pow skiing (ironically, using a sled to get there). But it isn't a red herring for the FS. And, I agree that a small amount of "enforcement" would likely stop the incursions entirely. If the FS just made a bit of a presence in the SnoParks and the alpine zones once in a while, folks would know that there is a chance they would be caught if they drop into the wilderness. As it is now, there are no possible repercussions for riding on the wrong side of the boundary, except for maybe a public flaming on a message board. Moving the boundary won't change that a bit. Imagine if the FS took the same position (e.g., enforcement is impossible, so we're not going to bother to try) with respect to poaching, illegal resource collection or illegal ORV use in the land under their care. The public would be outraged. I don't see a huge distinction in this case. I believe the FS needs to determine the CURRENT extent of the issue (through actual investigation and not hearsay) and employ intermediate measures before shutting down access to this well used and well loved area, especially when there has been no demonstration of harm to that area through the current legal usage. I'm willing to work with you and everybody else to save this wonderful area from closure. Happy to field suggestions on how best to contribute.

 

[diamonddave]

I haven't been in the fight as long as you YD, so I don't share your sense of frustration (yet). That said, I agree the boundary issue is a "red herring" used by WMC to justify set asides for him and his friends to get easy pow skiing (ironically, using a sled to get there). But it isn't a red herring for the FS. And, I agree that a small amount of "enforcement" would likely stop the incursions entirely. If the FS just made a bit of a presence in the SnoParks and the alpine zones once in a while, folks would know that there is a chance they would be caught if they drop into the wilderness. As it is now, there are no possible repercussions for riding on the wrong side of the boundary, except for maybe a public flaming on a message board. Moving the boundary won't change that a bit. Imagine if the FS took the same position (e.g., enforcement is impossible, so we're not going to bother to try) with respect to poaching, illegal resource collection or illegal ORV use in the land under their care. The public would be outraged. I don't see a huge distinction in this case. I believe the FS needs to determine the CURRENT extent of the issue (through actual investigation and not hearsay) and employ intermediate measures before shutting down access to this well used and well loved area, especially when there has been no demonstration of harm to that area through the current legal usage. I'm willing to work with you and everybody else to save this wonderful area from closure. Happy to field suggestions on how best to contribute.

Since you are new to the fight, ask Newtrout how many ACTUAL cases of reported wilderness incursions there have been over the last 10 years in the Teanaway.

Over the past couple years, Everybody who has posted in this thread was posting exactly what you are posting now.

 

[Wapow]

I know from personal experience that boundary incursions in the Teanaway are extremely rare. I've only seen it happen once in the 7 years that I've been going skiing and sledding out there, and it was the same incident that got publicized on BCR last year. I actually climbed/skied Mt. Stuart the day after it happened (in and out via Longs Pass), so I saw those tracks firsthand. But I also noted from the top of Stu that there weren't any other tracks in the wilderness that day (or any tracks whatsoever, the other 7 times I climbed that peak in winter conditions). Instead of a protest, as some have suggested, I think we should organize a huge snomo rally ride in the Teanaway to celebrate our current access privileges. It would be harder to close if more people used it. And, having more firsthand reports confirming that the issue has been overstated would really help our cause at this stage too.

 

[Wapow]

Just a reminder that the Hog Loppet xc ski event will be happening this Saturday, Feb. 25.

I contacted the event's organizer Leavenworth Winter Sports Club, to offer to volunteer to help manage sledders on the course that day. I was surprised to learn that they do not need additional snomo volunteers, because they already have sufficient snomo support from the Forest Service (I will be one of 5 volunteers working with the FS) and from the Apple Valley Snowmobile Club. So, it sounds like the snomo community has already stepped up. I was also surprised to learn that there are 600 participants expected this year. Definitely a popular event!

I'll likely be working either at the Blewett SnoPark or one of the road intersections along the course. I've got an '09 XP which will likely have skis on the rack. Stop by and say hello if you happen to be in the area (but please try to stay off the course if you're out there).

 

[line8]

For the last 4 years I have made a deliberate choice to sled in the teanaway area only. It is quiet, great areas to ride and I have yet to see a single ski/snowmobile issue there, or wilderness incursion for that matter. I have parked next to skiers, talked with them briefly on the trail. It is very different in other locations around the area. Same for the Mt Adams area. It's the masses that bring out the mass of probs in my opinion. There are times, though, that I would love to go park in the non motorized up at Blewett for a good cause of course.

 

[Wapow]

Totally agree with you Line8. More folks should ride out there. Will be a lot harder to close if more folks are using it legally.