I wish I could, when business picks up again in August I might be able to do a match again.
How NON-Motorized activists will restrict Snowmobile access to US Forest Service Land
- Thread starter christopher
- Start date
I wish I could, when business picks up again in August I might be able to do a match again.
I tried to send in a comment to the link to the forest planning revision page and my browser timed out.... luckily I saved the comment so I'll try again later and hopefully it will work.
Also, if there are any other places we can send comments to other than our state legislators, I am all ears!!!!!
Cle Elum Sledhead (SAWS Chairman) posted a Thank You to SWOL right after we received the check from them. It was mentioned that SAWS was the only organization that SWOL heard from upon receiving the donation.
Oops, thanks for the clarification!
Been a while since I posted anything here, but this thread calls for something. It's really great that there are so many people fired up about this subject! This was one of SAWS' first, if not THE first, action alert sent to our membership. Summer of 2005 it was proposed that snowmobiles be excluded from the OHV because in a sense they did not pose the same threats to erosion and vegetation that other OHV does, and that it was conducive to their use to travel off-trail.
The clowns at WWA are so transparent in their attempts to curb snowmobiling it's comical. Nevertheless they have a lot of money to spread their b.s. wherever they please. To me, it's scary how effective they could be if their leader had half a brain. The one thing we can be somewhat thankful for, though cautious, is the FS uses common sense on occasion. We can hope that if this thing from WWA ever gets any traction that the FS will say "thanks for the input, but these are public lands." They did that when they modified the OHV Rule in 2005 despite the thousands of letters they got from WWA and the like.
Thanks everyone for the donations, and for the support. We will do what we can to then help everyone get the word out. BRC developed an auto-letter generator for a petition to the Senate re: CIEDRA, maybe we will look at doing something similar. We have the "petition" from WWA so we can tear the s**t out of that too.
Thanks again all!
Scott, your Idaho SAWS Rep
The clowns at WWA are so transparent in their attempts to curb snowmobiling it's comical. Nevertheless they have a lot of money to spread their b.s. wherever they please. To me, it's scary how effective they could be if their leader had half a brain. The one thing we can be somewhat thankful for, though cautious, is the FS uses common sense on occasion. We can hope that if this thing from WWA ever gets any traction that the FS will say "thanks for the input, but these are public lands." They did that when they modified the OHV Rule in 2005 despite the thousands of letters they got from WWA and the like.
Thanks everyone for the donations, and for the support. We will do what we can to then help everyone get the word out. BRC developed an auto-letter generator for a petition to the Senate re: CIEDRA, maybe we will look at doing something similar. We have the "petition" from WWA so we can tear the s**t out of that too.
Thanks again all!
Scott, your Idaho SAWS Rep
Please stay on top of it as much as you can and LET US KNOW if this thing begins to see the light of day!!
SnoWestOnline WILL TAKE AN ACTIVE stand against this sort of thing to the best of our ability!
SnoWestOnline WILL TAKE AN ACTIVE stand against this sort of thing to the best of our ability!
Thanks for all you do Scott.
WE need a auto generator for letters here...anything to make it easier for everyone within the reach of SnoWest to be able to send something in!!
Is this possible Christopher...or anyone else out there who could help build this?
Probably NOT something we could code directly into the SnoWest Forums itself, BUT....
If they can share the source code, there is no reason why we couldn't duplicate it on a webpage outside of the forum but still on our servers.
Make it so...No 1. (Capt Picard intimation)
That would be awesome.....can you imagine the amount of letters and support that would generate? Whether its a auto generated letter or not, the number of letter that would flood into the respective decision makers would be enormous!! That would show that 1000's of use are aware, committed, ready to fight for the lands we love to play in with our families and friends.
Use your clout Christopher,
pull some strings to get the code...lets do this!!
Just gave $100 to SAWS, hopefully they can put it to good use (fingers crossed).
WAY TO GO PUCKER!
Re
so OB could make changes by Executive order... got that and should be expected at the very end of his term (hopefully 2012).. that being said.. HOW MANY PEOPLE WHO RIDE SNOWMOBILES (or horses, bikes, 4 X 4, etc) belong to the BRC? Sadly few... and more sad.. few choose to give extra money to save something for his or her children to enjoy in the future.. Janet and I feel if the rule was to pass and snowmobiles would be required to stay only on designated roads, we would sell our snowmobiles and what we would spend on snowmobiling send even more to the BRC
so OB could make changes by Executive order... got that and should be expected at the very end of his term (hopefully 2012).. that being said.. HOW MANY PEOPLE WHO RIDE SNOWMOBILES (or horses, bikes, 4 X 4, etc) belong to the BRC? Sadly few... and more sad.. few choose to give extra money to save something for his or her children to enjoy in the future.. Janet and I feel if the rule was to pass and snowmobiles would be required to stay only on designated roads, we would sell our snowmobiles and what we would spend on snowmobiling send even more to the BRC
S
sledheadjake
Well-known member
I wrote a letter to the washington FS and to the senator and Idahos senator and FS, and waiting to get paid to make my donation to saws.Thank you everyone for all the donations and support to keep our sport alive!
D
Dmill
Well-known member
wrote my letters, hope they fall in good hands, donated 50 to saws... this just blows my mind that they always shut it down and there is nothing we can do.. looks like snowmobiling is going to have to be an outlaws sport.. i guess if i have to get arrested to ride... I WILL!
First post here - I felt it important enought to register and set everyone straight
(As posted on the Skidoo forum)
http://www.dootalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=396627&pid=2938811&st=15&#entry2938811
--I don't think anyone on here understands this thing. You all sure indicate that in your comments.
Read the rule and then comment.
Basically in PA our National Forestry people have "opted in" snowmobiles but they did not make any changes to our current rules. And the reason is because our National forest here has always been "closed unless posted open" That's the biggest change that everyone else is noticing. All the roads they previously ride are now closed unless posted open. This is the biggest part of the act. This came along with the roadless bill the green weenies got in place in the clinton administration.
As for the manufacturers doing something on it they do already. They are all part of ISMA which is our legislative body who represents us to congress. ISMA is your voice (if you are a member of a state association and own a snowmobile) You can call them and ask them what they are doing on it. If you are a member, as each state association pays dues to them as well as the manufacturers. Sure, it's not a large sum of money but the ISMA's budget for this year is 200k. That's paid representation to go see congressmen and women to address our agenda. Call them up. Ask them what they are doing. Call the local people in your states. In PA we have representatives for each riding area to represent the members (those who join the PSSA in this case). You can get answers from them as well. I welcome people to contact me about this. I have some knowledge on how it all works.
Steve (PSSA region 3 director hat on)
(edited for a correction - The closed unless open rule still only applies to the Allegheny National Forest in PA as far as I know at this time - most all other areas are "open unless posted closed")
(As posted on the Skidoo forum)
http://www.dootalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=396627&pid=2938811&st=15&#entry2938811
--I don't think anyone on here understands this thing. You all sure indicate that in your comments.
Read the rule and then comment.
Basically in PA our National Forestry people have "opted in" snowmobiles but they did not make any changes to our current rules. And the reason is because our National forest here has always been "closed unless posted open" That's the biggest change that everyone else is noticing. All the roads they previously ride are now closed unless posted open. This is the biggest part of the act. This came along with the roadless bill the green weenies got in place in the clinton administration.
As for the manufacturers doing something on it they do already. They are all part of ISMA which is our legislative body who represents us to congress. ISMA is your voice (if you are a member of a state association and own a snowmobile) You can call them and ask them what they are doing on it. If you are a member, as each state association pays dues to them as well as the manufacturers. Sure, it's not a large sum of money but the ISMA's budget for this year is 200k. That's paid representation to go see congressmen and women to address our agenda. Call them up. Ask them what they are doing. Call the local people in your states. In PA we have representatives for each riding area to represent the members (those who join the PSSA in this case). You can get answers from them as well. I welcome people to contact me about this. I have some knowledge on how it all works.
Steve (PSSA region 3 director hat on)
(edited for a correction - The closed unless open rule still only applies to the Allegheny National Forest in PA as far as I know at this time - most all other areas are "open unless posted closed")
Last edited:
Will when I call Polaris they told me they know nothing about it, so I told the person I spoke with and they told me that they are not going to do anything about it UNTIL it becomes a law then they will worry about it!! I thought to myself glad your concerned about it I think that would be a little to late!
Last edited:
C
clutch man
Well-known member
Has not been much said here in a few day but i think we need to keep working on this it will not go away. <a href="http://www.sweetim.com/s.asp?im=gen&lpver=3&ref=11" target="_blank"><img src="http://cdn.content.sweetim.com/sim/cpie/emoticons/00020059.gif" border="0" title="Click to get more." ></a>
The opposition on behalf of our club went out today to Tidwell and the Region2 motorized rep for the forest service in denver (sherwood).
To be honest the whole thing looks like the comment that was submitted on behalf of the Winter Wildlands Alliance for the 2005 TMP rule- they just changed it to a petition. Legally it is crap but it still needs to be opposed.
Couple of the things that we hit on were, (and feel free to add them to what you are sending)
The arguments that are the basis for this petiton were already addressed when the comments and responses were made in the Federal Register at the time the 2005 TMP rule was adopted. You can't just keep arguing the same thing over and over because you lost.
The executive order does not even imply that says all users must be regulated in the same manner, the executive order only sets the minimum standard to be regulated to. The petition can't even provide a legal basis for such an interpretation. Sad
How to get to the standard is completely agency discretion and expertise and the courts give the agencies a lot of leeway here. To change it now would be arbitrary and capricious given the mountain of evidence supporting the different regulatory schemes that has come out since
I particularly enjoyed the peer reviewed articles.
Could not find most at the local regional library and/or google and only one article was written after 2005. least they could do was update their info.
Their complete oversight of the added cost and delay in TMP implimentation at the individual forest level was pretty funny. Whoops must have overlooked that
Social conflict?!?!?!?! Travel management can address this?? Probably not the best criteria for TMP to have to deal with and it is clearly poorly suited to remedy social conflict
Glad to see that we are not the only ones opposing
To be honest the whole thing looks like the comment that was submitted on behalf of the Winter Wildlands Alliance for the 2005 TMP rule- they just changed it to a petition. Legally it is crap but it still needs to be opposed.
Couple of the things that we hit on were, (and feel free to add them to what you are sending)
The arguments that are the basis for this petiton were already addressed when the comments and responses were made in the Federal Register at the time the 2005 TMP rule was adopted. You can't just keep arguing the same thing over and over because you lost.
The executive order does not even imply that says all users must be regulated in the same manner, the executive order only sets the minimum standard to be regulated to. The petition can't even provide a legal basis for such an interpretation. Sad
How to get to the standard is completely agency discretion and expertise and the courts give the agencies a lot of leeway here. To change it now would be arbitrary and capricious given the mountain of evidence supporting the different regulatory schemes that has come out since
I particularly enjoyed the peer reviewed articles.
Could not find most at the local regional library and/or google and only one article was written after 2005. least they could do was update their info.Their complete oversight of the added cost and delay in TMP implimentation at the individual forest level was pretty funny. Whoops must have overlooked that
Social conflict?!?!?!?! Travel management can address this?? Probably not the best criteria for TMP to have to deal with and it is clearly poorly suited to remedy social conflict
Glad to see that we are not the only ones opposing
Lorduss,
I think you have a good start, but thinking of how many people drive to a ski hill each and every day and how much pollutants come out of the car verses the amount of the snowmobilers. What is the environmental effect of a ski hill. I really don't know, it might not be that much?? Also,using Yellowstone as an example, there are 25,000 to 30,000 visitors a day in the summer. How many snowmobilers per year on the greatest year. If you can compare the environmental impact of the millions of cars to the thousands of snowmobiles, I can guarantee the snowmobiles are not even a dent compared to automobiles.
L8er
PK
S
snoman681
New member
to all the environmentalists that try to run the world
snomobiling in the national forests hurts very litle it should be allowed in every area of the wilderness it is a great way to get out and see all gods beauty the air on top of any mountain is the same air that is in New York, L.A,or any other big poluting city in the world comparitive snowmobilies do not even register as far as wildlife in winter on top of the mountains there is very little they move to the lower country for the snow months try saying that for all the cars and busses that tour the parks in the summer months my guess is the people that say these things have never seen the areas we ride in the winter so they have no real idea of what goes on
snomobiling in the national forests hurts very litle it should be allowed in every area of the wilderness it is a great way to get out and see all gods beauty the air on top of any mountain is the same air that is in New York, L.A,or any other big poluting city in the world comparitive snowmobilies do not even register as far as wildlife in winter on top of the mountains there is very little they move to the lower country for the snow months try saying that for all the cars and busses that tour the parks in the summer months my guess is the people that say these things have never seen the areas we ride in the winter so they have no real idea of what goes on
Similar threads
