New sound regs--Sleds/OHV

[mannix]

More laws in the wild is taking my right to get away from the city folk and have fun period.

OK. What about the "city folk" who want to go XC ski, hike, snowshoe, do yoga, eat tofu, whatever "they" do - do they have a right to have fun as THEY define it?

Your attitude is just as ridiculous as theirs; I _suspect_ that you mean to qualify your statements with "in OHV legal areas."

"They" want to close all "roadless areas" to OHVs, period.

Naturally, we don't want that.

From the sounds of it, you think _everywhere_ "in the wild" should be OHV-ok, and if a loud motor makes more power for YOUR enjoyment, screw them.

It IS a two way street. The non-motorized set needs to be a bit more realistic - a LOT of people recreate WITH motors.

*MOST* non-motorized people are OK with OHV use in specific areas, and I see your point - if "we" "allow" a DB limit, we're somehow admitting to them that we're too loud.

I see it the other way; I see it as "I respect your right to go to the wild and not be bothered by OHV noise, and I'm willing to self-police to help preserve OUR right."

Fact of the matter is, you and I share very similar goals - we want to preserve our ability to have fun as _we_ define it on public lands. I own a snowmobile, three dirtbikes, one racecar. Noise is an issue for all of them.

We ALSO need to recognize that we share very similar goals with THEM - we all - outdoor enthusiasts - want to enjoy our time on public lands.

We just differ in our definitions of "fun" and "acceptable use."

Dunno. The "screw you" attitude does not seem to be working; more and more stuff is in the process of getting closed in spite of that attitude.

If it is not working, why keep doing it?

Dunno. I'm glad you'll try to do your part to keep the sled as quiet as possible - ultimately, that's what needs to happen. It sounds like you're a responsible rider, which is good.

Maybe I'm ignorant, but it seems to me that it is more productive in the long run to be as cooperative as possible with "the enemy" - particularly when the "enemy" is more like minded than not.



Iain

 

[MtnDoo]

<<Maybe I'm ignorant, but it seems to me that it is more productive in the long run to be as cooperative as possible with "the enemy" - particularly when the "enemy" is more like minded than not.>>

Now, that's either Ignorant or Naive.

Cooperating with the enemy is not the answer - short run or long run.

The "Enemy" - the environmental activists - have one mission - that is to systematically eliminate our right to use public lands.

They do not "cooperate" in any way that benefits our right to use public lands; their every move from press, legislation, studies, PR, voting, philanthropy, coffee-shop discussions is designed to eliminate motorized travel beyond paved roads in it's entirety.

I've seen it first hand - over and over again - Vail, Rabbit Ears, Molas/Red Mtn, Crested Butte, etc... Delay through the false and temporary confort of "cooperation" is fruitless.

This battle is NOT about noise.

It's NOT about emissions, compaction, view shed, parking, user fees, demonstration areas, travel planning - it is about an elitist mentality and control in the name of a religeion called "Environmentalism" with the ultimate Jihad of eliminating motorized travel.

Period.

You could be driving completely silent soy-powered solar snowmobiles made out of recycled green beans and donating to Save the Wales for every mile you rode and it would not change the game.


Cooperate and capitulate at your own peril.

MtnDoo.

 

[johndeere8420]

Hey Guys... I need to do this follow-up post...Maybe pour some water on the fire I made Flair up...

I contacted my local Snowmobile Club president who keeps a close ear to these issues both for sleds and ATV's....

HE ASSURED ME IT WAS NOT A PERSONAL SCORE BEING SETTLED

The following is the EXACT COPY of what he emailed back to me with more explanation...

(((HOWEVER, I have not recieved a reply answering my latest question of: Will the sleds be on a stand or with park break applied durring these "tests".....)))



This was brought forward by CSA and COHVCO we wanted to get some sound regulations in place that we could live with instead of waiting for the green group to do it for us. One of the biggest points that the non-mortised crowd uses against us for closing riding areas is the sound issue. We had the manufactures also look this over and worked to make it something that they could live with as well. This does not go into effect until 2010. If the sled is stock pipe it will be fine and many of the after market pipes are good as well. This will give the performance companies a chance to adapt before it becomes enforceable. COHVCO also had a sound regulation passed that covers the ATV's and Motorcycles.

The test is conducted on snow 6 feet from the sled at a height of 4 feet with the sled stationary and the RPM at 4000. Two test averaged together needs to be less that 88DB

After this post I got a reply... it says.....

I think they said brake on, no stand. State Parks intends to to some random testing and will even come to an event if asked to help get themselves and snowmobilers up to speed.

 

[MtnDoo]

If you don't believe they enviro's and the Liberal Democrat Feds want to eliminate us, and have a direct impact on local land use, read on and vote carefully on Tuesday:




http://www.aspentimes.com/article/2...Feds propose fewer snowmobiles in Yellowstone


BILLINGS, Mont. — A cap on snowmobile use in Yellowstone and Grand Teton national parks would be lowered by 40 percent under a federal proposal released Monday in response to a judge's rejection of earlier plans.

Parks officials had proposed allowing up to 605 snowmobiles a day in the two parks, but U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan rejected that plan in September, agreeing with plaintiff environmental groups that it would increase air pollution, disturb wildlife and cause too much noise.

The new plan calls for a cap of 318 snowmachines a day in Yellowstone and another 50 in Grand Teton to the south. Park administrators said they expect it will be adopted by Dec. 15.

Yellowstone winter use planner John Sacklin said the new cap would meet Sullivan's concerns while park administrators again try to form a long-term plan for the machines. The cap would expire after three years.

Last year, an average of 294 snowmobiles a day entered Yellowstone. But the peak daily use was much higher — there were 557 on one day in December.

Jack Welch with the Blue Ribbon Coalition, a snowmobile advocacy group, said the proposed restrictions are too severe.

"People will be turned away and consequently it's not fair," he said. "318, no matter how it's divided up, is not going to be adequate to allow for people to visit their national parks."

Sacklin defended the new plan as "falling right within the range of use that we have seen."

"We believe the impacts will be no more than moderate based on our analysis and based on looking at monitoring results for the last four to five winters."

The plan released Monday also requires that all Yellowstone snowmobile trips be commercially guided and would allow 78 multi-passenger snowcoaches in that park daily, five fewer than what would have been permitted under the rejected plan.

It's been 28 years since the National Park Service began trying to address how many snowmobiles are appropriate for Yellowstone and Grand Teton. A succession of proposals — including an outright ban on snowmobiles sought by the Clinton administration — have been scrapped or thrown out by judges.

Environmental groups have called for the machines to be eliminated entirely and replaced with a smaller number of multi-passenger snowcoaches. But Tim Stevens with the National Parks Conservation Association said his group recognizes a temporary measure was needed while the issue is resolved.

"This steps in a better direction," Stevens said. He said the Park Service had "acknowledged that its prior plan did not provide adequate protection."

The state of Wyoming and snowmobile advocates have filed a lawsuit seeking to increase the number of the machines allowed in the two parks. That litigation is pending.

 

[MtnDoo]

<<The Bill exempts closed-circuit racing and vehicles used in emergencies for search and rescue. >>

So, they're admitting that "Loud Pipes Save Lives!"

Or, is it: "Save Lives with Loud Pipes!"

Guess, I'll be on S&R for that lost gas can for a season or two.

LOL.

 

[chsdaddy]

This is what pisses me off. I live in NM but ride in CO all the time. We all purchase a trail pass or whatever it called to be legal, like $50. I am happy to do it, the places I have been do a fabulous job of maintaining and marking trails to get to the "good" riding. If you use these trails and want a voice in regulations, pony up your 50 a year. Let the people paying extra for the use decide. If everyone who purchased a pass got a vote in the matter, I'd buy 2. That's much more fair and still self regulation without caving in to evirowacko's trying to regulate out the sport. My sled is piped and would not pass, and I will admit without a helmet on and some sweet sleding music pouring out of my Ipod, I would think it is loud. But that's not the point, the noise is just an easy and understandable inroad to regulation, not really what they are trying to eliminate.
I hunt and guide all the time on public land and have to put up with what I would call excessive noise from other people using public land. It ranges anywhere from people on dirtbikes to families picknicking in the meadow I would like to hunt. It's public land, if you don't like it buy 10,000 acres and fence it.
10% are very interested in one side or the other and the other 80% could pretty much care less. I try not to move any of the 80% to the other side by being respectful around other people. But let me tell you I've wanted to shoot some idiots who have messed up some hunts for me. It's public land, if you want to enjoy it differntly than I do, fine, but don't tell me what I can do either.
Bottom line is when you are paying extra to utilize the resource and someone who isn't can impose regulations on you, it's total B.S. and the end is near.

 

[CB Rob]

Mannix. I agree with 100%. We should not be able to have our good time at the expense of someone elses. The idea of quiet pipes went over better with the dirt bike crowd than it has with the sled crowd. I think the primary reason is that a couple extra ponys makes a bigger difference on a sled than it does on a trail bike. An expert rider on a dirtbike will always out climb a novice, no matter what the hp. A novice sledder, on the other hand will go a little higher up the hill with the added horses.
I guess some of the people that want to keep their loud pipes might ride in areas w/o nonmoto users, but my riding area is multi use. I choose to show other users respect. I would support any added enforcement at our trailhead.

 

[MtnDoo]

I support USFS enforcing 88db limit for hunting rifles.
This would require 8lb silencers.

I woke up many a morning this fall in our cabin to the sound of gunfire in the hills and was very, very offended.

BAN HUNTING! Eat (all natural) microwave dinners.

MD.

 

[wweverett]

More regulation I don't like it. When will they stop? Maybe when we have to have a plan of when and how and what we ride on file each year before we can go. BS Leave everything alone is my idea of a good goverment.

 

[Dogmeat]

Aren't db ratings for off road dirtbikes like 102db or something higher?
If so, why wouldn't that apply to all OHVs..

As I understand db, it's an exponential increase in sound, not just linear.

MD.

96db for use in USFS managed lands I believe, but there are different standards.

There's the AMA standard and another one.

They're both meangingless.

 

[duke1n]

Uh oh shorty is gonna be in trouble. Hopefully if you pay attention to where you park and not next to the USFS dorks and just creep out of the lot you won't get hassled. If I could get a Ti lightweight can that would quiet my sled down I'd do it. I could care less about the sound but don't want to bolt on 45lbs of muffler if I don't have too. If it get's to that point I'll put a turbo for a muffler on it lol. It's coming to and end... this sport that is. Sometimes the change we seek and get is not what we were counting on. Hope all the Obama supporters on this site are happy with themselves. You just gave the keys to this sport over to people who really don't like you at all. I live 10 mins from a ski resort... I guess I'll get a season pass and get my winter fix on the slopes when they take my sled away.

 

[routter]

There has been plenty of talk about cooperation and tit for tat here. I however, do not see any reciprocity to our further capitulation.

If we were truly "working together towards a common goal" then the forest service/ legislature would draft an amendment granting OHV/snomobilers use rights on an additional xxxx acres of previously non-motorized public lands.




com·pro·mise
Pronunciation:
\ˈkäm-prə-ˌmīz\
1 a: settlement of differences by arbitration or by consent reached by mutual concessions b: something intermediate between or blending qualities of two different things


I don't see us giving into sounds regulations willingly so as to hedge our bets as a thoughtful/beneficial long-term strategy.

 

[SXViper]

Denver Post link

Now that the season is over how many of you were checked or saw sleds being checked this season?

Here is a link to an article in the Denver post. The article states that we were lucky enough to be the ones to fund this project with our registration fees. How nice of us.


http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_19840293

 

[Goinboardin]

Back from the Dead Thread

I was checked once in 2010, early season. They were doing "educational" testing, so no tickets were being written at that time. My sled failed miserably...and I didn't even hit 4000RPM, I think it got to 3500RPM and wanted to engage, no way am I about to hold my brake and rev the motor to get a ticket and burn a belt. Oh and that was in Crested Butte. I've seen USFS there twice since then, neither times were they testing.

Actually, one day I saw them unloading their sleds, and thought ****! Now I'm going to get a ticket if I go ride today...so I walked over to the woman and asked if she was sound testing today, she said no. I explained my sled is somewhat loud, making sure I wasn't going to get a fine if I rode by. She assured me that I was fine to ride it, they had other plans for the day. haha

I did repack my glass in my pipes (SLP race twins) and my sled was much more quiet, at least for a few hundred miles. I think the glass blew out again because it was getting loud again near the end of my season. Whatever, that motor blew up, might not even run those pipes again.

 

[Boston Racing]

No problems in our group...We only have 2 sleds that are stock..The rest are piped or Turbo'd. There are enough douchbags out there to keep theFS busy most of the time.

 

[POLZIN]

Forest service ? whos that ? I have only seen them twice in 15 years. Go ahead and write your ticket anyway. good luck getting me to pay it.

 

[skibreeze]

We have seen them alot at Cottonwood, years ago, at RE quite a bit, and at WC a little.

 

[backcountryislife]

I haven't seen USFS in a few years... I've seen state parks 2x in the last few & I see the two sheriff guys at corona pretty often, but those guys are pretty cool. I was about to ride into an illegal area that I honestly didn't know was illegal, they took a few min to show me a map & then mentioned how good the riding was over there...


Have yet to see a single noise testing station since this began.

 

[AndrettiDog]

I haven't seen USFS in a few years... I've seen state parks 2x in the last few & I see the two sheriff guys at corona pretty often, but those guys are pretty cool. I was about to ride into an illegal area that I honestly didn't know was illegal, they took a few min to show me a map & then mentioned how good the riding was over there...


Have yet to see a single noise testing station since this began.

Same here. Even though we often venture to VP and there is always FS guys around...I have yet to see a testing station. I was at a CSA meeting recently and it sounds like there are issues with consistency in how the test takes place. Different snow pack and surroundings make a difference in the results.

 

[backcountryislife]

Same here. Even though we often venture to VP and there is always FS guys around...I have yet to see a testing station. I was at a CSA meeting recently and it sounds like there are issues with consistency in how the test takes place. Different snow pack and surroundings make a difference in the results.

Some real jeenyus scientists out there if this is a seeerpriiiize to them...