Vail Pass fee increase proposal

[rhalloran]

So I am not supposed to react to people wanting to unreasonably limit my rights? I should be OK with it because you are? Yes, we absolutely disagree.

What's unreasonable about having an area for sleds, an area for no sleds, and an area for sled skiing?

How on earth is THAT unreasonable?

I KNOW, you're mad at the state we're in TODAY, but let's just look at Vail Pass. JUST VAIL PASS.

About half is no motor.

The other half is motor-ok, with restrictions.

Less than a quarter of the motor-ok area limits the motors to established routes only.

SCREW YOU GUYS!!!! I WANT HALF!

(I do not.)

How is THAT unreasonable. Seriously. Not talking about all the previous closures - the snowmobile community somehow effed that up before my time.

Talking about TODAY. RIGHT NOW. RIGHT NOW, "my" group has the SMALLEST piece of the pie. I don't want more. Heck, I'm actually going to try to get the Black Lakes stuff REOPENED to sleds - it'd make it more usable for us.

So, yeah - here you are feeling like you're backed into a corner and "your rights" are being taken away, and that's not right.

I TOTALLY AGREE. I can't fix what I did not break. I was not involved 10, 20 years ago. I'm here now, though, and like you, I get mad when "they" infringe on "my rights."

This time, the sledders are "they." Kinda not kidding, I'm spinning it up a bit, but seriously - I know EXACTLY how you feel, I only have "this" much "hybrid use" land available to me, and these rectums keep ignoring the signs?

See my point? Our positions are really not all that different, in a weird way.

 

[CO Powder]

OK, JUST Vail Pass...

I want to ride the north side of the highway.... Oh wait, tens of thousands of acres RIGHT AT THE TOP OF THE PASS for people to ski on, either closed or Wilderness.

REASONABLE would be ski on the north side, sled on the south side. Or give me the north side and you ski the south side.

It is unreasonable to have ANY closures in my mind, ANY. It is a waste of resources to close ANY of it to snowmobiles. Snowmobiles are not proven to damage anything, so why do we close lands to them at all? Because skiers think they are somehow entitled to silent recreation? BS, there is NO such entitlement.

If such an unreasonable amount of land wasn't closed in this state you would not have the competition we are discussing, and there would be no conflict.

Then the fact that most of the wilderness designations and closures are easily accessible by sled but closed. The skiers use maybe 2% of the 3.5 million acres awarded them in this state.

Are you seriously trying to argue that there is any form of balance to these rules? We could go round and round for weeks but you will lose that argument. The balance is tipped WAY to far, and yes, I am mad about it.

The good news is, I am going to pick up my new sled this morning. I should probably take it up on Red Mtn and leave some trenches for the skiers

 

[rhalloran]

No. It is not currently balanced. No two ways about it.

I do think that people have the right - are entitled to - using public lands in different ways. OHVs and bicycles change the recreational experience for those that do not use OHVs or bicycles. I believe that it is reasonable to have some lands set aside for each type of recreation - non-wheeled, non-motorized, motorized.

To assert that OHVs should be allowed _anywhere_ is ridiculous. That is wholly inconsiderate to users who do not choose to use OHVs. You might not LIKE hiking, ornithology, freaking backcountry pilates, whatever - but if you're unable to see that using your snowmobile might CHANGE that user's experience - whether or not YOU see it as a bad or good change - you're not all that bright. It is different, and we all need to accommodate different people & forms of recreation.

We live in a democracy, right? What if people voted pro-OHV vs no-OHV, then we take THAT percentage and apply it to public lands? Our current situation would look pretty good - we make up a SMALL percentage of the population.

Like I said earlier, I do not support MORE closures.

I simply want my piece. The FS sells a product at Vail Pass, I pay for it, yet I don't always get it. All this fantasyland BS about "open the north side" or whatever is a red herring - you can work forward, and deal with what you've got.

I'm not the one who _created_ these restricted areas. I guarantee that ignoring the RULES IN PLACE - whether or not you like them - will NOT benefit your cause. I cut up two VP maps for giggles. I can fit all of the "hybrid use" areas into the area by Red Cliff. You people have WAY more room than we do.

I KNOW I KNOW, you don't LIKE the hybrid restrictions, but guess what? YOU'VE GOT THEM!

All you OHV people who talk about "civil disobedience" and "twig fairies" and how cooperating with "the enemy" is fruitless and turning this into a war - one question:

How's that working out for you?

 

[AndrettiDog]

We live in a democracy, right? What if people voted pro-OHV vs no-OHV, then we take THAT percentage and apply it to public lands? Our current situation would look pretty good - we make up a SMALL percentage of the population.

This has been attempted in Eagle County. Just look at the No Hidden Gems stickers on vehicles. It's overwhelming how many protest more wilderness (different issue than VP). We don't get to vote on this process and that's why so many people call it the "Forrest Circus". Yes, we vote on a representative for the area that then creates and votes on congress bills, but that process is a broken one in my mind. Bills like wilderness ones are often ride along bills.

rhalloran, you continually say you are one of us but your comments continue to look like what I hear from the other side. I spend so much time working with the wilderness workshop, congressman Polis' aids and the FS to keep terrain available for snowmobiling. They don't even get it, they still think we ride around on a trail all day.

 

[mtncrawler]

I have been involved with the Vail Pass Task Force over the years and was part of the process when the hybrid areas were formed. Some of you have likely seen me in one of my Thiokol snowcats skiing the area, others out free-riding my 159" 800. Those who know me think i'm one of the most dedicated motorheads they know so I really don't need to hear smack talk about my values. I have not been to the meetings for several years now but this is how things were. First off, Colorado Parks does not contribute funds to VPTF. This is because they see VPTF as self funded. I pressed this question at one of the Dowd Junction meetings several years ago and the snowmobile registration money they distribute grooms trails in other parts of the state, not Vail Pass. Second, all Vail users are required to buy a pass, not just motorized. Hut users have the fee included in there hut pass, day users are supposed to have it displayed on there person. Yes, for several seasons Shrine Pass road I-70 to the top was designated motorized only. X/C skiers were required to use their trail coming up the creek bottom. Several got tickets from the FS for ignoring this, most likely because of their attitude when informed of this. In early years the trail grooming was mostly done by Nova Guides for their snowmobile tours who in turn got a break on their permit fee. Vail Snowcat Skiing did some trails also for their own uses (Boss Basin, Barbeque/Queen Bee, cornice cut on Ptarmigan, Tele's etc.) In other words, alot of the groomed trails being used to get ya to the goods were made by commercial interests to fit their needs. Obviously it only took a handfull of sleds a short period of time to ruin the powder sking the snowcat operation was trying to sell. Hence the hybrid area designation. At the time snowmobilers didn't much bitch because they had a hard time getting into these areas without a groomed trail. In the mid nineties the Summit X 670 with a 136 was a top dog powder machine. It's funny to me to hear guys complain about "losing" terrain when little do they know the top performing machines of the day couldn't make it there on there own, at least not until mid March or so. Bottom line: riding in the hybrid areas to screw your brothers makes you an ***. A dumb ***. Out of time. Will talk about parking lot next.

 

[thesledhead]

Seems a bit steep for one increase???? Im down to pay for what I use but 50% per day and 120% per year only sets the standard for the next increase.

 

[CO Powder]

All you OHV people who talk about "civil disobedience" and "twig fairies" and how cooperating with "the enemy" is fruitless and turning this into a war - one question:

How's that working out for you?

Quite well actually. I used to get blamed for all these terrible atrocities against the skiers anyway. Now, it is more fun because I can screw with them and the results are IDENTICAL!

Why am I supposed to care about your experience when you don't care about mine? I am sick and tired of the one sided door with you people.

THANK GOD I don't have to ride in a place Like VP, seems like an epic cluster f**k.

 

[rhalloran]

Why am I supposed to care about your experience when you don't care about mine? I am sick and tired of the one sided door with you people.

THANK GOD I don't have to ride in a place Like VP, seems like an epic cluster f**k.

I absolutely care about your experience, even if I don't like some of your behavior. In my head, we have more in common than not, and if I were to classify myself politically, it'd be right-wing Libertarian; do as you please provided it does not negatively affect others. I understand that you're pretty set in your viewpoint, and that's fine; at least you took the time to read the other side.

VP really is not bad, actually. Once out on the hill, it all disappears. Those smart enough to park at Camp Hale/Red Cliff really have it figured out. Buff/RE typically gets more/better snow, but for me, VP is close, and this year, really freaking good.

 

[AndrettiDog]

I have been involved with the Vail Pass Task Force over the years and was part of the process when the hybrid areas were formed. Some of you have likely seen me in one of my Thiokol snowcats skiing the area, others out free-riding my 159" 800. Those who know me think i'm one of the most dedicated motorheads they know so I really don't need to hear smack talk about my values. I have not been to the meetings for several years now but this is how things were. First off, Colorado Parks does not contribute funds to VPTF. This is because they see VPTF as self funded. I pressed this question at one of the Dowd Junction meetings several years ago and the snowmobile registration money they distribute grooms trails in other parts of the state, not Vail Pass. Second, all Vail users are required to buy a pass, not just motorized. Hut users have the fee included in there hut pass, day users are supposed to have it displayed on there person. Yes, for several seasons Shrine Pass road I-70 to the top was designated motorized only. X/C skiers were required to use their trail coming up the creek bottom. Several got tickets from the FS for ignoring this, most likely because of their attitude when informed of this. In early years the trail grooming was mostly done by Nova Guides for their snowmobile tours who in turn got a break on their permit fee. Vail Snowcat Skiing did some trails also for their own uses (Boss Basin, Barbeque/Queen Bee, cornice cut on Ptarmigan, Tele's etc.) In other words, alot of the groomed trails being used to get ya to the goods were made by commercial interests to fit their needs. Obviously it only took a handfull of sleds a short period of time to ruin the powder sking the snowcat operation was trying to sell. Hence the hybrid area designation. At the time snowmobilers didn't much bitch because they had a hard time getting into these areas without a groomed trail. In the mid nineties the Summit X 670 with a 136 was a top dog powder machine. It's funny to me to hear guys complain about "losing" terrain when little do they know the top performing machines of the day couldn't make it there on there own, at least not until mid March or so. Bottom line: riding in the hybrid areas to screw your brothers makes you an ***. A dumb ***. Out of time. Will talk about parking lot next.

You are telling me that the Vail Task grooming funds, and funds that purchase the groomer do not come from Colorado State Parks? Because I have been in the meetings when those funds where awarded to Vail Task Force for grooming and for assistance in purchasing a groomer.

By the way, I do not feel that there should not be state funded grooming at Vail Pass. I do, completely. It's essential for that area, it's very busy. What I do not like is that there is currently problems with plowing and division on use in this area. I don't think that snowmobile funds (partly gathered by snowmobile registration) should be used to enhance a skier area. If the FS is waiting on CDOT to show up and plow the roads now, how is an extra $2 a person going to help that problem?

 

[mtncrawler]

Andrettidog, I'm curious as to what meetings you attended where Colorado State Parks awarded money to VPTF. As I said I questioned two State Park rangers at a VPTF meeting in Dowd Junction several years ago after they had made a statement saying snowmobile registration monies did not go to VPTF because it is self funded. I did not agree with their logic and questioned them about it. There was no misunderstanding the question or answer. These same guys were at Vail Pass I-70 parking 1st day that next season ticketing sleds for non-current registration - I had to run back home to get pink copy for my cat or get a ticket as soon as I unloaded. Maybe this has changed in the last couple years I don't know. Some of the grooming history up there I do know. Early on before VPTF the packed trails were put in by private snow cat skiing outfit Resolution Tours. They used 10 passenger Dodge van bodies mounted on LMC 2100 chassies. Guys name was Rick S and I heard he got mad when FS removed Resolution Peak from his permit area as to build Fowler Hut so he sold out to Vail Ski Co. I think it was this year there was no packed trail from Vail pass to Ptarmigian Pass until we beat it in with our Spryte. Vail Snowcat tours was run by a guy named Phil, (you might remember seeing him out there on crutches) using a converted coach Bombardier groomer from the ski area. They even experimented with a giant tracked trailer that looked kinda like an Airstream being pulled with a groomer but that didn't work too well. Phil left and Bruce B took over working for Vail. Vail Snowcat Tours and Nova Guides were doing all the grooming at this time for a break on their permit fee. About this time is when VPTF was formed. Bruce decided it was too hard on his equipment to continue grooming anything he didn't need for the cat skiing business. Nova Guides was spending most of their grooming time on what was good for them. I was sitting in the VPTF meeting when Chuck O. with Shrine Mtn Inn proposed buying a Piston Bulley and renting it back to VPTF. This was the way it worked for a couple years, over Ptarmigian Pass to Camp Hale and back then over Shrine Pass and back, each once a week. Bruce B went on to buy the cat ski busness about the time Vail Catagory 3 (Blue Sky Basin) expansion took place. I think Vail Ski Co spun it off as part of their expansion plan agreement since the FS would only grant a year to year permit to Bruce after that. He has since sold to Ben and Jen who still run it. There's your history for today.

 

[skicopper]

No, the established skiing areas within the Vail Pass Winter Recreation Area. Not talking about ski areas, talking about the areas that are clearly designated on the map as "hybrid use ski area," where snowmobiles are not allowed off the groomed road. It is basically Ptarmigan, and SW, over toward Fowler-Hilliard. It is approximately 10% of the total area at Vail Pass - the fee area.

Snowmobiles continually run their sleds through those areas, off the groomed roads. I figure it is largely a lack of signage (even though the MAP given to EACH USER clearly shows it), and if the FS had $$$ to enforce infractions, it would be less of a problem.

Maybe if the FS would stop closing more and more land to snowmobile use we would go somewhere else all together!... Snowmobiling is very low impact on the terrain and it's becoming more popular. The FS needs to recognize that.

 

[skicopper]

Rhalloran

The issue that many of us have is that the non motorized group continue to grab up more and more land that is not used. They are only interested in taking the land that is easy for them to get to, places they can ride snowmobile to the top of an area and ski down. They create all these wilderness area and they practically go untouched. They use an old logging road to haul in lumber, power supplies, cement trucks, to build a "yurt". In the summer they haul wood in, use a crane to build the structure, bring in supplies, have a gas truck come up and fill up the propane tank. Yet they tell me I can't go within 1/2 mile of it on my snowmobile because I am ruining the experience.

You don't see snowmobile only areas. They have a couple roads that are snowmobile only but that is only because they have a road right next to it that is skier only. Give us real areas to ride in. We don't want groomed trails, we want real terrain. Stop taking land away that my grandfather used to ride on. Stop trying to protect the land, over the snow travel does not hurt the land.

I completely agree with you. The FS insists on building these "huts" and like you said they build roads, dig foundations, and that's okay. But my snowmobile is off limits because it's going to completely ruin everything?!! Also, I love it when I see OHV areas that are open to summer traffic but winter is off limits. It makes NO sense at all. I think sleds get hammered harder than summer vehicles b/c the evidence that they drove somewhere can stay around for weeks. Oddly enough, summer vehicles do more damage, but it's difficult to see tracks if they only drove over something once...

 

[psychoneurosis]

This was taken last Friday at 1:30pm. 8" new that day.

This kind of stuff will only help get areas closed down.

Always amazed how much is attempted to be deduced from a picture. All I see in that pictures is a sled track next to a sign, I am completely unable to understand WHY the track is there. The WHY is very relevant to the picture and enforcement.

Couple of scenarios where that is a legal track and I am not able to exclude these based on the picture

- could be a ranger checking the sign to make sure it is not buried
- could be a permittee that is allowed motorized access to the non-motorized area
-could be a researcher who is not governed by travel determinations
-private land owner accessing property.

Maybe I am just not looking at that picture in the same manner others are, but I just don't see that information in the picture.

I am aware that WRNF writes a very minimal amount of tickets on vail pass despite a large law enforcement presence throughout the year. Most are for unregistered sleds, which impacts no ones experience. If there were noisy sleds up there I am sure the rangers would find them quickly and test. I know the RD has several sound meters that are available for their use anytime.

One other question - why would you ever go to vail pass seeking an experience similar to Wilderness in terms of solitude etc? Just not there.
Only 7% of WRNF is even available for snowmobile recreation but 16% of the USFS lands in Colorado are available to only non-motorized but result in less than 4% of all visitor days and that number plummets in the winter....

 

[CO Powder]

Besides the fact, that even if that was a willful act of disobedience, there is NO link to further closures. I always ask those who claim such things to explain to me exactly how unenforceable rules being broken begats further unenforceable rules?

That may spark a complaint but my first hand experience is that the green side makes up thousands of incidents every year to push their agenda. They would take that pic and use it for a decade trying to show what lawbreakers the sledders are. Pi$$ Off!

The USFS is supposed to use a rigorous process when determining land closures. Pictures like that do not carry any water for the closure folks. It is just hearsay and only the seriously uninformed (your average greenie) buy into garbage like that.

 

[rhalloran]

In the case of the picture, the guy who came up was having a good time & truly did not know. No sign at the bottom. Seemed like a cool guy.

I'd not be surprised if either side fabricated beneficial "data." This is not one of them; if it were, do you think I'd post it here in an effort to get cooperation, or use it as "evidence" at a meeting or some place which might benefit more closures?

right.

A picture does not _prove_ anything, but it can inspire action. Show people a picture of a "problem," otherwise unmotivated people might be inspired to do something.

Didn't they find Obama's birth certificate, then people started questioning its authenticity? sigh. Heh.

Maybe I'm crazy and there are NO sled tracks in the closed areas. My bad, bro.

 

[CO Powder]

Ahhh yes... the sheeple. That is who I was talking about. Incite emotion in people. That is exactly how it is done, illogical emotional responses.

Now this alone isn't enough to tip the scales when it comes to closures. What it does do is generate support and more importantly revenue from sheeple with no clue other than the lies told them by fundraisers. Then in conjunction with funds they pilfer from taxpayer funded coffers, they file lawsuits and sue for closures.

This has become somewhat less successful lately though.

Education of folks like you who do not remember when so much more land was open, and much better managed, is more important. Lands have been illegally closed with no benefit to anyone in the public. It needs to stop, it really needs to be reversed and managed at the State level. You discount the land north of VP as "it will never happen". I look at it like it should never have happened in the first place.

How much will you have to see lost in your lifetime before it is enough? Do your research, closed to motorized has been expanding for decades.

I see the lines in the snow violated all the time. Fortunately it is usually far from any skier traffic. The point is, those stealing from you WANT you to accept the rules as they are. It is progressive though each generation until you have no rights left, and for no good reason.

I guess you have to decide for yourself when and how to act.

I would also like to contest the notion that the USFS is selling a product to you on VP. They do not have anything to sell, that is public land. Continuing to give them the power to dictate how you use the land seems like a slippery slope to me.

What is supposed to be happening is that the govt entities take their cues from the public. They are then to apply science to balance the uses for the best outcome of both the land and its users. This is not what is happening anymore.

 

[rhalloran]

I'd intended to be done with this thread, but this morning, I was researching places to go.

One of my targets, unfortunately, was the victim of the big round of Summit County closures in 2011. Lame. In digging around to confirm that it is in fact closed, I came across a newspaper article.

http://www.summitdaily.com/article/20111011/NEWS/111019986

Specifically:

"However, a controversial modification is Miner's Creek near Frisco. It will close because users didn't turn around when the road ended, Waugh said. Indiana and Pennsylvania gulches near Blue River will close for the same reason, he said.

"You can't go there because you didn't stop," he said. "We could have kept it, but it would have been a huge management burden."

"He" is Dillon Ranger District recreation staff officer Ken Waugh. For all that think that disobeying closures does not help get areas closed, there's a pretty pointed example of it. CO Powder, you said:

"That is just comical. Explain to me exactly how this gets more land closed. "

Done.

Also, less pointed:

"One important change for snowmobilers to be aware of is a buffer zone near Elliot Ridge north of Silverthorne. The half-mile buffer is meant to eliminate the mistake of snowmobilers crossing into the Eagles Nest Wilderness."

We lost a half mile because people made the "mistake" of crossing into ENW. Dunno if it was a mistake or not, impossible to say, but at least PART of the motivation in 2011 was because people were not following the rules. It _can_ be an easy mistake to make - there are places were the boundary is not marked, at all. Tree falls, makes sound, who knows, but anywhere there's a sign, we need to obey it.

Disregarding the rules WILL have a negative impact on OUR sport. That's all I'm saying, and here's at least one chunk of evidence supporting it.

 

[CO Powder]

I'd intended to be done with this thread, but this morning, I was researching places to go.

One of my targets, unfortunately, was the victim of the big round of Summit County closures in 2011. Lame. In digging around to confirm that it is in fact closed, I came across a newspaper article.

http://www.summitdaily.com/article/20111011/NEWS/111019986

Specifically:

"However, a controversial modification is Miner's Creek near Frisco. It will close because users didn't turn around when the road ended, Waugh said. Indiana and Pennsylvania gulches near Blue River will close for the same reason, he said.

"You can't go there because you didn't stop," he said. "We could have kept it, but it would have been a huge management burden."

"He" is Dillon Ranger District recreation staff officer Ken Waugh. For all that think that disobeying closures does not help get areas closed, there's a pretty pointed example of it. CO Powder, you said:

"That is just comical. Explain to me exactly how this gets more land closed. "

Done.

Also, less pointed:

"One important change for snowmobilers to be aware of is a buffer zone near Elliot Ridge north of Silverthorne. The half-mile buffer is meant to eliminate the mistake of snowmobilers crossing into the Eagles Nest Wilderness."

We lost a half mile because people made the "mistake" of crossing into ENW. Dunno if it was a mistake or not, impossible to say, but at least PART of the motivation in 2011 was because people were not following the rules. It _can_ be an easy mistake to make - there are places were the boundary is not marked, at all. Tree falls, makes sound, who knows, but anywhere there's a sign, we need to obey it.

Disregarding the rules WILL have a negative impact on OUR sport. That's all I'm saying, and here's at least one chunk of evidence supporting it.

He admits they can't enforce it. How closed is it? So they keep making up new and more ridiculous reasons for closures, you act like this is new. Using the papers to spread this crap where it is sucked up by dolts like yourself just promotes such idiocy. I think "buffer zones" around Wilderness areas had been done away with, being completely illegal and all. Is the buffer still enforced? The stupid rules work because you are fool enough to follow them... right over the cliff I suspect.

Screw those rules

Take the Power Back

 

[rhalloran]

CO Powder, people like you are THE REASON stuff gets closed.

Until the OHV world figures out that "take the power back" and "fight for your right" don't work, stuff is going to keep getting closed down.

Think about it from the ranger district's perspective. They have two choices:

1. Close an area because boundaries are not being respected.
2. Leave area open, enforce/patrol/ensure that boundaries are respected.

Now, before you go off on some hillbilly rant about whether or not the closure should be there, stfu for a minute and play along.

Pretend for a minute that you're the guy who has to make the decision.

You have a fixed budget. You have....ehhh, who knows, probably not enough money to spend annually/quarterly/whatever on all of the things in your district.

Do you spend the money to benefit people whose attitude of "Screw those rules" put you in this position, or do you spend that money elsewhere?

Can you at least SEE that? I know you don't agree with it, you and ChuckD are taking the power back, but do you SEE that?

The people who actually make the changes - who actually rubberstamp the decision - probably don't care about snowmobilers. They probably care about the big picture - environment, taxpayers, benefit to the population (face it, not many of us....), etc.

I'd bet that snowmobilers are pretty far down the list to BEGIN with - there's just not that many of us. How many public tennis courts are there? Racquetball courts that are state/county owned/run? Quite a few, right? Sure, because LOTS of people do those things. How many public archery ranges? FAR fewer....because not so many people are into archery.

As far as public land users go, I suspect snowmobilers are pretty far down the list in terms of overall numbers.

Add horrendous attitudes and juvenile behavior, and you expect MORE? Really? It baffles me. I just don't get it. We're a small group, we're a fairly specialized group, and all you can come up with is "Screw those rules?"

Embarrassing.

 

[CO Powder]

CO Powder, people like you are THE REASON stuff gets closed.

Until the OHV world figures out that "take the power back" and "fight for your right" don't work, stuff is going to keep getting closed down.

Think about it from the ranger district's perspective. They have two choices:

1. Close an area because boundaries are not being respected.
2. Leave area open, enforce/patrol/ensure that boundaries are respected.

Now, before you go off on some hillbilly rant about whether or not the closure should be there, stfu for a minute and play along.

Pretend for a minute that you're the guy who has to make the decision.

You have a fixed budget. You have....ehhh, who knows, probably not enough money to spend annually/quarterly/whatever on all of the things in your district.

Do you spend the money to benefit people whose attitude of "Screw those rules" put you in this position, or do you spend that money elsewhere?

Can you at least SEE that? I know you don't agree with it, you and ChuckD are taking the power back, but do you SEE that?

The people who actually make the changes - who actually rubberstamp the decision - probably don't care about snowmobilers. They probably care about the big picture - environment, taxpayers, benefit to the population (face it, not many of us....), etc.

I'd bet that snowmobilers are pretty far down the list to BEGIN with - there's just not that many of us. How many public tennis courts are there? Racquetball courts that are state/county owned/run? Quite a few, right? Sure, because LOTS of people do those things. How many public archery ranges? FAR fewer....because not so many people are into archery.

As far as public land users go, I suspect snowmobilers are pretty far down the list in terms of overall numbers.

Add horrendous attitudes and juvenile behavior, and you expect MORE? Really? It baffles me. I just don't get it. We're a small group, we're a fairly specialized group, and all you can come up with is "Screw those rules?"

Embarrassing.

Just one more post that thoroughly demonstrates you have absolutely NO knowledge of the actual process.

My background includes nearly 10 years dedicated to fighting closures by the book. I organized a snowmobile club in my small town. I held meetings, I wrote letters, I took photographs. I attended closed meetings including the State Club President and VP, just the three of us in a room with the USFS decision making team for the San Juan National Forest.

If you think the ranger actually had the power to make the closure you suggested using the criteria you provided, you are further demonstrating your naivate'. I let you rant on because it helps make my point. You think you are ahead of the game and I am living in hillbilly land. Son, the truth is I played the game before you knew there was one. I played at a higher level than you likely ever will, so spare me your enlightened approach.

I have tried to share with you what I learned from all of this in this thread several times. I did so because clearly you are intelligent. I think you are misguided because you are being lied to by those trying to steal your rights on a regular basis.

This country was founded on civil disobedience. In England the crown/state owns all of the land. The govt gives you permission to use it, or not. That was a huge reason for the pilgrimage to this country, freedom with the absence of an overbearing govt. The closures you live with today do not make this country a better place nor further the citizens interests. It is the politics of control and the end justifies the means. That is why they are such effective liars and con artists. Groups of skiers react to these stupid feel good tactics without realizing what they too will someday lose, a freedom, and for no good reason.

Changes to these lines in the snow take a decade or more most of the time. When I started my personal battle the plan was supposedly almost done. Ten years later, I think I received notice to an old email addy that the plan was finalized. We lost nothing in the immediate area I fought to protect but 30 miles to the south they lost almost 40k acres to Wilderness, and to what benefit? The benefit of those wanting to control your freedoms in the name of some greater good or some such BS.

I have simply decided, based on the above an much more personal experience, and personal experiences of close friends that, I simply do not agree. We allowed people in the sixties and seventies to conscientiously object to the draft. I am doing the same with these unconstitutional federal land grabs, I reject the premise that they have the authority to make these kinds of laws in the first place.

I will never be willing to argue todays set of rules with you based on the above beliefs.