WMC Update 2012

Scotsman, your defensive posturing in your initial posts in this thread led me to post what I did. Equating a booted skier with a snowmobile in the destruction of vegetation and soil is laughable and dishonest. Trying to understand what you're thinking when posting here on a subject that you clearly lacked understanding of was why I posted the comment about PNWbrit and yourself being from the UK. I can't understand why backcountry skiers would be so against this proposal and was thinking that it may be cultural. By the way I do have a sense of humor for things that are actually funny, dismissing comments as humor when they were clearly intended antagonize the op is weak.

I think part of the problem here is that the current snowmobile use policy didn't consider advances in technology, the authors never thought that snowmobiles would be traveling extensively off road/trail. It is reaching critical mass over here, there are probably a lot more backcountry skiers over here per capital than on the westside. I would include hybrids in this group and they don't like the unchecked sled traffic either.

PNWbrit, didn't I sell you a pair of Coombacks? Are you enjoying them?

The problem with this approach is that most of the readers of this forum spend little time skiing in the areas you're interested in. So, your approach is essentially to point the cats in a general direction and suggest that they should herd themselves. I don't see how this is going to work.

I think that to generate the support you're seeking you need to provide a lot more information for skiers to understand and emotionally connect with this issue. A little of that information has dribbled out in this thread, but this is an inefficient way to communicate. In an earlier posting, you shrugged off the need for marketing. I don't think of it as marketing, I think of it as leadership.

You have a vision. You need to communicate it.

You have a clear understanding of a problem that your readers only vaguely grasp. You need to make them feel your pain.

My reading of human nature (based on my own nature) is that you will need to do these things to spur people to action.

Good points again! We are listening and continue to work to accomplish a lot of what you are saying.

We are in the process of having a map produced. WMC has not decided as of now as to the timing of the release of a map, if or when we decide it will be posted here. Not a dodge, some of us have considerable experience advocating for human-powered recreation, and will advise as to when and where to post a map. The map will be invaluable in meetings that WMC will be involved, we are just not decided on when it should go out generally yet.

In some previous posts, more description of these areas has been given. We may get more photos up also. Also, in previous posts, comment was made that WMC would support establishment of non-motorized areas in other places such as your example, and would support Sno Park parking expansion. We chose this project first.

Your points are good ones. We need to help skitourers understand why this initial project would benefit all WA skiers, including the TAY folks- and we are certain that it will. Also, the problem that demands management, that requires new non-motorized areas for winter recreation, is not completely understood in our experience by many backcountry skiers. So education is an important aspect of the WMC.

Thanks for the continuing discussion!

Scotsman, your defensive posturing in your initial posts in this thread led me to post what I did. Equating a booted skier with a snowmobile in the destruction of vegetation and soil is laughable and dishonest. Trying to understand what you're thinking when posting here on a subject that you clearly lacked understanding of was why I posted the comment about PNWbrit and yourself being from the UK. I can't understand why backcountry skiers would be so against this proposal and was thinking that it may be cultural. By the way I do have a sense of humor for things that are actually funny, dismissing comments as humor when they were clearly intended antagonize the op is weak.

I think part of the problem here is that the current snowmobile use policy didn't consider advances in technology, the authors never thought that snowmobiles would be traveling extensively off road/trail. It is reaching critical mass over here, there are probably a lot more backcountry skiers over here per capital than on the westside. I would include hybrids in this group and they don't like the unchecked sled traffic either.

PNWbrit, didn't I sell you a pair of Coombacks? Are you enjoying them?

Well Aaron.... sugar, the people up at MRNP and the meadow rovers and the people who think Sunrise should be closed until no snow so the fragile alpine tundra doesn't get damaged don't think skier boot traffic and path making quite as laughable as you ( glad you're laughing and regained your sense of humor).
Problem with idiots like you is you have certain dogma to which you subscribe without questioning and probing and just assume everybody thinks the same way as you and you admit it( you can't understand why a BC skier would have a different opinion as yourself) . Maybe it's a cultural thing as we British have always had a questioning culture and enjoy a good discussion whereas you Americans seem more and more disposed to dogma and sound bites.... unfortunately.
However, we have great hope that your new President, who we admire greatly will bring you around in the end. This is where you all chime in and say " go home" if you don't like it.

But damn it I find I have to admit I agree with your comments regarding that current polices are lagging behind advances in technology.( BUT so is TAY... haha )

Coombacks are fun and getting much human powered use thanks.

Not really sure what difference that makes to this conversation though?

But your continued references to national backgrounds are less than welcome or helpful.

Come on Aaron -- this is going as well as can be expected, but stirring the pot isn't helping. I think I get what you're trying to say with the UK/US thing, but Brit and Scotsman both know as much or more about how our parks/forest land are managed than I do, as evidenced by some of the Rainier threads. Nationality doesn't have anything to do with this.

I think I get what you're trying to say with the UK/US thing

Can you explain it to me then?