WMC Update 2012

No offense to the OP, but my earlier comments should not be taken as endorsement of WMC ~ just speaking my mind, and please, don't need further closure, synopsis, talking points or summary...

I would say, however, that I was pleased and found it valuable that the motorized community showed up, participated with conviction and , I think, integrity, and saw it through.

What I didn't add to my earlier posts is that i enjoy my occasional motorized excursions into the wild.  I rent a sled from time to time, and as I travel I've been known to shoot off the shoulder as I spy what may be a fun place to ride, not knowing if it's legit or not.   Human nature ?  Hell, I don't know  ~  maybe it's just the way boys are made .   

Cookie, if you're still there, think Padron ...

Peace ..

I've been following this thread for a while (just like some of you do on the sledding forums).  I don't really expect my point of view to be taken seriously, but I can't bite my tongue any longer. 

A little background first:  I'm a long-time resident of Kittitas Valley.  I probably spend 20 days a summer on foot in the Teanaway area between Blewett and Fortune Creek.  I'm also a snowmobiler.  I spend an equal amount of time in the area in the winter on sleds.  I'm a very vocal member of the snowmobile community when it comes to Wilderness violation/incursion. 

There's a group of sledders in the Wenatchee area that love to ride up through Navaho/Stafford into Wilderness.  They are the same group that was referenced earlier from a snowmobile forum; giving the name and phone number of a skier in the Leavenworth area.  Despicable...  Just know that they dislike me as much or more than they dislike you all....

That being said, I think the intentions of this thread are disingenuous.  I have to believe that the true intentions are little more than a land grab.  There is very little sled traffic east of Esmerelda Basin.  If the few sleds in that area are truly ruining your experience, then surely we'd better look into changing flight paths out of Sea-Tac, as well!  I'm not referring to those sledders that violate Wilderness policies.  I have zero tolerance for them and encourage any one and everyone to photograph and report those violators.

Esmerelda Basin itself is a slightly different story.  There is more sled traffic there (but still a fraction of the traffic further west).  Very rarely do I see skiers in Esmerelda Basin.  When I do, they have usually done sled access, and are skiing Headlight Basin or other north facing slopes in the Wilderness.  There is a ton of terrain on the south facing slopes that is unrideable by sleds.  If you want fresh tracks, they are easy to come by.

I'm trying to break this down in my mind to the basic issue; it's something like:  If one legal user aesthetically impacts another legal user's experience, do changes need to be made?  I guess I don't see how this is different than the way that horses and hunters impact my summer backcountry experience.  Can someone explain the difference to me?  Particularly in this case when we are talking about a majority group impacting a minority group? 

There are few alpine areas that are open to snowmobiles in Washington.  There is a slice of Mt. Baker, areas around St. Helens and sub-alpine Adams, some high country on the east slopes of the North Cascades, and these areas on the southern border of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness. 

Surely this isn't an environmental impact issue.  For those of you that are hikers, do you see more impact to this area from snowmobiles or foot traffic?  There is no doubt in my mind that foot traffic and hiker use in the summer has a much greater ecological impact than snowmobiles;  and as many of you are proponents of sled access skiing, I just don't see this as the issue.

Wilderness incursion is obviously an issue; but as others have said, closing down legal snowmobile terrain due to a few 'bad apples' is the equivalent to closing down the Alpine Lakes Wilderness to hikers due to a few fires built near lakes or above 5K.  Greater enforcement would help, but that is a challenge in itself.  I don't know the skill level of the current Rangers, but it isn't easy to climb to Ingalls Pass, Longs Pass, the Iron Peak saddle, or into Stafford.  Many of us are trying to approach this from within the snowmobile community by self-policing and changing the 'look-the-other-way' attitude.  I can honestly say that I see fewer tracks in Headlight Basin and Turnpike than I did 10 years ago.  The route from Navaho to Beverly get's regular violations from that small select group of riders from Wenatchee.  Sad how a small group leaves such an ugly scar on our community.

I hope someone can convince me that this is more than just right vs. left; red vs. blue; environmentalist vs. perceived redneck; etc;  and I hope that those of you (WMC) who want to limit 'off-trail' snowmobile use are also willing to limit 'off-trail' hiker use.  I don't believe that any of the wilderness or forest-use plans explicitly address foot traffic off-trail either.

I appreciate the opportunity to share my views.  I will do the same with Ms. Heath of the USFS.  And, I will continue to respect other backcountry users and take reasonable steps to limit my impact on their experience. 

Hi Newtrout - love your avatar.  I think you'll find that you will be taken seriously here - mostly because you're obviously sincere, and have your shit together.  But I think you're wrong about the land grab mentality.  This is about who's actions affect whom - some of which you've already conceded.

It's getting a tad late for my further chat tonight and there are yet more chores to finish, but I'm sure you'll soon find further company.

Best wishes

I've been following this thread for a while (just like some of you do on the sledding forums).  I don't really expect my point of view to be taken seriously, but I can't bite my tongue any longer. 

A little background first:  I'm a long-time resident of Kittitas Valley.  I probably spend 20 days a summer on foot in the Teanaway area between Blewett and Fortune Creek.  I'm also a snowmobiler.  I spend an equal amount of time in the area in the winter on sleds.  I'm a very vocal member of the snowmobile community when it comes to Wilderness violation/incursion. 

There's a group of sledders in the Wenatchee area that love to ride up through Navaho/Stafford into Wilderness.  They are the same group that was referenced earlier from a snowmobile forum; giving the name and phone number of a skier in the Leavenworth area.  Despicable...  Just know that they dislike me as much or more than they dislike you all....

That being said, I think the intentions of this thread are disingenuous.  I have to believe that the true intentions are little more than a land grab.  There is very little sled traffic east of Esmerelda Basin.  If the few sleds in that area are truly ruining your experience, then surely we'd better look into changing flight paths out of Sea-Tac, as well!  I'm not referring to those sledders that violate Wilderness policies.  I have zero tolerance for them and encourage any one and everyone to photograph and report those violators.

Esmerelda Basin itself is a slightly different story.  There is more sled traffic there (but still a fraction of the traffic further west).  Very rarely do I see skiers in Esmerelda Basin.  When I do, they have usually done sled access, and are skiing Headlight Basin or other north facing slopes in the Wilderness.  There is a ton of terrain on the south facing slopes that is unrideable by sleds.  If you want fresh tracks, they are easy to come by.

I'm trying to break this down in my mind to the basic issue; it's something like:  If one legal user aesthetically impacts another legal user's experience, do changes need to be made?  I guess I don't see how this is different than the way that horses and hunters impact my summer backcountry experience.  Can someone explain the difference to me?  Particularly in this case when we are talking about a majority group impacting a minority group? 

There are few alpine areas that are open to snowmobiles in Washington.  There is a slice of Mt. Baker, areas around St. Helens and sub-alpine Adams, some high country on the east slopes of the North Cascades, and these areas on the southern border of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness. 

Surely this isn't an environmental impact issue.  For those of you that are hikers, do you see more impact to this area from snowmobiles or foot traffic?  There is no doubt in my mind that foot traffic and hiker use in the summer has a much greater ecological impact than snowmobiles;  and as many of you are proponents of sled access skiing, I just don't see this as the issue.

Wilderness incursion is obviously an issue; but as others have said, closing down legal snowmobile terrain due to a few 'bad apples' is the equivalent to closing down the Alpine Lakes Wilderness to hikers due to a few fires built near lakes or above 5K.  Greater enforcement would help, but that is a challenge in itself.  I don't know the skill level of the current Rangers, but it isn't easy to climb to Ingalls Pass, Longs Pass, the Iron Peak saddle, or into Stafford.  Many of us are trying to approach this from within the snowmobile community by self-policing and changing the 'look-the-other-way' attitude.  I can honestly say that I see fewer tracks in Headlight Basin and Turnpike than I did 10 years ago.  The route from Navaho to Beverly get's regular violations from that small select group of riders from Wenatchee.  Sad how a small group leaves such an ugly scar on our community.

I hope someone can convince me that this is more than just right vs. left; red vs. blue; environmentalist vs. perceived redneck; etc;  and I hope that those of you (WMC) who want to limit 'off-trail' snowmobile use are also willing to limit 'off-trail' hiker use.  I don't believe that any of the wilderness or forest-use plans explicitly address foot traffic off-trail either.

I appreciate the opportunity to share my views.  I will do the same with Ms. Heath of the USFS.  And, I will continue to respect other backcountry users and take reasonable steps to limit my impact on their experience. 

Thank you Mr Newtrout, sir. Yes, we have seen your posts on Snowest and you seem to be a good guy, doing the things that you talk about above. You words and intent are commendable as far as within the snowmobile community.

You call it land grab, we are not sure what that means, WMC is advocating for Forest areas to be designated as winter non-motorized areas. This is for the reasons that have been discussed exhaustively above. As previously discussed, we believe with certainty that snowmobile riding is incompatible on the same terrain with skiing, therefore we need our own areas, and more of them, in suitable locations.

We are not convinced that snowmobile riders lack play terrain given the amount of Forest and including Wilderness that is continually tracked in winter by snowmobiles. As riders and many of us know, snowmobile riders are continually expanding their riding areas, often at the expense of other users' recreation and at times while other users are present before the arrival of snowmobiles. As was discussed above, such universal snowmobile use is by default, or lack of regulation- it just has not been addressed by USFS. So, we ask, is snowmobilers' use of the majority of Forest (especially offroad) without that Forest being Designated for snowmobile use- is that 'land grab' by unmanaged taking of the resource? WMC is asking for management by USFS, whose job is to balance uses.

The Wenatchee Mountains Coalition is quite an eclectic group of folks of various political views- red to blue. Some of us ride snowmobiles and motorcycles, mountain bikes, some hike, climb, snowshoe, ski, etc. Our common shared view and single purpose is that we need more and significant new Forest areas designated for non-motorized winter recreation.

For the many reasons discussed above, we have selected the areas described above for the reasons described. We can also recognize that the issue of proximity to Wilderness of the area from Van Epps to Brothers in the big picture may be considered as more important than our desire to use that area for skiing. Actually that point may help our cause.

Thank you for taking the time to raise some valid points and for your very civil tone!

A very interesting land use thread thanks to all contributors!
How about a devil's advocate persoective?
For me, I wonder...is snowmobile riding incompatible with/on the same terrain as skiing?

Clearly, for some it is yes, for others it is no. Many factors to consider.

But in my personal Cascade experience, it really has been a mixed bag.
I was with Jim O and his dogs when we were sprayed on purpose, clearly harrassed.
I have seen them run over small trees on purpose.
But I like biler tracks for access and retreat when snow/weather is difficult.
Snowmobile tracks can make lapping for turns easier.
below is a link to my recent silver basin tour.
highlights:
I saw only 2 people and no snow mobiles on the ski in which was nice.
I appreciated the biler track in and out on the ollallie downhill.
When i got up into the basin i was bummed to see snow mobiler riders drinking beers beneath the good runs they had tracked out.
But they were cool guys and offered me a beer.
My ski line home was different but untracked.
www.flickr.com/photos/11723786@N06/sets/72157623947447070/

Hi Newtrout,

Just want to say thanks because it is refreshing to hear from a sledder who doesn't start out with threats and talks of harassment and hate to anyone who doesn't agree with them.

Up in the Wood River Valley, North of Sun Valley Idaho, a few years ago there was some real tension between sledders and skiers even some acts of violence. The conflict was very real and so the Forest Supervisor stepped in and told the two groups to come to the table and work out a mutual agreement. Thus the Sawtooth Snowmobile Club and the Nordic and Backcountry Skiers Alliance met and developed a map designating areas for both groups to play in, it was a collaborative effort.