WMC Update 2012

WMC is asking for a small piece of the total for skiers, there is no compromise being shown in return, even from a formal organization that has sent a letter. WMC is not asking to prohibit or limit snowmobiles outside of non-motorized areas that are very insignificant acreage in the total. Conversely here the opposition appears to acknowledge little need to accommodate the needs of other users except to allow skiers (etc) to travel in the trail of snowmobile fumes and stumble along snow rutted by snowmobiles. Multiple use of thew Forest, sharing, compromise would allow skiers and other uses on a pristine snowy Forest.

Discussing this topic with you (the committee is draining)... No compromise, no formal letter? The forest service didn't even know about this a couple of weeks ago... Everyone in the snowmobile clubs I have discussed this with doesn't have a clue about this either, and yet here you are saying there is no compromise? Maybe this group needs to become more involved with groups that are currently involved in the winter recreation programs, rather then wishing everyone should become involved with them.

These continued statements about "opposition appears to acknowledge little need to accommodate the needs of other users" are baseless. The only ones that are the opposition here are mainly yammadog and myself, and we have both stated many times we do see "your needs", yet it seems it is continually ignored...

So again, look at the map, estimate some simple figures, see the dominance of one use, snowmobile riding on the Forest.

Every time I look at a map I keep seeing these awesome areas to ride that have the words "Wilderness" written all over them.

Including wilderness, I would say that skiers have a larger amount of skiable area then snowmobiles. Skiers have 100% of the forest to utilize. Snowmobilers have at most 40-50%. hmm....

...yet it seems it is continually ignored...

This seems go be going around (and around, and around). I see that you continue to state that skiers have 100% access, even though there are many places where it's just not worth skiing due to sled traffic and tracks (as discussed ad nauseum above). You keep focusing on the wilderness in your take on how much space skiers have despite clear discussion of why it's not practicall accessible for most of us (and I very much agree with recent comments on the unlikeliness of getting roads plowed or the Wilderness Act changed in a way that would alter the story).

As for the 2:1 ratio you see and sno-parks, I know multiple skiers who just plain avoid going to almost all tours that start at sno-parks where you'd see sledders (I'm not one of them - some of my usual crew says "I love the smell of two-stroke in the morning - it smells like victory!"). I don't think I've seen any credible stats/percentages in this thread yet, from either side, whether on users or on practically accessible acreage...

This seems go be going around (and around, and around). I see that you continue to state that skiers have 100% access, even though there are many places where it's just not worth skiing due to sled traffic and tracks (as discussed ad nauseum above). You keep focusing on the wilderness in your take on how much space skiers have despite clear discussion of why it's not practicall accessible for most of us (and I very much agree with recent comments on the unlikeliness of getting roads plowed or the Wilderness Act changed in a way that would alter the story).

As for the 2:1 ratio you see and sno-parks, I know multiple skiers who just plain avoid going to almost all tours that start at sno-parks where you'd see sledders (I'm not one of them - some of my usual crew says "I love the smell of two-stroke in the morning - it smells like victory!"). I don't think I've seen any credible stats/percentages in this thread yet, from either side, whether on users or on practically accessible acreage...

Could you please add some "credible stats" here?

The issues are quite obvious without stats for those who skitour where snowmobiles are ridden. We have skitoured using snowmobiles since the '80s. We experienced some years where it was possible to coexist, but the situation has changed with advancing snowmobile technology. We observe that snowmobiles are riding in new places every year, unfortunately snowmobiles could arrive at many stashes to skiers' surprise.

If one simply lays out the Wenatchee NF map and study it for a few minutes the arguments above would appear to be quite obvious.

Thanks for all the discussion!

This seems go be going around (and around, and around). I see that you continue to state that skiers have 100% access, even though there are many places where it's just not worth skiing due to sled traffic and tracks (as discussed ad nauseum above). You keep focusing on the wilderness in your take on how much space skiers have despite clear discussion of why it's not practicall accessible for most of us (and I very much agree with recent comments on the unlikeliness of getting roads plowed or the Wilderness Act changed in a way that would alter the story).

As for the 2:1 ratio you see and sno-parks, I know multiple skiers who just plain avoid going to almost all tours that start at sno-parks where you'd see sledders (I'm not one of them - some of my usual crew says "I love the smell of two-stroke in the morning - it smells like victory!"). I don't think I've seen any credible stats/percentages in this thread yet, from either side, whether on users or on practically accessible acreage...

Jim you're right, it is repetative in some regard as WMC has not stated an area that he deems acceptable for similar terrain in an equal foot print to what he is proposing be added, and he is also not willing to acknowlege that wilderness should be part of the equation.

I'm of the opinion that there is some level of incompatiblity between the sports and I'm asking these questions to be able to work on a possible suggestion and solution outside of simply excluding a large user group.

In the most recent posts WMC identifies the numbers of ALL forest users(151k), yet compares the 35k of sledders to try and show an imbalance in the user groups. the 151 is probably also including the 35k registered users along with summer time users and again very misleading.

Fact, skiers are authorized to go on all areas of the forest, whether you choose to do this is certainly your choice. I also avoid areas that area tracked out by weekend warriors and poor parking along with the annual xc skier event at blewett, so as to give them their peace. Fact is, I can't go to all areas of the forest on my sled. And I'm sure we can agree that areas WMC is identifying as sledder territory is area that is also skier territory and neither  groupsare probably there..the heavily wooded valleys.

No need to change the wilderness, we have plenty of forest closed off to the citizens. At this point with the information I know of, the answer to having sled free area is to create better access to the wilderness areas, which IMO is doable. Enforce the established non-motorized, educate the sledders on these areas and then revisit the situation in 4-5 years.

I want to consider your desire to not be in the wooded valleys and not be in the trench of sleds, but it takes both sides to acknowledge the other and WMC needs to acknowledge that we don't want to be there either.

the slippery slope that WMC hs laid out of creating non-motorized buffers in winter activity and then expanding it to become wilderness, which then will be called for another buffer et al...is my big concern and I think the underlying mission of WMC.

If WMC would help to identify area that he sees as acceptable terrain, similar to what he is looking to close to sleds and acknowledge the concept of creating greater access to EXISTING non- motorized and wilderness, then we can move forward. Until then, he is offering nothing in compromise or adding to a constructive conversation. It would be paramount to sledders simply saying..'no"...but we're not. Well, we are if he continues to stand fast in his position of simply exluding and not considering ALL user groups.

WMC does appreciate the passion and comments, we do want to fully explore these issues and ideas. Please remember that this is a discussion and all are entitled to their opinion. WMC believes what is stated by WMC, but this is not zero sum and (rhetorically) can anyone on any side really win this debate? Probably not, so let us listen to each other and realize that there are views different from our own. WMC is advocating for what we believe to be the right thing, and encourage others to do the same. WMC is not attempting to shut down snowmobile riding on the Forest, we ride snowmobiles sometimes. In the end, we look to USFS to manage Forest recreation. We are asking for a share of the Forest for non-motorized winter recreation, equity and parity to the dominant use of snowmobile riding.

The Teanaway- Wenatchee Mountains crest portion of the WMC proposal provides new and significant non-motorized winter recreation areas, and provides a non-motorized corridor to Wilderness for skiers and snowshoers. This and the east portion of the proposal are the primary intent of the WMC.

Possible benefits but not the primary intent of the WMC include the buffer to Wilderness that is the usual USFS practice, opportunity for effective Enforcement from a Road that is a clear Boundary with a few points only to allow unlawful access (compared to miles of unenforceable open terrain next to Wilderness open terrain), and resource protection in a roadless area with plant species and wildlife habitat that are unique to the specific area.

Here is copied the USFS message that was copied and posted on Snowest Forum on 3/23/2010 and also on BackcountryRebels.com. The message alludes to the possible concept of buffer areas to Wilderness, and Enforcement problems-

(QUOTE from Snowest Forum)
"March 23rd Letter from Cle Clem Forest Service Supervisor Tim Foss:

Dear fellow snowmobilers,

Once again, the issue of snowmobilers riding in wilderness is rearing its head. This is not a new issue, as you know, but it seems to be on the increase again. We are getting more and more letters from backcountry skiers who are really unhappy about seeing and hearing snowmobiles in wilderness, and once again the drumbeats for closing routes that get close to wilderness are getting louder. As you know, we (the Forest Service) are completely unable to patrol these boundaries with any degree of effectiveness. We will be putting up signs, and flyers at sno-parks, but I'm also asking for your help in getting on top of this. If you could pass this message on to your riding buddies, clubs, and especially folks you see in the woods who may be inclined to ride in wilderness:
"RIDING IN WILDERNESS LEADS TO CLOSURES OUTSIDE WILDERNESS". Or as I like put it "Every time you put a track in wilderness, you hand a box of ammunition to those who want to shut down our sport" Also, if you are aware of an incursion point that could use a sign, contact me and I'll get you one. You guys have always been helpful , and I'd appreciate any continued help in getting the message out. I'm also not very computer savvy, so if anyone would like to post something on Sno-West or other appropriate forums, that would be great.. Thanks in advance for your help!


Tim Foss
Trails, Wilderness, ORV, and Winter Recreation Manager
Cle Elum Ranger District"

(END QUOTE)

So is the above quote justification?