WMC Update 2012

We feel that individuals deciding to ask the Forest Supervisor for more non-motorized winter recreation areas has more importance than any organization, website, marketing, etc.

Those individuals are going to have to feel pretty strongly about this issue to help you. If you want 1000 letters, then the vast majority of the people you want to participate will not be familiar with the areas they're writing about, at least not in winter. My sense is that you're taking a very passive approach to this project. Without communicating better what stands to be gained or lost, I can't imagine that you'll get the support you say you're seeking. Not everybody knows or cares about these areas as much as you do. How are you going to motivate them to write?

Those individuals are going to have to feel pretty strongly about this issue to help you. If you want 1000 letters, then the vast majority of the people you want to participate will not be familiar with the areas they're writing about, at least not in winter. My sense is that you're taking a very passive approach to this project. Without communicating better what stands to be gained or lost, I can't imagine that you'll get the support you say you're seeking. Not everybody knows or cares about these areas as much as you do. How are you going to motivate them to write?

Yes good points. Perhaps we can work with some of your suggestions. We would accept technical assistance for mapping! It is somewhat sad that the snowmobile riders know this great terrain better than the population of skiers here.

We are not telling folks what to do, we are asking their support for non-motorized winter recreation areas. We threw in what we like specifically in our area, and we could do a better job in describing that, agreed. If all that they would support is the concept of more non-motorized areas for winter recreation on the Forest, that is a huge endorsement. We have spent considerable time thus far communicating and gathering information. Some here have spent many hours for many years on this topic in efforts and Committees unrelated to WMC/ TSP. We think it is time to be more specific, but we hear you, you would like more details than we have provided. We cannot say who may or may not write, we know that we would estimate starting with nearly 200 contacts in the Wenatchee Valley and Kittitas Valley who express interest in these issues.

We are making an effort to achieve a goal that would greatly benefit skiers who wish to ski tour these great places.

It does no good to impugn the character of your opposition.  It hurts your credibility and makes it harder to reach any compromise.  Please stop. (CookieMonster, I'm talking to you.) 

I've posted in support of the WMC proposals, but now I'm going to shift gears.  While I agree with the ideas being suggested here, I find it hard to take this project seriously.  I don't think it can succeed as it has been presented here.  I'm going to offer a few suggestions. 

First, WMC will eventually have to shed its cloak of anonymity.  As Antonin Scalia said yesterday, "Running a democracy takes a certain amount of civic courage." I don't think you'll be able to generate the political support you need if you stay anonymous.  I can't put my support behind an anonymous campaign.  We will all need to step forward. 

According to WMC, the new organization has no website, no funds, just an email address.  That's not going to cut it.  As I'll discuss below, you've got some serious communicating to do.  A website is a first step toward crafting your message. 

You need to document the historical use by skiers of the areas you're concerned about.  Having visited a few snowmobiling areas, I'm not so sure that backcountry skiers outnumber snowmobilers anymore.  There are a lot of sledders out there!  Unless you can prove that skiers far outnumber snowmobilers, your defense of skiing will have to be framed in terms of the traditional use of the areas you're concerned about.  You need to show that skiers have been using these areas for a long time, and that the growth and evolution of snowmobiling has been crowding them out.  This is fundamentally a conservative argument.  Respecting such traditions is a conservative value.  Use this to your advantage. 

You need to explain why federally designated wilderness does not meet the needs of the ski community.  That's the first thing that the skeptical listener is going to ask.  You need to explain that federal wilderness was established primarily with summer use in mind.  Neither snowmobiling nor backcountry skiing were given much consideration when our state's wilderness areas were designated.  Most wilderness areas are too remote for regular winter use by skiers (although they serve well for summertime use by hikers and horse riders).  You need to illustrate the problem with concrete facts and examples. 

You need to be very specific about which areas you are proposing for non-motorized management.  You need to provide maps.  Verbal hand-waving with reference to topo maps is not good enough. 

You need to be specific about which areas will NOT be managed for non-motorized use.  Again, the maps must be explicit.  Snowmobile enthusiasts will justifiably distrust you unless you clearly tell them which areas will remain open to them.  They're going to disagree with you no matter what you do. Don't give them a reason to distrust you as well. Writing off these areas for skiing may be painful, but I don't see any alternative if you want people to accept the plan. 

This thread is a nice way to kick off discussion of the issue.  But the proposals that WMC has offered are much too vague.  I can't throw my support behind the proposal at this point, and I doubt that you'll get 100 letters, let alone 1000, unless you get more serious and organized about this project.  My two cents... 

Great post. WMC...I would listen to this guy.. The arguement is certainly lost without the details. here's a site that might help with some of the details.... www.snowmobile-alliance.org/


Monty_B....noise and exhaust are both being addressed by the manufacturers. the new sleds are significantly quieter and much lower on the exhaust. We are finally seeing the technology get implemented and getting performance with it. Hopefully it will be more common place in the next couple of years to see but not hear a sledder.

Great post. WMC...I would listen to this guy.. The arguement is certainly lost without the details. here's a site that might help with some of the details.... www.snowmobile-alliance.org/

Well, sir, we are certain that there is no argument, justification, demographic. sense of fairness or ethics, anything that will convince Yammadog or nearly all snowmobile enthusiasts to consider another user group. There is no evidence that any snowmobile rider is interested in leaving one square foot of untracked snow for skiers or for snowshoers.

During one day of a five hour ski tour last January three of us climbed 1000 ft. slopes on skis on a peak and got first tracks on three different aspects, in nice powder. The 14 snowmobile riders that I mentioned previously not once but twice shared the resource by following us twice, then tracking the slope beside us that we had manged to get a run on, when there was much more open slope away from us. The ruts from the  snowmobiles rendered those areas unusable for skiing for weeks after. That is a great example, Mr Yammadog, of sharing, the type of sharing that you tell us you are teaching to your children.

Snowmobile Forum opponents claimed to email Becky Heath with automatic opposition very quickly- with just the statement of opposition and no logic other than "we oppose."

WMC has in common with Mr Skoog the active intellectual consideration of our use and others' uses. Mr Skoog has valid points which in the end may serve to strengthen WMC and TSP.

We would accept technical assistance for mapping!

A humble low tech suggestion - get yourself a topo map (or a set of them) and draw on them with a pencil, and if you don't have your own scanner (very cheap at Office Max, Staples, etc.), I'm pretty sure you can scan your results at a local Kinkos. Or perhaps even easier, buy this , which would allow you to select an appropriate magnification level, and if you can't do what you want with the internal map modification tools, read in their manual about how to "export" your map, and export it as a .tiff or .jpeg and pull that into whatever "paint" program you have on your computer (if on Windows, check programs:accessories - you probably have what you need right there) and do your drawing there. Perhaps I'm underthinking this, but I don't think you need a cartographic lab for your purpose.

Some investments such as this and documentation of historic use would demonstrate to me that you're going to put energy in here, and are not simply trying to take the easy route to rabble rousing via a few web posts. W/o such a demonstration of your own commitment, and w/o your coming out from the shadows, like Lowell, I'm not eager to sign onto the effort.

A humble low tech suggestion - get yourself a topo map (or a set of them) and draw on them with a pencil, and if you don't have your own scanner (very cheap at Office Max, Staples, etc.), I'm pretty sure you can scan your results at a local Kinkos. Or perhaps even easier, buy this , which would allow you to select an appropriate magnification level, and if you can't do what you want with the internal map modification tools, read in their manual about how to "export" your map, and export it as a .tiff or .jpeg and pull that into whatever "paint" program you have on your computer (if on Windows, check programs:accessories - you probably have what you need right there) and do your drawing there. Perhaps I'm underthinking this, but I don't think you need a cartographic lab for your purpose.

Some investments such as this and documentation of historic use would demonstrate to me that you're going to put energy in here, and are not simply trying to take the easy route to rabble rousing via a few web posts. W/o such a demonstration of your own commitment, and w/o your coming out from the shadows, like Lowell, I'm not eager to sign onto the effort.

Thanks. We are working on mapping.

We ask skiers to advocate on their own behalf. We are not instructing skiers to do this or that, we are asking skiers to advocate on their own behalf for designation of non-motorized winter recreation areas on the Forest.

Much more effort is in email circulation of the message through our networks, again asking individual skiers to send comments to the Forest Supervisor asking for designation of non-motorized winter recreation areas.