WMC Non-Motorized Advocacy

Slippery slope here folks.

This starts with one request then leads to others.
Limiting access to one group to suit your personal agenda, when will you really be happy?
The real answer is, you won't be, because this isn't about sharing it's about excluding.

I am a skier, I own sleds as a means to ski BC terrain not easily accessed from trail heads.
My sleds hardly get off the trailer, as a mater of fact they haven't been used this season yet.
When they do they will be used as BC skiing access tools. I would fight this even if I sold them tomorrow, because your premise is flawed and there is already land set aside that meets your requirements, it's called Wilderness (not to mention the National Parks).

BTW, don't bother bringing up the "some sledders violate wilderness" argument.
While it's true, the majority of sledders despise these actions and the people responsible.
These self entitled morons that make anyone with a sled look bad, are assholes, and many (snowmobilers) would go out of their way to turn these individuals in. I encourage anyone who is in Wilderness to carry a camera and take pictures that can be used as evidence in the evnet that you see someone violating a Wilderness boundary with a sled. All that said, assholes (and genuinely nice people) come in all shapes and sizes and I've met as many on skis as I have on a sled.

The only definite 'group' in this discussion is the snowmobile riders who go offroad. It is that group v. the majority of citizens who use USFS Lands for winter recreation that has denied the reasonable use of the winter Forest to others. We ask for management of snowmobile riding that allows areas for the majority of offroad Forest users- areas that are free of motorized use.

There are NO "rights" for snowmobile riding on all of this terrain, it is by default of (no) management. There has never been consideration, study, or any designation for such dispersed snowmobile riding. USFS literature speaks of groomed and ungroomed routes for snowmobiles, the Road system. Similarly, it has not been specifically prohibited, which along with the lack of enforcement presence allows "anything goes" as it exists. Unfortunately the vacuum of management has set up an expectation which some wish to assume some "right". The illogic of the situation is glaring. What other example of motor vehicle use on Public Lands allows machines to be ridden which have as much power as a Subaru station wagon, ridden with scant Regulation, no enforcement, no controls, anywhere except where specifically prohibited by signage?  We must point out indeed that snowmobile riders are overwhelmingly good citizens since there is no real enforcement and a paltry few RCW regulations in general. No speed limit, few limits as to where to ride, free-for-all.

The "Wilderness" argument is worn-out as well, it would be refreshing if the snowmobile advocacy websites added some new ideas to the rhetoric that is automatically given in this discussion. Wilderness is generally not accessible for most Forest non-motorized users, the majority of citizens using the offroad Forest in winter. Wilderness was NOT designated and designed to be easily accessed or heavily used for recreation.

The slippery slope has been that the formal management of snowmobiles applies to perhaps the year 1980 when snowmobiles hardly left the Roads. In the Wenatchee Mountains specifically along the pristine crest are set aside four sections of land that comprise the excellent Tronsen Non-Motorized Area- along something like 30 miles of roadless ridge all of which has snowmobile traffic to the summit. There are some other 'Voluntary" non-motorized areas that are not Enforced and not honored by some snowmobile riders. Along the area of the Proposal the Beverly-Bean Voluntary Non-Motorized Area is routinely ridden from over the summit ridge of  Earl Peak. The traffic in to the Voluntary Non-Motorized Area is indeed much less than the snowmobile traffic along the Ingalls (and Jack Cr.) side of the Teanaway crest, the Alpine Lakes Wilderness.

This author has ridden snowmobiles in the Proposal area for skitouring since 1988. It was only after the early 1990s that snowmobiles went much beyond the Roads. It has been in the past few years that the new very-capable snowmobile technology has become mainstream to allow even MORE expansion of snowmobile riding into MORE Forest areas. At this time, that unique, pristine area of the Proposal is completely dominated by snowmobile riding, and taken away from the practical use of the majority of Forest users.

The time has come for management, not for prohibition, of snowmobile riding on the Forest. Many other citizens indeed have their 'right' to use the Forest taken by unmanaged snowmobile riding. Skiers, snowshoers, winter campers, the majority of citizens who own the Forest must step up and ask for their fair share of the Forest for their use.

Nice blog.
After reading all of your points of view, I still respectfully disagree regardless.

The time has come for management, not for prohibition, of snowmobile riding on the Forest. Many other citizens indeed have their 'right' to use the Forest taken by unmanaged snowmobile riding. Skiers, snowshoers, winter campers, the majority of citizens who own the Forest must step up and ask for their fair share of the Forest for their use.

Clever wording, it still adds up to exclusion of others on the basis of your own self interest.

citizens who own the Forest must step up and ask for their fair share of the Forest for their use.

With that kind of logic I should be able to walk into the White House and crack a beer whenever I feel like it.

Nice blog.
After reading all of your points of view, I still respectfully disagree regardless.

Clever wording, it still adds up to exclusion of others on the basis of your own self interest.

Exclusion? How about practical exclusion of all others by snowmobile riders? I get it that snowmobile riders and their admirers like to post about the topic of creating winter non-motorized areas that will serve the clear majority of winter offroad Forest users. This author rides snowmobiles for decades, now to go ski touring, in the past for fur trapping and for backcountry camps for skitouring. What is pertinent about our advocacy is that our discussions at many venues and levels of Gov't include discussion of all Forest users including snowmobile riders. Aside from my snowmobile, I also ride my dirt bike on the Forest, drive my Jeep on 4 x 4 Forest trails, drive my car, pickup, Jeep on Forest Roads. I do not expect to run my motorized vehicles anywhere on the Forest, through meadows, through streams, to summits of pristine peaks. Other vehicles on the Forest are managed, unlike the current free-for-all snowmobile situation.

On the snowmobile forums are talk of how much riding is available on the Forest, discussion of how lightly used are some of the areas available for snowmobile riding. Here is cc from a SAWS (Snowmobile Alliance of Western States) Rep "dave h": "SAWS stands by our organization's commitment to engage in retention and expansion of snowmobile access on national forest land." Above you speak of exclusion? It is indeed other winter Forest users being excluded from reasonable use of the Forest from a smaller group that invests considerable cash into being able to ride a machine unregulated on the Forest.

Our effort is intended to motivate that silent majority of Forest users to speak up for their use!

Slippery slope here folks.

This starts with one request then leads to others.
Limiting access to one group to suit your personal agenda, when will you really be happy?
The real answer is, you won't be, because this isn't about sharing it's about excluding.

I am a skier, I own sleds as a means to ski BC terrain not easily accessed from trail heads.
My sleds hardly get off the trailer, as a mater of fact they haven't been used this season yet.
When they do they will be used as BC skiing access tools. I would fight this even if I sold them tomorrow, because your premise is flawed and there is already land set aside that meets your requirements, it's called Wilderness (not to mention the National Parks).

BTW, don't bother bringing up the "some sledders violate wilderness" argument.
While it's true, the majority of sledders despise these actions and the people responsible.
These self entitled morons that make anyone with a sled look bad, are assholes, and many (snowmobilers) would go out of their way to turn these individuals in. I encourage anyone who is in Wilderness to carry a camera and take pictures that can be used as evidence in the evnet that you see someone violating a Wilderness boundary with a sled. All that said, assholes (and genuinely nice people) come in all shapes and sizes and I've met as many on skis as I have on a sled.

taking into consideration that the laws were written before modern capabilites of sleds made these 'issues' an issue- gravity is right on the money here. it does seem to be 'excluding' rather than a progressive adaptation considering the technology.

Rep "dave h": "SAWS stands by our organization's commitment to engage in retention and expansion of snowmobile access on national forest land.

I'm confused.
After reading this several times, I'm not seeing it.
Tell me where he talks about limiting access or exclusion of others?

Additionally, how can you say that Wilderness doesn't factor into this conversation?
Seriously, the only reason you say this is because it takes the wind out of your argument.

From everything I have read, Wenatchee Mountains Coalition (WMC) seeks to exclude use of public lands to others on the basis of their own agenda.