Should the NWAC be publicly funded?

If your argument is correct.... then it works both ways. You can't prove NWAC is effective neither can you prove it's not. You only have conjecture and personal belief or hope.
Plus you were making the argument about me again with your prefix... not that I care ... but Marcus does seemingly.

I did an unscientific ad hoc poll of 11 snowmobilers this morning.
11/11 have never visited the NWAC site.
2 of 11 knew of its existance but still did not go there.
11/11 are highly skilled, high wage earner, union craftsmen.

Snowmobiler deaths are the still one of the groups most prone to death by avalanche.
Snowmobiler deaths are increasing.
Conclusion: NWAC is doing a poor job of  getting their message and data to smowmobilers
Reason: ?????????????

Chris, you clearly are familiar with the commutative law of arithmetic, but the logic of your conclusion is way off base.  Did NWAC personally send you a note when they heard you might be a bc skiier?  An interesting experiment might be to re-poll your guys in a month or two, to see if they are making use of the news you provided them.  If so, it may be evidence that their lack of awareness could be corrected at many points, including at time of sled purchase, annual registration renewal, suitable discussion and links on snomo forums, the culture of conversation among snowmobilers, and I might agree that perhaps  Avalanche.org could plug their existence/service in appropriate media, if they aren't already..  I'm more inclined to believe that operators believe that they are above the danger, than that they are unaware of safety resources.  But get the word out - we don't want increasing injuries in the mountains for any group.

Again you are making assumptions based upon what you think /hope is a fact and neglected to ask the obvious question.
What reason did the 2/11 give for knowing of the site's existance and still not going there??
What was the response of the 9/11 when told of the resource.
Are you arguing that the NWC site is NOT ski/rider centric because if so I'd like to here more from you to support that?

I'd encourage anyone who feels that NWAC is a public good and contributed to this thread to take a moment to copy your thoughts  to your state representatives, since that will likely be a much better use than debating the issue here.  You can look them with here .

Here's what my letter says:
[hr]
Dear Senator Murray:

I am writing to urge you preserve state funding for the Northwest Avalanche Center in the next biennium as line items in the Department of Transportation and State Parks budgets.  I personally use the NWAC's forecasts and mountain weather stations at least weekly as a backcountry skier, so I clearly have a vested in its continued existence, and have been proud to support it through donations.  But I don't think that you should fund the NWAC for me.

Instead, the biggest benefit of having avalanche forecasts free and easily available to the public is to occasional backcountry users.  The judgment to tell if snow in the mountains could avalanche requires much time to develop.  Occasional snowmobilers, families trying to snowshoe or others who only have a few times a year to enjoy our public land should not suffer unduly because they are unaware of the natural hazards a winter environment presents.  As a society, we can't prevent people from taking risks that a reasonable person would know about, but we should do as much as we can to make sure reasonable people are informed of the risks.

Interesting point and therefore your argument is that avy deaths are increasing due to more people being in avalanche terrain and that they would be even larger if NWAC did not exist. Seems like a plausible theory.... tough to prove or disprove.

However, perhaps one needs to look at the statistics and see what part of the user population is having increased deaths before assuming your  theory is correct. For instance if skier deaths were constant or not increasing despite more use then it would be a good argument that NWAC is having an effect on that statistic. Conversely, if AT THE SAME TIME snowmobile deaths were increasing at the same rate as that populations increased usage it woul infer that NWAC is having no effect on that population. Don't know the answer but it would be interesting to find out and see whose theory is correct.

As to your second point re public funding. If NWAC is so essential for the public good,   the nations nature GNP effect, commerce, keeping I90 open and all the reason advocated above then it should be funded completely every year  by taxpayer dollars and never ever considered for cuts or even complete withdraw of funding and shouldn't need FOAC and private donations. Nobody has answered me why that is not the case. ANybody know why?

Have you read this page Chris? www.nwac.us/about/mission/

Again you are making assumptions  based upon what you think /hope is a fact and neglected to ask the obvious question.
What reason did the 2/11 give for knowing of the site's existance and still not going there??
What was the response of the 9/11 when told of the resource.
Are you arguing that the NWC site is NOT ski/rider centric because  if so I'd like to here more from you to support that?

Sorry, not sure you were responding to mine, but you know I'm happy to chat, so..

I suspect the Av centers have been skiier-centric, but that's likely due to the preponderance of those that take advantage of the resource, not because of any attempt to exclude.  As I review avalanche.org I find many references to several user groups, including machine users of the bc, and it seems they have a special program tailored to them.  Not quite sure what the problem is - is there some sense among snowmobilers that the Av centers are not properly working for them, too?  I would be interested in knowing the response of the 2/11 and  9/11, but again, knowing how they may respond to the new awareness (9/11) could help to identify how agencies and the broader community could promote safety.

Hope you didn't think I was jumping on you.  Understanding why people may not be aware of, or take advantage of such important and available information is important.  thanks.