Snomo in couloir

T., You said "yes, regulation is a normal function of government"…

While this may be a true statement, it doesn't guarantee a good result.
There are plenty of examples of how the government over regulates, or miss manages, either because is lacks the insight, the budget to follow through or incompetence, etc.

It is also a normal function of the government to manage public resources through study and public hearings. Public lands are just that, public. Back country skiers, hikers, snowshoers and snowmobilers are the public (apologies to any group not mentioned here). All groups represented.

IMO It needs to start before that with the user groups working together on neutral ground, to establish a dialog that is outside a specific advocacy groups agenda. Finding the common connection, break down the stereo types by helping to educate each other, and to explore some common goals.
Too utopian? Maybe.

Respecting wilderness boundaries for instance.
As a user group snowmobilers as whole get a bad rap from the minority that (purposely) violate wildness boundaries. This pisses off snowmobilers as much, if not more than it does skiers because it is illegal and they know it hurts the sport as a whole. Reporting violators, working with the Forest service and land managers so law enforcement can do it's job is a shared responsibility.

Does this mean that we are all going to sing kumbaya around the campfire? Probably not.
While this does not apply to all, there is a culture of distrust, misunderstanding and bad feelings that exists between the user groups, much of which has been/is perpetuated by a few ignorant/bigoted and or thoughtless and destructive individuals on both sides of the line. We all need to remember that this is the minority. For every one of those bad examples, I know twenty more individuals that are reasonable, level headed, intelligent people who care and want to see something work out in a way that, while maybe not perfect, at least considers a fair and balanced approach.

Sadly there isn't a good history for this so far. From some of what I have read it appears that WMC has put in an effort regionally. The problem I see with this, is that they are likely to not be seen as being objective (my personal feeling and also assuming here) by snowmobile advocacy groups and organizations. Part of this has to do with the fact that they have also aligned themselves with WWA which has a strong anti snowmobile position in general. Also, their position is about taking something away. So, right away there is a lot of distrust.

Add to that, it's a fairly one sided conversation.
On one hand you have a user group that see's it's public land access shrink every year. On the other you have a user group that has access to Wilderness, that grows as more gets annexed as time passes. Additionally, most conversations seem to be about how "they" shouldn’t be allowed go there, or "they" should be limited to where they can go here. All of this with little understanding of their sport, what they enjoy about it and why. Statements like "I have no problem with snowmobiles on roads" highlights the lack of understanding relative to what the average sledder is looking for in their outdoor experience. For most sport sledders roads are means to an end, not the objective.

There is a fair amount of unfair characterization and stereotyping on both sides of the line.
People need to get together, there need to be discussions, learning, goal setting. If Government needs to facilitate that, then so be it, however a good result starts with the people who actually use the resource working together.

Sorry if this rambled a bit.
I see and understand it from both sides of the equation.
Please just don't tell me that government is going to come in and save the day by regulating.

Gravity, good points.  The ability of user groups to get along is most always based on having clear, current, and agreed upon policy set under the guidance of the land managers.  The process of developing policy needs the stakeholders to clearly express their positions.

The local work of finding common ground rarely involves those with the most extreme views. 

The user groups should seek USFS input and moderation in the form of an updated winter travel management plan as early as possible.  Mediation of differing views is frequently done very successfully in other busy National Forests.

Todd 

Great to see some meaningful discussion here. More involvement by skiers advocating for quiet, non-motorized areas for their sport is what is needed.

Indeed Public Land must allow reasonable use by more than just one specific use by a minority user group. Snowmobile riding offroad is that use of the Forest requiring significant investment of $5k to $13k to ?K and specialized skills so that one may stand over a cushy seat, push a throttle, lean, and ride quickly all over the Forest, all over nature.

In summer we drive up a road, we start hiking at a trailhead and know that we will not see, except for a very few exceptions, we will not see widespread, dispersed motorized vehicles traveling all over the Forest. Why should it be logical in winter that there is such a dominant unregulated and unmanaged snowmobile riding freeforall? Cars, trucks, Jeeps, motorcycles, mountain bikes, motor boats, and even horses are managed on the Forest, but there is  a snowmobile freeforall on the Forest in winter!

WMC has reached out to all sides of this discussion, and has found extreme unwillingness for snowmobile interests to even have a discussion. As seen here, some discussion from snowmobile enthusiasts sometimes simply tries to censor, shame, or limit conversation (by screaming nonsense), or sometimes tries to intimidate anyone wanting to have a conversation.

As stated several times, our Wenatchee area State Rep agreed (he sold snowmobiles) to host a meeting of the snowmobile groups and winter non-motorized groups to discuss the issues and areas addressed by the WMC Proposal. Contact has been made far and wide to try to arrange such a meeting. In our (WMC) meeting with OWNF Supervisor Heath we were complimented on the effort to meet and attempt collaboration and were asked by the Supervisor to include USFS officials in such a meeting. As far as we know, this arrangement stands and we will facilitate such a meeting as described. Perhaps one side has the most of it already- there are few limits on snowmobile riding on the Forest, and even those are sometimes violated. Thus there is an unwillingness perhaps to meet or even discuss these issues in good faith from snowmobile enthusiasts. Whatever the reasons, the opportunity for meeting, discussion, collaboration exists and does not occur possibly because some snowmobile enthusiasts maintain the "all MINE, shutup!" method of discussion.

WMC has asked USFS to manage issues that are not reasonably managed. The areas of the Wenatchee Mountains addressed by the WMC Proposal have seen in 15 years the exponential increase in acreage used by snowmobiles, without USFS Designation, plan, study, intent. Essentially an unplanned taking of the resource now claimed as established use. USFS continues to resist dealing with this management because "this Forest is not able to deal with this at this time." Our understanding is that such a position arises from the fact that the well-funded and hyperaggressive  snowmobile lobby will, as has occurred, bring costly lawsuits in order to derail any USFS management that limits the bully freeforall of snowmobile riding. How perverse is it that snowmobile interests have won lawsuits to prevent limits of snowmobile riding on public lands through arguments using NEPA!? Not all snowmobile riders, including this author, fit that category, but there is a formidable, aggressive, and well funded snowmobile lobby that also provides many of the mindless arguments that are now even seen regularly on skier websites (skiers could try a similar conversation, for example, on Snowest or BCR for an interesting education).

Thanks for the good-faith and meaningful discussion here by all who do so. It is time for skiers to step up and speak up!

WMC Do not mistake my post as support for your agenda.

.. The ability of user groups to get along is most always based on having clear, current, and agreed upon policy set under the guidance of the land managers.  The process of developing policy needs the stakeholders to clearly express their positions.

The local work of finding common ground rarely involves those with the most extreme views. 

The user groups should seek USFS input and moderation in the form of an updated winter travel management plan as early as possible.  Mediation of differing views is frequently done very successfully in other busy National Forests.

Todd 

Good points. Thanks.

Sorry to say that an updated winter travel plan and winter travel management plan will again ignore these issues in the OWNF Revised Forest Plan- according to some communication in a meeting and letter.

Indeed, the current OWNF Supervisor implemented winter management on the Gallatin NF when Supervisor there. That management gave significant portions of the Gallatin NF to winter non-motorized use.

Indeed, skiers and winter forest non-motorized users need to step up and speak out for their use of quiet, winter non-motorized areas on the Forest.

A USFS manager recently referred to this web posting below when explaining to us that the problem is solved because of peer group pressure- hooray!

www.backcountryrebels.com/showthread.php?t=15270&page=9

Snomos in Headlight Basin and over Stuart Pass, posted by the snomo guys. Good to know that it is only a few scofflaws violating the Wilderness on snowmobiles, it would be so much worse if it were just regular folks violating the Wilderness(?). Heck, those few scofflaws have only been riding across Ingalls Lake in the Wilderness "since 1984" according to a source respected by WMC, USFS, and snowmobile enthusiasts.

Sorry, another snowmobiler chiming in here (also a climber, hiker, mtn biker, blah, blah, etc.).  I'm right in the middle of the effort to self-police the snowmobiling community, so I thought it was worth chiming in.   The Teanaway, like Mt. Baker, is one of the few alpine areas open to snowmobiles.  I will admit that my efforts are because I don't want to lose access to the Teanaway, but the end result is a benefit to everyone.

I'd like to start by posing a few questions to the non-motorized users here. 
-How many of you have been on the Teanaway Crest this winter and witnessed snowmobiles or snowmobile tracks in Wilderness? 
-For those of you that ski Bean, Stafford, Beverly or Standup on a regular basis, how often do you encounter sleds in these non-Wilderness areas?  
-Do you have trouble finding fresh lines, unmolested by sled tracks?  
-In Esmerelda Basin, which gets several times more traffic, do snowmobiles ruin your experience there?

These aren't rhetorical questions.  I'm not asking these questions with the assumption that the user conflict is fabricated.  I'm very serious.  WMC has been spreading his propaganda everywhere he can, and I'm curious whether he represents the average backcountry skier.  

I didn't get up along the Teanaway Crest as much as I would on a normal year (it wasn't rideable until later in the season this year).  I was only along the Crest 6-7 times this winter, though I covered Scatter Creek through Negro Creek.  I saw tracks in Wilderness on one of those trips (the photos in the backcountryrebels thread above).  I've been riding this area for about 15 years.  There isn't a doubt in my mind that the problem has improved over the past 5 years.  The tracks I saw in Headlight Basin this year were the first I've seen there in a few years.  In the late 90's, it was common to see tracks there on any sunny weekend in the spring.  The biggest problem area that I see now is out of Stafford.  There is a very small group of riders who ride out of Blewett and ride through Hardscrabble and Fourth Creek.  Even here, I only saw tracks on one of the trips I made along the Crest.

WMC reports that Wilderness trespass is a common 'rampant' problem.  I'm not sure that I agree.  I guess it depends on your definition of 'rampant'.  Granted, my data set is limited, which I is why I am anxious to hear from those of you that visit the area more frequently than I.  If the problem is 'rampant', why does WMC continue to post photos and reports from several years ago, and why is he digging through public Youtube videos from three years ago for evidence?  It would seem to me that he should be presenting his own photo evidence from his frequent trips along the Teanaway crest.

WMC's original concern was keeping snowmobiles out of Wilderness and allowing for peaceful, unmolested ski trips.  Now he seems to be belittling our successful efforts to self-police.  I'm confused.  I thought this was the point?

I would love to sit down and discuss these issues with the USFS,  and work toward a solution that puts reasonable guidelines on motorized and non-motorized winter use; but I won't do it with WMC as a 'facilitator'.  I simply don't trust him.