How much gas and oil dumped by snomos?

Misread my post, Rob?  Had I been asked to guess how much fuel escapes to the environment, I might have thought up to 7 or 8%.  30 and 25 are both outrageous!  15% would still get my attention.

For the most part, I've been basing my support for sled management (not necessarily your earlier proposal) on the factors that seem to directly affect non-motorized users - noise, stink, trenched-out landscape, and the disappointment that comes from hoping (or expecting) to have a peaceful and pristine  experience but finding otherwise.

Taking the pulse of the natural environment more carefully should be added to that list.  It seems logical to me that knowing, really, the effects of significant winter motorized traffic on the landscape, and its' wildlife, is an imperative.

I like your posts and think we have common ideas. Thank you. Sorry if I was unclear- I was trying to talk to you and others at the same time.

Indeed, management of snowmobile riding stopped about 20+ years ago before they could be ridden extensively offroad. These issues of impacts to other users and to nature have never been addressed in the current scenario. Studies from back when short-track snomos stayed on roads until spring consolidation concluded no wildlife problems or other damage. Well, not really applicable now with modern 162 inch track snomos tracking so much of the Forest, all of the pristine areas, in the trees, over streams. New studies are evolving showing cause for concern.

Thanks for adding real discussion here, and for your manner of writing that is also very good.

I would agree, of course, that 2-stroke technology is less than ideal. It has come a long way in the past few years with the advent of better fuel injection, cleaner injection oils, etc; but, it still doesn't compare to 4-stroke and direct injection 2-strokes.

But seriously, 1,000-gallons of raw fuel dumped to the snow surface in the Teanaway? WMC, I think you and I need to spend a day together hiking in the Teanaway. I would love to do a little comparison of the environmental impact from snowmobiles vs. the environmental impact from hikers, horses, and other non-motorized users.

On these recent hot summer days, I've been up on the Teanaway River with my 4-year old daughter; playing in the river through some of those great sandstone sections. You can't miss the thriving benthic invertebrate population. That population would be the first to go.

As someone who cleans up petroleum contamination for a living, I struggle to see the evidence or impacts from hundreds of gallons of gasoline and oil being dumped to the snow surface every year.

Should we compare the studies that show surface water impacts by fecal coliforms, etc. from hikers that choose poo along the trail without digging a cat-hole? Maybe we should ban hikers from anywhere that there is a potential threat to surface water? Clearly, there is no need to provide actual evidence of impacts. We should just ban them due to the perceived threat....

Well said Newtrout. Late Spring/Summer/Fall visitors have much more DIRECT impact on the environment. Thanks for adding real discussion here, and for your manner of writing that is also very good.

I would agree, of course, that 2-stroke technology is less than ideal.  It has come a long way in the past few years with the advent of better fuel injection, cleaner injection oils, etc; but, it still doesn't compare to 4-stroke and direct injection 2-strokes.

But seriously, 1,000-gallons of raw fuel dumped to the snow surface in the Teanaway?  WMC, I think you and I need to spend a day together hiking in the Teanaway.  I would love to do a little comparison of the environmental impact from snowmobiles vs. the environmental impact from hikers, horses, and other non-motorized users. 

On these recent hot summer days, I've been up on the Teanaway River with my 4-year old daughter; playing in the river through some of those great sandstone sections.  You can't miss the thriving benthic invertebrate population.  That population would be the first to go. 

As someone who cleans up petroleum contamination for a living, I struggle to see the evidence or impacts from hundreds of gallons of gasoline and oil being dumped to the snow surface every year. 

Should we compare the studies that show surface water impacts by fecal coliforms, etc. from hikers that choose poo along the trail without digging a cat-hole?  Maybe we should ban hikers from anywhere that there is a potential threat to surface water?  Clearly, there is no need to provide actual evidence of impacts.  We should just ban them due to the perceived threat.... 

Yes, good stuff Newtrout.  I agree that Newtrout brings intelligent and pertinent discussion to these issues. More like him would help not only snowmobile interests, but would enhance Forest management, he seems truly a good guy from my interactions with him.

Newtrout's expertise could help us understand other impacts to vegetation as well. I observe that with the tanker spill on Hwy 97 at Magnet Creek from last year that you are overseeing, intensive contracted labor and various devices used. There must be a reason for that effort and expenditure, along a highway where already significant amounts of engine pollutants are present before a spill. What is the status of the benthic invertebrate population in proximity to the Hwy 97 tanker spill?

We were told  by a dealer that personal watercraft with two stroke engines and stand-up style were such a problem that the manufacturers quit making them, to save the sport. There is some correlation there, along with the fact that two stroke motorcycles were banned from highways in 1976 as I recall.

The study is not mine, my information comes from discussion with those trying to analyze the problem in the Teanaway, using the scientific method.  The amount is TBD and somewhat theoretical, but again serious folks are attempting to analyze and quantify the amount and effect of gas-oil mix exhausted by snowmobiles in the Teanaway.

How much gas/oil mix dumped in pristine areas is acceptable? What are the impacts? Is is a good idea to use our pristine lands in some experiment of the unknown consequences? Oh, oops, x gallons of gas/ oil exhausted in these pristine areas did affect the (?)!

When all snowmobiles have less, perhaps acceptable emission levels, then remaining for consideration is the damage to vegetation where there are no snowpack depth requirements on the Forest before allowing snowmobile riding. This is another example of reasonable management that has not occurred.

The 800 lb gorilla is, what of snowmobile use in all of these offroad pristine areas that Newtrout's guys are now documenting with letters? These  pristine areas were never evaluated under NEPA en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Environmental_Policy_Act and also not managed according to Executive Order 11644--Use of off-road vehicles on the public lands    www.archives.gov/federal-register/codifi...ive-order/11644.html  .

I will remind you and your crew that last year WMC came to your side first and asked for collaboration. Our idea was to address user conflicts together getting the best possible for both uses. Our idea was to consider impacts of the activities and per plan how to address them. WMC proposed that after establishing a good plan we would then defend each other's interests. WMC discussed this with and had enthusiasm from USFS folks at all levels of our discussion, and had the sense that USFS would likely find a way to implement the collaborative and reasonable solution. At this time, our issues of advocacy are being addressed by large formal Organizations, beyond our control, thus future collaboration will be guided by those larger Organizations.

Instead of the above collaboration, we have snowmobile interests simply resisting even any discussion, refusing to consider other Forest users, refusing collaboration, resisting any USFS managment actions.  I warned in several emails to SAWS and WSSA folks last year, without reasonable management of snowmobiles some areas may be recommended as Wilderness- not our goal, but it has occurred.

Litigation is currently underway regarding the above referenced Law and Executive Order in Region 1. Also in Region 1 RWAs are managed as Wilderness.  If I wanted to preserve my offroad snowmobile riding, I think I would put my money and efforts into addressing these legal requirements. I believe that it would (would have been) be more fruitful to collaborate with other users, the other side, instead of attempting to scream down the opposition, threaten, intimidate.  And there were plenty of large Organizations to approach if you did not want to meet with WMC, but your side did not.

We are also attempting to illuminate in Congress the possibility and evidence of intimidation by some associated with motorized interests of public officials charged with managing public lands. If such intimidation is a factor in Forest management decisions, that is an unacceptable and unfortunate situation.

What's up with all the anti-sled rhetoric on TAY? I tune into TAY for backcountry ski info, but lately it seems that TAY has become a forum for a few people that love to rant about snowmobiles. An occasional thread about impact to our sport, okay. A missive about enviromental oil spills, please go back to the Sierra club website and vent there. Thanks

What's up with all the anti-sled rhetoric on TAY?   I tune into TAY for backcountry ski info, but lately it seems that TAY has become a forum for a few people that love to rant about snowmobiles.  An occasional thread about impact to our sport, okay.   A missive about enviromental oil spills, please go back to the Sierra club website and vent there.  Thanks

Most of the current sled threads were started by a sledder...

... the discussion continues and is calm by most standards, don't read'em if don't like'em.