Snowmobiles on skyline ridge Why?

Between Z-Bo and Kyle, we could have a pretty good party in the mountains!

i think i deserve a spot on the invite list you better recognize.
bobby

you my friend, are the LIFE of the party

We know that education with sledders does not work because that is what the FS has been supposedly doing for the last 25 years and it has accomplished nothing. It has come to a point where the motorized users are taking and using almost all of the forest outside of wilderness and thus the FS has now been forced into doing what it has neglected to do for the last 25 years and that is to manage winter motorized use on our public lands.
As to the using the backcountry, close in access for those not using machines to get their BC experience is key. While Skyline is close for those of us on foot that is what makes it so popular and heavily used. Sledders should be looking for play areas a bit further down the road and out of sight of the close in areas where they know their use of an area is going to impact a large number of foot travelers.
Thanks to the recent court ruling the FS must now complete a winter travel management plan for all national forests in the USA. You can expect large areas to be designated as non-motorized use only and of course there will be complimentary areas of use for motorized uses. The point is that management and regulation has arrived and will finally separate areas of use and resolve many of the conflicts currently existing.

all of this is about some super front country? some kids having fun where it's legal? other locals witness respect? everybody got some good turns in that day, right?

that is SO punk rock.

it needs a hash tag or something.

We know that education with sledders does not work because that is what the FS has been supposedly doing for the last 25 years and it has accomplished nothing. It has come to a point where the motorized users are taking and using almost all of the forest outside of wilderness and thus the FS has now been forced into doing what it has neglected to do for the last 25 years and that is to manage winter motorized use on our public lands.
As to the using the backcountry, close in access for those not using machines to get their BC experience is key. While Skyline is close for those of us on foot that is what makes it so popular and heavily used. Sledders should be looking for play areas a bit further down the road and out of sight of the close in areas where they know their use of an area is going to impact a large number of foot travelers.
Thanks to the recent court ruling the FS must now complete a winter travel management plan for all national forests in the USA. You can expect large areas to be designated as non-motorized use only and of course there will be complimentary areas of use for motorized uses. The point is that management and regulation has arrived and will finally separate areas of use and resolve many of the conflicts currently existing.

Hey Guava - I go sled access ski touring pretty much every weekend and based on my real world experience, I have to disagree with most of your "facts" and conclusions.  First off, if sledders are riding in legal areas like Clara Lake, then what does FS education have to do with it? There was a recent TR on this site that raised that "issue".  Taken from a different perspective, it was one citizen complaining about a much larger group of citizens "stealing his milkshake", while legally recreating on public land.  Reminded me of surfers bitching about kayakers/personal watercraft/kiteboarders, etc. "stealing" their waves.   Second, illegal riding by sledders is exceptionally rare.  I've skied all over the south boundary of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness (and the Methow, Baker, Blewett, etc.) pretty much weekly for the past 10 years and I've seen evidence of sled incursions less than five times. The argument that illegal sledding is a major issue that will be cured with more boundaries and set asides is a red herring being promoted by WMC and the JustGetOutWenatchee crew to achieve their personal agenda.  They want their favorite areas, like Clara Lake, set aside for their personal use.  That might be a reasonable proposal in the grand scheme, but let's be honest here, they are promoting their personal agenda under the guise of the public interest.  They are also proposing to close areas like the S side of Navaho and the Three Brothers to sledders, so they can have those stashes unmolested whenever they get around to heading out there.  The irony is they need sleds to get to those spots.  They want to keep the roads legal for sleds, but close the hills.  What galls me about that point is that the ALW boundary is just over the hill from that spot.  They could easily enjoy the area alongside sledders, but they're too  lazy to climb over the hill and enjoy the north side, where sledding isn't allowed. Finally, the point that nobody seems to be acknowledging is that the FS has no interest in enforcing any boundaries, now or in the future. Change the rules all you like, but you probably won't see much difference. Myself, I have no problem finding great skiing wherever sledders go.  And, if I want to avoid sleds altogether, I go straight to the wilderness areas.  It's a fairly simple and effective strategy.  Try it.

Hey Guava - I go sled access ski touring pretty much every weekend and based on my real world experience, I have to disagree with most of your "facts" and conclusions.  First off, if sledders are riding in legal areas like Clara Lake, then what does FS education have to do with it? There was a recent TR on this site that raised that "issue".  Taken from a different perspective, it was one citizen complaining about a much larger group of citizens "stealing his milkshake", while legally recreating on public land.  Reminded me of surfers bitching about kayakers/personal watercraft/kiteboarders, etc. "stealing" their waves.   Second, illegal riding by sledders is exceptionally rare.  I've skied all over the south boundary of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness (and the Methow, Baker, Blewett, etc.) pretty much weekly for the past 10 years and I've seen evidence of sled incursions less than five times. The argument that illegal sledding is a major issue that will be cured with more boundaries and set asides is a red herring being promoted by WMC and the JustGetOutWenatchee crew to achieve their personal agenda.  They want their favorite areas, like Clara Lake, set aside for their personal use.  That might be a reasonable proposal in the grand scheme, but let's be honest here, they are promoting their personal agenda under the guise of the public interest.  They are also proposing to close areas like the S side of Navaho and the Three Brothers to sledders, so they can have those stashes unmolested whenever they get around to heading out there.  The irony is they need sleds to get to those spots.  They want to keep the roads legal for sleds, but close the hills.  What galls me about that point is that the ALW boundary is just over the hill from that spot.  They could easily enjoy the area alongside sledders, but they're too  lazy to climb over the hill and enjoy the north side, where sledding isn't allowed. Finally, the point that nobody seems to be acknowledging is that the FS has no interest in enforcing any boundaries, now or in the future. Change the rules all you like, but you probably won't see much difference. Myself, I have no problem finding great skiing wherever sledders go.  And, if I want to avoid sleds altogether, I go straight to the wilderness areas.  It's a fairly simple and effective strategy.  Try it.

Well said.