It looks like WMC is done viewing and responding to this thread as long as he is a basic member (I assume the 75 post limit applies here too). I believe the fight to keep further restrictions on snowmobiling on forest lands needs to focus on advocating multiple use of those lands as well as the economic impact further restrictions will create. If you look at the USFS agencies Mission-Motto-Vision-Guilding Principles it identifies the some following points:
-"multiple-use management concept"
-"help states and communities to wisely use forests to promote rural economic development and quality rural environment"
-"recognize and accept that some conflict is natural and strive to deal with it proffessionally"
-"promote grassroots participation in decisions"
-"sensitive to the effects of our decisions on people"
The USFS was initially established to promote the sustainable harvest and management of our timber recources while allowing multiple use of those forest lands. The large number of different user groups with vastly different needs and perceptons have steered the agency away from that multiple use concept (in my opinion). Too many user groups want their right to use the forest as they see fit and want exclusive use of that resource. I believe we need to not focus on our right to ride forests lands but focus on getting back to a multiple use concept and the economic impact snowmobiling has on local communities as well as our nations economy.
There are too many different groups wanting their "right" to use forest lands as they wish. We need to focus on the compairative lasting impacts snowmobiling has on the forest resource as compaired to other uses such as OHV, equestrian, mountain bike, dispersed camping, high traffic hiking trails, ect. which I believe and can be proven has more of a lasting physical impact on the forest than responsible back country snowmobiling. Our physical lasting impact on the forest resource is comparable to back country skiing and snowshoeing. We also need to advocate minimizing actual conflicts with other users. I say "actual" conflicts such as buzzing skiiers, tearing up groomed ski trails, staying out of "no snowmobile areas" ect, as compaired to "percieved" conflicts such as seeing tracks, being heard or seen. Those wishing to avoid the perceived conficts with snowmobile use have the wilderness areas and "no snowmobile zones" to pursue their recreational activities. If a person wanted to live in a place of quiet and solitude they would not move to downtown NYC and then petition the ban of motor vehicles on the street, they would move to an area that had little to no traffic.
We need to recruite local businesses who benefit economically from local and visiting snowmobilers who use the forest to back country ride. They need to be aware of the impact of severely restricted backcountry riding will have to their way of life. Even in the Black Hills national forest where trail riding is popular back country riding is an important aspect of what the forest has to offer and its ellimination would have drastic impact on the local economy. Large companies such as the snowmobile big four, enclosed trailer manufacturers, the big three pickup manufacturers, plus smaller companies who make backcountry specialty equipment and aftermarket parts have a stake in the decision to further restrict back country riding. It is well documented that the sales of mountain specific snowmobiles takes up a large market share and probably the only segment of the snowmobile industry showing significant growth. How many skiiers are transporting their equipment in large diesel pickups pulling an enclosed trailer.
The Forest Service and others who use forest lands need to realize and understand that back country mountain riding is an unique recreational opportunity that can only be found on forest lands in a handfull of western states. The US and Canada has hundereds of thousand miles of trails located throughout both country's but the opportunity to back country mountain ride is very limited.
-"multiple-use management concept"
-"help states and communities to wisely use forests to promote rural economic development and quality rural environment"
-"recognize and accept that some conflict is natural and strive to deal with it proffessionally"
-"promote grassroots participation in decisions"
-"sensitive to the effects of our decisions on people"
The USFS was initially established to promote the sustainable harvest and management of our timber recources while allowing multiple use of those forest lands. The large number of different user groups with vastly different needs and perceptons have steered the agency away from that multiple use concept (in my opinion). Too many user groups want their right to use the forest as they see fit and want exclusive use of that resource. I believe we need to not focus on our right to ride forests lands but focus on getting back to a multiple use concept and the economic impact snowmobiling has on local communities as well as our nations economy.
There are too many different groups wanting their "right" to use forest lands as they wish. We need to focus on the compairative lasting impacts snowmobiling has on the forest resource as compaired to other uses such as OHV, equestrian, mountain bike, dispersed camping, high traffic hiking trails, ect. which I believe and can be proven has more of a lasting physical impact on the forest than responsible back country snowmobiling. Our physical lasting impact on the forest resource is comparable to back country skiing and snowshoeing. We also need to advocate minimizing actual conflicts with other users. I say "actual" conflicts such as buzzing skiiers, tearing up groomed ski trails, staying out of "no snowmobile areas" ect, as compaired to "percieved" conflicts such as seeing tracks, being heard or seen. Those wishing to avoid the perceived conficts with snowmobile use have the wilderness areas and "no snowmobile zones" to pursue their recreational activities. If a person wanted to live in a place of quiet and solitude they would not move to downtown NYC and then petition the ban of motor vehicles on the street, they would move to an area that had little to no traffic.
We need to recruite local businesses who benefit economically from local and visiting snowmobilers who use the forest to back country ride. They need to be aware of the impact of severely restricted backcountry riding will have to their way of life. Even in the Black Hills national forest where trail riding is popular back country riding is an important aspect of what the forest has to offer and its ellimination would have drastic impact on the local economy. Large companies such as the snowmobile big four, enclosed trailer manufacturers, the big three pickup manufacturers, plus smaller companies who make backcountry specialty equipment and aftermarket parts have a stake in the decision to further restrict back country riding. It is well documented that the sales of mountain specific snowmobiles takes up a large market share and probably the only segment of the snowmobile industry showing significant growth. How many skiiers are transporting their equipment in large diesel pickups pulling an enclosed trailer.
The Forest Service and others who use forest lands need to realize and understand that back country mountain riding is an unique recreational opportunity that can only be found on forest lands in a handfull of western states. The US and Canada has hundereds of thousand miles of trails located throughout both country's but the opportunity to back country mountain ride is very limited.
Last edited:
) then you must not believe I'm a skier.
