<< ALERT >>: Federal judge says Forest Service broke law not regulating Snowmobiles!!

scootdog · Apr 4, 2013

Contributing money to your local or national snowmobile association is great to help fight the legal battle. But individuals contact forest service directly I think carries more weight. If every Forest service office got bombarded with emails it would work it's way up the chain of command. The national Forest office would take note and consider Snowmobilers when they draft a response to this and setup guidelines regarding access.

I sent a quick polite email and got a rapid response, not saying it's going to make a huge difference. If they got a few thousand emails or calls it has to make some impression.

My Email below.

Response was thank you & forward it up the ladder & check out this website for updates as well as adding me to email list on subject.

http://www.fs.usda.gov/tahoe/

Subject: 2005 Travel Management Rule Regarding Snowmobiles

To Whom It May Concern,

I’m avid backcountry skier as well as snowmobiler in the winter. In the summer I’m also an avid hiker and mountain biker. My family has had a residence in Tahoe Donner for over 20 years now. We love the great outdoors surrounding Truckee and the Tahoe basin. The Tahoe Forest Service has done a great job balancing the activities of all users. I’m a great supporter of the Sierra avalanche Center and try to attend fundraiser functions in addition to donating as much as I can. All this being said I’m very concerned by the recent ruling in Idaho regarding snowmobile access on National forest land. Little truckee summit is my main snowmobile riding area, along with castle peak, and mount rose. I would greatly appreciate any news or planned public forums the Forest Service might have regarding the use of snowmobiles. Basically If you are looking for any public feedback I would like to help anyway I can.

Thank You

xc6rider · Apr 4, 2013

christopher said:
its a money making business to be sure.

Why not make one ourselves with the forum? Decide what organizations would benefit the most from donations received through our members... Pick say, two well seated groups that Snowest chooses to endorse to help our cause. Then, when membership dues are up, make a easy check box ( donate $5/$10 to those chosen orgs).

Many may not choose to, but many will, especially when it's made easy to donate.

Maybe something like this is in place and I'm just not aware of it though?

paulharris · Apr 4, 2013

scootdog said:
Contributing money to your local or national snowmobile association is great to help fight the legal battle. But individuals contact forest service directly I think carries more weight. If every Forest service office got bombarded with emails it would work it's way up the chain of command. The national Forest office would take note and consider Snowmobilers when they draft a response to this and setup guidelines regarding access.

I sent a quick polite email and got a rapid response, not saying it's going to make a huge difference. If they got a few thousand emails or calls it has to make some impression.

My Email below.

Response was thank you & forward it up the ladder & check out this website for updates as well as adding me to email list on subject.

http://www.fs.usda.gov/tahoe/

Subject: 2005 Travel Management Rule Regarding Snowmobiles

To Whom It May Concern,

I’m avid backcountry skier as well as snowmobiler in the winter. In the summer I’m also an avid hiker and mountain biker. My family has had a residence in Tahoe Donner for over 20 years now. We love the great outdoors surrounding Truckee and the Tahoe basin. The Tahoe Forest Service has done a great job balancing the activities of all users. I’m a great supporter of the Sierra avalanche Center and try to attend fundraiser functions in addition to donating as much as I can. All this being said I’m very concerned by the recent ruling in Idaho regarding snowmobile access on National forest land. Little truckee summit is my main snowmobile riding area, along with castle peak, and mount rose. I would greatly appreciate any news or planned public forums the Forest Service might have regarding the use of snowmobiles. Basically If you are looking for any public feedback I would like to help anyway I can.

Thank You

yes, individual letters and comments are very helpful. But what is VERY effective is getting your club organized with leaders that speak on behalf of their members. The FS can then contact the leaders of that organization for meetings when issues arise. or vice-versa the leaders of the club can request meetings with the FS if they are threatening riding areas. a professional, calm approach telling the FS what the snowmobile clubs needs are goes a long way.

the FS is likely not going to contact multiple individuals and set up meetings with all of them. and the problem with this is that a lot of individuals can't keep from losing their temper over these issues. That is not what the FS wants.

clarson80 · Apr 5, 2013

xc6rider said:
Why not make one ourselves with the forum? Decide what organizations would benefit the most from donations received through our members... Pick say, two well seated groups that Snowest chooses to endorse to help our cause. Then, when membership dues are up, make a easy check box ( donate $5/$10 to those chosen orgs).

Many may not choose to, but many will, especially when it's made easy to donate.

Maybe something like this is in place and I'm just not aware of it though?

Seems like a good idea...does anyone know how to do that? Or start some sort of forum donation thread/link/website? I would assume there are a lot of sw members like myself that are willing to make a donation, but want to know which place is best for our $$'s to make a difference. There 78,000 members on this forum (I know a lot are probably not active...but maybe a third of that are?). Even small donations would add up fast for whatever would be needed. I would hate to see the backcountry closed to sleds before my boys are old enough to go with me.

I've heard a few people mention to donate to local clubs....but, for us flat landers, that won't help this issue.

WFO · Apr 5, 2013

I think Snowest setting up a donation link when people sign up for accounts is a great idea. It may cause an accounting nightmare on their end however.

I have donated money to BRC and our State Association over the years. If I could have donated to the cause when renewing my Snowest membership it would have been done.

Also, if you donate to any groups through PayPal make sure to do it as a "gift" to family or friends. This way there won't be any fees taken by PayPal. Every penny at this point is needed, no sense in lining PayPal's pocket.

Regardless, these enviro-nazis are getting out of hand.

Dub

smwizzz · Apr 6, 2013

Tough one!!!

This is a fight that has been going on for decades. The problem is alot of the granola crunchers are wealthy and educated. Not saying snowmobilers are different. There are alot of educated sledders, however for some reason it seems alot more wealthy people ride bicycles and ski. I have watched the closures in western Canada. I have tried to be supportive of the BCSF and the Alberta snowmobile association. It has been going on with 4 x 4's vs quads, sleds vs skiers and motors vs non motorized for generations.

Most of the Alberta rockies have been closed to off highway vehicles. The few left are so overcrowded it creates new challenges. A few years back one area was closed using the excuse the people using it are abusing it. This was based on one long weekend and I agree... it was abused. People were camped all over the place riding around drunk and diss-orderly and had motorhomes and campers stuck in off road areas where they should never have been. The area was blasted with litter and sensitve areas were disturbed because traffic was blocked by these RV's stuck on the regular trail.

In my world this says we have a problem. 1st... there is not enough camping etc for the people we have here in AB. Maybe having to book for long weekends at least a month in advance for a camping stall any where should be an indicator. 2nd... there needs to be some enforcement in both the provincial govt and personal levels in these areas. I have confronted people before about litter and such!!! 3rd... closing down one more area is not going to solve the problem... in fact it may make it worse.

People will be people. There needs to be some order. There was talk that maybe these areas should be members only areas!!! Good solution!!! Now we really have a tiered system. Poor people need not apply!!! I dissagree completely with this. I don't on the other hand dissagree with making it so you have to be a club member to use the areas as long as there is no club discrimination resulting in once again a tiered system. This would make the clubs liable to police their members. If you don't follow the rules you get booted...

On a different note. I believe that there is in actuality a potential plus to boycotting certain areas/towns for periods of time. Make it public knowledge. Make it happen for a couple weeks. This would get the attention of the local buisinesses and potentially gain their support. This on the other hand would be extremely difficult to organize.

I don't have the solution. I said once along time ago regarding bicycles having the same rights as vehicles on the road.... If this is the way it is to be... make them register and insure their bike... make them take a driving test and have a bike license. Make them abide by the rules of the road and ticket them if they don't follow the rules. And.... if they are obstructing traffic... fine them. $$$ talks... . Bikes are a great mode of transportation! I own one. I don't like riding it in rush hour traffic on busy fast moving streets. This is a recipie for not riding my sled next winter!!!

There is a time and place for everything. I have skied and hiked. I have both motorized and non motorized bikes. I have sleds and OHV's. I have boats. I don't row... that is the one thing I am not into. I would consider sailing tho... . Each to their own. Still the greenie's will fight with we, the more tolerable group. It is inevitable and therefore... we need to support groups that will fight back!

Thats my rant!!!

Cheers and may the snowdust be at your back!!!

03RMK800 · Apr 6, 2013

The immediate focused need for money might be for legal fees for an appeal. I haven't heard that they can or will, but we should check with Blue Ribbon coalition, Idaho State Snowmobile Association and American Council of Snowmobile Associations.

Iam going to contact BRC Monday and see what i can learn.

Bowtie496 · Apr 6, 2013

X2Freeride said:
The answer to this is really simple. Don't register your sled in the state and don't spend ANY money riding there. If people were to actually do this the regulations would go away real quick mostly because skiers don't bring in nearly the revenue for the state. When the forest service goes bankrupt they cant enforce the regulations.

This is NOT a State of Idaho Judge, this is a Clinton appointed federal judge whose federal jurisdiction is Idaho. 85% of our state snowmobile registration fees goes to whatever county the owner designates and it is for the grooming program. None of the registration fees goes to the U.S. Forest Service. The next step is this has to be appealed to the Federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, it's a very liberal court and has the distinction of being the most overturned circuit court in the nation, but it is the next higher court. Next step after that is the U.S. Supreme Court. Idaho has no control over these federal judges who were appointed in the Clinton years, do not hurt the state over something we have no control over. Idaho is one of the most conservative, motorized vehicle friendly states in the nation. We just unfortunately had federal judge vacancies when liberal presidents were in power. This is much like the wolf advocates going to federal judge molloy in Montana when they wanted a favorable judge to advance their agenda.

kidwoo · Apr 6, 2013

Bowtie496 said:
This is NOT a State of Idaho Judge, this is a Clinton appointed federal judge

You sure?

Judge Bush was a partner of the law firm Hawley, Troxell, Ennis & Hawley until 2003, when he was appointed to the Idaho Sixth Judicial District. He became a federal magistrate judge in 2008

http://judgepedia.org/index.php/Ronald_E._Bush#cite_note-bio-1

I agree there's no point in screwing the locals over a federal level decision that happened to be in Idaho. Just blindly blaming every government agency be it state or local is kind of self-defeating. The blame for this is on WWA, fair and square. Not the state of Idaho, not "skiers". It's on the nutjobs in WWA who for some reason can't find a place to park where sleds don't unload.

donbrown · Apr 7, 2013

A very similar lawsuit happened with motorized plan access to various lakes / rivers and streams where i go here in California.The NFS had no plan.

They (environmental groups) sued to have a motorized plan for the areras and ENFORCE the law as to where motorized vehicles can approach streams / lakes rivers etc as there was no plan. The greenies won the lawsuit.

So here is what the local NFS office did.

First of all they declared to drive responsibly, ride to minimize the impact on the environment. Rise it in ride it out leave no trash.

For lakes they wrote you can access the lake every 300 yards and can deviate 300 yards (anywhere on ther trail) if needed from the existing trail. (In essence meaning you can access the lake(S) any place since you can leave the trail and access another trail 300 yards away)

They also said if you get stuck in a lake / stream or river you must not leave your motorized vehicle in the lake / stream or river

Lastly they said they would not post trails markers since it may damage the environment and they do not have enough money.

They also sued to prevent trails cutting thru the wilderness cause people don't stay on a trail (and the greenies won) so the NFS service widened the trail thru the wilderness so a 4 lane road could go thru instead of the one lane. They did this for safety cause a vehicle could break down on the trail and a support vehicle park next to it AND allow traffic coming in each direction to pass ... hence 4 lanes thru the wilderness. They also said they would put up natural barriers when they have the funds and not put up artificial barriers cause it may adversely impact the environment.

So whats my point.

The people writing the rules can state in the motorized plan:

Snowmobiles are reguired to travel on enough snow to make minimal impact on the environment.

Snowmobiles have better weight distribution than a person hiking on foot and makes no permanent ruts on the earth since it travels on snow.

Snowmobiles may deviate from existing trails (at any point) to access another trail as long as there is enough snow to travel keeping it safe.

Last couple years many people I know who pay OSV registration fees have been getting surveys (from the state government) as to whether we want to use the money to assist in creating paths/areas for crosscountry skiers, snowshoe etc. I know they groom part of areas in California (with snowmobile money) and ban us from riding so dog owners, crosscountry skiers, snowshoe etc. have exclusive use of an area.

In conclusion they could add the snowmobiling to the motorized plan making it so the riding area is the same or totally have us all convert to 121 inch 1/2 lug tracks and stay on designated trails.

donbrown · Apr 7, 2013

I think this is worth reading

Arizona lawmakers push to take over federal land

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2012/03/23/20120323arizona-federal-land-takeover.html

mikew5945 · Apr 7, 2013

Slowly we are getting it. The attorneys need to be informed.
If you lease property and build a shed it stays when the lease is over unless it has a barrier between it and the land. The Barrier separates ownership of the land and shed.
The USFS is in ownership of the land. They have travel and harvesting policies ”on” the property. They can’t dictate rules to property that is not theirs. The dirt is but the snow/rain is not theirs. Privet land owners and even the ships on the Mississippi have filed rights to this property. Water rights are as close to God as you can get. When I ride a snowmobile it is on the “PROPERTY” of others, not the USFS. Snow is a barrier of privet property between my sled and the USFS. Any and all farmers will want the snow packed down to slow the melt.
This is the only way to beat the Feds. Using their established laws against them. If you know an attorney in the fight, pass it on.

TreewellDweller · Apr 9, 2013

Judge's Ruling on Forest Service

snengineer said:
What is Idaho going to do about it?

I realize that "snengineer" understands the magnitude of this issue but just in case others don't realize it, this is the ruling for all National Forests in the U.S., not just Idaho. The outcome of this is going to determine the snowmobile use of the National Forests in every state west of the Mississippi, including Alaska. Everyone that owns a snowmobile should be contacting their representative in Washington D.C. and voice your concerns. If any of us stand on our heels and wait to see what the "other" guy does we will definitely lose. In fact, right now we are closer to losing than we are to winning. It is time to rally or just shut-up and run your sled off of a cliff. I know that sounds extreme but we are fast approaching extreme closures.

Cat man doo · Apr 11, 2013

I agree. We HAVE TO ORGANIZE ! If we don't in a few years we will have nowheres left to ride. Look at Agenda 21. These greenies want everything !

White Rad · Apr 11, 2013

And here we are again with over 300 people viewing each of the major sled brand sections and 15 people interested in this thread. Hope all the mods everyone is planning for next year work out when we have no where to ride! Meanwhile this topic stays at the forefront of all the skier backcountry forums and the whacko greenies keep on it. Sounds like a broken record in here but EVERYONE BETTER GOT ON BOARD FIGHTING THIS OR OUR SPORT COULD BE OVER

WMC · Apr 11, 2013

The view from this side

Wenatchee Mountains Coalition (WMC) came here, and was allowed, to try to talk to snowmobile riders in 2010. WMC supports WWA and vice-versa. I think that some or most guys here are, of course, angry, but more importantly just keep going on without understanding laws and process regarding the Forest and how things are done. The extremist stance, the aggressive language, just drives this toward being influenced by groups such as Sierra Cub which seems to have no limit on desire to create new Wilderness and ruin our way of life. Though you like to label us, we are not usually like those labels thrown around, we want our share, many of us ride snowmobiles and skitour- but we believe that the motorized/ non-motorized or human-powered/ non human-powered uses need areas for each. USFS in many examples but not on all Forests neglected to divide up the winter Forest as required. This court decision now forces USFS to do this balanced management of the winter Forest- per longstanding law- in Idaho. As well, the decision may have nationwide implications.

It is tough to be faced with the prospect of not having snowmobile riding free reign over places such as the Wenatchee NF, but sooner or later 'you guys' will have to share. In 25 years, I have watched the reverse, I have watched the snowmobiles take over ranges of mountains that I skied on before snomos were capable of getting out there. All of the folks that I work with in Winter Wildlands are not trying to ban snowmobiles, although WWA and WMC want more areas available in winter without snowmobile riding. My own local contacts who are mostly Republcans and almost entirely professionals, guys who skitour and ride snomos, and want some balance. We, as described, are wanting to 'SHARE' instead of being shut out. WMC advocates for significant areas for non-motorized winter recreation on the Wenatchee NF. Wilderness is usually inaccessible, and on the Wenatchee very little provision for winter recreation other than snowmobile riding has occurred. This was not a problem until the technology allowed snowmobiles to ride on all sort of new terrain and take away most of the country that had been traveled only by skis and snowshoes before the new technology snowmobiles.

The real data shows such a greater number of folks who want to and do walk on the winter Forest on skis or snowshoes. This data has not been demonstrated by studies where surveyors target Sno Parks primarily. The human-powered folks are spread out in various parking locations, and one car will carry several- compared the the huge amount of parking to accommodate rigs with trailers for a few riders. One bus at our local Sno Park as is common from the city on a winter weekend will have more non-motorized users than probably days or the entire week numbers of snowmobile riders at that Sno Park. I am not trying to convince anyone these are the facts, you can rail against the reality and yadda but this overwhelming force of numbers and resources is beginning to be felt.

So I and most of my local contacts do not want to lose the ability to snowmobile back into the Forest, especially using the roads. The roads on the Wenatchee are thus far nearly all that is legally established for snowmobile riding- so 'you guys' have your work cut out for you to get some established riding areas beyond that. You have your work cut out, but you spend your time talking smack, acting out, threatening this and that, all of which no one cares. And please, do those mass demonstrations of breaking the boundaries, that will just make it go quicker.

I have heard often and from many USFS folks with a lot of years experience of how nasty it is to deal with snowmobile riders in regard to this management. We have been told directly that locally this is a primary reason why USFS would not deal with it. This Federal Court decision, if carried on throughout the USFS, will require USFS to manage the Forest and designate where snowmobiles may be ridden. The biggest mistake made is that riders think that all of the Forest that they have had free reign belongs to snowmobile riding. The mistake is, the fact appears to be that USFS folks often chose to ignore you riding all over because it is too nasty to deal with! Now there may be no choice, and the Forest level on down will be given 'cover' to proceed when it comes down from the top.

So no, I am not here to make friends. But some of my statements from 2010 are coming to fruition. I will tell you in 2013 that I believe snowmobile riders need to learn the new reality and join the process before your little fits just screw you out of all of it.

christopher · Apr 12, 2013

WMC said:
So no, I am not here to make friends. But some of my statements from 2010 are coming to fruition. I will tell you in 2013 that I believe snowmobile riders need to learn the new reality and join the process before your little fits just screw you out of all of it.

And by being the ONLY PERSON ON SNOWEST to go through this thread and pass out BAD RATINGS to most of the posts, you are ensuring that you make NO friends.

Scott · Apr 12, 2013

WMC said:
Wenatchee Mountains Coalition (WMC) came here, and was allowed, to try to talk to snowmobile riders in 2010. WMC supports WWA and vice-versa. I think that some or most guys here are, of course, angry, but more importantly just keep going on without understanding laws and process regarding the Forest and how things are done. The extremist stance, the aggressive language, just drives this toward being influenced by groups such as Sierra Cub which seems to have no limit on desire to create new Wilderness and ruin our way of life. Though you like to label us, we are not usually like those labels thrown around, we want our share, many of us ride snowmobiles and skitour- but we believe that the motorized/ non-motorized or human-powered/ non human-powered uses need areas for each. USFS in many examples but not on all Forests neglected to divide up the winter Forest as required. This court decision now forces USFS to do this balanced management of the winter Forest- per longstanding law- in Idaho. As well, the decision may have nationwide implications.

It is tough to be faced with the prospect of not having snowmobile riding free reign over places such as the Wenatchee NF, but sooner or later 'you guys' will have to "share". In 25 years, I have watched the reverse, I have watched the snowmobiles take over ranges of mountains that I skied on before snomos were capable of getting out there. All of the folks that I work with in Winter Wildlands are not trying to ban snowmobiles, although WWA and WMC want more areas available in winter without snowmobile riding. My own local contacts who are mostly Republcans and almost entirely professionals, guys who skitour and ride snomos, and want some balance. We, as described, are wanting to 'SHARE' instead of being shut out. WMC advocates for significant areas for non-motorized winter recreation on the Wenatchee NF. Wilderness is usually inaccessible, and on the Wenatchee very little provision for winter recreation other than snowmobile riding has occurred. This was not a problem until the technology allowed snowmobiles to ride on all sort of new terrain and take away most of the country that had been traveled only by skis and snowshoes before the new technology snowmobiles.

The real data shows such a greater number of folks who want to and do walk on the winter Forest on skis or snowshoes. This data has not been demonstrated by studies where surveyors target Sno Parks primarily. The human-powered folks are spread out in various parking locations, and one car will carry several- compared the the huge amount of parking to accommodate rigs with trailers for a few riders. One bus at our local Sno Park as is common from the city on a winter weekend will have more non-motorized users than probably days or the entire week numbers of snowmobile riders at that Sno Park. I am not trying to convince anyone these are the facts, you can rail against the reality and yadda but this overwhelming force of numbers and resources is beginning to be felt.

So I and most of my local contacts do not want to lose the ability to snowmobile back into the Forest, especially using the roads. The roads on the Wenatchee are thus far nearly all that is legally established for snowmobile riding- so 'you guys' have your work cut out for you to get some established riding areas beyond that. You have your work cut out, but you spend your time talking smack, acting out, threatening this and that, all of which no one cares. And please, do those mass demonstrations of breaking the boundaries, that will just make it go quicker.

I have heard often and from many USFS folks with a lot of years experience of how nasty it is to deal with snowmobile riders in regard to this management. We have been told directly that locally this is a primary reason why USFS would not deal with it. This Federal Court decision, if carried on throughout the USFS, will require USFS to manage the Forest and designate where snowmobiles may be ridden. The biggest mistake made is that riders think that all of the Forest that they have had free reign belongs to snowmobile riding. The mistake is, the fact appears to be that USFS folks often chose to ignore you riding all over because it is too nasty to deal with! Now there may be no choice, and the Forest level on down will be given 'cover' to proceed when it comes down from the top.

So no, I am not here to make friends. But some of my statements from 2010 are coming to fruition. I will tell you in 2013 that I believe snowmobile riders need to learn the new reality and join the process before your little fits just screw you out of all of it.

There lies the fallacy of your mentality.
I don't know what it's like in Wenatche, but as a rule there are VERY FEW areas that exlude non-motorized users. VERY FEW. Actually NONE that I personally know of.
You have a warped sense of "share".
Unless it's legally designated to EXCLUDE someone, it's all "shared".

Where I ride, you are WELCOME to join us on your skis if you like. ABSOLUTELY welcome.
And I'll share it with you whether you can even get there or not.

I don't need a judge or court ruling to tell me that I need to "share" it. I already do. Just like I don't need a law or court ruling to tell me not to shoot at humans. Guess what...I already behave that way.

Guess what, it's ALL "shared".

Oh wait...I'm wrong. There are millions of acres designated as ski areas, "W"ilderness and WSAs that DO EXCLUDE any and all motorized use. They are NOT "shared".
There are also other areas that are designated "skier/snowshoer" access only and are not "shared".
I know of NO areas that are designated as unshared "motorized use only".

??? "SHARE" ????

Your desire is to exlude certain user-groups, perpetuating the elitist mentality of "snowmobiliers are different than what I want and so therefore different = wrong".
The snowmobiler's desire is to "share" among everyone.
Can't we all just get a long?
It's people like you who the Greek philosopher, Plato, was opposed to. It's the peoplemaking selfish corrupt decisions who are not capable of the democratic process.

kidwoo · Apr 12, 2013

Rob you want to sit on your high horse and pretend that sledders are so childish and so difficult to deal with (nice fantasy there in your baseless claim that the FS doesn't want to interact with us even though it's their job to do so), but then you run around in a little tantrum giving people bad post rankings on the internet?

Ooh, way to step to the adult dialogue there bud.

Let me clarify something for you. When you make statements like the following:

So I and most of my local contacts do not want to lose the ability to snowmobile back into the Forest, especially using the roads. The roads on the Wenatchee are thus far nearly all that is legally established for snowmobile riding

that's akin to someone telling you your sweet new fat waist skis and dynafits are more than welcome to skin around in a circle on an xc groomer. It's not reasonable, nor a 'compromise' nor demonstrative of any real understanding of the discussion at hand.

The FS avoiding a management plan regarding over snow vehicles because of sledders is just laughable. Sledders aren't the ones getting in the government's face and filing lawsuits to exclude other users.

I'll agree with your last statement in that post and I've even said it myself here. So I at least take solace in the fact that your presence provides a lucid picture to snowmobilers everwhere of what we're up against: borderline lunacy from a bunch of people too lazy to skin to the millions of square miles of the american alpine where snowmobiles are banned.

CO 2.0 · Apr 12, 2013

I can't believe this guy is back on here ranting about this crap. Go to the wilderness and ride thousand if not millions of acres that we cannot. But no, you HAVE to ride in the actually small amount of area legal to snowmobilers. Then complain about it like it's YOUR land. We are sharing, but you are not. You sir are the definition of a HYPOCRITE!!!

<< ALERT >>: Federal judge says Forest Service broke law not regulating Snowmobiles!!

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Banned

Well-known member

Scott Stiegler

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads