Sorry, for the prolonged absence from the conversation, it is baby fish counting season!
Oh yea, and nesting phase for a soon to be here baby powderette!!!
Great thoughts, points, and ideas. I totally agree there is a fine line when presenting comparison of outdoor recreation in degrees of negative “impact”.
Unfortunately our society seems to be in an era of what I do is better than what you do; we are forced to, if not combine similarities - then define differences (not trying to sound like Sharpton). There is no need for fact or concern of actual cause and affect just the human urge for insistence. It seems it is not just disagreeing points of view on issues, but a real need for people to “tell” others what to think or do. I am not here trying to “tell” anyone something; my goal is to discus some ideas and approaches to deal with the unjust difficulties, challenges, and outright attacks on snowmobiling rights, lifestyle, and culture. I am disappointed in the disingenuousness of many, who use unsound science and generally accepted –incorrect- “knowledge” to garner recognition and false status as environmentally friendly; all the while, oblivious to their own direct or indirect impact.
I work with a critical areas monitoring biologist that had an issue of Defenders magazine on his desk with the page turned to picture of woodland caribou (Spring 2009). As it happens, I was on the reviewing panel interviewing this person and believe he has a keen holistic view and understanding of ecology and humanity. I started a conversation about the proposed increase in wilderness land and the effects on recreation activities and potential impacts on the general management of the discussed land. I explained that I felt that snowmobiling, my form of ATV recreation, is under increased “unjust” criticism. I explained the general numbers, locations, and typical practices of snowmobiles. He agreed that remote recreation is not the “critical” impact on our land and the real critical areas to be concerned about (regulating), and where his work is focused, is on the edge of expanding development.
According to WAAS there are ~36,000 snowmobile registrations in Washington State. Washington State estimated 2008 population is 6,500,000. According to Washington Trails Association, “There are more than a million hikers in Washington State, each of whom has a stake in the fate of our public lands and trails. Hiking is increasing in popularity as more and more people move to Washington and begin to enjoy our magnificent wild country.” Think about where most snowmobiles, and other ATVs for the most part, travel.
I am probably a technically average Snowest rider with an above average sense of adventure for my local riding area. I love to ride snowmobiles and average ~2250 miles a year (the last 3 years). Riding this often I see much of the extent of where other riders go, in my riding area. I have rode most of my (great) local riding area and was surprised when searching some alternative nearby places to ride this spring, how many large areas were restricted from snowmobile (not to mention other access), and limited to skiing and snowshoeing generally through private (including timber) property and/or forest service signage. The majority of the snowmobile travel is on the same roads used by other outdoor activities just to access campgrounds and trailheads as starting points to their “use”. Very few of us (snowmobiles) travel into areas accessed by thousands (hikers, ect) for extended periods specifically during increased wildlife presence and direct (constant) interaction with the physical habitat (not on snow). Our sport is a small fraction of the of the recreation land use.
True environmental / conservation concerns and regulation need to concentrate on the truly impacted, or soon to be impacted, areas and the implementation of restoration and development of technologies lessening detriment to the truly critical land.
Here are some things to watch out for and find documentation on:
False extrapolation of negative data:
Example: a lake in the mid-west that is primary (heavily used) snowmobile area, potentially linking contamination to snowmobiles being used to say “any and all lakes where snowmobiles travel are subject to the same levels of contamination”. That is not true, but if said could be exhibited as so.
Counter: find documentation on levels and differing sources in other places obviously contrary to the extrapolation to directly challenge data. Side note: recently discovered levels of contamination in western (US) high lakes and even on our snow pack (concerning increased melt) have widely been contributed to the industrialization (not to mention regular dust storms) of the East, China & India (search for references if so compelled).
Documentation:
Where wildlife congregates seasonally (winter refugia, breeding, migratory, and/or foraging) more likely to be non-snowmobile areas during winter.
Any thing showing or exampling enhanced wildlife habitat benefit from our recreation. Moose/deer travel ease vs. using road, enhanced habitat diversity areas (from recreation activities) providing feed.
Firebreak, fire fuel reduction, continued access for management practices…
Innovation and advancements from manufactures on increased fuel efficiency and reduced emission levels, donation to education, environment, ect…
Club programs volunteering cleanup, funding public safety education and facilities, ect…
To-dos:
· Find and review (and where possible refute) negative regulation, publicity, and “science” about snowmobiling.
· Find and present positive information about snowmobiling.
· Join snowmobile clubs; attend meetings invite regulators to discuss issues.
· Send e-mails, letters, and discus snowmobile advocacy with elected or appointed officials.
We need to explain that we too care about conservation and are a responsible low impact sport/recreation despite any and all negative information out there.
