• Don't miss out on all the fun! Register on our forums to post and have added features! Membership levels include a FREE membership tier.

Companies that finance the enviro-zealots

Thread Rating
4.00 star(s)
D
Feb 16, 2008
131
10
18
I know that the nature conservancy is buying land from private owners and trying to close public accesses to forest land. Accesses that have been used for decades by hunters and recreationalists alike. I wouldn't want to retrieve a large animal in wilderness. He!!, they've made it hard enough to retrieve them on public forest.
 
Originally Posted by summitchaser

I propose that in lands that are closed to motorized vehicles it should be that. I know around here they groom the ski trails, I say no to that. If they want to ski in wilderness let them with out groomed trails. Give them a couple years of blazing there own trails and dealing with crappy trails all winter long and see if there opinion changes at all.


SnowSnob said:
They don't allow groomers into Wilderness areas do they?
I sure f'in hope not otherwise isn't that a bit of a double standard?

I say we go a step further and not allow NON-MOTORIZED in motorized areas.
Seems when they are in the areas we're allowed in they just try to kick us out....we should do it 1st for a change.
Tell them it's for their own safety....by that meaning not getting lynched by us.

No, they do not allow any grooming what-so-ever in a designated wilderness. So-called Roadless areas yes. And also in some areas that are designated as non-motorized use, they will allow grooming and Cat skiing, but not snowmobiling.

Go figure! :rolleyes:
 
W
Nov 27, 2007
405
33
28
I am a member of the rocky mountain elk foundation. They are not against sleds but are for more wilderness. Does that make them againts us? I don't know, the answer.

The answer is yes. If they're for more wilderness, they are against sleds.
If you're a member of a sledding club also, you're funding both sides.
 

xrated

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Jul 20, 2004
8,870
1,018
113
40
Plainview, MN
Tim, talk to Big Bull, he had a hella good letter to SAWS about different hunting groups and the decisions he came to.
 

ruffryder

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Aug 14, 2002
8,468
1,258
113
This seems like a divide and conquer scheme to me. Making an outdoorsman having decide to which outdoors group he would rather belong to.....It would be nice if some of these groups could come together for their all benefit rather than just looking out for their own.
 
D

dre

Member
Jan 25, 2008
152
7
18
Portland OR
vimeo.com
What's the real issue here?

What's the real issue here?
The problems we face with regard to land use are only going to get worse. There is a shrinking abount of wlderness every day due to deforestation & urban growth (cities), mining, farming etc....basically the global population keeps growing at an alarming rate & there's not enough land for us all.
So the real issue is not 'stopping the environmentalists' ...thier fundamental goal is retaining wilderness (& possibly growing it). That's good for the planet & gives snowmobilers somewhere to ride & enjoy nature.
What we should be focussing on is practical ways to SHARE wilderness areas.

I'll give an example: I like to mountain bike during summer. In my immediate area, trails are closed to bikes & are only open to foot traffic. That sucks. That's because mountain bikers didn't come together & strike a deal with local land owners & Govt to SHARE the trails. The hikers won the battle out right because the notion of 'mixed use' trails wasn't put on the table. It was all or nothing.
Out in Utah, around Salt Lake City they struck a deal: every odd numbered day hikers get trail use & every even numberd day bikers get to use trails. It works great & everyone is happy. That's just one way to address the issue. I'm sure there are others.
As for those of us who beleive snowmobiles cause no harm to the environment & disturb animal life: stop & think for a second. Sleds are noisey & they do dump harmful gasses into the atmosphere. Those are facts. We (the sled community) should be thinking about ways to encourage manufactures to solve these problems. That will do more to resolve land use issues than boycotting REI & The North Face.
 
Last edited:

xrated

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Jul 20, 2004
8,870
1,018
113
40
Plainview, MN
What's the real issue here?
The problems we face with regard to land use are only going to get worse. There is a shrinking abount of wlderness every day due to deforestation & urban growth (cities), mining, farming etc....basically the global population keeps growing at an alarming rate & there's not enough land for us all.
So the real issue is not 'stopping the environmentalists' ...thier fundamental goal is retaining wilderness (& possibly growing it). That's good for the planet & gives snowmobilers somewhere to ride & enjoy nature.
What we should be focussing on is practical ways to SHARE wilderness areas.

I'll give an example: I like to mountain bike during summer. In my immediate area, trails are closed to bikes & are only open to foot traffic. That sucks. That's because mountain bikers didn't come together & strike a deal with local land owners & Govt to SHARE the trails. The hikers won the battle out right because the notion of 'mixed use' trails wasn't put on the table. It was all or nothing.
Out in Utah, around Salt Lake City they struck a deal: every odd numbered day hikers get trail use & every even numberd day bikers get to use trails. It works great & everyone is happy. That's just one way to address the issue. I'm sure there are others.
As for those of us who beleive snowmobiles cause no harm to the environment & disturb animal life: stop & think for a second. Sleds are noisey & they do dump harmful gasses into the atmosphere. Those are facts. We (the sled community) should be thinking about ways to encourage manufactures to solve these problems. That will do more to resolve land use issues than boycotting REI & The North Face.


Great ideas, but REI and Northface give money not for wilderness, but Wilderness. That big W means no bikes, no sleds. Btu wilderness with shared use is a great thing.
 
D

dre

Member
Jan 25, 2008
152
7
18
Portland OR
vimeo.com
So Dre tell me, do you understand what wilderness is being discussed here? I'ts not the forest out the back door of a home, this subject matter is about the lands being taken away by the few. I'm not trying to pick a fight just trying to figure out your view of a wilderness. Wilderness by definition is an uncultivated,uninhabited region, not a trail in Salt Lake. Be sure where you are riding because last time I checked snowmobiles are not allowed in the wildreness, nothing fancy here just facts. Anyway, this sport is great and we as a group ya must stick together to protect the areas we have. The problem with those who want more wilderness and try to persuade private land owners to lock us out is they are never happy with what they have. Also ALL snowmobilers MUST patrol ourselves and be mindful of the areas we ride in. Also as far as farming, mining and deforrestation goes for one farmers are losing land, miners are under strict guide lines with restoration they must do, and deforrestation, well, ya in urban growth areas for sure, but more and more these areas are being left more natural, so, I guess my next question to you is, and don't take this the wrong way but, do you really pay attention to all these issues or do you rely on what you hear from others? Just wondering, anyway, get more invovled and who knows maybe you will really get to like snowmobiling. gotta go!
----
KMMAC, you make some good points. Maybe my understanding of 'wildeness' is a little general.
Question: how much land are we losing every year in the USA - land that we can't sled on?
 
T
Nov 26, 2007
1,573
335
83
coeur dalene, idaho
Tim, talk to Big Bull, he had a hella good letter to SAWS about different hunting groups and the decisions he came to.

x
I am pretty informed on these topics. This has been discussed with in saws before. It is a decisive issue as a lot of hunters also like to sled. I am usually not one that follows the party line. I tend to walk both sides of it.

tim
 

xrated

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Jul 20, 2004
8,870
1,018
113
40
Plainview, MN
x
I am pretty informed on these topics. This has been discussed with in saws before. It is a decisive issue as a lot of hunters also like to sled. I am usually not one that follows the party line. I tend to walk both sides of it.

tim

tim just like in your pms very well said. We as sledders/hunters, as people in general need more people who aren't gung-ho to follow the party lines but willing to think things out on their own
 
T
Nov 26, 2007
1,573
335
83
coeur dalene, idaho
This seems like a divide and conquer scheme to me. Making an outdoorsman having decide to which outdoors group he would rather belong to.....It would be nice if some of these groups could come together for their all benefit rather than just looking out for their own.


I agree with you, it is getting tougher to do more than one outdoor sport anymore. You might piss of some of your friends. lol
 
D

dre

Member
Jan 25, 2008
152
7
18
Portland OR
vimeo.com
Tim & Xrated, I think you sum up my position well. I enjoy the great outdoors many different ways & don't hate others who have different ways of enjoying nature.
We need to be smarter about strategy (to maintain access to land) & think more boradly than just one position.

With regard to the facts: It's interesting that some folks claim such strong knowledge of the issues but can't produce a convincing case. Cold hard facts are usually the cornerstone of any proposition. It would be useful to have some actual facts from which to make decisions.
Anyone out there got a good summary of the situation?
Things like: acres(or sq miles) open to snowmobile access in 2000 v.s 2007?
Govt proposals that restrict sled access for 2008-09.
 
B
Jan 18, 2008
115
9
18
Western Slope, CO
Thanks Catwoman for the information, I have to say that there are a couple of surprises on the list, for me anyway. I wont be buying these products anymore.
Maybe we should take pictures of us snowmobiling using there product and send the pics to the business with a short note saying that we love our sport and can no longer support there products due to there choices. Might just be a burr under the saddle pad:devil:
 

neverenoughsnow

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Dec 8, 1999
426
100
43
Omaha, Ne.
fighting back

thank you, belle star, i have been trying to think of a way to write letters to some of these companies that some of us use. your idea of sending pictures to the company is great, and if we dont get a good response, then boycott we will. i am not sure how to send pics to Patagonia of me using there long underwear, but if alot of us do this hopefully a few companies will realize that not just hikers use there gear.
 

donbrown

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Nov 26, 2007
6,728
1,017
113
61
Los Angeles
The only statistic I know after watching AX men on Cable is there are more trees in the National Forest today than 100 years ago.
 

ruffryder

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Aug 14, 2002
8,468
1,258
113
I agree with you, it is getting tougher to do more than one outdoor sport anymore. You might piss of some of your friends. lol

So what is the solution? Like a blue ribbon coalition for outdoor sporting goods?
 

CatWoman

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Jan 26, 2004
21,797
2,419
113
NW Montana
One thing I do if I'm not sure of a company's position, is I email them. Winter I'm all about sledding, in the summer.....I love floating the river, and fishing. My favorite is floating/fishing a river that is non-mechanized (part of the Wild & Scenic River System).

One example is NRS, a company whom has some very high quality water products. Anyone who spends time on the flowing water, probably knows of them. Besides their rafts, they make some great other products related to floating. It took me several emails before it finally got passed along to the proper person to answer my questions about their position of shared use (motorized and non-motorized). I did finally hear back from them though, and I was assured at that time that they were not out to try to shut down Public Lands from the Public.

Basically I let them know that I didn't want to be spending my dollars with them, if they were in turn using monies to shut down access.

I prefer email over calling, because then it is in writing. :)
 
Premium Features