• 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.

170,000 acres of togwatee area threatened.

sledhead_24_7

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Premium Member
Jul 30, 2008
2,482
1,006
113
Jackson Wy
That is truly disgusting, that they have to sneak this stuff around!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

BeartoothBaron

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Nov 2, 2017
1,243
1,319
113
Roberts, MT
You can't turn around without someone trying to sneak another closure in on us! At least it's not a done deal yet – thanks for sharing!
 

Wintertime

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Apr 18, 2014
379
174
43
Casper, WY
We need to get on this one, in a hurry. Looking at the map it would be a bad deal if this happens. Send in 200 emails each if we have to. Voting Oct. 16 from what I read.
 

sledhead_24_7

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Premium Member
Jul 30, 2008
2,482
1,006
113
Jackson Wy
If you could share that info with
Advocates For Public Lands
https://amplcommunity.org

They are trying to stop these things.

Of coarse share with everyone you know and person in the industry, seems volume and cash talk.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
S

Spaarky

Well-known member
Oct 5, 2001
3,429
1,345
113
Chester, SD
just checking FB while I eat my lunch. small piece of chicken and protein bar don't last long. Sounds like the commissioners are talking in circles to cover tracks....

is there anyone from around there that can give more info on this??
 

05900

Embrace the BRAAAAAAP!
Lifetime Membership
Nov 27, 2007
10,696
4,560
113
Where the Buffalo roam
Rather than giving up, a county-appointed committee is maneuvering in the 11th hour to try to advance a unified recommendation that could be the framework of a legislative lands bill.

The Teton County Board of County Commissioners delayed voting Tuesday on a Wyoming Public Lands Initiative recommendation that achieved the approval the county had sought — two-thirds, or 12 of 18 members, of the stakeholder group. But nearly 200 people showed up to protest the plan, which called for 270 square miles of new wilderness, and a split county commission delayed its final decision until its meeting next Tuesday.

In the aftermath of the vote of indecision, committee member Tom Turiano is trying to bridge the gaps between the professional conservation and recreation advocacy communities.


“A lot of people are scrambling,” said Turiano, a self-described wilderness advocate. “I’d rather find common ground and come up with something than leave it at community polarization. I think the former is the higher road, and the other one is the lower, vibrating road.”

The Wyoming Public Lands Initiative, an effort of the Wyoming County Commissioners Association, was geared primarily toward finding a resolution for the state’s 45 wilderness study areas.

Despite this focus, the Teton County group’s final plan considered by the commission Tuesday proposed leaving the Palisades Wilderness Study Area in its current state — which is supposed to be a temporary, wilderness-like designation.

Turiano’s “middle ground” plan, which he’s developing with attorney Len Carlman, is largely geared toward getting mountain bikers, snowmobilers and other motorized-advocacy committee members on board. Preliminarily, he said, the recommendation would elevate 58 square miles of land to wilderness — parcels that were already identified as acceptable by the motorized and mechanized cohort. It would also designate almost all the rest of Teton County’s nonwilderness portions of the Bridger-Teton National Forest as “Jackson Hole Conservation Area.”

The novel designation would capture five broad land-use goals and policies that the committee and county commission unanimously agreed to, Turiano said. Those are supporting wildlife, and allowing no new roads, oil and gas extraction, mineral mining or commercial timber harvest.

“Under the Jackson Hole Conservation Area idea,” Turiano said, “the ‘Big 5’ are addressed.”

Turiano worried that his plan wouldn’t have much traction with the professional conservationists on the committee, and, at first blush, it appeared his concern was on point.

Wilderness Society employee and committee member Dan Smitherman said he was disappointed that the county commission didn’t bring the WPLI process to a resolution. He doubted Turiano’s proposal would win his favor, but he wanted to withhold final judgement until he sees it.

“To us, it was confusing about what the next steps are,” Smitherman said.


Commissioner Paul Vogelheim said Tuesday he hoped the committee would strive for “a greater consensus, of some sort” over the next week.

“If that’s not possible,” he said, “then we let it go.”

Advocates for Multi-Use of Public Lands co-founder Jesse Combs, who has been a point person for the committee’s motorized recreation members, said that he was keeping his hopes for a breakthrough in check.

“It’s hard for me to imagine, after two years of monthly meetings and lots of side meetings and discussions,” Combs said, “that in five days there’s going to be some grand compromise.”

Nevertheless, Turiano is upbeat about hanging a more broadly supported plan on the “Jackson Hole Conservation Area” concept.

“It’s a good idea,” Turiano said. “It could be a model for other places for protecting lands while allowing for recreation.”

 

revrider07

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Feb 17, 2008
2,034
1,001
113
ND
These assaults on recreation are unbelievable. IMO most of these people know nothing on land management just take California for example the build in the areas that can be burned out by wild fires. Nature has been doing this for thousands of years. The earth is constantly changing closing these areas do nothing other than create problems for the people living there that are making a comfortable living working their tail off. Email sent.
 

AndrettiDog

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Dec 23, 2007
6,329
2,478
113
Colorado
We have been dealing with this in Colorado. Hidden Gems Wilderness proposal reared it's ugly face almost 10 years ago. Just like this...a group of wilderness advocates (most who move in from other states) push for wilderness. Basically they are trying to kill motorized recreation. They won't say that but it is what it is.

We got as many people together to rally against it. It literally takes an act of Congress (Wilderness act of 1964). Which means that some local congressman has to sponsor the bill and it will get voted on. Right now Congress is controlled by the GOP so it's not likely that it gets passed. But...the left is banking on a surge on the Democrat side after a Republican President (kinda) and Congress is in office.

What we found helped the most is to be involved. It's painful, time consuming and frustrating. But local clubs in numbers make a difference. Contact local commissioners and town boards. Talk about hits against the local economy, that public land should be available, that the FS doesn't have the budget to enforce the enclosures, etc. Congressman will look for their support but the local gov does not vote on this. Get the club to meet with the congressman or more likely...his aide. At this point, work with them as though your club is interested in helping. Tell them you want to propose alternative designation. Closing some areas to sledding that are clearly not snowmobile-able. But keeping key areas open. If you don't show up and don't work against the group, they will simply tell every one that they have reached out and nobody objected.

Also...why is this in the Polaris section - seems it should be in General to get more looks.
 
Last edited:

sledhead_24_7

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Premium Member
Jul 30, 2008
2,482
1,006
113
Jackson Wy
Also anyone close to Jackson Wyoming area, if possible show up next week to help show numbers in favor for keeping areas open. Help show there are lots of people who oppose wilderness closures.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

west dreams

Well-known member
Premium Member
Aug 13, 2009
110
77
28
54
Becker, Mn.
Just wondering if there was a way to have a "on line" petition created that everyone who is on SnoWest could sign in opposition to the closures of these public lands? That would be a ton of names and a pretty easy way to voice your "NO" vote on the issues. It kind of surprises me that there is not a lot more traffic on this thread. I personally do not live out west but to me it is the most beautiful awe inspiring area I have seen. From the time I come back from my last trip, every single day I will be thinking about when I can go out west again and to feed my soul and fuel my passion, and the thought of people robbing me of that is very disheartening. I hope as a group (manufactures, snowmobilers, outdoor enthusiast) we can ban together to stop this senseless assault on our nondestructive use of these lands. The beauty of these lands are for ALL of us to enjoy. (I will never understand how riding on 15-20' of snow damages the forest land). Ban together brothers and fight!!!!
 

Sheetmetalfab

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Oct 5, 2010
7,908
6,650
113
……..
We have been dealing with this in Colorado. Hidden Gems Wilderness proposal reared it's ugly face almost 10 years ago. Just like this...a group of wilderness advocates (most who move in from other states) push for wilderness. Basically they are trying to kill motorized recreation. They won't say that but it is what it is

Also...why is this in the Polaris section - seems it should be in General to get more looks.

The Polaris section gets the most traffic. For what it’s worth.
 

AndrettiDog

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Dec 23, 2007
6,329
2,478
113
Colorado
Just wondering if there was a way to have a "on line" petition created that everyone who is on SnoWest could sign in opposition to the closures of these public lands?

What would be even better is an online form to send letters directly to the Congressman responsible for supporting the Wilderness bill. Even letters to local town boards and county commissioners would be great.


It kind of surprises me that there is not a lot more traffic on this thread.

This is the problem, people don't get involved until the land is gone and the FS is putting up the closed signs. It's cumbersome so many just expect that someone else is dealing with it. But then again, I'm preaching to the choir...
 

donbrown

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Nov 26, 2007
6,728
1,017
113
61
Los Angeles
These assaults on recreation are unbelievable. IMO most of these people know nothing on land management just take California for example the build in the areas that can be burned out by wild fires. Nature has been doing this for thousands of years. The earth is constantly changing closing these areas do nothing other than create problems for the people living there that are making a comfortable living working their tail off. Email sent.

Just a comment on the UNINTENDED consequence of having a WILDERNESS.

I have property surrounded by National Forest and Wilderness in California.

With all the NEW UNMANAGED lands INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE CANCELING PROPERTY & HOME POLICIES.

Unmanaged land will eventually burn (at least in the California Sierra Mountains because the entire range has lots of granite/ quartz … not uncommon to get 100's of lighting strikes an hour per square mile during a storm)

So the fiscal impact is significant.

Just cut down lots of trees … none within 100 feet of any building and no tree within 20 feet of each other PER insurance company guidelines.


If locals here give me a hard time about insurance for my mountain property I ask why property built in earthquake zones , dry lake and river beds, flood plains, tornado and hurricane corridors. They get insurance.
 

revrider07

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Feb 17, 2008
2,034
1,001
113
ND
I sent an email to togwette lodge and nothing back. So does anyone know there stance on this issue? I think I know the answer but waiting verification.
 

Big10inch

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Premium Member
Mar 11, 2018
926
888
93
Just a comment on the UNINTENDED consequence of having a WILDERNESS.

I have property surrounded by National Forest and Wilderness in California.

With all the NEW UNMANAGED lands INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE CANCELING PROPERTY & HOME POLICIES.

Unmanaged land will eventually burn (at least in the California Sierra Mountains because the entire range has lots of granite/ quartz … not uncommon to get 100's of lighting strikes an hour per square mile during a storm)

So the fiscal impact is significant.

Just cut down lots of trees … none within 100 feet of any building and no tree within 20 feet of each other PER insurance company guidelines.


If locals here give me a hard time about insurance for my mountain property I ask why property built in earthquake zones , dry lake and river beds, flood plains, tornado and hurricane corridors. They get insurance.



That same insurance problem came to western Colorado this summer as wildfires raged on public lands. I know you drove right through Olathe and Delta CO when you picked up sleds in Montrose. This summer insurance companies stopped writing homeowners policies in those areas because of out of control fires just to the west of those small towns.


Those lands used to have more roads though them that could have been used to access lands for fire fighting and recreation but newer roadless policies have actually increased the dangers to communities in the area. Definitely an unintended consequence to closing the public out of public lands under the guise of protecting those lands.


Excellent point to address when submitting letters to thee powers that be!
 
Premium Features