status, meet irony..
Asking for riders' input about winter non-motorized areas (PART 3)
- Thread starter rmk2112
- Start date
- Status
Y
Cut this movement off at the knees.
Prevent the FS from making a unilateral decision without public discussion , mandate or funding to enforce.
WMC has shown absolutely no intention to negotiate or reach a mutual user agreement.
Contact your senatorial candidates and tell them that if they support this proposal you will take your vote elsewhere.
The public lands are for all to decide how they are managed not just this group who won't compromise.
http://murray.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=ContactMe
http://www.dinorossi.com/
Prevent the FS from making a unilateral decision without public discussion , mandate or funding to enforce.
WMC has shown absolutely no intention to negotiate or reach a mutual user agreement.
Contact your senatorial candidates and tell them that if they support this proposal you will take your vote elsewhere.
The public lands are for all to decide how they are managed not just this group who won't compromise.
http://murray.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=ContactMe
http://www.dinorossi.com/
Y
I've seen those guys standing on the side of the road with bags of oranges....no appointment needed....
Have to admit, what's been accopmplished?
Y
Fabricated conflict I think was his goal.....
Based on some of the comments here, it was a goal that has been achieved.
W
WMC is learning more examples of the result of your strategy, snowmobile interests, resisting without any compromise, trying to stop discussion, trying to play the victim. WSSA and other $$ organizations pay to throw down roadblocks to the legitimate process, then find more bitter defeat that was only temporoarily delayed. Yet time and again decisions and management go against unregulated use of snowmobiles on the general Forest. Are you guys creating you own tragic outcomes? Should you try to engage in the discussion as a citizen, respect other's concerns, complaints, uses, try to hold out for as much of what is important to you as possible? Yes you should, as WMC is doing for our interests.
Any citizens may comment to USFS:
Public Involvement
"We’ve been hearing from you at public meetings, collaboration efforts, and through your written comments. Please click on one of the links below to hear what people have to say."
http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/wenatchee/forest-plan/
Thanks.
Y
What do you know about engaging in give and take discussion? You are only making statements, don't answer direct questions that could lead to compromise and only offer exclusion as a solution. Some of the comments here are the same as yours in substance...useless, which include some from me, but if only to get a response that isn't cookie cut out of a prepared statement. Now if you want to pose questions and give answers, then it can move forward.
Again, would you like me to pull up and put in list format the questions that have yet to be answered on SW or TAY?
W
It would be helpful to have substantive and civil discussion. Just opposing without substantive discussion and especially just flinging crap instantly destroys credibility, your words will not be heard by any decision maker in those examples. Again, if snowmobile interests just want to resist any discussion or consideration of others, and then throw money and lawyers to delay the lawful processes used to manage public lands, well then that is what has occurred before. How successful was that?
What if both sides could get together here, for example, and do as I have asked about years ago with USFS, try to get the Blewett Sno Park expanded by simply plowing the road up to the large Forest Discovery lot and plowing that lot? There would be more room for everyone, including the "Subarus" that some like to complain about in the Sno Parks. In regard to this, our snowmobile parking stickers are less expensive than what non-snowmobilers pay to park at Sno Parks, so I think some folks need to get over themselves and share the resource!
Thanks for any substantive and civil discussion here! Thanks for allowing this, whenever you want WMC out of here we are good with that also.
Y
WMC, thanks for offering a suggestion that doesn't include exclusion. Access is a topic that has been presented in previous posts and this is a great item to table. What do you think about tabling the idea that JimH offered yesterday on TAY? Does creating greater/easier access to EXISTING non-motorized and wilderness areas help satisfy your goals?
On TAY, ruffy and I both suggested looking at ways to create greater access but it was not answered whether that is a viable consideration. If realignment of non-motorized areas and corridors are suggested is this an idea you would accept? If so, we need to know what areas you forsee as acceptable motorized off road areas that area similar in terrain to your proposed closure so as to look at access and boundary.
I wasn't flinging crap, just stating that the WMC's constant view of snowmobilers as the opposition and the WMC's constant stance about not backing down, and trying to get everything that they can (example below)
has made many snowmobilers act as if we are in fact the opposition to the WMC's goals. The WMC make statements about compromise, and working together, then make statements as to the above. Isn't that two different methodologies there?
No one is resisting this discussion, it just feels very one sided as to the compromise issue and our constant acknowledgment of other non-motorized users needs goes un-noticed.
That is a good idea. Are there any ski clubs that represent these interests? Or was this a singular idea from a small group of people. It seems to me, that non-motorized users need to get better organized to communicate their needs in constant discussion with other clubs / groups in the area. I think this is a good idea. Is this in your proposal?
Please keep this discussion civil. Throwing crap is not appreciated..
The WMC keeps saying these statements, and yet when posters do offer ideas of compromise, they are continually ignored by the WMC. I have made this exact statement many times already. I have made statements of compromising many times as well, and many posters here have also. Yet we are continually branded by the WMC as non-compromising? There are people here that are trying to work out a solution, trying to compromise with the WMC, but it seems all that is responded is this.
that doesn't seem to me that the WMC is looking for a compromise..
Last edited:
Y
WMC, what is your opinion of the suggestions Mr. Newtrout offered with regard to the voluntary non-motorized options in the stafford/beverly/bean areas? I'm copying here to save you the time of looking back in the thread....
Compromise? I'll throw some ideas out there:
(1) Stop sled use in the North Fork of the Teanaway when the road melts out to Stafford Creek. That is when skiers use the area, and that is when sledders are done. Make it official. I can live with that.
(2) Addition to voluntary non-motorized area: The Beverly non-motorized area is a waste. It isn't used by skiers. Bean, on the other hand, has some really nice skiable terrain. It is very difficult to access from the bottom on sleds, and you can only come in the top by riding through Wilderness. Likewise, Stafford is hard to access from the bottom by sled. You can get in the top over Navaho, but it is also the prime access point for the Wenatchee gang to get into Wilderness. Add Bean Creek basin and Stafford Creek basin to the voluntary non-motorized areas. These are prime ski basins used by a minority of sledders.
(3) Improve skier access: What are the real options here? Realistically, you're not going to improve access much from the North Fork; too much snow and road that can't be maintained. What about from the Blewett side? How much closer to the crest could a road be plowed? We'd still be talking about pretty serious dollars to keep a road like that maintained; but banning sleds doesn't help skier access!
Last edited:
O
While it appears there is no formal comment period open right now, the USFS website clearly says that "You may write us at any time you’d like."
SAWS recently made the following recommendation to the USFS here in Oregon. Feel free to include this type of comment in any letters you are sending to elected officials or the USFS.
".....if the USFS could simply provide GIS files that snowmobilers could download to GPS units then we would all know where the boundaries are and there would be no need to move boundaries. We would like to encourage the USFS to use the advance technologies already used by snowmobilers, hunters and hikers in the management of existing areas, without the unnecessary creation of new areas."
SAWS recently made the following recommendation to the USFS here in Oregon. Feel free to include this type of comment in any letters you are sending to elected officials or the USFS.
".....if the USFS could simply provide GIS files that snowmobilers could download to GPS units then we would all know where the boundaries are and there would be no need to move boundaries. We would like to encourage the USFS to use the advance technologies already used by snowmobilers, hunters and hikers in the management of existing areas, without the unnecessary creation of new areas."
O
Ding, ding, ding!! I think we may have a winner!
....I'm anxiously awaiting a response to Mr. Newtrout's recommendation though....
I believe WMC already said they would share Newtrouts ideas at their next meeting. ??
"Great, a real counter-proposal WMC will add your idea to the discussion when we are in meetings. WMC has its proposal, but does discuss other ideas in the meetings we have had."
"Great, a real counter-proposal WMC will add your idea to the discussion when we are in meetings. WMC has its proposal, but does discuss other ideas in the meetings we have had."
Y
I stand corrected....although he has not offered answers to where/what he would give in his proposal to sledders. Only taking
Last edited:
Y
Do you suppose face to face meetings fall in to the same data collection of comments as write in? I know in my sales efforts success is increased dramatically in face to face communications.
I have spoken to many USFS officials and have NOT found ONE that is saying that the WHOLESALE poaching that YOU are stating happens... actually IS happening.
If this is anything more than just posturing and hyper-inflation of SMALL or INFREQUENT intrusions into wilderness areas by excluded parties, which could be non intentional ... Then I invite you to provide that information which is verifiable.
And what I mean by that is actual USFS reports or the name of a USFS official that will go on record to state that this WHOLESALE intrusion, YOU are claiming, exists.
Until you bring this information forward, please refrain from making these unsubstantiated claims, which I believe are, to coin a word, Veiled attempts to generate momentum for YOUR cause based on an inaccurate presentation.
Again... Make sure that you present a BODY of information that will substantiate a WHOLESALE intrusion as you have presented here.
There is enough mud-slinging and inflammatory posturing in the national political debates lately... Lets not repeat it here.
I do not operate in ANY designated non-motorized areas and work hard to promote understanding and cooperation amongst people in both of my favorite Backcountry sports... Both Non-motor and Motorzed.
I actively monitor the Wilderness boundaries in the areas I ride (both on skinz and snowmobile) for unauthorized MV use , and help to educate the people to what those boundaries are.
I HAVE seen snowmobile tracks go into a Wilderness area that I later found were from SAR personnel working with the USFS to recover an avalanche injured skier.
I also support programs that are involved in the marking of Wilderness boundaries...Does WMC participate in or support any such programs?
Aaron,
I actually CAN see where you might take this perspective. Please read below, and reply with your comments.... it may help you to see the whole picture... it may help ME to see the whole picture.
I believe that in his myopic fervor to present his point of view, WMC is "playing both sides against the middle" and if the pragmatic, and non-extremist views on both sides are presented... ALL users of the areas presented will benefit.
It was actually WMC that stated that there were "public meetings"... Yammidog and others are simply bringing to the fore the point that none of these public meetings are known.
If this was a "drop in" discussion ... or a phone call.... well that cannot be construed as a "public meeting" and should not be presented as such.
If it was indeed a "public meeting" please indicate the forum and date/time in the presentation to avoid confusion... and any conclusions to be made in this dearth of information.
On the SnoWest forums, where WMC is participating the following exchange was presented... with no answer....
THIS is where the propagation, by WMC through non responsiveness, of "clandestine" rumors was generated.
There was no reply this question in the MANY posts that WMC made following Oregongirls question.
I actually CAN see where you might take this perspective. Please read below, and reply with your comments.... it may help you to see the whole picture... it may help ME to see the whole picture.
I believe that in his myopic fervor to present his point of view, WMC is "playing both sides against the middle" and if the pragmatic, and non-extremist views on both sides are presented... ALL users of the areas presented will benefit.
It was actually WMC that stated that there were "public meetings"... Yammidog and others are simply bringing to the fore the point that none of these public meetings are known.
If this was a "drop in" discussion ... or a phone call.... well that cannot be construed as a "public meeting" and should not be presented as such.
If it was indeed a "public meeting" please indicate the forum and date/time in the presentation to avoid confusion... and any conclusions to be made in this dearth of information.
On the SnoWest forums, where WMC is participating the following exchange was presented... with no answer....
THIS is where the propagation, by WMC through non responsiveness, of "clandestine" rumors was generated.
There was no reply this question in the MANY posts that WMC made following Oregongirls question.
I will Publicly retract my statemet and appologize to you on this and all forums if you can show me where YOU infact DID reply to this direct question of "public meetings".
I take exceptiton to you stating that I am ranting or "haranguing"...
The ball is in your court sir... for ALL of my Fellow Skiers and Snowmobiler alike to see.
- Status
Similar threads
