Snowmobiling in Closed Areas

Please don't try to use "civil disobedience" to justify the wanton disregard for land closures. Mass incursions and blatent infractions only give the enviro-nazis more ammo to fire at us in the court of public opinon. There may be the RARE time when it has reversed a closure but the overwhelming number of times it has only accelerated and increased pending actions. Your being caught in violation does indeed affect more than yourself. It ultimately affects us all. Most of us begrudingly abide by closures. If enough land is closed off many will abandon the sport. Sale of new sleds are already falling and if they fall far enough the manufactures will stop sales all together. The enviros won't have to come take your sled. It will wither and rot on the vine like three-wheelers.
If you don't think it will happen, just take a look and what happened with 2-stroke motorcycles. Legal action by rabid tree huggers in just ONE state caused the manufactures to all but abandon 2-stroke bikes in this country.
Civil-disobedience.... BULL. It is just un-civil selfishness.
Join SAWS, BRC, your local club, VOTE, but don't think that your illegal actions do anything but harm.
BTW, The enviro-nazies read these forums to get info on our actions to use against us.

back to consequences

If you fully support some areas being closed, then we're back at the start of this thread, which is how to keep people from riding there illegally. What suggestion do you have besides zero dollar fines?

That zero dollar fine really stuck with you. I guess $5000 sounds like a fair value, for the damage caused. Heck, let's just make the fine financial ruin, that should work an infinite percentage better. At least a J-walking fine is designed to offset collective communal medical costs. This fine is purely virtual, it's to reassure some "selfish" person that his/her own personal public land has somehow been "saved". (No animal within a wilderness is ever unhappy or goes extinct.)

Too answer your question. Wilderness needs to change. Wilderness boundaries should be designed to be easily (topographically) discernible. Not all land deserves wilderness designation. Create a backcountry recreation designation for those other areas. Place proper signage. Work with the local people to create wilderness, don't ram it down their throats. Quite making all motorized users feel that closure is inevitable eventually anyways.

I think my point is, the reason we will never be able to keep all people off wilderness is because it doesn't make sense in all areas. If wilderness was limited to areas of obvious uniqueness then people would have a better ability to understand it. But, when it's some area you grew up riding, and it looks like everything else, and your not doing any damage, what exactly is the problem. Go to some closure meeting, every hill, every valley, every tree, every blade of grass is deserving of wilderness protection in the eyes of an evangelical greenie. Of course, there will be mistakes too, but from the 10,000 foot view, they all blend together as "intrusions".

I don't know who your talking to Steamboat-RN, if it's me (your probably talking to plycoupe), you'll see my name on SAWS, and BRC's lifer. Read the whole post, I don't advocate civil-disobedience at this point in time. And, yes I know that greenies read this page, they need to start thinking about what will happen, if we aren't treated equally. They need to start thinking about the position that disenfranchised owners of the public lands will take if the economy takes a dump. If I can't use the forest, sell it, pay off the national debt. Let the damn greenies offer to buy it all if they feel so strongly about it. Or try to regulate millions of 10 acre ranchettes. Oh, and fighting for one's rights is not selfish. Fighting for more than your fair share is selfish, aka greenies.

carrots vs sticks

Thanks for concerns, RN. What you describe as "wanton disregard" some feel is personal sacrifice to make a point. Some locals have tried to get cited for illegal riding in certain places just to challenge rules. Though I don't agree, I will say that they are purposeful, not wanton, and driven by passion, not disregard. Maybe we should say "civilly defiant" or something else? As Wade said, the defiance would be non-violent and Gandhi would be proud, though I'm sure he'd think we're overdressed.

Seriously, there is a strong feeling locally that illegal riding does not lead to closure. OOB is encouraged by dealers and others, and their opinion was proved correct in at least one big-time score. It is hard to argue with these guys since evidence of public land closures actually due to illegal riding is scarce. And if illegal riding stopped cold, who would know? The 'few bad apples' mantra is so firmly established as public opinion that actual conduct makes no difference. Be polite as you want, you won't get anything for it and it won't save you either.

That's why I really like Bagger's suggestion of rewards (as in improved access & terrain) for compliance. If terrain could be gained thru compliance, everyone would be motivated to behave sweetly. In certain places I believe that we would see not 99% but 100% compliance from even the 'bad apples' and/or civilly defiant (chose your descriptor). I actually suggested a compliance reward system to the FS last year but got no reply.

But we can go back to basics too. If someone's being caught knowingly and willingly OOB truly affects us all (again, show me the acres), how about a $5000 fine-per-violation (which is already the law)?

If riding in the wilderness is such a hienous crime,then how about riding in the newly closed buffer zones? Should one just comply with these closures? What do you think? Maybe if we only rode below 5000 ft. Maybe then the greenies would be happy and leave us alone,should we try that? What if we do it voluntarily ,beat them to the punch! That will show them how responsible and caring we really are.
Historicaly appeasement has always worked.... Against the appeasers
Rant off,Steve

If you have spent any time at public comment meetings related to potential closures you would know that illegal riding does indeed sway public opinion. And ultimately leads to closures. The pro-closure advocates proudly display photos of blatant incursions into off-limits areas. They quote forums such as this one where members advocate disregard for closures. It is their biggest argumnet. We can't be trusted so close it all. I have been an avid dirt biker and sledder for many years and I have fought closures through petition, joining pro-access groups and working on work crews.
I find it hard to believe that some people feel that breaking the law will lead to enlightenment on the side of the law makers. We are not talking mass protests to end the war or stop racial discrimination. We are talking a few self professed "martyrs" who think that their selfless acts of defiance will somehow expose some great injustice.
More often than not the martyr is just some guy that feels that laws don't apply to him/her. If challenged they claim to be doing it in our best interest. BULL. The only way for a protest ride to be effective is for it to be well attended and well documented. ie..the media. Solo incursions only serve to fan the flames and bring increased law enforcement.
The reality is that we are losing riding areas primarily due to urban and suburban sprawl. We can either work within the system or buck it and stir up the hornets nest.

Have you looked at KTMs line up. The 2 stroke is sticking around. Even the AMA has redone classes to promote more 2 stroke use.

wilderness

i personally know of an area where the FS showed up to enforce a wilderness boundary and the locals showed up with guns.

The end result was the FS gave the locals a schedule of when they would be up enforcing the boundaries and told them not to ride the area on those days. The FS in that area recognizes that the sleds don't do any damage, and that most locals were sledding there for years before it was made a wilderness. They still do there FS job and the locals are happy. The skiers in the area dont care case half of them use sleds to access the skiing in the wilderness...

I just bought an 08 KTM 300XCW. Went back to 2-smokes before they are all gone. Seen any new 2-stroke Hondas? The AMA restructuring was due to the VERY limited availability of new 2-strokes and the huge increase in 4-stroke sales. KTM sells the majority of it's bikes in europe. No problems with 2-strokes there...yet. And they already have the best 4-stroke line up in the industry. The outboard boat motor industry is quickly becoming 4-stroke as well.
It is very short-sighted to believe that the greenies don't have a profound effect on our lives.

phatty said:

i personally know of an area where the FS showed up to enforce a wilderness boundary and the locals showed up with guns.

The end result was the FS gave the locals a schedule of when they would be up enforcing the boundaries and told them not to ride the area on those days. The FS in that area recognizes that the sleds don't do any damage, and that most locals were sledding there for years before it was made a wilderness. They still do there FS job and the locals are happy. The skiers in the area dont care case half of them use sleds to access the skiing in the wilderness...

Click to expand...

So now you are advocating the use of guns. Great. lets just take back all our lost riding areas by force.
I doubt that this so called incident really happened. The FS taks a dim view of people threatening thier officers. We had a rally of the "rainbow family" (1960's hippie wanna-be's). Peace-niks shook branches and threw a couple of stones at the FS officers and they responded with guns. The state patrol was called in as was the national guard. Dozens were arrested. All because they didn't have a permit to have a large gathering in the forest. It made national news. So I find it hard to believe that an armed conflict with Federal law enforcement officials would go un-noticed. Even in Utah.
BTW the Forest Service's view is the snowmobiles do indeed cause damage. They limit travel to roads only with less than 12 inches of snow. And they bring up the amount of gas and oil the finds it's way into the snow pack each season. I hear it at every public comment meeting about access and land use.
We're talking about a group that won't allow sleds to be used in a life or death rescue if it is in the wilderness. Heck, they won't even allow chain saws in the wilderness. So you're telling me that they just rolled over and let a bunch of gun waving yahoos just have their way?
I wish I had a buck for every tree that I have ridden over or had to cut while boondocking. I could buy that new Dragon that I've been lusting after.

Steamboat-RN said:

So now you are advocating the use of guns. Great. lets just take back all our lost riding areas by force.
I doubt that this so called incident really happened. The FS taks a dim view of people threatening thier officers. We had a rally of the "rainbow family" (1960's hippie wanna-be's). Peace-niks shook branches and threw a couple of stones at the FS officers and they responded with guns. The state patrol was called in as was the national guard. Dozens were arrested. All because they didn't have a permit to have a large gathering in the forest. It made national news. So I find it hard to believe that an armed conflict with Federal law enforcement officials would go un-noticed. Even in Utah.
BTW the Forest Service's view is the snowmobiles do indeed cause damage. They limit travel to roads only with less than 12 inches of snow. And they bring up the amount of gas and oil the finds it's way into the snow pack each season. I hear it at every public comment meeting about access and land use.
We're talking about a group that won't allow sleds to be used in a life or death rescue if it is in the wilderness. Heck, they won't even allow chain saws in the wilderness. So you're telling me that they just rolled over and let a bunch of gun waving yahoos just have their way?
I wish I had a buck for every tree that I have ridden over or had to cut while boondocking. I could buy that new Dragon that I've been lusting after.

Click to expand...

wasnt in utah or even close to it... a remote place, where those who ride have more power than those who dont... believe what ever you want, but the story is true...

all i am saying, is that in 10 years when no areas are still open to sleds whats it going to be? lay down or stand up and fight?

BRP has a new 2 stoke marine engine that is way more powerful, cleaner, and environmental friendly than any 4 stroke engine out... if you believe the commercials they put on tv...

Steamboat-RN said:

I just bought an 08 KTM 300XCW. Went back to 2-smokes before they are all gone. Seen any new 2-stroke Hondas? The AMA restructuring was due to the VERY limited availability of new 2-strokes and the huge increase in 4-stroke sales. KTM sells the majority of it's bikes in europe. No problems with 2-strokes there...yet. And they already have the best 4-stroke line up in the industry. The outboard boat motor industry is quickly becoming 4-stroke as well.
It is very short-sighted to believe that the greenies don't have a profound effect on our lives.

Click to expand...

Not to sway topic, and I feel I'm not, but your saying the AMA changed due to a lack of 2 strokes and more thumpers. They opened the classes to take away the displacement advantage a 250f has over a 125. They did it because race attendance was down 30 some percent...could it be because thumpers are so expensive to keep up.

Just feeling that your statement is kinda off, and liek phatty said check out some of the new 2 stroke out boards that are just as clean and quiet as the 4 strokes.

And phatty I believe your story...there's alot of places where the law officials aren't dummies about what goes on and who gets away with what. Hell I know of a game warden sitting down to a fresh deer dinner in June and thanking the guys wife for the beef.

Even if this incident did occur, it is an extremely rare and bizarre exception to the norm. Think of the press the enviro-nazis could have if they learned of armed rebellion against Federal Law enforcement. The greenies LOVE to sue for non-enforcement.
Bottom line is that the normal fallout from illegal encroachment into closed areas is increased enforcement, fines and more widespread closures. I'm not saying I agree with it but it is reality. The notion that we should just disregard any closure that we feel unjust is foolish and ultimately harmful. A bunch of scoff laws riding in closed areas is NOT going to make land managers see the error of their ways. It only shows them the error of our ways.
A prime example is found right here in Steamboat. We had a voluntary limited use area for the skiers and the snowcat operations. Too many riders choose to ignore a plan that both side had worked on for years. The end result is now it is "legaly" closed to sledding including fines and use-permits.
I've delt with this same issue for years over dirt biking, jet skiing, sledding, even kayaking. Same issue, same problem. Illegal activities lead to more restrictions....period.

There's places where I believe such a thing could happen. Specially if the county sheriff is on the snowmobilers side. But, I wouldn't recommend it. Some idealistic FS boyscout might push back, get some people killed and then the Feds will stop at nothing. Killing a Federal employee is a capital case. Unless your ready to declare war, I wouldn't recommend escalating things to that level.

I did sit in a closure meeting once, where a Fish Cop was threatening all the snowmobilers that "they'd show up gun and force the snowmobilers". The guy needed a big gun to make up for other areas he lacked in obviously.

No, I'm thinking non-violent, organized protests / demonstrations. Media, the whole works. The shovel brigade down at Jarbidge did it. But, the leaders barely escaped going to jail. Individuals penetrating wilderness, will make a point, but it will basically result in hardening of the two sides. If you want to mess with the FS, just get your county to declare RS2477 on every road around there, even the ones in Wilderness, then get legal help to write a claim to use the road, and proceed. They probably won't even touch you, because of the precedences it might set.

If you want to see where we'll be in 50 years, just look at Norway. They've pretty much outlawed snowmobiles in 4 years. There's some point where people have to "fight" back.

Logan Canyon Utah.

Skiers backdoored the sledders and closed some areas that were crucial to spring riding. The sledding community of logan (way more sledders than skiers) backlashed hard with legal fights and continued to access the legal riding areas by cutting accross the illegal area. The end result was that the FS had no choice but to open back up the area to sleds. The skiers were mad as hell, but what it came down to was they were parking in a sled funded parking lot, skiing up a sled paid groomer trail, when 5 miles down the road they had 100,000 acres of wilderness to use all to themselves. Sensible letters and studies by the FS helped show that the skiers were just idiots and trying to close the area for no good reason.

This is one of the only areas i know of that has ever been re opened to snowmobilers. It only took the FS one winter to realize that closed or not the sleds were going to continue to ride up the canyon because its the only access in april/may/june.

The bottom line is the person making the call in the FS is either bleeding green or sensible, and sensible ones always leave the open sled areas alone.

and FYI budget cuts have led to the FS not being able to enforce the millions of acres of closed sledding areas... they generally focus on hot spots where skier/sledder conflicts occur...

It's interesting talking to differant people and seeing how they feel.

Couple weekends ago, D and I were sledding up some forest service roads to access Lost Lake. We could have taken the groomed trail around, but why?
Anyway, I'm seeing snowshoe tracks in the groomed trail at the beginning of the trip, and then they turned onto the ungroomed FS roads. So I'm being careful and going as slow as possible in 3' of powder.

Pretty soon we come around a corner and here are three dogs jumping up to get a view above the snow, and four snowshoer's (two couples) in the middle of the road. We stopped and talked to them (they looked lost) (and were)and I joked that they needed taller dogs. One guy was pretty cool, the other was pretty steamed that we were bothering them. He kept making the comment that they were trying to avoid the snowmobiles and kept trying to get me to say that my sled would go anywhere.

I assured him that in MY hands at least, it wouldn't go just anywhere, and that sledding was A LOT of work. I even offered to let him ride the sled. He refused, I told him that was probably good, 'cause if he rode it his dog wouldn't like him anymore.

Anyway, he came back to the "they wanted peace and quiet and we were bothering thier experiance" thing. I asked him if he was aware that just a couple miles down the road there was an entire trail system that was set aside for human powered snow sports. No he did not. He knew the area and I didn't.

Now, I should probably mention here that I'm a map guy. I mean I have a thing for maps. I don't just have maps, I care for maps. Backpacks too, but that's another story. So, I whip out not one map, but three. One is the general area map. It shows all the groomed trails in the whole area. Number two is geared toward motorized, and number three is geared towards human powered.

So after showing him the snowparks, and the trails, and explaining the color codes so he can tell the trails apart, it comes out that he doesn't have a snopark permit anyway.........

I offered to let the guy keep map #3. He refused that too. Can you imagine someone NOT wanting a map? Huh?

All the time I just keep smiling and refused to be brought into an argument with the guy. Just keep smiling and proving him wrong. Just keep smiling and proving him wrong while I was in the right.

That's the point here. I was in the right. I was in bounds. I was informed. I was equipped with tools to prove it. And I didn't act like an azz or cuss the guy out or make him feel stupid.

Is the guy going to run out and buy a sled? Doubt it. Does he get a chubby from the smell of 2stroke smoke? Probably not. But I'll bet he will at least educate himself enough to not look like an idiot infront of his friends again. Heck, who knows he might even run out and buy a snopark permit........

B

Bagger,

All I got to say is. you rock. Seriously.

We used to have Sheriff in our county with a tremendous amount of common sense (very rare) who actually made an effort to stand up to the feds and their rediculous mandates. This Sheriff didn't give a rats azz about areas being closed or open in the name of wilderness. It turns out he never really had any power over the feds and couldn't put up much of a fight, but at least he tried. He put them on ignore whenever he could. We should erect a memorial in the park honoring his years of service. We now have a new Sheriff who has yet to show if he has the balls to stand up and fight for his peoples rights. Time will tell.

AA,
Do they even put "Protect and Serve" on the fender anymore? B

I wish I was as prepared and informed as you Bagger.
Had a cross country skier tell me I was out of bound once, and all I could say was no I'm not.
Wish I had a map to show him I wasn't, and he was I'll informed.

Now he thinks he was right and I KNOW he was wrong.