Snowmobiling in Closed Areas

snotel · Jan 24, 2008

I just want to get a feel for everyone's opinion on the matter. I see a lot of snowmobile trespass into closed areas and I don't get it. Is the snow that much better on the other side of the line? Are people doing it just to make a point? Do people not know where they are? Many times it is right past a bright orange closed sign, so I have to assume they are just making a statement.

I see people complaining on this forum about all the areas getting closed, but no one really getting to the root of the problem, which is illegal snowmobiling in closed areas. Land managers definitely notice these infractions, whether they are reported or actually observed. They don't have the resources to supervise what the snowmobiling community is doing, so the only choice they have is to shut areas down. Most of these areas didn't have these problems 15 years ago since sleds weren't able to get back in there during the winter months, so land managers are dealing with these problems for the first time.

I realize that the majority of riders are responsible, but it only takes a few bad apples to ruin it for everyone. So my question is what can be done to keep people from doing stupid crap and continuing to get areas closed?

christian · Jan 24, 2008

Hard make a good apple out of a rotten one!!!!

snotel · Jan 24, 2008

I guess the question is how you keep the one bad apple from rotting the whole bushell of apples.

bigfoot · Jan 24, 2008

I think christian hates snowmobilers, I think he was on a different thread bashing sledders,

Swami · Jan 24, 2008

consequences?

Snotel, you say that illegal snowmobiling is the root of the land closure problem, that land gets closed to sleds because of law-breaking snowmobilers. Can you cite an example of this on public land? I can give you an example of the opposite - where terrain that was closed to motors was finally opened to sleds because of persistent illegal (uncontrollable) riding in remote terrain. That would be the high bowls around Leavitt Lake (near Sonora Pass) that are now open to sleds. I'm not saying that I advocate that approach, but I really haven't seen any actual consequences from high profile and openly deliberate snowmobile violations on public land. Have you?

CatWoman · Jan 24, 2008

Swami, it certainly doesn't help our cause at all. With the illegal riding going on around here locally, I've had several Forest Service personnel tell me personally that it makes them look like they can't manage the forests, and in turn DOES lead to more closure.

I know that sounds like it should work the opposite, but this is how it is working here. It gives the other side more ammo on us *lawless, no good, polluting, noisy sledders*. They use it to support their case, and the FS can't argue against it.

One solution to TRY to help out this situation is to call folks on things you see them doing wrong. If you see them in an area they aren't supposed to be, don't just turn a blind eye. I'm not saying ride into those areas, but if you pull up to a trailhead, and there is only your vehicle and another....and tracks going where they shouldn't be, then make a call. We need to help weed out those bad apples, and make there be consequences for what they are doing (being selfish and making the rest of us that do have respect, look bad).

snotel · Jan 24, 2008

Swami,

You have a good point about Sonora pass, but I think that is the exception rather than what's going to happen in the future. For example, the future of the Mount Jefferson area in southwestern Montana is up in the air. Repeated trespass into the wilderness study area is certainly a huge factor in the land manager's decision. I don't think that most land managers are going to cite trespass as reason for closures, but it's something that gets talked about behind closed doors.

Here's a quote from the Washington parks site.

"Unfortunately, illegal intrusions by snowmobiles into Wilderness Areas are on the increase. Sometimes snowmobilers do not know where the boundaries are or may not realize an area is closed. To prevent the need for additional area closures and stronger enforcement, familiarize yourself with the location of restricted areas and respect the boundaries. Carry this message to snowmobile clubs and other groups."

christian · Jan 24, 2008

Sorry there MR. BIGFOOT!!!! Where is you solution?

bigfoot said:
I think christian hates snowmobilers, I think he was on a different thread bashing sledders,

Seriously? I hate my self!!!!

Its an hard issue to solve??? It will be very hard to stop a problem like this unless you are willing to deal with the consequences????? You can talk to the guys say HEY... then they get pissed off at you and a little war starts...Seen it happen!!!!!! Different sitution but same principle...

I would try to take some pictures of the guy's doing it. Figure out what truck they drive and put a little anonymous envelope on there truck!!! Saying this is only a WARNING but seen ridding in this area again and pictures will be forward to the people who can do something about it!!!

So all I'm saying it's hard to make these kind issue's resolved....

It hard to unspoil an rotten apple!!!!

Swami · Jan 24, 2008

real consequences?

I know FS people grumble about OOB and claim it leads to closers, but I've never actually seen that come to pass. That's why I'd prefer to see an actual example rather than FS heresay or threats published by State Parks dept. If illegal riding certainly doesn't help our cause, then how do you explain the Sonora Pass outcome?

Obviously, not everyone agrees that illegal riding is a problem. Some believe that organized raids on restricted terrain are a way to show the futility of penning sleds with paper fences. Recall the case of Mr Unser, who spent thousands to contest a trivial fine for sledding in federal wilderness. Notices on the local W say $5000 fine for motor use. This is an obvious way to penalize just lawbreakers instead of penalizing all snowmobilers. So isn't that a solution we should support?

Wade · Jan 24, 2008

Fair is fair, close some areas to non motorized, if they break the imaginary barrier, then close the entire area. Sounds stupid doesn't it?

Fair is fair, if highway vehicle accidents don't cease, if speeding does not cease, close the interstates. It's public, and driving is a privilege. We don't need roads, we can develop mass transit. Sounds stupid doesn't it?

So, why is it any different for snowmobiles. We leave no tracks, We don't do any damage. Personally, I'd say that closing areas to snowmobiles constitutes unnecessary closure. At the least, the fine should be for the actual damage done. That would be zero dollars. Why is off highway motorized use the only form of public property use, where the actions of individuals justifies punishment upon the law abiding majority?

But, I do not condone Wilderness Intrusion. At least not right now. We need to stay out of these areas, since they were lawfully closed. And, the closures are not completely overbearing upon our sport, as it stands.

But, if a certain wilderness bill was to pass, and the majority of areas were closed, I'd say it is our duty as Americans to protest in a non-violent way. Snowmobiling into closed areas would constitute non-violent resistance. Gandhi would be proud.

xrated · Jan 24, 2008

Wade as always great post, your always well thought out and articulate with comments that add to the thread and cause at least myself to think about the topic even when I am done reading it.

Soccerd6 · Jan 25, 2008

Wade said:
We leave no tracks, We don't do any damage. Personally, I'd say that closing areas to snowmobiles constitutes unnecessary closure. At the least, the fine should be for the actual damage done. That would be zero dollars. Why is off highway motorized use the only form of public property use, where the actions of individuals justifies punishment upon the law abiding majority?

For the majority of us, yes, I agree - the fine would be $0.00..... but there are those who just don't give a rat's patooty about the damage they do - either by ignoring "boundaries", or leaving garbage and/or damaging personal property in areas legal to ride, etc.

I received a response from my senator on a letter I wrote on a proposed amendment to policy regarding areas overseen by Dept of Fish and Wildlife (DFW). I quote two parts of the letter as this senator's reasons for supporting the amendment:

"I know that most people are respectful users of ORVs anmd smowmobiles, and have a deep appreciation of the natural environment. Unfortunately, there are a few users who are irresponsible and destructive."

"I am certain that we agree that it is unfortunate that a few irresponsible drivers are spoiling it for everyone."

so....... here is one example of where "renegade" activity does NOT help our case, or reverse decisions on closures...........

RX1MountainMan · Jan 25, 2008

Prevent Closures

If you really want to stop closures you need to inundate political leaders with letters, emails and phone calls and let them know No Action = NO VOTE! I don't mean a letter once in awhile I mean constant bombardment. All of the Lewis & Clark NF closures were upheld by an Environmentalist Judge in Missoula. We as voters and taxpayers need to get them out of there, and we also need to get rid of the environmental Forest and Deputy Forest Supervisors (trust me on this one!) We can p!ss and moan all we want to on here but we need to be heard in the political offices!

Belle Star · Jan 25, 2008

Prevent Closurer

I agree with you and have sent letters, one of the responses that I got back said thank you for supporting more wilderness, when I asked for less wilderness. So I wrote back and said it was obvious that they had not read the letter that I had sent. Helloooo! I have asked everyone I know that snowmobiles or just enjoys being able to access forest and BLM land to write to make a difference.

Bagger · Jan 25, 2008

Wade,
Great post as usual. I'm getting tired of constantly backing up myself, but to intentionally break the law is to invite disaster.
It's also not that easy to correct the behavior of others. When a couple of people try to enlighten a large group, (no matter how nicely) the group will react badly nearly everytime.
In a perfect world, all snowmobilers would follow the rules, and respect the land, trails, private property and each other. And in that same perfect world that behavior would be rewarded by those in charge with more access and freedoms.
Unfortunatly, not all sledders do those things, as evidenced by the trash thrown out, trails blocked/raced down snowparks filled with firepits and litter, and riding in off limit area's. And our elected officials ignore our legal pleas for assistance in lou of special interest groups with more grease.
I believe that you have to argue from the high ground, and to me that means doing the right thing (or the lawful thing). I think if you try to argue from the position of doing wrong, that you have lost before you start. B

Wade · Jan 25, 2008

Yes Bagger, your right. The reason "they" use that excuse is because it works, and this position is hard to counter, and it's convenient. I dare say that if we fixed the trash and restricted area violations, they would just find another reason to continue closing areas. These problems can be fixed, but it will mean hiring more officers, and people to clean the trash and fix the damage. I doubt most snowmobilers would accept the cost.

I'd just like to see all user groups treated equally.

sumX08az · Jan 25, 2008

I think most of us outdoor enthusiasts are environmentalists.
The fringe lunatics don't hold a monopoly on that title.
The great thing about snowmobiles is the low impact- except for
disturbing animals in some cases. Trucks in the rainy season cause the worst damage.
The most of us in the middle have
been apathetic while the loonies on BOTH sides play the fiddle.
I've ridden a dirt bike responsibly and 4wd truck responsibly in my area for 30 years. I've tried to abide by road closures always, but it has gotten ridiculous
in the last few years, and to ride(responsibly) any of my long time favorite
fireroads I find that I have to break the regulations and the law. So be it!
After decades of abiding closures, I find I can't abide all of them any longer.
I know that huge pressures are placed by OHV 's and their mounting popularity, but it is an unsafe situation when the FS concentrates huge numbers of inexperienced riders on the main byways with trucks and cars and racing yahoos.
Talk about a weekly disaster! And the damage is concentrated too.
STAY OUT OF WILDLIFE AREAS AND KEEP YER FRIGGIN' TRUCK ON ROAD WHEN IT'S SATURATED!

Swami · Jan 25, 2008

acres of consequences?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the DFW matter a trails-only issue? And wasn't access preserved? If so, the example shows no actual consequence from the illegal use that is alleged. I apologize if I've confused this with some other deal, but now I'm really curious. Maybe I should ask if anyone can tally some acreage that was actually closed because of illegal riding? I imagine that has happened somewhere, (no doubt on private property), but I personally have never seen or even read of such a thing on public land. Threats yes, action no. The 'few bad apples' thing is such a platitude that even if illegal riding stopped cold, who would know? The civil disobedience at Sonora Pass I think netted 10 or 11 thousand acres of charming terrain, so no need to wonder why I'm wondering.

Maybe, like Wade says, disobedience can be a tool when necessary. But who's to say that time has or hasn't come? And if you believe that a few unruly showboats really are the root of snowmobile closers, why would you reduce their fines to zero? Not sure 'fair is fair' is a good deal if it lets me go anywhere but limits my climbs to 2 mph.

plycoupe · Jan 25, 2008

Most interesting thread! I find myself on the side of civil disobedience.
They have closed areas illegaly, are administering the kings land at his whim,and totally ignore the will of the local residents. There is absolutely no consideration given to local custom ,usage, or needs. Therefore I say to he!! with their rules. If I am found in violation that is my problem,no one elses.
Have you ever pondered a road closure sign? Administrative use only! ???
I don't think so, sorry it's still public land and the usfs are alledgedly working (?) for us :clock:

Wade · Jan 26, 2008

I guess I still don't understand how closing more land helps keep people off closed land. Seems the more land you dictate as closed, the more land there is for people to ride illegally on. And, it will happen. Did congress create Wilderness with the naive expectation that it would somehow keep everyone out? Or, did they create it knowing that some intrusions were inevitable. Assuming that they are intelligent people, the only logical answer is that they created Wilderness as a giant conspiracy to kill snowmobiling completely.

Create wilderness, wait for some knucklehead to cross the line, then outlaw snowmobiles. What are they going to do, confiscate all sleds? Close down ever area, and ever trail? Closing land does not keep people from riding on closed land. There's no logic in the threats. Only having adequate lands available for motorized groups lessen the illegal intrusion onto closed lands.

Seems people don't think much about tax cheats, but oh boy, you ride your sled there and the world may end.

On a lighter note, I fully support some areas being closed (aka wilderness). I don't support all land being closed.

Fair is fair, the skiers can ski as fast as they want. Up hill or down. We aren't creating a lowest common denominator here.

Snowmobiling in Closed Areas

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads