Beartooth Mt.

[TRS]

Hi all,

Well, we all knew this day was coming and it seems like it is here. The Shoshone Forest is ramping up their Travel Management Plan. We are on short notice because, unfortunately they did not send out email notifications we heard it through the grapevine. Maybe some of you saw the public notice in the newspaper last week.

I have been working with Taylor Jones (WSSA President), Brenda Miller (CCSA District 5 rep to WSSA), Forrest Kaminga (Wyoming State Trails Manager), and Kim Raap (Trails Work Consulting) for the last couple of days in regards to the Preliminary Environmental Assessment and the 3 alternatives that are in the plan. Kim has spent many hours in the last few days reviewing almost 500 pages of documentation as well as referring back to snotel data and the forest plan since we started this process in 2015.

Overall, the first look at the information we are looking like we are in a better position that we thought we would be. If we can end up really focusing on Alternative 1 and 2 we should be in pretty good shape from the snowmobiling point of view. Remember the anti-motorized folks will be pushing for Alternative 3 to rob of us about 1/3 of our snowmobile area in the Beartooths (High Lakes Wilderness Study Area).

Attached is the Preliminary Environmental Assessment focus on the highlighted areas and bubble comments.

The Shoshone National Forest will be hosting virtual public meetings next week in conjunction with the ongoing 3-day comment period for the Preliminary Environmental Assessment. These meetings will be hosted via the online communication platform Microsoft Teams; individuals may attend the meetings via the web-based platform and do not need to download the application to their computer. If you are unable to attend the meeting at the scheduled times, recordings will be posted on the Shoshone National Forest website https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/shoshone/home/?cid=stelprd3846526 as on their Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/ShoshoneNF).
The meeting for our area is Tuesday, August 11th at 5pm.

North Zone (Clarks Fork, Greybull, and Wapiti districts) - Join this meeting August 11th at 5:00 pm via:
https://teams.microsoft.com/l/meetu...b161-5925a7775948","IsBroadcastMeeting":true}
We are hoping that as many of you that are able to please join the meeting as well. This will be an important step in this process.
Additional Information can be found on the Shoshone Forest website https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/shoshone/home/?cid=stelprd3846526.

Bert Miller
CCSA President

 

[goridedoo]

Just briefly looked at the link, lots there. Is there a specific area that is at risk?

Is there anything we can do besides attend the online meeting?

 

[Murph]

Just briefly looked at the link, lots there. Is there a specific area that is at risk?

Is there anything we can do besides attend the online meeting?

Absolutely, you need to comment when USFS opens the comment period. Get your friends to comment in support of snowmobiling. The important thing to remember is that if the Proposed Travel management plan is announced, and you wish to object to new closures, you need to have "standing" with the USFS. The way to get "standing" is to comment during the initial comment period.

Tony and others, remember the "Alternative Plans" are only suggestions. You can pick and choose closures and keeping areas open bassed on multiple "alternatives" you do NOT have to accept any "alternative" as the best of the rest. You can put forward ANY suggestion. We went through this with the Tahoe National Forest when USFS put out 5 alternatives that we commented on and the Proposed action wasn't any one of them......

Remember to keep comments respectful, and focus on the positive aspects of snowmobiling versus mud-slinging at the non-motorized community.

 

[nibrandon]

Just briefly looked at the link, lots there. Is there a specific area that is at risk?

Is there anything we can do besides attend the online meeting?

The proposed area of risk, according to alternative 3 of the proposed plan, is the High Lakes Wilderness Study Area. You can see what it covers on mapping systems like OnX, but in short, its a bunch of prime riding area north of Island Lake in the Top Of The World area. We ride there all the time, and it would be a real loss. I would propose alternative 1 or 2. Maybe Tony can speak to one or the other being preferrable.

 

[Wintertime]

Comments sent. The period is only open till Sept. 28. Let's get on board with this.

 

[TRS]

From the Forests Supervisor, they are considering alternative2.
I propose no closures, but that is not going to happen. (Their words)
As Murph said, be respectful voice your thoughts.

 

[Pickin’ Boogers]

Legally, they need to consider a "range of alternatives." This should include not only an option with no additional closures (the "no change" alternative), but also an alternative with fewer closures. If the only alternatives they are considering include more closures, someone could probably challenge the whole process with some success.

 

[BeartoothBaron]

TTT – if I understand correctly, this is the last day of the open comment period. For the life of me, I cannot understand how any level-headed individual would consider closing any of the Top of the World area. Once the snowpack has built, the only areas I've seen where there is any potential for erosion are at the very top of the pass, which is flat and wind-blown, where nobody rides anyway. It's just another stupid land grab. Anyway, I decided to include my comments – not as a copy and paste, but hopefully to give some good ideas for what to say.

Hello,
I'm a outdoorsman who regularly and responsibly rides snowmobile in the Top of the World area, and I'm concerned about the proposed Travel Management Plan. In particular, I strongly urge that alternative three be rejected. The area is lightly trafficked by snowmobiles and the snowpack builds rapidly and is sufficient to preclude erosion issues throughout the riding season. The overall impact of snowmobiles to the area is negligible, and I see no need for more closures on top of the already-limited area we are constrained to ride in.

The snowmobiling community provides a great deal of positive impact when one considers the cleanup measures, trail management, and community support provided by snowmobile clubs and individuals. That positive impact is under threat, however. As riding areas are closed, often by capricious measures and at the encouragement of outside groups that simply oppose any and all motorized recreation, some are choosing to leave the sport altogether. The combination of once-committed riders leaving the sport and losses of winter tourism may be the breaking point for local businesses already facing a difficult year.

In closing, let me just say that I am committed to sharing public lands and recreation areas as equitably as possible and to ensuring that my own activities have no impact to the land or wildlife and do not disrupt those engaging in other forms of winter recreation. The actions of some advocates for non-motorized recreation make it clear that their goal is to close as much land to snowmobiles as they can–even with no demonstrable environmental impact–and I hope the Forrest Service will take this into consideration in making their decisions regarding land management. Despite this, those of us in the snowmobiling community will continue our efforts to engage with all parties in good faith.

Thank you for your consideration,

 

[PaulAnd]

Well said! Your hired!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BIG C]

What was the final outcome of this? Does anyone know?