Federal Judge in Idaho Rules Against USFS in OSV (aka Sleds) Case

[tommyvee]

There is huge amounts of area in Colorado designated as wilderness/no snowmobiling areas as it is now.
I think you're more concerned with enforcing the rules of the areas we already have which is fine by me. The reality is though, so few people go into those areas as it is now, the forest service would rather harass and ticket high snowmobile density areas (like Vail Pass)as that is where the $$$$ is at.

Really the USFS has an impossible job. I have talked with the Enforcement Ranger for Arapahoe NFS, normally he is one guy on duty for enforcement on many thousands of acres. Seems like his biggest tasks are enforcing summer time motorized vehicle usage, fire, and hunting/firearms violations. So mostly user groups are self-policing, and every so often the authorities make a show of force when violations get too flagrant. But enforcement in remote areas costs many times whatever fines it could generate.
Despite my sometimes sanctimonious tone, I have been on the other side too. For years everybody skied the Arapahoe "glacier" in Boulder's watershed despite plenty of signs closing the area (mostly because it holds snow all year). One day the watershed authorities flew a helicopter into the basin and gave everybody $300 tickets, I was walking out and met the rangers on the trail and convinced them I had not been inside the water shed. That enforcement effort must have cost them many times the fines received, but it made the point.
No way the FS can afford to fly helis around all the remote Colorado wilderness boundaries or pay wages for enforcement officers to patrol remote areas either. But I would sure like to see them do similar spot enforcement at locations like Polar Star where impunity has become the norm.
Overall I agree that Colorado has plenty of designated non-motorized use areas and that management/use patterns are working well to share resources, with a few exceptions.

[DoWork]

"I'm special and this land should be for ME"



"No way, I'm way more special and entitled and this land should be for MY personal use"




Honestly, I can see it from both sides but slednecks are just about the dumbest, loudest, most entitled and least likely to be successfully regulated bunch of destructive douchebag drunks you will find in the woods. At lest BC skiers are quiet, usually respectful of the environment around them and it takes time for them to (silently) track out a mountain. Slednecks will have that shit schralped in minutes, making more noise than an entire fucking parade procession all without getting their fat lazy asses off a fuckin' heated seat or taking their hands off their heated grips.


I'm sorry but I could not physically give a fuck less about what slednecks want. Fat, lazy idiot drunks making a fuckton of noise, stinking the joint up and throwing their garbage and shit everywhere? Fuck that. They should be the LAST group to help shape BC travel policy. That would be like letting these fucking retards....



decide what new cars should look like. Sorry if you're a respectful rider and this doesn't apply to you, but you are not the rule you are the exception. Slednecks are the WORST.

That said, I still totally want one.

[Hugh Conway]

DoWork brings the Hugh

[LightRanger]

A Federal Judge isn't saying that travel policies makes sense. I'm guessing the judge probably doesn't have an opinion on BC skiers vs. sledneckers.

A Federal Judge is saying that the USFS was supposed to develop a travel plan via their own rules and they didn't so they should. That's why WWA won. They pointed out a process wasn't be followed and that helps their cause.

This is a good summary. Although the decision will have an impact nationwide, so your prior post about Idaho issues is only one part of it.

IMO, it wasn't a hard ruling for the judge, based on the state of the law and what the USFS did.

Summary:
In 2005, the USFS put out a national rule through the standard notice and comment process that required each district to create an off-highway vehicle travel management plan. They exempted sleds from the rule. Therefore, under current law, all areas not explicitly designated as closed to sleds are presumed open, no travel management plan for sleds is required, and to close an area to sleds the district must go through the standard notice and comment process. For all other OHVs (ATVs, Jeeps, dirt bikes, etc.), each district is required to have a travel management plan designating where they're allowed, and if they want to open new areas, they have to go through the standard notice and comment process.

The Judge said that the exemption was arbitrary and capricious and not justified under the Administrative Procedure Act, and contrary to Executive Orders in place for forty years.

In some areas it may have a substantial impact on where people can and cannot ride. In others, it may have zero impact. To say it's the end of snowmobiling is a little over the top and way melodramatic. The decision (assuming it's not appealed, or upheld on appeal) merely forces the Forest Service to confront the issue (whatever it may be) in areas where they haven't.

[tommyvee]

In 2005, the USFS put out a national rule through the standard notice and comment process that required each district to create an off-highway vehicle travel management plan. They exempted sleds from the rule. Therefore, under current law, all areas not explicitly designated as closed to sleds are presumed open, no travel management plan for sleds is required, and to close an area to sleds the district must go through the standard notice and comment process. For all other OHVs (ATVs, Jeeps, dirt bikes, etc.), each district is required to have a travel management plan designating where they're allowed, and if they want to open new areas, they have to go through the standard notice and comment process.

The Judge said that the exemption was arbitrary and capricious and not justified under the Administrative Procedure Act, and contrary to Executive Orders in place for forty years..

Pretty much all National Forests already have travel plans that restrict mountain bikes to designated trails and prohibit off-trail travel in all other zones. Prohibiting quiet, no exhaust, light-weight, zero-fuel consumption mountain bike travel except on designated routes and then presuming that all areas are open to snowmobile travel unless prohibited pretty much fits "arbitrary and capricious" exactly. Not sure what rationale could make that combination of management policies defensible.

[Conundrum]

Pretty much all National Forests already have travel plans that restrict mountain bikes to designated trails and prohibit off-trail travel in all other zones. Prohibiting quiet, no exhaust, light-weight, zero-fuel consumption mountain bike travel except on designated routes and then presuming that all areas are open to snowmobile travel unless prohibited pretty much fits "arbitrary and capricious" exactly. Not sure what rationale could make that combination of management policies defensible.

Maybe because sleds travel on snow and not earth? Not picking sides, merely throwing a guess out there on how they got the original exemption. Or, the Blue Ribbon lobbyists realized it was a losing battle and gave up orv's as a compromise to exempt sleds. Or maybe politicians said okay when all sorts of laws and regs are bundled into some education funding bill or whatever a yes vote looks good for. If you actually stop using common sense and look at how our gov operates, it's not hard to see how this type of stuff happens.

[DoWork]

Maybe because sleds travel on snow and not earth?

Well by that logic, I should just be able to slap Mattrax's on my hooptie and drive anywhere I want, system blaring reggaeton and coffee can exhaust tip screaming as I bounce my tach off the rev limiter just for fun all day long.

[Conundrum]

Read past my first sentence. Just stating some of the pro bilers arguments. It's not my opinion but do you really think some bureaucrat on the beltway really gives a shit about snowmobiles. My bet is a Blue Ribbon lobbyist said "hey, you know guys, I can see how four wheelers are causing some issues and we should have a travel plan...but look at these snowmachines that travel on snow..." and then the politician says "hey, what fancy restaurant are we going to tonight? Oh anyway, I agree, your science behind snowmachine travel sounds solid. Hell, they don't even need roads. Let's do the exemption".

And if you're a doosher driving one of those cars, I support your decision to put tracks on it.

[Hugh Conway]

Read past my first sentence. Just stating some of the pro bilers arguments. It's not my opinion but do you really think some bureaucrat on the beltway really gives a shit about snowmobiles. My bet is a Blue Ribbon lobbyist said "hey, you know guys, I can see how four wheelers are causing some issues and we should have a travel plan...but look at these snowmachines that travel on snow..." and then the politician says "hey, what fancy restaurant are we going to tonight? Oh anyway, I agree, your science behind snowmachine travel sounds solid. Hell, they don't even need roads. Let's do the exemption".

Having in the past met a bunch of said bureaucrats - yes, the actual bureaucrats do care one way or the other. They spend their days getting educated and in meetings geting educated or the like.

It's the politicians, the political appointees, and the aides who don't know or don't give a shit.

[Conundrum]

I've never met one...just thinking they listened to their bosses who appointed them. I stand corrected.

[Blurred]

Gotta love Doworks ignorant stereotype of slednecks.

I think anyone who has done both sports extensively will tell you slednecks are by far the friendlier of the two groups.

[DoWork]

Gotta love Doworks ignorant stereotype of slednecks.

I think anyone who has done both sports extensively will tell you slednecks are by far the friendlier of the two groups.

Hey, that's not to say they aren't my kind of people, and I'd honestly love a sled. That doesn't mean however, that once I had one I'd expect ANYONE but other slednecks to want to protect my ability to scream around the woods disregarding every sign I see and rip shit up drunk as fuck all day and all night, free from the rules that plague pretty much any other motorsport. And honestly, it's really not much of a stereotype. Why wouldn't they be friendly, they didn't do a fucking thing to get where they are. Of course skiers will be pissed and bitchy they just slogged 3 hours to watch you highmark their line with a PBR tallboy in one hand hahaha...


The fact that snowmobilers expect people to just let them do whatever they want kind of cracks me up.


Also, I will agree that skiers can be quite the pretentious douchebags as well, but at least they worked up a sweat getting somewhere and I can respect that. Sitting on your fat ass and clamping the throttle while your BMI climbs faster than your sled is not praiseworthy in the least.

[BrianH]

[...]

I do like seeing a group hold the government to the rules that they themselves established.

My opinion...do what a couple groups did a couple hours northeast of here. Have the user groups get together over a few maps and a few beers and see what people would be happy with. Some of the best skiing and best sledding in the state was formed by some people hanging out together and coming up with some ideas.

This. This is how it gets done. The whole sport of skiing, whether 1080s in a park or leather booted pinning; is predicated on a huge logistical pyramid. From the moment you wrap yourself in the expensive plastic of gore-tex to when you start your car to get to the trail-head, you're burning dead dinos. But people getting together and acknowledging they have to share, can sit down over maps of terrain they know and figure it out. Throw the USFS a bone and create a joint plan that all major user groups can agree to. All the gov has to do is approve it.

[DoWork]

And if you're a doosher driving one of those cars, I support your decision to put tracks on it.

If I was driving one of those cars, I'd hope my friends would have an intervention or at least beat me down proper. Ugh. Like cancer on wheels.

I was simply drawing a correlation based on annoyance level. People that don't sled don't want one screaming past them, nor do any of us want a hooptie blasting reggaeton and revving the motor in our ear at the family picnic. I think a little understanding on the part of the slednecks would help, but hey we're all our own castle and who gives a fuck about other people, right? They want their reggaeton. Hence this discussion.

[Blurred]

Hey, that's not to say they aren't my kind of people, and I'd honestly love a sled. That doesn't mean however, that once I had one I'd expect ANYONE but other slednecks to want to protect my ability to scream around the woods disregarding every sign I see and rip shit up drunk as fuck all day and all night, free from the rules that plague pretty much any other motorsport. And honestly, it's really not much of a stereotype. Why wouldn't they be friendly, they didn't do a fucking thing to get where they are. Of course skiers will be pissed and bitchy they just slogged 3 hours to watch you highmark their line with a PBR tallboy in one hand hahaha...


The fact that snowmobilers expect people to just let them do whatever they want kind of cracks me up.


Also, I will agree that skiers can be quite the pretentious douchebags as well, but at least they worked up a sweat getting somewhere and I can respect that. Sitting on your fat ass and clamping the throttle while your BMI climbs faster than your sled is not praiseworthy in the least.

If you "slogged" 3 hours on skis to get to a sled playground, I'll be the drunk sledneck roosting around you and the other idiots you're with laughing and making as much noise as possible.

[DoWork]

If you "slogged" 3 hours on skis to get to a sled playground, I'll be the drunk sledneck roosting around you and the other idiots you're with laughing and making as much noise as possible.

I keep thinking of the video from like a year or two ago with that dreadlocked & duct taped brobrah doing taunting circles around the livid and mentally-shattering BC skier and I can't stop chuckling

[old goat]

There are so many of those obnoxious BC skiers who intentionally file these complaints just to piss off the slednecks, right?

And they constantly trash the poor sledneckers prime terrain by whining on about holistic gluten free energy when a man is just trying to get a decent brap going in between beers.

After all this country wasn't founded to grant some weedy, knicker sporting, klister sucking remnant of Allen Ginsbergs Whirling Dervish Camping Trip Gone Wrong the right to get all bom shiva omsterizational when there's good petroleum to burn, right? The Commons Crisis was due to inadequate amount of bitters.

I'm pretty sure this country was founded by guys wearing knickers. (Atheists too, for the most part.)

The farmers back in Michigan where I grew up had the right idea--wires between trees on their property neck high to a sledder.
Back in the day Karl and I were XC skiing (what else are you gonna do in Southern Michigan) and a couple of sledders saw us and headed over with the clear intention of beating up a couple of hippies. As they got closer they slowed, stopped, turned around and left--Karl was a 6'3 250 pound ex-Marine Seal/ Camp Lejeune brig turnkey (jailer that is--Lee Oswald was one of his "clients"). Fuck sledders.

[MTT]

Its an interesting topic. Technology is changing the argument.

I remember when there were almost no Back Country skiers.
I remember Riding snow mobiles anywhere I felt like. USFS laws made sense, control the trails for dirt Bikes and 4X4 traffic after the snow melts. But in winter? it does not matter there is endless land and no one else is there.

That has changed.
1: now ya got people out stomping around in the middle of nowhere in winter for recreation.
2: Snowmobies have changed ALLOT
Back when I rode you had to be Good!! and brave to go any distance into a forest. You could not climb any kinda pitch on untracked snow. and still spent a significant amount of time digging out.
Now look at what you can do.

Eveyone is going where they could not or would not a few decades ago.

I am not sure what the answer is?

there will need to be some general boundries, Mixed use / No motors / Do we need a Motor only?

[brutah]

Can someone explain to me what the issue is??? the federal judge said that the USFS now has to regulate snowmobile travel, is that it? doesn't seem too big of a deal to me.....

I will say having recently moved to spokane and now do a lot of recreating in the area that the Winter Wildlands Alliance has taken issue with, there are NEVER more backcountry skiers in that area than snowmobilers. in fact, i've had very little issue with snowmobilers in general in the idaho panhandle. If the purpose of the USFS is to applease the greatest number of area users than snowmobilers shouldn't be too worried since they far outnumber bc skiers in this region.

i'm kinda playing devil's advocate here because overall i'm not stoked to have to compete for fresh powder with someone who has a distinct advantage in travel speed

[Conundrum]

Yes, there isn't enough room in the sandbox apparently. The USFS's job isn't to appease anyone. It's to manage federal land and follow their regulations to do so. Snowmobilers have been getting a by for a few years. It will be interesting to see what the USFS comes up with. Regardless, I doubt there will be much enforcement.

[neufox47]

I can think of a number of reasons to seperate sledders and skiers. Avalanche concerns being a big one. Wasn't Esales09 in a major slide that was triggered by a sledder from above in an area the sledder wasn't supposed to be? A skier who has a sled drop in on them are extremely disadvantaged.

[~mikey b]

Blurred probably knows my opinion on this better than most. Fuck it - not going to repeat myself - again...

Here's a local perspective.

By: Snowlands Network

NEVADA CITY, Calif April 2, 2013 – On March 29, the United States District Court for the District of Idaho ruled that the exemption of over-snow vehicles in the 2005 Travel Management Rule is contrary to law. In the ruling handed down Friday, U.S. Magistrate Judge Ronald E. Bush ordered the U.S. Forest Service to issue a new rule within 180 days that requires all national forests to manage over-snow-vehicles under the same criteria used for all other off-road vehicles.

The ruling resolves a lawsuit brought by Boise-based Winter Wildlands Alliance challenging the legality of the over-snow vehicle (OSV) exemption in the 2005 Travel Management Rule. Advocates for the West represented Winter Wildlands Alliance in the lawsuit.

"This ruling will affect all National Forests and confirms the position we have advocated with the Forest Service in California and Nevada," said Gail Ferrell, Snowlands Network President. "Winter is not a 'secondary' season; the Forest Service needs to comprehensively address the adverse impacts of motorized recreation in winter as well as in summer."

"The popularity of backcountry skiing and snowshoeing is apparent to anyone traveling the Mt. Rose highway, or other roads in and around the Lake Tahoe basin, in winter," said Ms. Ferrell. "The preservation and promotion of opportunities to backcountry ski and snowshoe in the basin is extremely important to the economic health of communities in the basin."

"The Forest Service cannot continue to ignore the issues presented by snowmobile recreation when revising their land management plans and formulating travel management," said Bob Rowen, Snowlands Network Vice President for Advocacy. "We call on the Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit, which is revising its land management plan, to address the snowmobile issue. This does not mean a total prohibition of snowmobiles, but it means providing a fair balance of lands for non-motorized recreation in winter as well as in summer. The current lack of comprehensive regulation of OSV use has allowed motorized recreation to displace skiers and snowshoers from several areas in the basin, despite the fact that the demand for backcountry skiing and snowshoeing far exceeds the demand for snowmobiling."

Snowlands Network is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) corporation with over 600 members that represents the interests of skiers, snowshoers and other winter recreationists who desire to recreate in areas free from motorized use in California and Nevada. For more information, visit www.snowlands.org. Snowlands Network is an affiliate member of Winter Wildlands Alliance.

Bob Rowen is Baaahb on TeleTips by the way. A good enough guy, but a sled-hater.

[jetlag]

Separate but equal?

[Buster Highmen]

I'm pretty sure this country was founded by guys wearing knickers. (Atheists too, for the most part.).

Would you please stop confusing the issue with irrelevant data? Sheesh.