Forest Service Required to Examine Wildlife Impacts of Snowmobiling in CA

[LightRanger]

^quick edit^

does not matter what side you are on, any NEPA analysis related to winter recreation on those % NF's is certainly going to require something like kidwoo is asking for - that sort of inventory would be just a small part of it and probably pretty easy to come up with

clearly, a lot of people don't understand what's going on here, but a few do

Yep. I'm quick on the draw.

And, you're right on the NEPA analysis. The FS isn't taking comments yet, but I would assume a comprehensive list could be compiled from the comments that're put in.

[rideit]

I gonna take my motorized two stroke snowboard out and piss EVERYONE off.
Do you think a silencer would make the haterz MORE grumpy?

[MTT]

I used to blast around on something similar to this All over what is now the protected p[art of Sheep flats. I really liked sledding up into the Mt. rose And Slide Mountain Ski Area's for Lunch and then back at it for the better part of the afternoon.

[LightRanger]

I gonna take my motorized two stroke snowboard out and piss EVERYONE off.
Do you think a silencer would make the haterz MORE grumpy?

BAT: http://www.wired.com/autopia/2013/08...th-snowmobile/

[kidwoo]

GDI
turds.

Thank you for that well formulated and coherent response Hue! (I go with Hue because you use such colorful language!)
Your very reasoned civil retort has forced me to completely reevaluate my position on this matter.

[Hugh Conway]

Thank you for that well formulated and coherent response Hue! (I go with Hue because you use such colorful language!)
Your very reasoned civil retort has forced me to completely reevaluate my position on this matter.

Thanks for being the asshole I knew you were kidwoo - and no bones about it, you are, and you know you are. You haven't changed your views on bikes in parks in 5 years or on anything else, despite many coherent well formulated responses. No one does. You tune into your bike circlejerk, baaahb his. I guess you play the management asshole side of it more and that's why telemike thinks you know whats going on? Who knows, it's just one side spewing at the other side, which is all TGRs about now. The sad part about this place is I'm never wrong in the ways I'd like to be. And you and baaahb will fight until the death. A pox on both of you.

[kidwoo]

I used to blast around on something similar to this All over what is now the protected p[art of Sheep flats. I really liked sledding up into the Mt. rose And Slide Mountain Ski Area's for Lunch and then back at it for the better part of the afternoon.

Does that guy have a freakin respirator on? Man, I thought two strokes were bad now!

[kidwoo]

asshole
circlejerk,
spewing
pox

Thank you for that well formulated and coherent response Hue! (I go with Hue because you use such colorful language!)
Your very reasoned civil retort has forced me to completely reevaluate my position on this matter.

[ajax0988]

Probably because California just sucks

[Hugh Conway]

Thank you for that well formulated and coherent response Hue! (I go with Hue because you use such colorful language!)
Your very reasoned civil retort has forced me to completely reevaluate my position on this matter.

Thank you for that well formulated and coherent response douchebag! (I go with douchebag because you are a douchebag!)
Your very reasoned civil retort has forced me to completely reevaluate my position on this matter.

[MTT]

Does that guy have a freakin respirator on? Man, I thought two strokes were bad now!

I think he is up way north, Where any skin exposed to Air freezes and breaks off.

Don't really have that problem in the Sierra. and Hell Yes Loud as FUCK!! Only think Close were the Open pipe blown engines on the lake in summer.

You did get the point about Snowmobiles tracking the shit out of the now protected sacred High meadow that is Sheep Flats?

that was covered in Cattle in the 19th Century?

[toast2266]

Thank you for that well formulated and coherent response douchebag! (I go with douchebag because you are a douchebag!)
Your very reasoned civil retort has forced me to completely reevaluate my position on this matter.

I know you are but what am I? seriously? that's pretty weak, especially for someone who has all the answers.

[Baaahb]

kidwoo, I really appreciate you efforts to share knowledge and engage in a constructive dialogue. I think this thread has reached its limit in this regard and will contact you via pm.

Bob

[Baaahb]

From my limited personal experience, I can't think of a single multi-use area that's actually full of skiers fuming and bitching about sleds. And that includes some very high traffic spots, like Shasta, Castle and Mt Rose. Getting chewed out by self-righteous snowshoers, chased by dogs and dodging little kids on saucers isn't most sledders' idea of a good time, and where there are genuine conflicts, I think they're more willing to work out an agreement than Snowlands realizes. But if you want to complain about getting "displaced" from Brockway onto Donner, Castle, Mt Rose, Tallac and Jake's . . . don't expect people to take your concerns seriously.

mattyj. I also appreciate your desire to understand Snowlands position

most people don't come out skiiing in order to bitch. It's not my idea of a good time.

there is, however, a lot of quiet resentment in areas of conflict. you have mentioned some areas that are technically open to OSVs (e..g much of the area south of the Mt Rose highway) but that don't get much OSV use....when the few OSVs come, they are highly resented. one of Snowlands primary objectives is to close these areas before conflicts intensify

a lot of Snowlands effort also is in increasing enforcement against trespass. when you get an OSV crossing boundaries, such as onto the west side of Castle Peak, I think even you will agree you get a lot of "bitching".

and then are the tough areas like Relay Ridge, which can support maybe a dozen snowmobiles playing at once but could support several dozen skiers at the same time. and even with that many skiers, the powder would last much longer. I believe BC skiiing and snowshoeing is going to continue to increase in popularity. adjoining areas (such as hourglass) are pushed to capacity with increased use. it is entirely appropriate for the FS to reconsider what is the best use of the relay ridge area, considering sustainability, potential growth, impact to wildlife and ecosystems. ( and also impact on all the folks across the road trying to enjoy natural quiet --- which you can readily experience in the meadows despite the presence of the Mt Rose highway. cars are essentially silent as compared to OSVs

one also needs to put Snowlands efforts into context. getting a small area like Tahoe Meadows closed took a huge amount of effort. (the closure area is about 4 square miles) all Snowlands's efforts are vigorously opposed by much larger and better financed Snowmobile associations. Snowlands must in fact make a huge effort to get any areas closed, no matter how insignificant they may be to the OSV users

yes, you'd think the OSV'rs might accommodate reasonable change, but think again. in a recent collaboration effort involving user groups and sponsored by the LTMBU, we asked that the highly popular family sledding area (e.g. kids on saucers) on the north side of 431 be closed to OSVs, and that OSVs ride in a designated corridor through the highly congested family sledding area to access the Relay ridge (i.e a corridor a few hundreds yards long). nope, no go, the OSV representatives did not think it was necessary and would not agree to it

[~mikey b]

a little something for Bob from 10th Mountain Division Hut Association

Finally, your annual family ski trip to Shrine Mountain Inn is more than just a reservation. Once you arrive at the exit, you see them coming too: the other carload, equally enthusiastic, with snowmobiles in tow. Your youngster's neck cranes to get a better view of the machines and then asks, "Why do we have to carry everything to the hut…couldn't we get one of them to take our stuff?" And so the multi-use conversation begins, with your five year old.

According to Chuck Ogilby, current President of the Vail Pass Task Force and owner of the Shrine Mountain Inn, multi-use conversations among a group of concerned users in the Vail Pass area began in 1989 or 1990. "The area at the time was being overrun with snow machines with no areas reserved for quiet use. A helicopter operated a heli-ski operation, a snow-cat operator was there, several private snow-cat clubs, and of course the Shrine Mountain Inn, the Jackal, Janet's, and the Fowler-Hilliard huts. This intense use was chaos. But the use then was a fraction of what it has become today."

The group organized, and by the mid-nineties the Vail Pass Task Force had become a 501 c3 corporation. "For many years the Task Force tried to operate the area under a voluntary sharing (and separated) use plan. This, however, received no compliance from the snowmobile community. After years of frustration, and limited successes, the Task Force asked the Forest Service to implement a Fee Demo area as a last straw to manage the area."

"It is my true belief that if this action had not been taken, the entire 55,000 acres today would be one large snowmobile play area. This would have resulted in a sacrificed area for skiers including the non-motorized pods, which have worked, the elimination of the snowmobile through route in front of the Fowler-Hilliard, and larger non-motorized pods around the other huts, and a non-motorized Commando Run."

"The mission of the motorized user is to have marked, groomed, loop trails. For the non-motorized user the mission is to have designated, trackless, quiet areas and trails in which to seek enjoyment. I believe these objectives are being met better and better every year and it costs a great deal of money to administer both sides of this complex equation."

As an organization dedicated to self-reliant, non-motorized use of Colorado's backcountry, it is imperative that the 10th Mountain Division Hut Association supports the Vail Pass Fee Program. 10th Mountain collects fees from hut users when they make their booking. The fee program provides guidance to all winter recreationists visiting the Vail Pass area. Maps are distributed, showing the designated areas/trails for motorized and non-motorized use. Boundaries are marked with signs and have been set to maximize each user group's needs, and to utilize the area's topography. Patrolling rangers issue warnings and tickets when established boundaries are ignored, or fees are not paid. Working together, users of all types can now enjoy the Vail Pass area.

Please send comments to Jonathan Hare, Vail Pass Field Coordinator, jhare@fs.fed.us. Send comments regarding 10th Mountain's involvement in management of the Vail Pass area to 10th Mountain's Executive Director, Ben Dodge, ben@huts.org.

[Baaahb]

Thanks, Mike!

[~mikey b]

for what? Giving you something that took me 0.002 seconds to find on Google? You are going to need to get up to speed pretty quick, Son!

[kidwoo]

"The mission of the motorized user is to have marked, groomed, loop trails. For the non-motorized user the mission is to have designated, trackless, quiet areas and trails in which to seek enjoyment.

I think both of these guys would disagree

[Baaahb]

.002 seconds? damn!

[VC]

Any idea what percentage of land is usable to sleds in LTBMU? I don't know the answer but would love to know, because I imagine is a small percentage.

[kidwoo]

Any idea what percentage of land is usable to sleds in LTBMU? I don't know the answer but would love to know, because I imagine is a small percentage.

Don't know an acreage percentage but here's a visual in the map on the last page.

http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_...rdb5402181.pdf

[VC]

Don't know an acreage percentage but here's a visual in the map on the last page.

http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_...rdb5402181.pdf

More than I thought, but also a difference between usable and open to sleds.

[Baaahb]

In terms of the Forest Service lands, it's about 50%.

[that dude who did that thing]

Here in Idaho we spent years kicking around an idea called the "Boulder-White Clouds Wilderness." The idea was to combine some improvements to the national forests with a wilderness designation. Checkerboarded lands would be "de-checkerboarded" improving public understanding of the NF boundaries, reducing conflicts, and making enforcement easier for everyone. Certain motorized trails would finally be completd, in part by buying up private inholdings (the checkerboarding mentioned previously) so that the trails would be legal rather than trespassory. Some current NF land that really didn't make much sense as NF because of adjacent development, would be transferred to state or private ownership, to enhance development opportunities. And some existing roadless areas would become wilderness. At a party with a member of the Blue Ribbon Commission's board (one of its founders, actually) I asked about their position on this plan and was told "If we can't ride an ORV or snowmobile to those summits, we don't care if they get protection." I walked away rather than bitch-slapping a senile old fart. The point is that even if kidwoo is right and Snowlands wants to ban snowmobiles, it is equally true that Blue Ribbon wants to be able to take their snowmobiles literally everywhere. These are advocacy positions which will not carry the day. The land manager adn the land owner (the U.S. Congress) will ultimately make these decisions (and this includes the decision to leave matters up to the courts under ambiguous laws). But the snowmobile perspective WILL be well-represented, thanks to a wealthy industry that will make sure of it.

There is conflict on the public lands, folks. Get used to it, it's an exceedingly old problem. I know from personal experience that while every user has impacts, motorized users have bigger impacts than non-motorized. And that while one user may have a slight impact, ten users have far more than ten times as much impact. The idea that either snowmobiles or skiers should be automatically exempted from forest land management regimes was always absurd. And the current crop of decisions and settlements does nothing more than change that absurdity. Not sure what anyone is worked up about: your activities will now be managed, did you really think it should be otherwise? On public land?

[goldenboy]

How funny and ironic would it be if the FS finds that wildlife is more disturbed by quiet, non-motorized use than motorized use, as studies have shown. Therefore, as a result of this suit, they close areas to quiet use while keeping them open to motorized users.