Hunt Talk Radio - Look for it on your favorite Podcast platform

The White Clouds Wilderness compromise will be easy!

Ithaca 37

New member
Joined
Mar 4, 2001
Messages
5,427
Location
Home of the free, Land of the brave
How would you guys make sure everyone from Carole King to the local fatassed ATV riders are happy?

http://www.idahostatesman.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040702/NEWS01/407020328/1001/NEWS

Preservationists, recreationists tell Simpson their White Clouds ideas

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rocky Barker

The Idaho Statesman | Edition Date: 07-02-2004
STANLEY — Rep. Mike Simpson on Thursday heard what people don't like about his plan to protect wilderness in the Boulder/White Clouds Mountains and help the economy of central Idaho.

Preservationists in Ketchum criticized Simpson for leaving lakes and trails they love out of his 294,000-acre wilderness area.

In Stanley, mountain bikers and snowmobilers urged him to keep open access to the alpine peaks where they ride.

Others asked him to change plans to transfer federal land to Custer County and the state to offset wilderness protection costs.

About 250 people packed the American Legion Hall in Ketchum, while 150 came to the Stanley School. Simpson vowed to continue to seek a compromise that protects most of the state's largest roadless area while keeping motorized access and helping economically strapped Custer County.

He holds the last of his three meetings today in Challis.

Federal wilderness designation prohibits motorized use, logging and new mining. But in the Boulder/White Clouds, the major conflict left is between motorized recreationists and wilderness advocates who want the backcountry quiet and open only to hikers and horseback riding.

Sarah Michael, a commissioner from Blaine County, and Ketchum Mayor Ed Simon told Simpson they want more wilderness because it's critical to their recreation-based economy.

"Wilderness requires very little federal action and very little federal money,'' Simon said.

But Merle Ebers, of the Idaho State Snowmobile Association, countered in Stanley that the economies of Elk City, Grangeville and Kooskia that are next to wilderness are not benefiting economically. Stanley can build its winter economy on snowmobiling if he and other riders are allowed into the high country for riding. Singer-songwriter Carole King, who has a ranch in the White Clouds, called the 500,000 acre roadless area "our Hope Diamond."

"What's happening with this (plan) is we're chipping off the Hope Diamond,'' King said.

Jack Struthers, who owns a motorcycle dealership in Boise, urged Simpson to consider other ways to protect the area without kicking out motorized users. Simpson's plan does keep open several critical motorized trails, including a loop around popular Frog Lake and the Germania Trail that divides the Boulders from the White Clouds and connects the East Fork of the Salmon River area with the Sawtooth Valley.

"We don't want to destroy the land, we want to preserve it," Struthers said.

Rick Johnson, executive director of the Idaho Conservation League, said a provision that would require federal officials to open a new trail if they are forced to close an existing trail to motorized use is a "fundamental flaw" of the plan. He and other environmentalists decried the proposal to give the Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation $1 million for motorized trail development and land.

"It's really hard for them to take care of the land they have now," said Rep. Wendy Jaquet, D-Ketchum. Simpson's plan calls for transferring 1,000 acres of Challis National Forest lands to Custer County so it can resell it to help pay for the costs of wilderness management like ambulances, rescue and road maintenance. He also proposed an unspecified transfer of federal lands in the Stanley area, which is surrounded by the Sawtooth National Recreational Area.

Bob Hayes, executive director of the Sawtooth Society, which works to keep the SNRA from becoming overdeveloped, said he hoped they could support the bill. But Simpson must ensure that any land transferred in the SNRA cannot exceed 100 acres, must be contiguous to existing development and have strict deed restrictions to meet the SNRA standards.

Chris Cook of Boise, a mountain biker who regularly rides deep into the backcountry of the White Clouds, spoke for the Idaho Recreation Council, a new group he said represents motorized recreationists and mountain bikers. They can support the bill, he said, only if there is no net loss of recreation in the area, including bicycling.

"I feel the current proposal is going to shut me out of areas unique in Idaho and the United States," Cook said.

Only one rancher testified, Jay Neider of Stanley. He said he supports multiple use and has not liked watching logging, mining and ranching fade in the area.

"I'm against any more wilderness in Idaho, but I know there's going to have to be more to satisfy the enviros," he said. "I do think the peaks should be wilderness."

Simpson told those in various camps why they should help get his bill done this year. To wilderness advocates, he warned that if he fails, it could be 25 to 30 years before the issue is resolved, and motorized use would only grow. To the motorized users, he pointed out that Sen. John Kerry could win the election, and the western White House would be in Ketchum. Kerry could declare the area a national monument, which could close down use.
 
Sounds like Simpson is pushing pretty hard for the Wilderness designation. Plus, haven't many complained that wilderness/monument status doesn't take into consideration the locals. If I'm not mistaken I believe there's a few here that have stated that the local opinion should be given more weight than outsiders.

Given this quote:
Sarah Michael, a commissioner from Blaine County, and Ketchum Mayor Ed Simon told Simpson they want more wilderness because it's critical to their recreation-based economy.

"Wilderness requires very little federal action and very little federal money,'' Simon said.
Why not wilderness?? The local elected officials are asking for it!
 
7/03 news:

CHALLIS — U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson's effort to build a compromise plan for wilderness and economic development found support Friday in Custer County, a ranching and farming community.

Nearly 100 people came out to the Challis High School for the last of three public meetings Simpson held on his proposal to designate 294,000 acres of wilderness in the Boulder-White Cloud Mountains. His proposal, far different than past wilderness bills, offers Custer County land and money to offset the increased costs for emergency services and to help improve its depressed economy.

"We can support this legislation as a compromise if it can support multiple use," said Rod Evans, president of the Custer County Farm Bureau.

Simpson will take the dozens of comments he heard Thursday and Friday and begin turning his proposal into legislation. He said he hopes to have a bill introduced by the end of the month.

"Ultimately, we have to decide if we as Idahoans can manage this situation," he said.

Simpson has worked on the plan for more than three years, crafting a package that offers benefits to most of the groups that have fought over the future of the region for more than 30 years. For example, ranchers who give up grazing permits would be paid and motorcyclists would retain most of the trails they use, including a trail that runs through the heart of the Boulder-White Cloud Wilderness.

In two days Simpson heard several groups tell him what he needs to do to gain their support, or at least to keep them from fighting the measure.

Simpson has proposed transferring more than 1,000 acres of federal land to Custer County, which it could sell to pay for services and economic development.

A wide consensus of speakers ranging from ranchers and local business leaders to singer and wilderness advocate Carole King urged him instead to seek direct federal funding for the county.

"Wilderness visitors will not wait until we sell those lands to get lost or hurt," said Gynii Gilliam, economic development director for Lemhi and north Custer counties.

The most controversial of these transfers is proposed in the Sawtooth National Recreation Area, where the federal government has spent tens of millions of dollars buying up development rights from landowners. Many speakers expressed concerns about the county developing lands there. But the Sawtooth Society, the organization that watches development in the SNRA, said it could support a limited transfer with conditions that restrict development.

Simpson's proposal to give the Idaho Parks and Recreation Department $1 million for trail improvement in the area was loudly panned by wilderness advocates who see the agency as controlled by motorized recreation groups. But if Simpson were to pull the money out of the bill, it would undermine the guarded encouragement he has received from the Blue Ribbon Coalition, which represents motorized recreationists.

"I don't really care who gets the money," said Bill Dart, Blue Ribbon Coalition executive director from Pocatello. "We need trails maintained in the SNRA."

Simpson's plan to open the Champion Lakes area on the west side of the White Clouds was popular with motorized groups but also disappointed environmental groups. One Stanley outfitter, Devan Jackson, said 25 to 45 percent of his horsepacking, hiking and hunting business is in the Champion Lakes area and would be threatened if motorized use were allowed.

"It's one of the few areas you can leave the trailhead without running into motorcycles," he said.

The other major conflict Simpson must resolve is perhaps the hardest, satisfying snowmobilers and a hardy group of mountain bikers who want to continue their access to the high peaks area of the White Clouds. He sought to placate snowmobilers by leaving out the Washington Basin, one of their favorite alpine play areas. They also would continue to have access to the Warm Springs Meadows, a popular high mountain area.

But mountain bikers would lose access to the meadows and high lakes like Born Lakes and the Boulder Chain.

"The real challenge is how can we solve the issue of mountain bikes and snowmobiles," Dart said.

Wilderness advocates also hope Simpson adds several non-controversial areas on the edges. At some point this month, Simpson will decide what changes he must make to get the bill passed and then write it. He still faces a tough schedule trying to get it done by the end of the session in an election year.

Bart Koelher, director of the Wilderness Society's wilderness support center, a veteran of many past wilderness legislative efforts, noted that similar bills were passed on the last day of the session in 2000 and 2002.

"There's still plenty of time,'' he said.

What Simpson's plan means to ...

Hikers: They would not see or hear motorbikes and mountain bikers when hiking in the heart of the White Cloud peaks.

Motorbikers: They would retain the key Germainia Creek trail between the White Clouds and Boulders but lose the west fork of the East Fork Trail loop. They could still go to Frog Lake, Casino Lakes and would gain access to Champion Lakes. But they would lose access to Fourth of July Lake and the upper end of the Warm
Springs Trail. The proposal also would add $1 million to an Idaho fund for trail building and maintenance.

Snowmobilers: They would lose access to the high peaks except for Washington Basin and Warm Springs Meadow. The plan would indefinitely protect their use. A new trail would be built from Stanley to Redfish Lake. They also would benefit from the $1 million that would go to an Idaho fund for trail building and maintenance.

Mountain Bikers: They would lose access to the high peaks area, though only a limited number currently ride there. They would retain all of the trails used by motorized users.

Hunters: Continued access to the entire area and new protection for elk habitat in the Herd Creek and Jerry Peak areas.

Outfitters: They would continue to have access to all areas and would see $500,000 in trail and facility improvements.

Ranchers: They could have their federal grazing allotments in the wilderness bought out if they choose. Some ranchers would benefit from land transfers that resolve conflicts with federal agencies.

Custer County: The 4,300-person county would gain more than 1,000 acres of federal land, including valuable land near Stanley, which the county could resell to get money for economic development and other needs.

Preservationists: The proposal would preserve 294,000 of the 550,000 acres of roadless lands in the Boulder-White Clouds area, including ecologically valuable Bureau of Land Management land to the east.

People in wheelchairs: A wheelchair-accessible trail would be established into the wilderness near the Bowery Creek Guard Station along the west fork of the East Fork of the Salmon.

Forest lovers: The proposal would authorize a study of the beetle infestation in the Boulder, White Cloud and Sawtooth mountains to reduce fire risks.

Miners: The wilderness area would be closed to future mining and exploration. There would be no effect on existing patented claims or private lands within the area. The federal government would enter into negotiations to purchase claims within the proposed wilderness area.

Loggers: There is little marketable timber in the area.
 
["Why not wilderness?? The local elected officials are asking for it!]"


1 -Pointer,not all the local's are asking for it,not such a large area .
I hope they come to something close to what Simpson has proposed.
Im sure it won't come easy,but if the inviro's want us to believe they are after protection not a total take over they should be willing to compromise,I feel the same way about the motorized use/multipal use side as well.


"But Merle Ebers, of the Idaho State Snowmobile Association, countered in Stanley that the economies of Elk City, Grangeville and Kooskia that are next to wilderness are not benefiting economically. Stanley can build its winter economy on snowmobiling if he and other riders are allowed into the high country for riding."
 
So Merle thinks they have to be able to ride their snowmobiles in the Wilderness in order to help the local economy? What wrong with riding in the thousands of square miles of National Forests that aren't Wilderness? Does Merle need a NF map showing where all the NF is around Elk City, Grangeville and Kooskia?

I hope nobody is dumb enough to believe Merle's BS.
 
No, Merle thinks people should continue to be able to ride snowmobiles in areas they have been using in the past.

As for economic impacts, where else besides snowmobilers are the locals going to benefit? No way you can ignore the fact that snowmobilers have a large impact on local economies in the winter.

Go to page 9 in the linked PDF.
http://www.prr.msu.edu/stynes/nvum/SpendingProfilesShort.pdf


A report by the Institute for New Hampshire Studies and Plymouth State University said in New Hampshire in-state riders spent $66 per day while out-of-state travelers spent $88 per day.

Study:
http://oz.plymouth.edu/inhs/EconomicReports/Tourism_Satellite_Account_FY2002.doc


In the winter of 2003 New Hampshire determined that the total impact on their state's economy by snowmobilers was nearly $1.2 billion. This spending by snowmobilers was 1% of the gross state product and more than 10% of all travelers spending in the state.
 
Hanger, It sounded to me like Merle wants to ride in the Wilderness areas. Do you think he doesn't? He says, "Stanley can build its winter economy on snowmobiling if he and other riders are allowed into the high country for riding." If the high country is Wilderness does he want to be allowed in there? Where is he being kept out of now that isn't Wilderness?

[ 07-06-2004, 12:40: Message edited by: Ithaca 37 ]
 
Ithaca - I said "No, Merle thinks people should continue to be able to ride snowmobiles in areas they have been using in the past." These areas are in the proposed wilderness. They are not currently riding in any wilderness. I thought we were talking about the PROPOSED BWC wilderness. When you say "...Merle wants to ride in the Wilderness areas..." do you mean WSA?

EDIT: OK, so I'm a little slow today. What Merle is saying is those areas in which Wilderness has been designated (vicinity of the Nez Perce NF) have not seen a boost in the winter economies because of it.

[ 07-06-2004, 12:55: Message edited by: Hangar18 ]
 
MD- I understand that is true, but in a representative republic you vote for people that will then speak for you. In this case, the local gov. is asking for the designation. Same thing happens when the feds want to do something (like go to war), not everyone will agree, but we have entrusted them with the power/responsibility.
 
Hanger, All I can go on is what Merle was actually quoted as saying in the article, "But Merle Ebers, of the Idaho State Snowmobile Association, countered in Stanley that the economies of Elk City, Grangeville and Kooskia that are next to wilderness are not benefiting economically. Stanley can build its winter economy on snowmobiling if he and other riders are allowed into the high country for riding."

As for what Merle thinks; I don't know what he thinks. You say you know what he thinks when you tell us "No, Merle thinks people should continue to be able to ride snowmobiles in areas they have been using in the past."

Well, if Merle thinks he should be able to continue riding in a Wilderness area when the designation changes from WSA to official Wilderness I think he's got a screw loose.

I don't think anyone should be able to ride any motorized vehicle in any Wilderness area. They have plenty of other places to ride their fat ass around in without screwing up Wilderness areas. And I don't care what Merle thinks. National polls show the majority of people who understand the issue don't want motorized vehicles in Wilderness areas. What the hell's the sense of having Wilderness designations if every fatass is going to be able to ride around in them? I can't believe how selfish some people are!
 
Ithaca, first see my edit above.


As for what Merle Ebers thinks, he never said what he thinks. He is the president of the Idaho State Snowmobile Association, and is stating the position of the ISSA regarding the BWC wilderness proposal. Where I wrote "No, Merle thinks..." in response to your post I should have said "The position of the ISSA includes..." And once again, the BWC is not a wilderness area. One of reasons the ISSA is opposing the designation because it will no longer allow people to ride snowmobiles in areas considered for wilderness. I am sure this would not be the case if those riding areas were not going to be closed. No one is asking permission to ride in wilderness areas. Again, the statement is simply saying local winter economies (Elk City, Grangeville, Kooskia) have not improved when wilderness designation occurs.
 
“About establishing snowmobile opportunities in federal wilderness areas, back in 1977 I suggested the establishment of an experimental snowmobile trail through the Gospel-Hump Wilderness in Idaho. The trail would have followed a route used by snowmobilers prior to the area’s designation as wilderness.---I intend to work in the future for opening designated parts of wilderness areas for snowmobile use.”-- Frank Church, September 15, 1980 in a letter to Snowmobile Magazine.


Another point is that many years of snowmobile use in the BWC and in the Centennials has not compromised the wilderness characteristics and value of these areas. Therefore there is no reason to exclude them.
 
...an experimental snowmobile trail ...
How well do you think the snowmobile crew would follow the rules of staying on trail if a compromise would be made? (I'm asking honestly)

Oak
 
The point of the quote from Frank Church was to say even he recognized sleds do not adversely effect wilderness value.

How well do you think the snowmobile crew would follow the rules of staying on trail if a compromise would be made? (I'm asking honestly)

Oak
The crew I ride with uses the trail to get to the fun stuff. "Steep -n- Deep". So from a personal perspective, I wouldn't go there if I couldn't ride off-trail. That certainly doesn't include everyone of course. You could restrict it to short-tracks only.

Something to keep in mind is that over or around 90% of all sleds sold are for trail riding. Most of the organized clubs around here are made up of trail riders. Some trails I've been on are constructed so that off-trail riding is impossible. There are even some dumbasses that ride off the trails in Yellowstone. Most, never all, respect the rules.

I think in cases such as the BWC, something can be done besides wilderness. Motorized access in the winter is being treated differently in the DEIS in the Centennials on the ID/MT border. My point is you can get rid of the OHV's (otherwise, why do you need wilderness) without effecting the snowmobilers. That is where I am coming from, as a snowmobiler. We respect winter range because most of us are also hunters.


Was that an honest answer?
 
I am guessing that the Honorable Senator Church was thinking about Scorpion 340's and Yamaha Enticers. Machines that had a much different performance curve than today's machines.

Technology may have killed the "golden goose" with Snowmobiles, now that many places are "doable"... Same with Mt. Bikes.

Hangar, I would not have the "numbers" but with the sorry state of Idaho's trails, does the 90% of the machines sold in Idaho go on trails? I would not imagine that is the case, based on my vast experience.
 
Hangar, I would not have the "numbers" but with the sorry state of Idaho's trails, does the 90% of the machines sold in Idaho go on trails? I would not imagine that is the case, based on my vast experience.
Probably not that high in Idaho, or most of the west because the mountain sleds are primarily for, you guessed it, the mountains. You've just been on the bad ones. There are 7,200 miles of groomed trails in Idaho, more than any other western state. Not sure about the east.

Another interesting stat is that 30 years ago, manufacturers sold 495,000 sleds. Today it's around 140,000.
 
Hangar,

One of the problems with the Idaho Snowmobile crowd is the looney leadership. When we see the ISSSA coming out against Sage Grouse, when the President(?) of the group is the Leading Fat-Ass ATV rider involved in the Owyhee Intiative, it just makes the Snowmobilers of Idaho seem like a "Rip it up, tear it up" group, with no concern for the animals. It ends up getting them lumped in with the Fat-Assed crowd.

Why won't Merle come out saying we need to protect Wilderness from the Fat-Assed crowd, and we are willing to sell them out, for our Winter riding???
 
it just makes the Snowmobilers of Idaho seem like a "Rip it up, tear it up" group, with no concern for the animals.
Rip and tear WHAT up? Snow? Last I heard it melted in the spring. Maybe you know something I don't.

It is the ISSA, Merle Ebers is the president, Sandra Mitchell is the public lands director. And you are the first person I've heard that lumped us with the "Fat-Assed Crowd".

I've said this to Ithaca before, so why not again - Pay your $20 to join the ISSA, then as a member take your gripes to them.

Sign up here - http://www.idahosnowbiz.com/join.htm
 
The ISSSA website even has a diatribe by Sandra Mitchell on their, "defending our public lands from attacks"..... Isn't she the same Sandra Mitchell that is leading the Fat-Assed cause on the OI???
 

Forum statistics

Threads
113,615
Messages
2,026,752
Members
36,245
Latest member
scottbenson
Back
Top