Wildman

I wouldnt worry about the cvor, but if the combined weight ratings are over 4500kg they both need annual inspections. Note, not the combined weight, it is the combined weight rating, 2 totally different things.....tthen you need to make sure when your loaded you don't exceed the weight ratings.

Does Longlac groom that whole trail or do they share it with either Hornpayne or Hearst?

It is showing that 3/4 of it is open now, just a short piece on the east end is closed, gotta wonder if the data didn't get submitted properly because from what I have read it is suppose to be all open.

LOL, imagine that huh.......the system really works, grossly underfunded, yet dedication prevails........best protocol I have seen, pound the crap outta the keyboard and trash a system that works. If all the cheap mf out there ponied up we could raise the permit fee and tow the groomers to the repair facility to fix the junk in a timely manor......hahahahahahahaha. ...im goin back to work

I know your not asking about this kind of trailer, but they have so many uses, I use this all the time, I wouldn't look back, they are a great investment.

Most of the corn is off here, I'm staking my trail this weekend, most of our trail system got staked last weekend. Just need the A01 and snow, a couple inches here now and its snowing.

The only way fuel consumption will get better is to put a programmer on it, they are all that way, it takes allot of power to turn those tracks, lots of resistance. The final gear ratio is not far off what the production tractor is.

They will climb as long as there is a base and its not icy, they are niceer to drive then a 2 track unit.......they use 2/3 more fuel then a TS110 with the suretrac. This is with a Case Puma 140 pulling a sledgehammer.

I don't have allot of info, but club general meetings are still held the first Thursday of the month from oct to March

Have they asked for help?

We as districts and a federation as a whole, need to think outside the box, if we keep the same mindset and ramble around doing the same old thing for the same reasons we will fail as a whole. We don't get enough money per permit to operate the way we want, we need to be creative, moving groomers from areas that don't have snow is a real necessity, working on the logistics is too, by moving theses groomers and not sending operators to run them and allowing the clubs to operate them as they do their own will allow us to see what happens. We can work on the rest from there, and it may be the begining of a new model. All I know is that sitting here and saying what if, won't make the system better, we need to try, and that is what we are doing.

The 2 groomers we sent are rental units, d5 owns the tracks and the blades. It is permit money paying the rental whether they are used or not. The tc plan was to move those 2 groomers in the district to whoever had snow. It is a terrible year, those 2 groomers need to be used regaurdless of whether d5 has snow or not. If they get broke and its not warranty, they will get fixed, we will worry about the details after that. It is unreasonable not to work together and it is unreasonable to let the fact of who pays for what dictate whether we as a federation groom or not. When it comes to if the lending district gets snow or not, it depends on what district and how much snow. I can assure you, if we got 2 feet of snow, nothing would move anyway, we didn't have frost when we sent them and we don't have frost now. If we did, we would have to ask for them back and do the best we can with what we have got. As a federation, we will never move forward if we always say what if. D5 and 9 have proven there is different ways of funding the clubs within the district, we will prove groomers can be moved and trails can be groomed where the snow and riders are. MOTS has laid the groundwork for districts to become stronger, if each district moves forward, sharing resources will be much easier. And how long does it really take to fix a groomer anyway, in reality, the groomer should be able to be fixed properly with no huge pressure if a loaner unit is provided, I know from experience the type of repairs that get done when everybody is screaming we need that groomer now.

There is also another way of looking at it....the clubs/districts need to reach out and ask for a groomer......it's tuff to send one when you don't know where the problem is. This should also be getting easier to look after with districts looking after the groomer fleet. For the last few years I have read on social media where groomers are broke and there are tons just sitting around the province doing nothing, yet no correspondence have come through the d5 trail committee of any groomer requests.......had there have been, groomers would be made available. We are moving forward though, this is a step in the right direction, and it has happened in the past, just not really documented on social media. I know of other groomers that where moved in previous years as well from other districts.

And these idiots have lakes all over up there that they can track up, yet they use someone's property that was clearly marked to say off of.

I think going forward, moving groomers should be easier, if it is easier, the operators receiving the loaned groomer may be more apt to look after it as if it were their own. Let's face it, this equipment is bought with permit dollars, we should all respect the equipment t we have, no matter where it comes from. I think district alignment will make this easier......for the club personal that is allowing district alignment to take place. If your district has aligned a trail committee that is efficient and realistic, moving a groomer is easy and painless. For the districts that are having a hard time aligning, look at it like an extension of your club, we are involved in a club for one soul purpose, to make snowmobile trails, don't make it harder then it is.

Yup, we had a short discussion about moving groomers and there was no opositIon

By the way, awesome riding up there, you won't be disappointed.

Great to see you out exploring the vast Ontario trail system Greggie........lots more to it then the politics!!!!!!!!!

Merry Christmas, hope everyone gets to make lots of tracks this year. Keep hard right!!!!!

As long as the cost per km is in line with the provincial average, that should not be an issue. Probably allot more to the story.

6 to 7 inches here, close to a foot in some areas, packing has started, feeling optimistic.

just a suggestion here, I write the intersection # on the back of my signs and keep the signs for each intersection all together. Might not work for everyone, but it does 4 me.

obviously I have no insight on what stp is thinking, but looking at it from the standpoint that my district operates much like what MOTS proposes, my concerns are more with how the assets can possibly be manipulated from lets say, outside district powers. I have voiced my concerns to my club, the same as I have posted on here earlier, I have never heard from anybody how things work in respect to this. If I had a vote, it would be no, just because I don't have all the information. I am not on the club exec. anymore, I do sit on the district trail committee, and that is more then enough for me at this time. I guess it would really be fairly simple to get the answers, I just can't believe nobody else cares to know.

I want to clarify, I don't believe anyone has malicious intent within the federation, I don't want to see a system that has limited room for corruption turn into a system that has a huge opportunity for corruption. Having districts control incoming money and all clubs of the district working together makes sense for the sport, I think it is to early to hand all the assets to the district, that is what I am getting at.