My how a system has morphed from its original stated intentions in 1999 to the greed and lust for control of today.

In 1999 (as taken from SSA records):

“THE TRAIL FUND PROGRAM:
The Trail Fund is a user-pay snowmobile trail pass system whereby, a snowmobiler who chooses to ride on a designated snowmobile trail, helps to fund the costs of providing that trail through the purchase of a trail pass.”

Sounds very reasonable, if I choose to ride a designated snowmobile trail (their words) I pay.

“A Trail Pass is legally required if you choose to ride on a “designated” SSA snowmobile trail.
Designated snowmobile trails are those trails that the Clubs, at their option, want to include as a
designated trail within the provincial trail system. Trails on Crown Land or Provincial Parks do
not require a trail pass to be ridden. Designated trails may include not only bush trails, but certain
forestry and logging roads, fields, ditches, and waterways. If a Club chooses not to include their trail
system, or just a certain part of it, within the designated trail system, a Trail Pass will not be
required to ride on those non-designated trails. i.e., a Trail Pass will not be required to ride any trails,
ditches, or fields that are not part of the designated trail system.”

Again sounds very innocent and reasonable, if trails aren’t designated, then no pass is required, so clubs can keep some trails private if they choose.

“The designated trails are signed as such so that they are readily identifiable “out-on-the-trail”.”…

This is also stated in the SK Snowmobile Act, if there is not reasonable signage then trails cannot be called designated, even if they appear on a map, and therefore can be ridden without a permit. (I like to call this the “if you don’t maintain it then its not a designated trail” clause.)

…“Designated trails are subject to change each year and may potentially be re-routed throughout the season due to unforeseen circumstances.”…
“The monies collected from the sale of each Trail Pass are forwarded monthly to the SSA for deposit
into a trust fund. The costs of administering this trust fund are absorbed by the Trail Fund in its normal
course of business. As a dedicated fund, this means 100% of the Trail Fund goes back into snowmobiling
by helping to cover costs related to such things as maintaining existing trails, developing new trails,
purchasing and maintaining trail equipment, purchasing and installing trail signs, and producing zone
trail maps of the designated trail system, as well as the operational costs of the Trail Fund Program.”

Hmmm…wonder if anybody knew then that some of these operational costs would include a wages for the CEO and his (coincidentally related) office manager? How is one selected for this position again?

Fast forward to the 2003-04 annual report (as taken from SSA records)

“During the 2003 – 2004 fiscal year, a total of 50 clubs received $184,590 to maintain 9,270 km
of trail. This included $79,588 that was retained by clubs as a commission for selling trail
permits.

# of Clubs Funded 50
Amount Paid to Clubs $184,590
# of Kilometers Maintained 9,270
Permits sold:
1 – Day 672
7 – Day 710
Annual – Before December 1st 3,427
Annual – After December 1st 2,375”

So out of $478,345 directly collected from permits $184,590 went to clubs for trails, $145,000 (from letter to MLA May 6, 2004) went to premiums for a three million dollar liability policy, and $148,845 went to purchasing signs, and having maps and permits printed? Oh yeah…and wages?

Even the association acknowledges a lack of enforcement but I would have never guessed this: 2003-04 annual report (as taken from SSA records)

“No charges have been issued by the RCMP since the inception of the legislation that states it is mandatory to display a trail permit on designated snowmobile trails.”

Really, nobody has been charged in the six years the association has existed? Well judging from this I’d say $478,345 is a pretty good honor system.

Also in the 2003-04 annual report (as taken from SSA records)

“No Trail Permits required on Crown Land:
The Trail Fund provides funding for trails on crown land. However, the Trail Fund does not
receive any revenue from snowmobilers that ride on crown land as the legislation states that trail
permits are not required on crown land. We will continue to encourage Saskatchewan
Environment (SE) to change legislation so that snowmobilers are required to purchase a trail
permit prior to riding on crown land.”

So you want permits required on ALL crown land because SOME trails pass over crown land? How about the private trails you allowed clubs to not designate since 1999 or trails that are not properly signed? This seems pretty greedy and controlling, and in direct contradiction to your original stated premise of user-pay-only on designated trails.

Also for some of you who feel businesses are already put upon enough, evidently the SSA disagrees, as they need money to feed the machine and will squeeze everyone for it. Taken from 2003-04 annual report (as taken from SSA records)

“Business receives but does not give back to the trail system:
Many businesses in Saskatchewan benefit from the snowmobile trail in their area. We know that
the snowmobile trails contribute to the viability of each business. The SSA is trying to
encourage businesses to contribute financially to the grooming club that maintains the trail in
their area. If business does this – it would ensure that the snowmobile trail will be there in the
future and in turn it will benefit their business.”

These money grabs and pressure tactics are further illustrated by the fact that the SSA has threatened the government for support at least twice since their inception in 1999. In 2002 the SSA threatened to sell all of its grooming equipment (and in fact listed it in Edmonton) unless the government made changes to the Act that the association wanted and supported the Association. Again this past year the SSA threatened the government that they would no longer administer the trail fund if trail permit sales weren’t linked to plate registration. This type of “we’ll take our ball and go home “ hissy fit should be rewarded with prompt inaction. There were groomed trails in this province before 1999 and there will continue to be if the SSA leaves. If you don’t want to administer the permit program that YOU asked for then fine, leave. I am sure others will be glad to collect the money (and wage?).

They also blatantly lied in their letter to the government (taken from government house transcripts reading the letter dated May 6, 2004).

“I would like to inform you that the snowmobile trails in Saskatchewan will not be available to the people of Saskatchewan this . . . (upcoming) winter.”…

Pardon me? Just because you aren’t involved doesn’t mean all the trails will cease to exist, they existed before you you know.

…”The SSA has invested thousands of dollars to inform the public that a trail permit is required. Over the past five (5) snowmobile seasons trail permit sales (have) decreased.”…

Another lie, actually (taken from the 2003-04 SSA annual report) more permits were sold in 2003-04 than in 2002-03, the difference was in revenue was because more people bought before Dec 1 in 2003-04 than in 2002-03. This is their right and shows the growth and acceptance of the program with the people the SSA is selling permits to.

…”The Minister’s response is “. . . (the) government has done its part”. They have done their part in closing the door on PUBLIC SAFETY. They have done their part in closing the door on TOURISM. They have done their part in closing the door on SASKATCHEWAN. The SSA is now in a position where the public is informed. . . the snowmobile trails in Saskatchewan will no longer exist. SGI must be held accountable for their actions; their
actions have cost this province the LOSS of PUBLIC SAFETY, A TOURISM INDUSTRY and THE PUBLIC
CONFIDENCE.”…

Empty threats and overblown false accusations are no way to raise the level of support and stature of our sport.

“Mr. Speaker, the letter then goes on to point out some facts
about snowmobiling in Saskatchewan.

SASKATCHEWAN SNOWMOBILE FACTS:
- 40,000 snowmobiles
- 35,000 recreational snowmobilers
- 15, 585 registered snowmobiles . . .
So you can see from that, Mr. Speaker, there’s a significant difference between the number of snowmobiles and the number of registered; roughly one-third of the machines are registered and “5,400 trail-permitted snowmobiles . . . ” So you have about one-eighth of the snowmobiles are actually permitted to use the trails, and:
- 0 charges laid for trail permits — RCMP (1999-2004)
- $145,000 insurance costs for trails
- 10,000 kms of snowmobile trails
- Saskatchewan’s #1 winter Tourism industry’s —snowmobiling . . .

I do wonder though, Mr. Speaker, whether or not the hockey people agree with that statistic, or curling.”

Even the MLA reading the letter sees the overblown self-importance portrayed by the letter writer. Their supplied statistics also shows how the SSA is manipulating numbers for their own use. 40,000 snowmobiles in the province and only 5400 permits sold so only one eighth of snowmobiles allowed on trails? Well 5000 of these sleds are not required to have permits under the law in the first place so that drops the stat to 1 in 7. 20,000 are unregistered and therefore can assumed under the law to be unused (sitting in sheds), dropping the stat to 1 in 3. Of the remaining 15,585 who says they all use the trails? I would say even 1 in 3 in an honor system is pretty good. See, anybody can manipulate numbers to their own ends. Even if all 30,000 un-permitted recreational snowmobilers did use the trails I’d venture to say that is a pretty large silent majority that don’t like the permit system or don’t use the trail system. In a democracy doesn’t majority rule?

The MLA goes on to read a letter representing opposition to the changes asked for by the SSA and the letter and others supporting it came from…member clubs of the SSA! Even their members don’t like all of it! As well there is a follow-up letter from the SSA apologizing to the minister in charge of SGI for “misrepresentations” in the previous letter and the MLA reading in support chastises the SSA for the first letter “which was not very complimentary to SGI, to the minister’s department, and to the RCMP, Mr. Speaker.”


Now if plates are linked to permits then the original stated goal of “user-pay on designated trails only” will have morphed to “everybody pay everywhere” all in six short years, care to guess what the next six years will bring (no riding off trails, insurance only through SSA, and higher fees to feed the machine?)

edit...spelling

Also the SSA had there big snowmobile trade show this weekend in Regina. Well how are you suppost to sell any trail passes if you don't have them? What a joke they should have advertised the show as free admission with the purchase of a trail permit or something along these lines or at least be selling them there. Yes I know you can purchase them other places but thats not my point.

As far as I am concerned, what the SSA is trying to pull is a crock of shit. They are going to be the death of snowmobiling in this province. I agree that 5 yrs from now, the only place you are going to be allowed to ride is on designated trails or on your own private property, and we will have the SSA to thank. The sad thing is, we have lost our voice. we are being represented by an organization that has decided to put the blinders on and only see their side of the coin. How do you change this? by not showing support for the SSA..... Oh, but they took that away from us now. We are supporting them by buying plates to ride on crown land, which is not a designated trail. If the majority of sledders wanted this, don't you think the numbers of registered sleds would be higher? Wouldn't there be more trail permits sold? For everyone who thinks this is a good idea. Remember that 5 yrs from now......

The SSA is a not for profit organization. So are they registered? What I am getting at is can somebody that is in an area where there are no designated trails, and who is forced to buy a permit, claim the fee as a donation at income tax time?

I have heard by talking to a lady at SSA that permit price might be??? $40 per sled, added to the price of the plate...Not 100% sure...Any thing can happen with this "Gov." we have in sask...So I guess $40 is cheaper than $65-$90...

It is truly not about the price, it is about the choice and return for an individual. If a person rides where no money generated by the SSA is spent, then why should they have to contribute to the SSA with no choice (which is what they are asking for if permits are joined with plates)? Even in the SSA original manifesto this was not its described intention. Does this mean that if a car association wants funds to maintain a race track they should be able to collect a $40 fee from every registered car owner in the province? They are not a government agency they are a private association.

But the question is still can the fee be deducted as a charitable donation?

ed-sp

Not for Profit organizations do not have charitable status by vertue of being duely registered as Not for Profit organizations. Charitable status is a federal jurisdiction and has extremely tight and ridgid guidelines. There is no way to legitimately claim your "trail fee" as a charitable contribution. If your snowmobile is necessary for business purposes, then it would be an expense, but of course all expenses are income deductions, no such thing as a tax deduction. :banghead: :beerchug:

Thanks 94ZR! Guess that throws that idea out. I only asked because it sure seems like charity when you ask someone to donate extra money out of their pocket for something they may receive no direct benefit for, but substantiate it as being for the betterment of the whole. Oh wait, unlike charity the SSA is not asking for everyone’s money, they are demanding it (if permits do get tied to plates) whether one rides designated trails or not. :beerchug:

I guess if the "users" would have paid all along it would not have come to this..But there is to many people who want something for nothing...Those are the ones who screwed it up for the people who never ride trails...Where do you ride Deep Freeze? Ride a trail....you will really enjoy it....

I agree that people riding designated trails without permits are a problem, but the proposed solution does little to address this problem and in fact puts the SSA in a position where they become the

by requiring law abiding registered riders, who ride crown land and do not use designated trails, to fund their association. Using SSA numbers only 5400 of over 15,000 registered law abiding riders buy permits which implies that 10,000 law abiding riders either do not ride designated trails or are not so law abiding (but then why purchase plates at all). What the split is is anybody's guess.

The proposed solution still does not address the claimed 20,000 riders that buy neither plates nor permits (assuming they ride designated trails and require permits). Nothing in the proposed solution addresses enforcement and it just alienates up to 10,000 law-abiding riders. By trying to extend their authority beyond designated trails the SSA is miscalculating and the proposal becomes a money grab.

My main riding area encompasses most of the northern administration district, an admittedly large area but rest assured I rode in all areas of the district last year. I have ridden groomed trails from Meadow Lake to Greenwater and most points in between (all properly registered and permitted of course) and found that it was not my cup of iced tea (I prefer long lakes, tight technical trails, and bays full of unmolested powder). Most designated groomed trails were not properly signed or maintained, thus unpassable except for a trusty husqvarna. Greenwater was an exception but still not my style.

So in the press release this change will generate $500,000, seems very close to the $478,000 already generated under the old system. So how is $22,000 supposed to improve things dramatically?

Also 94% of 1243 sledders survey were in favor? Why not at least send the survey out to all 15,000 registered sledders to get a statistcally significant sample instead of sampling less than 25% of sledders who ALREADY buy permits. Of course those people are going to be in favor! If I surveyed 10 beers drinkers drinking Pil in a room of 100 beer drinkers drinking Pil, and 9 of them said they liked Pil I should be suprised? And then I should decide that everbody should drink Pil?

Here are the questions you will find on the questionnaire:
1)Would you be in favour of seeing the snowmobile trail pass added to the snowmobile registration?
2)If the trail pass amount was reduced to approximately $50 per season and added to the snowmobile registration would you be in favour?
3)Do you want to see snowmobile trails continue in Saskatchewan?
4)Are you satisfied with snowmobile trail maintenance in Saskatchewan?
5)How many times per season do you use the trails?
To participate in this survey and complete the survey go to the SSA’s website

Don't see any mention here about trail passes being manadatory for all registered sleds. Convienient that was left out and the survey was not sent to all registered sled owners.

1) Yes or No, is it optional if I don't ride designated trails?
2) Same question as 1 but with a "if we bribe you this year clause"
3) Who (even non users) is going to say no, how about makes no difference to me.
4) No but I don't care if I don't ride them or have to pay for them either.
5) 0

How about questons like:
6) Should the trail pass be optional if attached to plates.
7) Would you support a mandatory trail pass to be required on non designated trails.
8) Would you support a mandatory trail pass to be required on all crown land