So, G2G, if snowmobiles don't use sno-parks for non-motorized use, they don't have to pay the grooming permit fee? That's how I would read what you quoted; am I correct?
Please also clarify, do snowmobiles pay an equivalent amount that non-motorized users pay? Based on what I'm hearing, is that non-motorized users pay $40 and snowmobile users pay either $30 or $12 (vintage). Is this correct?
And for all non-motorized users...if they use groomed areas, they pay an additional $40, over and above the seasonal sno-park fee. Correct?
I would agree...there are more snowmobile users than non-motorized users. I guess I can see them paying less, well sort of.
It doesn't make sense that 'vintage' machines pay less. They likely spew out more fumes and pollute the forest way more than new machines. The same would likely go for vintage cars, however, they for the most part operate in the city...where the expectation of clean fresh air seems to be lower.
Your argument that non-motorized users 'get more for their permit dollar,' because non-motorized users can use both non-motorized and motorized groomed areas is true, but I know many non-motorized users who refuse to use the motorized trails due to the air pollution caused by sled traffic. Even today, on a low usage day for all users, pollution settled into the forest into a dense fog. I tried skating through it just a few hours ago, but realized I didn't want to consume that bad air and become ill--so I turned back. So much for getting more for my permit dollar; my choice, I guess.
This has been an interesting thread. I hope users from both sides of the issue will contribute their knowledge and opinions on the topic to illuminate the relative issues and concerns.