Wyoming's congressional delegation, concerned about the winter economies of Cody and Jackson, has asked Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne to, essentially, order Yellowstone National Park open to snowmobiling this winter.
Of course, not only is it questionable whether the Interior secretary has the authority to issue such an order, but he previously had recused himself from playing a role in the snowmobiling issue because he previously was governor and U.S. senator from Idaho, a state that has an interest in the outcome.
Nevertheless, in a letter dashed off to Secretary Kempthorne just the other day the Wyoming politicians -- U.S. Senators Mike Enzi and John Barrasso and U.S. Rep. Barbara Cubin, all Republicans -- asked that he "put in place a temporary plan that would allow snowmobiles and snowcoaches in Yellowstone" this coming winter.
Here's the text of their letter:
Dear Secretary Kempthorne;
We urge you to take immediate administrative action on emergency rulemaking for winter use in Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks and the John D. Rockefeller Jr. Memorial Parkway. Gateway communities in our state are struggling to prepare for the winter season under the cloud of uncertainty created by recent legal battles over winter use. Immediate action by your Department can help to provide stability to these communities.
As you know, Judge Emmet(t) Sullivan’s ruling on September 15, 2008 in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia vacated the National Park Service’ plan for winter use management of Wyoming parks. In the wake of this decision and continuing legal battles, administrative action is required to allow snowmobile and snowcoach access to the parks this winter. The many families visiting the Wyoming parks and the small businesses hosting them depend on this immediate action.
We ask that you immediately move forward with plans to prepare and implement an interim plan for the 2008-2009 winter use season in Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks and the John D. Rockefeller Jr. Memorial Parkway. This is a crucial time for business owners and community leaders in Wyoming. The Department of Interior has an opportunity to offer certainty and stability to these communities, despite the ongoing court battles.
Sincerely,
____________________ ____________________ ____________________
Senator Michael B. Enzi Senator John Barrasso Representative Barbara Cubin
According to a story in the Billings Gazette, Yellowstone Superintendent Suzanne Lewis told some business leaders from Cody that she's been told she has no legal means to resort to an "administrative fiat" to open the park to snowmobiling this winter.
It's somewhat curious that the Wyoming delegation felt it was necessary to write Secretary Kempthorne. Yellowstone officials earlier this month announced they were working on a plan to let recreational snowmobiles and snow coaches in the park this winter and were confident they'd be able to get the deed done.
What's also interesting is that the letter wasn't co-signed by the Montana delegation, whose state arguably does more in snowmobile business through West Yellowstone, the self-proclaimed "snowmobile capital of the world," than Wyoming's gateway communities do.
Comments
Maybe it was just a poorly inferred analogy, but the comparison between a human body's need (requirement, actually) for water and our nation's "need" for oil lacks substance and accuracy. We all understand that evolutional development within the human species has left us composed of approximately 78% water (saline in nature, as were whatever our ancestors were) and we therefore have a definitive need for water-based fluids and to some degree food sources. Without thought processes wandering into the abstract, without regular consumption of water in some form, from whatever the source, the human animal ceases to exist.
Conversely, the national "need" for petroleum is by choice, not by any manner of requirement. The basis for our initial industrial development was the coal-fired and steam generation engines, not any sort of petroleum based product. Petrol is a convenience, not a necessity by any stretch of the imagination. Ours in an insistence thrust upon us by oil merchants, not the "choice of the people", and this is due solely to a lack of options available to the masses. These options exist, and have existed for decades, and have only been refined and improved during the course of the last twenty or so years to become more compatible with current technologies, but have been effectively blocked by the oil lobby, who strive to maintain complete economic control of the American public not for the good of the masses, but solely to further their own fiscal security. We are a Third-World country in terms of our development of alternative energy sources, due to the small mentality of the pathetic oil barons, who have sold out the nation's economic future for immediate profit. The major "needs" supplied by petroleum products all have alternative sources available IMMEDIATELY. Heating supplies are in almost literally endless supply though geothermal sources. Plastics are now the byproducts of soy and mostly corn, with the added bonus of being 100% biodegradable. Additional heating, lighting and some cooling are easily converted into advanced "Next Gen" multi-layered solar cells, transportation into hydrogen (100% pollution free), water and garbage burning engines, again the availability of which is effectively masked by the oil lobby. But alas, since the people of this nation are generally lazy, and believe the first thing they are told, no matter who the source may be, and are prone to complete gullibility in the doomsday scenario if we proceed with alternative energy development, we as a populace act the good little lemmings diving off the cliff simply because we though we saw someone else do it first, and God forbid we think and act independently and show some backbone and an initiative in taking control of our own future.
Please spare me the "you don't realize how long it would take to bring these notions to the masses" logic. That usually comes from a lame position of "we can't start a program due to we're lazy and generally content". If we ever intent to lead again, we have no choice but to begin by taking control of our destiny away from both unreliable Middle Eastern sources and corrupt and contemptible internal energy suppliers. Drill for offshore oil? You're only prolonging the problem. With the BILLIONS that it would take to develop new sources, build platforms and refineries, transport and bring the products to market, you could make great strides into the burgeoning "next gen alt en" developing markets, making our national security independent of world politics.
What a concept, eh? International independence! Something our politicians claim isn't realistic or possible.....
As long as we, as a nation, remain stuck in the ridiculous "either Rep or Dem" mindset, we are destined to remain part of the problem, not the solution. Get fired up, get the lead out of yourself and Washington, and FORCE enacted change NOW, or be content with the economic woes that lie directly in the path of our future.
LH,
Sorry, late getting back to the debate. Work gets in the way of fun once again!
You are certainly entitled to your opinion, which I would defend in any forum on any topic. However, to mince alike words like "Need" and "Requirement" detract from my statement. I could have just as easily used an analogy with the body’s need for "Air" versus "Water", but I imagine you would have went on about how air is comprised of 21% Oxygen , 28% Nitrogen and 1% trace gases. That still does not nullify my point.
Oh, really? What would you choose in place of it? Is it readily available? If there was an alternative available, would the world not embrace it? You mention plastics being made of biodegradable materials, yet most plastics used by you and I today are petroleum based. If you have a better solution, let's hear it.
That's a pretty broad brush you paint the American people with. To claim such is an insult to the populace. I suppose that you do not place yourself in that category, but yet you have no solution to offer either. Sure, many are lazy, but I don not believe they deserve such derision. We lead the world in technological advancements in so many fields that I cannot list them all.
Request for being spared denied. There’s that “Lazy” comment again! I am neither lazy nor content, and wish for alternatives just as passionately as you do. I do, however, have a 20+ year practical background in Mechanical Engineering and Machine Design, mostly in the pharmecutical and Packaging industries. Chances are you have used a product that has been touched by one of my machines. Imagine that!
My point in that context is this: I've got a pretty darn good idea what it really requires to take a napkin sketch of an idea and bring it to reality. Even the most simplistic machine systems take months of R&D and design time to reach the manufacturing stage. Then a "Test & Debug" phase must be implemented to ensure that the design concept is sound. Revisions are always made, and T&D begins anew. In the case of human transportation devices, more attention to detail is required since peoples very lives depend on their safety and reliability.
Case in Point: It took Toyota 4 years of development to take the “Prius” from concept phase to first production vehicle. (1993-1997). Are you going to go on record calling the Japanese lazy as well? American oil companies hold no sway over them either. It took another 10 years to get it to the American market. And guess what? It still uses fossil fuels, and in my opinion, is not the “Brass Ring” that we all hope for.
Don’t you think that the every scientist in the field of transportation and beyond worldwide would love to find “The Ultimate Answer” to this problem? I smell Nobel prize for the person who arrives at the next best solution, as well as unfathomable wealth. How can we account for the fact the no one, American or otherwise, has yet found that solution?
You make it sound far easier than it really is, and you need to realize that.