You are here

Home

All Recent Comments

How Did The National Park Service Err So Badly On the Yellowstone Winter-Use Plan?

Sep 17th - 12:50pm | Kurt Repanshek

Ted, I would disagree that the groups you cite walk strictly in lockstep. While they are all in the same "lane," some certainly are more strident than the others when it comes to appropriate degrees of environmentalism in general and what's appropriate on public lands.

Sep 17th - 12:30pm | Ted Clayton

Kurt,

Sep 17th - 11:35am | Kurt Repanshek

Ted says: People 'of a certain perspective' - environmentalism - have deluded themselves that only one special mental posture is 'right' for those entering the National Parks, and that all other are offenders.

Sep 17th - 11:13am | MRC

@dapster: sorry, but that is nonsense. To succeed in court, the other side must have violated the law. If you use a lawsuit just as a weapon, you need very deep pockets, because if your claim is unfounded, you will lose the lawsuit and lots of money. Environmental organizations are not known for suing lightly.

Sep 17th - 10:24am | Ted Clayton

Jim Macdonald says:

Sep 17th - 08:42am | dapster

We have to understand that use of the courts should be merely seen as a tactic not a strategy in the overall fight and understand that there is something disingenuous about using the law as a means of protecting places that have no reason to be chained by any national or state law.

Sep 17th - 00:14am | jsmacdonald

Yes, it is dangerous to quote the law. What drives people nuts with snowmobiles is not the law but the incoherence of the policy and the process that brings it about. That leads groups to pursue various strategies to deal with the incoherence. One common strategy is to use the courts, and courts presumably base their decisions in law.

Sep 16th - 21:33pm | Ted Clayton

The most commonly-cited clause from the National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 is:

Federal Judge Blocks Recreational Snowmobiling in Yellowstone National Park

Sep 17th - 12:37pm | Kurt Repanshek

Frank raises an intriguing prospect, that of revising/updating the National Park Service Organic Act of 1916.

Sep 17th - 11:43am | Ted Clayton

Frank C., Road building? Who's talking about road building? Well ... you, mainly. Snowmobiles don't need roads, remember? You consistently caricaturize "access" in ways that are not real, not happening, and not a threat.

Sep 17th - 11:08am | MRC

@dapster: Both snow mobiles and snow coaches are only allowed in Yellowstone NP on roads - or to be precise where roads are under the snow. And coaches have much less impact per passenger.

Sep 17th - 10:25am | Frank N

"I have both a two year old son and a 73-year old father. I simply cannot ask them to make the same treks that I am capable of. Does that mean that they should be excluded from viewing our national treasures simply because of the limitations placed upon them due to their age? I think not."

Sep 17th - 09:42am | jsmacdonald

One big problem I have with snow coaches (and I'm no fan of snowmobiles) is access. Both modes of transportation are expensive and shut out a great many people. The biggest advantage of snowmobiles over snow coaches - as far as I can see - is that the snow coach choice in the park is monopolized, perpetuating the age old government / corporate rule over the park.

Sep 17th - 08:23am | dapster

This thread is getting really good. Many points to ponder written here. Terrorism, attached to any cause, is never the answer. It will only breed hatred for the cause and the people associated with it. It is also immoral, as well as illegal. Reprisals from the opposition will surely ensue if this is allowed to escalate.

Sep 16th - 21:36pm | Rick Smith

Good evening--

Sep 16th - 18:43pm | Ted Clayton

Frank C. summed up his edict ...

Sep 16th - 16:31pm | Kirby Adams

Life sucks and is unfair. Get over it. Well, Frank, I guess that's kinda, sorta what I was saying too. :-) But, expressing it like that usually doesn't endear one to your opinion. Quite the opposite, actually. Like I was saying, we all play different parts in these discussions. -Kirby.....Lansing, MI

Sep 16th - 16:21pm | Kirby Adams

I have both a two year old son and a 73-year old father. I simply cannot ask them to make the same treks that I am capable of. Does that mean that they should be excluded from viewing our national treasures simply because of the limitations placed upon them due to their age? I think not.

Sep 16th - 15:12pm | Random Walker

And when I am old I shall take to the over abundance of roads and nature trails that Our National Parks provide me, all the while holding to heart Our National Parks doctrine of Protection and Preservation for Our Future Generations.

Sep 16th - 13:55pm | Ted Clayton

Kirky Adams, I'll bite. Let's have a quick look at Ed Abbey. Favorite quote:

Sep 16th - 13:54pm | dapster

Belling cats. It's what I do.... Much, likely a majority of the population is incapable of accessing our Natural Wonders, on foot.

Sep 16th - 13:10pm | Kirby Adams

No vehicles should be allowed in any national park. Park all them RVs and cars at the entrance and walk in! You wanna see Old Faithful? Hop on a mule. You're joking. On multiple levels. One certainly hopes.

Sep 16th - 13:09pm | Ted Clayton

dapster belled the cat: "Also, we haven’t even broached the subject of the access for the disabled." Seriously, this is it - the basic reality. Much, likely a majority of the population is incapable of accessing our Natural Wonders, on foot.

Sep 16th - 12:08pm | dapster

Anons I & II,

Sep 16th - 11:48am | jsmacdonald

The car has done one good thing for Yellowstone. Because people travel further and faster over a day, there are far fewer structures and buildings in Yellowstone than there used to be. The theory for awhile has been to horde large crowds of people into fewer areas so that the larger area of the park is protected at the sacrifice for the few.

Sep 16th - 11:27am | Ted Clayton

Anonymous proclaimed: "Park all them RVs and cars at the entrance ... Hop on a mule. You're joking. On multiple levels. One certainly hopes.

Sep 16th - 08:35am | dapster

Anon, My, how you like to make assumptions and read falsehoods into my words!

Sep 16th - 02:33am | MRC

While I applaud the decision as such, I see a huge problem coming up from it. This decision is not about the use of snowmobiles in the first place, it is about sloppy decision making in the NPS and even sloppier documentation of those decisions. Administrations decisions must be documented in such way that (judicial) oversight is possible.

Sep 16th - 00:36am | Ted Clayton

Jim, Ah - I knew that all snowmobiles are guided (which surely goes a long way to tamp down the yee-haw! factor), but not the 4-stroke requirement. I understand that models tuned for smooth riding, durability & economy (rental machines) are similar to automobiles in emissions.

Sep 16th - 00:35am | Anonymous

No vehicles should be allowed in any national park. Park all them RVs and cars at the entrance and walk in! You wanna see Old Faithful? Hop on a mule.

Sep 16th - 00:09am | jsmacdonald

Ted, The current plan calls for snowmobiles to be accompanied by a guide and that they be 4-stroke. So, if that isn't good enough, it's not clear what would satisfy the judge in this case.

Sep 16th - 00:06am | Random Walker

Yellowstone Superintendent Suzanne Lewis, National Park Service Director Mary Bomar and Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne each wholly deserve this finely worded 63-page bitch slap, IMHO. Reads to me like Judge Sullivan did his homework.

Sep 15th - 22:47pm | Ted Clayton

bearguy, Alaska! Do you have a sense how the general Alaska snowmobile community stands on this question? Is it typical or atypical for an Alaskan snowmobiler to oppose their use in Parks?

Sep 15th - 21:51pm | Anonymous

Why do we keep allowing these motorized machines to pollute the environment in all our parks. The parks are not meant for racing etc they are meant to preserve the plants and animals and allow for guarded enjoyment by the public in such a way that the environment or animals are not interfered with.

Sep 15th - 21:32pm | Ted Clayton

There might be some pertinent insight to be gained, by looking into the background & history of Judge Sullivan. There's always been hangin' Judges, and warnin' Judges. From the points Kurt quotes the Judge as listing, the bench is basically 'fixing' the Park's winter use Plan. "You need to do better here, you need to be more specific there."

Sep 15th - 21:13pm | Anonymous

I am not saying that anything should be banned. All I did was point out the difference in the reaction to similar cases in YELL and CAHA. And wonder why the CAHA crew hasn't jumped on the bandwagon to allow snowmobiles in YELL....

Sep 15th - 21:10pm | bearguy

As an Alaskan who has spent time on a snow machine I support this decision. Snowmachines, ORVs, and other such vehicles have no place in parks whose mission is to protect and preserve the scenery and the ecosystems. These recreational activities are not compatible with this directive. There are other public and private lands where these damaging activities can occur.

Sep 15th - 20:57pm | dapster

It's ironic that most of these comments are in favor of keeping snowmobiles out of YELL, yet most of the commentators on CAHA issues want motorized access. Perhaps many of the CAHA people aren't interested in YELL? Or is YELL somehow different than CAHA? If so, is it really our - or anyone's - prerogative to say that one park is more deserving of protection than another?

Sep 15th - 20:55pm | JaeC

I agree with Paul. There has to be other places for people to snowmobile in the winter besides Yellowstone NP. Or any other National Park for that matter. Animals and habitat are already under stress in the winter. Why add more? My hats off to all the people involved in reaching this decision.

Sep 15th - 18:42pm | Anonymous

It's ironic that most of these comments are in favor of keeping snowmobiles out of YELL, yet most of the commentators on CAHA issues want motorized access. Perhaps many of the CAHA people aren't interested in YELL? Or is YELL somehow different than CAHA? If so, is it really our - or anyone's - prerogative to say that one park is more deserving of protection than another?

NPS Retirees Oppose Carrying Guns in National Parks

Sep 17th - 11:48am | Anonymous

As usual, who's the bigger fool? You or the ones your calling "Fool's".

Sep 17th - 08:24am | JB

Just a couple of questions for you Anti-Gun, Anti-Loaded Gun Types. 1) What does a criminal look like? 2) What does a rapist look like? 3) What does a child molestor look like? 4) What does a murderer look like?

Sierra Club Caught Standing Atop Mesa Arch in Canyonlands National Park

Sep 17th - 06:37am | gary

why?? Humans have been out of the natural selection loop for quite a while now...lol

Attendance Shortfalls at Steamtown National Historic Site Prompt Calls for Privatization

Sep 16th - 22:27pm | RoadRanger

A “thank you” to Anonymous for providing us with some real meat in the clarifying memo, and reinforcing how critical it is to follow the money if you want the real answers. Re the Baltimore collection, my point was not to study the origins, but to examine the evolution of the sites over the past 25 years.

Sep 16th - 14:11pm | Anonymous

CLARIFYING RESPONSES to RoadRanger; to Beamis; to ChrisBugsyShallFall:

Sep 16th - 12:00pm | Bugsyshallfall

Beamis is right when he says

What's the Solution For Cape Hatteras National Seashore?

Sep 16th - 11:25am | dapster

Jesse, Welcome to the debate! I thought this one had run it's course.

Sep 16th - 01:51am | Jesse Justice

We are for protecting the wildlife and Habitat, because we are apart of it and want to continue to be a part of it. That is why the ORV groups do beach sweeps,not environmental groups. It is ORV groups offering the reward for vandelized bird closures,not the enviromental groups, they're too busy looking for the next law suit .

A Historian's Take on the National Park Service

Sep 16th - 10:22am | Rob Mutch

Kurt, Thanks for posting this. It was an interesting read. I need to go through P.J.'s back issues of Thunderbear. Rob

House Subcommittee Considers Bill to Relax ORV Rules for Cape Hatteras National Seashore

Sep 15th - 21:30pm | Jeremy

Geezer, I think everyone has had enough "good models" falsehoods, lies and fake science from you people from the darkside. Quote "The consent decree was a valuable first step toward reasonable long-term limitations on ORVs." We have more than eleven thousand people on a petition that would beg to differ with such lies.

The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.