[at-l] The NPS and AT and Vision

[rickboudrie@hotmail.com (rick boudrie)]

Our governement, which is to say you and me, own huge tracts of lands in the
West.  Only a very small portion of these lands are called National Parks.

Before comming to a conclusion on snowmobiles in Yellowstone, the NPS
conducted numerous studies, reviews of existing research, and (and I dare
say) gave serious thought to the mission of the Parks and what kind of parks
we would leave to the generations that follow.  If you want a window into
this, click here:

http://www.nps.gov/yell/technical/planning/

Of course, we live in a democracy.  The politicians over ruled the
management and vision of career NPS officers.  While not questioning thier
right to do so, I don't think that is a good thing in this case or in
anything but the most unusual circumstances.

I say this because I think the today's NPS career people are more capable of
protecting our heritage.  You don't need to revist Hetch Hetchy to see this.
  Fairly recently, the NPS wanted to close down a large underground lunch
room that was prooven, beyond any doubt, to be contributing to real and
irreparable damage to the ecollgy of Mamouth Cave.  What happend?  Nothing.
The NPS was prohibitted from action because of the imapct on the catering
business and food-handlers jobs, by that states congressional delegation.  I
won't get into Saddleback.

Yellowstone is a special place.  Apart from its beauty, it also was for all
intents and purposes the WORLD's first national park.  It has been a model
for not only our country, but for all countries.  Not repecting the work and
decisions of the NPS employees entrusted to protect this resourse was wrong,
IMO.

Is there an AT connection?  I think so. And I'll introduce it this way.  Who
do we want making the tough decisions regarding the Trail?  The NPS or the
Admistration du Jour?  Ultimately, of course, all agencies must be
responsible to the people, and I do believe that the ultimate authority must
lie with elected officials.  So I don't want to get too theoretical.  I am
just asking about the tough management issues like this.  Like controlling
airspace over the parks.  Like controlling personal water craft in Parks
Like differentiating between Yellowstone mass-transport snoww buggys and
2-man snowmobiles.  Aquiring land.  Or instituting trams and shuttles.  Or
letting fires burn, or not.

Like others on this list, I don't want to ignore that many kinds of people
have the right to enjoy, and consume, public resources.  I just see National
Parks as being a special place, and distinct from other NF and BLM land.  I
see a modern Park service that recognizes that also, and is looking to
protect a vision that I believe will befefit generations upon generation.

I also think its OK to exclude certain activities as being incompatible with
that vision.  I thank God, that others who came before us had the balls to
do just that, without appology.  Our country has vast resources and public
lands, and the thoughtfull NPS directives regarding one small part of those
lands at yellowstone should not have been summarily overturned by the
current administration.  No matter what articles we can come up with on the
difference between a 2-stroke and a 4-stroke engine.

Rick B

(Not to Weary, BJ and other Thoreau-o-files:  E. O. WIlson's latest book
"The future of Life" has a first chapter which is an open lettter to HDT.  I
think you would enjoy it, and your recent posts made it more meaningful for
me. RNR, you should check out page 174, the one line about the Appalachian
Corridor in the book, but a good one.)




_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail