[at-l] National Parks and Snowmobiles - Not Just Air Pollution!

[Russ E. Boltz" <russboltz@hotmail.com (Russ E. Boltz" <russboltz@hotmail.com)]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
The problems with snowmobiles are not merely air pollution, or the fact tha=
t "snobbish" hikers don't like the sound.

(1) Snowmobiles compact the snow beneath them to a much harder form, and as=
 a result can seriously damage underlying vegetation (unless, of course, th=
e trail is on a road); if you doubt this, ask your nearest winter wheat far=
mer and, when he or she stops cussing, they can probably show you pictures =
of "springtime snowmobile" tracks, i.e. where the growth of their crops has=
 been stunted by the longer thawing time of the compacted snow as well as t=
he weight of repeated machines. This has a major effect even on established=
 trails, which are rarely as wide as snowmobile "trails" become. This assum=
es that snowmobilers stay on established trails, which is problematic: One =
snowmobile going "off trail" does far more damage than a few hikers, yet mo=
st backpackers know that they cause damage by "bushwhacking" and avoid it w=
hen there is an established trail.

(2) Snowmobile noise is devastating to animal life near trails; at even "re=
duced" levels in the 80-90db range (for one machine), the sound drives alre=
ady stressed animal life away from trails, making their foraging even more =
difficult. This is exacerbated by "caravans" of multiple machines. Again, i=
t's worsened by off-trail activities.

(3) The purpose of the National Parks is NOT to permit multiple use for all=
 who want to use it in any way their heart desires. The underlying National=
 Park Act contains its Congressional statement of purpose in 16 U.S.Code Se=
ction 1, as "...to promote and regulate the use of the...national parks...w=
hich purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic object=
s and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in=
 such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoym=
ent of future generations."  The key phrase is "by such means as will leave=
 them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations."  This isn't just=
 "tree hugging" - some of that National Parks contain such critical and fra=
gile ecosytems that even modest risky use can have phenomenal implications.=
  Simply put, walking on established trails, while causing some impairment,=
 causes far less than any other form of use.

(4) It's also wrong to say, "We're taxpayers, so we shouldn't be deprived o=
f the chance to enjoy the National Parks". Leaving aside that restricting/p=
rohibiting snowmobiles doesn't prevent access by less intrusive means (i.e.=
, buy a set of boots or snowshoes and go right ahead!), that argument is ju=
st a silly shibboleth (look it up). There are vast parts of our state and f=
ederal budgets that parts of the public don't get to "use", but in a large =
country and a diverse population, them's the breaks, folks: I live in Michi=
gan, so the Coast Guard helps me enjoy safe boating, but is of minor use to=
 people in Wyoming, where the Bureau of Land Management provides really che=
ap land leases (which fence me OUT) to ranchers.

(5) The availability of an item does not mandate its use where ever the own=
er wishes. This principle applies to snowmobiles just as it does to nuclear=
 weapons.  No one is entitled to go acquire a machine voluntarily, and then=
 complain that the rest of the country doesn't let them use it where they w=
ant. Believers to the contrary seem to fall into the category of "the world=
 owes me a living".  I can't set up targets on Main Street and practice my =
rifle shooting, even though my gun is legal and I pay road taxes.

Sorry, Rusty. Pick somewhere else. There are a lot of other places where yo=
u're welcome, more than you're excluded from. Leave the National Parks be.





See my website at www.mediate.com/russboltz
--
[ Boltz, Russ.vcf of type text/directory deleted ]