[at-l] For "everyone"

[Phil.Heffington@oc.edu (Phil Heffington)]

I'll stay out of the snowmobile discussion in general, but I do have to agr=
ee that Grey Owl's comment about the parks being "for everyone" is a false =
premise.  The parks would have no reason to be disignated as "parks" or "wi=
lderness" or as anything if they were for everyone.  They are designated fo=
r certain purposes, which naturally limits them to those who use the park f=
or those purposes.

For example, some "wilderness" designated areas have had protests from surr=
ounding ranchers that the areas have been limiting their grazing of cattle =
within the federally owned area.

The question is not whether those areas should be open to "everyone", but t=
o whom should the areas be limited to in order to meet the purposes of the =
park in the first place.  I don't want the AT to be opened to four-wheel dr=
ive utility vehicles, for instance.

The debate on the use of snowmobiles in Yellowstone is a valid one and, ult=
imately, has some bearing on hiking trails, etc., and whether they should b=
e opened for other, more commercially profitable uses.