[at-l] Cheney Lackey vs. Nat'l. Parks (from LA Times)

[jbullar1 at twcny.rr.com (Jim Bullard)]

How about "Mr. Hoffman's rewrite would open up nearly every park in the 
nation to off-road vehicles, snowmobiles and Jet Skis. According to his 
revision, the use of such vehicles would become one of the parks' 
purposes." Or do you think that sharing the trail with ATVs, dirt bikes, 
etc. would somehow enhance your hiking experience?

Or this "He also envisions a much wider range of commercial activity within 
the parks." Maybe shelters could be converted to combination hostels/hiker 
convenience stores to generate income for the Park. You wouldn't have to 
carry as much.

This idea is straight out of the school of thought that says land/resource 
use should be determined by a measure of its "highest use", a euphemism for 
"most profitable". Unfortunately what is most profitable today is not 
necessarily good for the state of things tomorrow.

At 08:50 AM 8/29/2005 -0400, Kurt Cedergren wrote:
>Specifically, how will the "proposed rule changes" degrade the AT experience
>in Shenandoah NP & Great Smokies NP?
>
>Onestep
>
>On 8/28/05, william fitzpatrick <jestbill@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Today's liberals are howling in the wilderness
> >
> > Is this the same guy who said that changes to the rules in national parks
> > was not relevant to the AT?