By Laura Scott, Kansas City Star Editorial Page columnist
A federal judge last week silenced a plan to allow 540 snowmobiles to roar through Yellowstone and Grand Teton national parks every day this winter.
It was an appropriate, and welcome, rejection, especially for those who believe the parks and the wildlife need protection from the noise and pollution caused by the machines.
But you can bet the Bush administration is figuring out a way to get the snowmobiles back in the park. That’s what it has been doing for the better part of its two terms, after throwing out a Clinton-era decision to phase out the snowmobiles.
Studies consistently show the snowmobiles dirty the air, drive away the wildlife and ruin other visitors’ enjoyment of the winter wonderland. But the Bush administration continues to carry water for the snowmobile industry. Even overwhelming public opinion against the snowmobiles doesn’t change the mindset.
There’s no doubt that many people enjoy snowmobiling, and possibly a limited number in the national park would be acceptable.
But the Interior Department’s proposals have been outrageous. The latest would have allowed more than 500 snowmobiles a day, far greater than the average daily count of 290 snowmobilers in 2006.
The fact that park rangers sometimes have had to wear gas masks to protect their lungs further demonstrates that the pollution in these majestic parks just isn’t worth it.
As federal judge Emmet Sullivan in Washington, D.C., remarked in his recent ruling, the National Park Service’s own data say the plan goes against the park service’s mission of protecting park resources. The plan, he said, “will increase air pollution, exceed the use levels recommended by NPS biologists to protect wildlife, and cause major adverse impacts to the natural soundscape in Yellowstone.”
The controversy over the snowmobiles is only one example of what this administration has been all about when it comes to America’s natural treasures.
It supports entities whose activities damage the environment, rather than those who are trying to preserve it.
And having failed to gain much progress in sacrificing environmental regulation in nearly eight years of control of the White House, the administration is making a last-minute push on several fronts to get some things done.
A prime example is the move to take wildlife experts out of decisions about protecting animals under the Endangered Species Act.
Government agencies could make the decisions on whether a species would be threatened or endangered without consulting the scientists who are best able to evaluate these things.
Scientific wisdom helped to save species such as the grizzly bear and the bald eagle.
The attempt to secure a legacy is not unusual for an administration, but this one doesn’t seem to mind that its legacy would be a poke in the eye to a public that favors protections for wildlife.
The public is a little distracted now, trying to balance personal economic problems in a financial world that every day has bad news.
At such times, people desperately want their elected officials to fix the problems, and protectinon of the environment and nature may become less of a concern, at least temporarily.
Look at offshore drilling as an example of an idea that has gained greater public acceptance because of high fuel prices.
No, this column isn’t about that. But in these final days of one of the most anti-environment administrations, people who love this country’s great natural treasures need to stay alert.
Last-minute moves that could harm some of the best of America could sneak in under the radar.
To reach Laura Scott, assistant editorial page editor, call 816-234-4452 or send e-mail to .
Delicious
Digg
You could probably hire
two decent reporters for what you pay this affirmative action baby. Time to get serious. Either publish a real newspaper and send the duds out to pasture, or go (thankfully) out of business.
Mainstream_Media becomes expert in yet another field
I suppose that since your unbeatable, Republican-battling Original Mavericks are sinking like gutshot muskrats into a mill-pond, you have to find something else to whine about. Defending the right of snowmobilers to crap up a national park is as good as anything, so, go ahead, little Mainstream_Media, make mudpies, but wash up before you come in for graham crackers and milk.
Call (202) 456-1414
Ask for "Temporary"
Lots of inaccuracies in your story
First of all an interim plan was in place for three years that allowed 720 sleds per day in Yellowstone and the new plan called for 540 sleds per day which is a REDUCTION in then number allowed per day. You can't compare an average to a maximum. They aren't the same. You can't max the number out everyday of the season due to weather and time of the year for people to spend their hard earned vacation time.
Second is the snowmobiles banned by the Clinton administration have always been banned and have never been able to return to Yellowstone so without the 2 stroke snowmobiles, the gas masks have also disappeared. They were mainly used for publicity because if you ever sat there and watched they didn't use the gas mask unless the media was there to take pictures. Since the 2 stroke oil is gone though, the masks are no longer needed. The current snowmobiles entering the park use automotive engines and must meet strict noise and emissions standards.
I don't think you could pass a blindfold test if an Arctic Cat snowmobile is running a 3 cylinder Suzuki engine or if a small Suzuki car is running the 3 cylinder engine. Afterall it is the same engine and while you say 540 snowmobiles is too many daily you don't seem to have an issue with over TEN THOUSAND unregulated automobiles traveling the SAME roads daily.
Finally the judge's ruling also eliminates the use of snowcoaches in Yellowstone and you don't hear any environmentalist who wanted the snowcoaches only even standing up wanting them back in the park. Bottom-line is the park would not be the same and families wouldn't have the ability to see the beauty of the park like Old Faithful because it is 30 miles one way or 60 miles round trip which is too far to walk or ski.
You say Bush is bad for the environment when in fact it was a very responsible plan and there are groups out there wanting to shut it down so nobody can even see the beauty of Yellowstone.