Yellowstone National Park, our nation's oldest and perhaps her most unique remains in the stranglehold of a long and heated debate. The goals have long tentacles. There may be agendas few realize. Yet they say they speaks for you.
For perspective we must step back to Yellowstone's beginning. Yellowstone National Park was a new experiment on the American landscape. A designated land controlled by the government for public use. What was the plan and purpose?
On February 27, 1872, Mr. Dunnell told the 42nd Congress, "The bill now before Congress has as its object. . .[to] sets it apart as a great national park or pleasure-ground for the benefit and enjoyment of the people. . ."
On March 1, 1872, Congress set it aside saying "[it] is hereby reserved and withdrawn from settlement, occupancy, or sale. . .dedicated and set apart as a public park or pleasuring-ground for the benefit and enjoyment of the people." It allowed for the "erection of buildings for the accommodation of visitors" and "the construction of roads and bridle-paths" It also protected these lands from ‘vandals who. . .will . . .despoil, beyond recovery, these remarkable curiosities. . ."
Note the purpose: ‘pleasuring-ground for the benefit and enjoyment of the people'. Note the restriction: ‘withdrawn from settlement, occupancy, or sale'. Note the freedoms: ‘accommodations for visitors' and ‘construction of roads'. Clearly our forefathers' planned for public use and access within reasonable non-destructive bounds.
The 1916 Organic Act further upheld this ideal requiring the National Park Service to conserve resources and provide for visitor use and enjoyment. Furthermore, this act did not place emphasis on either mandate. However we have started redefining terms.
Two questions have taken the forefront:
Some would have us believe snowmobiles are the destructive forces to which our forefathers referred. While uncontrolled access, at any time and in any form, can destroy, is motorized winter transport endangering Yellowstone National Park? Again, we gain perspective from looking back.
The first three snowmobiles were welcomed in Yellowstone in 1963. By 1973, winter snowmobile numbers had jumped to 26,800. In 1996, 72,000 snowmobiles entering the Park. Then, in 1997, the Fund for Animals sued Yellowstone National Park claiming winter recreation negatively impacted Bison.
A Bjornlie and Garret study concluded in 2001 determined bison were not negatively impacted by motorized winter travel. The Hardy study further revealed non-motorized recreationalists were perceived as a greater threat by wildlife. The Jaffe study revealed only 13 percent of the wildlife showed any visible response to over-snow traffic, and 68 percent of those looked up then resumed their previous activity.
Thus, while the Fund For Animals' concerns are noteworthy, they have proven unfounded. Nonetheless, some still want over-snow traffic, and specifically snowmobiles, banned from the Park. So the focus changed.
Air and sound pollution form the new basis upon which lawsuits are built. Current law opinions stress the need to protect Yellowstone from ‘"significant injury. . .and to [not allow] some winter visitors to spoil the visit for other winter visitors. . .[which would] violate both the letter and the spirit of the governing laws."
Who would not agree with this statement? What indifferent consumer would seek to destroy such a precious asset? What insensitive and selfish sojourner would seek to ‘spoil the visit for other winter visitors'? Surely it is right to uphold the letter and spirit of laws seeking to avert such issues.
However, remember our two questions? Who are the ‘public' (in this case winter visitors)? What are they doing to ‘despoil. . .these remarkable curiosities'?
Again we need some perspective. While snowmobile air pollution is emphasized, we are not told that even newer snowcoaches emit substantially higher emissions than snowmobiles. No one mentions summer Recreational Vehicles (RVs) produce eight times more Nitrous Oxides than all the allowed snowmobiles and snowcoaches combined. Nor do they disclose that snowcoaches and snowmobiles emit less than 6 percent of the total particles discharged annually in the Park.
Yellowstone National Park is our most popular national park. It is enjoyed by 3 million visitors every summer. This results in over 1.5 million cars, trucks, motorcycles, busses, and RVs. Snowmobile traffic represents less than 4 percent of the total vehicular traffic.
Sound pollution is the other factor claimed to be creating ‘significant injury' to the Park. In an effort to address this concern, the National Park Service has set an ‘acceptable' sound level at seventy decibels. This is equivalent to the sound emitted by your household vacuum cleaner.
Furthermore, the Park Service regularly tests major thoroughfares to determine whether current sound levels are remaining below this limit. It is interesting to note that while conservation groups are pushing for complete removal of snowmobiles in favor of snowcoaches, of the 129 times in 2008 the sound level threshold exceeded seventy, 100 incidents were attributed to snowcoaches.
It is also prudent to compare this winter sound limit to summer noise pollution. A passenger sitting in the back of a Greyhound bus is subjected to sound pollution which exceeds eighty decibels. If the inside of a bus exceeds the winter outdoor limit, who would imagine it is quieter outside?
How can they justify their claims? Where is the proof of ‘significant injury'? Why the focus on winter? Why not limit summer access? Maybe we ought to be wondering about the big picture??
Snowmobiles have not been proven to be the ultimate polluting factor in Yellowstone National Park. They are not more stressful to the wildlife. They are no more responsible for despoiling the ‘remarkable curiosities' than any other form of motorized transport in the Park.
Thus the second question comes into view. Who are the ‘public'? What winter visitors are ‘spoil[ing] the visit for other winter visitors'? Who is really creating "Yellowstone's cycle of rancor and instability"? Who actually visits the Park? How do they travel? What is their purpose?
Who visits the Park? How do they travel? Recent National Park Service records reveal 62 percent of the Park's visitors entered via snowmobile. Nine percent rode in a snowcoach. And, while twenty percent of Yellowstone visitors participate in cross country skiing (or snowshoeing) in the Park, only one percent entered on cross country skis.
In fact, in January 2008 USA Today said skiers can feel like "the place . . is all yours". They report that "even on the Upper Terrace Loop, only a stone's throw from the hotel at Mammoth Hot Springs [and the Park's only plowed road], you're not likely to bump into many other skiers on the trail."
Hal Higdon, another reporter and winter ski enthusiast felt snowmobiles and cross country skiers inhabited "different worlds within and around the park. Yellowstone is large enough to encompass both groups that visit in winter. During several hours skiing the Rendezvous Trail [on West Yellowstone's outskirts], I neither saw a snowmobiler, nor was aware of their machines buzzing in the distance."
Obviously the average cross country skier is not feeling threatened or invaded by motorized transport in the Park. However, to see the whole picture one needs to understand how much of the Park is noise pollution free. While only twenty percent of the Park's annual winter visitors even participate in cross country skiing (or snowshoeing), 87.4 percent of the Park provides their desired wilderness-environment experience.
It is also important to remember this small elitist group is not calling for snowcoach removal. Since studies have shown snowcoaches produce more air and noise pollution than snowmobiles, the logical question is, why not? There are two simple answers.
Yellowstone is 3,472 square miles (approximately 54 miles by 63 miles). This is a land mass larger than Rhode Island and Delaware combined. Without snow coaches, nineteen of the twenty percent of cross country skiers are probably not going to ski in the Park. Furthermore, most of the Park's cross country skiers rely on groomed trails. These trails must be groomed by motorized equipment. Obviously some motorized equipment is required for their sport, too.
In light of the facts, one is left scratching their head over Judge Emmet Sullivan's September 2008 decision rejecting snowmobile access because "that many machines [540 per day] would cause too much noise and disturb the Park's wildlife." Have American scientists suddenly become dimwits who cannot conduct and interpret their studies correctly?
Even the latest lawsuit filed by The National Parks Conservation Association, emphasizes the debate's hypocritical nature. NPCA's spokesman, Tim Stevens, said, "We know the wheels of justice turn slowly. Our bottom line is we want to make sure visitors and the park service know what to do next year."
Sounds like they want to make sure we know what they will allow us to do next year. Does this define ‘public park'? Do the twenty percent have the right to dictate what is allowable for the other eighty? Will this elitist group soon define allowable summer access? Do they speak for you?
Return to articles ♦ Visit our home page
5200 Elk Lake Road, Lima, MT 59739
Just 1 Hour From West Yellowstone, Montana
phone: (406) 276-3282 - ♥ - fax: (406) 276-3399
email: Reservations@elklakeresortmontana.com
© 2004 - 2010 --- ElkLakeResortMontana.com --- All Rights Reserved