source: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/17/politics/17PARK.html

WASHINGTON, Dec. 16 — On the eve of the winter snowmobile season in Yellowstone National Park, a federal district judge on Tuesday evening struck down the Bush administration's regulations permitting more than 950 snowmobiles a day in the park.

The judge, Emmet G. Sullivan, said the Clinton administration's decision to phase out snowmobile use in that sweeping landscape of canyons, geysers and jagged horizons had been arbitrarily reversed.

The ruling, while not unexpected, throws a new element of confusion into an annual ritual of snowmobiles converging at the park's four gates for the opening day of winter park touring.

With the latest rule invalidated, an earlier regulation holding the maximum number of machines to 493 in Yellowstone and 50 in nearby Grand Teton National Park and the road connecting the two goes into effect, a park spokeswoman said.

Next winter, she said, a full ban goes into effect if Judge Sullivan's ruling stands.

The ruling bristled with sharp characterizations of the Bush administration's actions.

"The gap between the decision made in 2001, and the decision made in 2003 is stark," Judge Sullivan wrote. "In 2001, the rule-making process culminated in a finding that snowmobiling so adversely impacted the wildlife and resources of the parks that all snowmobile use must be halted."

Judge Sullivan continued, "A scant three years later, the rule-making process culminated in the conclusion that nearly 1,000 snowmobiles will be allowed to enter the park each day."

The ruling included a footnote saying that "there is evidence in the record that there isn't an explanation for this change," and that the revised environmental impact statement "was completely politically driven and result oriented."

Judge Sullivan sent the relevant National Park Service decisions back for reconsideration.

Interior Secretary Gale A. Norton reacted to the judge's ruling by defending the Bush administration's decision, saying in a prepared statement that improvements in snowmobile technology and careful limitations had balanced the need for public enjoyment with that of resource conservation.

"The added Park Service restrictions of best-available technology and allowing a limited number of snowmobiles is a responsible approach and avoids a complete ban," Ms. Norton said.

The ruling was embraced by the environmental groups that sued to overturn the Bush administration snowmobile rule. The groups wanted to retain the snowmobile ban issued in 2000, which would have gone into effect over three years, with the final ban being instituted this winter.

"Yellowstone is where our country first said, `This is what our national parks mean to us.' " said Denis P. Galvin, a former deputy director of the National Park Service, in a statement released in collaboration with the Greater Yellowstone Coalition, which, along with the Fund for Animals, appealed the ruling. "This ruling reaffirms that fundamental purpose."

But for men like Bill Howell of West Yellowstone, a co-owner of Yellowstone Arctic Cats and for three decades a snowmobiler and tour guide, the ruling was simply another blow to the tourist business that sustains the small town.

Speaking of the local economy, he said, "For the last few years it's been a downward spiral, because of this issue." He agreed that the moribund national economy might be part of the problem, but then said, "The majority of it, I'm positive, is because of confusion over whether the park is open or closed."

Six of the more than 50 motels in the area, close to the most-used Yellowstone entrance, went out of business in the past year, he said.

The federal lawyers defending the reversal of the snowmobile ban had urged Judge Sullivan to delay action until a final rule was issued. He agreed, and the government issued the rule on Thursday, six days before the start of the winter season. Judge Sullivan reacted testily on Monday when a lawyer for the Snowmobile Association suggested that it was unfair to act so close to the start of business for the snowmobile-dependent towns around the park.

The Interior Department in 2000 went ahead with the unusual general ban on snowmobiles, partly out of concern about the health of park rangers who had to wear gas masks to alleviate the snowmobile exhaust. There was also concern about the studies that showed the accommodations made for snowmobilers hurt Yellowstone wildlife.

One study showed that in the wake of the grooming of 180 miles of park roads to accommodate snowmobilers, the distribution of bison in the park "changed drastically" apparently as they chose to use the easily traversed paths rather than other routes that took them through deep snow.

However, the easily traversed paths also made it easier for them to reach the park's edges and stray onto nearby ranches.

__________________
...Tracy

'00 ML320 "Casper"
'92 400E "Stella"

How the heck did they arrive at "493"? Not 490, or 500. Must have taken a 2 year study to arrive at that exact number.

__________________
past MB rides:
'68 220D
'68 220D(another one)
'67 230
'84 SD
Current rides:
'06 Lexus RX330
'93 Ford F-250
'96 Corvette
'99 Polaris 700 RMK sled
2011 Polaris Assault
'86 Yamaha TT350(good 'ol thumper)

But that was only the first study! There was another one....

__________________
...Tracy

'00 ML320 "Casper"
'92 400E "Stella"

A lot of this problem would never have surfaced if 4 strokes had made their debut 10 years ago. I understand the smoke from the 2 strokes makes it pretty bad at the entrance to the park and the 4 strokes would have cleared the air somewhat. Low noise and clean air go a long way toward allowing people to enjoy their hobbys. Why it has taken the manufactures so long to change technologies is a puzzle when I could see this coming a long time ago.

__________________
95 SL500 Smoke Silver, Parchment 64K
07 E350 4matic Station Wagon White 34K
02 E320 4Matic Silver/grey 80K
05 F150 Silver 44K

The pollution is half the problem. The other half is the damage to the area itself and the local animals in the area. Personally I look foreword to the ban of snowmobiles in the park. The entire point of the park was to set aside and preserve a wilderness area. Snowmobiles have greater access than do automobiles. While fun, they all but eliminate the appeal of getting into the wilderness.

__________________
...Tracy

'00 ML320 "Casper"
'92 400E "Stella"

I don't see a problem with the pollution aspects - how many gallons of fuel do cars burn a year inside Yellowstone? I'd bet it's a lot more. The problem is the noise, which I agree could have been solved. Unfortunately they missed their opportunity to solve it and now they'll get it solved for them. And such is government...

__________________
1982 Mercedes-Benz 300CD
1982 Mercedes-Benz 240D - stick

I got involved with this same situation except that it involved Waverunners. Our vacation spot on the Gulf of Mexico has changed from a quite little village with sparsely populated beaches to a tourist trap with loud stinking jet skies everywhere, operated by careless kids out for a thrill. Our group approached the city government and the chamber of commerce and were told that banning them would "infringe on someone's rights". As a consolation though, we were assured that in a few years the two cycles would phase out and the four cycles would take over.
I feel much better knowing that I will be killed by a quieter, cleaner smelling water rocket piloted by a punk trying to impress his girlfriend.

I have one of those pesky "Personal watercrafts"(what a stupid name they gave them ) I get very irratated at the idiots that ruin it for those of us that use them responsably(sp?). And I am glad they are going to 4-stroke as well. My 2-stroke is a lot louder than it should be.
When we bought it back in '96, all my frineds said "No sense buying one of those. They'll just be banned in a couple years anyway." But they are licensed as a "boat", and as such, the laws require that they be allowed on any public body of water. Well, Washington state is still finding ways to ban them in certain areas, because of the idiots that don't have sense enough to stay away from the beaches and other boats. All the water we have here, there's no reason to hang around areas that are just going to piss people off!
So, I suppose it's the same for snow mobiler riders. There always has to be a few idiots that don't follow the rules.

__________________
past MB rides:
'68 220D
'68 220D(another one)
'67 230
'84 SD
Current rides:
'06 Lexus RX330
'93 Ford F-250
'96 Corvette
'99 Polaris 700 RMK sled
2011 Polaris Assault
'86 Yamaha TT350(good 'ol thumper)

True Tracy but some people don't have the physical ability to enjoy the wilderness via human power, I do think they should limit the snowmobiles to 4 stroke, strictly enfoce trail rules and tax the hell out of them to pay for the enforcment and trail making. I used to think that ATV's were a menace to the wilderness before my neck injury eliminated my ability to mountain bike.

An interesting point. Is there a obligation to provide motorized access to disabled folks in National Parks in snow bound areas? Motorized is the operative word. Or by a more traditional criteria, is there an obligation to provide access for disabled folks in National Parks? Everyone knows that there is an obligation to provide disabled access to degrees, but as far as I’ve seen it, being disabled gets you front row parking, and sometimes specialized parking, and also gets you some ramps and wider toilet stalls, but that’s the extent. And even if it were a mandate, do you think Yellowstone would see 900 to 1,800 disabled folks a day?

The second point is to what extent convenience is permitted at the destruction of a designated wilderness area. Obviously, everywhere outside of wildeness areas convenience rules....

__________________
...Tracy

'00 ML320 "Casper"
'92 400E "Stella"

I think it is a good idea. We are losing "true" wilderness and what is pristine and ecologically special should be preserved for that reason. When it comes to Motorbikes, snowmobiles, or 4X4's, there are miles of logging roads and back country trails to boot around in. What is pristine wilderness, leave it alone and preserve it. Properly manage the rest for all interests. I do agree with rickg that it is usually a few "bad apples" that spoil the bunch. Have a great holiday everyone!

Shaun

__________________
1992 Pearl Black 500E (08/91) SOLD
1997 White C36 AMG (T-Boned by Chevy truck)
2003 Silver C32 AMG (lease due, traded up)
2002 Pontiac Montana VisionSOLD
2007 Volvo XC90 3.2
2005 E55 AMG (newest ride)

I know it's tough to please everyone, but we have a local park that is damaged due to heavy mountain bike use and regular tax payers foot the bill. What do you think should be done?

Sorry Lebenz, but we will be on the exact opposite sides of that judgement. The entire controversy is severely overstated. I've personally been there. The problems were sickeningly overstated, and the anti access crowds even resorted to outright fraud to push for that closure. It is not up to a relative handful of individuals to set laws via the court system. The reality is that four stroke powered snowmobiles ARE a reality, and WERE to be used in the park (they actually already were being put to use). The fact that the anti access groups screamed so virulently and continued to sue their way to closure only proves that they are not and never were interested in doing what is best for all, AND for Yellowstone. All people like myself can do now is hope that it goes to the next level in the court system, and that this moron judges ruling gets overturned. The closure of Yellowstone to snowmobiles sets up the precident for the eventual closure of Yellowstone. Have doubts? The Bluewater Network and the Fund for Animals both tried to sue for total park closure during the winter last January. Their next target will be automobiles. This judge directly assaulted our rights to enjoy Yellowstone in winter. It's unfortunate that you didn't notice this.

Howdy All,
First!¡ The park system was NOT set up as a Wilderness. That is another designation. They were set up so people could go to them and enjoy and preserve them. There are Wilderness areas in the parks where no machines are allowed.
Next!¡ We have NOT been losing Wilderness areas. We have been gaining them.In fact there have been areas that have been designated Wilderness study areas (WSA) with man made objects in them.
I'm still trying to figure out how you destroy snow
As far as taxing snowmobiles to pay for grooming trails. That is what the entrance fee is for. They don't tax hikers, horseback riders, fisherman and other visiters so they can maintain all the facilities at the park. There have been some thoughts of user fees.

__________________
Frank X. Morris
17 Kia Niro
08 Jeep Wrangler 4 door unlimited

How about conveyor belts on which we can ride all over the parks, all year? Young, old, one-legged, who cares? Just plop the old geezers on the sliding beltway and pick'em up on the other end.

Conveyor belt should be heated, too. Don't want our well-paded, insulated bums getting chilly, do we?

And aid stations every so often would be of special importance once we get the non-ambulatory on the old sliding carpet. "Depends" disposal baskets, too.

Liitle slots cut in the conveyor fabric to grip wheelchairs and crutches. Also pegleg holes for the piratically inclined (arrrrhhh).

This would eliminate all those noisy motor vehicles and that irritating "shoosh" noise of cross-country skiers.

Need emergency helipads, too.

Botnst