Environmental Politics I

Kirk, this issue, I'm afraid, is a canary in a coal mine for our national park service. It reflects the undercurrent of the current administration and it's subconscious support of all things business.
Let face it, snowbike were wide open during Reagan-bush, cut back then banned during
Clinton, brought back and now all at record numbers during W. Bush. This undoubtedly
points to many other shifts in policy and practice that will change our national wild spaces.
And, in my opinion, it sucks.
Now, the untold story, based on a conversation I had two years ago with a double tour ranger at Yellowstone: the real driving force behind the snowmobile movement is the park contractors who benefit from winter guests at the parks lodges and concessions. The numbers of winter visitor drops drastically when no snowmobiles are allowed, mainly for reasons of transportation. Even though there are snow cats that bring people in to the park in the winter, many rooms are vacant. With the snowmobile crowd comes stops at the hotels and beds filled. So, Xterra, who has the Yellowstone contact right now, would hate to loose that 'guest service' that snowmobiles provide. And they quietly support the poor independent snowmobile operators outside the park in their effort to save their 'only means of income', probably by lobbying at the highest levels.
By the way, all those poor operators also have other incomes like fishing guides, wildlife tours, and a whole host of other tourist trappings outside the park.
That being noted, I believe there is enough land for combined usage and the State of Nevada proves it. We don't need snowmobiles in Yellowstone Park, there are millions of acres of public land in Wyoming and Idaho with arguably better resources (for snowmobiling) than the park. The only problem is, there are not millions of paying customers waiting to sign up for a ride outside the Park. So, what the real issue is, of course, is not the use of the park, but the access to the visitor market. Just follow the money. And as usual with any American debate we are forced to endure the sound bite sharp ends of 'loss of only livelihood' vs 'disturbing the gentle
nature of our National Park'. Neither is faithful.
I believe in local input for land policy, but it must be uncontaminated local opinion and not be influenced by outside business interests. Honestly, I would support whatever decision the local park ranger made for the use of the park as long as it was not biased by politics.
Shawn