Six conservation groups are condemning the National Park Service's decision regarding snowmobiles in Yellowstone National Park, saying it goes against the core values of the national park system. To right that wrong, the groups said they would seek judicial relief.
In a joint press release, The Wilderness Society, National Parks Conservation Association, Greater Yellowstone Coalition, Natural Resources Defense Council, Winter Wildlands Alliance, and the Sierra Club said the decision to allow as many as 540 snowmobiles a day into Yellowstone goes against the Park Service's own scientific studies and recommendations and will lead to "noise, dirtier air and frequent disturbance of wildlife."
"That choice ignores the National Park Service’s overarching mandate to give highest priority to conservation of national park resources," the organizations said, adding that they hoped Congress would exercise its oversight authority over the Park Service.
“The past four seasons have shown that Yellowstone’s winter visitors are increasingly embracing modern snow coaches and the health of the park has improved because of it,” said Amy McNamara of the Greater
Yellowstone Coalition. “The National Park Service’s decision makes a U-turn on that progress and will lead to unacceptable impacts in our first national park.”
In their release the groups noted that the Park Service disclosed in a study accompanying its decision that allowing 540 snowmobiles into Yellowstone each day will dramatically expand-to 63 square miles-the portion of the park where visitors can expect to hear snowmobile noise during more than half of the visiting day. That would be a three-fold increase from the current portion of the park where noise intrudes on the visitor’s experience during at least half the day.
The groups also noted that in its Final Environmental Impact Study accompanying its decision, the Park Service notes that Congress established the National Park Service in 1916 in part due to a recognition that the American people “wanted places to go that were undisturbed and natural and which offered a retreat from the rigors and stresses of everyday life.”
“National Parks are supposed to receive the highest level of resource protection for the benefit of wildlife and future generations of visitors. The Park Service’s plan undermines this conservation commitment to the American public in its National Park System. This decision would set a dangerous and unacceptable precedent for the entire National Park System and that is why we will continue to work for a better decision,” said the NPCA's Tim Stevens.
Comments
Man, FRank...that's heavy man!
You are so gonna live a short life worryin about all that toulene, benzene, napthalene...your worryin about all that stuff is probably more hazardous to your health than all that stuff!
I say just live it up man, cause life is wayyyy too short! Even if ya live to be 80, it's still too short! Besides all that stuff ya mentioned is natural anyway, since it does come from the earth!
Now I'll go have a beer and watch some football.
At a time when it seems like we are trying too fill every available piece of land with another strip mall or garbage sub-division.Can there not be places where we are not intruding with our noisy engines,noxious fumes and pollution.
Hey Anon...yes there are places...millions of acres of designated wilderness when the sleds can't go.
Besides all that stuff ya mentioned is natural anyway, since it does come from the earth
Extremely incorrect sir. Toulene, benzene, napthalene, trimethylbenzene and MTBE are all products of organic chemistry, not compounds that occur naturally in the earth. Toulene (the active ingredient in model airplane glues of the 70's) is so user friendly that it was forced from the marketplace due to it's unnerving ability to rearrange your central nervous system. All too many teenagers died from inhalation ("huffing") and countless hundred suffered irreversible brain, nervous system and kidney damage. It also plays hell with your DNA, initializing what are known as frame-shift mutations, which to keep this on a user-friendly level, causes some proteins to be made incorrectly, others not at all, which leads to a whole host of issues. Benzene, TMB and MTBE are known carcinogens. Not hypothetical or theoretical, but KNOWN, PROVEN carcinogens. Even worse, these substances can be absorped through both soft tissues (e.g. eyes, nose and mouth) OR directly through the most protective barrier you possess, your skin. Not the type of stuff I'd care to leave laying around the environment for just any passers-by to contact.
Enjoy your ethanol cocktail with the ballgame.
In case you're interested......
Lone Hiker
Ph.D. Biotechnology, Biochemistry / Cellular Biology
Lone Hiker, your absolutely right it's called dermal exposure: skin, eyes, nose and mouth. Maybe in time, Yellowstone will qualify as a toxic dump after the snowmobile fiasco is over.
Excuse my not completing the story. Other issues needed more immediate attention.
As for napthalene, you might be more familiar with this compound as the active ingredient in moth balls. It's what makes moth balls smell like moth balls. The simple explanation as to why it is an effective moth barrier is that moths recognize a toxic substance when they smell one. We obviously aren't as intellectually evolved as the common moth. Most people aren't even bright enough to handle this stuff with gloves, or even wash their hands after handling the product. It too is easily ingested straight through your skin, and God forbid you itch your eyes, pick your nose or suck your thumb prior to washing your hands after contact with this junk.
And for what it's worth, I believe the proper spelling is toluene (phonetically pronounced towel-u-ene), but it's not worth nit-picking over. Either way you spell it, it comes out S-C-R-E-W-E-D. It's too damn bad that certain people develop a liking for the odors of certain organic by-products like gasoline, kerosine, toluene, lighter fluids, carbochlor (dry cleaning solution) and their ilk. They're all HIGHLY corrosive to your internal organs via a process known as oxidation. You may have heard about it. It's currently all the rage in the home cleaning industry, claiming the ability to remove any stain from any material. Which for the most part, it can. But highly oxidative substances such as these organics will remove more than you bargained for when mishandled.
I wonder how our grandparents lived so long (into their 90s) without the EPA and FDA around to cry that the sky is falling? They smoked, drank, ate lotsa fatty food....
...and were around a LOT of chemicals! I think Ziggy is right, you huggies WORRY yourselves to death.
Anon - I hate to tell you this, but only one of my four grandparents lived that long. The one grandfather who smoked (none of the rest smoked or drank) died in his early 60's.
You know why my other grandpa lived so long? Because his body was in much better shape. He did farm work most of his life, spent much time outdoors and got PLENTY of exercise - as a way of life (he called it work, not exercise). Ironically, he had a much harder life than me, relatively speaking, but was much healthier than me overall, because he wasn't exposed to some of the things I've been exposed to.
Worry? No. I don't worry daily about the chemicals that people have mentioned. Frankly, I think - to some extent - they are unavoidable, because Americans rage against changing their so-called cushy lifestyles. But I do try to watch how I live. And I agree with Lone Hiker.
Jen