When I first started the Traveler back in '05, I never expected some stories about the National Park System to be so controversial.
Who thought the snowmobile issue in Yellowstone National Park would still be slogging on, a decade and more than $10 million since it first arose back in 2000? And would anyone think that some birds and turtles would be such a hot-button topic at Cape Hatteras National Seashore.
There are other examples -- whether to drain Hetch Hetchy at Yosemite National Park, mule rides at Grand Canyon National Park, hunting/culling issues in any number of parks, and even oysters at Point Reyes National Seashore.
No, I figured writing about national parks would be relatively safe, a continuing series of feel-good stories about some of the most gorgeous and interesting (culturally and historically) places in America. After all, units of the National Park System are set aside for the preservation of their resources for today's and tomorrow's generations, and for the public's enjoyment.
But instead it seems there is controversy (not to mention firebrand politics!) lurking in every nook and cranny of the park system. Why do you think that is?
Support Essential Coverage of Essential Places
Comments
Because perceptions of what should be acceptable in a National Parks diverge, and there is a faction that will never be satisfied until the parks have reached a holy level of environmental purity. It's hard to compromise with such people.
And, Zeb, because there is a faction who will never be satisfied until every park has been squeezed dry of every bit of marketable resource. It is hard to compromise with such people, although as we saw a couple of years ago, we CAN vote them out of office.
Rick B:
If you had the position and responsibility for park, non-park land and the citizens of our country without the element of those you characterize would "squeeze dry" the parks, what and how would you attempt to implement given you would have non of the perks and exceptions to rules and laws you would implement? Given the extreme element(s) of todays discussions with, apparently, little willingness (yet) to view the issues from a larger picture to solve critical and increasingly dire results, I'm wondering how you and others would respond to the question.
There is controversy because people love the parks and everyone has his/her own vision for what the parks should be. I, for one, don't want anything ugly or industrial encroaching on park land, no matter how politically correct the landscape scar. I see the possibility of industrial solar farms and wind farms as a new threat to what is now open, pristine desert landscape. So there are even competing interests among those who claim to be environmentalists.
Re: The High Sierra Camps, they did not predate the establishment of Yosemite. They were put up in the early part of the last century after Yosemite was a national park. And yes, they should stay. They are wonderful.
Anonymous at 5:49am. I have no idea what you're talking about. Try asking me your hypothetical again with correct spelling and sentence structure so I can understand what you're asking. I don't really care much for ridiculous hypotheticals, but we'll see.
Sorry Rick, if you can't get the idea the English Major critic in you is overwhelming other qualities that could be productive. I have the same issue with some that get great mileage out of a Harvard degree so don't feel bad :). Rock on Parks (with reason).
Rick B., on one hand you have enviro fanatics who basically want to kick all humans out of the park, and the other, you have industries that would love to extract every single resource out the land. I'm somewhere in the middle, and I simply would like to ride my bike offroad.
I was recently in Canyonlands National Park. I was standing at one of the overlooks in the Islands in the Sky district enjoying the silence. Suddenly, I heard the roar of motorcycles and saw a pack of them riding the White Rim Road. Noise carries in the clear desert air. While they were no doubt having a fine time on their motorcycles, they were ruining my park experience. So there's 'controversy' because of the park service trying to compromise with different types of park goers.
The parks cannot be all things to all people, but I do think that like the noise of the snowmobiles in Yellowstone, the NPS needs to protect the noise disruption in other parks as well.