I received this via e-mail... we're not the only ones being targeted and the similarities to Glamis duners and snowmobilers are undeniable:





Vicki

I personally lived in West Yellowstone, which is the west entrance to Yellowstone Park. I've ridden snowmobiles into the park several times during my several years of living in the area and I must say that the arguments for the ban of snowmobiles is bollocks. Snowmobiling in the park is restricted to the trails groomed over the paved roads, there are speed limits, and the animals are seemingly unaffected by the presence of snowmobiles. I have spent lots of time sitting on a snowmobile or stopped in a car while waiting for a herd of bison to cross the road. Up to 30 to 45 minutes at a time while they totally ignore you and take their sweet time. Also the only ways of traveling through the park during the winter is by snowmobile and snowcoach. No automobiles are allowed.

A ban of snowmobiles would devastate the economy of the small towns surrounding the park. These towns are nearly deserted for half of the year. The only times when they bring in any money are during the winter months of Dec, Jan, Feb, June, July, and August. Imagine living in a town of 912 year round residents and having 1/2 of your town's economy taken away.

If you want to talk about habitat devastation, how about the "let it burn" policy of the Yellowstone Fires of 1988? Nearly half of the park burned and the National Park Service would not allow any attempts to put the fires out until it was declared a state of emergency and the Marines from Camp Pendleton were sent in to combat the fires. There were several days when the fire came within 1 mile of our home and we had our car packed ready to evacuate. My point being that the devastation of those fires caused much more damage to Yellowstone Park than decades of snowmobile use.

And finally how could you ban this??


*notice how he is traveling on a trail situated directly above the paved road.

what you can't see in the photo is the noise and pollution from the vehicle. BTW are skis not allowed during the winter? I understand that the park service is offerring access by large snow coach to cut down on unregulated snowmobiling through the park.

Man sure looks like he is on a road in that picture. See the sign there B.S.? But I guess the cars that drive on that same road are in stealth mode and expell no gases. Must only be electric cars that drive on that road .

>:< Leave our land alone! >:<

*sigh*

Vicki

Bush recently signed legislation that allows snowmobiles in Yellowstone but it has a limit on the number allowed on any given day, yet this number that is allowed is higher than the seasonal average for daily use. So, basically, snowmobilers have "won" to a point. They don't have unlimited access, but their access has not been denied. Read this is Sunday's L.A. Times (3-9-2003).

2 stroke motors deposit lots of unburnt fuel into the snow. when the snow melts, the fuel becomes part of the watershed.

How do you know it's a 2 srtoke? Can you PROVE it's a 2 stroke and not a newer 4 stroke? Talk about "noise" pollution!


LIVE FREE OR DIE!

blusky,

do you have any evidence of this damage that two-strokes cause or is this the typical enviro-liar spouted personal opinion as fact?

would you support snowmoble use if only four strokes were allowed or if fuel injection technology advanced to the point that there was no measurable hydorcarbon emissions? in other words, are you looking for any excuse to support a ban and just plain closed minded about it? or at that point would you look for some other excuse?

below is two links to some info on enviro damage by snowmobiles. I read some other links regarding the impacts of 2-strokes on the watershed but I can't find them now.



http://www.hikersforcleanair.org/papers/2cycle.html

http://www.americanlands.org/forestweb/off...ad_vehicles.htm
the more I read these documents, the more I wonder if a lot of the resistance of the enviro community could be overcome by better machines?


not so noisy

not so polluting

I realize that you folks, the users of the machines, have no control over the production specs--they're offered for sale and you buy 'em and ride 'em on public lands or other legal (or illegal, sometimes) places and then get jumped on by the Sierra Club for messing up the environment.

Much of the blame should rest on the agencies whose job it is to regulate usage and impacts of these vehicles on the land!!!!


As far as Glamis, I don't know if the machines could be made to be more friendly to the environment, but the noise level reduction should help. Also, recent moves by ASA and mature duners to control the craziness of some people that delight in damaging the environment can help.

For me, it's not about personalities or life-styles or politics. I would welcome solutions that could accomodate the recreational vehicle user and the environment.

Maybe the machines can be made to have less of an impact on the environment and on other public lands visitors.

then maybe we could all get along!!
(am I dreaming?)

Blusky, this statement RIGHT there PROVES you know nothing about our sport, or related sports. Why not go take a look at any of the snowmobile manufacturers web-sites and tell me what you find. Nearly zero emmision FOUR STROKE SNOW MOBILES>> Retard <<

take another look at the picture. Its obvious hes moving, see the snow roost? What is missing from the pic?? YEA, your claimed damaging Blue smoke/emmisions???

YamahaMama, could yo tell us if that a 2 stroke of 4 stroke sno mo??? Since you said a few years ago, Im going to assume its a 2 stroke,, which proves our point even better! I still dont see any exhaust???

Tell me again how sound at Glamis is affecting anything/anybody???

RoostKing....

BS,show some SCIENTIFIC proof not some granola heads ideas of what they think. Asking the "sierra club" is like asking PETA how they like their steak cooked.

FACTS only,no reteric just facts. guess that wouldnt nearly be as fun would it.

Environmental Effects of ORVs. By Wilshire and Webb,
Springer-Verlag, NY. 1983.

This book is out of print, but you can get it through inter-library loan.

The authors show the steps of how they did their experiments. For
example, to test the hearing of a Kangaroo Rat they did the following:

1. They got 14 rats from the desert.
2. They observed them in captivity for 4 months.
3. They exposed them to a live sidewinder 87 times and observed their
behavior.
4. They found that rats would kick sand at sidewinders (either a
real one or a freeze-dried one) whenever it was detected.
5. They blocked off the rats’ view of the snake, but the
rats could still smell it, but only at close range.
6. They played a tape of the sound of a sidewinder crawling through the sand
and saw the rats kick sand at the loudspeaker.
7. They measured the voltage at which the sound became audible to the rats.
8. They then exposed the rats to tapes of a dune buggy on and off for 500
seconds (eight minutes, twenty seconds), and observed the following:

“(the rats) exposed to dune buggy sounds ran in circles, defecated,
pushed at the openings of their cages, started at each new sequence of recorded sounds, frantically
groomed themselves and performed repeated slides and finally shivered on hind legs below the
loudspeaker, with head lowered. After the sounds were terminated, the rats assumed a
cautious stance with heads raised to about 20 degrees above the substrate. No external or middle ear
damages were found in (any of the) exposed rats” (p198).

After further testing, they found that the rats went partially deaf and did not fully recover their
hearing for 21 days. The scientists went on to conclude:

“Dune buggy sounds of 95dba delivered in a non-continuous duration of 500 sec. seriously
impaired the behavioral hearing of the rats and deprived these animals of one of
their primary dark-adapted predator detection skills. The dune buggy sounds immediately
lowered the fitness of rats by removing their primary ability to detect the approach of predators
in the dark for up to 21 days after their exposures.” (p200)

as you know, most quads and OHVs are only now limited to 96 db with no plans for enforcement in the dunes.

nice try, but flawed. 20 year old data. Wildlife seems to do well consider all the years they got bombed by patton. My guess is those tanks and ordnances are a wee bit more than 95 dbs.

Lets see now on to shredding the aurgument.



They then exposed the rats to tapes of a dune buggy on and off for 500
seconds (eight minutes, twenty seconds), and observed the following:

“(the rats) exposed to dune buggy sounds ran in circles, defecated,
pushed at the openings of their cages, started at each new sequence of recorded sounds, frantically
groomed themselves and performed repeated slides and finally shivered on hind legs below the
loudspeaker, with head lowered. After the sounds were terminated, the rats assumed a
cautious stance with heads raised to about 20 degrees above the substrate. No external or middle ear
damages were found in (any of the) exposed rats” (p198).

After further testing, they found that the rats went partially deaf and did not fully recover their
hearing for 21 days.


8 minutes 20 seconds ??? cmon now. time for class :

lets assume a reasonable high yet safe speed of 60 mph
60 mph = 1 mile per minute
1 mile = 5,280 feet per minute
60 seconds per minute / 5280 feet = 88 feet traveled per second

A car that fast lets say was 16 feet long.

16/88 = .18

So your "rats" are exposed 1/5th of a second not 8min 20 secs.

The "scientific" experiment over exposed the test subjects 2500x more than in a real word situation. You would run arund in circles and $hit yourself if you were exposed to noises 2500 longer and louder than in a real life setting.

Oh we get to the heart of Blues argument



We know them granola heads hate to bath, so they hate to see anybody/anything else bath...

BooooyAAAAA

Looks like SOUND SCIENCE wins again there BLUZER! :whoa:



LIVE FREE OR DIE!

March 9, 2003


Snowmobilers Riding High in Yellowstone
Riders see the end of a plan to ban them from the national park as a win over elitism


SNOWMOBILES

YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK


By Julie Cart, Times Staff Writer


YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK -- They call themselves bubbleheads.

With their bulbous helmets, puffy one-piece snowsuits and molded rubber boots, snowmobilers can resemble Teletubbies on winter vacation.

Astride their machines, they have been variously accused of keeping schoolchildren awake at night, creating a public health hazard and molesting wildlife. Every year, a couple of hundred snowmobile drivers are arrested in the park for trespassing and hooliganism.

But a rule to be adopted this month by the Bush administration will affirm their right to be here. After decades of venomous debate, snowmobilers have won. As they lined up recently at an entrance to America's oldest national park, snowmobilers said they saw the policy as nothing less than a victory for democracy.

"There are places in the world for everyone and this is a national park, here for everyone," said Greg Mathiowetz of Rapid City, S.D. "We have as much right to be here as the cross-country skiers."

Two Kinds of Votes

The issue highlights a fundamental disconnect: Public comment solicited last year by the National Park Service ran 4 to 1 against allowing snowmobiles in Yellowstone. On the other hand, the sport is far more popular than the only other modes of traveling around the park in winter -- in cramped, van-like snow coaches or on skis or snowshoes. Three of 4 winter visitors enter the park at the controls of a snowmobile.

After decades of unfettered use, snowmobiles in Yellowstone were scheduled to be banned by the Clinton administration, but the prohibition to go into effect this winter never did. The Bush administration's reversal of that policy will impose the first-ever cap on the number of snowmobilers that can enter the park on a given day -- although 35% more of the machines will be allowed than the historical daily average.

Even though Park Service studies document environmental damage by snowmobiles, Yellowstone officials said their plan is meant to strike a balance between protecting park resources and allowing access.

"It's been a very controversial and sensitive situation," said Yellowstone Supt. Suzanne Lewis. "The process has been collaborative. I've listened to a lot of folks tell me about their strong feelings on this issue. We will monitor the situation and make any appropriate changes."

New Engines

The plan requires that the majority of machines allowed in the park be powered by four-stroke instead of two-stroke engines. These snowmobiles are somewhat quieter and cleaner. When the machines are massed at a park entrance with engines idling and exhaust billowing, the differences can be difficult to appreciate.

Despite the snowmobiles' required modifications, skiers such as Sarah Michael of Sun Valley, Idaho -- whose husband leads cross-country ski tours in portions of the park not accessible to the machines -- say that even the quieter models emit a keening whine that can be heard deep in the backcountry.

Snowmobilers, including Lee Amaral from Eagle, Idaho, see no reason to accommodate skiers at their expense.

"Cross-country skiing is an elitist sport," Amaral said. "Tell them to take up yoga and get a video to watch it in their living room. The tree huggers' experience is this: They hike in with their Sierra Club tent, down-filled sleeping bag and aluminum snowshoes, and there is no one there but their fellow Earth muffins."

Rumbling through the park on a recent weekend morning, some snowmobilers seemed unfazed by their effect on the surroundings.

"After a day of riding you smell like smoke, it really stinks," agreed Mark Golembeski, who brought his wife and children along on snowmobiles to explore the park. "But I don't see how that's so bad. If you've ever been here in the summer, with all the cars, I don't see how anyone can say snowmobiles are worse."

Yet after more than 10 years and hundreds of studies, scientists and health officials say that the machines' acrid smell, noxious emissions and insistent whine threaten the health of visitors, park employees and wildlife. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, which supported the ban, the emissions from a single snowmobile can equal that of 100 cars. And rangers working entrance stations have been issued hearing protection.

Town Relies on Riders

Nowhere was the new policy welcomed more than in West Yellowstone, Mont., the main staging area for snowmobiles entering the park. During Yellowstone's snowmobile season, which begins in December and continues into March, the town is transformed into a buzzing hive of machines that are free to tool around trails in town.

More than 90% of the town's $2.5-million budget is derived from its resort tax, with snowmobiling tourists paying the lion's share.

And, when it comes to shelling out for souvenirs, dinner and drinks, merchants say it's the snowmobile crowd that spends money, not the parsimonious cross-country skiers. According to a recent survey, tourists visiting Yellowstone on snowmobiles spent about $225 a day in the park's gateway communities.

"Snowmobilers spend every dime in their pocket and save just enough to get them home," said West Yellowstone Mayor Jerry Johnson, who testified on Capitol Hill in opposition to the ban. Like many town officials, Johnson runs a snowmobile-rental business.

Still, not everyone in town is happy to endure the ragged revving of engines that carries on far into the night, or at least until the bars close. The town's schoolchildren were behind a ballot issue a few years ago that called for a curfew on operating snowmobiles. The measure was narrowly defeated.

Les McBirnie, a former city councilman, owns a bicycle and video store. He recalled a recent scene that played out on his doorstep. Two men who had been out drinking crashed their snowmobiles in front of his store. One guy rode off to get help, then came back and accidentally ran over his pal, who was sprawled in the snow.

"The city has catered to the yahoo clientele," McBirnie said, nodding at the machines whizzing past his shop. "I think that the people who are running around here speeding and riding drunk need to understand that they are guests in town. They say, 'I'm spending money here.' Yes, but that does not give them the right to do anything they want."

Unruly Visitors

Park and U.S. Forest Service officials have caught snowmobilers trespassing in wilderness areas of nearby national forests and illegally crossing into the park. Although there are few restrictions on riding in national forests, snowmobilers are allowed only on roads in Yellowstone.

"We know there's a contingent of riders who disagree with the philosophy of wilderness," said Bob Rossman, a former forest supervisor in Shoshone National Forest, along Yellowstone's eastern border. "Their mind-set is that this country has been taken from them. Marked wilderness boundary signs are shot up and run over."

Rossman said the combination of excessive speed and alcohol causes numerous accidents on roads in the park and forest and on state highways.

"Snowmobiling is, to my mind, much more damaging than has been heretofore recognized," he said. "These are fatalities waiting to happen."

Mike Finley, former Yellowstone superintendent and a 32-year Park Service employee, said it takes only a few unruly riders to disturb wildlife.

"For years, I watched bison being harassed up and down the roads," Finley said. "We have films showing bison being stampeded. I saw snowmobiles weaving in and out, causing the bison to kick and stampede. It absolutely offends and stuns the consciousness."

Still, officials say hot-dogging in the park is not what it used to be, notwithstanding a recent drunken demolition derby.

According to a ranger's report of the Jan. 29 incident, five Oregon men left a bar near Old Faithful, fired up their machines and raced 30 miles in a snowstorm to the gate at West Yellowstone. By the time park rangers caught up with them, one driver had blown an engine. Another had plunged into the Firehole River. And, not long after pulling him out, three of his companions had plowed into each other.

The five were charged with a number of offenses, including drunk driving, unsafe vehicle operation, damage to resources, riding illegally at night, failing to register their machines and interference with authorities.

A Bill to Ban

"National parks are not places where anything goes," said U.S. Rep. Rush D. Holt, a New Jersey Democrat who visited Yellowstone recently as part of a congressional contingent on a fact-finding tour. "You can't go hang gliding off El Capitan. You can't put a highway down the middle of the Grand Canyon. There are restrictions."

But the situation in Yellowstone isn't likely to change anytime soon. Despite bipartisan support, legislation introduced in Congress on Thursday to reinstate the snowmobile ban is given little chance of success.

"There's no political will for this in Congress, we know that," said Rep. Joseph M. Hoeffel, a Pennsylvania Democrat who was part of the visiting delegation. "But we can raise hell and we can scream. It's going to take public outrage."

Outrage is pretty tough to come by on the snow-packed roads of Yellowstone, where most riders report that snowmobiles are simply a uniquely fun way to visit the park.

David and Sherry Roberts of South Jordan, Utah, say their children read about the park's wildlife and then use snowmobiles to gain glimpses of bison and elk.

Michael Skirucha, a burly Chicagoan, says that seeing the park on cross-country skis is not an option for him.

"I don't have the ability to ski, so this is my access," he said, as he patted his idling green snowmobile. "They try to make us feel like outlaws. We're not."




Mar 13, 2003


LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Snowmobiles Run Over Public Opinion


"Snowmobilers Riding High in Yellowstone" (March 9) fails to mention the heavy lobbying by the snowmobile industry, which donated large sums of money to the Republicans. Rep. Joseph Hoeffel (D-Pa.) laments that "it's going to take public outrage" to reverse the Bush administration's lifting of the ban on snowmobiles in the park.

Apparently, the fact that public opinion runs 4 to 1 against snowmobiles isn't enough outrage for President Bush. Nor is the opposition of the Environmental Protection Agency (under the hamstrung "leadership" of Christie Whitman). When there's money to be had, Bush has shown himself completely unwilling to listen to majority opinion unless it agrees with his own shortsighted views.

Mike Laskavy

Oak Park

*

As one who has cross-country skied in Yellowstone, I am angry at the Bush administration's reversal of President Clinton's proposals banning snowmobiles in the national park. In a country dominated by the internal-combustion engine, where so many are seemingly surgically attached to their engines and virtual slaves to Big Oil and Big Auto, it is apparently too much to ask (as a vast majority of Americans have) that there be places -- national parks -- that are managed according to a different value system, where the needs of Mother Nature, rather than the needs of man, prevail.

I am angry at arrogant snowmobilers who can't see beyond their own needs and who are limiting my access to a park where natural peace and quiet prevail. But mostly I am angry at the Bush administration, which once again has thrashed democracy as it sells out to big-money interests.

Philippe Vermeyen

Vista

Yada, yada, yada, bla, bla, bla!!! Couldn't have quoted a more GREEN biased paper than the LA Times!

Fact of the matter is Blu, the snowmobilers have the same right to access their public land as the enviros! Like it or not! GO BUSH! FOUR MORE YEARS!!! :mrgreen:


LIVE FREE OR DIE!

Isn't that essentially what is happening to snowmobilers as well? The fact is that snowmobiling in the park is limited to the roads and there is a speed limit by which the snowmobiles must abide. On the other hand cross-country skiing is not restricted to the road ways. So how is the presence of snowmobiles limiting his access to the park? Banning snowmobiles would actually remove on of his options to access the park. It seems to me that he can access the park however he pleases on cross country skis. In fact, snowmobilers must pay an entrance fee into the park while cross-country skiers can just ski into the park without going through the entrance to pay the fee.

But then again I must not know what I'm talking about even though I lived there for several years and have both snowmobiled in the park and cross-country skied in the park!!!! After all, we all know that journalists from LA know more about the situation than someone with first hand experience!!

Michael-One other flaw with the "study"-animals don't stand there for ANY time when there is a machine nearby. They have brains enough to hear/sense it long before we get near them to expose them to any loud noise. NEVER have I seen kangaroo rats or lizards wait standing there in the dunes to get a look at the cool buggies and quads as they come flying by. Nothing like using a real life scenario...
Julie

if i am not mistaken, the supposed "4 to 1" public opinion against allowing snowmobiles was based on mass-mailing and mass e-mailing by greenie groups.

i don't believe a bunch of sierra clubbers making a mouse click on their website to sumbit pre-filled out "public comments" to multiple addresses on multiple issues reflects public opinion.

access groups are attempting to mobilize to fight fire with fire on this but how accurate is having "activists" hold letterwriting contests?

why not?

they paid for the computer and the connection. why shouldn't their opinion count?

For the same reason when you stick your thumb in your ear and go bowling the score doesn't count either.

I really do think that their opinions should count, but they do not accurately represent the whole population. They over shadow the opinion of the whole, because most people don't bother to give their opinion. It's the same in business. If a customer has a bad experience, they are almost always going to tell their friends about their horrible experience and trash talk your company. BUT if someone has a great experience with a business, then they are likely to praise you to their friends only 10% of the time. My point being that groups like the Sierra Club make such a impact, because the majority of others who oppose them do not bother to make their opinions heard and just assume that someone else will take care of it.

Blue, No argument for Michaels analysys...

typical., Your such a loser...

RoostKing...