Toledo Would Rather Rant Than Read

I GUESS THE WHINE IS STRONGER THAN REASON

There are still whiners fighting the “snowmobile wars” of 15 years ago. They certainly seem to be living an uninformed fantasy in Toledo.

dumb.jpgA recent editorial at the ToledoBlade.com website could easily have been written 10 years ago. The same old, and absolutely false – today, phraseology is used. The language is charged with words and phrases that exude ignorance of the current situation. It’s a shame they don’t turn their Pulitzer-Winning brains to the facts of this matter.

I just can’t believe that the good folks of Toledo believe this kind of whining. They can’t all be illiterate. What does the author mean by: “The vehicles erode the air quality in the park, adversely affecting the health of visitors, employees, and wildlife.” – as I’ve noted before, (just search ‘snowmobiling‘ or read the data,) the current fleet of 4-cycle snowmobiles is as clean as the vans, and cleaner than the diesel buses and the Bombardier fleet. Poor Toledo, being fed such pap!

And the author bemoans: ” . . . keep tourist dollars flowing and 720 snowmobiles per day whizzing through Yellowstone.” The only whizzing through Yellowstone is being done by the Park Service’s own 2-cycle snowmobiles – some chasing the speeding Bombardiers. The guided snowmobile groups follow the same speed limits as all vehicles, and do it better than the enclosed vehicles. Or maybe “whizzing” means something else in Toledo.

What does the author mean by: “The noise levels, also unacceptably high, shatter the quiet splendor of the park in winter.” Golly Gee, sister; the buses, coaches and bombardiers are all louder than the current generation of sleds. Poor Toledo, they’ll believe anything. [The report says: “Although on average snowmobiles were audible for more time than snowcoaches, snowcoaches in general had higher sound levels, especially at higher speeds. The reduced sound and audibility in the report is largely explained by fewer snowmobiles in the park, the guided group requirements and the change from two to four-stroke engine technology.”]

What does the author mean by: “Loud snowmobiles that emit harmful exhaust gases into the air should be banned in national parks.” Well, dufus – they have been banned: best read a little bit before your vomit up such tripe.

Does the author really believe: “And another study on the environmental impact of the noise and air pollution associated with snowmobile traffic will undoubtedly yield the same conclusions of prior studies on the subject.” The studies, (obscenely expensive and occasionally redundant, have shown differences as technology and regulations have changed.) Maybe nothing changes in Toledo.

I wonder what the author means by: “But when it comes to conservation, and one of the country’s most magnificent natural wonders, Americans cannot allow Yellowstone to be surrendered to lobbyists and commercial interests.” Does this mean that it should be surrendered to psudo-journalists ranting against a situation that no longer exists? Should we surrender the park to uninformed editorial writers? Where have these folks been for the last ten years – Toledo?

The sad truth is that the grotesque amount of money spent by the NPS, and the public results that are available, have not been read or studied by the whiners or the cheerleaders. This sort of dunderheaded resistance to facts and figures will continue to plague not just Yellowstone but the whole sphere of visitation in the national parks. And, girlfriend, ignorant diatribes like this will not help a thing.

Finally, the author says: ” . . . the administration is prepared to ignore public and scientific opinion and act unilaterally to implement its snowmobile policies.” Poor thing, willing to ignore scientific opinion in favor of their own uniformed view.

Now then, don’t get me wrong, snowmobiles have a long way to go before they are the perfect winter transportation for Yellowstone. The snowmobile industry needs to fully embrace the concept of clean and pleasant transportation. So too does the NPS. The real issue is winter access for all. The current solution fails on numerous counts: cost, intimacy, pollution, and others come to mind. Nothing is perfect in the NPS. But, girlfriend, tilting at windmills is not going to improve matters.

The current proposed policy substitutes expensive access in polluting enclosed vehicles for unlimited access in any vehicle. It’s a step. Is it in the right direction?

But, like they say; ‘If it plays in Peoria Toledo . . .’ — well, we will see.

Advertisements
  • RSS National Parks Traveler

  • RSS VINOGRAPHY

  • RSS Wine Hiker

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • RSS MID CURRENT

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • RSS NOAA HEADLINES

    • Heavy rain and higher elevation snow continue for the Northwest, fire danger continues in Southern California
  • RSS FLYFISHMAGAZINE

  • RSS Fly Fishing Colorado

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • RSS Trout Nut

  • Feeds For You

    Subscribe with Bloglines





    Fair Use Notice

    --- This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.

    --- We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

    --- If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.