Keith Fellbaum I was the environmental engineer on the Yellowstone park staff when the decision was made to allow snowmobiles in the park nearly 30 years ago. The resource impact issues that are now being discussed were all considered then. It was known that snowmobiles were noisy and they had internal combustion engines with exhaust. Compared with the automobile used by the summer visitor, these impacts were not significant. The exhaustive studies mentioned in your March 7 editorial have not proved that snowmobiles have a significant impact on park resources. After 30 years of snowmobile use, the roadsides are not covered with dead wildlife and dying vegetation. The program has been proved a success, not a failure. The editorial makes mention of the National Park Service-legislated responsibility to preserve the park resource, but you fail to mention that the same legislation requires that the Park Service provide for the public enjoyment of those resources. The legislation does not make enjoyment subordinate to preservation. It is the National Park Service's responsibility to provide visitors with a high-quality experience and preserve resources. The editorial seems to take the position that Clinton administration decisions were correct and Bush administration decisions are wrong. Park resource management decisions should be based on applied science, not political science. It would be naive to think that if snowmobile use can be limited or prohibited based on hydrocarbons' exhaust, that automobiles would not be next. The environmental groups have members who consider the Yellowstone road system to be a gigantic resource management mistake. |