Lawsuits to BAN: Snowmobiles, ATVs, JetSkis, etc

[Melensdad]

Thought some of you folks would find this interesting and might like to chat about it.

Here is a link to the Bluewater Network website, it is fascinating reading.

What I find particularly interesting is that they often seem to cite illegal activity as a justification to outlaw legal and regulated activity that they do not like. This is very similar to the tactics the anti-gun crowd uses. Someone breaks a law so therefore they need to outlaw all use of that object. They clearly are out to ban some activities and state so openly. Like I said, it is fascinating reading. Below are just 3 of their projects. The link above is to their home page, these article below are just a very SMALL sample of what they believe.




Snowmobiles: The Snow Can't Hide the Wreckage

From Alaska's Denali National Park and Preserve to the flagship Yellowstone National Park, our forests and parks protect and preserve some our most untamed and beautiful landmarks. Indeed, these places embody American ideals of wildness and originality.
But the trail of pollution and destruction left by snowmobiles threatens this heritage. Approximately 250,000 snowmobiles run roughshod though the Park System each year. More than 60,000 snowmobiles zoom through Yellowstone National Park alone.

Most snowmobiles are powered by two-stroke engines which dump 25-30 percent of their fuel unburned out the tailpipe. The air pollution from these dirty machines is so bad that Yellowstone Park Rangers now wear respirators to protect themselves. The piercing noise of snowmobiles can often be heard throughout our parks; studies show that these machines can be heard 90 percent of the time in Yellowstone. And snowmobiles harass and threaten wildlife. Even when restricted to approved and maintained trails, snowmobiles can push bison, wolves, elk, and moose, even the bald eagle, out of their preferred habitats.

Bluewater Network leads efforts to ban snowmobiles from our National Park system and from public lands that fall outside the Park Service authority. This work is critical to preserving the very mission of our National Parks: to protect and preserve our wild heritage for the enjoyment for future generations.

[FONT=Tahoma, Verdana, sans-serif]Take Action to Protect the Upper Missouri Breaks National Monument from jetskis![/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Verdana, sans-serif]

Background
The Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument in north-central Montana contains spectacular biological, scientific, historic, wildlife, geological, and cultural resources mixed with a remote location that offers opportunities for solitude rarely found in today's world. This remote location retains the unspoiled, natural setting in a nearly identical state to the one that Lewis and Clark found it in more than two centuries ago.[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, Verdana, sans-serif]The monument boasts the most viable elk herd in Montana, one of the premiere bighorn sheep herds in North America and is essential winter range for sage grouse and habitat for prairie dogs. More than 6,000 visitors float the wild and scenic Missouri River each year seeking to experience this unique area the same way that early explorers did.[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, Verdana, sans-serif]The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) recently released a draft resource management plan for the Upper Missouri Breaks that would prohibit jetski use in all but three miles of the 149-mile stretch of the Missouri River that flows through the monument. The BLM is getting pressure from the personal watercraft industry to open more of the river to jetskis and the BLM needs to hear from you to ensure that this treasure is protected and preserved for safe, passive and contemplative recreation.[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, Verdana, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, Verdana, sans-serif]What You Can Do Send an email to Gary Slagel, Manager of the Upper Missouri River National Monument and tell him you strongly support the regulations for jetski use in the monument's preferred alternative, which best protects the unique resources and visitor's ability to enjoy them safely.[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, Verdana, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, Verdana, sans-serif]Important! Comments containing your personal experiences will carry more weight with the Bureau of Land Management. So, please add your own thoughts to the letter. The deadline for comments is April 26, 2006.[/FONT]






[FONT=Tahoma, Verdana, sans-serif]
[/FONT]

[FONT=Tahoma, Verdana, sans-serif]Protecting the National Park System from
Damaging Off-Road Vehicle Use[/FONT]

​

[FONT=Tahoma, Verdana, sans-serif]Bluewater Network has joined with the National Parks and Conservation Association (NPCA) and Wildlands CPR to bring a lawsuit against the Interior Department and the National Park Service to protect national parks from harmful off-road vehicle use. An internal survey conducted by the National Park Service in the summer of 2004 revealed widespread damage throughout the park system from four-wheel drive and all-terrain vehicles (ATV), motorbikes, dune and swamp buggies, and other off-road vehicles. The lawsuit has been filed to ensure that the National Park Service complies with the laws designed to protect the parks from damage due to the use of off-road vehicle use.[/FONT]

[FONT=Tahoma, Verdana, sans-serif]Damage from illegal off-road vehicle use at Lone Star Geyser in
Yellowstone National Park (NPS photo)[/FONT]​

 

[Snowcat Operations]

What a bunch of crap! These people are Idiots and are completely whacked out of there little tie died minds!

 

[XeVfTEUtaAqJHTqq]

I think it is easier to make laws than to enforce them.

PB

 

[Melensdad]

I think it is easier to make laws than to enforce them.

PB

It is interesting to me that on one of the pages there is a PDF download to see the Park Service (Dept of the Interior) response to their lawsuit and a prior meeting. The Park Service basically said it is in total agreement that all the parks should enforce the law, but as the law permits use of the land by "registered" off road vehicles it sees no reason to ban "ALL" off road vehicles. Obviously the Park Service sees that there is "reasonable" land use, and sees that the problem is not with the "registered" users, but with the idiots who break the law. Not really any different than the debates about "legitimate hunters" and "illegal poachers" who kill game.

The Park Service basically is saying in their letter that we don't need new laws, and we don't need furhter restriction, we simply need to enforce the laws.

What a bunch of crap! These people are Idiots and are completely whacked out of there little tie died minds!

Mike, what do you really feel about this?

 

[XeVfTEUtaAqJHTqq]

Personally, I'd like to see less trivial laws and more enforcement of those truly abusing.

It's similar to immigration, I went through the legal channels and it took forever. I don't see anyone organizing protest marches in support of legal immigration. It was easy for the immigration officers to make me jump through tons of useless hoops and bureaucratic waste because I am a law abiding individual. They certainly didn't seem to want to help me.

You should see the crap I have to go through to buy a gun. I've already got an "Alien's Firearm License" for WA state (renewed around December) but that isn't enough. I also have to prove three months continuous residency and will probably have to wait before I can actually get the gun. It's always a hassle (less hassle than Canada though).

I've been fingerprinted and FBI screened at least 10 times in the 9 years I've been here. Probably more.

As for Mike's comments, I support them entirely but just choose to not voice them here. He's right on topic.

 

[mtntopper]

This organization http://www.sharetrails.org/index.cfm the Blue Ribbon Coalition needs our support to protect our rights to use public lands responsibly. They have a large membership in the west that funds programs to protect our rights to access and use public lands. I highly recommend everyone looks at this information and join this organization or one that has similar goals. Elimination of one user is just a step to eliminate all users. It does not matter whether you are a motorized user or a non motorized hunter, there goal is to eliminate all users who do not fit with their ideals.

The bluewater network is in direct opposition to the long time Blue Ribbon Coalitions efforts to promote responsible public land policies. It appears they have even adopted a similar name to confuse the public. The similiar name is another typical effort from the people who organize and promote these types of campaigns to discredit all other information.


Welcome to the BlueRibbon Coalition Website!
http://www.sharetrails.org/index.cfm


MISSION
The BlueRibbon Coalition champions responsible use of public lands for the benefit of all recreationists by educating and empowering its members to:

• Secure, protect, and expand shared outdoor recreation access and use
• Work collaboratively with land managers and other recreationists
• Educate the general public media, elected officials, and other decision makers on recreation and access issues
• Promote equitable and responsible land management
• Affect the political and administrative process
• Support recreation on, and promote, respect for private property
• Encourage appropriate enforcement of the law

VISION
The BlueRibbon Coalition is a well organized financially sound and steadily growing national coalition of organization, businesses and individuals which:

• Provides leadership in responsible use
• Promotes balanced resource conservation
• Is recognized by the general public, the media, and elected officials as a leader in promoting common sense and an equitable approach to recreation and access issues

 

[daedong]

If national parks are for everyone now and in the future then bans of this nature are a necessary evil. I understand where you are coming from Bob (I think) my views were very similar but have changed over time. Up until 20 odd years ago we could pretty much do what ever we wanted in national parks. Today it is a very different story; National parks are highly regulated now. Initially when these regulations were in their infancy I screamed like hell about vehicle access in and around some of these parks. In hindsight I was wrong in my thinking. With the amount ATV’s and bikes out there now they would have devastated our fragile ecology in national parks. It is simply too expensive, these areas are too vast to regulate laws so in my view total bans of ATV’s and bikes in national parks is fair and reasonable.

 

[bczoom]

If national parks are for everyone now and in the future then bans of this nature are a necessary evil. I understand where you are coming from Bob (I think) my views were very similar but have changed over time. Up until 20 odd years ago we could pretty much do what ever we wanted in national parks. Today it is a very different story; National parks are highly regulated now. Initially when these regulations were in their infancy I screamed like hell about vehicle access in and around some of these parks. In hindsight I was wrong in my thinking. With the amount ATV’s and bikes out there now they would have devastated our fragile ecology in national parks. It is simply too expensive, these areas are too vast to regulate laws so in my view total bans of ATV’s and bikes in national parks is fair and reasonable.

I believe ATV's, snowmobiles... need a certain degree of regulation in national parks the same as we need regulations for vehicles on roads.

But, I don't believe they should be banned completely.

As you said, "the parks are for everyone now" and "these areas are too vast".
Using those 2 things, the size of many of these areas are too big to be enjoyed on foot. Also there are many with disabilities that wouldn't see much of anything without mechanical help.

Who owns these parks? We, the people do. Therefore, as part owner, I believe we should have the right to enjoy the areas. Yes, I'll accept a certain amount of restrictions but to completely remove all motorized personal transportation isn't right in my mind.

Didn't they try to stop planes and helicoptors from flying in/around certain parks as well?

 

[mtntopper]

If national parks are for everyone now and in the future then bans of this nature are a necessary evil. I understand where you are coming from Bob (I think) my views were very similar but have changed over time. Up until 20 odd years ago we could pretty much do what ever we wanted in national parks. Today it is a very different story; National parks are highly regulated now. Initially when these regulations were in their infancy I screamed like hell about vehicle access in and around some of these parks. In hindsight I was wrong in my thinking. With the amount ATV’s and bikes out there now they would have devastated our fragile ecology in national parks. It is simply too expensive, these areas are too vast to regulate laws so in my view total bans of ATV’s and bikes in national parks is fair and reasonable.

Maybe we should just erect a fence around all national forest and park areas, keep everyone out. Let nature take its course. Then we can just look from the outside in at a blackened fire and insect destroyed wasteland of a national park. Tell our children and grandchildren we protected it for them. This is what will happen if nature takes it course in many national parks and forests. This seems to be the attitude and goal of many of the environmental protection groups today as long as they have their beliefs and can recreate in their own way.

Read the factual information, we are not talking about unlimited motorized and recreational use as it is already highly regulated. An example is snowmobiles in Yellowstone Park. They do no major damage if you compare their impact and total pollution to the summer vehicles that travel in the park. Maybe it is time to regulate the thousands of summer motorized vehicles that actually emit many times the pollutants. The summer time visitor does much more environmental damage to the land and wild animals than the few clean 4 stroke snowmobiles that are now allowed into the park in the winter time. But again it is very easy to pick on the few snowmobilers that do use the park in the wintertime. A great public outrage would happen if you talked about regulating the many summer visitors and prohibiting summer outdoor recreationalists from park use.

Up until 20 odd years ago we could pretty much do what ever we wanted in national parks.

We could also do pretty much what ever we wanted in national parks twenty years ago. Now we have certain laws and regulations enacted to protect the national parks and environment. No one is asking for unlimited and uncontrolled total usage. We just want equal rights without doing environmental damage to enjoy what is public property. Enforce the existing laws, change them when necessary, but do not push for a total ban on others just because it is a popular position to have today and because you do not recreate the same as others do in these locations.

 

[Melensdad]

Vin, I believe you misunderstood my post.

I oppose the banning of these things. I do not support running wild either. Here in the US we have many different categories of state & national parks and recreation areas. Some areas are set aside for nature and I have no problem with that. Other areas have "limited use" or restrictions that require permits to venture out, and still others are developed for use primarily by man.

I believe our system is a good one the way it is. I also believe we must enforce the laws and rules. Enforcing our laws and rules is more important than banning reasonable use.

To put it into perspective, in my younger days I was a "low impact hiker/camper" and believed that anything I carried in, I also carried out. I hiked/camped in 'permit only' areas. These were areas where no vehicles were allowed, they were often many miles from the nearest roads. And even in these areas where one would expect things to be pristine, I often found trash left behind by other campers. These other campers had to get the permits, but they did not honor all the rules. Does that mean I believe the backcountry areas should have been closed to hikers? No. It just reinforced my belief that rules & laws need to be enforced to be effective.

But I fully believe that people should be allowed into these areas, only by having access to areas that are really beautiful will people learn to understand true beauty.

Again, I am not sure how the park lands are fun in Australia, but here in the US I believe we have a very good system that divides our land into different types of uses. Motor vehicles are allowed in some areas, not in others. Hunters are allowed in some areas, not in others. Boats are allowed in some areas, not in others. The problems come into play when people do not follow the rules. And in my mind, we don't change the rules when that happens, we should punish the people who break the rules.

 

[daedong]

We have different categories of parks here. I don’t know the exact difference between parks.
There is definitely no dogs allowed, no firearms; vehicles must stick to designated roads and tracks, all camp areas are designated, unless on foot, no axes or chainsaws, (my wife just said unless your name is Vin Dowd) no fires at certain times of the year or in undesignated areas.

In Australia the principle of National parks is to protect the environment for the people to enjoy, NOT to provide a playground for people.

 

[mtntopper]

There is definitely no dogs allowed, no firearms; vehicles must stick to designated roads and tracks, all camp areas are designated, unless on foot, no axes or chainsaws, (my wife just said unless your name is Vin Dowd) no fires at certain times of the year or in undesignated areas.

Gee, with all the fun going on I will bet you do not have to fight the crowds!!!!! Just kidding, certain laws and regulations in some areas are necessary but not all inclusive to all areas at all times.

 

[Melensdad]

We have different categories of parks here. I don’t know the exact difference between parks.
There is definitely no dogs allowed, no firearms; vehicles must stick to designated roads and tracks, all camp areas are designated, unless on foot, no axes or chainsaws, (my wife just said unless your name is Vin Dowd) no fires at certain times of the year or in undesignated areas.

In Australia the principle of National parks is to protect the environment for the people to enjoy, NOT to provide a playground for people.

Vin, I think that SOME of our Parks are like SOME of yours. However SOME of ours are multi-use and allow for hunting (in fact the license fees from hunters/shooters supports an important portion of budget of the park system).

What struck me about the Bluewater Alliance is that on the surface it seems like a very reasonable group. But as I was downloading their materials and reading them (and I spent a lot of time looking over many many pages of their website and reading their downloads) it struck me that these people want to outlaw activities on lands OUTSIDE of the park system too. Many areas of our nation have thousands of miles of snowmobile trails running through them, the trails cross over public, private and utility company lands, they sometimes have deeded easements, the sometimes run adjacent to the roadways and follow similar traffic laws and often are used as a main source of transportation in the snow regions of our nation . . . and all of those would be affected by the bans these people want to impose.

They would impose similar bans on boats, etc.

I am all in favor of restricted use areas, non-use areas, but I don't see banning these things. Further I am all in favor of cleaning up our enviornment and taking steps to reduce pollution, mandating cleaner burning engines is fine with me on newly produced equipment and I support that, but I don't support banning antique boats or snowmobiles.

Again, I think the front pages and main statements of this group look to be very reasonable, but dig down into their core and these people want extreme restrictions that I think most people would not support here. I believe they show a very moderate and reasonable facade to garner donations but I believe they hide their true adjenda beneath the surface. Unfortunately most people rarely go deeper than the surface.

 

[BigAl]

Maybe we should just erect a fence around all national forest and park areas, keep everyone out. Let nature take its course. Then we can just look from the outside in at a blackened fire and insect destroyed wasteland of a national park. Tell our children and grandchildren we protected it for them

Your a little late on that suggestion.

William O. Douglas , the wacky nut case ,U.S. Supreme Court justice wrote that same thing back in the 60's in one of his books .He meant it too . I can't remember the title ,but it was a real joke and I got in a big fight with my college professor over it . It was required reading back then in my college . I hated it then and hate it now .