The Fund for Animals (The Fund) believes the recent
settlement agreement between the Department of the
Interior and the snowmobile industry is intended to
undermine the Clinton Administration decision to eliminate
snowmobiles from Yellowstone, Grand Teton, and John D.
Rockefeller Parks (the parks) in favor of a policy intended to
placate the self-serving and abusive interests of
snowmobilers and snowmobile manufacturers. The Fund and
others sued the National Park Service (NPS) in 1997 to force
the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
which led to the decision to phase-out snowmobiles.
The Clinton Administration policy and rule was intended to
protect wildlife, eliminate excessive snowmobile pollutants,
and reestablish the serenity and sanctity of the park
experience by phasing out snowmobiles. While The Fund
believes the Clinton Administration erred in not terminating
road packing or grooming practices to fully protect park
wildlife, The Fund supports the elimination of snowmobiles as
a first step toward achieving full protection for the parks
and their wildlife.
The terms of the settlement agreement allow this
progressive policy to potentially be replaced by a
pro-snowmobile alternative to the detriment of wildlife, air
and water quality, public safety, and serenity. Despite
President Bush’s claims to protect and preserve our national
parks, this agreement provides additional evidence of
anti-environment and anti-national park policies and
practices of the Bush Administration. Furthermore, this
agreement is contrary to the interests of the majority of
Americans who desire more, not less, protection for
America’s national parks. A recent Zogby poll, for example,
found that 66 percent of 1,003 people supported the NPS
decision to phase out snowmobiles in Yellowstone.
Despite the Bush Administration’s intent in entering into this
settlement agreement, The Fund will use the additional
opportunity for public comment on the Supplemental EIS
(SEIS) to support the elimination of snowmobiles from the
parks, to counter the propaganda from the cooperators and
plaintiffs, and to prove that there is no scientific dispute
regarding the adverse impact of packed or groomed roads on
Yellowstone’s wildlife, particularly its beleaguered bison
population.
In the original EIS, the NPS largely ignored the substantial
evidence, especially data collected by Dr. Mary Meagher,
regarding the serious impact of bison use of packed/groomed
roads on bison population dynamics, movements,
distribution, habitat use patterns, and on grizzly bears and
gray wolves. Bison use of packed roads facilitate their
emigration from the park where they continue to be
harassed and killed pursuant to scientifically fraudulent
policies of the State of Montana. Road packing or grooming
to facilitate snowmobile or snowcoach access causes
adverse impacts to park wildlife which exceed the NPS
impairment standard — an impact that harms the integrity of
park resources or values, including the opportunity that
otherwise would be present for the enjoyment of those
resources or values — and must be prohibited. The Fund will
ensure that the NPS cannot continue to ignore this evidence
or this issue during the SEIS process.
The nefarious nature of the agreement is reflected in the
failure of the Departments of Interior and Justice to consult
with Yellowstone National Park officials as they addressed
the snowmobile litigation. The Fund understands that, had
Yellowstone officials been consulted, they would have
advocated a strong defense of the Clinton Administration’s
decision in order to protect, as required by law, the wildlife,
air quality, and sanctity of America’s oldest and most
famous national park.
The Fund also rejects all claims made by plaintiffs and
plaintiff-intervenors that state and county cooperators in
the EIS process did not have sufficient time to provide
comments to the NPS or that the NPS failed to adequately
consider the proposals and expertise of the cooperating
agencies. Not only did the cooperators have ample
opportunity to participate in the EIS process but they,
through a politically driven decision by a former head of the
Council on Environmental Quality, were allowed to
participate in the original EIS process in violation of federal
law. The Fund and other organizations condemned the
involvement of the cooperators in the original EIS arguing
that none had the requisite expertise to be cooperators as
required by law. The continued involvement of the states
and counties as cooperators demonstrates the bias inherent
in the SEIS process.
The Fund will strenuously oppose any effort by the
snowmobile manufacturers, cooperators, or other
pro-snowmobile organizations to replace the decision to
phase-out snowmobiles with a rule allowing snowmobiles,
including so-called “cleaner and quieter” snowmobiles to
continue to use and abuse the parks. The NPS has already
determined that snowmobiles are inconsistent with the
statutes governing national park management and
considered and rejected alternatives that would have
established committees to evaluate new snowmobile
technologies. Thus, the “new information” used to justify the
SEIS is not new at all, has already been considered and
rejected by the NPS, and should not be subject to
reevaluation. If the cooperators failed to provide evidence
of cleaner and quieter snowmobiles during the original EIS
process, they should not be given a free pass to provide
such evidence now just because a new administration is in
power. The SEIS should not be wasted on reinventing the
wheel, but should be used to address issues, such as road
packing, which were not fully considered in the original EIS.
Furthermore, The Fund is unaware of any publicly available
data which provides valid evidence that new technology has
made snowmobiles substantially less polluting or quieter.
Even if such technology exists, snowmobiles remain a
significant threat to the survival and well-being of park
wildlife and must be eliminated from the parks. Ironically, the
same snowmobile industry that used the new technology
claim in its litigation, has aggressively opposed ongoing
efforts by the Environmental Protection Agency to adopt
emission standards for snowmobiles. While The Fund
questions the motives of the Bush Administration in reaching
this settlement, if the Administration complies with the laws
governing the protection of national parks and objectively
evaluates all existing information and new evidence
produced during the SEIS process, it will have to conclude
that snowmobiles have no place in national parks and that
road packing/grooming must be terminated to fully protect
park wildlife as required by law.
Enviroshop is maintained by dedicated NetSys Interactive Inc. owners & employees who generously contribute their time to maintenance & editing, web design, custom programming, & website hosting for Enviroshop.