| Author |
Topic |
|
Vancouver
1808 Posts |
|
398 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2004 : 12:03 AM
|
| Hallelujah for a blow against the winter menace of natural solitude, wildlife, and clean water and air. |
Edited by - Anon E. Moose on 12/04/2004 12:04 AM |
|
|
langley, bc
Canada
437 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2004 : 12:13 AM
|
I will second that Anon.
----------------------------------------
The first revolution is when you change your mind, about how you look at things, and see that there might be another way to look at it that you have not been shown. |
|
|
 Satirical photoshop junkie who frolics in the mountains of the Chilliwack River Valley
Chilliwack, BC
Canada
6897 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2004 : 12:39 AM
|
Snowmobilers have their place in this world just like the rest of us.
Perhaps the court's decision was valid in this particular case, but like it or not, snowmobiling is here to stay.
----------------------------------------
Live each day as if it was your last, and someday you'll be right.
|
|
|
|
Kootenay Bud
2695 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2004 : 07:14 AM
|
Too bad the government is the one that ended up paying the settlement, should have been the snowmobilers themselves.
Now, lets get them out of all the provincial parks they are entering illegally in the winter.
And, at the risk of sounding like one of those crack pot environmentalists ( an environmental comment not in the "conservation corner"), I think snowmobiles have far overrun "their place in this world." |
|
|
Langley, BC
549 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2004 : 09:02 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by sandy
Now, lets get them out of all the provincial parks they are entering illegally in the winter.
And welcome them to all the provincial parks that they can ride in.
The parks are for everyone. That includes people whose "outdoor experience" is different than yours. |
|
|
398 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2004 : 11:45 AM
|
How Snowmobiles Harm [Yellowstone] National Park(s)
Snowmobiles cause air and water pollution.
On an average weekend, snowmobiles pour out more pollution in Yellowstone than automobiles emit in the park in an entire year. These pollutants include but are not limited to carbon monoxide, ozone, and carcinogens such as benzene.
Snowmobile exhaust poses a significant health risk to Park Service employees.
had to install a special ventilation system to pump fresh air into ranger booths to protect the health of park employees. Today, park employees in Yellowstone are issued gas masks to ward off headaches, dizziness, and nausea that result from exposure to high levels of snowmobile exhaust.
Snowmobile engine noise shatters Yellowstone's natural quiet.
The whine of snowmobiles penetrates up to 10 miles into the wilderness surrounding Yellowstone's winter travelways making it virtually impossible for the average visitor to escape the roar of these machines.
Snowmobile use threatens Yellowstone's unique wildlife.
scare wildlife away from prime foraging areas and causing them to expend important energy reserves, snowmobiles represent a significant strain on animals already stressed by harsh winter conditions.
Snowmobile use conflicts with the visitor experiences of others.
The constant noise produced by these machines frightens wildlife and forces other visitors and park employees to wear earplugs. The haze that results from snowmobile exhaust also decreases visibility and restricts scenic views
http://www.sierraclub.org/wildlands/Yellowstone/snowmobiles.asp |
Edited by - Anon E. Moose on 12/04/2004 11:46 AM |
|
|
Langley, BC
549 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2004 : 1:09 PM
|
From the International Snowmobile Manufacturer's Association (naturally):
...Snowmobile use of groomed portions of Yellowstone National Park's (YNP) road system began 40 years ago. The snowmobiles are restricted to the same road system used in the spring, summer, and fall by over 1.5 million automobiles, busses, SUV's, trucks, recreational vehicles and motorcycles. Snowmobiles account for less than 4% of annual vehicular traffic in the Park.
...Since snowmobiles are allowed only on the groomed road surface, snowmobilers have access to less than 1% of Yellowstone Park, which is 2.2 million acres - or half the size of the state of Connecticut.
...One additional study looked at air quality and emissions and concluded that in the year 2000: (1) the emissions from snowcoaches and the older technology snowmobiles constitute a small fraction of the year-around mobile emissions in the Parks, (2) the summer Recreational Vehicles (RVs) alone emit more than eight times more Nitrous Oxides (NOx) than the snowcoaches and the older technology snowmobiles combined, and (3) snowcoaches and the older technology snowmobiles accounted for less than 6% of the particulate matter emitted in the Parks from mobiles sources.
...In 2001 Bjornlie and Garret (B & G) conducted a systematic study of bison activity and found that bison only made minimal use of the groomed roads and that snowmobile and snowcoach use does not have a "major influence on bison ecology."
...The Hardy study concluded that predictable motorized travel along established roads was the least stressful to elk and bison and the most stressful was off-road contact by individuals on skis.
...The Jaffe study examined wildlife responses on the groomed roads to over-snow vehicles and human contact. Jaffe found that 87% of the total number of animals observed during the surveys had no visible response at all to over-snow vehicles. Of the 13% that had responded, 68% looked directly at the visitors and then resumed their activity.
http://www.snowmobile.org/pr_argumentsopen.asp
And to wrap this up:
NPS WINTER USE PLANS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PROPOSED RULE
http://www.nps.gov/yell/planvisit/winteruse/[/ur]
Fewer snowmobiles, must be 4-stroke -- a balanced approach to shared use. |
Edited by - Slow Dog on 12/04/2004 1:47 PM |
|
|
|
Satirical photoshop junkie who frolics in the mountains of the Chilliwack River Valley
Chilliwack, BC
Canada
6897 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2004 : 1:30 PM
|
Oh no..here we go again.
----------------------------------------
Live each day as if it was your last, and someday you'll be right.
|
|
|
398 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2004 : 1:47 PM
|
Tell EPA: Revoke the Two-Stroke
"a two-stroke [snowmobile] engine ...is dumping nearly one-third of its fuel right into the environment.
An automobile would have to drive 100,000 miles to produce the same amount of smog-forming pollutants as a two-stroke engine does in seven hours, according to the California Air Resources Board.
http://www.sierraclub.org/planet/200111/alerts.asp
Why is EPA adopting emission standards for snowmobiles?
"Snowmobiles currently emit more than 220,000 tons of hydrocarbons(HC) and 580,000 tons of carbon monoxide (CO) each year across the United States. These emissions contribute to ambient concentrations of CO, air toxics (such as benzene), and fine particulate matter, which is largely responsible for visibility impairment at our national parks."
United States Environmental Protection Agency
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/2002/f02040.pdf
|
Edited by - Anon E. Moose on 12/04/2004 2:45 PM |
|
|
398 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2004 : 2:11 PM
|
For you CT asthma sufferers and those who live in the Fraser Valley, this is why ATV/Snowmobile/auto pollution is bad for you.
New EPA Emission Standards for ATV/Snowmobiles/...Starting 2006
The human health benefits of this rulemaking include avoiding approximately 1,000 premature deaths, preventing 1,000 hospital admissions, reducing 23,400 cases of asthma attacks, and reducing 200,000 days of lost work. In monetary terms, we estimate these health benefits to be roughly $8 billion in 2030. There are additional health and welfare benefits we are unable to quantify.
United States Environmental Protection Agency
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/2002/f02037.pdf
Unfortunately all those millions of older two-stroke polluting machines are not affected by the new regulation and they will continue to contaminate your clean air. |
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
228 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2004 : 2:20 PM
|
One of my beefs in is noise and light pollution. I sure wouldn't want snowmobiles disturbing a tranquil winter's day.
Fortunately the Alberta government had the foresight to put aside a large track of land in Kananaskis country (McLean Creek Offroad) just west of Calgary. ATV's, dirtbikes, me in my Jeep, Snowmobilers etc can tear up the countryside, splash through puddles, do wheelies, etc. to their heart's delight. There's literally hundreds of kms of trails from those that accomodate SUVs to some just wide enough for dirt bikers.
BUT...they vigourously restrict offroad use outside of the designated area. I've seen no abuse in or outside of the parks in Kcountry. There's no reason not to be satisfied with the designated area as it concentrates off-road use but is still large enough to add variety and a touch of adventure.
As for snowmobiles not disturbing wildlife in winter. Crap. I've come across run-over squirrels that were a lot more than 'disturbed'. Also, many animals are in borderline survival mode from the rigours of winter and don't need even more stress. Predators such as cougars, lynx, wolves, fishers, martins, etc. can be driven from territories by too much disturbance.
----------------------------------------
After hiking for 35 years I still haven't reached the end of the trail. |
|
|
Langley, BC
549 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2004 : 3:42 PM
|
quote:
An automobile would have to drive 100,000 miles to produce the same amount of smog-forming pollutants as a two-stroke engine does in seven hours, according to the California Air Resources Board.
http://www.sierraclub.org/planet/200111/alerts.asp
Why can't these organizations just give me the data and let me look at it for myself? (answer -- because they're full of it.)
If the issue is two-strokes and their HC belching ways then address it by imposing pollution standards (oh wait, they're doing that) or limiting areas to 4-strokes (oh wait, they're doing that too).
The new EPA limts are kind of weak (because they're easy to meet) but maybe they'll move to stricter standards in the future.
Just for the record, I'm all for clean air but is issue snowmobiles or the noise and pollution? If it's the latter then bring in standards. |
|
|
|
Alberta-based choss climbin', flame throwin', rappel lovin', ass talkin' hater who doesn't like "Gumby" for a descriptor
1100 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2004 : 4:04 PM
|
| The fact is, people are totally f'n up the environment. It needs to be stopped. It starts with attitudes. The less slow dogs the better. |
|
|
|
opinionated-stove huggin'-fleece wearin'-arse burnin' hill virgin
Here
Canada
4641 Posts |
Posted - 12/04/2004 : 6:33 PM
|
I personally don't like them because they are loud and smelly but they have their place. Sledding is practically a cultural activity in northern Ontario where they are used to and from ice fishing shacks, used for transportation, and used for recreation on well established and regulated trails. I grew up in a small town in BC where snowmobiles were a major winter activity. I happily followed snowmobile tracks to x-country further into the wilderness than I normally would have been able to as a kid. I think it's not quite as popular as it once was here in BC due to winters being much milder than they once were. There is this new culture of sledders who like to rip up all over the backcountry performing tricks and risking their lives in pristine avalanche country...I'd like to see this element gone. I'd like to see them stick to regulated trail systems like they have to in some areas of Ontario.
----------------------------------------
"My name is Hiker Boy and I approved this message" |
Edited by - Hiker Boy on 12/04/2004 6:34 PM |
|
|
Vancouver
1808 Posts |
Posted - 12/05/2004 : 7:57 PM
|
Speaking from the viewpoint of my other outdoor recreation passion, flying east Vancouver's only privately-owned F18 fighter jet....
Now I understand there's a tiny radical vocal minority having a hissy fit about my chosen recreation. They complain it contributes to global warming. They bitch there's a fuel shortage. They whine that it spoils things for others. Well, I have my place in the world just like those chronic complainers. Like it or not, recreational jet flying is a great sport, provides lots of well-paid jobs, and it's here to stay.
I especially enjoy buzzing folks. I know they like it, because they turn out by the hundreds of thousands to be buzzed at airshows. Talk about a great thing for kids, you should see the families that come to see the planes.
One thing that really peeves me is not being allowed to break the sound barrier over populated areas. Have to do that 'way back in the mountains. Too bad, rattling people's windows now and then might wake them up a bit. I've sure woken up one or two mountaineers in my time. LOL The more people we get flying jets for recreation, the stronger voice we'll have to change the laws to make it even more fun. To start with, let's get rid of the prohibitions against flying under bridges, and from flying within 500 feet of people.
The parks have great scenery to zoom around in. Just like in the movies. Those are my parks too, even though my "outdoor experience" may be a bit different from a hiker. Don't like the noise? Gimme a break, the complainers drive noisy cars to go hiking, so what's the diff? They can wear earplugs if they don't like it. Global warming? What a bunch of bs. There's no reputable science that proves any such thing is going on. And even if there is, what's wrong with growing bananas in Vancouver?
The bottom line is that recreational jetting is perfectly legal, and there's nothing that says that I don't have the right to burn whatever fuel I can afford to buy. To those who've never been in an F18: "Don't knock it if you haven't tried it." Give it a shot. You'll be hooked the first time and you'll never go back to hiking.
Hey, you CT folks who respect others' rights and don't mind a bit of "sonic tonic", let me know where your next trip is going and I'll put on a little buzz for you!
----------------------------------------
Meet you at DYE-II? |
|
|
|
Coffee swillin', wine lovin', Owl fearin' Andie McDowell stunt double, who sports retro gear
Vancouver, BC
5464 Posts |
Posted - 12/05/2004 : 8:24 PM
|
| I like it, sgRant!! |
|
|
|
opinionated-stove huggin'-fleece wearin'-arse burnin' hill virgin
Here
Canada
4641 Posts |
Posted - 12/06/2004 : 12:16 AM
|
I'm in but I want something that'll burn more fuel than an F18. Also, I want it armed so I can shoot baby whales and drop napalm down on old growth forest.
----------------------------------------
"My name is Hiker Boy and I approved this message" |
Edited by - Hiker Boy on 12/06/2004 06:12 AM |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Snomobilers Lose Class Action Lawsuit
