Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Environmental Group sues National Parks Service to Ban Off Road Vehicles (My title)
Outer Banks Preservation Association ^ | 11/29/05 | staff

Posted on 11/30/2005 8:07:03 PM PST by Rebelbase

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
November 29, 2005

Conservation Groups File Lawsuit to Protect National Parks From Harmful Off-Road Vehicle Use: Survey of Parks Reveals Extensive Damage from Off-Road Vehicles, Lack of Funding for Enforcement

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Bluewater Network, a division of Friends of the Earth; the National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA); and Wildlands CPR today filed a lawsuit against the National Park Service and theDepartment of Interior in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., alleging that those agencies have failed in numerous ways to protect the National Park System against the extensive damage caused by all-terrain vehicles and other off-road vehicles in America's national parks.

The plaintiffs met with the Park Service in July 2004 and raised concerns about off-road vehicle damage in the national parks. The agency responded by conducting an internal survey of all national park sites. The 256 responses available to the plaintiffs demonstrate that off-road vehicles are causing widespread damage in America's national parks.

"Despite evidence of damage, the leadership of the National Park Service is simply proposing more studies of the problems caused by off-road vehicles in some parts of the National Park System and has refused to take any action elsewhere," said Carl Schneebeck, public lands campaign director for Bluewater Network and a former Park Service ranger.

Park managers reported that off-road vehicle use is harming archaeological sites at the Grand Canyon; tearing up hiking/horseback trails at Olympic National Park; crushing animal burrows in Arches and Canyonlands national parks; and facilitating fossil poaching at Badlands National Park, as well as affecting the experiences of other visitors. Park managers at the Appalachian Trail reported that damage from off-road vehicles is the trail's "most pernicious" problem.

"Because of the damage off-road vehicles can cause to the natural wonders of the parks, the law expressly requires the agency to regulate the use of off-road vehicles," said Robert Rosenbaum of Washington, D.C., law firm Arnold & Porter LLP, counsel for the plaintiffs.

In the Park Service's survey, many park managers reported having insufficient staff to monitor the impact of off-road vehicles on the parks and enforce park regulations.


"Due to lack of funding, many parks are struggling to enforce the rules on the books to protect the treasures in our parks and the safety and experiences of visitors," said NPCA President Tom Kiernan. "In the meantime, the parks protecting our national heritage are being spoiled."

Exacerbating this problem, the Department of Interior has proposed a draft revision of the parks' management policies. The draft weakens protections for parks and could lead to increased use of off-road vehicles. The public can comment on the proposed changes to the Park Service's management policies over the next few months.

"National parks were created 100 years ago as preserves for our national heritage-not as playgrounds for off-road vehicles," said Wildlands CPR Executive Director Bethanie Walder. "The existing policies to protect our parks must be upheld and enforced."


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; News/Current Events; US: Arizona; US: District of Columbia; US: Maryland; US: Pennsylvania
KEYWORDS: access; bluewaternetwork; ecofascist; elf; friendsoftheearth; landuse; lawsuit; lawyers; nationalparks; npca; publiclands; sierraclub
The lawsuit: http://obpa.org/images/stories/Bluewater,NPCALawsuit.pdf

Speculation from access groups is that Friends of the Earth will seek an injuction against all off road vehicle use in National Parks.

That will be the beginning. National Forests and Seashores to follow.

1 posted on 11/30/2005 8:07:04 PM PST by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Comment #2 Removed by Moderator

To: Rebelbase

BUT WHAT IF A WOMAN'S HEALTH IS IN DANGER??? THERE'S NO PROVISION FOR THAT!


3 posted on 11/30/2005 8:15:35 PM PST by SteveMcKing ("No empire collapses because of technical reasons. They collapse because they are unnatural.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase
...as well as affecting the experiences of other visitors.

That's what it's really all about.

4 posted on 11/30/2005 8:17:08 PM PST by randog (What the....?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Regicide

I suppose that you and the eco-nuts will pay for the costs of increased enforcement?


5 posted on 11/30/2005 8:18:18 PM PST by clee1 (We use 43 muscles to frown, 17 to smile, and 2 to pull a trigger. I'm lazy and I'm tired of smiling.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Regicide

Incrementalism.

Forests were meant to be accessed not locked up.


6 posted on 11/30/2005 8:18:26 PM PST by Rebelbase (Food stamps, section-8, State paid Child support, etc. pay more than the min. wage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #7 Removed by Moderator

To: Regicide; Rebelbase

The National Forests belong to all of us. This suit, like others of its ilk, wants to limit forest visitors to only young, able-bodied, people with the free time to go on hiking trips. Disguised as an "environmental" issue, this is just a way to lock up our forests to everyone the elitists don't care for.


8 posted on 11/30/2005 8:27:59 PM PST by JennysCool (Non-Y2K-Compliant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase

RS 2477 Rights-of-way

SHOULD YOU BE CONCERNED ABOUT RS 2477 RIGHTS-OF-WAY?

ASK YOURSELF...

Do you enjoy hiking, camping, hunting, fishing, birding, off-road vehicle use, wildlife, mountain biking, backpacking, nature photography, horseback riding, rock hounding, climbing, or any other recreational use of the public lands?


IF YOUR ANSWER IS "YES,"

AND JUST WHAT ARE RS 2477 RIGHTS?

http://www.rs2477roads.com/


9 posted on 11/30/2005 8:32:34 PM PST by george76 (Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Regicide
National Parks should be accessed--you are right--but in a reasonable and sustainable way.


And just who is supposed to determine what is "reasonable and sustainable"?

It seems to me that this ought to be up to Congress to determine, not a bunch of econazis via tyrants wearing black robes. If the courts do intervene here, it would be a clear cut case of a violation of separation of powers.

Why don't you ecofascists go through the political process and pass laws for this in the congress, rather that having judges dictate your beliefs on the rest of us through the courts?
10 posted on 11/30/2005 8:34:19 PM PST by rottndog (WOOF!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase

Best Wishes.

The Blue Ribbon Coalition are good folks.

http://www.sharetrails.org/


11 posted on 11/30/2005 8:35:15 PM PST by george76 (Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #12 Removed by Moderator

Comment #13 Removed by Moderator

To: Regicide
Go for it enviros! I'll sign on!

Do I still deserve to be called an Eco-fascist?



Considering the theme of this thread--envirowackos going to court to enforce their beliefs about the use of National Parks--and your cheering them on, I would have to say yes.
14 posted on 11/30/2005 8:47:03 PM PST by rottndog (WOOF!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase

http://www.bcnorth.ca/atvdamage/photos/Sisters1.jpg

'Nuff said.


15 posted on 11/30/2005 8:50:24 PM PST by Born to Conserve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Regicide

Parks, forests, seashores, whatever. The truth is there are already laws on the books against destruction of public property, vandalism, and other such offenses. The aim of most of these latter-day suits, infortunately, is simply to cut off access to everyone but hearty Birkenstockers.


16 posted on 11/30/2005 8:52:08 PM PST by JennysCool (Non-Y2K-Compliant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase

This Park was created and is now administered for the benefit and enjoyment of the people...it is the property of Uncle Sam and therefore of us all."

President Theodore Roosevelt
April 24, 1903 at Gardiner, Montana
Speech dedicating the North Entrance Arch


http://www.yellowstone-natl-park.com/arch.htm


On the west tower is carved: "Created by Act of Congress, March 1, 1872"

President Theodore Roosevelt was already in the park on vacation when asked to lay the cornerstone


17 posted on 11/30/2005 8:56:47 PM PST by george76 (Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Born to Conserve

Looks like that was a lot of fun!


18 posted on 11/30/2005 8:58:26 PM PST by rottndog (WOOF!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Regicide
Off road vehicles should only allowed in National Parks when they do little or no damage to the terrain.

Does that include humans? How about bikes? "No damage" can be construed in many ways. How about we keep the National Parks employees out? Especially if they carry matches.

19 posted on 11/30/2005 9:05:58 PM PST by mpreston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase
OK, but I want an ADA exception for "handicapped hikers" who need an ATV to utilize the trails.
20 posted on 11/30/2005 9:09:03 PM PST by Boiling point (If God had not meant for man to eat animals, he wouldn't have made them out of meat!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #21 Removed by Moderator

To: rottndog; Born to Conserve
First, that was a pic of Seven Sisters "provincial" park, in British Columbia, not a U.S. park..

Secondly, Canada's park use regs are probably more rigorous than the U.S., and if that area was allowed for ATV use, then there was a reason for that "damage"..
From looking at the pic, it's a low-lying area, very "boggy", ( that's mud.. ) and what appears to be damage could very well look different under drier conditions..
The area was obviously designated for ATV recreational use..

"Git in there an' Git Muddy!!"

No Park Service is going to allow ATV's into ecologically sensitive areas..
They just don't do it..

22 posted on 11/30/2005 9:25:22 PM PST by Drammach (Freedom; not just a job, it's an adventure..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Drammach
No Park Service is going to allow ATV's into ecologically sensitive areas.. They just don't do it.


That's a good, common sense approach. Unfortunately, common sense is not so common anymore. There is plenty of space in the National Parks to set aside for this kind of use.
23 posted on 11/30/2005 9:34:32 PM PST by rottndog (WOOF!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: rottndog
Missouri provides for trails set aside specifically for dirtbikes, ATV, etc..
We even have bike trails as well as hiking trails..
There are "rules", and as long as everyone sticks to the proper trails and follows the rules, a good time is had by all..
24 posted on 11/30/2005 9:38:05 PM PST by Drammach (Freedom; not just a job, it's an adventure..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Regicide

To the environazis, your "reasonable and sustainable way" means without making any changes at all. The 'damage to the terrain' caused by vehicles includes simple tire tracks in the sand.

All of the "damage" will have disappeared within a few years, but if the environazis have their way, there will be nobody there to see it but members of their little clubs. This has already happened in at least one forest in Idaho.


25 posted on 12/01/2005 3:21:30 AM PST by jimtorr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Regicide

Screw your sustainable liberal crap


26 posted on 12/01/2005 3:24:45 AM PST by Modok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Born to Conserve

You've shown one photo of one very small open area with tire tracks in it, that is not even in the United States. Big whoop.....meanwhile, the forest around looks pristine.

'nuff said, because you've said nothing.


27 posted on 12/01/2005 3:26:10 AM PST by jimtorr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Drammach

Thats the problem. You want to go x-country skiing and
find a bunch of drunken yahoos with snowmobiles on the
trails. They ruin the trail and create racket and fumes.
Who needs that? Good that the National Parks outlaw these,
and too bad they tolerate them in National Forests.

The motorized yahoos make it impossible for anyone else
to enjoy the woods, due to their selfishness and inconsideration of other park users. As long as they have such an eff you attitude, people like me will cheer when their machines are kicked out of the parks.


28 posted on 12/01/2005 5:30:38 AM PST by rahbert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Born to Conserve
cool picture. But where's the environmental damage. All I see are a few tire tracks.
29 posted on 12/01/2005 6:33:45 AM PST by John O (God Save America (Please))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Born to Conserve

Looks to me like that small bog needed turning over.Can't prove from the picture that that is 'damage'. If I could I would post a before and after pic of Mt.St.Helens for example....


30 posted on 12/01/2005 6:44:10 AM PST by Minnesoootan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: JennysCool
Agreed

When my father's health was really touchy, one of the only things he enjoyed was four wheel drive trips through the woods. He couldn't hike 200 feet much less INTO a National Forest.

Anyone who doesn't see this for what it is is just blind.

These lunatics tried to cut out bass fishing here in the 90's. Thank God the proposition went down in flames.

The goal?........ Have us serve the animals and environment like gods.

31 posted on 12/01/2005 6:48:36 AM PST by ALWAYSWELDING
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: rahbert
Home page:

"I believe that most people in the world want the right things but that idealogues manage to screw things up."

"bunch of drunken yahoos"

"They ruin the trail and create racket and fumes"

"The motorized yahoos make it impossible for anyone else to enjoy the woods, due to their selfishness and inconsideration of other park users. As long as they have such an eff you attitude, people like me will cheer when their machines are kicked out of the parks."

32 posted on 12/01/2005 6:52:33 AM PST by Minnesoootan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: rahbert
The motorized yahoos make it impossible for anyone else to enjoy the woods, due to their selfishness and inconsideration of other park users. As long as they have such an eff you attitude, people like me will cheer when their machines are kicked out of the parks.

In other words, you have as much of an eff you attitude as they do. You want to use Park resources to do what you like, but want to deny Park resources to those who are doing what you don't like.

33 posted on 12/01/2005 7:20:02 AM PST by LexBaird (tyrannosaurus Lex, unapologetic carnivore)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: LexBaird

Yep, there you go again...liberals taking away our fun...


34 posted on 12/01/2005 11:57:39 AM PST by gman992
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: rahbert
The motorized yahoos make it impossible for anyone else to enjoy the woods, due to their selfishness and inconsideration of other park users.

Number One: They are park users too.. They pay the same fees, maybe more because of their ATV's..
Number Two: Your problem isn't with the snowmobilers, it's with the Park Service..
They should have specific areas and trails marked and mapped indicating where hikers are able to go, and where snomobilers are able to go..
If they don't, then take it up with the park service..
That's your right..

By the way..
Have you ever hiked on designated horse trails?
Ever step in a pile of Horse S**t?
Ever had a passing horse try to take a "nip" out of you?
Kick You? Slap their tail in your face? Fart in your face? P**s as they were passing and splatter horse urine all over your shoes and pants? ( and God only knows what else that was on the ground..)

Should we ban horses too?
Maybe we should ban all animals from National Parks..
Some of them are dangerous, you know..

Have fun hiking out of the park with a broken leg, or whatever, because motorized ATV's used as emergency vehicles aren't allowed..
No helicopter "life flights" either..
Can't have helicopters traumatizing the bears, or the deer..
Guess maybe you'll bleed to death before you can get to a doctor..

Sorry..
I can't subscribe to your philosophy..
The parks are there for all citizens to enjoy, not just the hikers..
If you insist on hiking in the ATV recreational areas and trails, that's Your Problem..

35 posted on 12/01/2005 6:05:48 PM PST by Drammach (Freedom; not just a job, it's an adventure..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson