Some 2004 snowmobiles actually dirtier!

[Hangar18]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ElkGunner:
...Hangar,
Just out of curiousity, to make sure we are on the same page, do you acknowledge that there is a Winter Time Air Quality Problem in YNP?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think I acknowledged this already, by saying the EPA standards set for YNP are not strict enough. So YES, especially at the west entrance. I would like to see results from monitoring stations within the park. What is your point? Not sure what this has to do with the rest of the discussions.

 

[Ten Bears]

GRINNER, when would you expect he college students to take their machine to full consumer product production? Artic Cat is there. I don't see the failure.

That article was media dribble, biased to start an environmental frenzy, it did.

Arctic Cat made a clean, but slow, machine 2 years ago. Nobody else wants in the slow machine market. Their still trying to build performance, "clean" machines.

Consumers don't want to buy an all around slow machine, and many can't afford to buy 2 machines (or 4 per couple). So why not have 80% of the riding in YNP be tourons riding rentals (slow Artic Cats)? You can't ride fast or off trail in the park anyways.

What part of that have you missed?

How about this????
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> However, as recent developments in the U.S. prove, radical groups ignore these facts, often using junk science and misinformation to bolster their case against snowmobiling. For example, they have long claimed snowmobiles as major emission polluters, touting out of date data from now debunked testing procedures using two stroke lawn mowers running at full throttle. The fact that their argument was shot down in 2000 by findings from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has not deterred them. The EPA confirmed that existing snowmobile emission numbers have been grossly exaggerated — by an astounding 335%! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> http://www.snowmobilebc.ca/SARA/sara.html

 

[JoseCuervo]

Hangar,

Given that there IS an Air quality problem, do you think the machines of the 2004 vintage will solve the problem? (And I don't view solving the problem to mean "meeting some set of negotiated air quality"). Do you think the Air will be clean, due to the switch to the 04 machines? If so, then the end of the topic.

 

[Hangar18]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ElkGunner:
Hangar,

Given that there IS an Air quality problem, do you think the machines of the 2004 vintage will solve the problem? (And I don't view solving the problem to mean "meeting some set of negotiated air quality"). Do you think the Air will be clean, due to the switch to the 04 machines? If so, then the end of the topic.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The topic was whether the articles were misleading and not telling the whole story, not acknowledging whether the 2004 sleds were cleaning up the air quality. Had Ms. Cart reported the sleds that were to be certified for use in the park were emitting 80-90% less than those previously allowed in the park, the whole point of this exercise in the first place, we wouldn't be having this conversation. But instead, sled manufacturers and the BRC were bashed. Because of the articles, the unknowledgeable public thinks their park is getting dirtier.

 

[Ten Bears]

Well put HANGAR.

I think the big issue here was whether or not the article was MEDIA DRIBBLE. The article was intentionally slanted to mislead people.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Hangar,

It is all what you use for a Point of reference. If you use the point of the 2-strokes, and the Air quality problem you admidt is there, then you are right, there is an improvement.

If you use the fact that the machines were Banned, and there would be Zero in there, then the machines now being permitted in MAY cause a problem, and it appears, an even bigger problem than envisioned, when the ban was being overturned by Bush.

I would imagine each reference point is valid, depending on what side you are trying to portray.

Since I "don't have a dog in this fight", then all I look at is the political issues, and it looks like Bush caved to industry, some sort of Air quality problem will still exsist, and the Industry misled the public and Park Service. Oh well...

 

[Ten Bears]

GRINNER, is what your saying is that air quality in the park would be pristine and clear without snowmobiles?

http://www.nps.gov/yell/planvisit/winteruse/batmodels.htm

 

[JoseCuervo]

Sure Ten,

If it helps you out, I'll say that...

 

[Ten Bears]

Just trying to see where you're trying to leadthe conversation. You can't seem to get past the fact that you supported an article that was slanted dribble, can you?????

Still laughing.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Ten,

Like most other threads in SI, after awhile, they should just fade away, kinda like your learnings from Third Grade did...

I for one don't think it was dribble, as I learned a lot from it, and from reading the other articles on the subject. I also learned quite a bit from Hangar and his link to SnoWest.

Too bad you have such a closed mind that you dismiss anything you disagree with as biased dribble. A mind is like a book, it is only good when opened....

 

[Hangar18]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I for one don't think it was dribble, as I learned a lot from it...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> What did you learn from it? All it said was three 2004 models were not as clean as four models tested in 2002.

 

[Lostagain]

About the only thing that will for sure help the air quality in NP is to remove the individual vehicles, both summer and winter....
Go to totally concessioners' coaches, shuttles, whatever....
the american people are too wrapped in their own vehicle independence and need to sacrifice for the good of the environment.

 

[Ten Bears]

GRINNER, like I've said so many times before.

"Don't go away mad, just go away."
BTW, ATVing was great in S.Idaho for the deer opener.