Wade was not fazed by the aspersions. "I want to stand face to face with this Klim guy and ask: What kind of scientific evidence do you have that disputes this [noise] data and shows that noise in a national park is tolerable and consistent with the values of Yellowstone? We have data that says it's not," he said.

The data is certain to be fodder for the ongoing legal battle between the Bush administration and the Greater Yellowstone Coalition, which won its initial lawsuit in a D.C. federal court, reversing the Bush administration's effort to block Clinton's snowmobile ban. That court's decision has since been challenged by the snowmobile industry and the state of Wyoming, and the outcome of the Great Yellowstone Snowmobile Controversy still hangs in limbo.

"The question boils down to this," Wade said. "Is any recreation machine that is noisy enough to potentially cause hearing damage appropriate in the world's flagship national park? In my opinion, it's not. The emphasis is supposed to be on preserving the natural quiet so we can hear the subtle sounds of Yellowstone -- the wildlife, the geysers and mud pots."

Perhaps that's why some 90 percent of the hundreds of thousands of public comments on Clinton's snowmobile ban supported the initiative.

Involuntarism

"Study finds mandatory caps work better than voluntary programs to limit pollution"

This just in, from the Department of Near Tautologies: Mandatory emissions caps rein in power-plant pollution more effectively than voluntary programs.

That's the conclusion being drawn from a report on the environmental records of the 100 largest electricity companies in the United States, released last week by an alliance of bottom-liners and tree huggers, including the Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economies (CERES), the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Public Service Enterprise Group, New Jersey's largest utility.

Some folks might regard that conclusion as a no-brainer, but those folks don't work for the Bush administration -- it's made "voluntary compliance" the central plank of its environmental platform.

Recall the words of Assistant Interior Secretary Lynn Scarlett in a recent Grist interview in which she argued the virtues of voluntary programs: "Regulations tend to curtail creativity and innovation. Just think of the way, by analogy, most of us raise our families. Sure, you hold out some discipline for your children, but for the most part we try to inspire them to be flourishing young people through being role models, through encouragement, through exciting them about opportunities in the world before them."

Most parents, however, still put the cookie jar out of reach -- a "command and control" parenting strategy that Bush backers seem to favor when it comes to social issues.

President Bush's down-with-command-and-control philosophy on the environment is perhaps most conspicuous in his widely criticized proposal for a voluntary cap-and-trade program to curb the growth of carbon dioxide emissions. It's also evident in his administration's repeated efforts to scale back enforcement and to gut mandatory emission-reduction programs such as new-source review and the Clinton-era plan for cutting mercury emissions.

The new report contends that this strategy might demonstrate more trust in the kids than they deserve.

The study analyzed utility-industry emissions of four pollutants -- nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur dioxide (SO2), carbon dioxide (CO2) and mercury -- using data collected by the EPA and the Energy Information Administration from 1991 to 2002. The data revealed a marked overall decrease in emissions of pollutants subject to mandatory federal regulations: NOx fell by 28 percent over the period studied, and SO2 fell by 35 percent. Both pollutants, targeted by the Clean Air Act amendments of 1990, contribute to acid rain and haze, and NOx is also a key ingredient in smog.

Recent Stories