Pollution In The Backcountry - Snowmobiles in Yellowstone National Park

In addition to providing the animal with shelter, and necessary supplies the natural parks can bring back a whole species from near extinction. In the passage “The Impact of Animal Protection” it directly states that keeping animals protected has proven to be beneficial and increase the population of endangered animals. Bringing animals back from near extinction can be a difficult task, however it is very beneficial. Animal protection is also used to help control animal population from getting out of control. These programs have brought back plenty of species such as black footed ferrets, California condors, red wolves, and golden lion tamarins. (Do Animals Lose in Zoos?) The community would never get to see these amazing creatures if these

My 1st contention is national parks can actually negatively affect the environment, they draw thousands or even hundreds of thousands of visitors who all impact the environment, whether through pollution from cars or the impact of camping. The roads that are built for cars in the parks have a severe impact on the environment and the animals that are l m, iving there. according to ournationalparks.us “High levels of park attendance affiliated with vehicular traffic have caused the Yosemite National Park administration to wonder how it can still allow visitors to enjoy the exuberance of the park, but, at the same time, preserve the habitat of the more popular

Many do not realize how beneficial state parks and forests are for people and a state’s economy. Hundreds of people are employed by the state park system to maintain all of the parks and forests throughout the state. Parks and forests provide hundreds of people with the availability to exercise outdoors and stay active with their lives. They also provide wildlife habitats for many different species of animals and allow them to coexist with people in our world.

The ideas on how to manage parks are varied. Based on a great spike in usage with population growth as a primary contributing factor, there is a good deal of information and debate on whether parks are a right and should be protected or are places that need to stand on their own. Information on this topic is easily found to debate. Experts abound in Colorado as such a great deal of our economy is based on tourism and use of the land. Much of the research on the state of Colorado and its parks is readily available due to having a populace that is among the most active and healthy in the United States and not only values the access to outdoor recreation but demands it. The peer reviewed articles tend to be based on the national parks, and they are tougher to find; however, based on issue of the fee hikes being raised they seem to be be possible to use to tie into the discussion without

To many complications will come from a dog park. Such as situations like a dog attacking another dog or even attacking someone else. This can cause a lot of upset owners. Also many painful court cases. Dog parks will bring up a lot of legal issues that we don't need.

Davis, Charles. "The politics of “fracking”: Regulating natural gas drilling practices in Colorado and Texas." Review of Policy Research 29.2 (2012): 177-191.

Building a new park there are many positive and a few negative impacts. A positive impact can be children having a place to play. A negative impact will be the animals in the area losing their homes. We, as humans, have to be considerate of every living thing and not just

It is not in the states that it is affecting. Many people argue that national parks are more important than private industries, but the private industries could do more good in the land on some of the unneeded national parks. There are many private organizations who run parks. Here is a link to one of them: http://parkprivatization.com/. This website shows who a private organization can do a better at running parks than the government because they have more motivation. It is great to get some fresh air, maybe camp and do outdoor activities, but it is not needed to have 25% of the country off-limits and owned by the government just for this small advantage. There are billions of dollars pumped into the national parks that could be given back to the taxpayer. Taxes could be lowered more than one percent, the EPA, if it was cut, could give back almost another full percent. This is more money to the taxpayers and less to the power hungry

As a Canadian scientist, who had been living along the shores of the Great Lakes, I feel a necessity to write this editorial regarding the State of the Great Lakes, condition of which has worsened in the past couple decades. They are an important economic resource, supporting shipping, industry, fishing, tourism, and, thus, needs to be protected.

188 articles in 1990 when congressional hearings were held on the issue (9). (4) In a study in 1995

Since the early 1920s to the 1970s, there has been a debate regarding the perceptions and standards by which national parks should be established and limiting the expansion of national parks, limiting access for people living in urban areas and threatening open spaces due to urban sprawl and over population. Gradually traditional perceptions gave way to the preservationists’ viewpoints which redefined and gradually expanded federal definition of national parks. This was to include areas that may not be extraordinarily scenic but still required environmental protection or allowed recreational access for urban citizens, allowing for expansion and more funding.

Throughout this article, most of it pertained to how the environmental community has shown that global warming is a social problem, while the public determined that global warming is a legitimate problem and supports policies that work against it. However, during the 1990s, the United State’s policies and beliefs on global warming were put into question. This is a result of the conservative movement challenging the notion whether or not climate change and global warming are social problems. The conservative movement pushes this further by using the media, creating policy forums, and sponsoring press conferences for policy makers in order to emphasize their point on how global warming is not a serious social issue.

When reading NPR article “15 years of wrangling over yellowstone snowmobiles ends” I read about how the” us government made new rules that should make the countys oldest national park cleaner and quieter” (Shogren)and the events that lead up to this situation. “The new rule allows only a certain amount of people in the park each day”. This quote shows how their limiting the amount of snow travel in the park” (Shogren). The park was getting so polluted that the rangers were wearing respirators be able to breath” (Shogren). This quote shows how the 2 stroke snowmobiles were making it hard to breath at the park's entrances”. The park now has few standards that snowmobiles can pass” (Shogren). This quote shows how they made emission standards few

It was right for people to reintroduce wolves into Yellowstone park. It was right because like in the second paragraph the wolves changed how Yellowstone was. Like I said, wolves are keystone species and in an ecosystem you need keystone species to keep an ecosystem at its best. With and without the wolves in Yellowstone the park is very different. Let me ask you, would you like to go to a park with a ton of deer, no birds, dead plants and trees, and other wildlife that in non existent in that area. Or would you rather go to a park with beautiful plants and tall trees, lots of wildlife, etc. In my opinion I would rather go to the park with lots of wildlife and beautiful plants and trees. According to National Geographic, Yellowstone National

The Issue of National Park conservation has become a widely controversial issue today. With the National debt reaching 17 trillion dollars some politicians think it is alright to either sell off national park land to commercial foresters, miners, and even foreign nations or to just close some parks entirely to make up some of the national debt. They are completely unaware that the parks arent just a “pretty area of land for tourists”. Many cities depend on the parks for their well-being. A quote from a local newspaper in California supports this “National parks don’t boast concession stands or charge tax, but data indicates they bring in millions of dollars to local economies each year”(Tree). Supporters of cutting the parks include big CEO’s of major companies and some of them not even in this country.