The issue is the purpose of a National Park, not whether or not jet skis have motors or whether their owners are irresponsible. The National Parks in most countries exist to preserve and protect and make available to humans the diversity of the natural world. If human inventions do that, they are accommodated or at least tolerated. Examples: River rafts to assist people looking at the Grand Canyon; Jet boats to assist people looking at Hells Canyon; Cars to assist people exploring Yosemite -- looking from the car and driving to trail heads; Kayaks and Canoes to assist people exploring various places; Snow mobiles to make exploration of the natural diversity possible in Yellowstone in the winter. I do not agree that all these are the best or even reasonable ways to learn about and enjoy the natural environment. But I believe that is their justification. Now a device -- a jet ski -- is invented for the sole purpose of going zoom. National Parks do not exist for people to go zoom. If jet skiers could convince us that their devices were necessary to get to trail heads, or to watch grizzley bears, they might be able to make a case. But the best case I hear is that the Park is a nice backdrop for going zoom. Well National Parks are also nice backdrops for golf, skiing, football, drag racing, summo wrestling, hang gliding, target practice, steel manufacturing, and war games. We could build golf courses and football stadiums and factories in Yosemite and Yellowstone and Jasper. But being a nice back drop is not sufficient justification. The activity has to relate to the park's natural environment and or to humans relating to that environment. I agree that jet skis might be great fun and can be used responsibly. That does not justify their use in a National Park. It probably does justify their use in what in the USA we call National Recreation Areas, which are run by the Park Service. Those areas should give the Jet skiers and hang gliders and sail boaters plenty of places to play. Motors may intensify conflicting uses. But the presence or absence of motors is not the deciding factor in their use in National Parks. *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/ ***************************************************************************
> Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 22:38:42 -0700 > From: Brian Heath <bheath_at_televar.com> > To: Paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net > Subject: [Paddlewise] PWCs > The issue is the purpose of a National Park, not whether or not jet > skis have motors or whether their owners are irresponsible. The > National Parks in most countries exist to preserve and protect and make > available to humans the diversity of the natural world. If human > inventions do that, they are accommodated or at least tolerated. > Examples: River rafts to assist people looking at the Grand Canyon; > Jet boats to assist people looking at Hells Canyon; Cars to assist > people exploring Yosemite -- looking from the car and driving to trail > heads; Kayaks and Canoes to assist people exploring various places; > Snow mobiles to make exploration of the natural diversity possible in > Yellowstone in the winter. I do not agree that all these are the best > or even reasonable ways to learn about and enjoy the natural > environment. But I believe that is their justification. > > Now a device -- a jet ski -- is invented for the sole purpose of > going zoom. National Parks do not exist for people to go zoom. If jet > skiers could convince us that their devices were necessary to get to > trail heads, or to watch grizzley bears, they might be able to make a > case. But the best case I hear is that the Park is a nice backdrop for > going zoom. Well National Parks are also nice backdrops for golf, > skiing, football, drag racing, summo wrestling, hang gliding, target > practice, steel manufacturing, and war games. We could build golf > courses and football stadiums and factories in Yosemite and Yellowstone > and Jasper. But being a nice back drop is not sufficient > justification. The activity has to relate to the park's natural > environment and or to humans relating to that environment. > > I agree that jet skis might be great fun and can be used > responsibly. That does not justify their use in a National Park. It > probably does justify their use in what in the USA we call National > Recreation Areas, which are run by the Park Service. Those areas should > > give the Jet skiers and hang gliders and sail boaters plenty of places > to play. Motors may intensify conflicting uses. But the presence or > absence of motors is not the deciding factor in their use in National > Parks. > > *************************************************************************** > PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List > Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net > Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net > Website: http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/ > *************************************************************************** > If Gengis Khan and Attila the Hun were alive today, they would have jet skis and snowmobiles, and would take them to our national parks. Brad Crain ********************************************************************** Bradford R. Crain E-mail: brad_at_mth.pdx.edu Dept. of Mathematics Phone: (503) 725-3127 Portland State Univ. FAX: (503) 725-3661 P.O. Box 751 Portland, Or. 97207 ********************************************************************** *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/ ***************************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:32:50 PDT