I'm not sure it's good news that visitors are unconcerned. It's the same thing with newcomers to Montana who think things are great and so what if Gallatin Valley is becoming a sprawling little city or Paradise Valley is filling up with homes? People from overcrowded areas have a very low bar for what constitutes a quality outdoor experience, and the value of solitude, among other things, is increasingly lost on many people. Mankind's perspective on natural experiences is changing, and not for the better (and the change doesn't benefit nature, either).
I hear you. And yet I think this is the essential paradox that I wanted to explore. People say they're happy despite congestion. People say they don't want shuttles. When shuttles are studied, the experts find drawbacks. When shuttles are provided, the providers can't find enough riders to stay in business. Meanwhile, the ecosystem indicators in the park are positive. And I don't know how to say that's "not good news" except by saying "People are stupid and I know better than them what's best for them," which doesn't seem like a winning attitude either tactically or philosophically.
Good Mountain Journal article, by the way. People may not be stupid, but that does not mean they know what’s best for the park or that they appreciate the bigger picture of the health of the park and its future. Or care about much beyond visiting Yellowstone Park, checking it off their list and then continuing with their vacation. Certainly more congestion is not good for Yellowstone Park (or the experience of it, for many of us), whether it’s in the form of more and bigger roads, larger parking lots or more campgrounds, all filled to the brim. On top of that, obviously, is a certain political party that would like to “corporatize” our national parks and emphasize maximizing profit, à la Disneyland, with no regard for the health of our parks. If the only option for getting around some or all of a park is shuttle buses they will be used. As your article points out, though, there are lots of options and possibilities. But allowing everyone to enter the park and drive wherever they want in a private vehicle, whenever they want, ultimately will not be feasible, especially as overpopulation worsens.
Thanks! One of the reasons I was obsessed with this feasibility study was that it implied that shuttle buses would require more bigger parking lots, etc., that might degrade natural conditions more than traffic congestion does. I hear you disagreeing. It'd be interesting to get more expert analysis.
John — The last words of your post: “‘success’ was the opportunity to take the journey.” Perfect! I wish those words had occurred to me over the 13 years since the sad end of my involvement in the Linx Cooperative Yellowstone Transit project. I find it strange to look back wistfully, even with an internal smile, on a grand “failure.” But now I understand: Success was the opportunity to take the journey. Which I treasure.
There's a paragraph we cut from the Mountain Journal story because it felt a bit too intrusive, my voice intruding on a story that belonged to you and your colleagues: "YBP had done some good and then, like an entrepreneur, put all of its chips on a risky but potentially transformative initiative. Not every organization needs to last forever." The journey may not have ended up where you hoped it would, but to my mind, even showing us that such explorations were possible was a success.
I'm not sure it's good news that visitors are unconcerned. It's the same thing with newcomers to Montana who think things are great and so what if Gallatin Valley is becoming a sprawling little city or Paradise Valley is filling up with homes? People from overcrowded areas have a very low bar for what constitutes a quality outdoor experience, and the value of solitude, among other things, is increasingly lost on many people. Mankind's perspective on natural experiences is changing, and not for the better (and the change doesn't benefit nature, either).
I hear you. And yet I think this is the essential paradox that I wanted to explore. People say they're happy despite congestion. People say they don't want shuttles. When shuttles are studied, the experts find drawbacks. When shuttles are provided, the providers can't find enough riders to stay in business. Meanwhile, the ecosystem indicators in the park are positive. And I don't know how to say that's "not good news" except by saying "People are stupid and I know better than them what's best for them," which doesn't seem like a winning attitude either tactically or philosophically.
Good Mountain Journal article, by the way. People may not be stupid, but that does not mean they know what’s best for the park or that they appreciate the bigger picture of the health of the park and its future. Or care about much beyond visiting Yellowstone Park, checking it off their list and then continuing with their vacation. Certainly more congestion is not good for Yellowstone Park (or the experience of it, for many of us), whether it’s in the form of more and bigger roads, larger parking lots or more campgrounds, all filled to the brim. On top of that, obviously, is a certain political party that would like to “corporatize” our national parks and emphasize maximizing profit, à la Disneyland, with no regard for the health of our parks. If the only option for getting around some or all of a park is shuttle buses they will be used. As your article points out, though, there are lots of options and possibilities. But allowing everyone to enter the park and drive wherever they want in a private vehicle, whenever they want, ultimately will not be feasible, especially as overpopulation worsens.
Thanks! One of the reasons I was obsessed with this feasibility study was that it implied that shuttle buses would require more bigger parking lots, etc., that might degrade natural conditions more than traffic congestion does. I hear you disagreeing. It'd be interesting to get more expert analysis.
John — The last words of your post: “‘success’ was the opportunity to take the journey.” Perfect! I wish those words had occurred to me over the 13 years since the sad end of my involvement in the Linx Cooperative Yellowstone Transit project. I find it strange to look back wistfully, even with an internal smile, on a grand “failure.” But now I understand: Success was the opportunity to take the journey. Which I treasure.
There's a paragraph we cut from the Mountain Journal story because it felt a bit too intrusive, my voice intruding on a story that belonged to you and your colleagues: "YBP had done some good and then, like an entrepreneur, put all of its chips on a risky but potentially transformative initiative. Not every organization needs to last forever." The journey may not have ended up where you hoped it would, but to my mind, even showing us that such explorations were possible was a success.