http://www.jacksonholenews.com/Archi...17-enviro.html

"Judge Sullivan's ruling is peppered with harsh language. While judges
typically defer to agency professionals, Sullivan said this case
deserved tougher scrutiny because of the "180 degree reversal." He
concluded that the Park Service failed to "meet its obligation to
explain" the dramatic shift in directions.

"Indeed, there is evidence in the Record that there isn't an
explanation for this change, and that the [new study] was completely
politically driven and result oriented," he wrote.

Sullivan cites internal Park Service documents that indicate the
agency's objective was not to take a new look but to find a way to
continue snowmobiling.

He quotes a participant in a Park Service meeting, who stated: "Gale
Norton wants to be able to come away saying some snowmobiles are
allowed."

Sullivan was unconvinced by Park Service arguments that new technology
justified taking a new look at the snowmobile phaseout.

Comments from the Environmental Protection Agency show the Park
Service had accurately projected potential benefits of cleaner,
quieter snowmobiles in the first plan, he said."