Star-Tribune Editorial Board

The latest judicial ruling on snowmobiles in Yellowstone National Park illustrates why brokering a compromise among interested parties would be much preferable to seeking a legal remedy.

If both sides in the dispute don't reach a consensus, this issue may never leave the court system. Any "permanent" plan issued by the National Park Service to allow - or ban - snowmobiles in Yellowstone will be subject to appeal by either conservation groups or the snowmobile industry and its supporters.

And as recent history shows us, competing interests will be allowed to shop for a federal judge whose recommendation will be favorable to a respective cause.

U.S. District Judge Clarence Brimmer did a good job of explaining the dilemma last week in a 21-page ruling.

The snowmobile issue has raged for years throughout the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations. The Park Service's latest plan would have allowed up to 540 snowmobiles into Yellowstone on a daily basis during the winter.

Conservation groups, who generally back the use of snowcoaches instead of snowmobiles, sued. U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan of Washington, D.C., rejected the plan because he agreed that it would increase air pollution, disturb wildlife and cause too much noise.

The state of Wyoming previously filed its own lawsuit in Brimmer's court, arguing that more snowmobiles should be allowed in the Park Service's plan.

In his ruling, Brimmer said Sullivan was wrong. The Park Service, he determined, "thoroughly reviewed and investigated the effects of the final rule on the environment" of Yellowstone and Grand Teton national parks.

While Brimmer criticized Sullivan for not deferring the case to the federal court in Wyoming, the Wyoming-based judge noted he doesn't have the power to revoke or alter the decision from Washington.

But Brimmer did throw a curve ball into the mix. He said the Park Service's temporary winter use plan to cap the number of snowmobiles in Yellowstone at 318 a day was too few. He ordered the agency to return to the restrictions that have been in place on a temporary basis for the past four years: 720 snowmobiles a day.

Brimmer was right. For years, businesses in communities surrounding the park have been unable to properly plan for the number of people who want to visit Yellowstone in the winter. At the proposed 318 limit, tourists who booked reservations far in advance might arrive at a gateway community only to learn that their snowmobile trip has been canceled.

Going back to the 720 limit set in 2004, Brimmer correctly reasoned, "will provide businesses and tourists with the certainty that is needed in this confusing litigation."

But it has set up a strange scenario in which one judge says 540 snowmobiles a day is too many, and the other judge says let's make it 720 until we can sort this all out.

The public has a right to be concerned about where all of this will end. First, the Park Service has a responsibility to provide public access to Yellowstone throughout the year. Second, the public - as represented by the state of Wyoming - is paying a substantial part of the tab for this litigation.

What's needed is a way to facilitate a compromise among all of the interests, so that a final winter use rule by the Park Service will really be final. At some point, the frustrated public will demand a solution. But until everyone agrees to come to the table determined to reach a deal, the federal courts will continue to be a revolving door for lawsuits.