Two Segway entrepreneurs have their sights on Yosemite and Sequoia national parks as the next frontier for these two-wheeled contraptions. Steve Steinberg and Darren Romar, who operate Segway of Oakland, want to offer fleets of these "human transporters" to the two parks.
"We want to expand rental operations into the U.S. National Park Service, and we're ready to take on bigger things like Yosemite," Mr. Steinberg said in a PR release. "Our goal is to work out partnerships where we supply Segway units to start your own turnkey operation, and support for when you are running the operation. We are already looking into a partnership with a concessionaire and we are excited about the Parks. We can only take on so many locations, but right now we're looking for good partnerships"
Of course, the rhetorical question is whether Yosemite and Sequoia and other national parks need Segways tooling around their roads? Another question is why the National Park Service would want to invite Segways into the parks?
It wasn't too long ago that former NPS Director Fran Mainella was touting the healthy benefits of recreation in the parks. It was back in June of 2006 when Ms. Mainella talked about the Park Service's efforts to "advance the physical and mental health of the American public by encouraging additional, appropriate physical activity during visits to national park units."
Riding a Segway around a park doesn't exactly seem terribly physical.
Beyond that, can anyone demonstrate a need to do away with the traditional ranger-led tour of a park? Or are we to assume that rangers will continue to lead tours, but only involving herds of Segwayians? Of course, the savvy Segway fleet owner could equip his units with "electronic rangers" and do away with the living and breathing ranger entirely.
Seriously, though, do we really need to add to the congestion that already exists in Yosemite Valley, where cars, hikers, joggers, cyclists and regular pedestrians already eat up most of the available ground space? Should the Park Service be advocating against walking and hiking? Should the agency be encouraging younger generations to avoid using their feet to explore the parks?
In their drive to "take on" the national parks, will Messieurs Steinberg and Romar lobby to see that Segways gain access to paved trails? And if that's accomplished, will they then outfit Segways with more rugged, knobby tires to conquer hiking trails?
Perhaps there are places in the national park system where Segways make sense, but I hope the Park Service doesn't believe Yosemite, Sequoia, Yellowstone, Grand Canyon and the other 54 "national parks" are among them.
Support Essential Coverage of Essential Places
Comments
To the people with bad knees: get a wheelchair! I have bad knees and would rather ride a bike, particularly in wilderness, but I can't. Segways are not street legal, so no roads, and they take up too much room on the trails, which were not designed for them.
Now if you want to use the Honda U3X, that might be ok, as it does not take up too much room
The majority of comments I see here are consistent with what I would've written prior to 2001. That was the year I was diagnosed with a spinal cord tumor. I had surgery to remove the tumor in September 2001. My life hasn't been the same since. I can walk short distances with a walker or canes. By not allowing me access to the Park, and I mean access equal to able bodied visitors, you are on equal footing with those small minded bigots who sought to keep minorities as second class citizen. There are mobility devices out there that allow me (almost) full access. There are all terrain Segways with amazing potential. They can navigate modera inclines and run on dirt and gravel trails. Not all people seeking to ride Segways are fat and lazy.