You are here

Around The Parks: A Blurring Of National Park Lines

Share
The National Park Service, and its employees, should not be blamed for the parks' closure.

Around the country, as the partial government shutdown moves into its second week, taxpayers angry with the closure of national parks are showing their disgust through civil disobedience, mockery, and anger directed at the National Park Service.

The national park idea, long recognized as America's best, is being degraded and disrespected as the result of a much different idea—using the parks as leverage to try to gain the advantage in a political donnybrook.

Many of the government functions impacted by the shutdown, while important, simply don't have the same media interest—or impact on the general public—as closure of the national parks. It's hard to generate a compelling news photo based on the interruption of airliner safety inspection or suspensions of some FDA food safety inspections. Hang a closed sign on the entrance to the Grand Canyon, however, or put a belligerent congressman face-to-face with a ranger at the World War II Memorial on the National Mall, and you have plenty of fodder for the prime-time network news.

The result is an agency and its employees caught in the middle of a fight it didn't create—or want.

Some critics are driven by anger over loss of income from the parks' closure. Others by disgust with Obama administration. Still others seemingly by the belief that the federal government has no right to close the parks. In the end, however, it's the rangers on the ground who are seen as the "face" of the shutdown.

Some Republicans in Congress, particularly in the House, blame the administration for the parks' continued closure, pointing out that that chamber voted to restore funding for the Park Service, among some other agencies and programs. But that legislation was tied to a demand that the Affordable Care Act be scaled back. Some protesting the parks' closure staged an "occupy" movement of Zion National Park last week, a protest that reportedly drew fewer than two dozen.

Many more turned out at Acadia National Park, where they simply walked around barricades to spend a beautiful fall afternoon on the park's Carriage Roads. One of those visitors was involved in a backcountry accident, and the resulting rescue severely taxed the limited resources of a park in "shutdown mode."

Alternate Text
At Acadia National Park this week, many cyclists routinely ignored the "closed" signs at the Carriage Roads. Rebecca Latson photo.

No doubt other parks saw visitors ignore the closure signs. There's even a "movement" encouraging people to enter the parks while they're closed.

In Florida, word that the waters of Everglades and Biscayne national parks were being closed led to ridicule of the Obama administration for "closing the ocean." However, the waters adjoining those two parks are as much part of the parks as the Thorofare region of Yellowstone National Park is part of that park, as the Tuloumne Meadows area is of Yosemite National Park, as the Maze is of Canyonlands National Park, and as the Cataloochee Valley is of Great Smoky Mountains National Park.

Too, Biscayne counts approximately 40 keys, or islets, within its watery landscape. That seascape, which comprises 95 percent of the park, also holds historic shipwrecks and fragile coral reefs that have suffered in the past from poachers of history. Those of Everglades hold vital habitat for fisheries.

When those parks were created, the Park Service was charged with overseeing those resources, and with reduced ranks spurred by the failure of Congress to pass a Continuing Resolution to keep the government funded, the agency is sorely lacking the manpower to monitor those areas.

"Whether units of the NPS are historic buildings that can be physically closed by closing a door, or parks with entrance stations able to close with a staff person speaking to visitors or by pulling gates across roads or in the case of some of our nation's most sacred sites, from the Lincoln Memorial to the Jefferson Memorial to the new WW ll Memorial that do not have physical doors or gates to close - these places are all a part of the National Park System whether they have a structure to close or they are sites without a defined entrance point such as the Lincoln Memorial," said Joan Anzelmo, a former park superintendent and now a member of the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees.

"The NPS is responsible for them and they are on federal lands. If left unstaffed in ways the public can see -- and more importantly in the ways the public can't see -- these places will not be preserved the way the agency has been directed to do by Congress," she added. "Congress can't direct the agency on one hand to protect the parks (all of them) so they are unimpaired for the future generations and then suddenly just say never mind- let them be open or let some of them be open. The U.S. National Park System has been an exemplar to the world and parks and the employees should not be played as pawns by Congress."

Regarding the situation at the National Mall, where attention has been focused on access, in particular, to the World War II Veterans Memorial, Ms. Anzelmo pointed to the status of all of the Mall's memorials as icons of our nation ... and also as potential targets for those who wish to do our country harm.

"I worked the shutdown in '95 and '96 and remember there were barricades placed at the Lincoln and Jefferson Memorials in that shutdown. Fast forward these 17 years and the security concerns area thousand times what they were in the innocent 1990s especially at the iconic locations such as the National Mall and Memorials in Washington, D.C.," she said. "
There are many behind-the-scenes security-related components, including staff (uniform and plain clothes) that are in place to protect these sacred sites and the millions of people who visit them. When you furlough the vast majority of the workforce due to no appropriation you suddenly reduce the capacity to safely protect the sacred sites themselves and to protect the visitors who wish to visit them. This is very serious business in present day times."

That the National Park System has become a pawn in Congress's malfeasance is unfortunate, regrettable, and unnecessarily places the rangers, and the public, at risk.

Featured Article

Comments

been cited as a "factual" source by one of our favorite negativists.

Could you identify when and where that happened? Just checking the facts.

{edit} Apologies - I first read that as a poster here claimed the Russians would be guarding. Now I see that you are discrediting every story on INFOWARS because one of their stories was inaccurate. In that case I guess we have to dismiss the entire media because I dare say not one of them have been 100% accurate.

As usual you try to discredit the source rather than address the actual facts that were in whatever story you are referencing. That is what one does when they don't have legitimate arguments.


Sorry, sweetcheeks.

Declaring that a dog's tail is a leg doesn't give the dog five legs. Your declaring that a claim on a source you like is as 'fact' doesn't make it so.


Who was it that said "believe NOTHING you 'hear' and only HALF of what you 'see' with your very own eyes"? Not sure who it was originally; but, I've been quoting it for about 50 years.


Your declaring that a claim on a source you like is as 'fact' doesn't make it so.

I have declared no such thing. I don't even have a clue what story or comment Lee is referencing. What I am declaring is one erroneous story does not make every other claim from that source false. Do we discredit everything CBS says because Dan Rather made up stuff?

If you have an argument, make it with facts. Discrediting a claim because of its source is nothing more than wimping out because you have nothing else to back your stance.


I'm not all that insecure about 'wimping out'; perhaps that is a concern for you as you keep mentioning it.

No, I have to disagree with you. Part of critical thinking is evaluating the source of the information you are contemplating.


This article is a little bias...you mentioned GOP's willingness to negociate for keeping NPs open but failed to note GOP is the same group that insist to hold the entire gov't down to its knees if it doesn't get it's way with defunding and/or delaying the Affordable Care Act. It is a law! It has been tested and approved by Supreme Court. In 2-years GOP tried to repeal it 43 times...a little excessive, no?!

This shutdown doesn't have to happen at all. If not the national park, it would be some other "non-essential" daily needs from our govt services that would pissed everyone off. The argument for smaller govt and less spending is so simple but it will never happen, we are stuck in an military-industrial-complex. This goes back to at least Eisenhower's recognization of the problem in 1961 and we have made no progress since.

Challenges facing our nation can be complex at times, but this doesn't mean each time, we must resort to shutdown to make a point. Especially when that point has been voted 43 times. I must admit it's great for talking heads in TV shows...more importantly, other nations get to laugh at our expense...literally!


but failed to note GOP is the same group that insist to hold the entire gov't down to its knees if it doesn't get it's way with defunding and/or delaying the Affordable Care Act. It is a law!

And the requirement that the House fund is the law too. In fact, it is the law spelled out in the Constitution which trumps all else. What you have failed to note is that the GOP was willing to fund 99+% of the government including most of Obamacare. They only asked for two things:

1) Congress be subject to the same rules as the public and

2) Individuals get the same 1 year delay in the mandate as corporations

Which of those two do you think is unreasonable?

Justin won't answer, and unless I missed it Kurt hasn't answered. Perhaps you would like to take a stab.


No, I have to disagree with you.

OK. So we dismiss everything that CBS says because of Dan Rather. We dismiss everything the New York times says because of Jason Blair, USA Today for Jack Kelly? Sure we can take suspect sources and give them extra scrutiny. I certainly do when reading the Times or the WashPo or listening to network news. Call it "profiling" -something I suspect you are against when it comes to crime. We may review those sources more thouroughly, but just like profiling, the suspect isn't guilty until proven so.

Dismissing any story from a "suspect" source purely because it is from that source is preemtively declaring it "guilty". It is the tact that someone takes when they lack the facts to make a legitimate argument.


The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.