Proposal to Allow Guns in National Parks Sparks Crossfire of Comment

WASHINGTON — A Bush administration proposal that would allow loaded guns to be carried in national parks is provoking a crossfire of controversy.

On one side are the National Rifle Association and 47 senators seeking a rule change to allow the firearms. On the other are all seven living former National Park Service directors and several park employee groups.

For the past 23 years, carrying firearms in parks has been permitted only in designated locations where hunting and target practice is legal. Otherwise, guns must be "inoperable or packed, cased or stored in a manner that will prevent their ready use," according to Park Service regulations.

"It's a ridiculous idea to change regulations that are working just fine," said Bryan Faehner, legislative representative for the National Parks Conservation Association.

"Parks are safe. The current regulation is in place to keep parks safe and make sure that poachers don't get away with poaching in parks. There is just no need (to change the rule). It is a crazy political stunt by the NRA," he said.

"This policy change is coming from a political situation at the Department of Interior level, and the Park Service doesn't want this," he said.

The National Rifle Association disagrees, saying park patrons should be able to use legal means to protect themselves from wild animals and violent crime.

"If there are politics being played, it's by those who continue to misrepresent the facts and law-abiding people who want to defend themselves and families from two-legged and four-legged creatures," said the NRA's chief lobbyist, Chris W. Cox.

The controversy began in December when the 47 senators sent the first of two letters to Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne requesting that the Park Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service remove restrictions on the carrying and transport of firearms.

"Regulatory changes would respect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners, while providing a consistent application of state weapons laws across all land ownership boundaries," the letter said.

Signatories included Sens. Mel Martinez, R-Fla.; Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., Johnny Isakson, R-Ga.; Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, and John Cornyn, R-Texas. Sen. John McCain of Arizona, expected to be the Republican presidential nominee, also signed.

Kempthorne responded by assigning Lyle Laverty, an assistant secretary, to develop a regulation by April 30 that would update firearms policies in national parks. Once it is issued, the public will have 60 days to comment before the department takes final action.

"Obviously, maintaining the safety of national parks is of utmost concern," said Chris Paolino, spokesperson for the Department of the Interior. "That will be at forefront of our processes. We'll consider the original intent of these regulations — to prevent unlawful plinking and poaching — and we'll want to keep those prevention-type concepts alive as we undertake this project."

All seven surviving former National Park Service directors have sent letters to Kempthorne defending the current restrictions on firearms.

Fran Mainella, the immediate former Park Service director, who was appointed by President Bush, said the current rules "have been received very well and we just ask Kempthorne to keep them that way."

While the NRA has urged Interior to follow state laws on federal parkland, Mainella and the other former directors are pushing for one set of regulations that would apply in all parks nationwide.

"We have over 270 million visitors a year, some visit several parks in different states. The most important thing is for them to feel that they are coming into a special place with special rules," said Mainella, a former director of Florida state parks.

Other organizations opposed to changing the rule, such as the Association of National Park Rangers, the Ranger Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police, and the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees, have said that carrying a loaded gun could give visitors a false sense of security. They said that there are more effective precautions that can be taken to protect families against animals, such as bear spray.

Supporters of the rule change argue that guns should be available in all areas to protect visitors.

"I think people should use whatever means necessary to defend themselves and their families," Cox said. "If a lawful person chooses to run from an attack, by all means run fast as you can. If you choose to use (bear) spray or jingle bells, then by all means do so. You should have the right to whatever legitimate option you choose."

Beyond the danger from animals, some note that production of illegal drugs such as marijuana and methamphetamine are on the rise in national forests. While neither the National Park Service nor the U.S. Forest Service keeps statistics on violent crime in parks, rangers across the country have told reporters they see an increase.

Allowing guns in parks "is not only common sense, but good policy," said Cox. "The dire predictions of shootouts in the streets are the same we heard during the debate over the right to carry (concealed handguns). Those predictions have not materialized, in fact, the opposite has happened. There has been a benefit to community."