National Park Service law enforcement rangers will be dispatched to Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument and Amistad National Recreation Area to help with border control.

Teams of law enforcement rangers next week will be dispatched from around the National Park System to Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument in Arizona and Amistad National Recreation Area in Texas on a rotating basis to help with border control.

At a time when the National Park Service's law enforcement ranks are stetched thin, according to Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, and as crowds are starting to arrive at parks throughout the system for summer vacations, the assignments have been ordered by the Interior Department "in support of the President's commitment to secure the Nation's borders."

The deployments, outlined in a memo from R. Duane Michael, acting chief ranger for the National Park Service's Northeast Region, came as a surprise to park advocates.

"I would want to know what are the consequences of these 14-day assignments and the added costs associated with this practice," said Phil Francis, a Park Service veteran of more than four decades who now chairs the Coalition to Protect America's National Park's executive council. "If this is a new NPS responsibility, then I suggest that Congress should fund this in lieu of (the Park Service) absorbing this responsibility. In my experience, we are underfunded and this exacerbates the problem."

Communications staff at the Interior Department and the National Park Service headquarters did not immediately respond to Traveler questions concerning:

* the costs of the deployments

* whether Organ Pipe and Amistad have seen a recent uptick in illegal border crossings

* which parks are being asked to provide rangers for this program

* whether any parks along the U.S.-Canada border will see similar deployments, and,

* whether anything was being done to help short-staffed parks across the system that are trying to protect resources and provide visitors with an enjoyable experience.

“As summer quickly approaches and we near the busiest season for many of our national parks, the administration’s plan to take law enforcement rangers away from already understaffed and underfunded parks is irresponsible," said Theresa Pierno, president and CEO of the National Parks Conservation Association. "Furthermore, it is unclear how long the Interior Department will continue to relocate National Park Service personnel to the southern border and the impact this could have on visitors across the country.

“This decision could have serious consequences for national parks already struggling with an 11 percent reduction in staff while also experiencing a 19 percent increase in visitation," she added. "Millions of visitors flock to national parks located along our southern border each year to experience the pristine landscapes, unique wildlife, abundant recreational opportunities and cultural resources these places offer. The administration should properly invest in the long-term staffing needs of the national parks on the border and nationwide, rather than shortchanging visitors through this disruptive plan.”

At the Sierra Club, officials called the deployments a waste of taxpayer dollars.

“The decision to send park police to the border is yet another example of Ryan Zinke misusing taxpayer funds and failing to carry out his duties as Secretary of the Interior," said Dan Millis of the Sierra Club Grand Canyon Chapter Borderlands Program. "He’s wasting billions of taxpayer dollars and threatening border communities to promote this administration’s xenophobic agenda.

“Our parks need maintenance funding, improved accessibility, and staff-- not officers sent to harass and racially-profile people on our public lands."

The Kris Eggle Memorial at Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument's Visitor Center/Kurt Repanshek

Under the deployment plan, teams of seven rangers -- four law enforcement rangers, two U.S. Park Police officers, and one Investigative Services Branch ranger -- will be dispatched on two-week details "to increase staffing and capacity at the designated border parks," according to Chief Michael's memo. "These resources will be under the operational control of the assigned park and will (1) support normal park operations and (2) conduct operations that support CBP border security objectives."

The deployments come at a time when border crossings have dropped significantly; in fiscal 2017, apprehensions were down to their lowest level since 1971, according to the Migration Policy Institute in Washington, D.C. Too, more of those caught crossing the U.S.-Mexico border were likely doing so to seek asylum.

Those arriving at the border now are more likely to be asylum seekers from Central America, many of whom turn themselves in to agents or at official ports of entry rather than trying to cross without detection. In FY 2017, 58 percent of apprehended border crossers were from countries other than Mexico, compared to 11 percent in 2010 and 9 percent in 2006. And asylum applications are up by more than 900 percent since the National Guard was last deployed: In FY 2017, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) made nearly 80,000 credible fear determinations in asylum cases, compared to fewer than 8,000 in 2010.

The deployments also come at a time when the ranks of National Park Service law enforcement rangers is shrinking, according to a May 2017 report from Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility.

Aggravating its diminishing resources, National Park Service’s (NPS) law enforcement program is adrift because it does not possess any real planning capacity, budgetary stability or overall leadership.

Figures released by NPS to PEER indicate that the number of permanent law enforcement rangers dropped by nearly 14% (from 1548 to 1331) in the decade spanning 2005 to 2016. The ranks of seasonal rangers covering the peak month of August fell 18% (502 to 407) from 2010 to 2016. This cut violates a 2001 NPS policy of “no net loss” in law enforcement ranger staffing levels and comes despite –

* Record high park visitation for the past three years, with more than 300 million visitors in 2016;

*  The significant expansion in the number of parks, with 34 new park units added since 2009, bringing the park system total to 417 units today; and

*  The resulting increase in calls for law enforcement assistance, ranging from medical emergencies to visitors posing for selfies with wildlife.

In the wake of the murder of Ranger Kris Eggle, who was shot and killed in August 2009 by a member of a Mexican drug cartel who crossed into Organ Pipe Cactus, there were concerns voiced that Park Service law enforcement rangers were not properly trained for dealing with drug runners and other violent border crossers. That apparently has changed, though, in the ensuing years.

"Some absolutely are trained properly for this, but not all," a retired National Park Service Special Agent said in an email to the Traveler. "I believe rangers from the NPS and BLM have routinely been rotating through assignments down there for some time. So the question is who will be assigned and how will those selections be made."

The retired agent, who asked not to be identified, added that Park Service rangers should be involved in this work.

"I do believe that we should be patrolling these areas, the amount of resource damage caused by illegal immigration and drug smuggling is unbelievable," he said. "Also, the public’s safety is a big concern. And if people are concerned about the illegal immigrants welfare (the women are sexually assaulted, people are abandoned if they can’t keep up, or people are forced to carry backpacks of marijuana if they want to get into the US). I think the only way it works is for all of the effected agencies to work together."

He also said it's important for the Park Service and other land-management agencies to be involved with border patrol.

"If they are not, Border Patrol/Customs is far more likely to ignore resource protection issues," he said. "Yes, there are risks … but those risks exist for every agency. Kris Eggle was an unfortunate casualty of these assignments, but his case should not be used as justification for the NPS to withdraw. Incidents like his have repeatedly been used over the decades to argue against NPS law enforcement going back to the 1950s. But if we don’t do it, somebody else will … and NPS should not forfeit its role in protecting public lands and visitors to those lands."