A survey stemming from the Bush administration's plan to allow concealed carry of guns in national parks and national wildlife refuges predicts the result will be more wildlife shootings and management problems.
The survey, performed for the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees, found that 77 percent of 1,400 present and former employees of the National Park Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service predict that the controversial proposed rule reversing the long-standing prohibition of carrying loaded, concealed weapons in national parks and wildlife refuges will have an adverse affect on the ability of NPS and USFWS employees to accomplish their mission.
This finding and others are contained in Natural and Cultural Resource Impacts and Management Consequences of the Proposed Regulation to Authorize the Possession of Concealed Firearms in Units of the National Park & National Wildlife Refuge Systems.
While DOI has neglected to provide an analysis of the potential impacts of its proposed rule, the retirees group performed the survey to assess the impacts that these experts foresee should the regulation take effect. Other key results of the survey include:
* 75 percent feel that there will be an increase in opportunistic or impulse wildlife killings in parks and refuges; and
* 83 percent of survey respondents anticipated that the proposal will increase the overall level of complexity for management of their park or refuge.
In issuing the report, the coalition emphasized that Interior Department officials violated the procedural
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act in failing to adequately examine the foreseeable impacts of the relaxed gun regulation. Additionally, the coalition asserts that Interior officials should have consulted the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service pursuant to ESA, as 89 threatened or endangered species inhabit the parks that would be affected by the regulation.
Separately, the executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Ethics predicts that once the regulation is published in the Federal Register, a move anticipated to occur this month, “there would be a multi-group suit filed" challenging the legality of the regulation.
The new report from the coalition highlights the enforcement complexities and threats to public safety that should have been addressed in an analysis of reasonable alternatives to the rule under NEPA.
Based on the report, CNPSR is renewing its call for Interior officials to withdraw the proposed rule.
"We think the proposed rule is manufactured and driven politically to fix a problem that doesn't exist.
Data show that parks are among the safest places to be in this country," says Bill Wade, chairman of the coalition's executive council. "Moreover, we believe it will create more problems than it can possibly fix. It is likely to alter, over time, the friendly atmosphere visitors look forward to in parks, where they go to get away from the day to day pressures and influences of their everyday lives, including worry about guns."
Comments
I certainly agree with these true experts (in my opinion). Having a loaded gun handy will surely lead to problems. Too many people these days do not have any common sense and do not take responsibility for their actions. Guns in National Parks will lead to unnecessary wildlife deaths and unnecessary human conflicts.
People who would behave in the way you describe are poachers or some other type of criminal which is already prohibited from owning a firearm. Crminals already ignore prohibitions on firearms, and would prefer the rest of us unarmed. Concealed weapon permit holders have had training, been finger printed and have had backround checks. I would feel safer having these people around in a park.
"too many peoiple these days do not have any common sense and do not take responsibilty for their actions" is exactly why i or any responcible person would want to carry a concealed firearm in a remote area or where help may be far away and unable to prevent an incident
As a CCW Holder I have had training in the use of firearms and have had Background checks done by 4 States. I do not go to parks to shoot animals, I go to enjoy them. Any body thats thinks criminals are going to care what the law says, needs to be re-educated. I follow the law (all laws) that is why I was approved for a CCW permit. PLEASE WAKE UP PEOPLE!!! You may not care to defend yourself, but don't take away my right to self defense. I live in the real world not an "I WISH IT WAS WORLD!!!"
Add weapons and there will be problems.
Shot up signs, windows, the occasional wounded and dead animal or human will be a fact.
I completely reject waving a CCW/CWP in my face as proof that one is safe and sane.
I have been around a bit ya see..
"Are you talking about boats killing manatees, boats killing people in national parks, cars killing people in national parks, cars killing panthers in national parks, cars killing wolves in national parks, cars killing grizzlies in national parks? Cars killing deer? Turkeys? Black bears? Red-tailed hawks? Owls? Elk? Moose? Raccoons? Coyotes? And so on?"
No I am not, please read again what I said.
"Concealed weapons permits holders are not the ones who shoot up signs or take shots at animals. Bored kids do that. And criminals are the ones killing people, not permit holders."
And I am saying that they have and they do.
"If you really want to protect humans and wildlife, please re-prioritize what you want to (and can constitutionally) ban in national parks."
Guns are not banned in Our National Parks.
"And read Beamis' comment above."
I always read what Beamis posts.
What exactly IS the current policy on carrying firearms in our national parks? I have been an avid backpacker for several years now and am still not quite sure. I do own firearms and am a huge proponent of concealed carry - I agree with the statement "the more guns the better" - the bad guys have and always will have them, why not give the good guys a chance to protect themselves.
Current policy allows you to transport guns through parks, but they have to be broken down and stored out of reach. There are, of course, exceptions in that some "national preserves" and seashores and lakeshores do allow hunting.