As a member of the National Parks Traveler community for more than five years, I have noticed that many stories touch on aspects of National Park Service management and policies.
Often, comments on these stories have posed questions about NPS management procedures and practices. Sometimes the questions are answered by persons who know the subject. Sometimes the questions go unanswered.
It is heartening to know that so many people care about the national parks and want to be involved in improving the parks and their management. Along those lines, we are starting a new Q&A feature: Ask A Former National Park Superintendent.
Questions regarding NPS policies and practices can be submitted and I will answer one question or more every other week. Questions can be of any subject or park, but we will not address or comment on individual people or employees.
The goals of this effort will be to post accurate information, resources for further information where appropriate, and to encourage vigorous and informed discussion of national park management.
With that said, raise your questions via comments to this post, and I'll pick one or more to answer.
Costa Dillon is a recently retired veteran of 35 years with the National Park Service. He was the superintendent of Fire Island National Seashore, Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, and Homestead National Monument of America. He was also the Superintendent of the Horace M. Albright Training Center, responsible for the orientation training for all new NPS employees.
He is the recipient of the Department of the Interior Meritorious Service Award, the National Park Service Sequoia Award for Interpretation, and the Secretary of the Interior's Award for Long-Term Achievement in Diversity. He is an Honorary Fellow of Indiana University's Eppley Institute for Parks and Public Lands and is currently an Adjunct Instructor in the Department of Recreation Management and Policy at the University of New Hampshire.
Comments
The debate about how to allocate scarce NPS dollars and positions among various functions has gone on for years, and will continue to do so. Over the past 40+ years I've seen the pendulum swing back and forth between emphasis on functions such as protection, resource management, and interpretation.
There have been some good comments above about NPS law enforcement; like it or not, our society has forced changes on the ways those functions are performed today vs. not too many years ago. Enforcement workloads do vary widely between places like Yosemite Valley and a small historical area, and in smaller parks with limited incidents, it would be desirable for protection rangers to have the flexibility to perform a wider variety of duties than is sometimes the case.
That said, it's unfortunate to read broad-brush comments such as "See a lot of law enforcers sitting around doing nothing but handing out tickets for speeders in the Smokies..."
For a more balanced look at the varied responsibilities for rangers in the Smokies, take a look at this story from this past summer.
The above quoted comment also suggests that traffic enforcement is not a valid NPS function in heavily visited parks like the Smokies. Who else would do that job on federal property? It's certainly not going to be a priority for state and local agencies, whose resources are already stretched thin elsewhere.
One of the responsibilities for park managers – and the protection staff – is to try to minimize preventable risks to visitors, and that certainly includes the ability to safely enjoy a drive on park roads. In parks like the Smokies, that's a big challenge, and yes, "handing out tickets to speeders" is one way to help keep all of us a bit more honest and careful on the road.
According to the park website, Motor vehicle accidents and drownings are the leading causes of death in the park. In recent years, there have been an average of 50 serious injuries a year in the park from motor vehicle accidents.
Here are just three examples found in a quick Google search: "A fatal car accident claimed the life of a Cherokee man on Friday, August 9th in the Great Smoky Mountains Park... The cause of the collision is under investigation, but Park Rangers believe excessive speed was a contributing factor."
In July 2010, the park experienced three mass casualty incidents involving motor vehicle accidents during a five-day period that resulted in injuries to a total of 20 people.
In 2008, a man driving the wrong-way on a park roadway known as the Spur crashed head-on into a car full of Florida tourists, leaving two of them with permanent injuries.
Could parks like the Smokies use more rangers for a variety of duties other than law enforcement? Yes, but to complain that rangers are spending too much time on traffic enforcement in that park doesn't seems to be supported by the number of incidents that occur.
The usual comments from the usual NPS suspects. Thanks NPT for allowing park users to voice concerns about potential malfeasance on behalf of the beloved agency. In the Smokies, local law enforcement (Blount County) offered to patrol the roads during the shutdown to allow the roads to open. NPS response? NO. They are kings and behave accordingly. It isn't THEIR park, it belongs to the people and the biggest problem we have here is an entitled management structure that answers to no one, of which Dale Ditmanson is chief crony.
I appreciate this magazine providing a forum for dissent, despite the overly loud protestations of folks affiliated with the NPS.
I agree with the observations of Smokieshiker. I think the park service should prioritize visitor experience first above other things. Surely private enterprise management when faced with budget cuts wouldn't choose to cut services to their customers FIRST in order to make them feel the pain. This is outrageous, disgusting, and terrible management. Just what one would expect from the federal government. It is about damn time to take our country back to the days when it war run by people who had the citizens in mind first.
Jim, interesting post. Another issue in keeping speed limits down is the wildlife. I know in Yosemite, the greatest cause of fatalities among Black Bears, Fishers and Great Grey Owls is excessive speeding. It is interesting to note that in a Fisher study area in the Sierra National Forest (on the Southern Boundary of Yosemite), rodent poisons have been the culprit. In any case, in an excellent chapter in the Barbara Moritsch book, "The Soul of Yosemite", there is an informative chapter on the issue of roadkills.
Perpetual seasonal, again you raise a very valid issue, Unfortunately this is true in the private sector as well. It is wrong and frankly it is in violation of the spirit and intent of the Fair Labor Standards Act at least in my own less than expert opinion. Thanks to PJ Ryan and one of his columns, I was tuned onto a book "Intern Nation", which really explores the issue of the abuse of temporary/part time workers, both in the governmental and private sectors. Please excuse if I have mentioned this to you before, but the book is well worth reading.
Thanks rmackie I was aware of the book but haven't read it yet. I wasn't aware it got into the issue of "temporary" workers.
Jim, I dont know if you are wrong about traffic enforcement but your methodology certainly is. You have the unfortinately tendancy to take a few annecdotal events and try to turn it into definitive evidence. It isnt.
What is the accident rate per mile driven in the park? is it higher or lower than outside the Park? What is actual rate impact of enforcement? How much does it cost?
EC, park officials say motor vehicle accidents and drownings are the leading cause of death in the Smokies. That's not evidence enough? Beyond that, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. That there aren't enough accidents in the park to justify L.E.s?
That said, that's one area where better transparency on behalf of the NPS would be helpful. Specifically, a website that would list all the positions on staff in a park, so we could see how many LEs are on the job and how many shifts they have to cover. Similarly, we could see how many interpreters are, or aren't on the payroll, and on down the line (historians, wildlife biologists, botanists, etc).