Once again, for this quarter, the firearms-in-parks debate has consumed much of ANPR’s time and energy. While the outcome is far from what we desired, at least our voice helped protect the regulatory process so that a single person or ideology in the executive branch did not override thoughtful, inclusive statutory protections for the National Park System and other federal lands.

The National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act, among others, involve many people, including political appointees, career federal employees and the public, in any decision-making process. These laws strengthen resource stewardship in the National Park System and they were/are worth fighting for.

While we disagree with the amendment Congress passed to allow firearms in parks per state law, we recognize that 535 elected officials of the legislative branch, their staffs and their constituents had some amount of deliberation beforehand. Their actions did not ignore or abrogate federal law as the revised gun regulation had.

The outcome may be the same but the precedent is quite different, and the precedent is worth protecting because one never knows when ideology may overtake the executive branch, and in particular, the Secretary of the Interior’s office, in the future.

This discussion leads us to the theme of this issue of Ranger. There may be some who believe political considerations play a small role in management of the National Park System. My perception was once such, but as my NPS career and association grew in years I began to see how and where political considerations and pressures affected policy and outcomes in the day-to-day management of parks.

National and local politics change as newly elected administrations and officials take office and work to achieve their agendas. Sometimes these transitions are smooth and sometimes they are not. Several contributors to this Ranger offer their experience and advice on how to maximize opportunities during these transitions, and It is a skill worth mastering and a skill that will be beneficial to your career if you can master it.

We thank the three policymakers who contributed to the summer Ranger, and we appreciate their time in providing insights into national park issues.

During the public debate over the gun regulation it became abundantly clear that both side’s talking points were anchored in speculation. While current and former NPS employees offered individual incident summaries in which loaded, readily accessible firearms by “law-abiding citizens” played a factor in the destruction of park wildlife, we could give no scientifically supported data or projections to back up those incidents. Wouldn’t it be nice, from a protection standpoint, if in future debates we could defend park resources and our stewardship mission with real and meaningful numbers? Neal Labrie’s article on pages 14-16 is worth your attention for this very reason. FORT is in its early stages and it may or may not be the final answer, but it could be one way to show politicians the likely consequences of their actions on the National Park System.

Finally, we honor Rick Gale after his untimely passing in March. He was an ANPR founding member, winner of a Harry Yount Award for Lifetime Achievement and our friend. He was the only person to have attended all 31 Ranger Rendezvous. He also started ANPR’s first newsletter, which evolved into Ranger, and he was ANPR’s “fund-raiser extraordinaire.” During his term as ANPR’s president (1988-94) we achieved our highest levels of membership and professional accomplishment.

I can only imagine the depth and breadth of ANPR accomplishments for NPS employees and the National Park System if we each had the energy, dedication and foresight of Rick Gale.

Goodbye, my friend. When I strike the gavel to call ANPR to order in Gettysburg this December, I’ll be thinking of you.

— Scot McElveen