Article View: ca.environment
Article #7511Re: Class Assessments For National Parks
From: JTEDMISTON
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 1994 08:35
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 1994 08:35
41 lines
2783 bytes
2783 bytes
In article <38jdev$mab@crl5.crl.com>, ourston@crl.com (Todd Ourston) writes: >Relying on some vague language regarding consistency in >management found in the Redwood National Park Act, the NPS has concluded >that they have been mandated by Congress to administer the same policies >in the same manner in every park. As a general statement is is just not true, either as a statement of NPS policy or the applicable law. Congress has shown great flexibility in its mandate to NPS, even within the general category, for example, of national recreation areas. Golden Gate NRA was created, inter alia, "in order to provide for the maintenance of needed recreational open space necessary to urban environment and planning . . . ." The statute emphasizes "recreation and educational opportunities consistent with sound principles of land use planning and management." This is to be done, as far as possible, to keep "its natural setting." Act of October 27, 1972, Sec. 1, Pub. L. 92-589, 86 Stat. 1299 (16 U.S.C. 460bb). The Santa Monica Mountains NRA on the other hand is to be administered with a more preservationist bent, to protect the "airshed for the Southern California metropolitan area" and "fragile resource areas of the recreation area shall be administered on a low-intensity basis . . . ." Act of November 10, 1978, Sec. 507, Pub.L. 95-625, 92 Stat. 3501 (16 U.S.C. 460kk). Likewise, hunting is permitted in some national recreation areas (e.g., Arapaho NRA (16 U.S.C. 460jj-2), yet prohibited in others. Similar micro-management will be found in the statutes authorizing various national park, seashore, and lakeshore areas. Indeed, the problem does not seem to be over-consistent NPS management, but rather Congress responding to local political pressure and mandating inconsistent, but locally popular, management practices. Joseph T. Edmiston (jtedmiston@aol.com) SMMC, Streisand Center for Conservancy Studies, Malibu, CA (Views are not necessarily those of the State of California, the Streisand Center, or affiliated entities.)
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<39koru$gji@newsbf01.news.aol.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!pipex!uunet!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf01.news.aol.com!not-for-mailReferences:
<38jdev$mab@crl5.crl.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 10df74,849bafc20e46a6e X-Google-Attributes: gid10df74,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-11-07 00:35:10 PST Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!pipex!uunet!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: jtedmiston@aol.com (JTEDMISTON) Newsgroups: ca.environment Subject: Re: Class Assessments For National Parks Date: 7 Nov 1994 03:35:10 -0500 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 41 Sender: news@newsbf01.news.aol.com Message-ID: <39koru$gji@newsbf01.news.aol.com> References: <38jdev$mab@crl5.crl.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf01.news.aol.com