Wednesday, November 7, 2012

FOIA response from ONP

So, they are saying that they don't need to follow DO 8.2 which states:

·         Restrictions placed on recreational uses that have otherwise been found to be appropriate will be limited to the minimum necessary to protect park resources and values, and promote visitor safety and enjoyment. Any restriction of appropriate recreational use will be limited to what is necessary to protect park resources and values, to promote visitor safety and enjoyment, or to meet park management needs.  8.2.2

·         Any closures or restrictions-other than those imposed by law-must be consistent with applicable laws, regulations, and policies, and require a written determination by the superintendent that such measures are needed to protect public health and safety; and prevent unacceptable impacts to park resources or values.

·         Any restrictions imposed will be fully explained to visitors and the public.  Visitors will be given appropriate information on how to keep adverse impacts to a minimum and how to enjoy the safe and lawful use of the parks.

·         Reinforces cooperation with federal, state, local and tribal governments, as well as individuals and organizations, to provide visitor enjoyment, and address mutual interests in the quality of life for community residents. 1.10

·         In the spirit of partnership, the Service will also seek opportunities for cooperative management agreements with state or local agencies that will allow for more effective and efficient management of the parks. 1.10

1 comment:

  1. It is truly disheartening that, in an agency Jon Jarvis has charged with operating with complete openness, transparency and accountability, a FOIA request should ever be necessary.

    But it was. And still only the bare minimum technically required by FOIA was released, and your questions have not been answered.

    "No records responsive to your request", and certainly no responsive answers, either.

    I cannot reconcile this with Jon Jarvis' direction "Accountability requires transparency".

    Apparently, I am painfully naive. I am deeply disappointed.