Copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Association of National Park Rangers.

Many National Park Service employees, especially those of a certain age, bemoan the loss of the “generalist” ranger — that fabled ranger of yore who could identify every critter in the park, knew all the trails but could also get Boy Scouts off cliffs and drunks off the roads. Some have gone so far as to say today’s law enforcement ranger no longer wants to do generalist type duties and would rather just be a gun-toting police officer.

Although I question whether the true generalist ever existed in any great numbers, it’s important to note that two major changes have occurred in the ranger series to make the generalist even rarer. One change is the introduction of competencies and professionalization of the law enforcement ranger. The other is a more than 40-percent reduction in permanent law enforcement rangers and a 50-percent reduction in seasonal law enforcement rangers.

In 1994 the NPS embarked on a mission to professionalize its ranger ranks in both interpretation and law enforcement. It was referred to as Ranger Futures (later enacted as Ranger Careers). Arguably, the largest change came within law enforcement. Included in this specialized series was an enhanced retirement annuity, otherwise known as the 6c package. To meet the “rigorous duty” standards imposed by 6c regulations, law enforcement rangers were required to pass one of the toughest medical standards in the federal government, a physical fitness battery exam and expanded LE training requirements. Initial LE training requirements currently are a minimum nine-month academy divided between FLETC in Glynco, Georgia, and a park where the ranger-trainee is supervised by a field training officer. That means being away from your family and home park for almost all of that time. LE rangers are then required to have an additional 40 hours of law enforcement refresher training each year.

For the first six years of the Ranger Futures model, many rangers continued as generalists, with their duties including LE, EMS, SAR and fire. There was a drastic change in 2000. Since the inception of Ranger Futures in 1994, some rangers had been waiting for a determination of whether their prior 1994 service counted toward their retirement. Due to the incredible backlog, the Department of Interior formed a team called FLERT, the Firefighter and Law Enforcement Officer Retirement Team. FLERT, which evaluates and handles 6(c) enhanced law enforcement and firefighter retirement claims, has tended to obstruct NPS park rangers from receiving their 6(c) special law enforcement retirement benefits. Ironically, some rangers are being denied 6(c) enhanced law enforcement coverage although they do the same work of others who have already been approved. The sudden change in decisions in 2000 was due to a new interpretation of the definition of law enforcement.

For retirement purposes, a “law enforcement officer” is defined as: “. . . an employee occupying a rigorous position, whose primary duties are the investigation, apprehension or detention of individuals suspected or convicted of offenses against the criminal laws of the United States, or the protection of officials of the United States against threats to personal safety, as provided in 5 U.S.C. § 8401(17).”

This new interpretation has been backed by DOI and the Merit Promotion Review Board and has led to hundreds of law enforcement rangers being denied retirement benefits, requiring many to work well past the mandatory separation age of 57. This is while they still are required to meet the physical fitness and medical standards. Because most of these rangers have waited more then 10 years for a decision, they have been effectively denied the opportunity to change careers to obtain the benefits they expected.

The other major change has been in the actual duties law enforcement rangers are now performing. Emphasis in training and actual job functions are now focused on meeting the 6c enhanced-annuity law enforcement definition. As has been stated in FLERT determinations, firefighter duties, EMS, security details, interpretation, resource management and general police work such as road patrol do not meet FLERT’s fundamental idea of law enforcement. FLERT’s emphasis has been that in order to fully meet the definition, law enforcement rangers need to be performing investigations. It is important to remember that LE rangers haven’t forgotten their roots of why they became park rangers. Rather, they have been pushed into a corner by DOI to meet a specific job classification or risk losing their retirement.

We have all heard the same story — park divisions are underfunded, understaffed and have been doing more with less for years. So the final straw in the demise of the generalist ranger is the dramatic decrease in the numbers of law enforcement rangers at many parks. At a meeting in recent months at an East Coast park, we learned that in 1994 this park had 42 permanent law enforcement commissions and is now down to 17, even with a steady increase in visitation. A smaller urban park had 16 permanent law enforcement commissions and in less then five years is down to seven. Law enforcement divisions are now forced to compete for the same pot of money that all the other divisions are sharing.

Finally, for several years in a row, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility has stated that “law enforcement work in the National Park Service is the most dangerous in federal service. NPS officers are 12 times more likely to be killed or injured as a result of an assault than FBI agents.”

The Department of Justice Bureau of Statistics has stated that the NPS suffers the worst record of having its officers killed or injured by assaults in the line of duty of any federal law enforcement agency. A study (Analysis Of Assaults Upon National Park Rangers: 1997-2003) carried out by Northern Arizona University on this alarming rate of assaults on rangers found:

“Based on the reports it appears that NPS rangers have a wider range of duties than most other federal law enforcement agents. The range of duties performed by the NPS rangers appears to be even more diverse than what would normally be found in local law enforcement agencies. Again, based on the information provided in the reports it appears that some NPS rangers had difficulty transitioning from non-law enforcement roles to law enforcement roles. Specifically the difficulty seemed to be greatest when there was a need to transition from an educational/informational role to an enforcement role.”

In short, it is too dangerous — to the public and rangers — for us to be the “ranger for all seasons” that many in the NPS and the public expect. There isn’t space to address the increasing professionalization requirements of SAR, EMS and, especially, fire. It is almost impossible to maintain competencies in all these skills, to say nothing of being able to identify a Wilson’s warbler in flight.

As such, LE rangers have had to change emphasis, concentrating on better training, tactics, equipment and staffing for adequate officer back-up. In order to meet GPRA goals, emphasis has been placed on meeting visitor satisfaction requirements and concentrating on visitor-centered issues. This is also combined with meeting the ever-increasing demands of homeland security rotation requirements. It is important to note that crime statistics in the national parks have remained relatively stable for the past 10 years, thanks in part to the dedication of the law enforcement ranger.

The professionalization of the ranger ranks was long overdue. It’s impact on the law enforcement ranger has been tremendous. There is still a ways to go. In the next four years approximately 43 percent of the current law enforcement ranger ranks are eligible for retirement. Even though many LE rangers are not staying with the NPS to age 57, they are deciding to get out due to current fears that their retirement may be in jeopardy and the continued push for doing more with less. The NPS needs to start filling some of the ever-increasing empty positions now before the floodgates open.

I am pleased that the president of ANPR has extended an invitation for the U.S. Park Rangers Lodge to comment in Ranger magazine and offer our thoughts on the status of the park ranger profession, specifically law enforcement rangers.

John Waterman is president of the United States Park Ranger Lodge, Fraternal Order of Police, organized to protect and advance the professional needs of commissioned law enforcement rangers while providing the camaraderie and social support system for which the FOP has been famous since 1917. He began his NPS career in 1991. Currently he is stationed at Valley Forge as a permanent Level 1-commissioned law enforcement ranger and emergency medical services instructor.

If you enjoyed reading this excerpt from Ranger magazine and want to receive Ranger year-round for a modest price, please join the Association of National Park Rangers.