A career lawyer, Ed Keable, has been named superintendent of Grand Canyon National Park/DOI
Editor's note: This updates with additional comments from the Coalition to Protect America's National Parks.
A lawyer with three decades of experience with the federal government but none on the ground in the National Park System on Friday was named superintendent of Grand Canyon National Park, a highly unusual move for a park that has struggled in recent years with sexual harassment issues and internal dissension and seen a revolving door of acting superintendents.
Edward Keable, who has worked for the Interior Department's Solicitor's Office for 23 years, is to move to the park within 60 days, a release from the National Park Service said.
National Parks Traveler has requested an interview with Keable, and Park Service staff was reaching out to see if he would grant it.
"What in the world qualifies him to be a superintendent?" Phil Francis, chair of the Coalition to Protect America's National Parks, said after hearing the news. "In my experience, I have never known a person to be appointed to be a superintendent of a major park who didn't have significant National Park Service experience. Experience in smaller parks, experience in one of the disciplines found within a park, or something that gives them the special needed qualifications that a superintendent must have.
"This is extremely rare, and while I don't know this individual, on the face of it it seems improper," he added.
Later Friday, the Coalition issued a stronger statement opposing Keable's appointment.
“Ed Keable is not qualified to manage and lead a complicated park such as the Grand Canyon. While Mr. Keable may possess the ‘passion’ and ‘leadership skills’ that Acting Director Vela referenced in his statement, it does not mean that Mr. Keable has the knowledge, skills, and ability to be superintendent of Grand Canyon National Park, one of the most high-profile, complex, and heavily visited national park operations in the System.
Individuals named to Senior Executive Service level positions have historically demonstrated significant skill in complex park management, earned through experience working in the field. Mr. Keable’s selection sets a terrible precedent and robs the National Park Service career workforce, who have decades of expertise working in national parks, of opportunities to lead the agency in senior superintendent posts.
In addition, Mr. Keable, who has worked closely with Secretary Bernhardt for years, will need to contend with efforts to develop a resort in Tusayan, just outside the gates of the park. Coming as no surprise to anyone following Secretary Barnhardt’s actions at the helm of Interior, Secretary Bernhardt’s former law firm, Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, has been hired to lobby for its development. At this crucial time, when leadership is desperately needed, Grand Canyon needs an experienced and strong advocate, not a politically appointed superintendent.
On the heels of Secretary Bernhardt showing such disregard for NPS employees during the escalating pandemic by keeping parks open and putting their health and safety at risk, the decision to put someone with no national park experience in charge of a crown jewel of the National Park System is appalling.”
Former National Park Service Director Jon Jarvis, who had worked with Keable during his career, didn't dismiss the appointment out of hand.
"I know Ed and worked with him at DOI. He is smart and capable and a career public servant with experience in the legal aspects of public lands," Jarvis said in an email. "It is an odd choice for the superintendent of Grand Canyon, but if Ed has a good operational deputy and a strong NPS management team in the park, he should do fine."
In taking on the challenging task, Keable will oversee the 1.2-million-acre park's 350 employees and operations that range from river operations and lodging, dining, and outfitting concessions to air tours.
Another extremely hot issue he'll have to confront are efforts to develop a major resort just outside the park on the South Rim. Opponents to the project being pushed by an Italian developer have said it could see more than 2,000 housing units and several million square feet of commercial space reach to within a half-mile or so of the park, and could impact groundwater flows that feed the canyon's springs and hanging gardens.
Keable steps into a job whose last full-time superintendent, Christine Lehnertz, was temporarily removed from her job in the fall of 2018 after undisclosed allegations were made against her. Lehnertz eventually was cleared of any wrongdoing, but she refused to return to Grand Canyon and the Park Service, saying what she experienced convinced her she could better impact people's lives elsewhere. She resigned from the Park Service in March 2019 shortly after she was cleared. Today she leads the Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy.
Lehnertz had been handpicked by former National Park Service Director Jon Jarvis to move from the same job at Golden Gate National Recreation Area to the Grand Canyon in July 2016 to help the park overcome a long-running episode of sexual harassment.
The turmoil that swirled up around Lehnertz went back more than two decades. Reaching back to about 2000, life deep in the Inner Gorge of Grand Canyon at times reflected rowdy, sexually charged scenes from a frat party for some National Park Service employees, with male employees pawing and propositioning female workers, some of who at times exhibited their own risqué behavior. The behavior was largely ignored by park managers, including former Grand Canyon Superintendent David Uberuaga and even former Intermountain Regional Director Sue Masica.
But a group of 13 former and current Park Service employees in the early fall of 2014 wrote then-Interior Secretary Sally Jewell to complain and ask for an investigation. That investigation by the Office of Inspector General generated a tawdry list of inappropriate behavior, from male employees taking photographs up under a female co-worker's dress and groping female workers to women dancing provocatively and bringing a drinking straw "shaped like a penis and testicles" to river parties. The incidents, the letter to Secretary Jewell charged, "demonstrated evidence of 'discrimination, retaliation, and a sexually hostile work environment.'”
Since 2003, the OIG reported stated, there have been a dozen disciplinary cases taken in connection with employee behavior in the Grand Canyon's River District. The matter led Uberuaga to retire rather than take an assignment in Washington, D.C.
Keable is well familiar with the sexual harassment issue in the park. Part of his role in the Solicitor's Office was working with the Office of Inspector General on its investigations, and providing legal advice regarding those investigations.
During a May 2016 hearing by the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations that was "Investigating the Culture of Corruption at the Department of Interior," the attorney testified that, in his opinion, the Park Service was working to address the problem.
"I believe what they have done is they have looked at the IG report of the Grand Canyon and they are assessing how to address procedural issues to ensure that those kinds of situations do not repeat," testified Keable.
He also told the subcommmittee that, "I think the Park Service is taking very seriously the information in the IG report on the Grand Canyon and are very seriously addressing the issues highlighted by that report."
The allegations made against Lehnertz in 2018 that eventually led to her departure from the Park Service claimed she fostered a hostile atmosphere among the park staff and spent recklessly on renovations to employee housing. In the end, Interior's Office of Inspector General cleared her of all allegations, and in its report created a portrait of one of her accusers as determined not to follow her directives and even impede them.
Regarding air tours, the Grand Canyon staff long has struggled to manage them. The problem seemingly was heading towards resolution in 2011 when the Park Service released a draft environmental impact statement that claimed a proposed air tour plan would boost the level of "natural quiet" in the park -- quiet that allows you to hear the murmuring of creeks, the roar of rapids on the Colorado River, the melodies of canyon wrens. But congressional efforts blocked the plan from taking effect, according to the park.
While Keable's lack of on-the-ground experience in the park system has alarmed some Park Service veterans, David Vela, the de facto director of the agency, said the lawyer "brings excellent leadership skills and passion for our nation’s public lands to his new role."
“His experience at the Department of the Interior also provides a broader perspective that will be an enormous benefit to the park, employees, and visitors," Vela added in the Park Service release without elaborating.
Keable said in the Park Service release that he was "greatly honored that Department of the Interior Secretary David Bernhardt and Deputy Director Vela have entrusted me to work alongside the dedicated employees at the Grand Canyon National Park to conserve this natural wonder for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of the American people and the whole world.”
The lawyer, who gained his law degree from the Vermont Law School, has served as the assistant solicitor of General Law for the Office of the Solicitor of the Department of the Interior since March 2012. He has worked for the solicitor's office 23 years, according to the NPS release.
Stories about:
Story Categories:
A copy of National Parks Traveler's financial statements may be obtained by sending a stamped, self-addressed envelope to: National Parks Traveler, P.O. Box 980452, Park City, Utah 84098. National Parks Traveler was formed in the state of Utah for the purpose of informing and educating about national parks and protected areas.
Residents of the following states may obtain a copy of our financial and additional information as stated below:
- Florida: A COPY OF THE OFFICIAL REGISTRATION AND FINANCIAL INFORMATION FOR NATIONAL PARKS TRAVELER, (REGISTRATION NO. CH 51659), MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE DIVISION OF CONSUMER SERVICES BY CALLING 800-435-7352 OR VISITING THEIR WEBSITE. REGISTRATION DOES NOT IMPLY ENDORSEMENT, APPROVAL, OR RECOMMENDATION BY THE STATE.
- Georgia: A full and fair description of the programs and financial statement summary of National Parks Traveler is available upon request at the office and phone number indicated above.
- Maryland: Documents and information submitted under the Maryland Solicitations Act are also available, for the cost of postage and copies, from the Secretary of State, State House, Annapolis, MD 21401 (410-974-5534).
- North Carolina: Financial information about this organization and a copy of its license are available from the State Solicitation Licensing Branch at 888-830-4989 or 919-807-2214. The license is not an endorsement by the State.
- Pennsylvania: The official registration and financial information of National Parks Traveler may be obtained from the Pennsylvania Department of State by calling 800-732-0999. Registration does not imply endorsement.
- Virginia: Financial statements are available from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 102 Governor Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
- Washington: National Parks Traveler is registered with Washington State’s Charities Program as required by law and additional information is available by calling 800-332-4483 or visiting www.sos.wa.gov/charities, or on file at Charities Division, Office of the Secretary of State, State of Washington, Olympia, WA 98504.
National parks and their natural resources belong to you. The National Parks Traveler works to ensure you know how these essential places are being cared for.
Sign Up For Our Weekly Newsletter
Unsubscribe at any time.
INN Member
The easiest way to explore RV-friendly National Park campgrounds.
Here’s the definitive guide to National Park System campgrounds where RVers can park their rigs.
Our app is packed with RVing- specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 national parks.
You’ll also find stories about RVing in the parks, tips helpful if you’ve just recently become an RVer, and useful planning suggestions.
Comments
Sounds as if someone finally decided to scrub clean the management of a national treasure overly sullied by erratic, direspectful, and certainly morally challenged individuals. I wonder how land management concerns are improved upon by the indiscreet behaviors of the "supposed" professionals who can't seem to conduct their work with the understanding of just what they have been priviledged to have as employment. It appears to be an action taken that is long overdue. While the tendencies of people acting in this manner are not strictly isolated to Grand Canyon National Park, regulating overt displays of a sexual nature in a public area where families and small children visit should definitely be considered as an on-going matter of protocol in a bulleted list of mandated job requirements. Such slack disregard for personal integrity has run amuck across all institutional and traditional venues and a growing number of the population has just honestly gotten fed up with "trash" and slovenly maintained ethics.
Perhaps it's a sorely needed breath of fresh air to have someone come aboard with absolutely no experience whatsoever and clean up the whole arena from the top down as he gets a "lay of the land", both environmentally in respect for the earth, AND the natural inclinations of the employees entrusted with the true priviledge of working as representatives of a place of wonder and amazing beauty. National Parks are crowning jewels of a continent, and their care must continually be kept with the highest of standards in these changing times and for future generations to come. To clean up an environment and protect it always seems to demand taking care of people first! Too bad that animals and the natural world behave with more dignity than a percentage of humanity.
Absolutely! Well written!
Well, when it rains, it pours. Arizona has become a funny place, not funny in a haha kind of way, but funny in more of an eeuww sort of way. Oldtime locals say "Nobody from Arizona is from Arizona any more" in recognition of the outside money and power that is now calling so many of the shots in that state. For example, the NPS seemed almost willing to close national parks in other places in response to the COVID-19 situation; but, the DOI fought notably harder and longer over closing the Grand Canyon. I suspect somebody, maybe an organized group of somebodies, with money and power wanted that park open for business and, in that case, the Trump Administration was relatively more inclined to listen ...maybe just like they were relatively more inclined to reverse and remove protections for national monument designations not so far away from that park.
I'm not very familiar with Mr. Keagle. He may have just been another loyal trooper who got himself a retirement position outside the high-priced DC area and can now sell his home there and live more comfortably in Arizona. If so, I congratulate him. However, one observer has commented that, in his experience, he had "never known" a person appointed superintendent of a major park without significant National Park Service experience and that Mr. Keagle's appointment "is extremely rare ...seems improper" and, while such comments arouse my sense of caution, I believe we need to take a deeper look, if we're allowed to do so, at Mr. Keagle's background. Let's look at few more current events surrounding the NPS and the Grand Canyon about which Mr. Keagle might have been or be expected to have opinions.
First, according to the article, Mr. Keagle has worked for the Office of the Solicitor of the Department of the Interior for 23 years and served as the assistant solicitor of General Law for that office since March 2012. That's a pretty high position and, in that position, he could have been expected to at least speak up about pretty much every controversial issue involving, well, general law. Now, the issue of the NPS policy on electric bikes has been in the news again and I posted, as a comment to another NPT article, some questions about my understanding of the major steps through which this policy was developed.
1. David Bernhardt issued an order in August, 2019, directing the NPS to expand eBike access in NPS units with the emphatic assertion that this order "simplifies and unifies regulation of electric bicycles (eBikes) on Federal lands managed by the Department and also decreases regulatory burden."
2. In December, 2019, more than three months later, a watchdog group with a long history of visibility into Interior operations filed suit charging that "the decision-making process was flawed ...violated not only the Administrative Procedures Act but also" NEPA and that there was enough solid evidence to argue that "an advisory committee comprised of industry friendly representatives met regularly with Interior officials to ...develop the new policy."
3. Last Thursday, in April of 2020, more than seven months after Bernhardt issued his order, the NPS revealed that "more than 380 national parks have evaluated eBike use" in response to an already issued and implemented policy, that they're now ready to "define the term" electric bicycle and eBike, and that the NPS is just now, again more than seven months after Bernhardt issued the order, "seeking public input" on the policy. The NPT article on this topic quotes one knowledgeable observer commenting that these actions, in the chronological order in which they occurred, appear in conflict with the Code of Federal Regulations.
So, I suppose we need to ask what Mr. Keagle, as the assistant solicitor of General Law for the Office of the Solicitor of the Department of the Interior at that time, knows about this topic, what responsibility he felt to speak out or otherwise take a position on this topic, and what his position was on this topic, if any.
Second, it would be helpful to know whether Mr. Keagle, as the assistant solicitor of General Law for the Office of the Solicitor of the Department of the Interior had any knowledge of or involvement with the scheme being pushed by the Italians, Stilo, and the interests around Tusayan to gain water usage and other infrastructure to support "more than 2,000 housing units and several million square feet of commercial space ...within a half-mile or so of the park." It seems certain, at least to me, that he would have and that his involvemetn would be pertinent to determing whether his appointment as superintendent is proper or just another one of the Trump Administration's rampantly criminal shenanigans.
Thats what happens when an oil lobbyist is running our National Parks. But hey, some people thought putting someone in charge of our entire country with no experience was a good idea too, so I guess I've seen worse decisions made.
I wonder how many people would object had the new superintendent been a woman with no experience. Also, isn't "lawyer" being used in a pejorative sense here? Certainly, the headline to this article could have read: "Interior Department Names 23-year Veteran to Head Grand Canyon National Park." Does it matter that he never "directed" a park staff of some kind? He was in the Interior Department all those years. You mean none of the Park Service's mission rubbed off? And, come to think of it, what "experience" did Steve Mather have on founding the agency in 1915? None. He had been a miner. An executive is supposed to know people. If Keable doesn't, we'll know soon enough. God knows that "experience" cuts both ways in government.
Great choice. Neither Matger or Albright had direct experience within the parks system before being named to leadership. His experience makes him well suited to deal with the unique issues facing the park.
It's possible, not certain but possible, that there are less "direct" parts of his experience that may actually be driving the Trump Administration to think he's well suited to deal with the unique issues facing this park. It is that possibility that makes some of us want to exercise greater caution ...that and the fact that it's Arizona and the fact that so many folks who I don't recognize as regular commenters are suddenly so eager to come to his defense, again in these hopefully last days of the Trump Administration. Some of us have already been more than once bitten by the Trump Mob and thus are now more than twice shy.
I'm sorry about the mix-up in the spelling of his name. I used the spelling from an earlier update of the article; but, looking at how fast some of these supportive comments starting coming in, almost as if commenters were primed and ready to come to his defense, I now wouldn't touch Mr. Keable with a ten foot pole without a more substantive explanation of why he might have been chosen.
As far as any unsubstantiated, but nonetheless emphatic, assertions that Mr. Keable was chosen to clean up the sexual harassment and moral turpitude issues that have plagued Grand Canyon and finally get rid of the residual perpetrators who remain in place, I ask whether it is probable or even believable that an administration that still includes Betsy "boys will be boys" DeVos and is still headed by Donald "just grab them by the p***y" Trump would suddenly and genuinely experience such a belated epiphany so late in the game.
The more I dwell on this, the more I smell something that might indeed be rotten.
If you are a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
Yeah, maybe; but, again, experienced observers have already noted that Mr. Keagle's appointment "is extremely rare" if not unheard of; his appointment sets a bad precedent for promoting qualified candidates with decades of field experience from within the agency; and, while there must be a reason the agency chose to go this route and the agency must have been aware that there would be questions about that reason, the agency does not seem to be focused on transparency or full disclosure regarding that reason.
What is increasingly clear is that, at about the same time that Bernhardt’s former law firm, Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, was lobbying on behalf of that development scheme being pushed by the Italians, Stilo, at Tusayan and at exactly the same time that the legal processes around that scheme were going to be heating up, Trump's first Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke presided over the temporary removal and ultimate resignation of the Grand Canyon's previous superintendent who Zinke's sidekick and replacement, Bernhardt, is now replacing with his own handpicked staff attorney.
I know that you are famous for your disregard for the public's right to know the reasons an official at your end of the political spectrum might have for making any decision; but, some level of transparency and full disclosure, at least when possible, are supposed to be hallmarks of our form of democracy and, under such suspicious circumstances, I would still like a more substantive explanation of why this attorney was chosen for this position at this time. Frankly, I admit that, when it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, waddles like a duck, flies north and south with the seasons, and lives in a swamp mating with ducks; I do tend to wonder whether it's a duck; but, I would certainly be willing and would like to see more of any evidence that might point one way or the other. Are you offering any such evidence or just engaging in another nonspecific defense of the Trump Administration?
Nice to get some new blood in the area and drain the swamp. I hope the new developers progress in the area so more people can enjoy the area - including Phantom! Would be nice to get someone who actually cares about the people who live there and give them a hand up. I hope he works out- more importantly upons things up so I don't have to cancel my July river trip!!
It sounds to me like the Coalition to Protect America's National Parks is complaining that one of their good old boys wasn't appointed. Maybe they should be asking why following their criteria resulted in all of those past failures. I do think experience is extremely valuable. However when a department, agency or company becomes too close knit they run the risk of group think. Sometimes some fresh blood and a new set of eyes is exactly what is needed. I hope he has the intelligence to listen to those that have the experience and in turn, that those with experience are open to seeing things through a different set of eyes. Hopefully he brings in some fresh ideas. I wish him well.
It may be rare in the NPS, but it is quite common in the business world for CEOs to go from one industry to another where they have no experience in that particular field. The role of the Superintendent, like a CEO should be more organizational, motivational, forward looking.... rather than knowing a Ponderosa from a Hemlock.
As Wild noted, perhaps extremely rare events are needed to provide a little cleansing among NPS ranks.
I don't know Keagle or whether is or is not qualified. However, I don't think it is an automatic disqualification just because he comes from outside the industry.
Not really a surprise-NO ONE at that level in the NPS wants the job. After what happened to Chris, at least two NPS SES level employees have retired rather than go there, and several others have hinted that they would do the same. This leaves the department needing to send an outside SES into the job-Far from me to defend the department-but this one makes sense in context.
Okay, Anonymouos, I would still like more concrete information; I still find the connection between Stilo and Bernhardt's old law firm to be both odious and too convenient to be just coincidence; and the other excuses still sound like the usual whitewashing. But, I also can't just dismiss your explanation. On the one hand, getting a chance to get paid to live at the Grand Canyon has to be a great opportunity and I could swallow a lot to take advantage of that kind of chance. On the other hand, some, maybe more than some, of the people in that part of the country and in that NPS operation truly are toxic to the point of being completely and eternally irredeemable. I can imagine how having to work/deal with them on a continuing basis could be seen as an intolerably awful experience for many potential candidates.
An amusing thread this time, to say the least. Obviously, the critics of this appointment have read no history, at least, none they would admit to, as it were. For the record, the first superintendents of the major national parks were military officers (1886-1913; then civilian superintendents during the three-year transition to the National Park Service (1914-1917). Even with the establishment of the agency, experience from "outside" was preferred, again, with preference given to former military officers, business executives, and engineers. The Park Service we believe we think we know--where interpreters stand a chance of getting a superintendency--has been rare, certainly at the largest national parks with complex constituencies requiring legal, political, and law-enforcement skills.
After all, what is the superintendent if NOT a politician? The pressures on the office come from concessionaires, chambers-of-commerce officials, and politicians. And that pressure is immense. The purity of military administration couldn't survive because of it. No one wanted to be ordered around by the Army, whose discipline was much too strict. In wartime, Americans accept that, but not for the national parks. Even today, the concessionaires, "friends," and cooperating associations want their free-for-all, in which THEY get to have their way in the parks.
Probably Rump is just ticked off again because no one consulted him. Well, no one consulted me, either, nor will they likely read my books. Years ago, giving a keynote address at a major conference, I was challenged for "my" history. I had it wrong; Stephen T. Mather was God, and Horace M. Albright himself next to Moses.
Speaking of Albright, he left the Park Service in 1933 to work in industry. EC is right to point out that industry respects experience far more than time in "service." As does government when the chips are down, as they are today. Does anyone give a damn whether the doctors and scientists advising us come from government or the private sector? In times of crisis, we want the best advice, and no, it doesn't consistently come from within.
In academe, the expression is dead wood. I wish to hell my university system had believed in prescribed burning, but even that took decades to catch on in the parks. The President is right; it's time for a change. You may not like the changes; you may not like the President. Well, some of us didn't like "your" president, either. But we didn't drag his character over the coals every time he opened his mouth. Stop it, good people, and do some reading for a change. You might surprise yourself what the Park Service is "like."
Come on. Al. At least admit that some of us who picked other career fields than academia have read a book or two and perhaps even a professional journal or three in our day. I retired from my chosen career [nursing] over a decade ago, but I still do my reading of medical updates. You, I'm certain, have also kept current on your reading after having academic doors close to you. You don't wear "intellectual snob" well - few do.
You're a poor student of recent history, apparently, if you don't think that your guys didn't "drag his character over the coals every time he opened his mouth". It was sufficient for all the nooses,the monkey jokes, and so forth to tantalize the frothing true believers of the right wing. "Our President" just confused the right wing bigots because he spoke in full sentences -- something rarely seen with your Trump.
Watch your adjectives, Rick. They keep getting you into trouble. Write with nouns and verbs, as Strunk and White advise. Now, just in case you missed it, my comment was directed at Mr. Rump. He keeps complaining about Park Service "experience," as if only his kind passes muster. You have to come up through the "ranks." Well, isn't the Department of the Interior a worthy "rank?" Stephen T. Mather came from the ranks of business with absolutely no experience in government per se. In your case, I would need a license to be a nurse, but what is the licensing agency for park superintendents? And Mr. Keable does have a law degree.
I dunno; I think everyone's hatred of the president has blinded them to how government has always worked. It has always been quid pro quo; it has always been about Power and Party. You think Lyndon Johnson was any different from Mr. Trump, for example? Johnson wrote the book on Power and Party. And Mr. Obama's chapter hardly qualifies him for sainthood.
No one qualifies, is the historical point. So why not give yourself a break? Nothing will change when the Democrats return to power--as someday they most certainly will. I can read you chapter and verse about Democrats undermining the national parks--holding up hearings, for example, until their cronies benefited. Why do you think Redwood National Park was reduced to stumps?
Sure, we lost Bears Ears and Escalante, but why didn't Clinton and Obama give them to the National Park Service in the first place? I'll tell you why; because it was all for show. When a president believes in the national parks, he actually visits one on occasion. Well, how many did Mr. Obama and Mr. Clinton visit? None, as I recall, except to sign those "executive orders" before flying off again into the Swamp. I think Clinton stayed all of two hours at Grand Canyon Airport. And you rattle on about Donald Trump?
I rattle on about them all--when they deserve it, as all of them do. The last president who was actually in the wilderness overnight while president was Jimmy Carter, and that on the Salmon River in Idaho. Simply, don't think that anything will change when your "team" regains the White House. Power and Party leave little room for nobility. For now, we should at least see if Mr. Keable is worth our patience. If he is not, then we can weigh in.
Just to be clear, President Clinton visited Yellowstone, Grand Canyon, Great Falls Park, and Grant Teton. President Obama visited Yellowstone, Grand Canyon, and Acadia. Each of them spent the night in one or more of these parks.
No, AEI/PERC Alfred, I'm really not overly interested in complaining about Mr. Keable's experience; but, many knowledgeable stakeholders in the NPS and the DOI are definitely very concerned about his apparent lack of direct field experience in modern national park management. I'm certainly careful to listen to their views, to respectfully note their viewpoints in my comments, and, by doing so, to elicit feedback as a means of ensuring I don't miss any major elements of the issue.
You pompously and condescendingly brush aside the "little people" and order them to to just go away and "do some reading for a change." That comment seemed, at least to me, to be quite an illbred thing for anyone to come out and say. However, if you, yourself, had taken the time to carefully read my comments, you would have seen that I'm actually focused on 1) Mr. Keable's background and record, 2) his connections, 3) how those factors relate to ongoing events in northern Arizona, 4) what it all might mean as far as reasons for his unusual selection, and, perhaps most revealing of all, 5) why so many of the usual suspects seemed suddenly so eager to preemptively attack my line of inquiry, shut down my efforts to fully understand what's happening here, and undermine my efforts to gain more information, especially more specific information on why this man, this park, at this time. But, perhaps you already know what I'm focused on because, although I've actually been quiet on this topic for quite a while, you and your unsavory packmates have just flat been soiling your clothes in your efforts to keep coming after me and to preemptively discredit my questions. What are you trying to hide here?
Just for the record, because all of this is going to be part of the record, let's go back and look at what I've been trying to establish through my previous comments. I noted that Mr. Keable worked for the Office of the Solicitor of the Department of the Interior for 23 years, served as assistant solicitor for General Law in that office since March of 2012, and how, on his watch, David Bernhardt issued an order in August of 2019, directing the NPS to expand eBike access in NPS units. In December of 2019, more than three months later and still on Mr. Keable's watch, a suit was filed charging that the process by which this order was issued violated the Administrative Procedures Act and NEPA, which it certainly seems to have done. Last Thursday, April 2, 2020, more than seven months after Bernhardt issued his original order and while still on Mr. Keable's watch, the NPS revealed more than 380 national parks had begun evaluating eBike use, after the policy had already been issued and implemented, and that they would now begin to define what was covered by that more than seven month old order. At the same time, the NPS declared that they were now "seeking public input" on the same seven month old order. Now, you may not care about eBike access in NPS units anymore than I do and you may dismiss this issue with a nihilistic handwave; but, the NPT article on the topic stated that these actions, in the chronological order in which they occurred, appear in conflict with the Code of Federal Regulations. That statement was incorrect. The actions do not appear in conflict with the Code of Federal Regulations; they are in conflict with the Code of Federal Regulations; and, although I do not draw a conclusion about Mr. Keable's personal involvement, Mr. Keable needs to be asked about his involvement because it would raise important questions, not about Mr. Keable's experience, but about his background, record, and his view of the law, all of which are pertinent to any discussion of his selection as a park superintendent.
Next, it would be both pertinent and helpful to know whether Mr. Keable, as the assistant solicitor for General Law in the Office of the Solicitor of the Department of the Interior had any knowledge of or involvement with the scheme being pushed by the Italians, Stilo, and the interests around Tusayan to gain water usage and other infrastructure to support "more than 2,000 housing units and several million square feet of commercial space ...within a half-mile or so of the park." At about the same time that Bernhardt's former law firm, Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, was lobbying on behalf of that development scheme and at exactly the same time that the legal processes around that scheme were going to be heating up, Trump's first Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke presided over the temporary removal and ultimate resignation of the Grand Canyon's previous superintendent who Zinke's sidekick and successor, Bernhardt, is now trying to replace, not with someone in line because of their long service in modern national park management, but with his own handpicked staff attorney in what knowledgeable stakeholders in the NPS contend is an extremely unusual selection. Again, these events raise questions, not about Mr. Keable's experience, but about his connections, about how they relate to ongoing events in northern Arizona, and about how they might relate to the reasons for his allegedly unusual selection. We don't need your personal reassurances on the matter; you're not trustworthy in that regard; we need the questions formally asked and answered, perhaps under oath.
Again, why are you trying so hard to derail this line of questioning? Why are you suddenly so eager to preemptively attack my line of inquiry, shut down my efforts to fully understand what's happening here, and undermine my requests for more specific information? An earlier comment expressed my focus well, "I would still like more concrete information; I still find the connection between Stilo and Bernhardt's old law firm to be both odious and too convenient to be just coincidence; and the other excuses still sound like the usual whitewashing." So, stop trying to duck and weave, whitewash, divert, and distract. Given the tainted mix of development schemes and connections with high-priced lobbying operations we have here, I want specific, concrete, reasons why this man, this park, at this time and you should want them too.
Rump, you keep missing the point. I am not disagreeing with any of your findings or concerns. I am merely asking why you and others seem so surprised that your National Park Service marches to political drummers, and why, in the larger scheme of things, few advance in the agency without agreeing to do so. Years ago, when I was a consultant to the Grand Canyon Railway, I learned full well how Arizona "works." Every politician in the state listens to developers, and, at the time, John McCain and Bruce Babbitt were no different. As for my development, the Grand Canyon Railway, it would have disappeared had the Highway Lobby gotten its way. Railroads? Public transportation? God forbid we have that in the Grand Canyon State! Now it's the Italians, is it? Well, it's always somebody. And your National Park Service plays right along, as does the National Park Foundation and other "friends" groups that rely on corporate donations for their payrolls.
What does it take to turn an environmentalist into a developer? A development the environmentalist likes. Call me a developer; I like railroads. Unfortunately, John McCain listened to the Bus Lobby, you know, those people running visitors into South Rim from Las Vegas and Phoenix for an hour or so in the park(ing) lot. Fifty years ago, Stewart Udall, then Secretary of the Interior, wanted Grand Canyon dammed--and ordered the National Park Service to shut up about it. If it hadn't been for David Brower and the Sierra Club, two reservoirs would fill the canyon today.
Where has the Park "Service" been in all of this? Serving its masters to stay afloat. Sure, it's a fine agency, but hardly a perfect agency. When you take the King's shilling, you serve the King.
Who is King? The economy. And always has been. If I were you, I wouldn't worry so much about the Italians as I would about everyone who lives next door. The so-called Gateway Communuities are the bigger problem here; the drumbeat from them is endless. More visitors! More spending! It's time we all got PAID!
Occasionally, if a park superintendent is patient, he or she gets to "restore" a corner of the park. That's what we wanted to with light rail at Grand Canyon--get the asphalt out entirely. Senator McCain cut us off at the knees--and under the Clinton Administration, just for the record. We can't have light rail in the national parks! After all, they were meant for asphalt--and the wider the road the better to get all of the buses through.
You want a conspiracy, Rump? There is your conspiracy. Don't look for it in the Interior Department. It is rather to be found on Capitol Hill.
Having known concessionaires who wanted me fired while telling the truth in Park Service uniform--and a university that protected a file tamperer just because the crook was tenured--I don't need anyone lecturing me about what goes on "behind the scenes. " All rats live behind the scenes. Will Mr. Keable do the bidding of the rats? You bet he will if that's who picked him. The point is: No one gets into those positions period without agreeing to live with rats. As for not becoming a rat yourself, that takes a ton of discipline.
I vowed never to be a rat. And what do I get from you, Rump? The insinuation that I was never an effective scholar because the University of Washington denied me tenure. No, my problem was that I was a scholar--and it took file tampering to make your case.
Make it. The truth is on the record for anyone who cares to find it. Just as the truth will come out about Mr. Keable without your help or mine. The minute he opens his mouth, we will know which "side" he is on. I just don't expect him to be on the side of preservation. Now that would be a first.
CJDillon, at the beginning of the same paragraph to which you just responded, whiny "nobody liked me or did it like I said, so everything is too corrupt to be worth any effort to do anything; nothing matters anyway; and I don't want to play anymore, except maybe to make sure I tell you that you're all too foolish and far beneath me to understand what I know by rote" Alfred asked and answered, "Sure, we lost Bears Ears and Escalante, but why didn't Clinton and Obama give them to the National Park Service in the first place? I'll tell you why; because it was all for show."
I believe you might be the very person to explain 1) what threats these areas faced and why these threats, rather than purely just a desire to make a "show" of it, might have prompted Clinton and Obama to protect these areas at the times they took those steps, 2) the differences between the processes for designation of a national park as opposed to a national monument, 3) what Clinton and Obama, respectively, faced in the House and Senate, in terms of which party controlled which body, at the times they felt compelled to protect these areas, 4) how the positions of the two political parties differed and still differ on the protection of these and other areas, 5) why, under the circumstances they faced, Clinton and Obama both felt they had to resort to the Antiquities Act to protect these areas given the apparent urgency of the threats, 6) why Clinton and Obama, given the politics of the times, didn't just give these areas to the National Park Service in the first place, and 7) what has happened, in terms of the environmental and conservation threats, planning and management trends, and on the ground changes, to the portions of Bears Ears and Grand Staircase–Escalante National Monuments that have had protections removed or revised by the Trump Administration and the GOP and how do those changes either validate or refute either Clinton's or Obama's concerns about the need to protect the areas?
I get exhausted debating deaf opponents; but, perhaps since this is your area of expertise, you might be able to get it out there on behalf of all of us who are too foolish and far beneath Alfred to understand what he knows by rote.
And just to be clearer, Mr. Dillion, you perfectly prove my point. Are these the records of presidents in love with the national parks--four "parks" for Mr. Clinton and three for Mr. Obama?--and that, for each president, over a period of EIGHT years? No matter, each of them, you further offer, "spent the night in one or more of these parks." Which "one?" Indeed, are you sure it is even one? There are only three or four to begin with!
Stunning records, to be sure. And Mr. Trump is compiling one exactly the equivalent. Let's not get carried away "roughing it" off the golf course.
My point, which history continues to make, is that the truth is unkind to all politicians. You were a National Park superintendent, I see. Tell me I am wrong about the politicial pressures you faced. Indiana Dunes, when I spoke and visited there in the 1980s, was still having growing pains, as I recall.
We're lucky, when all is said and done, that we have the parks we have. Just don't go looking for heroes in politics. Every great park--especially the biological ones--emerged after a knockdown fight. And then there was the superintendent of Olympic National Park, Fred Overly, who actually logged the park for nearly a decade, until a small band of interpretive rangers (two of them later distinguished university professors and another with the Peace Corps) blew the whistle on Overly and got him "promoted" out of Olympic--next to become superintendent of Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Talk about the fox in the henhouse.
Why are we so worried about Mr. Keable? Nothing is new; nothing has changed. We simply prefer our "selective outrage." We get outraged when "their side" does it; when our side does it we find excuses. Even my good friend, the late Michael Frome, happened to "like" Fred Overly, So he cut a few trees (150 million board feet at least). Well, maybe he had his "reasons," an observation that infuriated one of the original whistleblowers, also a good friend of mine (Carsten Lien, OLYMPIC BATTLEGROUND, Mountaineers Books).
When you live among historians and writers--in these cases, many of them former park interpreters--these are the "stories" you hear. And then, immersing yourself in the records, you find they are not "stories," after all. Certainly, some have inspired my own books, especially YOSEMITE: THE EMBATTLED WILDERNESS. Everything biological in Yosemite was an upfill fight. It's the nature of the political territory.
We will never get politics out of our national parks, but yes, I wish we would get a few more of our politicians into them. These one-night stands might be good for "image-building," but the parks deserve so much more.
Really, Rump. You slay me. Now we have "seven reasons" why Mr. Clinton and Mr. Obama perhaps established Grand Staircase-Escalante and Bears Ears the way they did. No, let's stick to the one. It was all for political show. How do I know that? Because they left them with BLM. There was no reason in the world they needed to do that. If they had meant these monuments to last, they would have given them to the Park Service in the first place and let the environmental community defend their gift.
That, Rump, is how parks are made. Someone on the ground needs to take ownership and see that the park survives. Who wants to take "ownership" of anything controlled by BLM? Or the Forest Service, for that matter? The philosophies of both have always undercut the parks. You are dead with those agencies before you start. Sure, they talk a good game, but when push comes to shove, the "game" always gets back to development.
You mean Mr. Clinton didn't know that--or his advisors? Or Mr. Obama and his advisors? As i said, you slay me. How ignorant do you think THE TRAVELER'S readers are? Even Wikipedia reports that Grand Staircase emerged during the height of Mr. Clinton's second campaign for president (September 18, 1996). Now just why would Wikipedia take note of that?
Just for the record, along about 1980, when Mount Saint Helens blew its top, the Forest Service insisted on getting that "national monument"--that for the first time, since 1933, when FDR had placed all of the national monuments under the Park Service. It worked because, just then in Alaska, Congress had bent to the wishes of Native Americans and extractive interests in establishing national parks and PRESERVES. From then on, the Park Service's competitive agencies got smart and started demanding they manage "their" national monuments, in other words, any carved from "their" lands.
When a president is serious, he acts like FDR. He puts the monument straight into Park Service hands. I believe only three or four of the fifteen or twenty latest monuments meet that criterion. I, too, would have to check. But I do not have to check the "facts" behind the politicizing of the entire process. If you want a "weak" monument, you start it weak. And the land managing agencies want them weak.
Imagine if Mr. Clinton and Mr. Obama (drum roll, please) had put the Park Service in charge from the start. You mean to say Mr. Trump would have dared abolishing them? Absolutely not! You don't abolish things run by the Park Service and get your political teeth kicked in. Why do that? Utah will still vote for him anyway. But yes, if Mr. Obama and Mr. Clinton have left you low-hanging fruit, why not? It's not the Park Service; it's BLM. These are not even national parks "in waiting," as my late colleague, Hal Rothman, used to put it. They're just aa name change--a convenient photo op. Politicians live for those.
But wring their hands over them? Bah, humbug! No heavy thinking needed. Throw the puppy a bone and make him think there is meat on it. I wish there were "seven steps" to that, but there aren't.
One minute, Rump, you're finding conspiracies all over the Interior Department, and the next you're denying there are any "conspirators" among your list of favorites. When Clinton and Obama made decisions, they "agonized" over them. When Trump makes a decision, he is a jerk. Well, they're all jerks--and statesmen. It all depends on what's at stake. That's American politics. You should be used to it by now. "It's a republic, Madam, if you can keep it." (Benjamin Franklin) And so far we've at least held on.
I was not a NPS superintendent. Mr. Runte, I beleive I know you and your great work from when I worked at Glacier National Park as an east side district interpreter and was familiar with your adminstrative history work. Costa, I know and respect from work, I have been in classes with Costa, viewed his work up close and personal and back in the day when he treated mosquitos at fire island....was hanging on every natural resource move (in a fgood way). I write this because I am an older gal (62) I did go to Northern Arizona University and thr true honor and privilage to have Dr. Larry Agenbroad (WACO pleistocene work) and Dr. Dale Nations (author of Geology of Arizona) on my my thesis committe along with paleobotanist Dr. Rishrd Hevly and Jim Meade. We studied landscape change in Northern Arizona in the 1980's and beyond. We studied each aspect of Central Arizona Projecy (CAP) in my hydrology course with Dr. Agenbroad, the sedimintation rate of Lake Mead. Why do I write this? Because everything Dr. Agenbroad said is TRUE. We need a visionary leadet for Grand Canyon who is STEEPED in natural resources and MANAGING people. Do not tell me he is familiar with the horrible treatment of qulified women who come forward in the NPS to speak the truth. I AM FAMILIAR with qualified women who have the nerve and audacity to come forward and tell truth to power. Please, for all who have any say in this matter I say fight it with every breath that you have in your body. Future generations will thank you.
Dear Lynne. Thank you for writing and commenting. You bet. We need great leadership in our national parks, and too often don't get it because of the politics, about which I ask that you make no mistake. I'm on your side all the way. In explaining the politics I am simply reminding readers how we get what we get. Too often these past three years, we have been told that Donald Trump is "the problem." However, the problem, as history explains, was simmering long before he arrived--and went UNSOLVED long before he arrived.
Fortunately, Grand Canyon is a flagship park--with lots of stakeholders and millions of friends. It has what Grand Staircase and Bears Ears lacked--fame. And it is managed by the National Park Service, which has standards America has come to expect. If attacked, and however attacked, Grand Canyon will be on the evening news every night, as it was in the 1960s when Stewart Udall wanted it dammed--and the Sierra Club took him on. If Mr. Keable needs a lesson in history, all of us will be sure to give it to him, which reminds me. Thank you for your comments about my work. It sometimes does get lonely "talking truth to power," as you say, but that is the only kind of history worth reading.
This appointment is further proof that Trump wants to rid all government agencies of their professionally trained staff who possess the institutional knowledge that is needed to operate government with some continuity from one administration to the next. And even though political appointees are commonplace in government, Trump is taking it to another level where many of his pointments are temporary. That way he can control whatever agenda he is pushing at the time. That means no one is really in charge of anything for long. He loves moving his pawns wherever he needs them. Some would say he has the authority to do whatever he wants and make everyone around him fight for his approval. He did this earlier in the week with various Press Secretaries. Now we get to see how long the new Superintendent lasts before he becomes expendable. The Trump Code is "A good friend today. A nobody tomorrow" . Will anyone be able to name his cabinet heads over the past 3.5 years?
It's not just that Press Secretary. Don't forget the reign of terror Trump is unleashing against the Inspectors General. If that doesn't constitute overt retaliation against Michael Atkinson, if it doesn't also consitute a clear effort to intimidate any other Inspector General, permanent or acting, who might still be tempted to do their job, including at HHS and now Glenn Fine at Defense, if it doesn't all constitute clear intent to obstruct justice, then I just can't imagine what would.
I re read my comment and do apologize for typos.
I feel strongly about this proposed assignment based on professional natural resource knowledge, and decades of mistreatment of qualified women in the NPS.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-energy-202/2020...
It doesn't matter. I'm sure Mr. Keable will only hold the superintendent's position long enough to approve whatever the Trump Mob wants approved, probably that development scheme at Tusayan. Then, whether Trump gets another term or not, Mr. Keable will take the blame for whatever the GOP needs a scapegoat to take that blame and he'll quickly and quietly be put out to pasture in the hopes that the public won't pay much attention.
This is corruption, pure and simple. Coconino county voters rejected Stilo development again and again. Stilo lobbied Arizona to incorporate Tusayan even though it had less than 600 residents. Arizona law requires mininimum 1500 population to incorporate. Stilo lobbied to get an exception. Now you have a "city" where more than half of city counsil is paid by Stilo. This appointment is yet another move by Stilo to take over public office. This has Stilo written all over it. Very sad that American democracy degraded so much that an Italian company can handpick public officials by paying few bucks.
I apologize --- who or what is "Stilo"?