Interior Secretary David Bernhardt has refused Grand Canyon National Park's request to close due to the coronavirus pandemic/Rebecca Latson file
Editor's note: This updates with some services reduced at Grand Canyon National Park, but park remains open.
Hours after Coconino County officials in Arizona, frustrated that Grand Canyon National Park is still open despite the worsening coronavirus pandemic, urged Interior Secretary David Bernhardt on Thursday to follow guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and close the park, the National Park Service announced some operational changes at the park.
However, the South Entrance remained open, entrance fees were not being collected, and visitors were being allowed to enjoy overlooks along the South Rim of the park. Backcountry permits for camping at Bright Angel, Indian Garden, and the Cottonwood campgrounds were suspended, as was access to the Bright Angel, South Kaibab, and North Kaibab trails. Reservations for the Mather Campground also were suspended, as were those for the South Rim Trailer Village.
Meanwhile, the Coconino County Board of Supervisors was hoping that other "local, state and federal officials" would join them in seeking the park's full closure.
Shutting down the park was necessary "for the safety and health of Coconino County healthcare providers, residents and visitors," read a letter sent from the county board of supervisors to Bernhardt on Thursday.
"The Grand Canyon is the crown jewel of parks across the county and country. However, it is important that the park adheres to proven guidance to help slow the spread of COVID-19," read the letter. "Social distancing measures in response to pandemics work. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, closures aimed to reduce the spread of infection have been proven to be extremely effective. Keeping the park open and allowing travelers from all over the world to come here and risk spreading COVID-19 is an unnecessary risk."
Last weekend a similar letter from Colorado officials convinced Bernhardt to close Rocky Mountain National Park. In that situation, Estes Park Mayor Todd A. Jirsa said his town would be overwhelmed if the coronavirus pandemic swept over the bucolic gateway town.
"We have an older, high-risk population with many retirees, and limited critical resources," the mayor wrote. "Some of our businesses are closing and others are on restrictions to comply with public health orders. Medical and emergency servides, as well as basic supplies like groceries, must be available to meet the needs of our community at this time.
"Estes Park is not in a position to support the potential needs of extra guests at this time."
Earlier Thursday, the Interior secretary was strongly criticized by the head of the National Parks Conservation Association, who called Bernhardt "beyond reckless" for failing to act.
“Many of our most iconic national parks remain open during this public health crisis, and this could come at great risk. National parks are home to some of our country’s greatest natural wonders, and the parks are designed to direct visitors to them. While visitors expect to encounter crowds on popular trails and overlooks under normal circumstances, during this global pandemic it could put them in harm’s way," said NPCA President and CEO Theresa Pierno.
“Warnings on the National Park Service website and closed park facilities are not enough to deter people. In fact, the visitors are still coming in droves. Parking lots are full and attractions are too crowded as people try to seek respite in this incredibly stressful time," she added. "On a popular trail in the Grand Canyon, a ranger had 600 contacts with visitors in just one day, proving that social distancing just isn’t possible, despite people’s best intentions. If an outbreak were to occur in one of these parks, the rural community hospitals and staff would be overrun.
“Secretary Bernhardt’s refusal to close iconic parks like the Grand Canyon and Zion, despite pleas from national park staff and local communities, is beyond reckless. He is needlessly putting lives at risk by operating as if this is business as usual."
Pierno added that the Interior secretary's stance was "giving people a false sense of security by inviting them to national parks, despite the risk."
Mary Risser, the national park's acting superintendent, had met earlier this week with area officials to get their input on whether the park should close in the face of the pandemic, and indicated her position was to close the park.
"Our board weighed in and supported the park superintendent’s recommendation. The Interior secretary denied that, and then so the board followed up with a letter directly to the Interior secretary asking them to reconsider," Matt Rudig, the public information officer for Coconino County, told the Traveler on Thursday.
There were reports that the acting director of the National Park Service's Intermountain Region office had supported the decision to close. National Park Service officials in Grand Canyon National Park did not respond to a request for comment.
Alexandra Picavet, the acting chief spokesperson in the agency's Washington, D.C., headquarters, said Thursday evening that Park Service officials were evaluating "the conditions and operation" at the park and that the Park Service had not made a decision about closing Grand Canyon.
"We have not sent a request to the secretary of the Interior specific to Grand Canyon National Park," she said.
Across the country more than three dozen parks have closed, including such iconic ones as Yellowstone, Grand Teton, Yosemite, Rocky Mountain, and even Valley Forge. Why Grand Canyon and Zion national parks have remained open has drawn criticism from some circles.
Last week Zion National Park staff in Utah posted a photo of a crowd of hikers passing each other as they were either on their way up or down the popular Angels Landing Trail and used it as an example of park visitors not practicing social distancing. Days later the park closed the trail, and on Wednesday it also closed its two sprawling campgrounds in Zion Canyon.
At the Coalition to Protect America's National Parks, Phil Francis said he had been told that Shenandoah National Park's superintendent also was denied permission to close that park. While the coalition has not yet called for all national parks to close because of the pandemic, Francis said they were close to making that call.
At the Southwest Utah Health Department, spokesperson David Heaton said Thursday that the department doesn't see a sizable risk in keeping Zion open. According to the department, there have been seven confirmed COVID-19 cases in its five-county jurisdiction. Six of those are in Washington County, which part of Zion touches.
For now, the health board is urging residents and visitors to practice social distancing, and schools, universities, churches, nursing homes, and other facilities in the counties have already been temporarily closed.
Heaton said a health department employee who lives in Springdale, the main gateway to Zion, told him Thursday morning that visitor traffic was way down from usual levels.
"She said it's markedly light in Springdale as far as people coming through into the park," the spokesman said.
National Parks Traveler, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit media organization, depends on its readers and listeners for support in providing coverage of the national parks and protected areas and the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. Please support our efforts with a donation.
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
This is a special kind of STUPID on the Interior Secretary's part.....CLOSE IT for the protection of the residents there.....This man must be a complete idiot.
I was at Grand Canyon last Saturday. I have never seen so FEW people. I was shocked, given the weather, time of year, free entrance fees and closed services. Parking lots at major areas were nearly EMPTY. The only area where I encountered many cars were near Yaki Point.
Spare me your ignorance. If the place looked like Miami Beach two weeks ago, I'd agree with your comments. That's not the reality. LEARN the reality before you make comments.
Not just stupid, Leslie, but downright mean and stupid and at what appears to me to be at perhaps a criminally culpable level.
Prayers to the Ranger who had 600 contacts. Totally unnecessary. Doubt he was wearing the proper PPE since the hospitals don't even have enough. They are using their employees as canaries in a coal mine. The rest of the world is not making this up. This virus is extremely deadly but the NPS thinks otherwise and will be glad to help the spread. SHAME, SHAME, SHAME!
Please don't blame NPS employees. Bernhardt's the one pushing parks to stay open and saying decisions to adjust operations, close buildings, or close parks must be based on science and data. This administration saying decisions must be based on science would be hilarious if it wasn't placing so many dedicated park employees and their families at risk.
Given all the debate on the topic of "business as usual" as opposed to a more cautious "public health first" approach, I feel an obligation to share the comments of one of America's most strategic business thinkers. In recent online comments, Bill Gates noted, "The U.S. is past this opportunity to control (COVID-19) without shutdown... We did not act fast enough to have an ability to avoid the shutdown... It’s January when everybody should’ve been on notice...” and, although he regrets that self isolation will be “disastrous” for the economy, he is suggesting a shutdown of six to ten weeks is now necessary and that “there really is no middle ground.”
“It’s very tough to say to people, ‘Hey keep going to restaurants, go buy new houses, ignore that pile of bodies over in the corner, we want you to keep spending because there’s some politician that thinks GDP growth is what counts,’” Gates said. “It’s hard to tell people during an epidemic …that they should go about things knowing their activity is spreading this disease.”
Personally, I'm actually an Apple fan and haven't used MicroSoft products in a long time; but, I think Gates is correct.
Why doesn't the superintendent have authority to close the park?
Because the Secretary of the Interior is the boss of the Director of the NPS who is the boss of the regional directors who are the bosses of the park superintendents. Chain of command.
...because the boss of his boss is Secretary of the Interior David Bernhardt and in charge of the Department of the Interior. Bernhardt was personally appointed by Donald Trump to replace the Trump Administration's previous Secretary of the Interior, Ryan Zinke, who had to resign due to corruption investigations. Bernhardt is going to do and order anyone who works for him to do whatever Trump wants regardless of any public health risks; Trump is desperate to get the economy back on track before the November elections no matter what it takes because, if he loses the election, he'll probably end up in jail; and the lives of the public mean next to nothing to Trump or Bernhardt at this point. A park superintendent is just another worthless grunt employee to these guys.
Trump is awful but there is no reason the grand canyon should close. The area is so vast that it is easy to avoid other humans. I have been there during slow times and along the 23 mile stretch I barely saw any cars. However, they should definitely shut down all services and only allow folks to drive along the 64. There is plenty to see from your car with relatively low risk of ever seeing, much less coming in contact with another human. The views along route 64 can easily be seen from your vehicle so there is no need to even get out of your car, which I am a fan of. Finally, the 64 connects the reservation and those traveling along on 89 to the 40 and 180.
Finally, got a press release yesterday at 5:20, that GRCA trails close and all back country permits rescinded as of noon March 27. It's about time.
Too little too late. Study it and nauseum until conditions change. Overlooks are still open...
Bernhardt is a monster, but most superintendents at flagship parks are spineless and craven. The federal bureacracy is not the military and closing Zion and the Grand Canyon and others is within their legally delegated authority. They've just chosen to put their (telework-eligible) careers ahead of the health and safety of the public and frontline contract, concession, and park staff.
Notice the number of “actings” in this story. Lots of people in the NPS upper management are not in permanent assignments. Grand Canyon, Yosemite, and other SES jobs have not been filled. Its hard to fault a temporarily assigned superintendent who has to go back to their regular job and hope to have a career in front of them. Far from “spineless,” superintendents like Mike Reynolds at Yosemite and Dan Wenk at Yellowstone lost their jobs because they stood up to DOI.
Same story here in Moab, with Arches and Canyonlands National Parks still open despite appeals by the Southeast Utah Health Department and the City of Moab to close. Our 17-unit hospital is ill-equipped to handle the needs of tourists who continue to visit.
Absolutely correct, CJDillon, there are actually at least three reasons why the Trump Administration and the party that backs it have kept so many of the "little people" of the federal government in "acting" positions. First, an employee in an "acting" position is less able to speak out or defend themselves when the corrupt hoodlums that the Trump team have placed in positions above them muscle them into doing things that they know are wrong and that they would not do on their own. In the case of "acting" park superintendents who, as SES, can be sent wherever on a moment's notice, any even suspected move in any direction other than what Trump/Bernhardt want will get them reassigned to a special study of restroom paper goods inventory systems and warehouse operations based out of Hot Springs. Second, it's easier to deflect blame onto or otherwise scapegoat someone in an "acting" position when whatever the Trump team muscled them into doing is revealed and the investigations begin (I don't know; you'll have to ask Michael Cohen; and by the way, I don't know Michael and wouldn't know him if I met him.). Third, it's very hard to invoke the 25th Amendment when almost all of the "the principal officers of the executive departments" are just lower level party flunkies who have been "snookered" into positions as "acting" department secretaries. In these cases as well, any even suspected move in any direction other than what the Trump team wants will get them thrown out and discredited with a career ending RINO label.
What rubish Rump. A sitting director can be canned just as easlily as an acting one. A sitting director can be blamed as easily as a sitting one and the 25th Amendment calls on the majority of the "principal officers" of the executive departments to make an Article 25 determination. An acting director would be the principal officer. Further, of the 15 current officers, only 1 is acting.
Buck, I believe you either missed the point, which is possible, or have decided you can get away with just "shining it on" by being defiantly dense, essentially resorting to a variation of a truth by emphatic assertion strategy.
I know your point, it is to attack the current administration any time you are given the opportunity. But the fact is, your attack was totally baseless. Your three points were just wrong and have no evidence to support them. Otherwise you would have responded with that evidence rather than a "defiently dense" response.
And, I know that you are so invested in your tribal loyalties that you will defend the current administration at all costs and no matter what it does and has already done. As many other commenters on NPT have pointed out and advised me before, it is pointless to debate a deaf opponent.
As a matter of fact Rump, I have critisized many actions of the current administration here and elsewhere. But, unlike you, I don't make up supposed digressions and make false accusations. Didn't with prior administrations either. If you define calling out your factual errors "tribal loyalty", so be it. Doesn't make them any more factual. Why don't you just admit your three points where totally off base. Or does your TDS drive your tribal loyalty?
So we can shutdown the Canadian border and also the Mexican border but not the national parks. Are you kidding me! What does DOI/NPS management think is going on, people just catching a cold. Have they noticed that over 900 people died in a 24 hour period in Italy and New York has become the new epicenter. Oh by the way the US is now leader in the number of coronavirus cases. Does the NPS really care about its employees? It was stated that there are employees now infected with coronavirus. Does the NPS not realize everyone else not only in the US but the world is trying to slow the spread. But somehow the NPS believes there is no threat and now is the best time to travel across state lines and visit your favorite national park. Gives a new meaning to Find Your Park. In some areas the only medical care sits in a strip mall. Rural areas can not withstand an outbreak. Look at NYC with all of its hospitals and they can't keep up. They don't even have enough beds or respirators. Wake up people, now is the time to do your civic duty and stay home and ride this out. Bernhardt and Vela probably believe the NPS is immune to one of the deadliest viruses ever. Don't expect the NPS to protect you. You protect you and now is the time to stay home and help the rest of the world. Help stop the spread!
Hope the Az Governor directs Highway Patrol or NG to turn all non essential traffic around on HWY 64 north of Valle.
The NPS used fee revenue to stay "open" during the government shutdown. That same fee revenue will not be available for parks when things start ramping up again AND the Secretary waived entrance fees during this crisis but attempts to keep the parks open. By using the fees during the shutdown and by waving fees at the parks now the NPS is going to be in a bind for sure.
I bet the fireworks will so go on at Mount Rushmore but the social distancing required of the MAGA Hat wearing spectators will be a downer!
Oh, don't forget the GAO found that the Department/NPS broke the law during the shutdown - it will now come back to haunt them for sure.
This is just criminal.
I wonder if local/state authorities could just order the roads leading to the Park closed and thus block access. It'd take Troopers to man the 'blockade' but it would effectively block access.
Yes, Trump is awful; but, there most certainly is a reason, a good reason, for the Coconino County Board of Supervisors and other leaders in northern Arizona to want the Grand Canyon closed, despite the hit to the local econemy, and it has nothing to do with whether it is or is not easy for visitors to avoid other humans from their cars.
Let's try to get this information across one more time and see if we can get it to stick. Many people, a significant percentage, who are infected with COVID-19 and actually fully contagious are asymptomatic, which means they are carriers of the disease and can spread it to others; but, they either do not yet have, no longer have, may not have had, or may never have noticeable symptoms. The infamous unintentional serial killer known as "Typhoid Mary" never had any noticeable symptoms of typhoid fever, yet her many victims did.
The reasons that local leaders in communities around national parks want the parks completely closed is that these communities are usually smaller towns or villages with smaller, less developed, medical facilities that have less capability and less surge capacity to treat any significant number of seriously ill patients. When these national parks are, in any way, shape, or form, open, they attract visitors from long distances. These visitors often come from areas that have known COVID-19 outbreaks and some are infected carriers of the virus. They then come through airports, often smaller nearby regional airports, where they interact with airline and airport personnel and other travelers; they stop at rental car counters and interact with people there; they stop at gas stations; they go to the local grocery store to get snacks and water; and they shed the virus as they exchange money or use credit card terminals and come into contact with handrails, doors, door handles, and restroom fixtures. And, although they may have left home feeling fine, they can also become seriously ill during their visit. These are all activities that can spread the infection among the local population, as well as leave local leaders, local medical staff, and local park staff facing the challenge of using small town capabilities to deal with what should be big city problems.
These are not hypothetical concerns. There are already several examples of where seemingly innocent gatherings resulted in serious local outbreaks. The small local communities in central Colorado are now dealing with a COVID-19 "hotspot" that formed after a party of wealthy visitors, some foreign and some domestic, a group that included at least one asymptomatic carrier, decided to defy the pandemic and hit the ski slopes around Aspen and Vail. Although the local business community is trying to keep things quiet, the local medical infrastructure is now dealing with the result.
When someone thoughtlessly posts directions to a national park, including suggestions for long distance highway routes, and does so in defiance of the urgings of local authorities to please stay away and despite national pleas for self-quarantining until the pandemic starts to subside, they make themselves directly culpable for the outcome. Let me reiterate my personal plea that we all commit to listening carefully to the advice of properly educated and qualified experts and continuing to ignore any and all guidance offered by those lacking such education and qualifications.
Rump --- don't bother. In over a decade that I've personally observed, his behavior has not changed, nor his rhetorical style, and never ---NEVER --- in that ten years or more has he ever conceded a point on any matter under discussion. There are names for that sort of behavior, names no one would willingly wear.
Rick, provide some evidence to prove me wrong and I will be happy to concede, as I have indeed done in the past. Problem is, your style is to make baseless accusations and then run when confronted Since Rump has failed to do so, perhaps you would like to explain how acting park superintendents are going to invoke the 25th amendment for the removal of the President.
Well, I certainly can't "explain how acting park superintendents are going to invoke the 25th amendment for the removal of the President" because park superintendents, whether acting or not, are actually not, in any way other than perhaps as witnesses, part of the 25th amendment process, which you should know if you're going to be opining on it. But, I have to give you credit for a comment with a level of passive-aggressive spin that would have made Joseph Goebbels proud. And, although your punctuation still needs work, you seem to have spelled it all correctly.
"Since Rump has failed to do so, perhaps you would like to explain how acting park Iuperintendents are going to invoke the 25th amendment for the removal of the President. "
Since neither of us has any idea what you're talking about, I have to ask if you're running a fever? It's one of the first signs of COVID19.
"Well, I certainly can't "explain"
Then why did you say it. Someone noted the high number of "acting" superintendents in the article. You replied it was purposeful. Your point three was it would weaken the ability to do a 25th amendement removal. "Third, it's very hard to invoke the 25th Amendment when almost all of the "the principal officers of the executive departments" are just lower level party flunkies who have been "snookered" into positions as "acting" department secretaries." Why would that be a reason for acting park superintendents and why would you make the statement when in fact only one of the current Department heads is "acting"? I don't doubt you knew the 25th amendment was limited to the Department Heads, that there is only one acting Department head currently and as such he is a fully qualified as a acting Director to vote for 25th Amendment removal. But you inserted the comment as an explaination for acting park superintendents, I suppose because you assumed nobody else new the difference and it was a chance to excercise your TDS.
Rump, did you mention the 25th amendment? I don't recall ever doing so, or even what it would have to do with the Park Service or any particular park, for that matter. Did you know, btw, that the best definition for TDS "those so delusional as to follow him, even as people are dying as a result".
Rick, - His exact words which I quoted in the post just prior to yours and appears in his post ealier in this thread" "Third, it's very hard to invoke the 25th Amendment when almost all ...." Its no wonder you don't know what I am talking about when you can't even follow the thread.
Rick B., I did mention the 25th amendment. What got all of this wrestling with a pig started was a comment from a very knowledgeable commenter, CJDillon, posted last Friday afternoon, in which he noted "the number of 'actings' in this story" meaning involved with this topic, how many "people in the NPS upper management are not in permanent assignments" and how many upper level federal jobs have not been properly filled, and, finally, how it's ultimately "hard to fault a temporarily assigned superintendent who has to go back to their regular job" hoping they still have a career. CJDillon is certainly in a position to know how much power Trump and his minions can wield against underlings who aren't sycophantically loyal to the regime and how especially vulnerable an employee serving in an "acting" capacity can be under those circumstances. I still honestly believe that anyone with any serious level of experience or intelligence would quickly understand and agree.
I then posted, again last Friday afternoon, a comment in support of CJDillon's comment and tried to illustrate his comment by articulating "at least three reasons why the Trump Administration and the party that backs it have kept so many of the 'little people' of the federal government in 'acting' positions." The third reason I offered was that "it's very hard to invoke the 25th Amendment when almost all of the 'the principal officers of the executive departments' are just lower level party flunkies who have been 'snookered' into positions as 'acting' department secretaries."
Let me stop here and offer a bit of explanation about the 25th Amendment for those who may not be familiar. The 25th Amendment to the Constitution allows for the president to be relieved of his or her duties, for some indefinite length of time, in the event that a majority of the principal officers of the executive departments, meaning the "secretaries" or "heads" of the cabinet-level departments or agencies, effectively find the president to be either incapacitated or otherwise unfit to discharge those duties. It's essentially a kinder, gentler, form of temporary removal from office.
Eric immediately came to Trump's defense, stating that "of the 15 current officers, only 1 is acting" and, although that may be correct, when I posted my comment alluding to this administration's heavy use of "acting" assignees as heads of cabinet-level departments or agencies, I was referring to an earlier period when there was much discussion, at least during that period, of the majority of Trump's cabinet being there in only an "acting" capacity.
I didn't respond to him and, as my later posts indicate, I just moved on; but, he didn't. Yesterday evening, he came out with a demand that one of us, you or I, "explain how acting park superintendents are going to invoke the 25th amendment" so, to direct his fire back at me rather than keep you in the middle, I posted that "park superintendents, whether acting or not, are actually not, in any way other than perhaps as witnesses, part of the 25th amendment process," which is true. Eric then came back again, claiming that, "Someone noted the high number of "acting" superintendents in the article" and that I had replied, "...it would weaken the ability to do a 25th amendment removal." The only problem is that I never said "acting" park superintendents would weaken the ability to invoke the 25th amendment. CJDillon remarked on the number of "actings" and the number of "people in the NPS upper management who are not in permanent assignments." I responded to CJDillon, "Absolutely correct ...there are actually at least three reasons why the Trump Administration and the party that backs it have kept so many of the 'little people' of the federal government in 'acting' positions." My comment referring to the 25th amendment pertained to Trump's preference for putting people into "acting" assignments, not just "acting" park superintendents. Eric missed the point.
By the way, I seem to remember you mentioning some medical issues. How are you doing and how is it going? I hope you're getting whatever medical attention you need and the COVID-19 situation over there isn't impacting you. Everybody seems to be keeping their heads down over there.
Rump, your "point" was just wrong. There is no evidence that acting superintendents/directors are any more likely to be canned or any more likely to be intimidated. In fact two of the three acting superintendents in the article were expressing disatisfaction with policy. Apparently, they didn't feel intimidated. With one of 15 current Department heads being acting, it is hardly "heavy use" of the acting designation. The reality is you were trying to stretch an observation re acting superintendents in the park system into an attack on the Trump administration and implying the President would otherwise be subject to 25th Admentment removal. The rubber band broke. Ouch!
The impression of many acting comes from how many Presidential appointees [requiring Senate confirmation] have been left open, filled with a temp, or so on.It's a great way to keep folks unstable in their positions.
Don't forget this chart the Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-administration-ap...
Pure rubish. There is absolutely no evidence that acting positions are any less stable than sitting positions.
I think ec may have a valid point. It would be hard to top this regime's record-breaking turnover of 'sitting' appointees:
82% 'A' Team departures
38% Multiple 'A' Team departures
ten cabinet head departures
https://www.brookings.edu/research/tracking-turnover-in-the-trump-admini...
Oh, almost forgot: It's 'rubbish' with two 'b's, comrade, and most Americans would not use that word. Tell Vlad he needs to up his game to troll NPT ;o)
it's sad what's become of the comment section on this site.