I always was against armed Rangers and in this case it would have not made a lick of difference, but it has me thinking.
I had a very interesting conversation about 3 years ago with a female MRNP ranger (not Margaret) who helped me pull my car out of a snowbank on the road up to Paradise. She ran my license and, once she saw it was clean, gave me permission to sit in the front seat of her Explorer. "Please don't touch the weapon," she said politely as I slid in next to the M-16 propped between us. As we drove uphill from Longmire, she explained that MRNP rangers have what is known as
Exclusive Jurisdiction within the park. This means that within the boundary, they are the sole law enforcement authority. Whatever trouble occurs inside the park, they have to handle it, and backup is a long way away.
She described one episode where Pierce County law enforcement called to advise they were chasing someone on the FBI's ten most wanted list, known to be armed and dangerous, up a forest road on the park's southern boundary. She and her colleagues had to scramble to set up a roadblock and arm themselves for his arrival. He ended up being apprehended before getting to her, but let me tell you, after hearing that story I have no problem with MRNP rangers bearing arms.
Most outdoorspeople I know have a healthy respect for the rangers and the work they do, but in my opinion, the public has too little appreciation of a ranger's responsibilities. It's a tough balancing act, having to shift from support and education to hardcore enforcement. Before Ms. Anderson was called to set up her roadblock, she was running the sledding hill.
