Decision Maker

U.S National Park Services

The National Park Service manages national parks and American national monuments


Does U.S National Park Services have the power to decide or influence something you want to change? Start a petition to this decision maker.Start a petition
Closed
Petitioning U.S National Park Services

Remove Selma’s KKK Memorialization: Rename the Edmund Pettus Bridge

Fifty years ago, the Voting Rights Movement marched through Selma and over the Edmund Pettus Bridge. The marches across the bridge led to the passage of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and today the bridge is a symbol of nonviolent victory for change! Unfortunately, the bridge is STILL named after a man who served as Grand Dragon of the Alabama Ku Klux Klan, was a Confederate General, and was later elected as a United States Senator. The bridge was the site of “Bloody Sunday”. On March 7, 1965, hundreds of nonviolent protesters attempted to march from Selma to Montgomery for their right to vote. But as they crossed the Edmund Pettus Bridge, they were met by Alabama state troopers and deputized civilians who were armed with billy clubs, tear gas, and cattle prods and attacked the marchers and drove them back to Brown Chapel Church. How could a landmark that holds so much significance for the civil rights movement be named after a man who not only supported slavery, but held one of the highest positions within the Ku Klux Klan? It's time for the state of Alabama, the city of Selma, and the National Park Service to remove a KKK leader's name from the historic bridge.  Selma and the Voting Rights Movement altered the course of history forever, and Selma has done too much for this country to remain unchanged. Selma is currently 80% African American, with a black mayor and majority African American local city officials. The name Edmund Pettus is far from what the city of Selma should honor. Let’s change the image of the bridge from hatred and rename it to memorialize hope and progress. Please sign our petition calling on Selma and Alabama leaders and the National Park Service to rename the Edmund Pettus Bridge.

Students UNITE
190,049 supporters
Petitioning U.S National Park Services

National Park Service: Don't Kill Deer in Our Nation’s Capital

Dear Friends – At the end of the week, a hike or bike ride through Rock Creek National Park, in Washington DC, is a cleansing antidote to a heavy work schedule and the stress of city living. When that hike or bike ride includes a chance meeting with a creature of the forest, however, it becomes a magical, even spiritual, experience. To spot a red fox or a pileated woodpecker really makes our day. To come upon a peaceful, gentle doe and fawn, or a magnificent buck standing in a glen, takes our breath away and confers upon us a profound feeling of gratitude and wellbeing that lasts all week. To know that these beautiful and gentle animals are in the park living out their lives is very important to us. While the world is in upheaval all around us it makes us inexplicably happy and hopeful to know that, at least in the wilds of Rock Creek Park, all is as it should be. In the spring of 2012, however, the wellbeing of the Park was suddenly threatened. The National Park Service, for the first time in the 123-year history of the park, ordered the killing of half of the park’s 314 deer in the first year of a multi-year killing program for the stated purpose of protecting native plant species from “overbrowsing.” These practically tame deer, who have never before been harassed or hunted, were ordered to be shot with guns and archery after being lured to piles of grain, apples and hay; others would be killed after capturing them with nets and shooting them in the head with penetrating captive-bolt guns, or by bleeding them to death. A coalition of dedicated Washington residents, attorneys, and animal-protection groups, including In Defense of Animals (IDA), has studied the Park Service proposal in depth and has concluded that the Park Service proposal is not only unprecedented, but it is unnecessary, ineffective, inefficient, inhumane and unacceptable. There are so many reasons to oppose the Park Service plan: First, eliminating the deer is unnecessary as there is no deer overpopulation in Rock Creek Park at this time. The Park Service’s own records clearly state that there is no current over-population of deer in Rock Creek Park. Instead, the Park Service plan states that killing is needed to address the “POTENTIAL” of deer becoming the dominant force in the park’s ecosystem, and that deer “COULD POSSIBLY” affect the forest “IN THE FUTURE.” Secondly, deer aren’t destroying Rock Creek Park; invasive exotic plants are. Since 1996, the National Park Service has identified invasive non-native plants entering the park from neighboring properties to be “the most serious threat to this natural area and the top management priority.” By 2012, however, the Park Service had failed to stem the overwhelming spread of exotic plants and blamed the deer for damage to native plants instead. Third, even if there were a deer overpopulation problem in Rock Creek Park, killing is unnecessary. There are effective non-lethal ways to control the deer population, and there are many non-lethal ways of protecting plants from deer. Several reproductive control agents developed for wildlife are readily available and have been successfully used elsewhere in the country – including by the National Park Service on other lands under its jurisdiction. The cost is comparable to or less than a killing program. In addition, fencing, deer repellants, and other non-lethal means are used routinely across the country to successfully protect plants from deer. Fourth, hunting and killing is an ineffective and inefficient way to regulate the deer population. When food is plentiful, deer tend to have twins and even triplets. When food is scarce, they have single fawns, or stop reproducing altogether. After many deer are killed the remaining ones will produce even more fawns since even more food will be available to them. In addition, deer who are killed will rapidly be replaced by deer immigrants from adjacent Maryland. Fifth, lethal deer controls are inhumane. Luring deer with food and then ambushing them with bullets and archery, capturing them with nets and smashing their skulls with penetrating captive bolts, or bleeding them to death, is brutal and inhumane. In fact, killing wild animals after luring them with food is considered to be so offensive that it is illegal in 28 states. Archery is widely acknowledged to be a particularly inhumane method of killing. Statistics show that the wounding rate is over 50 percent. This means that for every animal dragged from the woods by a bow hunter, at least one animal is left to suffer and die a slow, excruciating death. Lastly, killing the deer was overwhelmingly opposed by the public during public comment periods on the Park Service proposal. Fifty-three times as many comments supported an option to use only non-lethal means than opposed it. Fourteen times as many comments opposed the lethal reduction of deer than supported it. Non-lethal means to control the Rock Creek Park deer are also favored by many elected officials including several members of Congress. Among them are Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton of Washington, DC, Rep. James. P. Moran of Virginia, and Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland. While we have been able to stall the kill temporarily for the past few months through a lawsuit, the Rock Creek Park deer now desperately need your help. The National Park Service needs to hear from you that killing deer in the middle of the nation’s capital is not acceptable. Please join us by imploring the National Park Service to choose humane, science-based alternatives – such as contraception -- instead of killing. Here in the nation’s capital we should be creating a model for peaceful co-existence with wildlife and exporting that model to other communities. Please sign this petition and circulate it to as many people as you can in the United States and around the world. For more information, visit Save the Rock Creek Park Deer on Facebook. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONCERN AND FOR YOUR HELP! Jeremy R. Rifkin and Carol Grunewald

Save the Rock Creek Park Deer
19,999 supporters
Petitioning U.S National Park Services

Designate Prince Rogers Nelson's Paisley Park As A National Historic Landmark

To National Historic Landmark Program & The Estate of Prince Rogers Nelson    Pursuant to Code of Federal Regulations, Title 36, part 65, we the undersigned, fans of Prince Rogers Nelson, do hereby nominate the building structure which was  the residence and studio of Prince Rogers Nelson, known as ‘Paisley Park’, located at 7801 Audubon Road, Chanhassen,Minnesota, 55317, to be designated as a National Historic Landmark for the purpose of preserving this landmark for the future and so that it not be destroyed or not available to future generations    This site sufficiently meets the criteria as set forth by the aforementioned regulation as follows:Paisley Park is a building and structure  which possesses exceptional value in illustrating the heritage of the United States in artistic culture and possesses a high degree of integrity of location and setting.   It is associated with the life of Prince Rogers Nelson, deceased, who is a significant person in the history of United States, a United States citizen who was an internationally  acclaimed musical artist, singer,writer,poet,composer,film director, and academy award winner. The association being that Paisley Park, so named by Prince Rogers Nelson,was not only where he lived, but also included a studio where he created the music and where a stage where he performed as well. The events associated with Prince Rogers Nelson are outstandingly represented.  As Paisley Park is associated with the life,music, of Prince Rogers Nelson, it meets the criteria for being named National Historic Landmark, with all of the benefits and protections therein.  The areas of significance are ‘Art’ and ‘The Performing Arts’. It is a building and structure which possesses cultural value.  Paisley Park possesses significant value  as that is not only  where Prince Rogers Nelson created music, but also where he lived and performed. It also possesses significant value to his legions of fans not only in the United States, but worldwide as well.    Prince Rogers Nelson’s significance is unquestionable in the history of music art and performing arts.. He had mastered numerous instruments, and received numerous awards for his achievements in music.     We the fans of Prince Roger Nelson wish the structure, building, and objects therein, to be preserved for future generations, and for those fans to visit and for others to visit. It is a location that is loved by his fans and recognized as the place which is associated with Prince,his life,and his music. We, the fans of Prince wish that the building and structure  be protected from demolition and/or any other sort of destruction. We, the fans of Prince wish that ‘Paisley Park’ be preserved as a tribute to the outstanding legacy to Prince and be designated as a museum and a National Historic Landmark.  

RayeEllen Stiles
17,023 supporters
Petitioning U​.​S National Park Services, Jared Huffman, Dianne Feinstein

Protect and Restore Wildlife at Point Reyes National Seashore

We are writing to express our concerns about the General Management Plan Amendment under consideration for Point Reyes National Seashore and Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA), two national parks in Marin County, California. Designated an International Biosphere Preserve by the United Nations, the Point Reyes National Seashore and adjacent GGNRA serve as vital refuges for more than a hundred federally listed threatened or endangered species. Under pressure from the pro-industry Administration, politically connected ranchers, and the impacts of climate change, these unique and biologically important public lands may be lost to present and future generations they were meant to serve. Climate change, the accelerating loss of species, diminishing fresh water supplies, polluted marine environments, and decreasing demand for beef and dairy products deserve careful consideration before recommitting some 28,000 acres of national parkland to private, extractive use. We object to any conversion of Point Reyes National Seashore lands to row crops, which would degrade wildlife habitat and water quality in the park and prevent public access. We also oppose the expansion of commercial livestock farming to introduce sheep, goats, pigs, turkeys or chickens, which would create conflicts with predators and pressure to kill bobcats, coyotes and foxes.We strongly support the management of Point Reyes National Seashore to protect its outstanding natural values and to provide for public recreation, benefit, and inspiration. The public has submitted more than 7,600 comments to the Park Service’s proposed plan for ranching at the Seashore and GGNRA.  More than 90 percent of these public comments oppose ranching and killing native wildlife—rare Tule elk—to make cattle ranching profitable. Point Reyes National Seashore should prioritize restoration of the park’s elk herds to historic numbers. There is immense public value to the native tule elk at Point Reyes, the only tule elk herds within the National Park system. Elk are an ecologically important part of the landscape of Point Reyes and their recovery is a success story for restoring native ecosystems, consistent with the mission of the National Park Service.The National Park Service is charged with managing Point Reyes National Seashore in a manner which provides maximum protection, restoration, and preservation of the natural environment. The Park Service’s amendment to the General Management Plan should prioritize protecting the native wildlife and natural values of Point Reyes National Seashore.Thank you for preserving our national parks and wildlife. 

the Resource Renewal Institute
16,282 supporters