• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Olympic National Park

M

maquimike

New member
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
6
Location
Bellevue, WA, ,
imported post

I'm a new member, so please bear with me if this has been covered before.

I'm not truly an OC crusader or anything, but I do admire what the activists on this board are trying to achieve. I actually prefer to CC on most occasions, because I just don't want the hassle of "explaining" my rights to my skittish neighbors.

But I do a lot of back country hiking, and prefer to be armed when I'm hiking alone through remote country -- and not necessarily for protection against bears and cougars either. And CC while wearing a 25 pound pack is tough. So I figured I would strap my leg holster on and head out, right?

At Olympic NP a couple of weeks ago, however, I started out on a 7-mile roundtrip hike and at the trailhead encountered a sign stating "No Weapons Allowed on Trail". Now, I'm not naive enough to assume that WA state law will apply in all cases in a national park, but this actually caught me by surprise. Why would the NPS not allow weapons in the backcountry? And how can they get away with taking my 2A rights like that?

By the way, there is NO indication on any NPS website that I can find that mentions a prohibition on weapons.
 
Mainsail

Mainsail

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
1,533
Location
Silverdale, Washington, USA
imported post

Carry of any weapon in any manner is not allowed in the National Parks. I understand that's being worked on, but for now that's the law. State law plays no role because the Park is Federal land.

Open carry is OK in the National Forests, that's where I hike.
 
S

sandy

Regular Member
Joined
May 16, 2006
Messages
102
Location
, Washington, USA
imported post

Want to be a test case? If judges are honest, it would be hard to lose this battle in court, but stranger things have happened. I hope it gets fixed soon. My life is only so long.

Mainsail, do you have a link to info on who is fighting this good fight? I assume the NRA is impotent as usual on this sort of issue. Is it the VCDL?

-- Sandy (WA)
 
M

maquimike

New member
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
6
Location
Bellevue, WA, ,
imported post

In a quick update, this past weekend I did a 16-mile round trip in the Alpine Lakes Wildnerness area, within the boundary of the Mt. Baker - Snoqualmie National Forest. During that hike, I had my .45 in a leg holster in plain view. I encountered two Forest Service rangers during the hike. No concerns or questions about my being armed -- just a nice conversation about the trail.
 
Mainsail

Mainsail

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
1,533
Location
Silverdale, Washington, USA
imported post

maquimike wrote:
In a quick update, this past weekend I did a 16-mile round trip in the Alpine Lakes Wildnerness area, within the boundary of the Mt. Baker - Snoqualmie National Forest. During that hike, I had my .45 in a leg holster in plain view. I encountered two Forest Service rangers during the hike. No concerns or questions about my being armed -- just a nice conversation about the trail.
Click to expand...

The OP was asking about the National Parks, the National Forest is a whole different ball of wax. I hiked in two differnt NFs over the weekend, one in the Cascades and the other in the Olympics, both times I had my Alaskan 44 Magnum in a chest holster.

07c597e4-5e57-4b8c-96cc-76d715a3b3c2.jpg




I would not recommend OC in the parks for the time being.
 
J

jenzenk

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2007
Messages
44
Location
Oak Harbor, WA
imported post

After my wife and I were stalked by a cougar on the Hoh trail I inquired about carrying while in the park. It's not legal in any park in the lower 48. However carrying of a weapon in highly reccomended in any and all parks in Alaska. It's politically driven... big surprise, since we all know that cougars and bears will not attack you in any lower 48 national park. Let's not even mention attacks by any other fellow hiker. Would any woman out there hike across the Olympic peninsula alone and feel totally safe?

I sent many emails to the park service about this topic and never recived a reply, and then never had any phone calls returned.

I know I read somewhere there is a push to change this that actually had a reply from the park service. Let's keep this fight going!!!
 
BB62

BB62

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
4,069
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
imported post

The somewhere where you may have read it was at or from VCDL - link in the post previous to yours.

Please call!
 
thebastidge

thebastidge

Regular Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
313
Location
2519 E Fourth Plain Blvd, Vancouver Washington, US
G

gregma

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2007
Messages
618
Location
Redmond, Washington, USA
imported post

jenzenk wrote:
It's not legal in any park in the lower 48.
Click to expand...
Just wanted to clarify that sentance above. I'm sure what you meant was "National Park". Because in WA, it's perfectly legal to carry in a State Park, a County Park, or a City Park. Only National Park's are forbidden currently.
 
J

jenzenk

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2007
Messages
44
Location
Oak Harbor, WA
imported post

gregma - Yes, National Parks is exactly what I meant.

Still doesn't make sense to me, cougars and bears exist in the lower 48 National Parks (not to mention criminals) as well as Alaska. I guess gun owners either have a stronger voice up in AK or the liberals have trained all the bears and cougars in WA not to attack. Must have been the agreement they made with cougars after outlawing hunting them with dogs (unless that's changed since I left in 2004).
 
J

jchen012

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
144
Location
Bellevue, WA, ,
imported post

Just to let you guys know, I went hiking on the Annette Lake trail in Mt.Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest this past weekend. I open carried my Glock 32 and had no issues at all.
 
G

gregma

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2007
Messages
618
Location
Redmond, Washington, USA
imported post

jenzenk wrote:
gregma - Yes, National Parks is exactly what I meant.

Still doesn't make sense to me, cougars and bears exist in the lower 48 National Parks (not to mention criminals) as well as Alaska. I guess gun owners either have a stronger voice up in AK or the liberals have trained all the bears and cougars in WA not to attack. Must have been the agreement they made with cougars after outlawing hunting them with dogs (unless that's changed since I left in 2004).
Click to expand...
I think #1 is more accurate. More powerful gun lobby up in AK. And I doubt it will get better in the lower 48 anytime soon. But we do what we can do.
 
BB62

BB62

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
4,069
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
imported post

gregma wrote:
I think #1 is more accurate. More powerful gun lobby up in AK. And I doubt it will get better in the lower 48 anytime soon. But we do what we can do.
Click to expand...
I thought the National Park prohibition was generated by the NPS, and was national? Is neither the case?
 
Mainsail

Mainsail

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
1,533
Location
Silverdale, Washington, USA
imported post

It might be beneficial to remember that in the NPs in Alaska, we are not at the top of the food chain. If they enacted such a prohibition it would either result in nobody visiting the parks at all, or everyone ignoring the rule entirely.
 
G

gregma

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2007
Messages
618
Location
Redmond, Washington, USA
imported post

BB62 wrote:
gregma wrote:
I think #1 is more accurate. More powerful gun lobby up in AK. And I doubt it will get better in the lower 48 anytime soon. But we do what we can do.
Click to expand...
I thought the National Park prohibition was generated by the NPS, and was national? Is neither the case?
Click to expand...
You are correct in both statements. There is a movement driven by the VCDL to get that overturned, but hasn't been successful as of yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top