Should answer your question.
Thread: CHL in state park
Can you carry in a Texas state park?
Should answer your question.
randy1911 wrote:Randy,Can you carry in a Texas state park?
Yes you can carry in Texas state parks.
On July 8, 1998, Texas Parks and Wildlife Executive Director, Andrew Sansom signed Executive Director Order No. 98-001 which reads as follows:
Nothing in the Public Hunting Lands Proclamation or State Parks Proclamation prohibits a person from possessing a concealed handgun, loaded or unloaded, under the authority of a concealed handgun license issued by this state or any other state. Persons carrying concealed handguns must comply with all concealed handgun laws.
This order was issued in response to several complaints of TP&W employees/officers denying CHL holders right to CCW on park property, includinga few instances of CHL holders being arrested and/or having their firearms confiscated. Since this order was issued, I am not aware of any problems.
Hope this helps.
Youo may carry in any Texas State Park UNLESS it is property owned by the US Army Corps of Engineers, which is LEASED to Texas Parks and Wildlife to be used as a State Park.
So, in a nutshell, the Texas State Parks TPWD Stocks and manages which are "USACE Property" The USACE says we can NOT carry in, regardless of our State law saying we can. Same with places such as the San Gabriel River (Brazos River Authority) is OK, until you reach Lake Georgetown, and Granger Lake, at which at the boundaries of each (which are unknown exactly to the Corps, as they know "approximate" you must have someone meet you and taxi your concealed handgun around their property and meet you downstream, twice (once for each lake) before you can continue down river.
Also, you can't use Georgetown's CITY PARK, Blue Hole Park etc ... it sits on USCAE property.
3. 36 C.F.R. § 327.13 remains in full force and effect. It will continue to prohibit loaded concealed weapons on Corps properties regardless of the new law and notwithstanding any contrary provisions of State law.
It remains Corps policy that we will not honor State-issued concealed weapon permits on our facilities and that District Commanders do not have discretion under 36 C.F.R. § 327.13(a)(4) to create blanket exceptions to this policy. A change of this nature to Corps regulations in 36 C.F.R. Part 327 would require formal rulemaking procedures under the Administrative Procedures Act (5 U.S.C. §§ 551-706).
Here is an email that went out to USACE ranger personnel very recently,
(Just before Feb 22, 2010) from a head USACE Ranger guy.
Subject: New Federal Law Pertaining To Firearms on National Park/National
Wildlife Service Lands Is Not Applicable at USACE Projects and Facilities
All -- a new law regarding firearms on some specific federal properties
takes effect next
week. This is not new information for us, and we have been reviewing it for
quite a while.
Counsel has been fully engaged. We offer the following guidance:
1. Section 512 of the Credit Card Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-024) pertains
to possession of firearms and allows an individual to possess an assembled
functional firearm in any unit of the National Park Service or National
Wildlife Refuge System provided that the individual is not otherwise
prohibited by law from possessing the firearm and the possession is in
compliance with the law of the State in which the National Park/Refuge is
located. This law becomes effective on 22 February 2010 on property under
the jurisdiction of the National Park Service or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
2. Public Law 111-024 does not apply to Corps projects or facilities. The
passage of this new law does not affect application of Title 36 regulations
(36 C.F.R., Chapter III, Part 327, Rules and Regulations Governing Public
Use of COE Water Resources Development Projects). 36 C.F.R. § 327.13(a)
prohibits the possession of loaded firearms or ammunition on lands and
waters administered by the Corps unless one of the exceptions in 36 C.F.R.
§327.13(a)(1)-(4) applies. The full text of 36 C.F.R. can be viewed on the
NRM Gateway at:
3. 36 C.F.R. § 327.13 remains in full force and effect. It will continue to
prohibit loaded concealed weapons on Corps properties regardless of the new
law and notwithstanding any contrary provisions of State law.
It remains Corps policy that we will not honor State-issued concealed weapon
permits on our facilities and that District Commanders do not have
discretion under 36 C.F.R. § 327.13(a)(4) to create blanket exceptions to
this policy. A change of this nature to Corps regulations in 36 C.F.R. Part
327 would require formal rulemaking procedures under the Administrative
Procedures Act (5 U.S.C. §§ 551-706).
4. It is incumbent upon us to communicate and reinforce our firearms
regulation with our visitors and partners, which may include posting park
entrances with "No Firearms" signs IAW the Corps sign manual (EP 310-1-6a
and EP 310-1-6b) and taking other actions deemed necessary by Operations
Project Managers as coordinated appropriately with other Corps elements.
Information related to this matter will also be posted for public awareness
on the NRM Gateway.
5. HQUSACE POCs for this matter are Stephen Austin, Natural Resources
Manager, Operations (for Visitor Assistance policy and program
information), 202-761-4489, firstname.lastname@example.org; and Milt Boyd,
Assistant Counsel, Office of Chief Counsel (for regulatory questions on
federal lands) at 202-761-8546, Milton.W.Boyd@usace.army.mil.
Provided for your attention and appropriate action.
Michael G. Ensch, SES
Chief, Operations & Regulatory CoP
and Lakes & Rivers Division RIT
441 G St, NW Rm 3E92
Washington, DC 20314
Work (202) 761-1983
Cell (703) 386-6102
Here from Texas Parks and Wildlife Law Enforcement Director ...
It is indeed illegal to carry a firearm in a state park leased by TPWD from the COE, as per federal laws. State parks NOT on COE properties are legal for concealed carry.
Good information RPB. I never thought about leased corp property. Then again, I don't visit any of the areas you mentioned, at least in an long time, so I guess that is why. Either way, I guess we have to get that changed now.
The problem with ACoE land is that they can't even tell you where the property boundaries are.