PDA

View Full Version : USACE Lands DO NOT APPLY to Firearms in National Parks Rules


Alaric
02-22-2010, 8:47 PM
Just an FYI to everyone, the new rule that went into effect regarding firearms in National Parks DO NOT apply to firearms in lands overseen by the USACE. That is, the US Army Corps of Engineers. What does this matter? This information would apply largely to the lands and waterways overseen by the USACE. In California this means many large reservoirs (http://corpslakes.usace.army.mil/visitors/states.cfm?state=CA) that you might mistake for State Parks, Forest Service lands, or National Parks will still be off limits to your guns.

Here is an email that went out to USACE ranger personnel very recently, from a head USACE ranger guy to inform them of this fact.

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 or
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
Service.

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: http://corpslakes.usace.army.mil/employees/visitassist/pdfs/title36.pdf.

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 administration
information), 202-761-4489, stephen.b.austin@usace.army.mil; 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.

Mike

Michael G. Ensch, SES
Chief, Operations & Regulatory CoP
and Lakes & Rivers Division RIT
HQUSACE, CECW-LRD
441 G St, NW Rm 3E92
Washington, DC 20314

Work (202) 761-1983
Cell (703) 386-6102


The State and Federal lands out there are a huge mess of differing laws. Please inform yourselves and exercise caution when treading on these lands with guns to make sure you are within the bounds of the law. Mudcamper has an excellent thread on the laws pertaining to these disparate lands if you need a clue what to search for.

Alaric
02-22-2010, 10:27 PM
Note that after doing some research on 36 C.F.R. § 327.13 (http://law.justia.com/us/cfr/title36/36-3.0.1.1.2.html#36:3.0.1.1.2.0.1.14) I can't seem to find any reason it wouldn't still apply, as the USACE states.

Disappointing that we seem to need to fight this battle one federal department at a time.

Rumpled
02-22-2010, 11:13 PM
Isn't hunting allowed on some ACE areas?
I see no mention of that.

Alaric
02-22-2010, 11:52 PM
I believe you are correct, hunting is allowed in certain areas at certain times. Lake Sonoma boar and deer hunting comes to mind. This doesn't change that.

The gist of the USACE email was that the change in rules allowing firearms affecting National Parks has no bearing on the USACE parks. If firearms weren't allowed there before, that hasn't changed.

GrizzlyGuy
02-23-2010, 9:10 AM
I believe you are correct, hunting is allowed in certain areas at certain times. Lake Sonoma boar and deer hunting comes to mind. This doesn't change that.

The gist of the USACE email was that the change in rules allowing firearms affecting National Parks has no bearing on the USACE parks. If firearms weren't allowed there before, that hasn't changed.

Yes, here is the relevant section of 36 C.F.R. § 327.13, and it does allow for hunting sites and shooting ranges:

327.13 Explosives, firearms, other weapons and fireworks.

(a) The possession of loaded firearms, ammunition, loaded projectile firing devices, bows and arrows, crossbows, or other weapons is prohibited unless:

(1) In the possession of a Federal, state or local law enforcement officer;

(2) Being used for hunting or fishing as permitted under 327.8, with devices being unloaded when transported to, from or between hunting and fishing sites;

(3) Being used at authorized shooting ranges; or

(4) Written permission has been received from the District Commander.

(b) Possession of explosives or explosive devices of any kind, including fireworks or other pyrotechnics, is prohibited unless written permission has been received from the District Commander.

MudCamper
02-23-2010, 10:09 AM
Alaric, thanks for the post.

Funny, I was just looking up the Army Corp CFR codes and updating the Firearms in Forests and Parks (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=186457) thread on this. I sometimes visit Lake Sonoma and Lake Mendocino so this is quite relevant to me.

GrizzlyGuy already posted part of the codes. Here is another part specific to hunting:

§ 327.8 Hunting, fishing, and trapping.

(a) Hunting is permitted except in areas and during periods where prohibited by the District Commander.

(b) Trapping is permitted except in areas and during periods where prohibited by the District Commander.

(c) Fishing is permitted except in swimming areas, on boat ramps or other areas designated by the District Commander.

(d) Additional restrictions pertaining to these activities may be established by the District Commander.

(e) All applicable Federal, State and local laws regulating these activities apply on project lands and waters, and shall be regulated by authorized enforcement officials as prescribed in §327.26.

http://law.justia.com/us/cfr/title36/36-3.0.1.1.2.html

Lake Sonoma Hunting (http://www.spn.usace.army.mil/lake_sonoma/hunting_information.html)
Lake Mendocino Hunting (http://www.spn.usace.army.mil/mendocino/hunting.htm)

GuyW
02-23-2010, 10:28 AM
.....time for another change in federal law....

.

N6ATF
02-24-2010, 12:00 AM
All laws containing the word "firearm" "gun" etc. are hereby repealed for violating the 2nd and 14th amendments.

Done.

Southwest Chuck
02-24-2010, 12:31 PM
.....time for another change in federal law....

.

Looks like we've got some work to do! :D

Boulderlaw
08-08-2013, 9:26 AM
Mountain States Legal Foundation sued on Aug. 5, 2013, to stop the Army Corps of Engineers gun ban.

More details: Morris v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (http://www.mountainstateslegal.org/cases/all-cases/morris-v.-u.s.-army-corps-of-engineers)

Related MSLF cases:

USPS gun ban struck down:
Bonidy v. United States Postal Service (http://www.mountainstateslegal.org/cases/all-cases/bonidy-v.-united-states-postal-service)

Campus gun ban struck down:
Students for Concealed Carry on Campus v. Regents of the University of Colorado (http://www.mountainstateslegal.org/cases/all-cases/students-for-concealed-carry-on-campus-v.-regents-of-the-university-of-colorado)

State parks gun ban repealed:
Baker v. Drozdoff (http://www.mountainstateslegal.org/cases/all-cases/baker-v.-drozdoff)

Boulderlaw
01-11-2014, 5:06 AM
Army Corps gun ban ruled unconstitutional - http://bit.ly/1eoEOep

cdtx2001
01-11-2014, 5:15 AM
Once again, the 2nd Amendment and who honors it is a mere patchwork across this nation.

LAWABIDINGCITIZEN
01-11-2014, 7:20 AM
Don't you love how the "Credit Card Act" has a section on firearms in it?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

ddestruel
01-11-2014, 8:52 AM
very interesting ruling actually discusses the various levels of scrutiny and his interpretation of how and when to apply also where relief or exceptions exist.

MudCamper
01-11-2014, 10:00 AM
Army Corps gun ban ruled unconstitutional - http://bit.ly/1eoEOep

Thanks for posting this Boulderlaw. This is great news.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that the motion for preliminary injunction (docket no. 4) is GRANTED. The Corps is enjoined from enforcing 36 C.F.R. § 327.13 as to law-abiding individuals possessing functional firearms on Corps-administered public lands for the purpose of self-defense. This preliminary injunction shall remain in force until further notice of the Court.

Morris v. Army Corps Order (http://www.mountainstateslegal.org/news-updates/case-documents/2014/01/10/morris-v.-army-corps-order)

BumBum
01-11-2014, 11:21 AM
Yes, here is the relevant section of 36 C.F.R. § 327.13, and it does allow for hunting sites and shooting ranges:

I figured that had to be the case. After all, there is a shooting range back in Iowa at a USACE reservoir that I've been shooting at since the 90's (and as recently as last summer). Actually, it's not so much a range, mostly just a berm to shoot in to. No organization or range officers.

Southwest Chuck
01-11-2014, 6:20 PM
Here's another source for the decision:
http://www.volokh.com/2014/01/11/right-carry-guns-federal-recreation-areas-right-possess-tents-areas/

"Today’s Morris v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (D. Idaho Jan. 10, 2014) (http://ia800902.us.archive.org/4/items/gov.uscourts.idd.32180/gov.uscourts.idd.32180.42.0.pdf)strikes down an Army Corps of Engineers regulation barring possession of loaded guns in recreation areas surrounding Corps dams. The court holds that tents are akin to homes, where Second Amendment rights are protected. The court also holds that the Second Amendment protects the right to carry guns as well as to possess them at homes, so that the regulation is unconstitutional even as to carrying outside tents. And the court rejects the argument that the government may restrict such gun possession and carrying on the grounds that the government owns the property, and has no obligation to open the property to the public in the first place. "
I LIKE This !!!

Southwest Chuck
01-11-2014, 6:29 PM
It would seem that this would help support a challenge to the LOC ban in CA. too, No? At least help with the ban in State Parks??? I know, not binding but persuasive. I guess we'll see how this plays out on appeal. Is Idaho in the 9th or 10th Circuit?

CWDraco
01-12-2014, 6:52 AM
It would seem that this would help support a challenge to the LOC ban in CA. too, No? At least help with the ban in State Parks??? I know, not binding but persuasive. I guess we'll see how this plays out on appeal. Is Idaho in the 9th or 10th Circuit?

you'd think, but the fact that CA leadership simply ignores court decisions it doesn't like trumps common sense.

fairfaxjim
01-12-2014, 8:59 AM
you'd think, but the fact that CA leadership simply ignores court decisions it doesn't like trumps common sense.

CALIFORNIA trumps common sense!

Steve1968LS2
01-12-2014, 10:26 AM
Wow.. they sure make it easy to accidentally become a criminal.. then again, that fits thier agenda

Alaric
05-15-2014, 10:04 PM
Its been a long time since I posted this thread, but I was curious. Anyone that shoots or hunts on ACE lands, what has your experience been lately? Are you seeing more or less infringement, enforcement, harassment, etc.?