Explore The NRA Universe Of Websites

APPEARS IN Hunting

NRA Comments On The Environmental Impact Statement For The Big Cypress National Preserve Addition Lands

Tuesday, June 13, 2006

Printer Friendly version (PDF)

June 13, 2006

National Park Service
Denver Service Center
Big Cypress Planning Team
12795 West Almeda Parkway
PO Box 25287
Denver, CO 80225-9901

Dear Big Cypress Planning Team:

The National Rifle Association (NRA) takes this opportunity to respond to the National Park Service's announcement that the scope of the General Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement (GMP/EIS) for the Big Cypress National Preserve Addition Lands will be expanded to include a wilderness study and an off-road vehicle management plan. The announcement invited the public to comment on these subjects.

The focus of our comments is on the wilderness study. The NRA acknowledges the fact that the study is required by the Addition Lands= enabling legislation; however, we believe that the language was included as standard language in legislation creating units of the National Park System at the time and didn't take into account the long history of mankind's presence in that area. A central issue to the wilderness review is how designation of wilderness will affect the traditional and customary activities that the enabling legislation and its supporters took great pains and precautions to protect.

The National Park Service's overview of the Wilderness Act, as provided in its website information about the GMP process, states that hunting, fishing, hiking, canoeing, camping etc. will be allowed, provided that motorized equipment or mechanical transportation is not used. This restriction may be acceptable in other units of the National Park System where mankind's presence was rarely felt and recreational activities, other than the very primitive, were uncommon. This is not the situation with the Addition Lands where these activities have been taking place for decades with the help of motorized vehicles and equipment. Wilderness designation would strangle traditional access and close the area to sportsmen whose activities the enabling legislation sought to protect.

The Wilderness Act overview also notes that for an area to quality as wilderness it has primeval character and influence to be retained. The Addition Lands have long been inhabited, visited and used by man such that this requirement for wilderness designation does not exist. If it did, it is unlikely that the Big Cypress would have been established as a National Preserve and the Addition Lands added to it. It would have been designated as a national park. Designation of a national preserve indicates that the area is more "open" to human activity than what is generally allowed in a national park, including such activities as hunting and the use of OHVs. Wilderness designation would turn the concept of a "Preserve" on its head.

The overview also notes that wilderness designation must at a minimum meet certain criteria including that the designated area appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man's work substantially unnoticeable. For centuries man has traversed the Big Cypress and the Addition Lands. Man's imprint is found throughout the Addition Lands. The network of ORV trails alone would disqualify the area as suitable for wilderness designation.

In closing, the NRA agrees that the GMP/EIS should be expanded to include the wilderness study only because the summary of the GMP process states that, "until the wilderness suitability study and general management plan are completed, the Addition Lands will remain closed to recreational OHV use." However, the NRA strongly opposes any designation of wilderness within the Addition Lands because it contravenes the intent of Congress and the enabling legislation.

Big Cypress National Preserve and the Addition Lands were set aside to provide recreational opportunities not generally allowed in national parks. There was no intent to have these activities and the access necessary to enjoy them subjected to the restrictions of a national park designation, and most assuredly the intent was not to subject them to the restrictions of the Wilderness Act.

Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments for the public record.

Sincerely,

Susan Recce
Director
Conservation, Wildlife and Natural Resources

TRENDING NOW
FBI Releases Final Crime Report for 2025 to the Dismay of Firearm Prohibitionists

News  

Monday, August 24, 2026

FBI Releases Final Crime Report for 2025 to the Dismay of Firearm Prohibitionists

There has been a certain amount of anticipation while the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) analyzed the available crime data for last year. The speculation among many was that the report would be, not just ...

Questions and Answers About the Texas NFA Case

News  

Monday, August 17, 2026

Questions and Answers About the Texas NFA Case

On August 12, we reported on an important development in the ongoing litigation over the National Firearms Act (NFA) filed by multiple plaintiffs in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. These included, ...

DOJ Relaunches Federal Firearms Rights Restoration with New Final Rule

News  

Monday, August 24, 2026

DOJ Relaunches Federal Firearms Rights Restoration with New Final Rule

On August 20, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) published a final rule in the Federal Register that establishes application standards for those seeking relief from federal firearm disabilities under the Gun Control Act of ...

District Court Enters Final Judgment Striking Down New Mexico’s Waiting Period Law in NRA Victory

Friday, August 28, 2026

District Court Enters Final Judgment Striking Down New Mexico’s Waiting Period Law in NRA Victory

The U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico granted summary judgment holding New Mexico’s 7-day waiting period law unconstitutional in Ortega v. Grisham—a case brought by the National Rifle Association and Mountain States ...

SCOTUS Statutory Ruling Not the Final Word on Biden-Era “Frame or Receiver” Rule

News  

Monday, August 24, 2026

SCOTUS Statutory Ruling Not the Final Word on Biden-Era “Frame or Receiver” Rule

For years, NRA-ILA has closely followed and reported on the legal and regulatory saga surrounding the Biden-Harris administration’s so-called “Frame or Receiver” rule. 

California: Anti-Gun Bills Pass the Legislature, Now Heading to the Governor's Desk

Wednesday, August 26, 2026

California: Anti-Gun Bills Pass the Legislature, Now Heading to the Governor's Desk

This week, three anti-gun bills received final passage from the legislature and will now be transmitted to the Governor's desk for his consideration. The most egregious among these measures is Senate Bill 948, which imposes ...

Federal Court Strikes Down NFA Registration Requirements for Suppressors, Short-Barreled Rifles, and Short-Barreled Shotguns in NRA Case

Wednesday, August 5, 2026

Federal Court Strikes Down NFA Registration Requirements for Suppressors, Short-Barreled Rifles, and Short-Barreled Shotguns in NRA Case

In another major victory for the National Rifle Association and law-abiding gun owners, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas today held that the National Firearms Act’s registration and approval requirements for ...

What Does the Texas NFA Decision Mean for You?

News  

Wednesday, August 12, 2026

What Does the Texas NFA Decision Mean for You?

On August 5, 2026, Judge Wesley Hendrix of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas held that the National Firearms Act’s registration and approval requirements for suppressors, short-barreled rifles, and short-barreled shotguns ...

NRA Files Another Lawsuit Challenging the National Firearms Act

Thursday, October 9, 2025

NRA Files Another Lawsuit Challenging the National Firearms Act

Today, the National Rifle Association—along with the American Suppressor Association, Firearms Policy Coalition, and Second Amendment Foundation—announced the filing of another lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA).

ATF Director Corrects Gun Control Advocates on Regulatory Reform

News  

Monday, August 17, 2026

ATF Director Corrects Gun Control Advocates on Regulatory Reform

In a stark departure from the last administration, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is taking gun control advocates to task for their sensationalist rhetoric and questionable legal claims. 

MORE TRENDING +
LESS TRENDING -

More Like This From Around The NRA

NRA ILA

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the "lobbying" arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.