Arming Maine Forest Rangers

Wesspur
Rugged made
Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I never felt the urge to pack a gun. It would have just been additional weight and bulk to pack around, and I might have shot some loggers. Instead of throwing rocks at trees and stuff to kill time waiting for somebody to show up, I might have been tempted to shoot trees for fun. Nope, never felt like I needed a gun in the woods.
 
hanniedog said:
Did you have the option of carrying a side arm?
Click to expand...

Nope. It's against the rules. There's really no need. The wildlife takes off. I guess a bad person might do something, but that is so rare. We generally are carrying a lot of stuff so having to carry a gun and ammo? It doesn't make sense. If the job is that dangerous, I wouldn't have been working at it.

Just an example. Marking timber? You've got at least a gallon of paint to pack, if gone all day think two gallons, plus drinking water, plus radio, plus munchies, plus bandaids, plus jacket, plus spencer tape, plus data recorder, plus whatever you measure heights with, and other necessities.

Fire fighting? Why? You're packing stuff again. Sometimes a lot of stuff. Our crew had a radio melt a bit one time. I don't think I'd want to have ammo on me. Besides, I think our crew boss might have taken a few shots at one of the helicopters that didn't bring us food and sleeping bags, after he'd run out of cigarettes and snoose. He flipped them off.

Reality TV plus over hype of danger makes things sound worse than they really are.
 
for inforcement around here the FS uses sharrifs or Fed marshalls, its completely pointless for the average FS ranger to be wandering around with weapons. The game wardens on the other hand they have to deal with drunk wanna be hunters... sometimes they have to shoot back.

And for park rangers to start carrying weapons, well that is a line in the sand for someone, regular folks can't so now the park service can?
 
10051021_H10130155-600x401.jpg

Maine Forest Ranger Thomas Liba stands in woods near an illegal maple syrup operation in the Katahdin region in March 2013. A bill being debated in legislature aims to provide guns and training to state forest rangers.

Article says he's facing the criminals from an illegal maple syrup operation... really? Are Aunt Jemima and Mrs. Butterworth running thug operations these days on the mean streets of Skowhegan?

Our National Forests are drawing criminals growing pot, sometimes cooking meth. I'm not a professional forester but we carry when we wonder around in the woods down here.
 
Last edited:
OK, I'm outta here before this turns into the usual YOU MUST CARRY A GUN BECAUSE IT IS SO DANGEROUS.

And my 32 YEARS IN THE WOODS AND NEVER NEEDED ONE.

Then you'll say, BUT YOU MIGHT COULD NEED ONE JUST ONCE IS ALL IT TAKES

And I'll remind you THE WOODS ARE SAFE AND THE EXTRA WEIGHT OF SOMETHING I DON'T NEED IS REDICULOUS.

And on it will go except I'm done with this topic.

We head back to town immediately if we run into a meth lab or garden. We don't stay and start a shoot out. We're foresters, not law enforcement. We can choose who to get out and check permits with, or who to leave for the guys with guns. Besides, most folks are aware that should you shoot or threaten a federal employee, you are in a heap of trouble.

I have had folks yelling in my face. The last was a tea partyer who went into a rant about how they were going to do away with the Forest Service and I'd be out of a job. A very rude man. I said, good. The other time? It was a druggie turned evangelist who started yelling and telling me I was going to hell. I loaded up my stuff, and moved to a whole different area.

That's all I can remember. Most folks don't venture much off the road. Bears are hunted and so are very shy of people. We don't have grizzlies, or moose. I've only seen a couple of cougars. When I walked back to the pickup one time I saw cougar tracks in my tracks in the snow. That was a little creepy, but I got over it. Our woods are different than those of the southeast. They may be more like Maine's in that we have very large areas with no roads or any settlements. The majority of people won't work that hard to go in and shoot a forester.

There have been two National Park rangers shot and killed. They were law enforcement rangers with guns. The one guy set out to kill a law enforcement officer, the other guy shot an LEO who chased him when he ran a roadblock. Both never made it to trial. I think the first killed himself, the second was killed by Mt. Rainier--hypothermia. They weren't out to kill a forester.

You do what you want. I will maintain that we don't need to pack guns out here. That's another reason why I choose to live here.
 
jpj6780 said:
No gub'ment official should have basic rights otherwise denied to citizens. I think anyone should be able to carry. Don't know why you'd walk in the woods without a sidearm of some variety, but if we can't, I don't think they should either.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I thought that if a person was allowed carry in the state they were in, they were allowed to carry in any national forest or park within that state? Is it possible workers have fewer rights than visitors? I am not sure on this, but curious now as we were planning a trip this summer.

I think the original US legislation was to allow each state jurisdiction over the gun laws and prevent federal decision within separate states. Law might have changed five times since that happened a few years ago. I could be and have been wrong other times.

Here in WI there are very few places you cannot open carry as a resident, or carry concealed if you pass a basic background check, have basic gun safety knowledge and pay $40 for the 5 year permit. A common practice here is a single sign that says no weapons on a business, building or 'area'. This is often done to satisfy those who are scared of guns. The signs do not legally prevent guns in the area or building if you have to look for the signage here in WI.
 
I started this thread because I thought it was important to the industry, not to debate gun control. If these folks aren't able to protect landowners and contractors from thieves and vandals - who will? If they're armed it sounds like status-quo. If not, sounds like we won't have rangers anymore. Lots more if you search them on the web.

I hope I didn't alienate any of my new-found friends here on AS.

Admins - feel free to move, lock, or do what you want with this thread.
 
I am not sure if anyone actually read the article. I quote "The bill, supported by the state’s forest rangers, seeks to arm and train those rangers, who are already considered law enforcement officers." The bill is to arm law enforcement officers, not foresters, maintenance workers or private citizens. I am a bit surprised that they are not already armed. The state forest rangers in California are armed. From what I understand a good portion of their time is spent doing law enforcement activities. If you are going to ask someone to do a job then you should give them the proper tools to do the job.
 
The park rangers don't carry here but there are agencies that patrol the national forest that are. Dept of agriculture/forest service has law enforcement officers that are well armed. See them more often than rangers. Also another dept that is armed that patrols the wildlife refuge areas. The game wardens are all armed. Been checked by all of them & never had an issue. If I had their jobs I would want to armed.
 
Flat47 said:
I started this thread because I thought it was important to the industry, not to debate gun control. If these folks aren't able to protect landowners and contractors from thieves and vandals - who will? If they're armed it sounds like status-quo. If not, sounds like we won't have rangers anymore. Lots more if you search them on the web.

I hope I didn't alienate any of my new-found friends here on AS.

Admins - feel free to move, lock, or do what you want with this thread.
Click to expand...

Meh nobody listens to me so don't worry. Problem is anytime you bring up fire arms in friendly conversation it becomes political in a short time, whatever your own veiws may be. Law enforcement should already have side arms, if they don't, then chances are they probably don't need them, as far as park rangers carrying weapons, its just one more reason for me not to enjoy this country's national parks, damn shame really some of them are quite nice.

And law enforcement in my experience does nothing to protect anybody from thieves or vandals, they just make a vague attempt to capture the perp (read "we'll file a report but there really isn't much we can do we're underfunded you know" Anymore the only reason to call the police is to report a crime so your insurance can cover the cleanup or so they can call the coroner to clean up the mess.
 
Not sure why you couldn't enjoy national parks/forests if rangers were armed? Wouldn't make a bit of difference to me.
 
cause you stick a gun and a badge on someone they suddenly get the urge to feel authority, and then go out looking for trouble where there isn't any. And since I have enough problems with law enforcement trying to arrest me for stuff I don't do, I don't need that while I'm trying to go camping.
 
I didn't read the whole article because I refuse to "answer a few questions" in order to do so. But we foresters also run into music wood thefts, firewood theft, timber theft and can write tickets if we keep the training up.

Firewood cutters are the worst. Bunch of whining anarchists!
 

Similar threads

Bob Wulkowicz
Is this the sharpest knife in the drawer?
Replies
12
Views
2K
Tony Mayhew
Tony Mayhew

Latest posts

Back
Top