August 19, 2025 • 46 mins
"Every contact we have is an opportunity to build or destroy a relationship."
Notable Moments
[00:02:00] – Why law enforcement consistently ranks among the most debated topics in parks
[00:06:20] – Chip’s background, love for the outdoors, and how nature shaped his perspective
[00:08:16] – The assumption that all rangers are law enforcement officers
[00:11:00] – How uniforms and appearance influence public perception of park rangers
[00:18:55] – The importance of branding, presence, and professionalism
[00:22:35] – Lessons from SWAT about shifting how officers show up in communities
[00:27:29] – The risks rangers face when authority is assumed but not backed by training or tools
[00:33:11] – Why connection and trust must remain the primary role of law enforcement in any setting
[00:37:54] – The reminder that passion and authenticity cannot be faked in public service
[00:43:56] – Chip’s insight: there are no perfect solutions, only trade-offs
[00:45:35] – Leadership as the key to finding common ground and balancing priorities
Law enforcement in parks sparks some of the strongest debates in conservation leadership. In this episode, Jody Maberry and Phil Gaines welcome retired Kansas City Police Major Chip Huth to unpack the complexities of blending ranger identity with law enforcement responsibility. Chip shares how presence, professionalism, and human connection outweigh authority, and why leadership must embrace trade-offs rather than chase perfect solutions.
Read the blog for more from this episode.
Resources
https://parkleaders.com/about/
Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/theparkleaders/
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:02):
Welcome to the Park Leader show where we are changing the landscape of
leadership and parks and conservation. I'm your host,
Jody Mayberry, a former law enforcement
park ranger. That's relevant. I don't usually say that that's relevant
this episode. Joining me is the semi
regular guest co host, the retired director
(00:25):
of South Carolina State Parks and your favorite park
ranger. At least that's what he tells me it is, Phil Gaines. Hello,
Phil. Hey, Jody. Looking forward to today's conversation.
I hear we got a very special guest today. We do, we do. And I
will introduce him in a moment. But Phil, it's always great
to have you back and this topic is
(00:47):
one. I will say Phil and I have been on the verge of
doing many episodes about law enforcement
many times over the years. But Phil, where, when it
comes to park conversations and attitudes
and opinions, where does law enforcement rank? Is
this just like a mild topic that no one really cares about?
(01:09):
Oh, far from it, Jody. I think if you had to say, list the top
three controversial topics or
topics that get people most engaged and
involved. Law enforcement, if it's not at the top, is certainly in the
top three. And it's, you know, it brings out a lot of opinions.
You know, we have 50 sovereign states who rarely agree on
(01:32):
anything anyway, and law enforcement is, is no different than that.
So it, it encompasses all that. Different parts, different regions of the
country, you know, more rural states, more urban
states, and, and everybody does it a little bit different. And so
I don't think we'll find the magic solution today. But
it'll be good having a different perspective than just this apart
(01:55):
perspective. But it is a fascinating topic. It's, you know,
I like to say that it's kind of like leadership. It's really hard, you
know, even, even when you're a professional and this is the primary function of your
agency. That's hard. But then when you kind of sprinkle it in and kind
of make it a little bit of a hybrid product of a bigger agency, it's
really hard because you got to make hard decisions. And literally it
(02:17):
could be life and death decisions. Phil, I
may be misremembering this, but as I
recall, the first time we met was at the national
association of State Park Directors conference. The first time we met in person,
we already knew each other, but we met in person. And I walk into
a room and there's dozens of people in there
(02:40):
and I found you and you were having a conversation with someone.
I don't remember who it was. Don't remember what state they were from. But
I do recall they were telling you South Carolina is
irresponsible. You don't spend enough time or resources on
law enforcement and you're going to get people hurt. And that was the conversation
you were involved in the first time I met you in person. Yeah. And it
(03:02):
was a professional law enforcement person who had been hired by this state and I
won't mention the state. And they had been career law enforcement and traditional law
enforcement and they had gone around the room
and heard all these hybrid models of what law enforcement,
from zero law enforcement to the model that we had in South
Carolina at the time, which was kind of a hybrid model, not perfect
(03:24):
by any means. And he was asking me and I was trying to explain how
we did it the best way we could, the way we were set up. And
he was, he took real offense to them and said, you're going to get somebody
hurt. And I says, I'm trying everything I know how to not to.
And then what's funny about that is as soon as he left, after
wearing me out for about 30 minutes, he left. And
then some park ranger folks who were really passionate about
(03:48):
resources and interpretation in that and says, I can't believe you
let that happen and you didn't tell him why important what we do is. And
then, so then I got wore out by them for about 30 minutes that I
didn't have the right position. So it's just, it was really hard. But yeah, I
remember that night. That guy was not happy with me because I didn't have the
perfect. I didn't do it the way he thought it should be done. But sometimes
(04:08):
states have to do it the way that they're enabling
legislation allows them to do it. And, and that's what makes it
difficult. And that's what I think makes it not cut and dry that you
can say, yeah, you need to do all of this because some states aren't allowed
to do that. I think statutorily there's some states in
our nation from the park standpoint that are not allowed to have law
(04:29):
enforcement. So it is a fascinating topic and
I'm kind of excited to hear from someone who is a professional
law enforcement person that is open minded and can give us some good thought
provoking ideas of how to look at this thing
objectively. Well, that takes us right into our
guest who I'm so pleased he was willing to join us.
(04:52):
Our guest is Chip Huth. He is a retired member major
with the Kansas City Police Department, was once called
America's favorite law enforcement Officer, that was by me. I don't know
how much weight you give to that. But, Chip, it is so great
to have you join us for the Park Leader show.
Jody, thank you so much for having me. Always
(05:14):
great to speak with you. And Phil, So great being on here with you too.
I love what you had to say there. It just seems like you have this
balanced approach. I'm interested in getting more into the way that you think.
Well, the reason we invited Chip is because all the
times Phil and I started to do episodes about law
enforcement, we thought there's so many variables.
(05:36):
There's so many different ways to go at it. And the way we
have to do enforcement is unique. Maybe we're in over our heads
and we need someone else to come in and have this conversation with us. And
we chose America's favorite law enforcement officer to
come in and have this talk because Chip has
incredible experience. He's from a city that
(05:58):
has needed heavy law enforcement. He's from a city that has also needed
a community presence in uniform, which is very similar to what
we do in parks. If you can think something has happened in law
enforcement, Chip has probably been involved in it. Wide range of
experience. How many years were you an officer, Chip? 30
years, actually, Jody. 30 total. 30 total. Okay. Well,
(06:21):
before we get into law enforcement, tell us about your history
with the outdoors. Oh, man, I am a passionate.
I am passionate about the outdoors. That's my happy place. I mean,
you know, the Smokies, Arcadia, the Tetons. It doesn't matter, man.
I, you know, I'll. If I'm cruising through Arkansas, I'll just
find a park, pull off and start hiking. I don't care where I'm at. I
(06:43):
absolutely love the outdoors, brother. I guess that started from being homeless as a kid,
right? I lived outdoors for a little bit. I don't know for sure. Wasn't as
nice of a place as a park, but yeah, there's something about nature for
me, it's just an out of the box place. You know, sometimes I,
like everyone, probably gets a little in their own head. Self absorbed, self
concerned, you know, I'm very agenda driven, and I
(07:04):
don't pause and take time to just experience gratitude,
you know, for all that we have in the world. And for some reason, when
I get out into nature, oh, man, I'm just
transformed. I have more patience, I have more gratitude. I feel more
connected not just to the environment, but also
other people that are experiencing that with me. So, yeah,
(07:25):
I'm passionate about that. And so this is that's what
I would say about that. Right. I'm definitely consider myself to be an
outdoors guy. I guess you would say, well, that's a better
answer than I even expected that. I think that sets us up really
nice because now, you know, Chip knows law enforcement
and now, you know, Chip spends a lot of time outdoors.
(07:48):
He's an outdoors guy. He loves park rangers. He's already told
me that. So Chip is the perfect guy to come
in and talk to us about that. And Chip coming into
this conversation only with the background
of the relationship between park rangers and law enforcement
that Phil and I have told you about, what's your
(08:10):
view or attitude towards law enforcement
when it comes into parks? Yeah, and this is going to be a
qualified opinion because up until knowing you,
Jody, I had made an unhelpful assumption that all park
rangers were law enforcement officers. The ones that I've interacted with, as
I recall, most of them were armed. Most of them had law
(08:32):
enforcement authority. You know, I think back and, you know, as I was talking to
Phil before we started recording, there are some rangers, you know, that
I met that I think were more like positioned to be
interpretive for tour guides or, you know, things like that. But most of my interactions
have been with. So I just assumed like, you know, before knowing you,
I'm like, yeah, they're just law enforcement component. It's just their
(08:53):
bailiwick is, are parks. They do all the same things any
other law enforcement officer does. It's just their jurisdiction is
parks. And so my opinion's qualified in
the sense that there's a lot probably on both
sides of this debate, if we can call it a debate, should we or should
we not have law enforcement officers in parks that I
(09:15):
probably am just ignorant to. But reflexively I think
to myself, there's no doubt in my mind that there's criminal
activity that occurs in parks, that there's a need for safety and
well trained people that are able to respond in the case of
crises, you know, in the case of people victimizing other people,
which while it may be statistically rare, still happens. And
(09:38):
I am, you know, I am biased, I think, toward like I
feel like with respect to. And you guys know more than I do about the
money that it takes to stand up and fund a law enforcement
element. I know there's a big, you know, there's some funds that need to be
encumbered to make that happen. But I'm almost thinking to myself,
like, what is the downside outside of, you know, the fiscal side of it?
(10:00):
Right. Of having people that are well trained, that can engage
with people who are patronizing the parks with, you know, respect
and be helpful and handle the things that come up, you
know, from lost hikers to, you know, all the other things that
have to be done, but then also be able to make an arrest
and detain a person and do the things they might have to do if they
(10:22):
find somebody, you know, acting are up to no good in a park. So
I guess my bias, that's a long answer to say my bias is like I'd
rather have them and need them or have them and not need them than need
them and not have them. Because if something comes up to where you know, you
did need them, it'd be sure nice to have them there and have them trained
to that to the point they could take law enforcement action. So I don't know
what you think of that, but. Well, this. We're with you. I will
(10:46):
say this could be a spoiler. Phil and I are both pro
park ranger law enforcement. We were both law enforcement rangers.
So we are pro. I'm going to start on
maybe this is one of the minor things we're going to talk about. But I
will say Chip said, I don't see one of the downsides.
I'm going to start with one of the downsides I
(11:08):
have heard people complain about. And then, Phil, I'm going to turn to you
as former director and say what you think.
So I remember as a ranger, somebody, and I
can't recall who, but somebody saying, look, a park ranger
should wear the flat hat. If you're going to wear a hat, it should not
be the black ball cap that you see police officers wear.
(11:30):
It should be the flat hat, the campaign hat. Okay,
so that's one. Also to go with the look, you will see
some states allow park rangers now
to wear body armor on the outside instead of under the
uniform. Completely changes the look. So, Phil,
as a former law enforcement ranger and as a
(11:52):
director, one of the complaints about law enforcement
rangers is when you change the look from park
ranger to law enforcement officer, it changes the feel
of interactions with the park ranger. What do you think about that?
That's again, there's no easy answers to any questions that we're going to ask today.
And that's. That's the hard part about this. So I'll kind of answer it
(12:14):
in a different way. So. And I think, Chip, I'd be interested to see
what your thoughts are on when I say this. So I think the flat hat,
the campaign hat, the Smokey Bear hat, whatever you call it, I think that
is. That's part of our brand of being a park ranger, that
icon stuff. I think it's a critical piece for law enforcement, too,
because that one piece of equipment that's a hat that's not going to,
(12:36):
you know, that's not a weapon, but it's. It's kind of a symbol of.
That's the guy or gal you go to. So it's kind of like that
authority. It's a brand that's over 100 years old. So I
think that can be a critical piece of a law enforcement uniform.
In South Carolina, our state troopers wear that flat hat, too. And they, you know,
they never take it off. Never taken off. So it's part of that
(12:59):
mystique of this person's taking care of us. So I think
it's a. I think it's a good law enforcement tool. All the other
stuff, the outside body armor and all that kind of stuff, I
understand it. I struggle with it because I'm a
traditionalist with park ranger stuff. And I think it goes to the part of
what makes it so difficult. And I'll say this to maybe get some
(13:21):
conversation started. One of the challenges for the law enforcement that I was
experienced with is it. It was. We didn't do it. We were
kind of a hybrid. And I think one of the things that is different
from traditional law enforcement in a. In an agency that is
nothing but law enforcement, the hard part is when you have this hybrid
model is there are so many other things that you're
(13:44):
required to do as a park ranger. And law enforcement is one of
those. And because it is one of many things
and oftentimes not the most
prioritized thing, it makes it even harder to be
on go ready all the time. Because, you know, you could
have. You could be all geared up and doing your law
(14:06):
enforcement stuff, and then all of a sudden you got to go do a program
or you got to go clean a bathroom, or you got to do all this
other kind of stuff. And that's not to say that the traditional law enforcement folks
in towns and cities and states don't do that. I think
the hard part is you find that that commonplace that we call
ranger first Chip is a little program we called Ranger first. And
it means that you are law enforcement, but you're a ranger first. And
(14:29):
all those components that we've been talking about of being a ranger for the last
hundred years is one of your tools in your toolbox that makes you a better
law enforcement person. So we always want you to be a
ranger first. And so when I talk to my law enforcement friends,
I get them past that. It doesn't mean that we don't want to do this
and do it the right way. It's a different terminology for
(14:51):
community policing, for verbal judo, for
all those other kind of things that have been in law enforcement over the last
20, 30 years. So I'm not answering your question, Jodi, because
I don't know the answer to it. I think. I think the flat hat,
the uniform, all that stuff is critically important, and it is part
of the brand that helps you in law enforcement. The hard part is how do
(15:12):
you balance? And again, this is not the right answer, Chip, but I love to
hear your take on it. It's not right or wrong. It's just different.
I want to be a ranger. And one of the things I struggled with when
I was director, I want us to be rangers. And it
frustrates me that I know we got to be law enforcement, too, or there's a
component out there, because they are bad people who come in the parks, and there
(15:33):
are bad things that happen, and we need to be ready and trained.
One of the challenges is, how do you do that? How do you be all
things to all people without literally separating it? And there's
a division of law enforcement in a state park and not
this hybrid model that a lot of states have. And again, you know, the
fascinating thing is that there are states in America that have
(15:55):
zero law enforcement, and then there's states who have, you know,
full blown law enforcement with everything that a
big city has and everything in between. So it's.
It's hard because as a park ranger, starting out as a park
ranger, I want to be a park ranger. But the world changed on us,
you know, and that changed with the National Park Service in Yosemite
(16:17):
Valley that day that, you know, the world changed in law
enforcement kind of took off in the park world. And,
you know, I don't know how to fix it, and I don't think I can
fix it. And. And certainly I know I can't fix it, but I
still struggle with, you know, where's that happy place that I can
still be a ranger, be ranger first and. But still
(16:38):
preserve the resources that we've been responsible for
and protect and serve the people is
hard. And we. Chips probably just shaking his head and said, these
guys, man, you guys, I don't know where y' all coming from, but it's. It's.
We get really passionate about this because I get frustrated as
a leader of, like, I don't have the right answer because it's,
(17:01):
you know, it's so complicated and we're so different across the country.
And, you know, I've said this a bunch of times over my career
is when I would be criticized for looking like I was pro law
enforcement. And I don't consider myself pro law enforcement or not
pro law enforcement. I'm just. I'm kind of in between
and trying to. To be a guy who can find some solutions.
(17:23):
But I was often criticized that, you know, we spend a lot of money on
law enforcement. It comes back to your point, Chip, about how expensive good law
enforcement is. We spent a lot of money on law enforcement, and part of that
was selfish from my standpoint, because I wanted to be able to
sleep at night knowing that our law enforcement guys out there had the best
equipment and the best training. And so. But that's really
(17:45):
difficult. And it should. You know, you'd hope that the finances shouldn't get
involved in some of the decision making, but. But I think it does.
And sometimes I would on the other side, so my people
who are not pro law enforcement won't be mad at me too. On the other
side, I would always say sometimes if we spend as much money
on customer service and interpretation as we did in law
(18:07):
enforcement, we wouldn't have as many law enforcement problems as we do.
Because part of my philosophy on law enforcement is
you got to engage with people and you got to entertain them
because bad stuff happens when they get bored on parks. And so you got to
keep them, you know, you got to engage with them and interact with them
and keep them from getting bored. But if, you know, if we spend as
(18:29):
much money on customer service and interpretive programs as we did on law
enforcement training, I don't know, that's just something I've always thought
about. So that's enough to get Chips to ask us some
tough questions or give us his opinion on what you're doing. And you just now
learning a lot about how parks do this. And my guess is, is
that you're probably a little bit fascinated or your eyes are opened a
(18:51):
little bit wider now when you understand when you hear that some states don't have
law enforcement. Yeah, no, for certain. I can identify with a lot of what
you're saying, Phil, from the standpoint that I would label myself
a traditionalist as well. I do think branding is important.
The troopers here in Missouri also wear the flat hats, and
it's just such a iconic symbol. And again,
(19:13):
that almost a lot of people would say to me, well, chip, function over
form, man. I mean, it's just not that convenient, let's say. Or maybe
not always that comfortable, but. And I feel hypocritical saying this as a career
SWAT guy where we did wear more of a class C uniform, vest on the
outside, black clothing, ball caps, sometimes that type of thing.
But I'm not a fan. Whenever I put my blues on, even though we were
(19:34):
authorized to wear external vests toward the end of my career, whenever I put my
blues on, I wore a vest under my shirt, and I made sure my leather
was shined. And, you know, I wanted to present that image,
that traditional, if I can borrow your word, Phil, image of
what, you know, a beat cop looks like. I felt like with
the external vest, I'm not gonna spend a lot of time on equipment because
(19:56):
there's probably a thousand opinions on that as well. I could argue both
sides, but with the external vest, there's a lot of creep with that.
It's like you put out an external vest policy. You can have two
magazines and a pair of handcuffs on your vest. Next thing you know,
you know, people are carrying all of the stuff. They look like the Stay Puft
Marshmallow man, where they're. And they don't keep it clean.
(20:19):
You know, it's not professional. Velcro's fraying.
You know, you got. All of the vest is getting dirty and discolored or faded,
and it just doesn't look professional. People don't always maintain the right
physical conditioning, quite frankly, to wear those type of equipment. You know, that
does not flatter someone who's not in good shape. You know, the
argument on their side is, well, it's more comfortable. You know, you can take it
(20:40):
off in the office, get a little, you know, get some air, you know, flow
in there. I mean, there's pros and cons, but I am biased, I'll admit it.
That I just. I think branding, to your point, is important. I
don't think that having law enforcement training
or having the law enforcement capacity within the ranks
of the park rangers would necessarily get in the
(21:03):
way of having them still dress professionally, wear the internal
vest, you know, the vest under the shirt, wear the flat hat. I don't think
that's a. I don't think there's necessarily. Those are competing things, you know,
I don't think they are, but, yeah, I mean, that's what I would say about
the branding piece. I don't. I do not disagree with you. I think it is
important what I would say about the what you're calling interpretation, what you're
(21:23):
calling customer service. Honestly, cops would be so much better
off in the aggregate if they approach their job with
that attitude. Like it does not forestall your ability
to respond to crises with force if need be. If
you are simply just human with people, if you simply orient
yourself toward people, the majority of people you're going to meet are
(21:46):
trying to do the best they can to enjoy their leisure time,
to spend time with people they care about, to enjoy nature. You know,
it's a very small percentage of people who are out there
trying to do no good. You're not paid for what you do every
day. You're paid for what you might have to do and that's what you're trained
for. Right. But what we do every day, generally just the attitude
(22:08):
we carry into those interactions is so important. And I saw this in the SWAT
teams. We didn't change uniforms, we didn't change, we didn't change
equipment, we didn't change our mission. What we
changed was our way of being with people, the way that we showed up with
our customers. And we went from the most complained upon unit in the entire
organization to having an eight year run of zero
(22:30):
complaints on search warrant executions, which is the tip of the spear
of enforcement. People weren't responding to what we were doing, they were
responding to how they felt seen by us once we changed that. You know, so
if I'm in a national park, then the park ranger that's helping me, regardless
of what they're wearing or what authority they might possess, if they're meeting
me where I'm at, human to human, you know, they're not presenting themselves
(22:52):
as being superior to me or condescending to me. And
they've got the knowledge that they have to have to be able to be a
good host for that particular venue. Yeah, I
mean, I don't think those are competing interests. I really don't. I
don't think you have to adopt what someone might call a law enforcement identity
that's characterized by closed distance supply force, you know,
(23:14):
giving people orders. I don't think you have to make that choice. I think that's
a false dichotomy. And I would also say, and I again, I want to bring
Jody into this too. I would also say that let the
data set you free. What are the data saying? You know, as you
do your do a sincere campaign of
interviewing customers, of interviewing other
(23:35):
stakeholders, maybe partner organizations, do a serious deep
dive and collect some data. You Know, what are the stakeholders saying?
What do they prefer? What's their experience been? What are the
actual statistics that are available out there to be collected as
to what's the need? Like, what is the need here for this
particular resource? I can tell you this. If you're out in the middle of
(23:58):
a state park somewhere and you've got to call a local law enforcement
officer to come out there to back you up or to provide
some enforcement action, you're going to be waiting a while. You're going to be
waiting a long while. And so, you know, I think about that all the
time. It's like, you know, I. Who's at more of a risk? The park ranger
out there all on their own in the middle of nowhere, in the middle of
(24:20):
nature with a radio, or me with a SWAT team surrounded by
seven to 10 heavily armed people, like, you know, who's really
more at risk? So, anyway, I'm just kind of riffing, right? But I
mean, I just. Jody, again, I love to bring in this conversation, but I. I
just, I'm with Phil. I want to offer a different perspective,
but, you know, I do come from a place of
(24:43):
how we show up matters more than anything else, the way
that we present to people. You know, I think brand is important.
I think park rangers have a long history.
They needs to be honored in the way that we do what we do. At
the same time, park rangers, like everyone else, need to be willing to adapt
to changing context and to changing needs. You know,
(25:06):
the needs. As the needs of people change, we have as park rangers, they have
to evolve too, right? You have to evolve in response to that. And what does
that look like? And that's a worthy debate, I think. And I'm not throwing shade
on the people who. Who ask the hard questions, right?
Who ask about the funding and, you know, is the juice worth the squeeze? Those
questions should be asked. But at the end of the day, a lot of it
(25:26):
can be settled with data. Not to reduce it to something as simple as
an inferential analysis, but it could be right. Well, you've both
touched on so many good points. And
the idea of the presence, just the way
that you look and hold yourself and you wear the flat hat, it really
does make a difference in context. And I'll even take
(25:49):
it back to the very first thing Chip said. Well, perhaps not the first,
but he said it early on, is he claimed that he thought
every interaction he had with a park ranger, it was a law enforcement park
ranger. And I would even say probably not, but
the park ranger had a good enough presence. You just assume.
Because a lot of people just assume every ranger is a law enforcement ranger.
(26:11):
And if you have the right presence, the right look,
they're always going to put that authority piece in
with being a park ranger. Well, Jody, I gotta ask as a follow up to
that, and you guys can tell me, I may be really, this might be
hyperbolic, but I believe what you're saying is true, that
the majority of people who think park ranger think they're law
(26:33):
enforcement in the parks. I believe that to be true. Like if you just sampled
a random bunch of people on the street, if you just walked up and, and
accosted them and said, hey, you know, tell me about what you think a park
ranger does. I think a lot of them would assume there's a law enforcement component
to it, right? Like if you, you know, if you carve up a tree in
the park or you light something on fire, you're going to have park ranger coming
(26:54):
down to intervene. Okay. Saying that to say, and this may be hyperbolic, you guys
tell me if that assumption is out there. And people who are
inclined to engage in criminal activity are also assuming that how much risk
is a park ranger at if they don't have the training and equipment
to respond to a threat? Like, you know, am I as a criminal noticing, oh,
that person's not packing a gun, Am I noticing that? Or am I seeing the
(27:16):
badge? Am I seeing the hat? You know, am I seeing the uniform and just
making an assumption that, hey, this person is here with the
authority to arrest me? So what do you all think? I mean, I mean, am
I making a mountain out of a molehill there or. Well, this is
really interesting, Chip. And as a former director, I
think this is one Phil should tackle. Thank you, Jody. Thank you.
(27:39):
Jody's always, well, and that is, that
is the million dollar question. And that's the hard question for a park leader to
figure out that because there is part of it is
that aura, for lack of a better word, that aura, that brand. It
is park ranger. I can tell you many times as a park ranger
or park superintendent, I've gone up to a situation and
(28:02):
not thinking about it, but I had this. I'm the park ranger, and you can't
do that anymore. And here's why you can't and do the all the ranger first
stuff and walk away. And then later on that night when I
lay my head down on bed, I was like, boy, that was the stupidest thing
you ever did. Because, you know, I could have Got in really bad trouble. That
and I think there's park rangers out there every day that are doing that.
(28:23):
So. And therein lies the problem of, I think,
the presence of a park ranger uniform, the flat hat and all that
stuff. Less the weapon, less the gun, if you will,
works. It's like locking a screen door. It works
for people that you need it to work on. But when
it's. When there's bad guys there, it could get you in trouble.
(28:46):
And there's the. Where's that fine line in a lot of states, you know,
so when do you gear up and what is gearing up?
Or you is, you know, in South Carolina, when I was director, it was
like, when you gear up, when you put on one thing, you got to. Put
it all on. And, you know, and it's like. And that was. That was again,
you know, selfish on my part because, you know, if you're going to put your
(29:08):
weapon on, you got to have all the other stuff, too. And you're going to
wear a vest, because I'm not going to go tell somebody that, that you didn't
have your vest on and you didn't make it. So it's all that stuff that
makes it so complicated, but it's on A shout out. A good friend of
mine, Mark Coughlin, who is a law enforcement chief in
Wyoming State park, and he's real involved with the Park Law
(29:29):
Enforcement Association Across America. And so
there's. There's a group of park law enforcement people in state parks that
get together every year and talk about these complicated issues and
stuff. And Mark's done a really good job of doing that in
Wyoming. But he's, you know, he will be the first to tell you
that it was not without, you know, some growing pains and all that kind of
(29:51):
good stuff. But I think your point is, Chip, you're spot
on. And because I'm at a loss for words to what the answer is, is
where our problem is. I mean, that is a problem. That is a challenge. And
then once you figure out you got to do that, where's that happy
place, that happy spot that you get enough of that to where
you don't. And I mean this with all due respect to law
(30:13):
enforcement people around the country is I
always worried is, when do I have just a law enforcement guy? When
do I have just a police officer out there? And I've lost my park ranger?
And I don't want that to be in any way a slam to law enforcement
people or to park rangers. It's just like, I Wanted to find that
I didn't want a policeman. And I'm not. And maybe it's just me,
(30:35):
the nomenclature of the. Of the words and the jargon. I wanted a park
ranger. And it's really fine line. And you got to be a really
special person to be a law enforcement park ranger. Because it is different.
It's really different. But to your point, and I want you to elaborate
on this, to your point, we think that because we're park guys
that's been out in the woods, but it's kind of like community policing
(30:57):
anyway, right? Look, here's the deal. And just for the
listeners, I'm going to qualify this. This isn't something I make a habit of doing,
but you have to know where I'm coming from. I have been in
more kinetic situations than most people you'll ever meet if
you travel the world. That's just the nature of leading the busiest SWAT team in
the nation for over a decade. And I have seen everything
(31:20):
there is to see on the sharp end of law enforcement. You name
it. I'm saying that so that people don't mistake me for
somebody who spent a career pushing paper or
teaching DARE to students, which, by the way, I'm a big fan of
those things, too. The DARE program be one of them. I thought that was
amazing, but that's not been my path. And so what I'm saying is
(31:42):
this. When I qualify it that way, all
people involved in law enforcement run the risk of thinking about
that aspect of our job as our identity.
Enforcing the law, writing tickets, making arrests, doing
those type of things is a skill that we have
to have as peace officers, but it is not our
(32:05):
identity. The majority of our job, even in the busiest cities in the
nation, does not involve making arrests and doing law
enforcement work. The majority of our job involves simply
connecting with people again, connecting them with resources, with
help, providing service from giving directions. I can't
tell you how many times in the inner city that I led people to locations
(32:27):
they were looking for long before there were GPSs and things of that
nature, where I just simply said, hey, follow me, and I'd take them to where
they were going. That was a daily thing. So I like
what you're saying, Phil. What I would love to be able to do is eradicate
that distinction between, hey, we've got a law enforcement person, or we've
got a park ranger. No, no. How about we got a park ranger that
(32:49):
as part of their job, has the capacity to do law
enforcement. Their identity isn't law enforcement. I'M saying that
for every cop listening to this, regardless of where you work,
right? You know, from Oakland to Miller County, Missouri, like,
the primary role we serve is to help people.
We facilitate safety and security. That's what we do.
(33:12):
We're outnumbered thousands to one. There is no way, if every
citizen in any city USA stood up and said,
we're not going to obey the law today, law enforcement officers would become
passive observers to chaos. There is nothing we could do about it,
and especially not in a constitutional republic. So saying that
to say we better get real darn good at connecting with people
(33:34):
and building trust in every contact we have, every contact we have is an opportun
to build or destroy a relationship. And that should be our number one priority. Now,
we're not letting our guard down or assuming the best out of people. We're going
to maintain our situational awareness. We're going to do all of that. But
as we're doing that, our primary objective needs to be building trust. The
more people that trust us, the more safety and security is instilled in the community.
(33:56):
And it's the same thing for the park, right? Like, it's the same thing for
the park. And again, I'm. This isn't coming from a guy who spent his career,
you know, kissing babies and, you know, walking through Mayberry. That's
not been my. That's not been my path. But I tell you, I think we
could all learn a little something from. And you've met these park rangers, by the
way. I've met them, too. That you really feel like that person
(34:17):
has your best interest in mind. They're there to serve and help.
Nothing is below or above them or below them. Like, like you
said, if I got to pick up a broom and sweep a bathroom, I'll do
it. Right? Guess what? Some of the best cops I've ever met do the same
thing, right? You know, do the same thing. So I get a
real. I get to burn a burr under my saddle. When I think
(34:37):
about this idea that we have to think about. Well, if I'm a law
enforcement officer, all I do is go out there and arrest people. All I do
is go out there and. And look if the only tool you got. You've heard
this, right? The only tool you got is a hammer. Everything's a nail. And that's
your concern, Phil. Like, if you're looking at, through, through that lens, you're going to
lose the majority of what you need those park owners to be doing, which is
(34:57):
connecting with people, representing that they're the frontline representation
for the park services to the customer. They're the only ones out there on the
ground. Right? And so I think that's really important. But again, I'm going to go
back to what I said before. You know, there's a logical fallacy there, that we
have this false dichotomy, like we've got to have it one way or the other.
I don't think we need to have it that way. And I would love. I
(35:19):
think, you know, you talk about customer service, you talk about community policing, whatever you
want to call it, you know, whatever the words that we use to describe this
connection we want to have with the people we serve, this authenticity
that we want to have. I think conventional law enforcement can learn a lot from
park rangers about how to show up and how to talk to people, how to
talk to folks, how to be. The thing about park rangers, and I'll kick it
(35:40):
back over to you guys, the thing about park rangers is one thing that they
do that every cop in America could learn to do better is
teach. Sometimes when people know better, they do better. I think Maya
Angelou said that you're educating people, right? I know
when I listen to a park ranger talk about the environment, I walk
away with a sense of responsibility about how I need to conduct myself
(36:02):
out on that trail. Right. I have more consideration for my
fellow hikers, for my fellow campers. I have a better
understanding of the impact on my decisions have on the
environment and everybody else. I mean, I get that. Why? Because they're educating
you. So I think all of us. It should be encoded. All of us to
do that, to be able to do that. That's a skill, brother. That's a skill
(36:23):
I think we all need to have. I'll take a breath. Yeah. You know what's
great, Jetty? This is what's great about law enforcement. This is great about
teachers. This is what's great about park rangers, is
you cannot fake passion. And if you have it, you get
results. And, you know, and I think what we're. What we're doing is hopefully getting
some dialogue around the country, people saying, man, you know, maybe there is this place
(36:44):
in between it. You know, you don't have to be all or nothing one way
or the other. And there's good components from each side because it is difficult.
And if, you know. And I think that's what. If you're passionate about
what we do in parks, if you're passionate about preserving the
resources that we've been charged with, and if you're Also passionate about
protecting and serving communities and stuff. There's gotta be common ground.
(37:06):
We can figure this thing out. And, you know, probably the biggest hurdle is
still money. Like everything else, it's still money. I think
that's really the most legitimate argument for being on the con
side, right? The most legitimate argument because nothing's free
and you can't do it halfway. You can't have a law enforcement component and then
not train and prepare and equip them. That's worse than not having any at all.
(37:28):
Like, you've got to do it. I think I made the comment that it's kind
of like. It's like riding a bicycle. You're riding it or you're not riding it.
If it's not moving at the speed it needs to move in order for you
to maintain balance, you're going to fall over. It's the same thing with law enforcement.
You can't half ride it. You got to go in with the attitude that we're
going to professionalize this thing all the way. I think that's so important that people
recognize that, Phil. It's so important. And, oh, here's a
(37:50):
spoiler alert. Here's a dirty secret that I think people need to
know. You want to look behind the curtain. Everybody that needs to hear this, which
is everybody, hear this. If you don't care about people,
you can't be a park ranger or a conventional law enforcement officer. So get
that through your head. Like, if you legitimately don't care about people,
that's the wrong profession for you. So all the things that we think about, all
(38:12):
the horror stories, right, of people being abused and mistreated, and it's going to happen
as sure as there's humans doing the job. That's just not the right profession for
you if you can't find it in your heart to care about people. And when
you care about people, to your point, you talk about passion. You know, we talked
about authenticity. When you care about people, and that's your azimuth,
right? That's your true north. You're going to make better decisions regardless of
(38:33):
those decisions involve enforcing the law or just simply being able to
educate and be helpful. See how simple it was, Jody? See how
simple it is? I feel I got more
passionate. Yeah, you did. Yeah. Well, from
this. This conversation, I think you can understand
why Chip is America's favorite law enforcement officer and why
(38:56):
Phil is sometimes called Pastor Phil because of the
way he preaches about parks. We had a little bit of both here.
Look, kind of a meta Conversation. But the thing about Phil that I'm getting. So
I'm a leader, right? I'm a career leader. I dedicated myself to the practice of
leadership when I was 19, in the army, my first leadership position.
And so leadership's an art, and people are the medium. And so I'm
(39:18):
very good with people. And the thing about Phil that I like is he's
thoughtful, right? You know, he's got. He's not afraid to have an
opinion, but he holds them loosely. He's open to changing his mind. You can
tell, right? I've known him for, you know, what, an hour now. Like, you can
tell. He's like. He holds those opinions loosely. He's willing to change his mind
if presented with different facts. And that is a sign of
(39:39):
maturity and wisdom. And I think that is a gift, brother. That's
like a superpower, especially in the day and age of being bombarded
with, you know, all of this data and information right at the tip of
your fingers. People are always, you know, they can go on the social medias now,
and what are they on the myspaces or the Furnsters? What are they doing now?
What are the kids doing? Whatever it is, Joe, you know, you're. You're into
(40:00):
that, but they can go on there and, you know, you're, you know, like, hey,
just jumped out of the shower. Lol. Like, you know, you've got, like, all
of this information being swamped with. So I think, Phil, that's a cool thing for
you to be able to hold on to that. That objectivity,
right? I mean, I think that's fascinating to me. I think that's what makes you
good at who you. Being who you are and probably made you really great at
(40:22):
what you did and what you still do. Well, I appreciate that. I appreciate
that. I tell Jody always, here's one of my. I do
feel philosophies in my class that I teach. And one
of my philosophies, it always gets people scratching their head is like,
humility is a byproduct of confidence. And
so people who are. Get to that point, it's because they have a lot of
(40:44):
confidence in their abilities, and they're okay with saying, you know what? That's wrong. Let's
go this way. That makes sense. And it's just not enough of that today.
Is that, you know, so that's my philosophy for the week. Phil,
look, man, you are. Well, you are singing my song. People ask me,
I had a reputation for being tough and formidable. You know, I hit the
weight pile a Lot. I hit the range a lot. I hit the judo at
(41:07):
a lot. You know, I kickbox. I go in kickbox professionals just to
stay sharp. And people ask me, man, why do you put so much work, time,
and sacrifice into being so formidable? I said, so I can
be more humble. Yes. Amen. Like, what you're saying is
true. Like, I have the power now. I don't have anything to prove to myself
or others. I know I'm equipped to do this. Right. And the same thing applies
(41:28):
to technical knowledge. Right? Like, I no longer have to be the
smartest guy in the room. I'm open to learning new things because I put a
lot of work into learning what I've learned at this point. And I put a
lot of work into being tough and capable. Guess what? I don't have to act
tough and capable of now. I can be. I love what you said there, man.
You can write a book about that, brother. I mean, that is. That is such
a good point, you know, like, oh, you're working so hard so you can beat
(41:51):
everybody up. No, no, I'm working so hard so I don't have to beat anybody
up. That's right. Absolutely right. Yeah, that's right.
You got it, brother. Oh, my goodness. Well, I. I will tell you,
I feel like all we did with this episode was
stir up more questions. Like when. When you go out to
knock down a hornet's nest and you mean to take it away, and all you
(42:12):
do is stir them up and it gets worse, which I've done a couple of
times. That's what we've done here. So if you like
this, let us know, because maybe we'll invite Chip
back and we'll go even deeper into more specifics.
This time we tried to tackle the whole thing at once, which was never going
to work, but we also knew it wouldn't work. All we hoped for
(42:34):
was, was to start a conversation. So you can start talking about law
enforcement in parks. And reach out to us. If you want Chip back,
let me know. Send in questions, we'll have him back, and we'll
cover more specific topics. You can reach
me@jodyparkleaders.com
and when I introduced Chip and Phil, I didn't
(42:56):
give them full introductions to each other because Chip doesn't know
that Phil is now a professor at Clemson University,
and Phil does not know that Chip is now a
consultant with the Arbinger Institute. So they're both still
very active, still practicing leadership. And
Chip, if anyone says, look, I liked what you were
(43:18):
saying, I don't want Phil and Jody to hear this
message I have for you. How can they just reach out to you personally? Oh,
goodness gracious. So the easiest way to get a hold of me these days is
probably on the LinkedIn. You know, I'm on the LinkedIn and
Charles Huth and then of course through Harbinger, through the
Harbinger Institute. It's easy to access me there through the website
(43:40):
www.harbinger.com. it's like Harbinger without the
H arbinger. And you know, Joey, I just want to say, just. And I know
we're bringing this thing in for a landing, but what I would want the listeners
to know as you go about debating this very important topic. This is not
like an insignificant topic. It really isn't. Is that there really? In
my, my experience, this is true in economics. I think it's true in life. There
(44:01):
are no solutions, only trade offs. And if we get our mind around
that, right, like there's, there's never going to be a perfect solution. We position
this as side A and side B. But at the end of the day, whatever
thing that we do, wherever we land, there's going to be trade
offs. It's never going to be perfect. That's true for anybody that does anything.
There really aren't any exceptions to that. And I think we got to be okay
(44:23):
with that. And we've got to be okay like Phil, we got to be okay
with running experiments. You know, we got to be okay to say, hey look, let's
run this experiment. Let's see, let's just make this change, see how it works. And
we will evaluate it, right? We'll make adjustments, we'll look, you know, we'll do after
actions. We'll see, hey, is this working or not? We'll go back and tweak. You
know, I think that's important. And all of those experiments are predicated on trying
(44:43):
to be the best for others and whatever it is that we're doing. So I
definitely wanted to squeeze that in there. So thank you. All right, well,
Phil, I will give you last words since you're the semi regular
guest co host and you have that wonderful mustache. What
did you think of Chip and do you have any final words on this
topic? I thought it was awesome. And you know, you could tell with
(45:05):
Chip's passion. And then there's a. I think one of the things that the Park
Leaders shows always talks about is that leadership component. And I
think Chip hit that at the end is that, you know, leadership looks for
solutions doesn't point fingers and is always open to
figure out there's some common ground. And then you build on that, and then you
find a way to do it the right way. And it does. A
(45:26):
lot of times it comes down to leadership and being able not to dig your
heels in, but to look at different, you know, different options and
to come up with a solution. I think it's a great starting point, and it
is so complex. I mean, you could do series and series after this
right here to get down into the weeds of it, but, you know, I think
we agreed on some real strong components here that we want
(45:48):
our park rangers and our police officers to have the same qualities and as they
care about people and. And that public service component. And
I think you take it from there. And the hard part is figuring out financially,
how do you make sure that you do this thing the right way? Yeah. So
it's a great, great conversation and really enjoyed meeting Chip and
look forward to talking again. All right, thank you so much, Chip.
(46:11):
Thank you, Phil. And thank you for listening to the park
leaders show.
Sam.
Welcome to the Park Leader show where we are changing the landscape of
leadership and parks and conservation. I'm your host,
Jody Mayberry, a former law enforcement
park ranger. That's relevant. I don't usually say that that's relevant
this episode. Joining me is the semi
regular guest co host, the retired director
(00:25):
of South Carolina State Parks and your favorite park
ranger. At least that's what he tells me it is, Phil Gaines. Hello,
Phil. Hey, Jody. Looking forward to today's conversation.
I hear we got a very special guest today. We do, we do. And I
will introduce him in a moment. But Phil, it's always great
to have you back and this topic is
(00:47):
one. I will say Phil and I have been on the verge of
doing many episodes about law enforcement
many times over the years. But Phil, where, when it
comes to park conversations and attitudes
and opinions, where does law enforcement rank? Is
this just like a mild topic that no one really cares about?
(01:09):
Oh, far from it, Jody. I think if you had to say, list the top
three controversial topics or
topics that get people most engaged and
involved. Law enforcement, if it's not at the top, is certainly in the
top three. And it's, you know, it brings out a lot of opinions.
You know, we have 50 sovereign states who rarely agree on
(01:32):
anything anyway, and law enforcement is, is no different than that.
So it, it encompasses all that. Different parts, different regions of the
country, you know, more rural states, more urban
states, and, and everybody does it a little bit different. And so
I don't think we'll find the magic solution today. But
it'll be good having a different perspective than just this apart
(01:55):
perspective. But it is a fascinating topic. It's, you know,
I like to say that it's kind of like leadership. It's really hard, you
know, even, even when you're a professional and this is the primary function of your
agency. That's hard. But then when you kind of sprinkle it in and kind
of make it a little bit of a hybrid product of a bigger agency, it's
really hard because you got to make hard decisions. And literally it
(02:17):
could be life and death decisions. Phil, I
may be misremembering this, but as I
recall, the first time we met was at the national
association of State Park Directors conference. The first time we met in person,
we already knew each other, but we met in person. And I walk into
a room and there's dozens of people in there
(02:40):
and I found you and you were having a conversation with someone.
I don't remember who it was. Don't remember what state they were from. But
I do recall they were telling you South Carolina is
irresponsible. You don't spend enough time or resources on
law enforcement and you're going to get people hurt. And that was the conversation
you were involved in the first time I met you in person. Yeah. And it
(03:02):
was a professional law enforcement person who had been hired by this state and I
won't mention the state. And they had been career law enforcement and traditional law
enforcement and they had gone around the room
and heard all these hybrid models of what law enforcement,
from zero law enforcement to the model that we had in South
Carolina at the time, which was kind of a hybrid model, not perfect
(03:24):
by any means. And he was asking me and I was trying to explain how
we did it the best way we could, the way we were set up. And
he was, he took real offense to them and said, you're going to get somebody
hurt. And I says, I'm trying everything I know how to not to.
And then what's funny about that is as soon as he left, after
wearing me out for about 30 minutes, he left. And
then some park ranger folks who were really passionate about
(03:48):
resources and interpretation in that and says, I can't believe you
let that happen and you didn't tell him why important what we do is. And
then, so then I got wore out by them for about 30 minutes that I
didn't have the right position. So it's just, it was really hard. But yeah, I
remember that night. That guy was not happy with me because I didn't have the
perfect. I didn't do it the way he thought it should be done. But sometimes
(04:08):
states have to do it the way that they're enabling
legislation allows them to do it. And, and that's what makes it
difficult. And that's what I think makes it not cut and dry that you
can say, yeah, you need to do all of this because some states aren't allowed
to do that. I think statutorily there's some states in
our nation from the park standpoint that are not allowed to have law
(04:29):
enforcement. So it is a fascinating topic and
I'm kind of excited to hear from someone who is a professional
law enforcement person that is open minded and can give us some good thought
provoking ideas of how to look at this thing
objectively. Well, that takes us right into our
guest who I'm so pleased he was willing to join us.
(04:52):
Our guest is Chip Huth. He is a retired member major
with the Kansas City Police Department, was once called
America's favorite law enforcement Officer, that was by me. I don't know
how much weight you give to that. But, Chip, it is so great
to have you join us for the Park Leader show.
Jody, thank you so much for having me. Always
(05:14):
great to speak with you. And Phil, So great being on here with you too.
I love what you had to say there. It just seems like you have this
balanced approach. I'm interested in getting more into the way that you think.
Well, the reason we invited Chip is because all the
times Phil and I started to do episodes about law
enforcement, we thought there's so many variables.
(05:36):
There's so many different ways to go at it. And the way we
have to do enforcement is unique. Maybe we're in over our heads
and we need someone else to come in and have this conversation with us. And
we chose America's favorite law enforcement officer to
come in and have this talk because Chip has
incredible experience. He's from a city that
(05:58):
has needed heavy law enforcement. He's from a city that has also needed
a community presence in uniform, which is very similar to what
we do in parks. If you can think something has happened in law
enforcement, Chip has probably been involved in it. Wide range of
experience. How many years were you an officer, Chip? 30
years, actually, Jody. 30 total. 30 total. Okay. Well,
(06:21):
before we get into law enforcement, tell us about your history
with the outdoors. Oh, man, I am a passionate.
I am passionate about the outdoors. That's my happy place. I mean,
you know, the Smokies, Arcadia, the Tetons. It doesn't matter, man.
I, you know, I'll. If I'm cruising through Arkansas, I'll just
find a park, pull off and start hiking. I don't care where I'm at. I
(06:43):
absolutely love the outdoors, brother. I guess that started from being homeless as a kid,
right? I lived outdoors for a little bit. I don't know for sure. Wasn't as
nice of a place as a park, but yeah, there's something about nature for
me, it's just an out of the box place. You know, sometimes I,
like everyone, probably gets a little in their own head. Self absorbed, self
concerned, you know, I'm very agenda driven, and I
(07:04):
don't pause and take time to just experience gratitude,
you know, for all that we have in the world. And for some reason, when
I get out into nature, oh, man, I'm just
transformed. I have more patience, I have more gratitude. I feel more
connected not just to the environment, but also
other people that are experiencing that with me. So, yeah,
(07:25):
I'm passionate about that. And so this is that's what
I would say about that. Right. I'm definitely consider myself to be an
outdoors guy. I guess you would say, well, that's a better
answer than I even expected that. I think that sets us up really
nice because now, you know, Chip knows law enforcement
and now, you know, Chip spends a lot of time outdoors.
(07:48):
He's an outdoors guy. He loves park rangers. He's already told
me that. So Chip is the perfect guy to come
in and talk to us about that. And Chip coming into
this conversation only with the background
of the relationship between park rangers and law enforcement
that Phil and I have told you about, what's your
(08:10):
view or attitude towards law enforcement
when it comes into parks? Yeah, and this is going to be a
qualified opinion because up until knowing you,
Jody, I had made an unhelpful assumption that all park
rangers were law enforcement officers. The ones that I've interacted with, as
I recall, most of them were armed. Most of them had law
(08:32):
enforcement authority. You know, I think back and, you know, as I was talking to
Phil before we started recording, there are some rangers, you know, that
I met that I think were more like positioned to be
interpretive for tour guides or, you know, things like that. But most of my interactions
have been with. So I just assumed like, you know, before knowing you,
I'm like, yeah, they're just law enforcement component. It's just their
(08:53):
bailiwick is, are parks. They do all the same things any
other law enforcement officer does. It's just their jurisdiction is
parks. And so my opinion's qualified in
the sense that there's a lot probably on both
sides of this debate, if we can call it a debate, should we or should
we not have law enforcement officers in parks that I
(09:15):
probably am just ignorant to. But reflexively I think
to myself, there's no doubt in my mind that there's criminal
activity that occurs in parks, that there's a need for safety and
well trained people that are able to respond in the case of
crises, you know, in the case of people victimizing other people,
which while it may be statistically rare, still happens. And
(09:38):
I am, you know, I am biased, I think, toward like I
feel like with respect to. And you guys know more than I do about the
money that it takes to stand up and fund a law enforcement
element. I know there's a big, you know, there's some funds that need to be
encumbered to make that happen. But I'm almost thinking to myself,
like, what is the downside outside of, you know, the fiscal side of it?
(10:00):
Right. Of having people that are well trained, that can engage
with people who are patronizing the parks with, you know, respect
and be helpful and handle the things that come up, you
know, from lost hikers to, you know, all the other things that
have to be done, but then also be able to make an arrest
and detain a person and do the things they might have to do if they
(10:22):
find somebody, you know, acting are up to no good in a park. So
I guess my bias, that's a long answer to say my bias is like I'd
rather have them and need them or have them and not need them than need
them and not have them. Because if something comes up to where you know, you
did need them, it'd be sure nice to have them there and have them trained
to that to the point they could take law enforcement action. So I don't know
what you think of that, but. Well, this. We're with you. I will
(10:46):
say this could be a spoiler. Phil and I are both pro
park ranger law enforcement. We were both law enforcement rangers.
So we are pro. I'm going to start on
maybe this is one of the minor things we're going to talk about. But I
will say Chip said, I don't see one of the downsides.
I'm going to start with one of the downsides I
(11:08):
have heard people complain about. And then, Phil, I'm going to turn to you
as former director and say what you think.
So I remember as a ranger, somebody, and I
can't recall who, but somebody saying, look, a park ranger
should wear the flat hat. If you're going to wear a hat, it should not
be the black ball cap that you see police officers wear.
(11:30):
It should be the flat hat, the campaign hat. Okay,
so that's one. Also to go with the look, you will see
some states allow park rangers now
to wear body armor on the outside instead of under the
uniform. Completely changes the look. So, Phil,
as a former law enforcement ranger and as a
(11:52):
director, one of the complaints about law enforcement
rangers is when you change the look from park
ranger to law enforcement officer, it changes the feel
of interactions with the park ranger. What do you think about that?
That's again, there's no easy answers to any questions that we're going to ask today.
And that's. That's the hard part about this. So I'll kind of answer it
(12:14):
in a different way. So. And I think, Chip, I'd be interested to see
what your thoughts are on when I say this. So I think the flat hat,
the campaign hat, the Smokey Bear hat, whatever you call it, I think that
is. That's part of our brand of being a park ranger, that
icon stuff. I think it's a critical piece for law enforcement, too,
because that one piece of equipment that's a hat that's not going to,
(12:36):
you know, that's not a weapon, but it's. It's kind of a symbol of.
That's the guy or gal you go to. So it's kind of like that
authority. It's a brand that's over 100 years old. So I
think that can be a critical piece of a law enforcement uniform.
In South Carolina, our state troopers wear that flat hat, too. And they, you know,
they never take it off. Never taken off. So it's part of that
(12:59):
mystique of this person's taking care of us. So I think
it's a. I think it's a good law enforcement tool. All the other
stuff, the outside body armor and all that kind of stuff, I
understand it. I struggle with it because I'm a
traditionalist with park ranger stuff. And I think it goes to the part of
what makes it so difficult. And I'll say this to maybe get some
(13:21):
conversation started. One of the challenges for the law enforcement that I was
experienced with is it. It was. We didn't do it. We were
kind of a hybrid. And I think one of the things that is different
from traditional law enforcement in a. In an agency that is
nothing but law enforcement, the hard part is when you have this hybrid
model is there are so many other things that you're
(13:44):
required to do as a park ranger. And law enforcement is one of
those. And because it is one of many things
and oftentimes not the most
prioritized thing, it makes it even harder to be
on go ready all the time. Because, you know, you could
have. You could be all geared up and doing your law
(14:06):
enforcement stuff, and then all of a sudden you got to go do a program
or you got to go clean a bathroom, or you got to do all this
other kind of stuff. And that's not to say that the traditional law enforcement folks
in towns and cities and states don't do that. I think
the hard part is you find that that commonplace that we call
ranger first Chip is a little program we called Ranger first. And
it means that you are law enforcement, but you're a ranger first. And
(14:29):
all those components that we've been talking about of being a ranger for the last
hundred years is one of your tools in your toolbox that makes you a better
law enforcement person. So we always want you to be a
ranger first. And so when I talk to my law enforcement friends,
I get them past that. It doesn't mean that we don't want to do this
and do it the right way. It's a different terminology for
(14:51):
community policing, for verbal judo, for
all those other kind of things that have been in law enforcement over the last
20, 30 years. So I'm not answering your question, Jodi, because
I don't know the answer to it. I think. I think the flat hat,
the uniform, all that stuff is critically important, and it is part
of the brand that helps you in law enforcement. The hard part is how do
(15:12):
you balance? And again, this is not the right answer, Chip, but I love to
hear your take on it. It's not right or wrong. It's just different.
I want to be a ranger. And one of the things I struggled with when
I was director, I want us to be rangers. And it
frustrates me that I know we got to be law enforcement, too, or there's a
component out there, because they are bad people who come in the parks, and there
(15:33):
are bad things that happen, and we need to be ready and trained.
One of the challenges is, how do you do that? How do you be all
things to all people without literally separating it? And there's
a division of law enforcement in a state park and not
this hybrid model that a lot of states have. And again, you know, the
fascinating thing is that there are states in America that have
(15:55):
zero law enforcement, and then there's states who have, you know,
full blown law enforcement with everything that a
big city has and everything in between. So it's.
It's hard because as a park ranger, starting out as a park
ranger, I want to be a park ranger. But the world changed on us,
you know, and that changed with the National Park Service in Yosemite
(16:17):
Valley that day that, you know, the world changed in law
enforcement kind of took off in the park world. And,
you know, I don't know how to fix it, and I don't think I can
fix it. And. And certainly I know I can't fix it, but I
still struggle with, you know, where's that happy place that I can
still be a ranger, be ranger first and. But still
(16:38):
preserve the resources that we've been responsible for
and protect and serve the people is
hard. And we. Chips probably just shaking his head and said, these
guys, man, you guys, I don't know where y' all coming from, but it's. It's.
We get really passionate about this because I get frustrated as
a leader of, like, I don't have the right answer because it's,
(17:01):
you know, it's so complicated and we're so different across the country.
And, you know, I've said this a bunch of times over my career
is when I would be criticized for looking like I was pro law
enforcement. And I don't consider myself pro law enforcement or not
pro law enforcement. I'm just. I'm kind of in between
and trying to. To be a guy who can find some solutions.
(17:23):
But I was often criticized that, you know, we spend a lot of money on
law enforcement. It comes back to your point, Chip, about how expensive good law
enforcement is. We spent a lot of money on law enforcement, and part of that
was selfish from my standpoint, because I wanted to be able to
sleep at night knowing that our law enforcement guys out there had the best
equipment and the best training. And so. But that's really
(17:45):
difficult. And it should. You know, you'd hope that the finances shouldn't get
involved in some of the decision making, but. But I think it does.
And sometimes I would on the other side, so my people
who are not pro law enforcement won't be mad at me too. On the other
side, I would always say sometimes if we spend as much money
on customer service and interpretation as we did in law
(18:07):
enforcement, we wouldn't have as many law enforcement problems as we do.
Because part of my philosophy on law enforcement is
you got to engage with people and you got to entertain them
because bad stuff happens when they get bored on parks. And so you got to
keep them, you know, you got to engage with them and interact with them
and keep them from getting bored. But if, you know, if we spend as
(18:29):
much money on customer service and interpretive programs as we did on law
enforcement training, I don't know, that's just something I've always thought
about. So that's enough to get Chips to ask us some
tough questions or give us his opinion on what you're doing. And you just now
learning a lot about how parks do this. And my guess is, is
that you're probably a little bit fascinated or your eyes are opened a
(18:51):
little bit wider now when you understand when you hear that some states don't have
law enforcement. Yeah, no, for certain. I can identify with a lot of what
you're saying, Phil, from the standpoint that I would label myself
a traditionalist as well. I do think branding is important.
The troopers here in Missouri also wear the flat hats, and
it's just such a iconic symbol. And again,
(19:13):
that almost a lot of people would say to me, well, chip, function over
form, man. I mean, it's just not that convenient, let's say. Or maybe
not always that comfortable, but. And I feel hypocritical saying this as a career
SWAT guy where we did wear more of a class C uniform, vest on the
outside, black clothing, ball caps, sometimes that type of thing.
But I'm not a fan. Whenever I put my blues on, even though we were
(19:34):
authorized to wear external vests toward the end of my career, whenever I put my
blues on, I wore a vest under my shirt, and I made sure my leather
was shined. And, you know, I wanted to present that image,
that traditional, if I can borrow your word, Phil, image of
what, you know, a beat cop looks like. I felt like with
the external vest, I'm not gonna spend a lot of time on equipment because
(19:56):
there's probably a thousand opinions on that as well. I could argue both
sides, but with the external vest, there's a lot of creep with that.
It's like you put out an external vest policy. You can have two
magazines and a pair of handcuffs on your vest. Next thing you know,
you know, people are carrying all of the stuff. They look like the Stay Puft
Marshmallow man, where they're. And they don't keep it clean.
(20:19):
You know, it's not professional. Velcro's fraying.
You know, you got. All of the vest is getting dirty and discolored or faded,
and it just doesn't look professional. People don't always maintain the right
physical conditioning, quite frankly, to wear those type of equipment. You know, that
does not flatter someone who's not in good shape. You know, the
argument on their side is, well, it's more comfortable. You know, you can take it
(20:40):
off in the office, get a little, you know, get some air, you know, flow
in there. I mean, there's pros and cons, but I am biased, I'll admit it.
That I just. I think branding, to your point, is important. I
don't think that having law enforcement training
or having the law enforcement capacity within the ranks
of the park rangers would necessarily get in the
(21:03):
way of having them still dress professionally, wear the internal
vest, you know, the vest under the shirt, wear the flat hat. I don't think
that's a. I don't think there's necessarily. Those are competing things, you know,
I don't think they are, but, yeah, I mean, that's what I would say about
the branding piece. I don't. I do not disagree with you. I think it is
important what I would say about the what you're calling interpretation, what you're
(21:23):
calling customer service. Honestly, cops would be so much better
off in the aggregate if they approach their job with
that attitude. Like it does not forestall your ability
to respond to crises with force if need be. If
you are simply just human with people, if you simply orient
yourself toward people, the majority of people you're going to meet are
(21:46):
trying to do the best they can to enjoy their leisure time,
to spend time with people they care about, to enjoy nature. You know,
it's a very small percentage of people who are out there
trying to do no good. You're not paid for what you do every
day. You're paid for what you might have to do and that's what you're trained
for. Right. But what we do every day, generally just the attitude
(22:08):
we carry into those interactions is so important. And I saw this in the SWAT
teams. We didn't change uniforms, we didn't change, we didn't change
equipment, we didn't change our mission. What we
changed was our way of being with people, the way that we showed up with
our customers. And we went from the most complained upon unit in the entire
organization to having an eight year run of zero
(22:30):
complaints on search warrant executions, which is the tip of the spear
of enforcement. People weren't responding to what we were doing, they were
responding to how they felt seen by us once we changed that. You know, so
if I'm in a national park, then the park ranger that's helping me, regardless
of what they're wearing or what authority they might possess, if they're meeting
me where I'm at, human to human, you know, they're not presenting themselves
(22:52):
as being superior to me or condescending to me. And
they've got the knowledge that they have to have to be able to be a
good host for that particular venue. Yeah, I
mean, I don't think those are competing interests. I really don't. I
don't think you have to adopt what someone might call a law enforcement identity
that's characterized by closed distance supply force, you know,
(23:14):
giving people orders. I don't think you have to make that choice. I think that's
a false dichotomy. And I would also say, and I again, I want to bring
Jody into this too. I would also say that let the
data set you free. What are the data saying? You know, as you
do your do a sincere campaign of
interviewing customers, of interviewing other
(23:35):
stakeholders, maybe partner organizations, do a serious deep
dive and collect some data. You Know, what are the stakeholders saying?
What do they prefer? What's their experience been? What are the
actual statistics that are available out there to be collected as
to what's the need? Like, what is the need here for this
particular resource? I can tell you this. If you're out in the middle of
(23:58):
a state park somewhere and you've got to call a local law enforcement
officer to come out there to back you up or to provide
some enforcement action, you're going to be waiting a while. You're going to be
waiting a long while. And so, you know, I think about that all the
time. It's like, you know, I. Who's at more of a risk? The park ranger
out there all on their own in the middle of nowhere, in the middle of
(24:20):
nature with a radio, or me with a SWAT team surrounded by
seven to 10 heavily armed people, like, you know, who's really
more at risk? So, anyway, I'm just kind of riffing, right? But I
mean, I just. Jody, again, I love to bring in this conversation, but I. I
just, I'm with Phil. I want to offer a different perspective,
but, you know, I do come from a place of
(24:43):
how we show up matters more than anything else, the way
that we present to people. You know, I think brand is important.
I think park rangers have a long history.
They needs to be honored in the way that we do what we do. At
the same time, park rangers, like everyone else, need to be willing to adapt
to changing context and to changing needs. You know,
(25:06):
the needs. As the needs of people change, we have as park rangers, they have
to evolve too, right? You have to evolve in response to that. And what does
that look like? And that's a worthy debate, I think. And I'm not throwing shade
on the people who. Who ask the hard questions, right?
Who ask about the funding and, you know, is the juice worth the squeeze? Those
questions should be asked. But at the end of the day, a lot of it
(25:26):
can be settled with data. Not to reduce it to something as simple as
an inferential analysis, but it could be right. Well, you've both
touched on so many good points. And
the idea of the presence, just the way
that you look and hold yourself and you wear the flat hat, it really
does make a difference in context. And I'll even take
(25:49):
it back to the very first thing Chip said. Well, perhaps not the first,
but he said it early on, is he claimed that he thought
every interaction he had with a park ranger, it was a law enforcement park
ranger. And I would even say probably not, but
the park ranger had a good enough presence. You just assume.
Because a lot of people just assume every ranger is a law enforcement ranger.
(26:11):
And if you have the right presence, the right look,
they're always going to put that authority piece in
with being a park ranger. Well, Jody, I gotta ask as a follow up to
that, and you guys can tell me, I may be really, this might be
hyperbolic, but I believe what you're saying is true, that
the majority of people who think park ranger think they're law
(26:33):
enforcement in the parks. I believe that to be true. Like if you just sampled
a random bunch of people on the street, if you just walked up and, and
accosted them and said, hey, you know, tell me about what you think a park
ranger does. I think a lot of them would assume there's a law enforcement component
to it, right? Like if you, you know, if you carve up a tree in
the park or you light something on fire, you're going to have park ranger coming
(26:54):
down to intervene. Okay. Saying that to say, and this may be hyperbolic, you guys
tell me if that assumption is out there. And people who are
inclined to engage in criminal activity are also assuming that how much risk
is a park ranger at if they don't have the training and equipment
to respond to a threat? Like, you know, am I as a criminal noticing, oh,
that person's not packing a gun, Am I noticing that? Or am I seeing the
(27:16):
badge? Am I seeing the hat? You know, am I seeing the uniform and just
making an assumption that, hey, this person is here with the
authority to arrest me? So what do you all think? I mean, I mean, am
I making a mountain out of a molehill there or. Well, this is
really interesting, Chip. And as a former director, I
think this is one Phil should tackle. Thank you, Jody. Thank you.
(27:39):
Jody's always, well, and that is, that
is the million dollar question. And that's the hard question for a park leader to
figure out that because there is part of it is
that aura, for lack of a better word, that aura, that brand. It
is park ranger. I can tell you many times as a park ranger
or park superintendent, I've gone up to a situation and
(28:02):
not thinking about it, but I had this. I'm the park ranger, and you can't
do that anymore. And here's why you can't and do the all the ranger first
stuff and walk away. And then later on that night when I
lay my head down on bed, I was like, boy, that was the stupidest thing
you ever did. Because, you know, I could have Got in really bad trouble. That
and I think there's park rangers out there every day that are doing that.
(28:23):
So. And therein lies the problem of, I think,
the presence of a park ranger uniform, the flat hat and all that
stuff. Less the weapon, less the gun, if you will,
works. It's like locking a screen door. It works
for people that you need it to work on. But when
it's. When there's bad guys there, it could get you in trouble.
(28:46):
And there's the. Where's that fine line in a lot of states, you know,
so when do you gear up and what is gearing up?
Or you is, you know, in South Carolina, when I was director, it was
like, when you gear up, when you put on one thing, you got to. Put
it all on. And, you know, and it's like. And that was. That was again,
you know, selfish on my part because, you know, if you're going to put your
(29:08):
weapon on, you got to have all the other stuff, too. And you're going to
wear a vest, because I'm not going to go tell somebody that, that you didn't
have your vest on and you didn't make it. So it's all that stuff that
makes it so complicated, but it's on A shout out. A good friend of
mine, Mark Coughlin, who is a law enforcement chief in
Wyoming State park, and he's real involved with the Park Law
(29:29):
Enforcement Association Across America. And so
there's. There's a group of park law enforcement people in state parks that
get together every year and talk about these complicated issues and
stuff. And Mark's done a really good job of doing that in
Wyoming. But he's, you know, he will be the first to tell you
that it was not without, you know, some growing pains and all that kind of
(29:51):
good stuff. But I think your point is, Chip, you're spot
on. And because I'm at a loss for words to what the answer is, is
where our problem is. I mean, that is a problem. That is a challenge. And
then once you figure out you got to do that, where's that happy
place, that happy spot that you get enough of that to where
you don't. And I mean this with all due respect to law
(30:13):
enforcement people around the country is I
always worried is, when do I have just a law enforcement guy? When
do I have just a police officer out there? And I've lost my park ranger?
And I don't want that to be in any way a slam to law enforcement
people or to park rangers. It's just like, I Wanted to find that
I didn't want a policeman. And I'm not. And maybe it's just me,
(30:35):
the nomenclature of the. Of the words and the jargon. I wanted a park
ranger. And it's really fine line. And you got to be a really
special person to be a law enforcement park ranger. Because it is different.
It's really different. But to your point, and I want you to elaborate
on this, to your point, we think that because we're park guys
that's been out in the woods, but it's kind of like community policing
(30:57):
anyway, right? Look, here's the deal. And just for the
listeners, I'm going to qualify this. This isn't something I make a habit of doing,
but you have to know where I'm coming from. I have been in
more kinetic situations than most people you'll ever meet if
you travel the world. That's just the nature of leading the busiest SWAT team in
the nation for over a decade. And I have seen everything
(31:20):
there is to see on the sharp end of law enforcement. You name
it. I'm saying that so that people don't mistake me for
somebody who spent a career pushing paper or
teaching DARE to students, which, by the way, I'm a big fan of
those things, too. The DARE program be one of them. I thought that was
amazing, but that's not been my path. And so what I'm saying is
(31:42):
this. When I qualify it that way, all
people involved in law enforcement run the risk of thinking about
that aspect of our job as our identity.
Enforcing the law, writing tickets, making arrests, doing
those type of things is a skill that we have
to have as peace officers, but it is not our
(32:05):
identity. The majority of our job, even in the busiest cities in the
nation, does not involve making arrests and doing law
enforcement work. The majority of our job involves simply
connecting with people again, connecting them with resources, with
help, providing service from giving directions. I can't
tell you how many times in the inner city that I led people to locations
(32:27):
they were looking for long before there were GPSs and things of that
nature, where I just simply said, hey, follow me, and I'd take them to where
they were going. That was a daily thing. So I like
what you're saying, Phil. What I would love to be able to do is eradicate
that distinction between, hey, we've got a law enforcement person, or we've
got a park ranger. No, no. How about we got a park ranger that
(32:49):
as part of their job, has the capacity to do law
enforcement. Their identity isn't law enforcement. I'M saying that
for every cop listening to this, regardless of where you work,
right? You know, from Oakland to Miller County, Missouri, like,
the primary role we serve is to help people.
We facilitate safety and security. That's what we do.
(33:12):
We're outnumbered thousands to one. There is no way, if every
citizen in any city USA stood up and said,
we're not going to obey the law today, law enforcement officers would become
passive observers to chaos. There is nothing we could do about it,
and especially not in a constitutional republic. So saying that
to say we better get real darn good at connecting with people
(33:34):
and building trust in every contact we have, every contact we have is an opportun
to build or destroy a relationship. And that should be our number one priority. Now,
we're not letting our guard down or assuming the best out of people. We're going
to maintain our situational awareness. We're going to do all of that. But
as we're doing that, our primary objective needs to be building trust. The
more people that trust us, the more safety and security is instilled in the community.
(33:56):
And it's the same thing for the park, right? Like, it's the same thing for
the park. And again, I'm. This isn't coming from a guy who spent his career,
you know, kissing babies and, you know, walking through Mayberry. That's
not been my. That's not been my path. But I tell you, I think we
could all learn a little something from. And you've met these park rangers, by the
way. I've met them, too. That you really feel like that person
(34:17):
has your best interest in mind. They're there to serve and help.
Nothing is below or above them or below them. Like, like you
said, if I got to pick up a broom and sweep a bathroom, I'll do
it. Right? Guess what? Some of the best cops I've ever met do the same
thing, right? You know, do the same thing. So I get a
real. I get to burn a burr under my saddle. When I think
(34:37):
about this idea that we have to think about. Well, if I'm a law
enforcement officer, all I do is go out there and arrest people. All I do
is go out there and. And look if the only tool you got. You've heard
this, right? The only tool you got is a hammer. Everything's a nail. And that's
your concern, Phil. Like, if you're looking at, through, through that lens, you're going to
lose the majority of what you need those park owners to be doing, which is
(34:57):
connecting with people, representing that they're the frontline representation
for the park services to the customer. They're the only ones out there on the
ground. Right? And so I think that's really important. But again, I'm going to go
back to what I said before. You know, there's a logical fallacy there, that we
have this false dichotomy, like we've got to have it one way or the other.
I don't think we need to have it that way. And I would love. I
(35:19):
think, you know, you talk about customer service, you talk about community policing, whatever you
want to call it, you know, whatever the words that we use to describe this
connection we want to have with the people we serve, this authenticity
that we want to have. I think conventional law enforcement can learn a lot from
park rangers about how to show up and how to talk to people, how to
talk to folks, how to be. The thing about park rangers, and I'll kick it
(35:40):
back over to you guys, the thing about park rangers is one thing that they
do that every cop in America could learn to do better is
teach. Sometimes when people know better, they do better. I think Maya
Angelou said that you're educating people, right? I know
when I listen to a park ranger talk about the environment, I walk
away with a sense of responsibility about how I need to conduct myself
(36:02):
out on that trail. Right. I have more consideration for my
fellow hikers, for my fellow campers. I have a better
understanding of the impact on my decisions have on the
environment and everybody else. I mean, I get that. Why? Because they're educating
you. So I think all of us. It should be encoded. All of us to
do that, to be able to do that. That's a skill, brother. That's a skill
(36:23):
I think we all need to have. I'll take a breath. Yeah. You know what's
great, Jetty? This is what's great about law enforcement. This is great about
teachers. This is what's great about park rangers, is
you cannot fake passion. And if you have it, you get
results. And, you know, and I think what we're. What we're doing is hopefully getting
some dialogue around the country, people saying, man, you know, maybe there is this place
(36:44):
in between it. You know, you don't have to be all or nothing one way
or the other. And there's good components from each side because it is difficult.
And if, you know. And I think that's what. If you're passionate about
what we do in parks, if you're passionate about preserving the
resources that we've been charged with, and if you're Also passionate about
protecting and serving communities and stuff. There's gotta be common ground.
(37:06):
We can figure this thing out. And, you know, probably the biggest hurdle is
still money. Like everything else, it's still money. I think
that's really the most legitimate argument for being on the con
side, right? The most legitimate argument because nothing's free
and you can't do it halfway. You can't have a law enforcement component and then
not train and prepare and equip them. That's worse than not having any at all.
(37:28):
Like, you've got to do it. I think I made the comment that it's kind
of like. It's like riding a bicycle. You're riding it or you're not riding it.
If it's not moving at the speed it needs to move in order for you
to maintain balance, you're going to fall over. It's the same thing with law enforcement.
You can't half ride it. You got to go in with the attitude that we're
going to professionalize this thing all the way. I think that's so important that people
recognize that, Phil. It's so important. And, oh, here's a
(37:50):
spoiler alert. Here's a dirty secret that I think people need to
know. You want to look behind the curtain. Everybody that needs to hear this, which
is everybody, hear this. If you don't care about people,
you can't be a park ranger or a conventional law enforcement officer. So get
that through your head. Like, if you legitimately don't care about people,
that's the wrong profession for you. So all the things that we think about, all
(38:12):
the horror stories, right, of people being abused and mistreated, and it's going to happen
as sure as there's humans doing the job. That's just not the right profession for
you if you can't find it in your heart to care about people. And when
you care about people, to your point, you talk about passion. You know, we talked
about authenticity. When you care about people, and that's your azimuth,
right? That's your true north. You're going to make better decisions regardless of
(38:33):
those decisions involve enforcing the law or just simply being able to
educate and be helpful. See how simple it was, Jody? See how
simple it is? I feel I got more
passionate. Yeah, you did. Yeah. Well, from
this. This conversation, I think you can understand
why Chip is America's favorite law enforcement officer and why
(38:56):
Phil is sometimes called Pastor Phil because of the
way he preaches about parks. We had a little bit of both here.
Look, kind of a meta Conversation. But the thing about Phil that I'm getting. So
I'm a leader, right? I'm a career leader. I dedicated myself to the practice of
leadership when I was 19, in the army, my first leadership position.
And so leadership's an art, and people are the medium. And so I'm
(39:18):
very good with people. And the thing about Phil that I like is he's
thoughtful, right? You know, he's got. He's not afraid to have an
opinion, but he holds them loosely. He's open to changing his mind. You can
tell, right? I've known him for, you know, what, an hour now. Like, you can
tell. He's like. He holds those opinions loosely. He's willing to change his mind
if presented with different facts. And that is a sign of
(39:39):
maturity and wisdom. And I think that is a gift, brother. That's
like a superpower, especially in the day and age of being bombarded
with, you know, all of this data and information right at the tip of
your fingers. People are always, you know, they can go on the social medias now,
and what are they on the myspaces or the Furnsters? What are they doing now?
What are the kids doing? Whatever it is, Joe, you know, you're. You're into
(40:00):
that, but they can go on there and, you know, you're, you know, like, hey,
just jumped out of the shower. Lol. Like, you know, you've got, like, all
of this information being swamped with. So I think, Phil, that's a cool thing for
you to be able to hold on to that. That objectivity,
right? I mean, I think that's fascinating to me. I think that's what makes you
good at who you. Being who you are and probably made you really great at
(40:22):
what you did and what you still do. Well, I appreciate that. I appreciate
that. I tell Jody always, here's one of my. I do
feel philosophies in my class that I teach. And one
of my philosophies, it always gets people scratching their head is like,
humility is a byproduct of confidence. And
so people who are. Get to that point, it's because they have a lot of
(40:44):
confidence in their abilities, and they're okay with saying, you know what? That's wrong. Let's
go this way. That makes sense. And it's just not enough of that today.
Is that, you know, so that's my philosophy for the week. Phil,
look, man, you are. Well, you are singing my song. People ask me,
I had a reputation for being tough and formidable. You know, I hit the
weight pile a Lot. I hit the range a lot. I hit the judo at
(41:07):
a lot. You know, I kickbox. I go in kickbox professionals just to
stay sharp. And people ask me, man, why do you put so much work, time,
and sacrifice into being so formidable? I said, so I can
be more humble. Yes. Amen. Like, what you're saying is
true. Like, I have the power now. I don't have anything to prove to myself
or others. I know I'm equipped to do this. Right. And the same thing applies
(41:28):
to technical knowledge. Right? Like, I no longer have to be the
smartest guy in the room. I'm open to learning new things because I put a
lot of work into learning what I've learned at this point. And I put a
lot of work into being tough and capable. Guess what? I don't have to act
tough and capable of now. I can be. I love what you said there, man.
You can write a book about that, brother. I mean, that is. That is such
a good point, you know, like, oh, you're working so hard so you can beat
(41:51):
everybody up. No, no, I'm working so hard so I don't have to beat anybody
up. That's right. Absolutely right. Yeah, that's right.
You got it, brother. Oh, my goodness. Well, I. I will tell you,
I feel like all we did with this episode was
stir up more questions. Like when. When you go out to
knock down a hornet's nest and you mean to take it away, and all you
(42:12):
do is stir them up and it gets worse, which I've done a couple of
times. That's what we've done here. So if you like
this, let us know, because maybe we'll invite Chip
back and we'll go even deeper into more specifics.
This time we tried to tackle the whole thing at once, which was never going
to work, but we also knew it wouldn't work. All we hoped for
(42:34):
was, was to start a conversation. So you can start talking about law
enforcement in parks. And reach out to us. If you want Chip back,
let me know. Send in questions, we'll have him back, and we'll
cover more specific topics. You can reach
me@jodyparkleaders.com
and when I introduced Chip and Phil, I didn't
(42:56):
give them full introductions to each other because Chip doesn't know
that Phil is now a professor at Clemson University,
and Phil does not know that Chip is now a
consultant with the Arbinger Institute. So they're both still
very active, still practicing leadership. And
Chip, if anyone says, look, I liked what you were
(43:18):
saying, I don't want Phil and Jody to hear this
message I have for you. How can they just reach out to you personally? Oh,
goodness gracious. So the easiest way to get a hold of me these days is
probably on the LinkedIn. You know, I'm on the LinkedIn and
Charles Huth and then of course through Harbinger, through the
Harbinger Institute. It's easy to access me there through the website
(43:40):
www.harbinger.com. it's like Harbinger without the
H arbinger. And you know, Joey, I just want to say, just. And I know
we're bringing this thing in for a landing, but what I would want the listeners
to know as you go about debating this very important topic. This is not
like an insignificant topic. It really isn't. Is that there really? In
my, my experience, this is true in economics. I think it's true in life. There
(44:01):
are no solutions, only trade offs. And if we get our mind around
that, right, like there's, there's never going to be a perfect solution. We position
this as side A and side B. But at the end of the day, whatever
thing that we do, wherever we land, there's going to be trade
offs. It's never going to be perfect. That's true for anybody that does anything.
There really aren't any exceptions to that. And I think we got to be okay
(44:23):
with that. And we've got to be okay like Phil, we got to be okay
with running experiments. You know, we got to be okay to say, hey look, let's
run this experiment. Let's see, let's just make this change, see how it works. And
we will evaluate it, right? We'll make adjustments, we'll look, you know, we'll do after
actions. We'll see, hey, is this working or not? We'll go back and tweak. You
know, I think that's important. And all of those experiments are predicated on trying
(44:43):
to be the best for others and whatever it is that we're doing. So I
definitely wanted to squeeze that in there. So thank you. All right, well,
Phil, I will give you last words since you're the semi regular
guest co host and you have that wonderful mustache. What
did you think of Chip and do you have any final words on this
topic? I thought it was awesome. And you know, you could tell with
(45:05):
Chip's passion. And then there's a. I think one of the things that the Park
Leaders shows always talks about is that leadership component. And I
think Chip hit that at the end is that, you know, leadership looks for
solutions doesn't point fingers and is always open to
figure out there's some common ground. And then you build on that, and then you
find a way to do it the right way. And it does. A
(45:26):
lot of times it comes down to leadership and being able not to dig your
heels in, but to look at different, you know, different options and
to come up with a solution. I think it's a great starting point, and it
is so complex. I mean, you could do series and series after this
right here to get down into the weeds of it, but, you know, I think
we agreed on some real strong components here that we want
(45:48):
our park rangers and our police officers to have the same qualities and as they
care about people and. And that public service component. And
I think you take it from there. And the hard part is figuring out financially,
how do you make sure that you do this thing the right way? Yeah. So
it's a great, great conversation and really enjoyed meeting Chip and
look forward to talking again. All right, thank you so much, Chip.
(46:11):
Thank you, Phil. And thank you for listening to the park
leaders show.
Sam.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.