Reading Comprehension

Once surrounded and protected by vast wilderness, many of the
national parks are adversely affected by activities outside their
boundaries. The National Park Organic Act established the national
park system and empowered the Secretary of the Interior to manage
activities within the parks. Conditions outside park boundaries are not
subject to regulation by the Park Service unless they involve the direct
use of park resources.



Several approaches to protecting the national parks from external
degradation have been proposed, such as one focusing on enacting
federal legislation granting the National Park Service broader powers
over lands adjacent to the national parks. Legislation addressing
external threats to the national parks twice passed the House of
Representatives but died without action in the Senate. Also brought to
the table as a possible remedy is giving the states bordering the parks
a significant and meaningful role in developing federal park
management policy.



Because the livelihood of many citizens is linked to the management of
national parks, local politicians often encourage state involvement in
federal planning. But, state legislatures have not always addressed the
fundamental policy issues of whether states should protect park
wildlife.



Timber harvesting, ranching and energy exploration compete with
wildlife within the local ecosystem. Priorities among different land uses
are not generally established by current legislation. Additionally, often
no mechanism exists to coordinate planning by the state
environmental regulatory agencies. These factors limit the impact of
legislation aimed at protecting park wildlife and the larger park
ecosystem.



Even if these deficiencies can be overcome, state participation must be
consistent with existing federal legislation. States lack jurisdiction
within national parks themselves, and therefore state solutions cannot
reach activities inside the parks, thus limiting state action to the land
adjacent to the national parks. Under the supremacy clause, federal
laws and regulations supersede state action if state law conflicts with
federal legislation, if Congress precludes local regulation, or if federal
regulation is so pervasive that no room remains for state control.
Assuming that federal regulations leave open the possibility of state
control, state participation in policy making must be harmonized with
existing federal legislation.



The residents of states bordering national parks are affected by park
management policies. They in turn affect the success of those policies.
This interrelationship must be considered in responding to the external
threats problem. Local participation is necessary in deciding how to
protect park wildlife. Local interests should not, however, dictate
national policy, nor should they be used as a pretext to ignore the
threats to park regions.





In the context of the passage, the phrase external degradation (lines 8-9) refers to
which of the following:



A. threats to national parks arising from the House of Representative's
willingness to address environmental issues.
B. threats to national parks arising from state government environmental
policies.
C. threats to national parks arising from local politicians‘ calls for greater
state involvement in national park planning.
D. threats to national parks arising from the National Park Organic Act.
E. threats to national parks arising from the lack of local support