Threats are mounting for the national parks. Most Americans love them just as they are, as places where they can enjoy nature and find occasional refuge from the increasing hubbub and commercialism of life. But National Park Service Director Fran Mainella and her boss, Interior Secretary Gail Norton, are ganging up to make fundamental changes in management of the parks. In short, they are heading more toward exploitation and less toward preservation and conservation,

Everyone seems to agree that the parks are underfunded. Like many other federal programs, budgets are stretched thin because so much money goes for the Iraq war, huge new weapons programs and tax benefits mainly for the rich. The Bush administration’s solution is to cut park budgets and solicit new funding from private and corporate donors, repaying their generosity by naming park buildings and other park facilities for them.

Supporters of the parks are particularly aroused by a proposed rewrite of the Park Service’s 2001 basic management policy statement. A first draft was hastily withdrawn after an uproar in which critics said it would have destroyed the park system. It was by Paul Hoffman, an Interior Department political appointee who was once an aide to Vice President Richard Cheney when he was a Wyoming congressman.

The new draft, like the abandoned one, omits a key sentence in the 2001 document that says, “Congress, recognizing that the enjoyment by future generations of the national parks can be ensured only if the superb quality of park resources and values is left unimpaired, has provided that when there is a conflict between conserving resources and values and providing for enjoyment of them, conservation is to be predominant.”

The latest draft, now open for public comment, would also permit greatly expanded use of snowmobiles and other off-road vehicles and jet skis in the parks.

Snowmobiles in Acadia National Park are limited to a relatively small course, and the short season does not draw a horde of out-of-staters. Their future probably will be fought out in Yellowstone. But Acadia is threatened by spongy new standards and elimination of language about “preserving the natural soundscape” and limiting motorized vehicles to those with the “least impact.”

Additional effect on Acadia would come from a proposed reduction in air quality standards in the park. Down East Maine is at the end of the tailpipe that brings in pollution from the Midwest smokestacks, and Acadia would suffer.

Also, the proposed policy changes would shift major responsibility for maintaining the parks to private organizations like Friends of Acadia and away from the federal government, where it belongs.

What can be done about these threats? Now is the time for public comments, directed to the National Park Service. As a minimum, critics should call for restating that assurance that any conflicts will be resolved in favor of conservation.

An Internet link at http://nps.gov/ tells how to send comments.