Barataria Preserve hunt unit map opens park to expanded hunting
Secretary Order (SO) 3447 Hunting and Fishing Access
National Park Service· Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve, Barataria PreserveNPS Planning (PEPC) project page ↗
NPS PEPCWe track this on the agency’s own system of record, where most on-the-ground decisions live.
A new map defining the Barataria Hunt Unit would expand hunting access inside Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve.
What’s at risk
Wildlife in the Barataria Preserve face increased hunting pressure as Secretary's Order 3447 pushes NPS to open more park land to hunting. The map locks in where and how hunters can operate within this unit of the park.
If this goes through
The Barataria Hunt Unit boundary becomes official, permanently shaping hunting access and use inside Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve under a federal directive to expand such access parkwide.
Our plain-English read of the official notice ↗. Check it against the agency’s own words below.
By the numbers, from the agency’s own document
- Hunt season the new zones cover
- 2026-2027
- Comment period close deadline
- Oct 14, 2026 at 11:59 PM Mountain Time
Barataria Hunt Unit Map
Open the document ↗“The Barataria Preserve added additional hunt zones for the 2026-2027 seasons.”
Each figure is checked word for word against the decision document ↗; open a label to read the sentence it comes from and the document it’s in.
The agency’s own analysis
What the notice says, and what it leaves out
The strongest findings read from the agency’s own document, each quoted word for word. Each one is a point a letter can put on the record.
Document Content
The agency says
“No files have been uploaded for this document.”
The 'Document Content' section confirms the agency has filed nothing in the official PEPC record for this action.
Barataria Hunt Unit Map
The agency says
“The new zones are located in Bayou aux Carpes and the Fleming Plantation.”
The notice names two new zone locations but provides no acreage, GPS boundaries, or description of what hunting activities and methods are permitted in either area.
Barataria Hunt Unit Map
The agency says
“The Barataria Preserve added additional hunt zones for the 2026-2027 seasons.”
The notice announces new hunt zones under Secretary Order 3447 but does not reference any NEPA categorical exclusion, environmental assessment, or environmental impact statement.
Barataria Hunt Unit Map
The agency says
“Please find the updated hunt zone map on the Preserve's hunting and trapping page.”
The notice title and body use only the word 'hunt zones,' but the only linked resource is described as the 'hunting and trapping page.' The notice never states whether the new zones in Bayou aux Carpes and the Fleming Plantation permit trapping.
Topic Questions
The agency says
“You are welcome to comment on the updated hunt zone map.”
The only entry under 'Topic Questions' does not pose a question; it tells the public they are 'welcome to comment' without identifying what impacts, alternatives, boundaries, or management tradeoffs the agency is seeking input on.
5 holes in the agency’s own analysis
Make these points, in your own words
- I oppose this action as proposed, and I ask the agency to weigh the specific harms below.
- The 'Document Content' section confirms the agency has filed nothing in the official PEPC record for this action. The public is invited to comment on a hunt zone map that exists only at an external URL the agency controls and can update or remove after the comment period closes. A comment period attached to no document in the record cannot produce a stable administrative file against which comments can be preserved or formally answered. The agency should upload the hunt zone map and any supporting analysis to the PEPC record before the comment period closes and restart the clock once the record is complete.
- The notice names two new zone locations but provides no acreage, GPS boundaries, or description of what hunting activities and methods are permitted in either area. Without this, commenters cannot evaluate whether the expansion covers a few acres or several square miles, which habitats it covers, or how it interacts with existing zones. The agency should provide boundary data and acreage for each new zone in the PEPC record so commenters can assess the scope of the action.
- The notice announces new hunt zones under Secretary Order 3447 but does not reference any NEPA categorical exclusion, environmental assessment, or environmental impact statement. Adding new permanent hunting zones to a National Park Service unit is a federal action that requires documented NEPA compliance. The agency should produce and post the applicable NEPA determination in the PEPC record and allow comment on it before the zones open.
- The notice title and body use only the word 'hunt zones,' but the only linked resource is described as the 'hunting and trapping page.' The notice never states whether the new zones in Bayou aux Carpes and the Fleming Plantation permit trapping. Trapping in a national park preserve raises distinct wildlife mortality, non-target species, and public safety issues that are separate from and more severe than hunting. The agency should state in the record whether trapping is authorized in the new zones and provide any analysis of those impacts.
Show every point from the document
- The only entry under 'Topic Questions' does not pose a question; it tells the public they are 'welcome to comment' without identifying what impacts, alternatives, boundaries, or management tradeoffs the agency is seeking input on. This formulation provides no guidance on what the agency will treat as substantive and may reduce its obligation to respond to comments that fall outside an unstated scope. The agency should post specific questions about wildlife impacts, zone boundaries, permitted methods, and trapping, so that comments can be evaluated against a defined scope.
- Say something only you can say. The law requires the agency to consider and respond to substantive comments, and specifics are what make a comment substantive.
In the agency’s own words
Barataria Hunt Unit Map
On the record for this fight
1 person has filed on this fight through PLAN. The official record is still catching up.
- Emily, California32 seals
Ranked on letters found on the agency’s record, then letters filed. Readers appear as first name and last initial, or as a steward in their state; switch yours off in your record. All boards
Did the agency answer?
5 issues are on this record. The agency has not published its decision document yet, so each one stays pending until the agency answers.
Issues on the record, awaiting the decision
- PendingThe notice names two new zone locations but provides no acreage, GPS boundaries, or description of what hunting activities and methods are permitted in either area.
The notice names two new zone locations but provides no acreage, GPS boundaries, or description of what hunting activities and methods are permitted in either area. Without this, commenters cannot evaluate whether the expansion covers a few acres or several square miles, which habitats it covers, or how it interacts with existing zones. The agency should provide boundary data and acreage for each new zone in the PEPC record so commenters can assess the scope of the action.
A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own notice, quote verified against the text
- PendingThe notice announces new hunt zones under Secretary Order 3447 but does not reference any NEPA categorical exclusion, environmental assessment, or environmental impact statement.
The notice announces new hunt zones under Secretary Order 3447 but does not reference any NEPA categorical exclusion, environmental assessment, or environmental impact statement. Adding new permanent hunting zones to a National Park Service unit is a federal action that requires documented NEPA compliance. The agency should produce and post the applicable NEPA determination in the PEPC record and allow comment on it before the zones open.
A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own notice, quote verified against the text
- PendingThe notice title and body use only the word 'hunt zones,' but the only linked resource is described as the 'hunting and trapping page.' The notice never states whether the new zones in Bayou aux Carpe
The notice title and body use only the word 'hunt zones,' but the only linked resource is described as the 'hunting and trapping page.' The notice never states whether the new zones in Bayou aux Carpes and the Fleming Plantation permit trapping. Trapping in a national park preserve raises distinct wildlife mortality, non-target species, and public safety issues that are separate from and more severe than hunting. The agency should state in the record whether trapping is authorized in the new zones and provide any analysis of those impacts.
A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own notice, quote verified against the text
- PendingThe 'Document Content' section confirms the agency has filed nothing in the official PEPC record for this action.
The 'Document Content' section confirms the agency has filed nothing in the official PEPC record for this action. The public is invited to comment on a hunt zone map that exists only at an external URL the agency controls and can update or remove after the comment period closes. A comment period attached to no document in the record cannot produce a stable administrative file against which comments can be preserved or formally answered. The agency should upload the hunt zone map and any supporting analysis to the PEPC record before the comment period closes and restart the clock once the record is complete.
A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own notice, quote verified against the text
- PendingThe only entry under 'Topic Questions' does not pose a question; it tells the public they are 'welcome to comment' without identifying what impacts, alternatives, boundaries, or management tradeoffs t
The only entry under 'Topic Questions' does not pose a question; it tells the public they are 'welcome to comment' without identifying what impacts, alternatives, boundaries, or management tradeoffs the agency is seeking input on. This formulation provides no guidance on what the agency will treat as substantive and may reduce its obligation to respond to comments that fall outside an unstated scope. The agency should post specific questions about wildlife impacts, zone boundaries, permitted methods, and trapping, so that comments can be evaluated against a defined scope.
A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own notice, quote verified against the text
The reporting behind this
From More Than Just ParksAfter more than a decade chasing peak color across America, we built the foliage map we always wanted.
More logging. Fewer protections for big trees, roadless country and wildlife. Another sweeping change to America’s public lands is moving fast.
Another foreign mining company wants a piece of America’s public lands. This one comes with millions of gallons of groundwater pumping and radioactive radon.
More actions that need you
Go deeper, free
See how your members of Congress vote on public lands
Every representative, graded on the votes that decide the fate of parks, forests, and refuges.
Open ↗The mapSee the places under active threat
A live map of the parks, monuments, and wild country in the crosshairs right now.
Open ↗A wrong fact, a dead link, a form that wouldn’t take your letter: one tap and it comes to the people who build PLAN, with this fight attached.
Know an open comment period we are missing, or spotted a wrong deadline? .