TOURISM : Faceoff Looms Over Operating Mt. Rushmore : South Dakota answers U.S. closure proposal with plan to run the park and three others itself. Offer is gaining support.

The National Park Service might find out the hard way that bluffing can be dangerous--especially in the Wild West.

The agency’s gambit began last month, when Republicans in Congress threatened a 10% budget cut next year and cuts as big as 36% over seven years. The Interior Department, which oversees the Park Service, responded with a bureaucratic ploy so old it even has a name--”Selling the Washington Monument.”

The theory is simple: Make the cuts so painful they inspire a public outcry. So last month the Interior Department suggested that one way to cope with Draconian budget slashing would be to close 200 of the nation’s smallest parks, including Mt. Rushmore National Memorial in the Black Hills of South Dakota. Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt said: “We simply cannot keep public lands open and available if we are required to cut.”

*

The suggestion to close Rushmore produced an outcry, all right. One of South Dakota’s official nicknames is “The Rushmore State.” The famous carving appears on the state’s license plates. Mt. Rushmore is the flagship of South Dakota’s $1.2-billion tourism industry, which is big business for a state with an annual budget of $1.8 billion.

Mt. Rushmore is so revered in South Dakota, there probably is not a citizen in the state who believes the Park Service would close it, including Republican Gov. William Janklow. “Why do they play that game?” Janklow asked. “Nobody believes government anyway, and this is why.”

The department definitely shouldn’t play “political poker” with Janklow.

On June 16 the governor announced his plan to save both the monument and American taxpayers. He issued a challenge: Let South Dakota manage Mt. Rushmore and he would do it for 80% of what the Park Service spends. Janklow offered the same deal for the other three national parks in South Dakota--Wind Cave and Jewel Cave, both of which were on the list of 200, and Badlands. “We can do anything for less than the federal government can,” Janklow said.

At first, the Interior Department treated the challenge as political rhetoric. Park Service Director Roger Kennedy said he doubted the federal government would ever turn management of Rushmore over to the state. He also backpedaled on the issue of shutting the parks. “It was never a closure list,” Kennedy told the Rapid City (S. D.) Journal. “All that is is a simple listing of how much money is currently being spent on the 200 least expensive parks.”

Last week, Janklow released a 17-page plan titled: “A South Dakota Proposal to Keep the National Parks Open.” Under Janklow’s proposal:

* The four parks would remain part of the national park system.

* The South Dakota Division of Game, Fish & Parks Department would operate and maintain the parks.

* The federal government would pay South Dakota 80% of the $4.5 million Washington now spends each year on the four parks.

* The state would follow current federal management plans.

The governor pointed out that South Dakota runs Custer State Park, which has a budget of $2.7 million annually. Janklow said the four national parks and the state park could share personnel and administration. “You only need one boss, one personnel office, one scheduling office,” he said. “There are economies of scale.” He also wants greater freedom to charge user fees, which pay for 65% of Custer State Park’s budget.

Mt. Rushmore Supt. Dan Wenk said the Park Service also wants parks to be granted more power to charge and keep fees. A bill before Congress would do that. Wenk said Mt. Rushmore already runs efficiently. “I don’t believe it can be run for 20% off--not if you do it with the level of programs we have today,” he said.

*

Interior Department officials also have said only Congress could turn Mt. Rushmore over to South Dakota. Wenk said he did not think that would happen.

“They’re crazy,” Janklow said. “If they decide they want it to happen, they have the power to do it.”

Janklow’s plan has picked up support from Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S. D.).

A Babbitt spokesman now says the Interior Department will consider the plan. Janklow’s ace in the hole may be his friendship with Babbitt, dating from when Babbitt was Arizona’s governor.

Janklow’s next step is a personal meeting with Babbitt, who once campaigned for President at Mt. Rushmore. The secretary may have to decide whether his park rangers there should accept one-way tickets back to Washington.