there is only one valid reason to refuse this man access to the rocks, and that is if he attempts to use invalid methods in his research.
I don't see any problem either.
Regardless of who he works for, Snelling is a degreed biologist. I can think of no legitimate academic or scientific reason he shouldn't be allowed to collect a few dozen fist size rocks.
(BTW, what if, it looks like NAIG is back. When I searched "Snelling creationist," their website was the first hit and the link worked.)
If he wasn't allowed to take samples because he personally believes in YEC I agree that is wrong, but I am curious as to what the proposal looked like. If the proposal was something like 'let me take samples to show that they are thousands of years old', then I could see why they would reject his proposal as pseudo-science.
Considering that he is a geologist and has successfully taken samples before, it seems unlikely that he would have worded his proposal like that. However, if the Park Services had reasonable suspicion that that was his intention even if he didn't explicitly write it I can see why they would still refuse him access.
snelling is perfectly willing to lay all of his research on the table for all to see.
you know, if i was so positive that snellings work would be outright refuted, i wouldn't have any problem at all in letting him have access to said rocks.
refusing snelling access is just outright wrong . . . period.