crime on state land carries different punishments than crimes committed on private or even public lands (think local or federal). If KY and VA have different laws, then it is likely they have an agreement in place to allow their law enforcement officials (i.e. park rangers, park police, etc.) to continue pursuing criminals within the boundaries of the state park even if they happen to cross state lines. Once a person crosses a state line, then it opens the door to it potentially being a federal issue. It wouldn't surprise me if both states agreed to play by a certain set of rules within the boundaries of the park even when a person crosses the state line. Also, it is entirely possible the funding for the park is comingled. Both states agree on how much funding they are going to chip in for the upcoming fiscal year (FY). They probably even formed a committee, involving members from both states, to manage how the park spends the money during the FY. It wouldn't surprise me some of KY's funding has been used to pay for projects on the VA side and vice versa over the years. Since the park is a joint project, each state has a vested interested interest in what happens on the other side's part because it could have an impact on their side. If you notice the reasons I have given are practical governmental reasons why the 2 states did it this way. That may have been more of a driving factor than getting the credit. If the joint project is unable to perform simple daily operations to function, then it looks bad for both states and no state wants bad PR.