Yes. rather too narrow in my opinion. I don't know why people in National Parks are expecting silent skies. Manned aviation faces no additional restrictions here to ensure that, public roads often go right through them, and other visitors all make a reasonable amount of noise, to which drones would contribute hardly anything. We all know how quiet (for example) a Mini series drone can be, to the extent that it's not really hearable from the ground at all once it gets to around 200 ft or so, so I find it quite hard to take seriously rules based on drone noise disturbing people's peace and quiet. So why have these regulators, in their 'wisdom', not simply confined us to 200 ft+ except while launching or landing ? or limited our numbers so there are never more than say 5 in the sky at a time ? Or ring fenced a few days a month / season drones are freely allowed to film ? Where is the justification or mandate for banning the entire hobby from access to the land ?
With a very few exceptions, the NPS prohibits the taking off, landing, and operation of aircraft on national parklands (36 CFR 2.7). The FAA recognizes the authority of the NPS to establish such prohibitions and restrictions (14 CFR 107.45).
Neither agency, however, expressly prohibits flight over national parklands. And so, a loophole large enough to fly a drone through.
At least for now, you could launch and operate a drone outside the boundaries of a park, fly it over parklands, land outside the boundaries, and be in compliance with the letter of the law. You would, however, be thumbing your nose at the spirit of the law. Is that the kind of reputation you'd like to have?
As a practical matter, if you were to fly over parklands from a launch point outside the boundaries, and you were to comply with FAA regulations under Part 107 as regards altitude, VLOS, and other restrictions, how far could you penetrate the airspace over a park before losing sight of your drone, exhausting your battery, or encountering terrain that would block your control signals? How gratifying would such an experience be?
Many parks are vast. Yellowstone, for example, is about 50 X 60 miles and comprises about 2.5 million acres. Dinking around its hundreds of miles of rugged and largely inaccessible boundary isn't going to yield any shots of the more celebrated and spectacular features located in its interior. They're way beyond the range of a consumer drone.
Scofflaws, of course, have violated regulations and operated their drones inside parks. One idiot crashed his drone in Yellowstone's Grand Prismatic Spring. Removal of the drone from that thermal feature was difficult and expensive. So were the fine and costs levied against him. Do you suppose, in retrospect, that he thought his actions were worth it?
Just fly somewhere else.