Among the many thousands of named places in America's National Park System are quite a few that could reasonably be given more appropriate names. Indeed, there are even some zingers among the unit designations of the 397 national parks.
Two examples of inappropriate place names in our National Park System leap to my mind almost unbidden. If the Ohio Congressional delegation can be made to sit still for it, Mt. McKinley in Denali National Park and Preserve should be officially renamed Denali, which is what everybody in Alaska calls it. New Mexico's Aztec Ruins National Monument, a place in which no Aztec ever set foot, should be renamed to honor the Ancestral Puebloans.
OK, it's your turn. What renamings would you like to see?
By the way, this is not necessarily idle thinking. Place names in long-standing public use are seldom changed, but it does happen from time to time. The federal arbiter for such decisions, the U.S. Board on Geographic Names, approves about 85% of the 250 naming proposals it receives in a typical year. Congress has renamed national parks from time to time too, as when Custer Battlefield National Monument was redesignated Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument back in 1991.
Support Essential Coverage of Essential Places
Comments
I second condensing the riduculously long names. Example: Grand Staircase-Escalante is redundant.
I agree with honoring Kurt, but I also agree with the comments about making the new names easy to spell and pronounce. Instead of Mt. Repanshek how about something like Lake Kurt?
How about everything gets changed to GPS coordinates and be done with it. We cant please everybody and with all the closures taking place again this year, I know we can use the money better, even if the costs are minimal.
There was a display in the park's old Jackson Visitor Center on the decision to name the park Mt Rainier NP. I don't know if it made the jump to the new visitor's center. I remember the name "Tahoma" was considered. That's probably the name I'd favor, despite the arguments put forth by the individual in the article you cite.
How about Grant-Kohrs National Historic Site. No one knows what that is and they drive right on by. How about Cowboy National Historic Site. That would bring them in.
I've read before (maybe here) about Colorado National Monument needing a new name, and I agree, it took me awhile to check it out, I always assumed it had something to do with the river corridor in that area, but it doesn't at all. Also, I don't see how Grand Staircase-Escalante is redundant. I thought those were two distinct areas.
Right on, Richard. The Timbisha are a bit miffed that their homeland is called "Death Valley", so I can only imagine what the Cheyenne and Lakota think of Devil's Tower being named as it is. From what I have read, the name came about because a government explorer received a bad translation from the original Lakota. "Bear Lodge" became "Bad Tower" somehow...
As much as I complain about wasted tax dollars... it has been several years since the Cuyahog a Valley National Rec Area became Cuyahoga Valley National Park, and while all the signs have been edited, few if any were changed because of the name change. They all have a sticker covering the bottom of the sign with the new name, the wooden ones clearly have a new piece of wood where the old wording was. All things considered they were pretty responsible with the money on the sign changes. In many cases the edited signs look terrible, but you can't always be both frugal and pretty.