A park opinion U-turn in Utah

In the early 1960s, when Interior Secretary Stewart Udall proposed a new national park in Utah’s Canyonlands, local politicians stepped up to decry the federal government as a usurper of local land rights, a political play which has been rehashed nearly every time a park is proposed. When the National Park Service came to the University of Utah to show a promotional film about the region’s beauty, the subject was deemed too controversial for campus:

A color film on Utah’s southeastern canyonlands has touched off political charges of suppression of academic freedom. [ … ] The Governor said that the timing of the film’s premiere had political overtones. The film depicts the eroded redrock and cliff country bordering the Colorado River where establishment of the 310,000-acre Canyonlands National Park is being sought. [ … ] Senator Bennett and Governor Clyde vigorously oppose the Canyonlands park proposal on the ground that such a park would “lock up” such valuable Utah resources as oil, potash, and uranium.¹

The film was not shown, but, two years later, the park was established over the continued grumbling of some local leaders. Skip ahead nearly half a century later to today, and what do we have? Utah local communities which are so closely linked to the park that they are attempting to forcibly reopen it in the middle of the government shutdown:

San Juan County has become the fifth county in Utah to declare a state of emergency in response to the closure of National Park areas.

But the San Juan County Commission has also decided to storm National Park Service barricades, take control of some parks, and reopen them to the public.

“How do we let local businesses starve to death?” [the county fire marshal] asked.

Maybe fifty years from now, the residents of Millinocket will be desperately trying to reopen a shuttered Maine Woods National Park.