2 Comments

national parks are such a mixed bag. while on the one hand they provide access to spaces with a container for vistors to still have modern comforts and guidances, they also are a reflection of the problem with wilderness and the museumification of nature in the United States in particular. I can understand the confusion of what to advocate for when parts of it seem beneficial and parts of it seem off the mark or slightly post-apocalyptic like degrading portapotties and roads for tourists to tour through 'looking' at nature that is destroyed elsewhere. So many national parks have problematic pasts, especially in their removal of indigenous peoples with the idea of the best interest of 'nature' in mind, but its tricky to suss out what is appropriate now that were here, in the situation we're currently in. Preserved land was a good forethought, but if it meant the abuse of land outside of those fenced boundaries than it makes me question the deep divide between the two.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks for reading and commenting, Kelly. You capture a lot of the ambivalence that is wrapped up in the DNA of the parks and associated protected lands. I often share your sense that it's tricky to determine what's appropriate now, after going down certain paths for so long. Reset buttons don't quite work!

Expand full comment