Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
While, it's easy to understand why Independence Mall Nation Historic Park was created, there's always been debate about the creation of the mall actually having been necessary.
The commonwealth of PA built the mall. You’re right— terrible waste of historic buildings / streets that people didn’t think were historic enough. NPS built the part from 5th to 3rd Streets. Lots of demolition there too but the result is much nicer and seems appropriate whereas the mall is way too big with too much lost in building it.
I don’t think there are any parks that shouldn’t be national park. That opinion comes off as extremely pretentious and frankly, ignorant.
What is wrong with having protected areas where natural habitats are allowed to thrive? Are some areas more worthy than others because humans decided they’re prettier? Is that the litmus test?
It’s not some status symbol. There need to be way more national parks, not this ridiculous beauty pageant to decide which ones are the prettiest. Those who understand why national parks are national parks get it.
I don’t think there are any parks that shouldn’t be national park. That opinion comes off as extremely pretentious and frankly, ignorant.
What is wrong with having protected areas where natural habitats are allowed to thrive? Are some areas more worthy than others because humans decided they’re prettier? Is that the litmus test?
It’s not some status symbol. There need to be way more national parks, not this ridiculous beauty pageant to decide which ones are the prettiest. Those who understand why national parks are national parks get it.
Did you read the thread? Most are places that should be national monuments because there small and aren't natural wonders like Olympic National Park.
Did you read the thread? Most are places that should be national monuments because there small and aren't natural wonders like Olympic National Park.
Yep, I did. And the discussion devolved into irrelevant points about national monuments (the OP didn’t ask about national monuments, as clueless as he was, FYI) but there was quite a bit of shade thrown at Death Valley, Cuyahoga, the Indiana Dunes among others which absolutely do deserve national park status. Felt38’s comment #35 was particularly offensive.
Yep, I did. And the discussion devolved into irrelevant points about national monuments (the OP didn’t ask about national monuments, as clueless as he was, FYI) but there was quite a bit of shade thrown at Death Valley, Cuyahoga, the Indiana Dunes among others which absolutely do deserve national park status. Felt38’s comment #35 was particularly offensive.
Indiana Sand Dunes and monuments like Gateway Arch are good suggestions as they are fairly small and don't offer the kind of amenities much larger parks do. I honestly didn't know Cleveland had a National Park, and it's a beautiful area but also small and doesn't provide a home for rare species (per Wikipedia). Although overall, I do want more parks added with an emphasis on preservation. But with that said I don't see a reason why Cuyahoga Valley NP should be a NP.
Another perspective is that the NPS has to cover small monuments/parks that a city or state government could assume responsibility for and have more resources to make new parks like my biased opinion that the Atchafalaya Basin (and more) should be a national park. Okefenokee Swamp could be added as well.
Indiana Sand Dunes and monuments like Gateway Arch are good suggestions as they are fairly small and don't offer the kind of amenities much larger parks do. I honestly didn't know Cleveland had a National Park, and it's a beautiful area but also small and doesn't provide a home for rare species (per Wikipedia). Although overall, I do want more parks added with an emphasis on preservation. But with that said I don't see a reason why Cuyahoga Valley NP should be a NP.
Another perspective is that the NPS has to cover small monuments/parks that a city or state government could assume responsibility for and have more resources to make new parks like my biased opinion that the Atchafalaya Basin (and more) should be a national park. Okefenokee Swamp could be added as well.
Indiana Dunes is home to quite a few endemic and endangered species and habitats including oak savanna and wetlands and is well deserving of national park status. Cuyahoga as well. People think it’s just a political whim but these designations generally take years if not decades of work. Atchafalaya and Okefenokee also deserve national park status as you said.
Indiana Dunes is home to quite a few endemic and endangered species and habitats including oak savanna and wetlands and is well deserving of national park status. Cuyahoga as well. People think it’s just a political whim but these designations generally take years if not decades of work. Atchafalaya and Okefenokee also deserve national park status as you said.
I do not think that people are complaining about preserving land or protecting endangered species of plants and animals. But when you call something National Park you are putting it in the same category as Yellowstone, Grand Canyon and Yosemite National Parks.
In contrast, Indiana Dunes and Cuyahoga could easily be State Parks. Indeed, in my state there are hundreds of thousands of acres of similar land in state park lands just in the New York suburbs. But simply changing the name from State Park to National Park does not make Harriman State Park, Palisades Interstate Park, Fahnestock State Park, Hudson Highlands, Jones Beach State Park, Robert Moses State Park, Storm King, etc. any grander a place then they are now.
But again, I am all for saving as much land as possible, far more than we are doing now, this is just a debate about nomenclature.
I do not think that people are complaining about preserving land or protecting endangered species of plants and animals. But when you call something National Park you are putting it in the same category as Yellowstone, Grand Canyon and Yosemite National Parks.
In contrast, Indiana Dunes and Cuyahoga could easily be State Parks. Indeed, in my state there are hundreds of thousands of acres of state park land in the New York suburbs. But changing the name to National Park does not make Harriman State Park, Palisades Interstate Park, Fahnestock State Park, Hudson Highlands, Jones Beach State Park, Robert Moses State Park, Storm King, etc. any grander a place then they are now.
But I am all for saving as much land as possible, this is just a debate about naming.
There's also the fact that National Parks now have a major function as natural spaces that people travel from all over the world to visit. I'm sure that wasn't intended when the National Park system was founded, but that is kind of what it has morphed into. If something is being upgraded to a national park, it's done with the expectation that it will be flooded with people whose travel destination is the park itself.
I don't see the problem with pointing out that some parks just aren't destination worthy, especially from a long distance. This forum gets a lot of lurkers and threads like this are useful for allowing people to manage their expectations. Sure, if someone is visiting Chicago, I would recommend checking out Indiana Dunes as a side trip, but I wouldn't suggest basing a trip around Indiana Dunes like I would for other parks like Yosemite and the Grand Canyon.
I will not opine on which National Parks shouldn't be National Parks. However, I will offer this interesting comparison.
Yellowstone National Park (Wyoming, Montana, Idaho) vs. Gateway National Park (St. Louis)
GATEWAY:
Established 2018
Area: 91 acres
2019 visitors: 2.1 million
YELLOWSTONE:
Established 1872
Area: 2,220,000 acres
2019 visitors: 4 million
Actually, props for some decent visitor numbers in St. Louis!
Here's hoping that the $380 million renovation that was completed a couple of years back can help push those numbers even higher. It connected the park with Old Courthouse (which is also apart of the national park) via a cap over the interstate, completely turned the museum and visitor center underneath the Arch into a state of the art attraction, tore down the old eyesore of a parking garage on the north end of the park and replaced it with a natural amphitheater, etc. You can see some more of the changes here: https://www.travelandleisure.com/tra...-park-monument
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
