Advocates say this could give Utah “a stronger voice” in park operations. Critics worry the plan could open the door to state-level political interference, revenue-driven management, or even a slow erosion of the very principles that created the national park system in the first place.
Before this meeting happens, it’s worth remembering why America created national parks at all, why Congress placed them under federal, not state control, and what the law says about maintaining them as treasures held in trust for the entire American public.
A Brief History of a Radical American Idea
When Congress created Yellowstone National Park in 1872, it did something unprecedented in world history: it set aside land not for kings, nobles, or private entrepreneurs, but for “the benefit and enjoyment of the people.” All the people. Rich or poor. Local or distant. American or visiting traveler.
This radical democratic idea was driven by lived experience.
The American founders knew what it meant when land belonged to a monarch.
Under British rule, vast estates, forests, rivers, hunting grounds were controlled by the Crown or aristocrats. Common people were often excluded, fined, or imprisoned simply for crossing into lands they once used for food and freedom. The memory of privileged access to natural beauty, reserved only for those of status, stuck with early American thinkers.
The idea that a government could reserve extraordinary landscapes for the public good rather than elite pleasure was revolutionary.
The founders of the National Park System also knew what could happen without national protection.
In the mid-1800s, Niagara Falls was one of America’s most spectacular natural landmarks and yet nearly all of it was privatized. The shoreline was carved up by private landholders who built high walls, charged admission, erected cheap carnival attractions, ran high-wire acts over the gorge, and turned the area into a gaudy circus. Visitors complained that the commercial chaos ruined the natural majesty of the falls.
This exploitation deeply shaped national park visionaries thinking. When lawmakers considered the creation of the national park system, they explicitly referenced both European aristocratic models and the lesson of Niagara: if a natural wonder is left to private or local interests, the experience can be degraded, restricted, or lost entirely.
Why National Parks Are National
From Yellowstone onward, Congress created national parks to preserve America’s most extraordinary landscapes under national stewardship, not state or private control. Over time, courts have affirmed this arrangement.
Case Law Supporting Federal Management
Federal courts have consistently upheld the United States’ authority to create, manage, and regulate national parks and federal lands.
The Organic Act of 1916
The act that created the National Park Service directs the federal government:
“to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wildlife therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same…unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.”
The courts later described this mandate as a non-delegable federal responsibility.
Key Court Decisions Affirming National Control
-
Camfield v. United States (1897)
Upheld broad federal authority to prevent private or state interference with federal lands, even when regulating activities on adjacent non-federal property. -
Light v. United States (1911)
Confirmed that the federal government may regulate and restrict uses of federal lands regardless of state preferences. -
United States v. Grimaud (1911)
Held that Congress may delegate regulatory authority to federal agencies like the Department of Agriculture (later analogous to NPS) to manage federal lands. Importantly, the Court confirmed that federal agencies can issue binding regulations backed by criminal penalties—solidifying the legitimacy of federal land-management regulations generally. -
Kleppe v. New Mexico (1976)
The Supreme Court declared that Congress’ power over federal public lands is “without limitations,” giving federal agencies supremacy when conflicts arise with state policies or laws. -
National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA) v. Stanton (D.D.C. 1998)
A federal court held that the National Park Service must comply with the Organic Act’s conservation mandate and may not weaken protections to accommodate outside pressure. The ruling reinforced that park resources must be preserved unimpaired, and that NPS cannot delegate or dilute its statutory responsibilities.
Together, these decisions make clear:
Congress holds exclusive constitutional authority over national parks, and the National Park Service has a legal obligation to protect them according to national—not state—standards.
The Stakes of Utah’s Proposal
Utah has long had a complicated relationship with federal public lands. Some state leaders have pushed for greater state control, expanded development, or reduced federal regulation. Co-management, depending on form, could introduce:
-
Revenue pressure overriding preservation
-
State politics shaping visitor access
-
Increased commercial development
-
Conflicts over wildlife, water, and resource protection
-
A precedent other states might emulate
Once the door opens, it may be difficult to close.
And it could return us, step by step, to the mistakes of Niagara—or the exclusionary systems the founders rejected.
National Parks Belong to the Nation
America’s national parks are protected by law, shaped by history, and treasured by generations. They were created precisely to prevent short-term interests from compromising long-term national values.
They belong not to Utah, not to Washington, D.C., and not to any administration.
They belong to all of us and to those who come after us.
A Call to Action
If you believe that America’s national parks should remain under strong national protection free from politicized co-management experiments now is the time to speak up.
Contact your senators and representatives. Tell them you oppose any arrangement that weakens national stewardship of national parks. Tell them to honor the legacy of Yellowstone’s founders, the lessons of Niagara, and the constitutional principle that these lands belong to the entire American public.
Utah’s proposal may be only a rumor today. But what happens in that room between Interior and Utah officials could shape the future of America’s greatest treasures.
