The politics behind Mount Rainier National Park | Politics in Focus

What part did politics play in the creation of Mount Rainier National Park? To answer this question I used information from the book, "Mount Rainier Wonderland: An Administrative History of Mount Rainier National Park."

What part did politics play in the creation of Mount Rainier National Park? To answer this question I used information from the book, “Mount Rainier Wonderland: An Administrative History of Mount Rainier National Park.”

“Diverse interest groups successfully combined their efforts in the campaign for Mount Rainier National Park. These groups included scientific organizations and mountain clubs, university faculties and chambers of commerce, people of national stature and local newspaper editors.”

Key political and economic beliefs and interests also helped bring the park into existence. These aspects will be the focus of this week’s column.

It is an axiom that the longer a bill takes to attain passage through Congress, the more political opposition there will be. Passing Mount Rainier National Park into law required six difficult years in Congress from 1893 to1898 and, with each passing year, more qualifications and amendments were added before the final document was placed on the president’s desk. As originally drawn, the concept of the “worthless land” argument played a big part:

“The boundaries of the proposed national park have been so drawn as to exclude from its area all lands upon which coal, gold, or other valuable minerals are supposed to occur, and they conform to the purpose that the park shall include all features of peculiar scenic beauty without encroaching on the interests of miners or settlers.”

Because of this argument, the size of the park was reduced from 24 miles by 26 miles to its eventual size of approximately 18 miles by 18 miles.

The Northern Pacific Railroad also played a major, though covert, part in the park’s creation. Land grants given to NP within the park’s boundaries were cancelled. In return for this concession, NP would be able to acquire an equal amount of timberland elsewhere, that area being in Oregon. This was the tribute preservationists had to pay in order for the Northern Pacific to support the bill. This final wording of the law, though hotly denied by NP, demonstrates its influence.

The NP would also benefit from the creation of Mount Rainier National Park because millions of tourists who would visit it would ride on NP’s trains.

Additionally, the creation of a national park required an act of Congress, while the creation of a national forest only required, “a stroke of the president’s pen” to turn it into law. Very clearly, economic pragmatism separated national parks from national forests. National forests would be treated as crops while national parks would be viewed as wilderness preserves.

Mount Rainier National Park also created and protected a regional watershed, which especially benefitted the two major cities of Seattle and Tacoma. The within-two-hour proximity of Mount Rainier to these two cities would also benefit these cities economically as tourists traveled through them to visit the park.

Some Congressmen objected to the creation of national parks because, once created, they would become an economic burden to the federal government. A Texas representative thought the state of Washington ought to pay for the expense of the park. Adding pressure to this attitude was the powerful Speaker of the House, “Uncle Joe” Canon, who made a final demand: he said he would kill the bill unless no money was requested after passage, “to improve the place and make it possible to bring visitors to go there.” He exacted this promise from Seattle businessman John P. Hartman, influential in the bill’s support, before he gave his approval:  “I promise you, Sir, that if this Bill is passed I will not be here asking for money from the federal treasury to operate the place so long as you shall remain in Congress.”

With that pledge, Speaker Canon said, “I will take you at your word and let the measure go through, if otherwise it can travel the thorny road.”

To mollify angry settlers, Washington Congressman James Hamilton Lewis gave them the same rights as the Northern Pacific – to be able to settle elsewhere on federal lands “in lieu of their lands in the park.”

Finally, the name of the park was changed from “the politically sensitive but dull Washington National Park” to Mount Rainier National Park in a late final amendment.

President McKinley signed the bill into law on March 2,1899.

Mount Rainier National Park had followed the precedent set by Yellowstone National Park and firmly imbedded the two approaches to federal lands: preserves or national forests open to harvest and development. It also set the example for later parks like Crater Lake (1902), Wind Cave (1903) and Mesa Verde (1906).

Bills take a tortuous and time-consuming route to get through Congress. Compromises have to be made and various interests groups paid off. Perhaps the recent successful push to end pork barrel legislation is not such a good idea after all. Perhaps part of the reason for our gridlocked Congress stems from the end of these entitlements – the grease that lubricates the system?

 

More in Opinion

America’s monster

I’m not sure when it happened, but I recently realized I’ve stopped asking myself, “What are we going to do about mass shootings and gun violence in this country?” Instead, I now ask, “When is the carnage going to come to Enumclaw?”

Avoiding loss means more than gaining something else

Some studies have shown that losses are twice as psychologically powerful as gains. American history and our current political situation help reveal a great deal about the American/human psyche.

Congratulations, Jan Molinaro

In every election, one person must win and the other will lose. Now more than ever, it is important to show our children how to be gracious in victory and humble in defeat.

Don’t give into the pressure of driving drowsy

Eleven years ago, a drowsy-driving car wreck left me with injuries that still challenge me today.

Opening our minds can be a beautiful thing

As a leader of my church’s Sunday Adult Forum, I had a goal: to put a human face on Islam for the members of the congregation and community.

The definition of insanity

It is totally clear that the incumbent mayor lacks any ability to bring people together and get things done. She is a failure as mayor, making Black Diamond a laughing stock with her out of control behavior and outbursts at Council meetings.

Baxley and Young should have showed up at public forum

On Tuesday, October 17th, was the Black Diamond Maple Valley Chamber of Commerce Candidates Forum, where the Black Diamond candidates for Mayor and two City Council positions had the opportunity to talk with the citizens of Black Diamond, and to answer questions put to them by these citizens.

Issues to be addressed in Enumclaw elections

Who should I vote for in the Enumclaw City Council and mayoral races?

Enumclaw helped raise $3,500 for Special Olympics

The last couple of weekends the St. Barbara Knights of Columbus have been involved with our annual Tootsie Roll Program.

Court grapples with school funding

When the legal battle on education funding returned to the state Supreme Court Tuesday, the leader of Washington’s public school system was closely monitoring this installment of the McCleary drama from his office down the street.

Baxley is an important choice for Black Diamond mayor

Judy Baxley has been part of our local civics for years, and thank goodness because citizen involvement is critical to monitoring big developers.

Enumclaw chamber board supports Molinaro for mayor

In an election with significant consequences that will largely shape the future of our community, Enumclaw voters have a clear choice for mayor.