Feds to rename derogatory Mount Rainier National Park lake

Editor’s note: Much thought went into printing the word “squaw” in this article. To read more about this process, read “A slur that’s fit for print?”, published in the April 20 edition.

The federal government is looking to rename a lake in Mount Rainier National Park because it is considered derogatory.

At issue is Squaw Lake, located on the park’s Wonderland Trail.

The federal Department of the Interior, headed by Secretary Deb Haaland, the first-ever Native American to hold a cabinet seat, announced the intended renaming of the lake — along with more than 660 other geographic features across the country with what many believe to be derogatory names — on Feb. 22.

“Words matter, particularly in our work to make our nation’s public lands and waters accessible and welcoming to people of all backgrounds. Consideration of these replacements is a big step forward in our efforts to remove derogatory terms whose expiration dates are long overdue,” Haaland said in a press release. “Throughout this process, broad engagement with Tribes, stakeholders and the general public will help us advance our goals of equity and inclusion.”

The only entity the Interior Department has charged with officially making these name changes is the U.S. Board of Geographic Names, meaning the Washington state Committee on Geographic Names is not at all involved in the decision process.

That hasn’t stopped the Committee from encouraging the national Board to make these name changes to 18 geographic features in the state — but their praise came peppered with some criticism.

First, the Committee said in an April 7 letter to the Interior Department that the federal public comment period is far too short — the Interior Department imposed a 60-day public comment period after its initial announcement, meaning the comment period closes April 25.

“We are confident that it was not the Secretary’s intent to prevent public participation in this process, but that is, effectively, what the current proposal will do,” the Committee wrote. “We must object to the process as currently proposed.”

The Committee also objected to the suggestions the U.S. Geological Survey (charged to do so by the Interior Department) came up with to replace the names of several of the targeted geographical features; the suggestion process was computerized, and came up with alternative names based on other nearby landmarks (and modified to match the appropriate feature).

For example, one suggestion for a Squaw Lake in Chelan County (there are four such lakes in Washington) was “White Lake” because there is a nearby White River; for the Squaw Islands in Kittitat, “Bonneville Island”; Squaw Creek in Stevens, “Franklin D. Roosevelt Creek”; and, finally, for Mount Rainier’s Squaw Lake, “Indian Henry’s Lake,” which, though not on the Interior Department’s list of places to be renamed, is also considered derogatory by some.

Indian Henry, or So-To-Lick, was given his alternative name by Henry Winsor, a pioneer mail carrier.

“… When Winsor met So-To-Lick he asked him his name. It was unpronounceable to Winsor prompting him to joke, ‘that’s no name – your name is Indian Henry,’ offering So-To-Lick his ‘Boston’ name,” the website Visit Rainier writes about the popular hiking grounds. So-To-Lick eventually went on to help some of the first people to summit Mount Rainier, including John Muir and Fay Fuller. His fame led to the naming of “Indian Henry’s Hunting Ground” in the national park.

According to local Mount Rainier expert Jeff Antonelis-Lapp, the lake was named for one of So-To-Lick’s (or Soo-Too-Lick) three wives; he could not recall the names of the wives at this time, and online research revealed no additional information.

“So here we have a lake named by white people after Indigenous women, and now in 2022 white-led committees may rename it based on the act of another white guy 150 years ago who renamed an adult Indigenous person after himself,” Seattle Times columnist Danny Westneat wrote in an April 13 piece. “That’s a lot of layers of appropriation — it’s practically an object lesson on how history really does come down to whoever gets to tell the story.”

The Committee on Geographic Names would like to see some more thought put into replacement names.

“Each of these derogatory placenames represents the life or lives of indigenous women, a population which is significantly under-represented in historical commemorations… We believe that a diligent effort must be made to identify the specific women or women’s activities for which these places were named, and to reflect that history in the renaming process. Replacing names referring to indigenous women with names such as “White,” “Columbia,” “Bonneville,” and “Franklin Delano Roosevelt,” as proposed in Interior’s draft replacement names list, is not an appropriate solution, ” the Committee continued in its letter. “We urge the Department of the Interior to communicate closely with states, tribes, community heritage groups, mapmakers, and other stakeholders to develop replacement names which reflect the true, deep histories of this country.”

Other suggested names for the mountain lake include “Devil’s Dream Creek” (related to the Devil’s Dream Camp),“Satulick Mountain”, “Iron Mountain”, and “Mount Ararat” (all Mount Rainier National Park peaks).

Public comment can be submitted online by going to regulations.gov, searching “DOI-2022-0001” in the Search bar, and clicking the “Comment” button on the “Reconciliation of Derogatory Geographic Names” notice.

Comments can also be mailed to: Reconciliation of Derogatory Geographic Names, MS-511, U.S. Geological Survey, 12201 Sunrise Valley Dr., Reston, VA 20192

For more public comment instructions, head to www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/02/23/2022-03748/reconciliation-of-derogatory-geographic-names.

If the Interior Department does end up renaming the lake, the state Commission of Geographical Names could still be involved.

“The state Committee acts on requests from members of the public to change a placename on a case-by-case basis, usually considered at two regular meetings per year,” said spokesperson Natalie Johnson. “All name changes have to be initiated by residents of the state, not members of the committee.”

Johnson added that it can take at least six months for the Committee to approve a request to change a name and send the recommendation to the state Board of Natural Resources, where it could take a couple more months to get officially approved.

ETYMOLOGY AND MODERN USAGE

There are several ways to look at the word “squaw”, Indian Country Today wrote in a 2017 piece.

Historically, the publication wrote, the word may have come from the Algonquin version of the word “esqua,” “squa”, or “skwa”, and refers to “the totality of being female”; others point to the Mohawk word “ojiskwa”, which Indian Country today noted “translates politely (sic) to vagina.”

Historical records of the use of the word point to it both being used respectfully and as a slur, but it appears the modern connotation appear to come from American Indian rights activist Suzan Shown Harjo, who claimed on the Oprah Winfrey Show in 1992 that it was, in fact, a reference to the vagina.

“That’ll give you an idea what the French and British fur-trappers were calling all Indian women, and I hope no one ever uses that term again,” she said.

Although Indian Country Today provided evidence that the word has both been used respectfully and derogatorily, it censored nearly all uses of the word in its article (using the phrase “s-word”).

A majority of public comments from 31 people Washingtonians, submitted to the state Committee on Geographic Names about the upcoming name changes before an April 7 meeting, showed positive support, though many, supporters and even some opponents of the name changes, indicated they want the Interior Department to communicate more with local tribes about possible replacement names.

“Have tribal communities, councils, Indigenous lead organizations been consulted to rename these locations? My hope is that this change request is not coming from a white person with only white organizations determining the names,” wrote Mary Big Bull-Lewis, member of the Colville Confederated Tribes and several other bands. “Have any Indigenous, Native American organization, council, board reached out to request this change? My fear is that this was provoked by non-Natives and is another act of white savior-ism.”

“I fully support renaming places that have derogatory names. I support places being renamed with the names Indigenous people used historically,” Heide Fernandex-Llamazares commented. “I believe that the tribes should be involved in these decisions.”

“I live near Neah Bay, and for decades, non-Indians have complained about the name of the Highschool sports team, Red Devils,” an anonymous comment reads. “Last year, it was put to a vote of the Makah Tribe, and keeping the name won by a landslide! I suggest letting the people alleged to be offended decide if changes should be made.”

It’s unclear how many total comments the state Committee or the Interior Department has received from Washington state residents on this issue at this time.

The Courier-Herald has reached out to the Interior Department about their reasoning for the 60-day public comment period and the computer-generated placename suggestions, as well as whether the agency is considering extending the comment period and/or starting discussions with local tribes to consider different replacement names.

Interior Department Deputy Press Secretary Giovanni Rocco said that most federal public comment periods are 30 days, and the 60 day window was already an extension.

And as for tribal communication: “The Department conducted three Tribal consultation sessions, and Tribes and the public have until April 25 to submit written comment. The Derogatory Geographic Names Task Force will prioritize these names in its review and provide a final recommendation for the Board of Geographic Names (BGN) to vote on when it convenes later this year,” he said. “If a Tribe, a member of the public, or another interested party believes the replacement name is not the most appropriate choice, they are welcome to propose that it be changed to a different name. Such proposals should be submitted to the BGN through the conventional process and the BGN’s usual review process will apply.”

It’s unclear if local tribes, including Puyallup and Muckleshoot, participated in these sessions.