Trump administration purges negative signs from national parks
The Trump administration has ordered the removal of interpretive signs in U.S. national parks that discuss environmental threats like climate change and pollution. This effort, led by the Interior Department, aims to eliminate messaging perceived as negative. Critics argue it suppresses scientific information on public lands.
In the early months of the Trump presidency, the National Park Service faced directives to alter how it communicated environmental issues to visitors. According to reports, the administration initiated a review of interpretive signs across parks, targeting those that highlighted human impacts on nature. This purge extended to mentions of climate change, fossil fuel extraction, and historical mining pollution.
The process began in 2017, shortly after Donald Trump's inauguration. Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, appointed to oversee federal lands, instructed park officials to reassess signage for 'negative' content. For instance, at Zion National Park in Utah, a sign explaining how climate change affects the Virgin River's flow was removed. Similar actions occurred at the Grand Canyon, where exhibits on uranium mining's toxic legacy were toned down or eliminated.
Park rangers and environmental groups expressed concern over the changes. One anonymous ranger told reporters, 'We're being asked to hide the truth about what's happening to our parks.' The National Parks Conservation Association criticized the moves, stating in a release that 'this is an attempt to whitewash the science of climate change from America's treasured places.'
Background context reveals that such educational signs were installed under previous administrations, including Barack Obama's, to inform visitors about ecological challenges. The Trump-era review affected over 100 exhibits nationwide, with the Interior Department justifying it as promoting a more 'balanced' view of park history and resources.
Implications for public understanding are significant. By removing references to climate change—described in the sources as a key focus— the policy limits visitors' exposure to established science on global warming's effects, such as rising temperatures altering park ecosystems. While the administration framed this as avoiding partisan messaging, opponents see it as part of broader efforts to downplay environmental regulations.
No specific timeline for completion was provided, but the changes were largely implemented by late 2017. This event underscores tensions between resource management and scientific communication in federal parks.