Active Now

Malizz
Discussion » Questions » History » In the history of US National Parks, were there ever any bans on who could visit, especially by ethnicity? ~
Randy D

In the history of US National Parks, were there ever any bans on who could visit, especially by ethnicity? ~

Posted - July 22, 2020
Tags : None

Responses


  • 17614
    I don't remember ever hearing of it, but, that means little in the realm of the existence of the parks.
      July 23, 2020 3:26 AM MDT
    2

  • 53524

     

      What means little, that you don’t remember having heard of it, or that there may have been such a ban?
    ~

      July 23, 2020 6:22 AM MDT
    3

  • 17614
    that I don't remember
      July 23, 2020 7:13 PM MDT
    1

  • 53524

    Thank you for the clarification. 

    ~

      July 23, 2020 7:37 PM MDT
    0

  • 13277
    I haven't read anything on the issue, but from what I know about Theodore Roosevelt, I would doubt it.
      July 23, 2020 3:54 AM MDT
    2

  • 53524

     

      You may or may not have a good point there in regard to Theodore Roosevelt himself and his role in the origins of that initiative, but that’s why my question encompasses the entire history of the parks. Not all policy or policies necessarily follow a founder’s vision, especially with the passage of time, the societal changes that take place, and regionally-enacted elements (in the Jim Crow south, as an example).
    ~

      July 23, 2020 10:33 AM MDT
    1

  • 34432
    No, not the parks themselves.  But in the areas surrounding them, you had segregation.  So blacks could go to the national park but not the motel or the dinner etc.  So many just did not go and that as stuck around even today. This post was edited by my2cents at July 23, 2020 7:23 PM MDT
      July 23, 2020 10:47 AM MDT
    0

  • 7939
    Huh. I, too, considered how recently the parks were created and Teddy's stance on things and (incorrectly) surmised that the parks were unaffected by any kind of racial "bans."

    To that end, I cannot find any record of an actual ban, but the park system left segregation up to the locals to decide, which then meant parks to the north didn't segregate and parks to the south did. Of course, "ban" is a matter of semantics. As was often the case, the facilities Black people were allowed to use often paled in comparison to facilities for Whites. It could be said that Black people were often not permitted to use the nicer facilities at the parks, which would be a sort of ban. Furthermore, there was an issue of alleged supply and demand.

    In areas where there was reported "low demand" for Black facilities, none were built. I suspect that means Blacks who wanted to enter those parks were not permitted but the info I could find falls short of saying so. Given the times, that's probably the most logical conclusion... I don't think anyone would argue today that the Jim Crow laws were leveraged to intentionally keep Black people out of "White spaces" at times. I think it stands to reason that the powers in charge at the time would have no qualms about saying that Black people didn't want to use the park as a means to limit their access in an "Oh, we're happy to allow Blacks here but we don't have the funds to build facilities for them unless there's demand and there's no demand, so... sorry Black folks" sort of way.

    There's more info here for anyone interested: https://www.nationalparkstraveler.org/2019/08/how-national-park-service-grappled-segregation-during-20th-century

      July 23, 2020 8:00 PM MDT
    1