Our Parks: Flagged for Review pt.1
Part of my Our Parks Worth Fighting For series.
It’s been almost a year since I wrote about the little public sign popping up in national parks around the US, asking the public to report on any signs, monuments, literature, or audio video programs which were noncompliant with a new Executive Order, and a subsequent Secretarial Order from the Secretary of the Department of the Interior. National Park staffs were given a similar directive to photograph and submit any materials that fell within the scope of Secretarial Order 3431. (This links directly to the government website hosting the order.
Also, calls to action usually come somewhere in the middle, or the end, but that’s lame. Here’s a summary: The National Park Service is being directed by the order above to remove, or censor, a lot of their media. Erasing or hiding history. I’ll make that case below, and even provide a more open look at the evidence than a lot of journalistic articles are able to do, but that is what’s happening. So, what can we do?
Early Call to Action!
Parks signs are being removed. What you can actually do, is simple. (And you don’t have to do it for all 433 park service units, just your favorite park(s).)
1. Read the signs, ask for the Junior Rangers handbooks in the parks.
2. Take pictures of potentially controversial signs and preserve any park brochures, because they might disappear. Especially if they mention slavery, indigenous people, or gardens becoming overgrown.*
*(topics for a future article.)
3. Talk to the rangers about the media, talk to other people about the media. Let people know that it is seen and appreciated.
4. If there is an aspect of a sign that seems too negative, ask yourself why that is, look a little deeper into it, and talk about it. If something pops up in your kid’s Junior Ranger Book that you disagree with, have a conversation about it, take it as an opportunity to learn and grow together. Even if it’s something you still disagree with, then it becomes a conversation about existing in a world with different opinions.
5. If there is an absolute fact that you find is incorrect or needs updating, that’s totally ok to mention to rangers, they might even be able to explain why it is there, or why the sign hasn’t been updated. (Have you seen the NPS’s maintenance backlog?)
6. And most importantly, the next time you’re admiring a sign, watching a movie, or checking out a display in a National Park, know that the media presented is the product of of the hard work and dedication of rangers, historians, the local communities (which the park service has learned to increasingly involve.) And the media, while not always perfect, is vetted with reports, suggestions, reviews, and much more before it’s ever approved. So it’s removal and censorship should not be taken lightly. Especially for and with the slapdash reasons and methods provided in SO 3431. Basically, I’m saying the National Park service has been doing a good job with these signs, is improving with time and should be recognized for these efforts, and not edited by the political whims of a single frail administration.
And if you really just don’t like a sign: you’re tired of seeing a negative depiction of slavery every time you hike your favorite trail, you don’t need a 23rd reminder not to feed the wildlife, that civil war era quote insults your favorite military commander, etc. There’s a super simple option: ignore it.
But why all of these calls to action?
Secretarial Order 3431: Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History.*
*(More like preserving the thin skin of weak people with frail egos.) - I’m not pulling any punches in this one, if the demand you make of history is that it conforms to a narrativized fantasy, that bad things never happened, our ancestors were perfect angels, and any complications to legacy are smoothed over or hidden, then you are simply asking to live in a dangerously ignorant dreamland. Which is, frankly, the exact opposite of “sanity.”
But, why would I be this mean to a poor and fragile little soul like the Secretary of the Interior?
Because it’s an accurate assessment born out by his secretarial order, and it’s results. Read the order linked above, but here is the sign which was required to be posted in every National Park last year:
Sections blacked out because I haven’t checked the links, and didn’t want to implicate any specific park.
Rangers were given similar instructions in their respective parks. But the sign ask visitors to photograph and submit
1) any areas that need repair
2) any services that need improvement
3) any signs or information that are negative about either past or living Americans, or that fail to emphasize the beauty, grandeur, and abundance of landscapes or other natural features.
Signs that need repair, services that need improvement, all good. But let’s use a small amount of critical thinking and ask the obvious question: According to a Secretarial Order Titled: “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History” which of these 3 requests is the primary focus?
I’ll give you a hint: … it’s number #3
The results are in.
In early 2026, a cache reported to be an internal database was released through the Internet Archive. It contains hundreds of files purported to be the various National Park Media reported, and subsequently Flagged for Removal by the Department of the Interior. (The link takes you to the Internet Archive of these files.) Anyone with a computer can download the entire cache of files. You can also read a letter explaining what the files are and why they were uploaded on the internet posted by the people who uploaded it. (You do not have to download the files to read the explainer, just scroll down on the linked page.)
Reportedly, if you download the files, you’ll find a ton of folders containing signs, brochures, Junior Rangers Booklets, and other media which are flagged not just for review, but also censorship and removal. The documents included at the bottom of the cache even include instructions for Parks from Harpers Ferry Center on how to censor materials or ask them for help. Since it’s release, various news outlets have looked into the list, and it was the Washington Post which first verified it’s authenticity. (I am not a journalist, and I do not have connections, so I am reliant upon the work of reporters to do the hard work.)
The Database seems legit.
Even before the release of this database, signs were coming down. Since the release of the database, various news outlets have been reviewing the contents and reporting upon media in the files. Sometimes the media correlates with signs that have already been removed. Here are just a few examples: A sign in the Tetons about a historical figure who participated in a a massacre. The more widely publicized signs about slavery Liberty Center Philadelphia. And a sign about Climate Change in Acadia National Park. These are only a few, and it would be impossible to link to all the changes without creating a massive database of my own. But it extends even into the biggest, most popular, National Parks. (Sometimes in the stupidest of ways: see the signs removed form Big Bend in the last link.) ALL of the above examples match up to signs, brochures, or other media in the Database.
And I know this, because I’ve been looking at the database myself. Here’s what it looks like:
I’ve gone through the entire database. Just skimmed most of it. It’s a long list. Open a folder titled NPS, and inside there’s a folder called bird_teeth. Within that file is a long list of numbered folders, 109 - 1414, with lots of missing numbers in between, and below the folders are a couple of documents, including: a copy of the Secretarial Order linked above, an excel spreadsheet of every submitted document, with comments explaining why some were flagged and what should be done to some. (In the excel sheet, there are lots of files missing comments of this sort,) a guideline on how to implement SO 3431, and instructions on how to contact Harpers Ferry Center to change or alter media. Inside each numbered folder are files, usually pictures of signs, books, or brochures, sometimes word documents, like transcripts of audio or video media, and at least 1 video file which is just a 2 second clip of a book.
Some of these folders contain only one or two images of signs. Others contain longer lists. A few have highlighted areas of text, a few have a larger picture of a whole sign, and then a zoomed in photo of a specific paragraph. Some of the folders include word documents with text explaining what has been highlighted and why. Most are not that informative. Most are simply pictures, and without the Excel Spreadsheet, anyone seeing the photos would be left to infer what the photographer thought was: 1) damaged, 2) needed improvement, or 3) what is negative about Americans, or doesn’t well enough emphasize the abundance, grandeur, or beauty of landscapes and other natural features.
(It’s actually pretty easy to infer with most of them.)
There are several very distinct patterns to the files in this database of media which has been “flagged for removal.”
So: let’s discus what’s in the database,
With several massive disclaimers: (see the bottom of this article, putting them here bogs the whole thing down.)
I intend to do a series of blogs on the submitted media, and the SO 3431. But I want to start with a brief overview of what I noticed within the folders. And, frankly, it has very little to do with truth, or sanity. In fact, the thing which is truly disparaging to American’s past and present is the idea that we’re so fragile we can’t handle history, too dumb to understand that the people in the past we chronicle might not all be perfect angels or to frail to accept criticism of their heroes, and that the many, many, people who fought for our parks might have been fighting to do more than simply preserve the abundant grandiose majesty of natural features and landscapes.*
Looking into the files:
Not a whole lot of suggestions for repairs. Less than 1% of the files are pictures of damaged, worn down, or degraded signage.
Not many suggestions for improvements. There were even fewer files focused on, or suggesting improvements.
A whole lot of supposed insults to Americans and an apparent dearth of signage focusing on abundance, grandeur, and majesty when discussing nature or landscapes.
*(when I initially wrote about this, I predicted that focusing the ‘a, g, m’s of nature would be stupid, but the interpretation of this is so dumb as to actively be insulting to this American and anyone else who is literate.)
So, it really is almost entirely about part 3 in S.O. 3431.
S.0. 3431, even if not presented with the intent to provide a political bent to historical censorship, definitely at least enables the politicization of history in very specific ways.* The results bear that out. As I scanned through hundreds of folders, looking at hundreds more files, patterns emerged in the exact types of things people found ‘negative’ and how incredibly short-sighted it is to stand in nature and demand that we only focus on the A, G, and M.**
*(an example: the two national park units most flagged in these files are the Selma to Montgomery Trail, and Cane River Creole National Historic Park, for, unfortunately, obvious reasons. (if they aren’t obvious, you haven’t been paying attention.
**(I’m going to abbreviate Abundance, Grandeur, and Majesty from now on)
Those trends are readily apparent, and easy to infer. (some might be a stretch, but the most obvious are so blatant that only someone being purposefully obtuse could
Some parks and presentations got a lot more flack than others.
The attempt to erase history, and ignore science is readily apparent, and removing both from the parks seems to be the primary function of the S.O.
If all of these monuments, signs, and media are taken down, edited, or removed then we would gain nothing and loose a lot.
Anyone who would propose this level of censorship of history and science has active disdain for your intelligence and does not respect Americans as actual critically thinking people. Or, they are just ok with false narratives in favor of weakening the entire value of our parks as places to preserve and promote the most awesome and historically significant places in the US, and are actively robbing us of our most valuable National Treasures.
The last three might be more opinion than verifiable fact, (and my inferences about the reason some signs were targeted might be off, but most of this is verifiable. You can visit the database and check for yourself, (as of right now,) and read through other articles about it. Here are just a few: SF Gate, AP News, The Coalition To Protect America's National Parks (you can also search the topic yourself.)
The entire Secretarial Order is absurd, and censoring or removing the media in this database is an active attack on history, the environment, and the truth. Many of the topics targeted as “negative to Americans” are sadly predictable, but there are some incredibly amusing flags along the way. I’ll to do a more cogent breakdown of the categories perceived as negative to Americans or lacking A.G.M.
Today, I simply wanted to explain my sources, and what exactly it is I’m highlighting: allowing anyone interested to understand more about the the database of National Park Material which has been flagged for Removal and giving a peak into how it works. I’m also backing up my future articles on this topic with sources and the scroll above, so that anyone interested has some example of the material targeted, and the secretarial order itself.
And, let me be clear on my position. We shouldn’t go out of our way to ‘inappropriately disparage’ historical figures but hiding, or hiding from, aspects of who they were creates imaginary sock puppets who aren’t actually historical. And, ignoring massive parts of the formation of this country, simply because they are negative is akin to ignoring curves in the road. It might be an easier drive, but we’ll all soon be off track. When that ‘negative history’ is accurate documentation of the way some people were wronged, then the choice to censor it is an active choice to negatively disparage the victims in favor of preserving the fantasy image of a perfect history.
That doesn’t mean violent acts from the past should be glorified. It’s important to treat the past with respect and care. And, not every aspect of the history of a national park has to be available for all eyes to see. It should be age appropriate. And sure, there are times when the messaging, the signage, the movies, and the scripts need improvement.
But that improvement doesn’t come with a How To Censor guide. And authentic improvement is EXACTLY what the National Park Service has been learning and doing throughout its entire history. Not perfectly, but better through time. Many of the highlighted media are the direct result of that improvement. Time and expertise is utilized to make sure the stories presented in our national parks are better. Rangers study the history, work with local groups, talk to living people, and learn more about the ones from the past. They study the science and work with scientists to make certain the facts they present (along with the A,G, and M) about natural features are accurate and informative. They try to make certain that the right people are recognized and to spotlight both the important stories we already know, and some parts of history and science that might have eluded us in the past. And gasp* they sometimes suggest ways our actions affect the A, G, and M, of a park and how we can do better.*
*(A surprising number of flagged signs are simple reminders to pick up trash, or explanations of how street lights at night may lead sea turtles to nest in the wrong spot, or how safe boating helps save manatees (who are often hit by boats) It literally says in the excel spreadsheet that these were highlighted because they “mention a natural feature, but do not highlight abundance, grandeur, or majesty. I’m using literally correctly. )
So, what should we do?
The longer winded call to action.
(No way I’m going to write this in the same order as from above.)
Well, the submission period is over, so unfortunately I cant ask you to photograph and submit every sign in every national park as negative to Americans too afraid to learn.
So, what can we do? First, keep an eye on the signs, and let people know you’re watching. Obviously, you cant monitor every one of the 433 national park locations on your own. But you probably have a favorite park, or two, (or ten.) So check in with them, read the signs, ask for the Junior Rangers books. Second, pay attention to news stories about the parks and potential media removal. And join local efforts to push back when/if signs are removed wrongfully. It worked in Philadelphia, where an exhibit was removed, but then restored. And enough public pressure and attention might prevent the removal entirely. Second, check out the database provided below, it’s a list of materials flagged for removal.* Fourth, long term, I think it’s time we do a better job of championing the information in National Parks. Perhaps it’s not discussed enough, but every display you see in a visitor center, every sign along a trail, every script in a park movie playing from the projector is the product of the hard work and dedication of rangers, historians, the local communities (which the park service has learned to increasingly involve.) And the media, while not always perfect, is vetted and reported on, such that it’s removal and censorship should not be taken lightly. Especially for and with the slapdash reasons and methods provided in SO 3431. Basically, I’m saying the National Park service has been doing a good job with these signs, is improving with time and should be recognized for these efforts, and not edited by the political whims of a single frail administration.
*(Flagged for Removal is the title of the database of folders and files, which are set to be reviewed and censored by regional management in the national park service. It does not necessarily mean that all of the submitted signs, books, articles and scripts will be removed or censored. The list appears to have all media file which were reviewed but did not require changes removed. But it also seems like some of the remaining folders have not been assessed and are therefor still awaiting judgement on whether or not they conform to S.O. 3431.)
And finally, if you see material in a park that is uncomfortable: a reminder of a massacre, or an acknowledgement of the hardships of slavery, instead of taking offense or rushing to the defense of historical figures, sit with that discomfort, because history isn’t perfect, people are not and were not perfect, and highlighting these aspects of our past might be negative to the people who perpetuated the violence, but ignoring them is an insult to the victims. If you or your children find material that you disagree with, use it as a learning opportunity. If it doesn’t conform to your beliefs, it’s a great chance to talk about encountering different opinions. If it’s actually factually inaccurate, then maybe see a ranger.
“History is written by the victors.”
counterpoint: Good history is written by people who ignore those blowhards and document everything.
Those Hefty Disclaimers I mentioned:
1) While the contents of this file have been verified by other media outlets, the label “Flagged for Removal” is a title provided by the people who uploaded this document. It doesn’t necessarily mean that all of the signs, brochures, documents, and etc stored in this file are set to be removed from national parks.* A better title might be Flagged and under review. Plus **
*(Although, the fact that several of these signs have already been removed, is indicative of a trend.)
**(I’m hoping that the visibility this list has garnered will help to protect and preserve some of these signs from removal: preview for the call to action）
2) As mentioned, many of the files in this database have no highlights or explainers, leaving me to infer what is being flagged and why. As I am neither a mind reader, nor do I have to ability to track down the people* who submitted these files and ask them why they chose to submit these pieces, I have to either go with what is written on the Excel sheet, or I have to make by best guess.
*(there are at least a couple hundred people who have submitted files)
3) When given the opportunity to infer, considering how much I’m contemptuous of this entire Secretarial Order, I will probably be a little sarcastic. I will not personally identify anyone who submitted any of the media for review, (nor could I) but even if it is possible, please understand that they should not be judged or bothered based upon my inferences alone.
4) The database is publicly available on the internet archive as of the publication of this blog. I don’t know how long that will last. So, currently, anyone can check it out. That might change.