| OCR Text |
Show 177 was illegal to change the namc.s44 However, the proposal was one of many events revealing the growing animosity between the federal government and ranchers who grazed livestock on public lands. The national park idea was embraced in Utah during the 191 Os and 1920s. However, in the 1960s, many residents of Southern Utah communities began to sec the parks as an intrusion on their rights rather than prized national recognition or a way to protect landscapes. Over six decades, the journalism associated with the parks evolved from a booster stance that had cheered Zion onto the national stage to more disinterested, restrained coverage that repeated different sides of the story with little analysis. This perspective and the evolving national park movement was reflected in reporting that increasingly emphasized the legal and political aspects. Newspapers were no longer champions of the parks, but instead became a venue for distributing the stories of conflict that surrounded them. The growing local opposition to national parks - or al least a more vocal opposition - added to politically heavy news coverage of the later parks. As congressional representatives tried to further the interests of their constituents, the national park idea spent more time in I louse and Senate hearings than it had in the past. With the epicenter of park battles moving to Washington, so too did the related journalism. By the time Interior Secretary Stewart Udall proposed establishing Canyonlands, The Salt Lake Tribune and Deseret News had news bureaus in the nation's capital. Perhaps the proximity of journalists to Capitol I Iill debates added to the growing political content of national park coverage. Examination of the legislative record also shows increased debate and deliberation associated with the later parks. }-4 4 Deseret News, "Boulder to Stay Boulder," February 27, 1969, 86. |
