In the wake of the ongoing struggle to designate Route 66 as a National Historic Trail, a newspaper along the historic highway has floated an intriguing idea — make Route 66 a national park instead.
The editorial board of the Joplin Globe in Missouri published an editorial with that proposal a few days ago. Below are excerpts:
What if, instead, Congress authorized Route 66 National Park, a linear park to fit historian and author Michael Wallis’ characterization of Route 66 as a “linear village?”
What if select communities — one in each state, for example — were anchored with museums and visitor centers, each of which told a different chapter in the route’s story?
In Oklahoma, for example, the focus could be on Route 66 “as the path of a people in flight,” to use John Steinbeck’s words, the route of “refugees from dust and shrinking land, from the thunder of tractors and shrinking ownership, from the desert’s slow northward invasion, from the twisting winds that howl up out of Texas, from the floods that bring no richness to the land and steal what little richness is there … 66 is the mother road, the road of flight.”
In another state, the museum might focus on Route 66 as the highway of optimism and adventure, a symbol of a united country after World War II. This is the highway of Bobby Troup: “If you ever plan to motor west, travel my way, take the highway that is best. Get your kicks on Route 66.” […]
Route 66 is a big story, a national story, and we think National Park designation might just be the best way to tell it — and save it.
(The op-ed, incidentally, dovetails from this article in which I’m interviewed.)
It’s an intriguing idea, but not a new one. I, Wallis and officials from the National Park Service briefly discussed it during a phone conference earlier in the last decade. We concurred the easier step is the National Historic Trail designation, and that led to this op-ed in Route 66 News in 2012.
It’s also been documented that the idea of a Route 66 National Park was discussed in the early 2000s and even late 1990s by folks with the National Historic Route 66 Federation.
A big reason a Route 66 national park hasn’t been pursued is it inevitably would require the U.S. government to acquire some land — a tough sell for a mostly hands-off Congress and many landowners along the route. The National Historic Trail plan doesn’t require land acquisition except in very rare instances and thus would find an easier passage with lawmakers.
In short, the national park idea is a good one but should only be considered until after Route 66 attains National Historic Trail status. There’s a lot to be said about a compromise solution before proceeding with a more ambitious one.
(Image of Route 66 shield in California by Randy Heinitz via Flickr)
That’s actually not a bad idea.