National Park System: Establishing New Units

January 23, 2004 – April 6, 2022 RS20158

National Park System:
Establishing New Units
Updated April 6, 2022
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
RS20158

National Park System: Establishing New Units

Summary
The National Park System includes 423 diverse units administered by the National Park Service
(NPS) in the Department of the Interior. Units generally are added to the National Park System by
acts of Congress, although the President may proclaim national monuments for inclusion in the
system on land that is federally managed. An act of Congress creating a National Park System
unit may explain the unit’s purpose; set its boundaries; provide specific directions for land
acquisition, planning, uses, and operations; and authorize appropriations for acquisition and
development. Today, there are more than 20 different designations (i.e., titles) for units of the
National Park System, reflecting the diversity of the areas.
Before enacting a law to add a unit, Congress often first enacts a law requiring NPS to study an
area, typically to assess its national significance, suitability and feasibility, and management
options. When Congress directs NPS to prepare a study, the agency must assess whether an area
contains natural or cultural resources that are nationally significant, constitutes one of the most
important examples of a type of resource, and is a suitable and feasible addition to the park
system. The agency also is to consider certain other factors established in law (e.g., threats to
resources).
The addition of units to the National Park System sometimes has been controversial. Some
discourage adding units, asserting that the system is “mature” or “complete,” while others assert
that the system should evolve and grow to reflect current events, reinterpretations, and a changing
U.S. population. A related issue is how to properly maintain existing and new units given limited
fiscal and staffing resources. Differences exist on the relative importance of including areas
reflecting the nation’s natural, cultural, and social history. The adequacy of standards and
procedures for ensuring that the most outstanding areas are included in the park system also has
been debated.
It is generally regarded as difficult to meet the criteria and to secure congressional support and
funding for expanding the National Park System. Thus, another issue has been whether particular
resources are better protected outside the National Park System, and how to secure the best
alternative protection. Certain areas that receive technical or financial aid from NPS, but are
neither federally owned nor directly administered by NPS, include affiliated areas and national
heritage areas. Some programs give places honorary recognition. NPS also supports local and
state governments in protecting resources through grants for projects and technical assistance.
Congressional Research Service

National Park System: Establishing New Units

Overview of the System
The National Park System contains 423 units throughout the nation. They are administered by the
National Park Service (NPS) in the Department of the Interior (DOI). The system encompasses
approximately 85 million acres of land—81 million federally owned acres and 4 million acres of
private and other public land (e.g., state land) within NPS unit boundaries.1 Units range in size
from less than one acre to millions of acres. Nearly two-thirds of the total acreage is in Alaska.
In 1872, Congress designated Yellowstone as the world’s first national park. Subsequently, the
nation slowly developed a system of national parks. While some new areas were administered by
DOI, others were managed by different agencies. A 1916 law created NPS within DOI to protect
existing and future parks, monuments, and other areas.2 It charged NPS with promoting and
regulating the use of those areas both to conserve them and to provide for their enjoyment by the
public. A pair of 1933 executive orders furthered the development of a national system by
transferring dozens of sites to NPS from other agencies.3 The General Authorities Act of 1970
made explicit that all areas managed by NPS are part of a single system, and gave all units of the
system equal standing with regard to resource protection.4 Statutes authorizing particular units
sometimes provide additional management direction for those units.
Units of the National Park System generally are managed to preserve resources in their natural or
historical conditions for the benefit of future generations. Thus, hunting, mining, and other
consumptive resource uses generally are not allowed. However, in the laws creating units,
Congress sometimes has specified that some of those uses are allowed.
Today, there are more than 20 different designations (i.e., titles) for units of the National Park
System, reflecting the diversity of the areas.5 There is no statute that sets out and defines all the
designations, and Congress has discretion in choosing the type of designation for a unit being
established. While some designations are descriptive and possibly self-explanatory, such as
“battlefield,” others have been used in different ways. For instance, the designation “national
monument” has been given to a variety of areas, including natural reservations, historic military
forts, prehistoric ruins, fossil sites, and the Statue of Liberty. Some classifications (such as
“national park”) are unique to NPS, while others (such as “national recreation area”) also are used
by other land management agencies.
Of the 423 units within the National Park System, 63 are national parks, the so-called crown
jewels of the park system. Other commonly used titles include national historic sites (74),
national monuments (84), national historical parks (61), national memorials (31), national
recreation areas (18), and national preserves (19).6

1 Park acreage reports are available on the National Park Service (NPS) website at https://www.nps.gov/subjects/lwcf/
acreagereports.htm. Figures are current as of December 31, 2021. Of the 81.1 million acres of federally owned land in
the National Park System, NPS has full (“fee simple”) ownership of 80.0 million acres and manages another 0.4 million
acres in less-than-full ownership, for instance, through conservation easements or other partial interests. Other federal
agencies own the remaining 0.7 million acres. Of the 4.0 million acres of nonfederal land within the system, 2.6 million
acres are privately owned and 1.4 million acres are publicly owned (e.g., by state or local governments).
2 Act of August 25, 1916; 39 Stat. 535; 54 U.S.C. §§100101 et seq.
3 Executive Order 6166, June 10, 1933; and Executive Order 6228, July 28, 1933.
4 84 Stat. 825; 54 U.S.C. §100101(b).
5 For further discussion of the different types of park units, see CRS Report R41816, National Park System: What Do
the Different Park Titles Signify?, by Laura B. Comay.
6 The numbers of units with each type of designation are on the NPS website at https://www.nps.gov/aboutus/national-
Congressional Research Service

1

National Park System: Establishing New Units

Adding Units by Public Law and
Presidential Proclamation
National Park System units are created by acts of Congress, except that national monuments also
may be added by presidential proclamation. The Antiquities Act of 1906 authorizes the President
to create national monuments on land that is already federally owned or controlled, and that
contains historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, or other objects of historic or
scientific interest.7
An act of Congress creating a National Park System unit may explain the unit’s purpose; set its
boundaries; provide specific directions for land acquisition, planning, uses, and operations; and
authorize appropriations for acquisition and development. Bills to create units generally are
within the jurisdiction of the House Committee on Natural Resources and the Senate Committee
on Energy and Natural Resources, with appropriations typically contained in Interior,
Environment, and Related Agencies’ appropriations acts. Congress sometimes has enacted free-
standing legislation to add units to the National Park System. Congress also has authorized units
as part of omnibus public land laws containing dozens of measures related to lands and
recreation.8 Legislation creating a new unit often is preceded by legislation to authorize an NPS
study of the area, as described below.
Studying Units for Potential Addition to the System
Provisions of law govern Congress’s consideration of measures to create units of the National
Park System. In 1998, Congress amended existing law pertaining to creating NPS units to
standardize procedures, improve the information about potential additions, prioritize areas, focus
on outstanding areas, and ensure congressional support for area studies.9
Current law does not appear to explicitly require an NPS area study before Congress adds a unit
to the National Park System, but any such study requires “specific authorization of an Act of
Congress.”10 Before 1998, studies were prepared at the initiative of NPS, individual Members of
Congress, and other entities, as well as required by authorization and appropriations laws. The
1998 statutory change sought to eliminate these separate sources for initiating studies, on the
grounds that in some years funding was insufficient to cover all studies, and ongoing studies

park-system.htm.
7 54 U.S.C. §§320301 et seq. For more information, see CRS Report R41330, National Monuments and the Antiquities
Act, by Carol Hardy Vincent. Most monuments are managed by NPS, with many newer monuments managed by the
Bureau of Land Management or other agencies. Extensions or establishment of monuments in Wyoming require the
authorization of Congress (54 U.S.C. §320301(d)), and withdrawals in Alaska exceeding 5,000 acres are subject to
congressional approval (16 U.S.C. §3213).
8 For instance, P.L. 116-9, a public lands omnibus measure enacted in March 2019, authorized the establishment of
several new park units.
9 P.L. 105-391, §303; 54 U.S.C. §100507.
10 P.L. 105-391, §303; 54 U.S.C. §100507(b)(4). The law also directs the Secretary of the Interior to recommend
annually to Congress a list of areas for study for potential inclusion in the National Park System (54 U.S.C.
§100507(b)(1)). The list is to be submitted to the House Committee on Natural Resources and the Senate Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources at the beginning of each year, at the same time as the annual budget submission.
Additionally, NPS is to submit to Congress a list of areas previously studied that contain primarily historical resources
and a list of areas with natural resources (54 U.S.C. §100507(d)). In practice, the lists have not been submitted
regularly.
Congressional Research Service

2

National Park System: Establishing New Units

sometimes were not completed because funds were earmarked for other studies. However, NPS
has standing authority to take certain actions, provided that they cost less than $25,000. These
actions include preliminary activities, such as resource assessments of areas, “reconnaissance
surveys” of areas, and updates of previous studies.
After funds are available, NPS must complete a study of an area within three fiscal years.11 In
practice, studies have taken longer to prepare. This is due to the large number of studies
authorized by Congress and the extent of available resources.12 The length of time for completing
studies varies, based in part on the complexity of the study, such as the number of stakeholders
and whether any environmental issues may be involved.13 The cost of preparing a study also
depends on its complexity, with the average cost estimated at roughly $350,000.14 Studies must
include public involvement, with at least one public meeting held in the local area, and reasonable
efforts to notify affected state and local governments and landowners. Studies also must comply
with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which requires an assessment of the
potential impact of the proposed action on the human environment.15
Criteria for Studies
The NPS studies must consider certain factors established under law to promote the consistency
and professionalism of the studies.16 The law directs NPS to assess whether an area contains
natural or cultural resources that are nationally significant, whether it constitutes one of the most
important examples of a type of resource, and whether it is a suitable and feasible addition to the
system.
NPS has developed criteria for determining national significance, suitability, and feasibility. An
area will be regarded as nationally significant if it is an outstanding example of a resource;
exceptionally illustrates or interprets natural or cultural themes of our country’s heritage; provides
extraordinary opportunities for public enjoyment or scientific study; and contains a true, accurate,
and relatively unspoiled resource.17
In evaluating national significance, NPS considers natural and cultural areas, with cultural areas
evaluated under the process for national historic landmarks.18 Examples of nationally significant
natural areas might include a refuge that is critical for the survival of a species, a rare landform,
or an outstanding scenic area. Cultural areas might include districts, sites, structures, or objects of
exceptional quality in interpreting our nation’s heritage, such as sites with important associations
to the lives of nationally significant Americans, or sites that offer outstanding representations of
key themes in U.S. history.

11 54 U.S.C. §100507(c)(1).
12 For instance, as of January 2022, 23 authorized special resource studies had not yet been completed and transmitted
to Congress, according to NPS. These studies pertained to potential park units, national heritage areas, and other
designations. CRS communication with NPS Park Planning and Special Studies Division, January 11, 2022.
13 National Park Service, Budget Justifications and Performance Information, Fiscal Year 2022, p. Const-76.
14 CRS communication with NPS Office of Legislative and Congressional Affairs, January 12, 2022.
15 42 U.S.C. §4321. For more information on NEPA evaluations, see CRS Report RL33152, The National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA): Background and Implementation, by Linda Luther.
16 54 U.S.C. §100507.
17 National Park Service, Management Policies 2006, pp. 8-9, at https://www.nps.gov/subjects/policy/upload/
MP_2006.pdf.
18 36 C.F.R. Part 65.
Congressional Research Service

3

National Park System: Establishing New Units

NPS views an area as suitable if it portrays a natural or cultural resource insufficiently included in
the system, unless a similar area is managed for public use by another agency. An area is feasible
to add if it is large enough, configured so as to allow long-term protection and public use, and
affordable to manage. Other important issues in assessing the feasibility of adding an area to the
National Park System include ownership of the land and the cost of acquiring it, access, current
and potential land uses, threats to resources, public support, and staff or development
requirements. For instance, privately owned land that the owner is unwilling to sell, or that would
be expensive to acquire, might not be viewed as feasible. NPS studies of potential new areas also
must evaluate a variety of other factors, such as the rarity and integrity of the resources, the
socioeconomic effects of addition, and the interpretive and educational uses of the site, among
others.19 Studies also usually discuss boundary possibilities. NPS statistics show that since 2000,
about one in three to one in four area studies has concluded that an area is recommended for
inclusion.20
Other Management Options
In studying an area, NPS must consider whether protection by means other than NPS
management is appropriate.21 Options may include administration by other federal agencies, state
or local governments, Native American authorities, and the private sector. Consideration may be
given to technical or financial assistance; other designations, including wilderness, national trail,
or national historic landmark; and cooperative management between NPS and another agency.
NPS generally will not recommend adding an area to the National Park System if another
arrangement already provides, or could provide for, sufficient protection and public use. The
study must identify the best alternative(s) for protecting resources and allowing public enjoyment.
Each study sent to Congress must be accompanied by a letter from the Secretary of the Interior
that identifies the preferred management option for the area, to minimize uncertainty about NPS’s
position.22
Issues
The addition of units to the National Park System sometimes has been controversial. Some
discourage adding units, asserting that the system is “mature” or “complete,” while others assert
that the system should evolve and grow to reflect current events, new information, and
reinterpretations. A related issue is how to properly maintain existing and new units given limited
fiscal and staffing resources. In general, the Trump Administration did not support the creation of
new park units and the expansion of existing units, as it sought instead to focus funds on
maintaining current units.23 The Trump Administration supported some expansions on the
grounds that they could be accomplished for relatively little cost.24 Supporters of new units have

19 54 U.S.C. §100507(c)(4)(A).
20 CRS calculations based on data received from NPS Park Planning and Special Studies Division, January 11, 2022.
The estimate includes sites studied for potential addition as units of the National Park System but excludes studies of
areas for other types of designation, such as national heritage area or national historic trail designation.
21 54 U.S.C. §100507(c)(4)(B).
22 54 U.S.C. §100507(c)(6).
23 Among other examples, see NPS testimony on H.R. 139, H.R. 1487, H.R. 4139, H.R. 7098, S. 774, and S. 2340 in
the 116th Congress, at https://www.doi.gov/ocl/hearings/116.
24 Among other examples, see NPS testimony on H.R. 4840 and H.R. 5458 in the 116th Congress, at
https://www.doi.gov/ocl/hearings/116. President Trump also used his executive authority under the Antiquities Act to
Congressional Research Service

4

National Park System: Establishing New Units

charged that the older units are the most costly. To date, the Biden Administration has expressed
support for some bills to establish or expand national park units (e.g., on the grounds that the
proposed sites meet criteria for inclusion and that the additions are supported by local
stakeholders) and has expressed reservations about other proposals (e.g., on the grounds that NPS
has not studied the sites proposed for addition).25
Differences exist as to the relative importance of including areas reflecting U.S. natural, cultural,
and social history. The adequacy of standards and procedures for assuring that the most
outstanding areas are included in the system also has been debated. Critics contend that the
system has been weakened by including inappropriate areas, especially where authoritative
information was unavailable, incomplete, or disregarded in favor of political considerations.26
Others counter that there will always be disagreement over the worth of areas, and that recently
added areas have been held to the same high standards as older units.27 Some contend that the
system must evolve to represent a greater diversity of American heritage than was historically
reflected in the national parks.28 Another issue has been whether particular resources are better
protected outside the National Park System, and how to secure the best alternative protection.
Alternatives to Inclusion in the National
Park System
It is generally regarded as difficult to meet the criteria and to secure congressional support and
funding for expanding the National Park System. While there often is considerable interest in
establishing new units, usually no more than a handful of units are created in each Congress.
Many areas are preserved outside the National Park System. Some of these are protected with
recognition or assistance by NPS. Certain areas that receive technical or financial aid from NPS,
but are neither federally owned nor directly administered by NPS, have been classified by NPS as
affiliated areas.29 Affiliated areas are nationally significant but may not meet other criteria for
inclusion in the Park System. Under NPS policy, they are worthy of special NPS recognition or
assistance beyond existing programs, are managed in accordance with standards applicable to
park units, and are to receive sustained resource protection as detailed in an agreement between
NPS and the nonfederal manager of the area.30 In the past, the affiliated areas have included

add one new unit to the National Park System (Camp Nelson National Monument).
25 For example, see NPS testimony on H.R. 268, H.R. 1117, H.R. 4648, H.R. 4706, S. 270, S. 1284, S. 1317, and S.
1321 in the 117th Congress, at https://www.doi.gov/ocl/hearings/117.
26 For example, see Senator Tom Coburn, Parked! How Congress’ Misplaced Priorities Are Trashing Our National
Treasures, 2013, at http://www.landrights.org/ActionAlerts/Sen%20Coburn%20Report%20on%20NPS-Parked-
1029131a.pdf.
27 For example, see NPS hearing testimony on bills for recent additions to the National Park System, such as S. 1284,
117th Congress (Amache National Historic Site); S. 2889/H.R. 4895, 115th Congress (Medgar and Myrlie Evers Home
National Monument); S. 3176/H.R. 5979, 115th Congress (Mill Springs Battlefield National Monument); H.R. 664,
113th Congress (Harriet Tubman National Historical Park and Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad National
Historical Park); and S. 507, 113th Congress (Manhattan Project National Historical Park).
28 For example, see Center for American Progress, “Better Reflecting Our Country’s Growing Diversity: Progress Has
Been Made, But Work Remains for National Parks and Monuments,” February 19, 2014, at https://www.
americanprogress.org/article/better-reflecting-our-countrys-growing-diversity/.
29 For more information on NPS affiliated areas, see CRS In Focus IF11281, National Park Service Affiliated Areas: An
Overview, by Mark K. DeSantis.
30 NPS Management Policies 2006, Section 1.3.4, at https://www.nps.gov/subjects/policy/upload/MP_2006.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

5

National Park System: Establishing New Units

properties primarily recognized for cultural or commemorative worth. Affiliated areas have been
created by act of Congress and by designation of the Secretary of the Interior. Currently, there are
about two dozen affiliated areas.31
Congress has established national heritage areas containing land and properties that reflect the
history of their people.32 Typically, heritage areas consist mainly of private properties and may
include natural, scenic, historic, cultural, or recreation resources. Conservation, interpretation,
and other activities are handled by partnerships among federal, state, and local governments and
nonprofit organizations, and for each area Congress has recognized a “management entity” to
coordinate efforts. NPS supports these efforts through technical and financial assistance, and such
support is not intended to be permanent. Supporters of heritage areas have asserted that they
reduce pressure to add new, costly, and possibly inappropriate areas to the National Park System,
while opponents have feared that they could be used to extend federal control over nonfederal
land. Differences also have existed over whether to create a comprehensive heritage program
containing priorities and standards for establishing heritage areas.
Some programs give places honorary recognition. Cultural resources may be listed by NPS in the
National Register of Historic Places as meriting preservation and special consideration in
planning for federal or federally assisted projects.33 The Secretary of the Interior may designate
natural areas as national natural landmarks, and cultural areas as national historic landmarks.
National parks, monuments, and other areas of international worth may, at the request of the
United States, be recognized by the United Nations as world heritage sites or biosphere reserves.
Congress or the Secretary of the Interior may designate rivers as components of the National Wild
and Scenic Rivers System,34 and trails as part of the National Trails System.35
NPS also supports local and state governments in protecting resources. The agency may provide
grants for projects (including acquisition and development of recreational facilities) and technical
assistance (for conserving rivers, trails, natural areas, and cultural resources). In addition to this
range of NPS programs, resources are protected by the private sector, state and local
governments, and other federal agencies.

Author Information

Laura B. Comay

Specialist in Natural Resources Policy

31 Brief descriptions of most affiliated areas are included in Part 3 (Related Areas) of The National Parks: Index 2012-
2016, at https://www.nps.gov/aboutus/upload/NPIndex2012-2016.pdf.
32 For more information on heritage areas, see CRS Report RL33462, Heritage Areas: Background, Proposals, and
Current Issues, by Mark K. DeSantis.
33 For more information, see CRS Report R45800, The Federal Role in Historic Preservation: An Overview, by Mark
K. DeSantis.
34 For information on national wild and scenic rivers, including their designation and management, see CRS Report
R45890, Wild and Scenic Rivers: Designation, Management, and Funding, by Anne A. Riddle.
35 For information on national trails, see CRS Report R43868, The National Trails System: A Brief Overview, by Mark
K. DeSantis and Sandra L. Johnson.
Congressional Research Service

6

National Park System: Establishing New Units

Acknowledgments
This report was originally written by Carol Hardy Vincent, CRS Specialist in Natural Resources Policy.

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service
RS20158 · VERSION 23 · UPDATED
7

Download PDF

Download EPUB

Revision History

Apr. 6, 2022

HTML · PDF

Jul. 21, 2016

HTML · PDF

5% changed

Mar. 26, 2014

HTML · PDF

13% changed

Apr. 25, 2013