Chiricahua is the nation’s newest national park – what does that mean?

With a stroke of a pen, President Donald Trump has officially created the United States’ .

, in southeastern Arizona, was established as a to protect its towering rhyolite hoodoos – tall spires of rock – and diversity of wildlife. The mountainous landscape is commonly known as a “wonderland of rocks.”

An , signed by Trump, has now designated the 12,000-acre property a national park, the flagship label of the National Park Service system. It joins the , and as the fourth national park in Arizona.

As a who studies parks and the naming of places, I have seen that when a National Park Service property is redesignated as a national park, the new label doesn’t typically include much change for the site itself beyond signs and branding.

There’s not usually more money available to manage or protect the site. But the new title serves political purposes and could mean quite a lot to visitors, supporters and surrounding communities alike in the coming years.

How parks are designated

The National Park Service , with , such as “national battlefields,” “national lakeshores” and “national scenic trails.” Only carry the formal title or designation of “national park.”

All but one of these categories can be bestowed only by Congress. National monuments can be created by the president directly, under the provisions of the .

For example, the Antiquities Act has been at the center of a decade-long controversy over the size of , which President Barack Obama created to protect 1.3 million acres in Utah in December 2016. That same act allowed Trump to in 2017 and President Joe Biden to in 2021. In 2026, .

Why redesignations make a difference

My previous analysis of the of the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial in St. Louis to in 2018 found that it was not done to offer additional protection for this monument to the United States’ Western exploration and growth.

Rather, the move was meant to take advantage of the and thereby attract more tourists and tourism revenue to the local economy.

The effort to make it a national park was part of a , revitalize the park grounds and increase tourism. But the included no additional funding, resources or protections for the Gateway Arch.

Changing the designation contradicted the park service’s own declaration that the term “national park” should be used for an area that “ and encompasses large land or water areas to help provide adequate protection of the resources.”

During congressional hearings, the deputy director of the National Park Service, Robert Vogel, recommended the Gateway Arch not be labeled a national park but rather a national monument, because it “ in the range of resources the site protects and interprets to be called a national park.”

Gateway Arch National Park is now the smallest-area park in the U.S., at less than 200 acres, and is home to a – a courthouse where was heard, along with other civil rights cases.

However, it does not provide opportunities to view wildlife in its natural habitat, spectacular geologic features, diverse outdoor recreation opportunities or a sense of wilderness that .

The park’s website admits “” and describes the park as adjacent to the “.”

Although Chiricahua’s and archaeological evidence of more closely resembles what , it likely will receive some of the same that the Gateway Arch and other national parks redesignated during the first Trump administration have received.

Potential ‘new’ national parks on the horizon

In rare cases, a community, group or other organization proposes adding an area that is not currently managed by the National Park Service to the system, but that process .

It is more common to change the formal designation of a property already within the system, as has happened with this redesignation of Chiricahua.

Similarly, Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore became in 2019. That same year, White Sands National Monument in New Mexico became . And in 2020, New River Gorge National River in West Virginia became .

There are redesignation efforts underway seeking to make national parks in other locations as well, including the in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, in Wisconsin, and in the District of Columbia.

In my measure, it is simply a waiting game to see whether these National Park Service sites will also be redesignated to national parks.

What will actually change for Chiricahua?

Making Chiricahua a national park was a bipartisan effort – co-sponsored by Arizona U.S. Reps. Juan Ciscomani, a Republican, and Greg Stanton, a Democrat – that has received some opposition for several reasons.

The complaints have highlighted and overcrowding in what is considered a . Now that Chiricahua has been redesignated, the potential influx of new visitors in the coming years could affect the more that they currently appreciate.

However, the only real changes in these places would be in marketing – the signs, and merchandise sold in gift shops. But these changes have an important effect: The tagline of “new national park” to .

But the funding that Chiricahua receives from the federal government will not change, and the label of “national park” won’t actually protect this landscape any better than it already is under the stewardship of the National Park Service.

This article includes in an article about the potential redesignation of Ocmulgee Mounds on Dec. 8, 2025.