Soldiers of Yellowstone: The Role of the U.S. Army in the World’s First National Park
Abstract
By the 1860s, the United States’s colonization of the West was reaching its peak.
Not even the most challenging terrain could escape European-American exploration,
as was proven when groups began to enter the Yellowstone region in 1869. Within three
years, the spectacle and promise of the area prompted lawmakers to designate Yellowstone
as the world’s first National Park. That designation led to many questions, though;
what was a National Park? How should it be managed? Who would do the work of maintaining
it? After over a decade of uncertainty, the U.S. Cavalry was eventually given the
responsibility of keeping the Park in 1886, and would go on to hold that responsibility
until 1918. Throughout the periods of exploration, of Native conflicts, and of Army
management, the role of the military in Yellowstone’s history has left an indelible
mark on the people and the landscape of Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho. All through this
period, the motivation was the search for value; while the Army had initially sought
a strategic use for the landscape, their discoveries only invited profit-seeking ventures.
When Yellowstone proved to have greater economic value than strategic, the Army moved
away from its original mandate to defend and facilitate that economic usage.
Type
Honors thesisDepartment
HistorySubject
U.S. ArmyNational Parks
Yellowstone National Park
U.S. Cavalry
Environmental History
Native American History
Permalink
https://hdl.handle.net/10161/25027Citation
Murphy, Thomas (2022). Soldiers of Yellowstone: The Role of the U.S. Army in the World’s First National Park.
Honors thesis, Duke University. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/25027.Collections
More Info
Show full item record
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Rights for Collection: Undergraduate Honors Theses and Student papers
Works are deposited here by their authors, and represent their research and opinions, not that of Duke University. Some materials and descriptions may include offensive content. More info