Appendix E STATEMENT OF POLICY FOR APPLYING NAMES OF PERSONS TO NATURAL FEATURES AND GUIDELINES FOR MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS ON GEOGRAPHIC NAMES UNITED STATES STATEMENT OF POLICY FOR APPLYING NAMES OF PERSONS TO NATURAL FEATURES This statement of policy is for the guidance of the Board in deciding cases and for the guidance of organizations and individuals who propose personal names for natural features. The policy with reference to place names in Antarctica is stated elsewhere. It should be understood that the various factors involved in the policy outlined below are relative. Peaks which are major features in eastern United States would be secondary features in western United States and minor features in Alaska. Features which are prominent in the public mind by reason of accessability, outstanding natural beauty, or other special attribute should be placed in the category next higher than their magnitude alone would warrant. Features in areas where many features are unnamed should be considered in the category next lower than their magnitude alone would warrant. An existing name should not be replaced unless it is a duplicate or is inappropriate. Names of men who qualify for features of one order of magnitude may be applied to features of a lower order if such application is particularly appropriate.
With the following qualifications, the Board will consider applying the name of a deceased person to a natural feature of the first order of magnitude, such as a mountain range or group; a high, massive, or spectacular mountain, summit, peak, or ridge; a large river, a major island; or a prominent cape:
With the following qualifications, the Board will consider applying the name of a deceased person to a natural feature of the second-order of magnitude, such as a mountain other than that of the greatest size, a ridge, a small glacier, a valley, a medium-to-small island, a medium-sized river.
With the following qualifications, the Board will consider applying the name of a person, living or deceased, to a relatively small natural feature, such as a hill, watercourse, or cove:
GUIDELINES FOR GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES UNITED STATES NATIONAL PARK SERVICE GUIDELINES FOR MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS ON GEOGRAPHIC NAME PROPOSALS Supplementing United States Board on Geographic Names Guidelines of March 5, 1946 These guidelines are intended to supplement the United States Board on Geographic Names guidelines of March 5, 1946. The Board, cojointly with the Secretary of the Interior, formulates Federal Government principles, policies, and procedures related to both domestic and foreign geographic names and determines the choice, spelling and application of these names for official use. The Service guidelines consist essentially of two sets of criteria and some general principles designed to guide the National Park Service Committee on Geographic Names in formulating its recommendations to the United States Board on Geographic Names on proposals to name geographic features in the areas administered by the Service for individuals, including its former or deceased employees. The two sets of criteria are subdivided for convenience into Classifications A and B. The numbered criteria under Classification A closely relate to those correspondingly numbered under Classification B, differing principally in the higher degree of importance of those in Classification A.
A proposal will, as a general rule, be recommended by the Service Committee for adoption by the Board on Geographic Names if the individual qualifies under one or more of the following criteria:
If the individual docs not qualify under at least one of the criteria under Classification A, his name may receive further consideration if it meets two or more of the following requirements under classification B:
Several compelling reasons exist as to why proposals to name features in areas administered by the Service for its former or deceased employees should be critically evaluated. The simple fact that the unnamed geographic features yet available are becoming progressively more scarce is one good reason for this. Another is that a highly sensitive matter of propriety is involved in taking actions which tend to preempt the remaining unnamed features in areas the Service administers for its former or deceased employees at the exclusion of other individuals. It is also important to recognize that it is not an objective of the program on geographic names proposals to name features in the areas administered by the Service for every individual whose qualifications meet the criteria. Moreover, an individual may already be adequately memorialized in other ways and in other locations. For example, the great naturalist, John Muir, has probably been sufficiently memorialized, though not every area the Service administers with which John Muir was significantly associated contains a feature named for him. Some additional general principles which will prove helpful to the committee in its deliberations appear in the numbered sections below:
Observance of a five-year waiting period after the death of an individual before considering proposals to name geographic features for him resolves some of the inherent difficulties. In any event, the waiting period should extend beyond the emotion-charged interval which usually follows an untimely death. A minimum of five years generally allows sufficient time for a sober evaluation of the contribution the individual has made and of the other aspects relating to his overall worthiness for memorialization. 2. Use of Unnamed Category. Opportunities exist in some areas to promote an atmosphere of complete naturalness by retaining single natural features, or clusters of such features, in a nameless category. As an illustration, it has been found that the "Unnamed Wilderness Peaks" of the Alaskan Range rival Mount McKinley in visitor interest. The fact that the peaks are unnamed, and that they are so designated, contributes much to the feeling and atmosphere of wilderness associated with them. 3. Latitude in Naming Manmade Features. The jurisdiction of the Board on Geographic Names does not cover proposals for the naming of manmade features. Therefore, considerable latitude exists in the choice of names for features such as buildings, bridges, roads, and trails except for those officially named in legislation pertaining to them. The dedication of suitable memorial markers or plaques erected for features in this category can be made the occasion for appropriate ceremonies. Whether it be a proposal to name a manmade or a natural feature, a reasonable degree of consistency should prevail between the significance or magnitude of the feature on the one hand and the qualifications of the person for whom it would be named on the other. The Statement of Policy for Applying Names of Persons to Natural Features, issued on March 5, 1946, is used by the United States Board on Geographic Names in considering proposals. Approved: GEORGE B. HARTZOG, JR.,
admin_policies/policy1-appe.htm Last Updated: 05-Jun-2007 |