Should the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area be redesignated as a national park?/NPS file

Are the benefits of "national park" status negated by what some see as unwelcome aspects of such a designation? That's the question revolving around efforts to see Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area renamed as a national park.

So concerned are some by the possible name change that they formed a nonprofit Delaware Water Gap Defense Fund to "preserve, protect, and promote responsible resource management and diversity of recreational opportunities within the DWGNRA. We are currently working to prevent the efforts of any group or organization to change the designation of the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area to that of a National Park and Preserve."

The Water Gap, as it's known, straddles the New Jersey-Pennsylvania border and has existed since September 1965. It is a nearly 70,000-acre unit of the National Park System, with park lands almost equally divided between the two states along and including the 40-mile-long Middle Delaware National Scenic and Recreational River, which is the boundary between the two states.

Proponents of the name change say it would raise the prominence of the site, bolster environmental protections, better preserve archaeological sites and local history, and provide an economic boost for surrounding communities. Opponents, though, fear a "national park" would close areas now open to hunting.

That spurred a campaign to have the Water Gap renamed as a "national park and preserve," which would allow thousands of acres to remain open to hunting.

But the Delaware Riverkeepers Network is concerned about negative impacts that would flow from greater recognition, and visitation, tied to the name change.

"It is our considered opinion that the water quality and ecosystem impacts of the development planned should national park status be achieved, compounded by development outside of the park boundaries that will additionally ensue, will compromise the high quality water and natural ecosystems of the River, to a degree not in keeping with the needs and goals of our region or the Special Protection Waters designation that we have worked so hard to secure and uphold for the non-tidal River," the group said in a letter [attached below] to those driving the name change.

"National Park status will significantly increase the number of visitors to the park in the near term and the long term – thereby increasing the environmental footprint and creating increasing rationale for additional infrastructure including parking lots, sewage treatment and other utility facilities, hotel housing, and other development," the letter continued. "The footprint and activities plan, by sheer virtue of their size and scope, will inflict irremediable harm and undermine any efforts of NPS to prioritize river protection over visitor experience."