Topsy-Turvy Tiffany

The tangled thinking woven into Representative Tom Tiffany's soon to be reintroduced Apostle Islands National Park & Preserve bill

At a recent public meeting in Ashland, Wisconsin Representative Tom Tiffany announced plans to reintroduce a bill that would “elevate” the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore to the “Apostle Islands National Park & Preserve.” Touted by some as a simple name change, the truth (and the logic tangled up in the way the entire proposal has been handled thus far) is more an exercise in the topsy-turvy world of political double speak than a simple, straight-forward path to anything.

Take for instance just two sentences from the Ashland Daily Press which covered the announcement. 1) “Tiffany said he introduced the bill last session, then let it fade away to hear from constituents.” In most worlds, those two things would occur in reverse order - first hear from your consituents, figure out what is in their best interest, and then introduce a bill that reflects the desires and wishes of the people you have been elected to represent.

Instead, Representative Tiffany in the first go-around sent the finished bill and a pre-drafted letter of support he expected organizations to sign at the very same time. That completed bill and the form letter were, for many who received it, the first they had even heard of the proposal. He still has not held a single public hearing here in Bayfield, the gateway community to the islands or in Red Cliff. His staff will tell you, correctly, that he held a “Telephone Townhall” but that was on a variety of topics and touched only lightly on the park proposal.

Come here in person. Listen first, listen carefully, craft and introduce the bill later.

The political footsteps for that approach are already deeply etched in the island sands. When Senator Gaylord Nelson began the effort to protect this area as a National Lakeshore, he first held dozens of meetings with local leaders, organizers, and activists as well as listening sessions with the public. Only then did he introduce a bill for consideration in September of 1965. And, it worked. That bill would be signed by President Richard Nixon five years later on September 26, 1970.

Tom Tiffany would do well to follow in those hallowed footsteps, to undertake the Gaylord Nelson model of public service. And then, like Gaylord Nelson, take a walk barefoot in the island sands.

(Gaylord Nelson walking barefoot in the sands of Julian Bay on Stockton Island - WI Historical Society photo)

2) The second sentence I’d like to point out from the Ashland Daily Press reads “Despite local opposition, Tiffany plans to reintroduce the bill soon to make the lakeshore Wisconsin’s first national park.” First of all, the good people of Red Cliff might point out that Gaa-Miskwaabikaana (Frog Bay Tribal National Park), designated in 2012, already is Wisconsin’s first national park. Secondly, wouldn’t most politicians reintroduce a bill based on growing local support rather than “[d]espite local opposition”?

The Red Cliff Tribal Council, the City of Bayfield, the Bayfield County Board, and more local entities, individuals, and organizations came out against the first iteration of the proposal. (Read the letters of opposition in the essay linked below). Simply reintroducing the bill without changes, without deeper consultation, without added assurances, and “despite local opposition,” is not the tried and true way to win the support of our communities (and constituents). True leaders build support rather than carry on “despite” the opposition.

Hold on, the machinations get even more topsy-turvy.

On his website, Representative Tiffany touts the “extraordinary features of sandstone cliffs, historic lighthouses, and ice caves” here in the Apostles (despite the fact that the “ice caves” have not been officially opened by the National Park Service since 2015) and its “unique blend of natural beauty and cultural history.”

On that, he isn’t wrong.

Yet, at the same time, Representative Tiffany stands idly by watching DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) decimate and demoralize the very people whose job it is to protect that natural beauty, preserve that cultural history, and maintain those historic lighthouses. Seasonal hirings were first frozen (job offers already extended were retracted), then reinstated with certain parameters delaying a process that will likely lead to fewer seasonal workers and a later start in training. Probationary employees were fired, and then by court order reinstated, for now. And even “permanent” employees have been given a choice of a buyout, early retirement, or potentially being fired as part of the 30% cut facing the National Park Service through the “Reduction in Force” (RIF) initiative.

Travel and procurement credit cards were frozen at $1 spending limits curtailing the purchase of even simple supplies (such as, ironically, paint to put a fresh coat on the flagship Raspberry Island Lighthouse, one of those “historic lighthouses” trumpeted by Congressman Tiffany).

How can someone sing the praises of the natural beauty and cultural heritage of an area, qualities so striking that he himself believes they rise to the level of national park status, and at the same time allow the decimation of the professional, hard-working staff that has dedicated their professional lives to the protection of those very same qualities?

Without a full staff and an adequate budget, the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore is in danger of environmental degradation, litter, unsanitary bathroom conditions. Cultural resources could be closed, face potential vandalism, deterioration through lack of maintenance and general upkeep. Visitors will have fewer interactions with park rangers due to limited ranger programs and patrols. Lighthouses will be locked (not to mention unpainted). Search and rescue capabilities could be stretched thin. Wildlife could be endangered.

The very beauty and history that makes the Lakeshore worthy of being considered as a national park in the first place are being put at risk. And yet Representative Tiffany seems to be saying, yes, the Lakeshore is worthy of national park status but no, it is not worthy of full staffing and an adequate budget.

You cannot have it both ways.

And there’s more — Congressman Tiffany claims to have the support of hunters yet the bill would reduce the huntable acreage from nearly 42,000 acres now open on the mainland unit and many of the islands within the National Lakeshore to about 3,000 acres on just a single island (Sand Island) which would be designated a “Preserve” rather than a “national park.” The “Preserve” part of the bill is a serious red flag which is why this is not just a re-naming bill and why it is important to use the full name when discussing it: the Apostle Islands National Park & Preserve bill. (For more on the difference between a “National Park” and a “National Preserve” see my essay “What’s In a Name?” by clicking below).

Can the Lakeshore infrastructure handle a significant increase in visitation? Can the facilities of its gateway community of Bayfield handle it? Is there enough housing for the additional workers necessary? Will there be added funding for search and rescue or law enforcement? There is talk by Representative Tiffany and his staff of increased visitation but no talk of added budgets, personnel, or infrastructure, in fact they support the cutting of that staff by DOGE.

What about the Explore Act signed into law in late 2024? That act, according to Rep. Bruce Westerman, chairman of the House Committee on Natural Resources, is meant to “Support gateway communities by addressing housing shortages, parking, and outdated infrastructure.” Will Representative Tiffany, who supported the Explore Act, be sure that these issues are included in his proposal? A national park is not an island (even one made up of islands). This bill has far-reaching implications not just for the national lakeshore but for its surrounding communities as well.

These and a host of other unanswered questions are zig-zagging around the potential reintroduction of the bill like a flock of birds at sunset.

It is enough to make a person dizzy trying to follow the flight pattern of this kind of erratic thinking.

The one question that we must consider, however, as Representative Tiffany prepares to reintroduce his bill, is this: Should the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore become a national park and preserve?

The answer to that is, in my mind, maybe, maybe not. But what the islands undoubtedly deserve is a thoughtful, transparent, in-depth, inclusive and public process to make that decision. One without all the twists and turns of contradictory logic, the topsy-turvy rhetoric. All voices need to be heard and all the questions need to be answered. Then, and only then, can those of us who truly love this place feel like we can get straight to the heart of what is best for Bayfield and the Apostle Islands without standing on our heads just to figure it all out.

— Jeff Rennicke (all photography by the author unless otherwise noted)

To read the full statements of opposition from the Red Cliff Tribal Council and the Bayfield County Board, click below and read my essay “Phoning It In”

For background on the important differences between a “national park” and a “national preserve” see my essay “What’s In a Name?” by clicking below.

What are your thoughts on a national park for the Apostle Islands? Let me know below: