Opinion

Until someone in Major League Baseball recently came up with the knuckleheaded idea to build a stadium in Grand Teton National Park, I thought the worst national park proposal in Wyoming’s history was a 1991 plan to build a monorail in Yellowstone.

The Yellowstone monorail, the brainchild of former Wyoming U.S. Sen Malcolm Wallop, had people laughing at the thought of turning the first national park into Disney World.

But unlike the MLB’s weird Grand Teton proposal, which was universally panned, at least some monorail proponents had a reason behind the idea. The plan was born from frustration with the terrible condition of Yellowstone’s roads, which were causing traffic jams and a plethora of complaints from tourists.

As you’ve probably noticed, there is no Yellowstone monorail. That’s because while it would have unclogged the roads, it came at a big price: at the time fixing roads in the park cost an average of $1 million per mile, while building a monorail would cost anywhere between $15 million and $50 million per mile.

Hopefully, we successfully dodged ever breaking down the estimated cost to build a temporary baseball stadium in Grand Teton National Park. It was dropped like a hot potato by Major League Baseball and the Trump administration when people were either outraged or found it laughable.

When I first learned about the proposal — “Grand Teton National Ballpark? Visitors Call It a Field of Nightmares” — for a few seconds I thought I must be reading The Onion, America’s best satirical website.

But no, WyoFile’s account of what park visitors thought about the plan was the cold, hard and unvarnished truth.

Building Wyoming’s equivalent to the “Field of Dreams,” where two major league teams square off once a year in a permanent stadium built in the cornfields of Iowa, was immediately branded a horrible idea by, well, everyone.

“MLB, you should know that Grand Teton National Park, home to free ranging wildlife, including grizzly bears, bison, wolves, moose, cougars and elk, is not an appropriate or safe venue for your baseball fantasy,” said Joan Anzelmo, former superintendent of Colorado National Monument, said in a statement.

I expected that perfectly reasonable reaction from national park visitors. But what about baseball fans? Did they have any dreams of attending a game with the majestic mountains in the background?

What did Wyoming baseball fans think of the idea when it was first announced, and then squashed? 

To find out I went to the state’s most dedicated followers of baseball I know: the Wyoming Rotisserie Baseball League, the oldest fantasy baseball league in the state. Its first season was in 1989.

Full disclosure: I’m a proud member of the WRBL, having joined in 2002. I own the “Wolf Blitzers.” 

I asked our commissioner, Dan Neal of Casper, an Idaho native whose team is the “Russets,” if the league would like to make a statement. It did.

The league officially condemned the “dangerous idea” that it said should never have been explored. But after the Trump administration listened to the pitch from Rob Manfred, MLB commissioner, it decided to give life to the nutty notion by actually wasting time and money to send Interior Department officials to the park to check out three potential stadium sites.

“President Trump always resorts to chaos to distract people from the issues/matters he fears. This is simply another stir of that pot,” the WRBL stated. “They’re using the prospect of defiling one of the National Parks system’s great Nature parks to make people forget the Iran War, the Trump-Epstein files, and the rise in the cost of living.”

Neal said members of the league love both baseball and our national parks.

“I suspect a minimum of 95 percent of our players over the past years enjoyed the beauty of GTNP,” he said. “They’ve enjoyed it for many things: skiing; hunting; hiking; exploring; and seeing its abundant wildlife.”

Neal said Manfred and most MLB owners “have a thirst for money that their mere monopoly of the sport cannot slake.”

“They continue to strive to broaden the market across the world and in the country,” Neal said. “The president, I’m sure, will be willing to help them if they agree to pay a few million dollars in ‘campaign contributions.’”

The president, who I can see naming the ballpark the “Donald J. Trump Stadium” and covering it in tacky fake gold, bailed on the idea. I agree with Neal and my fellow WRBL owners, it was a smokescreen to try to hide everything else that was blowing up during Trump’s monumentally addled second term.

But another WRBL member, “Grinning Dogs” owner Russ Dahlgren of Cheyenne, had a different opinion of this project. He told me, with his tongue firmly planted in his cheek, that he’s not sure this is such a bad idea. 

“Sitting in a new stadium with a cold adult beverage in my hand, looking out over the green grass field with the Tetons in the background, I could think of worse places to be,” Dahlgreen said.

That much, I’ll concede, is true. Wherever humans get together to enjoy the thrill of watching tremendous athletes launch mammoth homers or turn perfect double plays, I’d rather be there than any other place on Earth. But in this case, not at the expense of disturbing one of the world’s wonders.

Dahlgreen added that he thinks all revenue from the new stadium should go to beautification projects in Washington, D.C.

“Sounds like a great deal for us ‘mericans that we can all get behind,” Dahlgren joked. “The stadium, of course, will be paid by private funds, hopefully money from Russian oligarchs.

“We could have Grand rule doubles, Teewinot triples, Mount Moran homers,” he added. “The Cascade Canyon power alley in left field, Leigh Canyon the right field power alley. The Rockchuck section would be the cheap seats.”

Upon learning that the Grand Teton plan is now dead, Neal reminded opponents to be vigilant. “It’s an idea that has its appeal to the greedy, so like a bad penny, we can expect to see it again,” he said. 

He’s right. And his advice should extend to any pathetic plan this administration tries to lead off first base. Wyoming, we’re the pitcher, and we need to be ready for the pickoff throw.

Veteran Wyoming journalist Kerry Drake started writing "The Drake's Take" for WyoFile weekly in 2013. He is a communication specialist for Better Wyoming.

Leave a comment

WyoFile's goal is to provide readers with information and ideas that foster constructive conversations about the issues and opportunities our communities face. One small piece of how we do that is by offering a space below each story for readers to share perspectives, experiences and insights. For this to work, we need your help.

What we're looking for: 

  • Your real name — first and last. 
  • Direct responses to the article. Tell us how your experience relates to the story.
  • The truth. Share factual information that adds context to the reporting.
  • Thoughtful answers to questions raised by the reporting or other commenters.
  • Tips that could advance our reporting on the topic.
  • No more than three comments per story, including replies. 

What we block from our comments section, when we see it:

  • Pseudonyms. WyoFile stands behind everything we publish, and we expect commenters to do the same by using their real name.
  • Comments that are not directly relevant to the article. 
  • Demonstrably false claims, what-about-isms, references to debunked lines of rhetoric, professional political talking points or links to sites trafficking in misinformation.
  • Personal attacks, profanity, discriminatory language or threats.
  • Arguments with other commenters.

Other important things to know: 

  • Appearing in WyoFile’s comments section is a privilege, not a right or entitlement. 
  • We’re a small team and our first priority is reporting. Depending on what’s going on, comments may be moderated 24 to 48 hours from when they’re submitted — or even later. If you comment in the evening or on the weekend, please be patient. We’ll get to it when we’re back in the office.
  • We’re not interested in managing squeaky wheels, and even if we wanted to, we don't have time to address every single commenter’s grievance. 
  • Try as we might, we will make mistakes. We’ll fail to catch aliases, mistakenly allow folks to exceed the comment limit and occasionally miss false statements. If that’s going to upset you, it’s probably best to just stick with our journalism and avoid the comments section.
  • We don’t mediate disputes between commenters. If you have concerns about another commenter, please don’t bring them to us.

The bottom line:

If you repeatedly push the boundaries, make unreasonable demands, get caught lying or generally cause trouble, we will stop approving your comments — maybe forever. Such moderation decisions are not negotiable or subject to explanation. If civil and constructive conversation is not your goal, then our comments section is not for you. 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *