Home  /  Recent Bills  /  A bill to designate the mountain at the Devils Tower National Monument, Wyoming, as Devils Tower, and for other purposes.
SENATE · S 31 119 CONGRESS

A bill to designate the mountain at the Devils Tower National Monument, Wyoming, as Devils Tower, and for other purposes.

INTRODUCED
January 08, 2025
POLICY AREA
Public Lands and Natural Resources
STATUS
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
SOURCE
Congress.gov ↗

Bill Summary

This bill is a concise, single-purpose measure that formally designates the prominent geologic formation and a nearby associated area within Devils Tower National Monument, Wyoming, as “Devils Tower.” It provides two specific coordinate points—44°35'26"N, 104°42'55"W (the monolith itself) and 44°35'21"N, 104°41'48"W (an associated area within the monument)—and directs that any reference in federal law, maps, regulations, orders, or documents shall be deemed a reference to “Devils Tower.” In effect, the bill codifies in statute the name already widely used by the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Board on Geographic Names (BGN), and the public, thereby standardizing the nomenclature across all federal records going forward.

The operative mechanics are straightforward. Section 1(a) establishes the official name for the feature and a nearby area. Section 1(b) ensures consistency by requiring that all federal references—whether in laws, maps, or administrative materials—use “Devils Tower.” There are no other sections or policy provisions; the bill does not alter monument boundaries, land management authorities, access policies, climbing regulations, or sacred site protections. Nor does it authorize funding or require immediate reprinting of maps; rather, it ensures that the standardized name is used as materials are updated. The phrase “and for other purposes” in the short title is boilerplate and not reflected in any additional mandates in the text.

The practical effect is to lock in the long-standing federal usage of “Devils Tower,” a name familiar to tens of millions of visitors, climbers, and tourists, as well as the surrounding gateway communities whose tourism branding relies on it. The BGN historically disfavors apostrophes in possessive place names, and “Devils Tower” (without an apostrophe) reflects that convention. By elevating the name from administrative usage to statutory law, Congress would supersede or preempt any future administrative renaming efforts by the Department of the Interior or the BGN. Any change thereafter would require new legislation.

The bill inevitably touches a broader, longstanding cultural and historical debate. The formation is sacred to many Native American tribes, including the Lakota, Cheyenne, and others, who have traditional names such as “Mato Tipila” (often translated as Bear Lodge or Bear’s Lodge). Over the years, tribes and some local stakeholders have urged reconsideration of the “Devils Tower” name, sometimes advocating renaming the feature or the monument to reflect Indigenous heritage. These efforts have occasionally generated local, state, and national discussion, with economic branding, cultural sensitivity, and historical continuity all in the mix. By codifying “Devils Tower,” the bill would decisively maintain the status quo and signal that any shift to a tribal name or a dual-name solution would not proceed via federal administrative channels.

From an implementation standpoint, the bill is low-cost and administratively clean. Agencies would update the name in digital databases and printed materials as part of regular cycles. The coordinates ensure precision about what is being named, reducing ambiguity in mapping and land records. The statute’s clarity helps avoid piecemeal or conflicting references across agencies. There are no direct fiscal outlays or programmatic directives.

Politically, the bill aligns with the Wyoming delegation’s emphasis on preserving recognized local and historic place names that support the state’s outdoor recreation economy and identity. Supporters will portray it as a common-sense standardization and a safeguard against uncertain or politically contentious renaming processes. Critics will view it as foreclosing meaningful consultation outcomes with tribes and insulating a contested name from evolving norms around cultural recognition and reconciliation. The measure could thus be read both as a purely technical naming fix and as a symbolic cultural-positioning bill that places congressional weight behind the current name.

In sum, S. 31 is a narrow, definitional statute with minimal operational consequences but notable symbolic resonance. It codifies “Devils Tower” for the iconic monolith and a nearby area within the national monument, mandates consistent federal usage, and effectively removes administrative pathways for future renaming, thereby channeling any subsequent changes through Congress. It neither expands nor contracts federal land management authority and carries negligible costs, but it does stake out a clear position in a sensitive cultural conversation about place names, history, and tribal recognition.

Ask This Bill

Ask a specific question about this bill’s actual text — answers cite the section they come from.

Read the full analysis on Congress.gov →

Where Each Party Stands

Democrats

MIGHT SUPPORT
+Provides administrative clarity and consistency across federal records without changing monument management or access policies.
+Imposes negligible cost and workload on agencies; updates can be folded into routine map and database cycles.
+Avoids sudden administrative renaming that could confuse visitors and local businesses mid-season; predictability benefits stakeholders.
+Coordinates precisely define the covered features, minimizing ambiguity for mapping and legal references.
+Maintains current visitor familiarity, which can indirectly support local jobs and economic stability while broader naming conversations continue.
MIGHT OPPOSE
Locks in a name many tribes consider inaccurate or disrespectful, preempting administrative avenues for reconciliation-oriented renaming or dual naming.
Short-circuits the U.S. Board on Geographic Names and Interior-led consultation processes that Democrats often favor for inclusive decision-making.
Misses an opportunity for compromise solutions (e.g., dual naming that elevates Indigenous names alongside the established one).
Sets a precedent for Congress to legislate contested names, potentially politicizing what is typically an expert-driven, consultative process.
May strain relationships with tribal governments and undermine trust in future co-stewardship or sacred site management initiatives.

Republicans

MIGHT SUPPORT
+Protects the long-standing, widely recognized historical name, preventing administrative changes perceived as driven by political or cultural trends.
+Supports local tourism branding and business investments built around the Devils Tower name, minimizing confusion and preserving economic value.
+Asserts clear congressional authority over high-profile naming decisions, limiting bureaucratic discretion at Interior or the BGN.
+Delivers a low-cost, straightforward, and easily implemented standardization for federal records and maps.
+Reflects constituent sentiment in Wyoming and aligns with state-level preferences to maintain the established name.
+Reduces the risk of piecemeal or agency-by-agency divergence in naming that could create regulatory or navigational confusion.
MIGHT OPPOSE
Invites cultural controversy by freezing a contested name in statute, potentially galvanizing opposition from tribes and national advocacy groups.
Could be seen as federal micromanagement of a symbolic issue, detracting from GOP messaging on limiting federal involvement where not strictly necessary.
May complicate future collaborative efforts with tribes on access, seasonal closures, or sacred site protections if viewed as dismissive of cultural concerns.
Consumes legislative time on a symbolic matter when voters may prioritize economic, border, or national security issues.
If public sentiment evolves, requiring a new act of Congress to change the name could be seen as inflexible and politically costly.

History

Jan 08, 2025
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Jan 08, 2025
Introduced in Senate
SPONSOR
Sen. Lummis, Cynthia M. [R-WY]
Sen. Lummis, Cynthia M. [R-WY]
WY · R