After filing Freedom of Information Act requests with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the National Park Service (NPS) the Alaska Watchman received 68 pages of internal emails and texts from the NPS and 14 pages from the FHWA. These communications provide insight into exactly what transpired in the lead up – and aftermath – to construction workers in Denali National Park being told in May that they could no longer fly the American flag when driving through the park.

The Watchman broke this story, when we were contacted by a construction crewman, who ask to remain anonymous because he is actively working with Granite Construction – the company building a massive bridge for the Federal Highway Administration, about 43 miles down Denali National Park Road.

As we first reported on May 23, the worker asserted that the flag ban on vehicles in the park originated with Denali Park Superintendent Brooke Merrell, who he claimed contacted the on-site Federal Highway Administration official overseeing the bridge project. The crewman claimed it was Merrell who told the Federal Highways official that there had been “complaints” about the 3′ X 5′ American flags affixed to construction trucks, and that she said they detracted from visitors’ “park experience” and should be removed.

After our initial story was published, the National Park Service publicly denied having anything to do with the removal of American flags. The 82 pages of email exchanges and text messages paint a different picture, and show that the NPS was, and remains, fully supportive of the ban on flags flying from construction worker trucks driving along the park road.

We also discovered that Superintendent Merrell was not the initial park employee to push for the flag removal, but she wholeheartedly defended it, and worked behind the scenes to justify this stance.

The bridge construction project involves three key parties – the National Park Service, the Federal Highway Administration (which oversees the project) and the construction contractors who are building the bridge (in this case, Granite Construction).

MAY 16: Park employee raises concerns about U.S. flags

Documents we obtained through our FOIA request reveal that, on May 16, an NPS employee working under Merrell sent an email to the FHWA Project Engineer who is overseeing the bridge construction. The email claimed that a park visitor had complained about “a pick-up truck (assumed to be Granite) driving on the park road yesterday, west of Tek, with a ‘very large and obnoxious American flag attached to the vehicle and flapping in the wind.’” The email conveyed that NPS wanted to make park traffic as “as discreet as possible for wildlife and visitor experience,” and asked, “is there an appropriate way to request that Granite take it down?”

The NPS employee also complained about contractor traffic on the park road, and asked if construction workers could carpool to reduce traffic. The email ended with a clarification that the NPS employee was “not speaking on behalf of park managers. I’m just trying to help us follow through on the commitments we made to the public during the planning and compliance process.”

On May 16, the FHWA Project Engineer overseeing the bridge construction responded to the NPS email, thanking the NPS employee for the “observations,” and saying, “I figured the flag would get some comments and have mentioned it to Granite.”

In a lengthy email detailing the flag controversy, the FHWA Project Engineer recounted to his superiors that he went to the bridge project site and spoke with his primary contact at Granite. He relayed the complaint from NPS to Granite and noted that the Granite supervisor “said he would tell the employee to take [the flag] down.”

The FHWA official recounted that, a few minutes later, a crewman on the project approached him, to say that the flag had been removed. This crewman then asked if American flags could still be flown while the trucks were confined within the limited construction site area – but not out on Denali Park Road. The project engineer said he “didn’t have a problem with that.”

May 17: Park officials scramble to answer Sen. Sullivan’s questions

After speaking with the FHWA official, the crewman contacted U.S. Sen. Dan Sullivan’s office to inform him that construction workers were no longer allowed to fly 3″ X 5″ U.S. flags from their trucks on the park road.

On May 17, a concerned Sullivan staffer emailed Denali National Park Service Public Affairs Officer Peter Christian, seeking more information. Christian quickly forwarded this email to Park Superintendent Merrell, asking for details so he could respond to Sullivan’s office. At that point, emails and texts show Merrell and other NPS officials collaborating to prepare a response.

That morning, Merrell wrote in a group chat to her colleagues, asking whether the park has any official “restrictions on contractor vehicles” when they are on the park road. She said she was responding to a complaint relayed to Sullivan’s office that a park official had “asked a contractor (I’m guessing a sub) to not fly a large flag on his truck.”

One of Merrell’s colleges texted her back, asking whether the park employee who told the FHWA official about the flag complaint was authorized to do so. Merrell indicated the NPS staffer was, saying there are two NPS staffers who “tag team a bit” in communicating with the FHWA on the bridge project. Merrell then added that Granite construction vehicles technically fall under “administrative traffic, and we would not allow NPS traffic to have a distracting large flag on the restricted portion of the road for reasons [redacted] told [redacted] … but looking for park policy that upholds that.”

May 20: Park officials respond to Sullivan’s questions

On May 20, while finetuning a statement for Sullivan, Merrell sent a draft response to Christian and another staffer.

“While I did not directly know about this instance, it is true that on the restricted portion of the Denali Park Road we manage to minimize visual disturbance on the landscape to allow for visitor experience,” she wrote. “The park manages to achieve standards that include how much traffic any given vehicle encounters, where vehicles stop within key iconic viewsheds, and vehicle impacts to the wildlife that are a major draw to visitors.” Her draft added that the park works “to ensure that vehicles on this portion of the road are neutral colors that blend with the landscape.”

She then explained, that for park visitors, “a flag becomes a visual impact to the natural landscape and a potential deterrent to roadside wildlife viewing. The request to the driver of this truck was in response to a complaint by a visitor.” Merrell continued: “Contractor traffic is considered administrative traffic along the restricted portion of the road, and the contractor has been amenable to conforming to NPS administrative traffic practices.” She noted that, “the visual and potential wildlife impacts by an administrative vehicle is counter to the successful management plans and goals of the restricted road.”

Merrell’s colleagues advised her to run her explanation by FHWA and Granite before communicating with Sullivan.

Christian later followed up with Merrell, asking whether she wanted to speak with Sullivan’s office directly. He also wanted to know whether Granite was enforcing the flag removal at the “behest of the park or because of the Vehicle Management Plan,” – the park’s policy document regarding vehicle restrictions.

Merrell admitted there was no formal contract between Granite and the park regarding flag flying, and told Christian she would follow up with Sullivan’s office directly.

“I think both NPS and Granite just did not foresee this particular instance to get it in the contract,” she wrote.

Later that afternoon, Merrell emailed Christian and another NPS staffer, saying she had spoken with Sullivan’s office and, was going to give Granite construction workers more “context” about flag flying during the park’s visitor season.

That evening, the crewman who was told he could not fly a flag from his truck contacted the Watchman, explaining that workers flew flags without incident before the park prepared to opened for tour buses on May 20. This is the same man who had called Sullivan’s office a few days prior.

May 21: Merrell lables Watchman ‘fringe media,’ says she won’t respond to questions

On May 21, around noon, the Watchman sent Denali National Park several questions seeking clarification on the flag controversy. After failing to hear back, the Watchman sent a follow-up request on May 22.

Park spokesman Christian, finally contacted the Watchman on May 22, saying he would not be able to give us a response by our May 22, 2 p.m. deadline.

That same day, Christian emailed Merrell about the Watchman inquiry, and asked her to “start working on the answers, as you would like this to read in a local newspaper.” He added that, “we will probably need to vet this up the chain.”

Email exchanges that evening show NPS coordinating with FHWA to “to circle up to collectively discuss and jointly formulate a response.”

The next morning, an NPS staffer (presumably Christian) asked Merrell for an update on how to proceed with the Watchman’s questions. He was planning to travel, and wondered if he should stick around.

“No, go. We’re still trying to figure out how to deal with this…fringe media request,” Merrell responded. “Right now, the direction I’m going is to not engage with this particular group but to prepare a short statement explaining that we are not anti-flag and talking about how we manage administrative traffic on the restricted portion of the road to minimize visual impacts to visitors – for in case more mainstream media picks it up.”

May 23: Watchman story published

After failing to receive any updates from the NPS, the Watchman published our initial article on May 23, around noon. We quoted the crewman, who claimed Merrell was behind the flag removal, and noted that the park had not responded to our questions. The story was quickly picked up by national media.

May 24: Park launches damage control efforts

On May 24, Merrell and various park officials began dealing with a flood of visitor and email inquiries regarding the flag controversy.

Merrell sent talking points to her staff, instructing them to tell visitors, “there are no restrictions on flags in the park,” but that the park does manage vehicles in the restricted area of Denali Park Road (mile 15-92) to “minimize visual disturbances” and to ensure vehicles are “as unobtrusive as possible.”

Sen. Sullivan then published a letter on May 24, which he had sent to the National Park Service D.C. office seeking a full account of the flag controversy. Sullivan’s letter expressed outrage that, on the lead up to Memorial Day weekend, a national park would ban flying a U.S. flag on public lands. This letter made national news.

That afternoon, Merrell sent an email to “all employees” noting the Watchman article, and saying it is “being interpreted as that the park has banned flags.” She said she has a “heavy heart” knowing that there are some people “who feel that I and the NPS have disrespected the flag by how we manage the Park Road.”

May 25: Protesters plan convoy as park struggles with messaging

As news about the flag controversy spread, a group of Alaskans announced they planned to drive in a convoy from Fairbanks to the Denali Park entrance on May 26 to peacefully protest the park’s approach to flag flying.

An internal email from NPS noted that the park was “preparing for the convoys by moving into an incident command team and bringing in additional law enforcement for a low-visibility presence.”

In response to the convoy preparation, Merrell received an email from someone who had access to her staff emails, telling her she’s doing a great job, and adding, “F**k these MAGA idiots.” Merrell replied, “Thanks, made my day.”

Throughout the day on May 25, Merrell sent messages to various NPS staffers reiterating the claim that “no NPS employee instructed Granite leadership or employees to remove flags from vehicles.” Rather, “NPS advised the FHWA of complaints about the flags. FHWA advised our manager, and our manager asked the workers to remove the flags.”

She added that she thought Granite might have a company policy that may “cover what can be displayed on company vehicles.” It turned out, however, that Granite’s policy does not mention flag flying at all.

That afternoon Merrell sent a text message to a colleague, suggesting that she was resigned to the fact that the construction truck flags might be approved by her NPS higher ups. She said the National Park Service Director would be calling Sen. Sullivan shortly. “I expect he will say the contractor can fly the flag. (just FYI – that’s fine, certainly not a mountain to die on).”

May 26: Merrell’s internal email contradicts NPS claim that it wasn’t involved in flag ban

The next morning, May 26, Merrell emailed Christian with answers to questions sent from the NPS Washington D.C. support office, which wanted a full account of how the flag controversy unfolded.

Merrell’s email explained that the park has a “system where we forward complaints related to the project to the [Federal Highway Administration]. That person conveys the messages appropriately applying the requirements of the contract.” She added that “NPS does not have authority unless we go through a contracting process.” She also said Granite told her that they were not “ordered” to have their employees remove the flags, and were “taking full responsibility for the request to take down the flags.”

When asked by the D.C. office about the identity of the NPS employee who first raised the visitor’s flag complaint with the FHWA official, Merrell identified the person (whose name was redacted from the FOIA document). Merrell said this staffer was “assigned to the project and frequently interact with FHWA.”

Merrell added that the complaint relayed to FHWA stated there was “a pick-up truck (assumed to be Granite) driving on the park road yesterday, west of Tek, with a ‘very large and obnoxious American flag attached to the vehicle and flapping in the wind.’”

As the story spread through national news, the NPS office in Washington D.C. posted a one-paragraph statement on May 26, asserting, “Reports that a National Park Service (NPS) official ordered the removal of an American flag from a Denali bridge construction worker’s vehicle at Denali National Park are false. At no time did an NPS official seek to ban the American flag from the project site or associated vehicles. The NPS neither administers the bridge project contract, nor has the authority to enforce terms or policies related to the contract or contractors performing the work.”

This statement flatly contradicts Merrell’s assertion that the NPS has authority to enforce its traffic policies with regard to contractor vehicles on the park road. It also failed to acknowledge that the park instigated the effort to have the flags removed from trucks on the road.

May 26: NPS spokesman doubles down on claim that park never sought to ‘limit the flag’

May 26 was also the day the Anchorage Daily News published a story about the flag controversy. The article includes a question to NPS spokesman Christian about whether NPS ever attempted to “limit the display of flags by workers or contractors in any way or at any location inside the park?” Christian was quoted as saying: “I can’t begin to speculate on how such an unfortunate miscommunication occurred.” When pressed on whether there had been any incident involving a flag, Christian told the ADN, “At no time did an NPS official seek to ban or limit the flag.”

While email and text exchanges reveal that one of Merrell’s staffers initially contacted the FHWA about the flag controversy, Merrell clearly supported this position and, in fact, defended it. At no point were the construction workers told they could resume flying flags from their trucks while driving the 43 miles of park road.

On the evening of May 26, the Watchman called the FHWA project manager for comment on the situation. He said all media inquiries must go to the FHWA’s D.C. office.

After failing to receive any additional comments of clarifications from Denali Park officials, the Watchmen sent another round of follow up questions with a deadline of May 28, at 2 p.m. We asked whether NPS had ever contacted the FHWA about the visitor’s flag complaint, and asked why the visitor was so upset with the flag? NPS did not respond.

That same afternoon, the Watchman emailed FHWA media affairs person with questions about who contacted FHWA with the initial complaint, what was conveyed, were flags removed, and who has jurisdiction. We also asked about whether the flags are now back on the trucks, and gave a deadline of May 30.

May 27-28: Watchman files FOIA requests

On May 27, the Watchman filed a Freedom of Information Act request with NPS, seeking all emails, texts, phone or written communications to or from Merrell related to the flag issue.

On May 28, the Watchman reached out to Granite Construction for comments. We also filed a FOIA request with FHWA.

May 29-30: Public statements reveal NPS was behind request to remove flags

On May 29, a FHWA spokesperson sent a written account of the incident to the Watchman and other media admitting publicly, for the first time, that a park employee was the instigator behind the flag removal.

“NPS staff relayed concerns to FHWA – as it does with all feedback related to the project – regarding single occupant vehicle traffic, as well as a visitor complaint about a flag on a vehicle while the vehicle was in motion,” the FHWA stated. “FHWA brought both concerns to the responsible contractor, who addressed the situation per their usual process.”

On May 29, the Watchman reached out to Denali Park media affairs Peter Christian for third time, asking for a response. He wrote back, “We’re continuing to look into this, and I’ll circle back to you when I have something to share. I appreciate your patience.”

The next day, a Granite spokesperson publicly confirmed that the FHWA had relayed to them the NPS complaint about visitor who opposed the flags affixed to Granite trucks driving down the park road.

May 30: Park says unauthorized employee raised flag concern without Merrell’s knowledge

Finally, on May 30, after it became publicly known that NPS did, in fact, play a key role in the flag removal, NPS issued a public statement acknowledging that, “After further review, it has been confirmed that a Denali National Park employee notified FHWA staff about a visitor’s complaint of a flag ‘flapping’ on Denali Park Road and asked if there was an appropriate way to request it be detached from a contractor’s vehicle to limit wildlife and visitor impacts.”

This NPS statement also asserted, “The employee contacted the FHWA without authorization, and without the superintendent’s knowledge. Park officials have taken corrective actions to ensure future park and project communications follow proper procedures.”

Click here to support Alaska Watchman reporting.