The contemporary cultural reflex to right the wrongs of history by renaming places may have jumped the shark with the body of water in Longmont known both as “Calkins Lake” and “Union Reservoir.”

The proposal to officially rename it “Union Reservoir” is one of the current initiatives the recently revived Colorado Geographic Naming Advisory Board is considering in monthly Zoom meetings with various stakeholders from across the state – including elected officials, state agency representatives and historians, among others.

Since Gov. Jared Polis restarted the board in spring 2020, they’ve started to weigh the merits and potential real-world ramifications of a backlog of more than 15 geographical name-change proposals across the state.

The pending backlog includes the likes of Mount Evans in Clear Creek County and the Gore Range in Summit, Eage and Grand counties. In each of those more highly-publicized cases – both not yet heard by the board – the proposals are specific to iconic peaks on the state’s Rocky Mountain landscape that name-change advocates believe improperly honor men who did much more harm than good.

Both proposals fall into a category in which, though the name itself doesn’t include a word most reasonable people find offensive, the person behind the name is deemed problematic.

The board’s backlog also includes names that explicitly include words many people find offensive. That includes the likes of Redskin Mountain in Jefferson County, Chinaman Gulch in Chaffee County and Negro Creek in Delta County. In all those proposals, the board explicitly classifies the “reason for proposal” as “current name considered offensive.”

That’s not the classification given for changing the name of Calkins Lake to Union Reservoir. Rather, the classification is “change name to reflect local use.” And according to the proposal’s officially cited “proponent,” U.S. geographer Jennifer Runyon, the U.S. Geographic Board of Names submitted the proposal because the federal geography database had both the Union and Calkins names in their system. So, for clarity’s sake, they want to settle on one.

As such, the board’s course of action seems simple enough: consult appropriate historical information, people and interest groups so the federal geographers can work more efficiently under one name.

But, as The Gazette reported, at the board’s October meeting the topic arose of whether the name Union “has ties to the confederacy” and/or is connected “to efforts by some residents of Weld County to secede from Colorado.”

Yes, that, of all places, is where the discussion went – despite the fact that the “Union” name stems from 1902 when the Union Ditch Co., located near LaSalle, built the reservoir.

A month later, at the Nov. 18 meeting, state name board member Rep. Adrienne Benavidez of Adams County noted how a member of the general public in October called in to oppose the Union name, as the Longmont Times-Call reported, because of “discriminatory and racially restrictive instances” by Union soldiers in Weld County and in Greeley.

The charge of a systemically-racist tie for the Union name forced Runyon to tell board members the reservoir is located 24 miles from Greeley and that the Union name doesn’t relate to the activities or incidents of any Union Army soldiers in the area.

The board has yet to make a recommendation.

Here’s the thing: the board always knew it was going to, effectively, rule on whether certain names in the backlog are too racist, offensive and/or derogatory to keep. They already have done so with their September recommendation, approved by Gov. Jared Polis, to rename Squaw Mountain in Clear Creek County Mestaa’hehe (pronounced mess-ta-HAY) Mountain.

But “Union Reservoir” wasn’t one of them. Which should be a sign to people across the state that the name-change crusade may have gone too far. For, in contemporary woke culture, anything and everything – including the word “union” – can be painted as systemically racist.

That’s not to say reasonable people can’t have a substantive discussion on certain proposals. That may be best embodied by the Gore Range debate, which has seen varying county commissions come down on both sides of the argument. Perhaps more important, the people themselves are coming to a more nuanced understanding.

That includes the popular “Gore Range Ski Mountaineering” Facebook group. They’ve been on both sides of the debate as, earlier this year, they reverted to the Gore name after switching in 2020 to “Nuchu” – the newly proposed name that is intended to be a loose translation to “Ute’s Range.”

At some point, this renaming frenzy must be reined in and thought through, all while we reintroduce reason. Or else, as the curious case of Calkins Lake shows us, the reflex to rename so quickly can become a parody of itself.

Colorado Springs Gazette editorial board