The Elk Mountain pilot. [volume] (Irwin, (Ruby Camp), Gunnison County, Colo.) 1880-19??, 1919-08-28

thsre n. mt a scenic national park worthy OF the
name between Rocky Mountain :" Co'o'"uo NJ"
Lafalyette on the coast OF Maine
So Indiana Illinois and Michigan want M
tiono park and they have picked out the dunes az
the right place for 1t. -.,,,.,
How they are going to bring about Its estaOlisn-
ment - big question The proposed par -. .,sc-
10 all under private ownershp and Is held at spee.
ulative prices the chance OF secono Ha.s
being built at the head of Lake Michigan. Gse ..
at actual values 1t would cost about $|'ooVoUV W
buy the $1,000 acres most desirable ior p11. pa
poses The scenic parks Of the West were takef
from the national forests and the pubic domsin
BY congress. To date there Is no precedent 1ot
the appropriation by congress OF FUNDS 10 purcnase
q national park area Lafayette was presented 70
the government for national park purposes oy tne
owners of the property.
Congress has national park policy II oHiy
dallies with national parks as 1t does with most
other things. 1t Is now generous with appropFia'
lions and again nggardly; for instance. II gave
Yellowstone $3S4.OOO and Yosemite $@ooNOo III
1919 and kept Rocky Mountain. with twice as
many visitors as both parks. down to $lOOVW
Politics largely into all national PARK regis
lation. In the Sixty-fOprth congress the interior
department supported the bill to enlarge Yellow
stone and the bill to add to SeQuOta ana change
its name to Roosevelt. The agricultural depart
ment, because the proposed additions would De
taken from national forests and therefore from Its
control opposed both bills. beating the former in
the senate and the latter In the house. So there
the matter of national park legislation
Can congress be induced to appropriate money
for the purchase of private holdings for national
park purposes?
This question has been put squarely up to con-
Rress by bills introduced at this session. One
calls for the appropriation of million dollars
so for the purchase of Mammoth cave Kentucky
and its environs for national park. The other
provides for the establishment Of the Mississippi
Valley National park on both sides of the Missis
sippi in southwestern Wisconsin and northeastern
Iowa Here the two states own the land under
tbe river the federal government controls its
navigation, part of the proposed area is Wiscon-
Gin state park some of the land will he donated
md the land to be purchased by the government
has been appraised Mt a very moderate price,
Can congress condemn private holdings for
tional park purposes!
Nobody seems to know. Most lawyers would
saw Off hand that the state of Indiana
denim the dunes for state park purposes. And
presumably the state of Indiana could transfer the
land TO The federal government. The national park
service has been looking into the question of
dpmnatiOn 1t is advised that the government can
condemn private holdings inside Of national park
fact, a bill is pending to condemn
100 acres in General Grant National park which
the owner will not sell for reasonable price, As
to the condemnation of patented land outside of
a national park the national park service is yet
undecided Condemnation of the dunes has been
advocated by private individuals and by the press.
The creation of Lafayette National park has
established this precedent; The federal govern
mopt viii, accept suitable land presented to 1t for
national park purposes So. while other questions
arc being thrashed out. the Indiana. Illinois and
Michigan declarations of the General Federation
of Women's Clubs engaged in campaign to
rn,.e sufficient money by subscription to purchase
the dunes and present them to the government for
q national park