The Oakley herald. [volume] (Oakley, Idaho) 1908-1961, 1919-08-29

there IL not a scenic national park worthy OF the
name between Rocky Mountain IN Colorado ana
Lafayette on the coast OF Maine
So Indiana Illinois and Michigan want ma
tional park, and they have picked out the dunes as
the right place for 1t.
How they are going to bring about It's establish
ment is a big question. The proposed park area
is all under private ownership and is held at spec
ulative prices on the chance Of a second curry
being built Mt the head of Lake Michigan Even
at actual values 1t would cost about $2oooVoo 20
buy the 1900 acres most desirable for park pur-
poses. The scenic parks of the west were TAKEN
from the national forests and the public domain
by congress To date there is no precedent Tor
the appropriation by congress of funds TO purchase
a national park Lafayette was presented to
the government for national park purposes by the
owners Of the property.
Congress has national park policy. 1t dllly-
daliies with national parks rs 1t does with most
other things. 1t is generous with appropra-
lions and again niggardly; for instance 1t gave
Yellowstone 1884, 600 and Yosemite S255,0OO In
1910 and kept Rocky Mountain with twice as
many visitors both parks. down to $4,000.
Politics enters largely into all national park legs-
lation In the Sixtyfourth congress the interior
department supported the bill to enlarge Yellow
stone and the bill to add to SeQuoia and change
Its name to Roosevelt. The agricultural depart
ment, because the proposed additions would be
taken from national forests and therefore from its
control opposed both bills, beating the former in
Is telling what congress will or will not do In
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-
gress by two 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 a 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
the river. the federal government controls Its
navigation part OF the proposed area ts a Wiscon-
sin state park. some of the land will he donated
and the land to be purchased by the government
has been appraised at a very moderate price.
Can congress condemn private holdings for ma
tonal park purposes7
Nobody to know. Most lawyers would
say otf-hand that the state Of Indiana can con-
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 con-
domination. 1t Is advised that the government cnn
condemn private holdings inside of national park
bOundaries-in fact, bill is pending TO condemn
100 acres in General Grant National mark which
the owner will not sell for reasonable price As
to the condemnation Of patented land outside NJ
a national park the national park service is VET
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
ment will accept suitable land presented II for
national park purposes So, while other questions
are being thrashed out. the Indiana. Illinois and
Michigan declarations of the General Federation
Of WoE,en's Clubs engaged in a campaign to
raise sufficient money by subscription to purchase
the dunes and present them to the government for
4 national park.