The Hays free press. [volume] (Hays, Kan.) 1908-1924, 1919-09-04

there is not scenic national park worthy of the
name between Rocky Mountain n Colorado ana
,Lafalyette on the coast of Maine.
So Indiana Illinois and Michigan want ma
itiona park and they have picked out the dunes as
the right place for it.
How they are going to bring about its establish
.ment is big question. The proposed park area
lis all under private ownership and is held at spec
Culative prices the chance of a second Gary
being built at the head of Lake Michigan. even
at actual values it would cost about SZ0OOOOO 10
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 for
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 no national park policy. 1t dilly-
daeS with national parks it does with most
other things 1t is now generous with appropria-
tions and again niggardly; for instance, it gave
Yellowstone 1884, 900 and Yosemite $295OO0 In
1919 and kept Rocky Mountain, with twice as
many visitors both parks, down to $1O,OOO
Politics largely all national park legis
lation In the Sixty-fourth congress the interior
department supported the bill to enlarge Yellow
stone and the bill to add to SequOia and change
its to Roosevelt. The agricultural depart
;ment because the proposed additions would be
taken from national forests and therefore from it's
control opposed both bills, beating the former in
the senate and the latter in the house. So there
lis telling what congress will or viii 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
greSs by two bills introduced at this session. One
calls for the appropriation of a 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 both sides of the Afissis-
Sppi in southwestern Wisconsin and northeastern
Iowa. Here the two states the land under
the river, the federal government controls it's
navigation, part of the proposed is a Wiscon-
sin state park, some of the land will be donated
and the land to be purchased by the government
has been appraised at very moderate price.
Can congress condemn private holdings for
tOnal park purposes?
say off-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 con-
demnation. It'is advised that the government can
condemn private holdings inside of natios4aI park
boundaries-in fact, bill is pending TO condemn
160 in General Grant National park which
the will not sell for q 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
ment will accept suitable land presented to it for
national park purposes. So, while other questions
are being thrashed out the Indiana, Illinois and
Michigan declarations of the General Federation
of Womens Clubs are engaged in a campaign to
raise sufficient money by subscription to purchase
the dunes and present them to the government for
a national park.