, 1925-11-04

creek and north of Phippis Canon
and west of the Jackson Lake Re-
clamation project grant and the east
line of the forest reserve, to the
summit of Teton Range should be
set aside as a national park.
They also recommended that the
south fork of Snake river be made
the south boundary of the present
Yellowstone park, and Thai the head
water of Eagle creek and its tribu-
taries be excluded.
Now the question for the people of
Wyoming to decide is whether these,
approximate, two hundred thousand
acres of land are more valuable to
the state and nation if administered
by the forest service or by the ma
tional park bureau.
What do the people of Wyoming
lose by the transfer of this body of
land from one government bureau to
another?
Teton county would lose some
three or four hundred dollars each
year in taxes.
We would lose the right to Craze
sheep upon this land. Cattle graz
ing is not an issue for these regions
are so rugged hal they cannot be
used for that purpose.)
We would lose the right to cut
the timber which grows on portions
of these proposed national park
areas.
We would lose the right to have
log jams on Jenny's, Leigh, and all
the other lakes.
We would lose the right to dam
these lakes for irrigation projects.
We would lose the right to build
summer homes and to hunt game
within the confines of these new
parks.
What does Wyoming gain by this
transfer?
An area of land less rugged than
the proposed park regions would
be transferred from the Yellowstone
park to the forest service.
We would gain the advantage of
much national advertising that
would inevitably follow the crea-
ton of a national park.
1t would mean the routing of
thousands of tourists through Wyo-
ming that Colorado now gets.
1t would mean that Jackson hole
would get a large percent of the
auto travel that visits the Yellow
stone park each year, instead of
the tiny dribble that now filters in.
More people would mean more
money and an excellent market
would be created for farm produce.
The more people that visit this re-
gion the more chances there are for
dissatisfied settlers to sell out.
1t would stimulate the building
of summer homes and that would
mean more taxable property.
1t would release from presidential
withdrawal that large urea of land
north of Buffalo river and would
permit the forest service to admin
lister without fear of national park
criticism every time they cut a tree
or graZed a COW upon it.
1t would stabilize the tourist in
dustry in this country and forward
progressive plans that are now held
up through fear of scenic spoilation.
1t would mean the expenditure of
large sums of money for the build
ing of tourist resorts adjacent to the
park to care for increased travel.
Each improvement would mean
o taxable property.
The fear many of us have that
this country would be ravished by
spoilers is based on the evidence
of what has already occurred.
There is the object lesson of Jack
son Lake. A concrete dam, SUBJ
merged trees, and when irrigation
lowers the water, a Shiny shore line
trewn with logged timbers. These
unsightly features enable an irriga-
ton project in Idaho to irrigate
certain acres of Land. The same re-
suits could have been obtained by
impounding Snake river waters out
side of Jackson hole. What has
Wyoming gained by the destruction
of this scenic feature of incalcul-
able value for recreational uses?
Not n penny has it ever receiv-
ed and our new county of Teton is
now involved in an expensive law
suit trying to collect taxes from
this Idaho project.
1t has cost the state of Wyoming
additional taxes for the construction
or a more expensive bridge across
Snake river than would have been
required If this dam had not been
constructed.
What about those two lovely
bodies of water with their alternat-
ing shore lines of meadows and N
chanting groves of trees that the
Osgood Land C Livestock company.
an Idaho corporation, has placed
their strangle hold upon?
1 refer to Emma Matilda and
Two Ocean lakes, mountain gems