322 LANDSCAPE DESIGN 



be drawn as to which areas should be administered by the state * and 

 which by the federal government, it may be said in general that those 

 which preserve the unusual, in which all the country may be interested, 

 may well be under national control, whereas those which preserve the 

 locally typical may well be the property of the state. In either case 

 of course they would be equally open to any one who might desire to 

 come to them. These areas may serve also as forest reserves, or at 

 least they may form parts of, or be contiguous to, areas reserved for such 

 purposes. The proper uses of a national park and a national forest 

 being however fundamentally different,! it is probably advisable, as 

 our governmental machinery is at present organized, that though these 

 different areas should be handled in the closest cooperation, they should 

 be separately administered. 



The matter of accessibility of these reservations, as far as it affects 

 their internal development, will not be essentially different from that 

 which we have already discussed under the subject of landscape parks. 

 It should be religiously borne in mind by whoever has charge of them that 

 not for any short-sighted reasons of making them self-supporting or 

 advertising their value to the public at large or making all parts of them 

 accessible to any one who might seek them, should their essential char- 

 acteristics be injured, or should any policy be inaugurated which would 

 in the future diminish the peculiar landscape beauty which they alone 

 can furnish to the coming generations of the nation. 



As to their accessibility from without, it is evident that they will be 

 sought to a greater and greater degree not only by rail but especially 

 by automobile, and that therefore the relation of the state parks to i 

 state highways and state parkways, and the relation of these with the 

 national parks into one great system J providing for outdoor rec- 

 reation and recreational travel, is obviously a desirable thing, and one 

 which we may hope to attain through consistent and intelligent effort 

 in the not very distant future. 



* Cf . article by H. A. Caparn, Some Reasons for a General System of State Parks, 

 in Landscape Architecture, Jan. 1917. Cf. later papers on state parks by James L. 

 Greenleaf and S. Herbert Hare also in Landscape Architecture, July, 1925, and July, 1926. 



f Cf. paper by F. L. Olmsted, Jr., The Distinction between National Parks and Na- 

 tional Forests, in Landscape Architecture, Apr. 1916, v. 6, p. 114-115. 



I Cf. the national planning studies of Warren H. Manning and Cyrus Kehr. 



