EDITORIAL 



is a matter in which all our readers should be interested, to the attention of Congress this opportunity for passing 

 Let that interest have a definite expression in bringing constructive measures. 



PRESERVE THE NATIONAL PARKS 



THE National Parks, set aside as permanent recreation 

 grounds for the people of the entire country, are 

 threatened by commercial invasions from two distinct 

 sources. The Federal Water Power Act, which finally 

 became a law last spring, in addition to many construc- 

 tive features, contained a provision authorizing the 

 Water Power Commission to issue licenses for the con- 

 struction, operation, and maintenance of dams, reser- 

 voirs, power houses, and other project works in the 

 National Parks and Monuments on exactly the same 

 basis as in National Forests and other public lands. That 

 the possibility of commercial development afforded by 

 this provision constitutes a very real danger to the in- 

 tegrity of the National Parks is clearly indicated by sub- 

 sequent developments. The City of Los Angeles, for 

 example, has already filed with the Water Power Com- 

 mission applications for storage reservoirs and power 

 house sites on Merced Lake in Little Yosemite; for a 

 diversion of Buena Vista and Ulilouette Creeks, and a 

 storage reservoir just below Wawona, and for reservoirs 

 in Virginia and Tuolumne Canyons. The Sierra Club 

 has stated that "there is only one thing worse that could 

 be done for the complete commercilization and ruin of 

 the Yosemite National Park, and that is the damming 

 and flooding of Yosemite Valley itself !" 



The present Secretary of the Interior has declared that 

 this tendency to commercialize the National Parks should 

 be "resisted to the utmost," and the Water Power Com- 

 mission has voted to entertain no application for power 

 licenses in the National Parks and Monuments pending 

 further action by Congress. Secretaries and Commis- 

 sions change, however, and there is no assurance that the 

 present policy may not be reversed at any time without 

 notice. Real assurance that the National Parks will be 

 saved from commercialization by the water power in- 

 terests can be secured only by amending the Water Power 

 Act so as to make this impossible. 



The other threatened invasion of the Parks comes 

 from the irrigation interests. During the last session of 

 ;'ress the Smith Bill (H. R. 12,466), granting ease- 

 ments for dams, reservoirs, canals, and other irrigation 

 works in the Yellowstone National Park was passed by 

 the Senate and reported favorably to the House. The 

 irrigation interests by which this bill was promoted wish 

 to flood immediately an area of nearly 8,000 acres in 

 the Bechler River and Falls River Basins in Yellowstone 

 Park, and eventually to use also other parts of the Park. 

 Pressure for the passage of the bill was accompanied 

 by gross misrepresentation. Thus the two basins which 

 it is proposed to flood were described by its advocates 

 vanipy and the whole region was said to be of abso- 

 lutely no scenic value. Later investigation proved the 

 "swamps" to be a veritable campers' paradise of beauti- 

 ful meadows interspersed with pleasant woods and 



bordered by one of the most remarkable and lovely series 

 of waterfalls in any of the National Parks ! 



While in theory the Smith Bill upholds the basic prin- 

 ciple of Park protection by directing the secretary of 

 the Interior to confirm the easements which it grants 

 only in so far as they would not interfere with Park 

 uses, the fact remains that should any Secretary at any 

 time make such easements effective, his action could not 

 be subsequently reversed and the damage done would be 

 irrevocable. It is also clear that the Smith Bill is ex- 

 ceedingly dangerous because of the precedent which it 

 sets, and that if it becomes a law similar concessions by 

 irrigation interests will be eagerly sought in other parts 

 of the National Parks. 



These proposed raids on the National Parks raise a 

 fundamental question of national policy. Are the Parks 

 to be distinguished in their use from other public lands, 

 and if so how? The underlying motive in their creation 

 has been the desire to preserve forever in their primitive 

 condition a few widely separated examples of the 

 American wilderness as havens into which the people 

 can occasionally escape from the grind of the work-a- 

 day world for recreation, inspiration, and the study and 

 enjoyment of our native wild animals, birds, and plants 

 living natural lives in the natural homes of their ances- 

 tors. Unlike the National Forests, which are handled 

 principally for economic purposes, the distinguishing 

 feature and at the same time the greatest value of the 

 National Parks lies in the very fact that they are con- 

 secrated to recreational, esthetic, and scientific ends to 

 the exclusion of those commercial activities which else- 

 where rule supreme. If the camel's nose of business is 

 ever allowed to enter, no matter in what guise, it is only 

 a question of time when this distinction will disappear. 



Altogether only one-quarter of one per cent of the 

 area of the continental United States, exclusive of 

 Alaska, has been set aside through the creation of 

 National Parks and National Monuments for non-eco- 

 nomic purposes. Surely this is not an unreasonable area 

 to devote to the preservation of some of the finest and 

 most inspiring examples of wild life and of natural 

 scenery in the country. If the United States should ever 

 reach the point where its natural resources properly 

 handled are unable to meet the economic needs of its 

 people, it will then be ample time to consider whether 

 the basic idea of the National Parks should be abandoned 

 and commercial exploitation permitted. Certainly that 

 time has not yet been reached. Until it is the dividends 

 received from the Parks as such through the develop- 

 ment of the spiritual, mental, and physical strength of 

 the people will be of far greater value than the com- 

 paratively small commercial advantages which could be 

 derived from their economic utilization. 



Elihu Root was right when he wrote, in connection 



