First, that the National Parks must be maintained in absolutely
unimpaired form for the use of future generations as well as those of
our own time; Second, that they are set apart for the use,
observation, health, and pleasure of the people; and Third, that the
national interest must dictate all decisions affecting public or
private enterprise in the Parks.[339]
Since then the program has made steady progress. Its purposes and
policies have been enlarged and clarified. The acceptable qualities of
parkhood were defined. Such an area must be supremely significant,
having a national appeal whether scenic, archaeological, scientific, or
historical. Only such features of natural architecture were to be
included as would represent the highest accomplishment within its class.
For example, Grand Canyon of the Colorado exemplifies the most
extraordinary achievement of stream erosion, whereas Yellowstone is most
unique in the realm of thermal activity.[340]
The National Park represents the apex of the conservation program,
wherein the principle of optimum use is the dominating force. The twin
purposes of enjoyment plus conservation always remain uppermost.
Commercialization beyond actual requirements is not to be tolerated, and
to this end close supervision is maintained.
Natural species of animals and plants were to abide in normal
relationships, free from man’s interference, except under urgent
circumstances such as were described in the discussion of wild life
control. The primitive appearance of Yellowstone forests is distasteful
to some people. It was a carping German traveler who said, “Look at your
dead trees and burned stumps in the woods ... and your streams are full
of driftwood. It is not cared for.”[341] In that sense Yellowstone is
not a park but a wilderness full of the beauty of natural disorder. All
things remain as nature leaves them. No man disturbs landslide, log jam,
or wind-swept lodgepole avalanche.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account