Excerpt
SINCE the late 19th century, Americans have had a love affair with the national parks. Not only the well-known places like Yellowstone, the Statue of Liberty, and the Grand Canyon, but such equally diverse and spectacular sites as Big Bend, Mesa Verde, and Valley Forge have touched us.
In the early 1930s and thereafter, when historic areas were added to the national park system, people realized that the national parks could represent the nation's cultural heritage as well as its natural heritage. From the mid-1960s on, when Congress began to add significant numbers of new areas, particularly in the East, and primarily to serve the growing urban populations, the national park system became a concept that could truly benefit all Americans.
Although the system will never be “complete,” it cannot and should not be expected to incorporate every area needing protection and wise management. Appropriate areas of national significance certainly should be added, and areas of less significance should be protected by other public agencies or private organizations.
Units of the national park system are the most protected public lands in the nation. Yet they face major threats from conditions and activities both within …
Footnotes
Paul C. Pritchard is president of the National Parks and Conservation Association, 1015 31st Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20007. This “Viewpoint” was extracted from the introduction of a plan for protecting and improving the national park system—“Investing in Park Futures, The National Park System Plan: A Blueprint for Tomorrow”—released by NPCA in February 1988. The nine-volume NPS Plan is available either separately or as a complete package. For further information contact NPCA at the above mentioned address or call (202) 944-8530.
- Copyright 1988 by the Soil and Water Conservation Society
This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.