New information added on February 26, 2008

Email Us R.I.P. Thou Shalt Not STEAL The National Park Service Doesn’t Like Competition Kantishna Mining District 1903 - 1985 “Mexican Drug Cartels Are Growing Marijuana in U.S. National Parks and Forests,” News Brief, PRFA, August 2007 “National Parks of Alaska - Testimony Before U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Committee on Government Reform” - By Rick Kenyon of Glennallen, Alaska (presented at the August 14, 2006 Hearing - Committee on Government Reform, Anchorage, Alaska) For three decades, the National Park Service has run amok, mistreating inholders within the Alaskan National Parks: — forcing almost all the historic placer miners to give up their claims, contrary to ANILCA, denying property owners access to their homes, causing them to lose their property, punishing them for their wilderness way of life, and dragging them into federal court on trumped-up charges. The Service provides its own employees exclusive, luxurious wilderness accommodations. February 2002: “Interior Dept. Seeks Comments on Strategic Plan” Secretary Gail Norton asks for ideas to guide budget, goals and performance measures for five year period. Deadline for comment is March 2002. “Department of Interior Official Asks to Hear Concerns” - letter from Kit Kimball, Director, Office of External and Intergovernmental Affairs, to PRFA, Sept. 25, 2001 Kit Kimball, the new appointee by Secretary Gale A. Norton, sent a letter to the Property Rights Foundation of America announcing that her office’s responsibilities “include working with advocacy and non-profit organizations actively seeking input in policies and programs as they are discussed and implemented here at the Department of Interior.” January 2001: “Church in Land Between the Lakes Recreational Area Restored as Memorial to Sanctuaries Demolished by National Park Service.” See Also Essential Books & Publications “Biosphere Reserves—The International Vanguard of Rural Depopulation” - National Park Service: Part 2, Positions on Property, Vol. 2, No. 1 (PRFA, Jan. 1995) Publication Order Form “Come Into My Parlor—The Executioner of Small Towns Weaving a Net of national Land-Use Controls” - National Park Service: Part 1, Positions on Property, Vol. 1, No. 3 (PRFA, Oct. 1994) Publication Order Form

In-Depth Information “Adirondack Stretch of North Country National Scenic Trail Planned” - By Carol W. LaGrasse, PRFA, January 2008 Property Rights concerns for the 140 mile stretch of the Adirondack segment of the 4,600-mile North Country National Scenic Trail include acquisition techniques, exact location, liability, ultimate ownership, and impacts on hunting and trapping. The plan for the trail has been moved out of the High Peaks region to a less scenic area to the south after over two decades of opposition by the Adirondack Mountain Club. North Country National Scenic Trail - Letter from Thomas L. Gilbert, Superintendent, Ice Age & North Country National Scenic Trails, Madison, Wisconsin, to Carol W. LaGrasse, President, Property Rights Foundation of America, Inc., March 31, 2008 In response to Ms. LaGrasse’s February 18 and February 25 letters and her article in the New York Property Rights Clearinghouse, Mr. Gilbert stated that the article recounted the North Country National Scenic Trail history “quite well.” He enclosed important documents and answered the questions Ms. LaGrasse raised about trail width, ownership of the trail, and hunting access, and discussed the trail liability issue. North Country National Scenic Trail - Adirondack Segment - E-mailed response to Carol W. LaGrasse, PRFA, from Thomas L. Gilbert, Superintendent, Ice Age & North Country National Scenic Trail, Madison, Wisconsin, February 19, 2008 This e-mail discusses whether the state or local government, or the National Park Service would own the Adirondack segment of the North Country trail, initially and ultimately; what the width of the land that is owned or managed for the trial will be; and what the width of the functional walking trail that is cleared and maintained will be. North Country National Scenic Trail - Letter from Thomas L. Gilbert, Superintendent, Ice Age & North Country National Scenic Trails, Madison, Wisconsin, to Peter Frank, Division Chief, NYS Department of Environmental Conservation, January 4, 2008 Official Park Service comment on the Draft Adirondack Park Trail Plan for the North Country National Scenic Trail. A particular point that needed clarifying, was that the 47 miles of “New Trail” that will need to be built is in addition to the 27 miles of “Temporary Corridor.” These two categories total 74 miles in addition to the 70 miles of “Existing Trail” (including “herd paths”). A future Memorandum of Understanding is proposed, which would cover acquisitions, administrative policy, marking the trail, shared-use trails (to ultimately be hiking-only), and compatibility with range of existing landowners and landscapes. Viewing this letter requires Adobe Acrobat Reader. It is free software for viewing and printing Adobe PDF files. Adobe® Acrobat® Reader™ is free, and freely distributable, software that lets you view and print Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files on all major computer platforms, as well as fill in and submit PDF forms online. If you do not have Acrobat Reader installed on your computer it can be downloaded free by clicking the Acrobat Reader icon on the right. “Why Was Olana Jilted?” - By Carol W. LaGrasse, Reprinted from the New York Property Rights Clearinghouse, Vol. 11, No. 4 (PRFA, Fall 2007) During October 2007, the Office of International Affairs of the National Park Service announced that Olana, the home of Hudson River landscape artist Frederic Church, had been dropped from the list of surviving applications for UNESCO World Heritage Site designation. But the reason given at that late date, that Church was not a world class artist, doesn’t jibe, considering that it is common knowledge that Church, although revered in the U.S., is not considered of world significance. In reality, the Park Service backed off because of property rights opposition. “LaGrasse Testifies on Proposed 600-Mile Historic Trail” - By Carol W. LaGrasse, Reprinted from the New York Property Rights Clearinghouse, Vol. 11, No. 4 (PRFA, Fall 2007) This article, which should be read in addition to LaGrasse’s full official testimony, describes the proposed National Park Service 600-mile, nine-state Washington-Rochambeau National Historic Trail. Revolutionary history and selections from advocates’ testimony are used to show the potential negative impact in private property rights in New York related to historic landscape preservation. A brief summary of LaGrasse’s full testimony is included. “Testimony By Carol W. LaGrasse, President, Property Rights Foundation of America, Before the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands of the Natural Resources Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives Regarding H. R. 1286, Washington-Rochambeau Revolutionary Route National Historic Trail Designation Act, October 30, 2007” The proposed 600-mile Washington-Rochambeau Historic Trail through nine states from Rhode Island to Virginia poses a threat to private property rights because of the National Park Service’s pattern of secrecy, lack of true public participation, piecemeal development, use of municipalities and non-profit agencies as false fronts, and use of eminent domain (directly, indirectly through local municipalities, and later to widen trails). Amendments to H.R. 1286 are proposed to eliminate these deficiencies. “The Yukon Cleansing” - Book Review: A Land Gone Lonesome, By Dan O’Neill, Counterpoint, a Member of Perseus Books Group, 2006 Review by Susan Allen, Reprinted from the New York Property Rights Clearinghouse (Vol. 11, No. 3, Summer 2007, PRFA) After the ANILCA settlement divided Alaska’s wild country among native, state and federal holdings, the National Park Service controlled vast federal landholdings. The Park Service told the people living on the wild lands that they could go on with their accustomed “subsistence lifestyle” as hunters, trappers, placer miners, and the like, but the agency cut off access and instituted regulations and an insurmountable permit application process, which made it impossible for the people to live in the wilds anymore. Old cabins were burned, only to be rebuilt by the Park Service as historic reconstructions. “Update on Property Rights in the U.S. Congress”-By Jason Knox, Staffer, Resources Committee, U.S. House of Representatives, Tenth Annual National Conference on Private Property Rights (PRFA, Albany, N. Y., October 14, 2006) Rep. Sensenbrenner’s eminent domain reform bill (H.R. 4128) died in the Senate. Rep. Chabot’s bill to enable property owners to bring Fifth Amendment takings cases into federal court (H.R.4772) would overcome the requirement that state remedies be exhausted and the ironic application of res judicata. Eminent domain due process reform would eliminate the bulk of federal condemnation abuse. “Smart Growth Shows Its Ugly Side” Kay McClanahan, Eastover, South Carolina (Reprinted by permission of author) South Carolina landowners face off against Richland County’s “Town and Country Land Use Plan” and the National Park Service’s expansion of Congaree Swamp National Monument to a National Park. Many Black farmers are descendents of freed slaves who purchased their land after the Civil War. “Letter to Kit Kimball, Director, Office of External and Intergovernmental Affairs, U.S. Dept. of Interior” - From Carol W. LaGrasse (PRFA, March 2002) This letter gives ideas for reform to incorporate in DOI’s five-year strategic plan. Wildlife restoration and land acquisition should take place under transparent processes and be privatized, eliminating corporatism between government and non-profit organizations. Management of DOI land should promote private property rights, while protecting human life, adjacent lands, rural communities, wildlife and the environment, to produce raw materials, provide recreation, and reduce eco-colonialism. “Britain’s Exmoor National Park to Ban Second Homes—New Rules to Fight Gentrification”-by Carol W. LaGrasse (PRFA, February 28, 2002) “New Math for the USFS and the NPS: Visitor Days”-By Don Fife (January 2002) This little essay tells how the U.S. Forest Service and National Park Service inflate the visitor counts at certain National Forests and National Parks. “Santa Cruz Island—Just Compensation from the National Park Service” - Roger M. Sullivan, Senior Partner, Sullivan, Workman & Dee, L.L.P., Los Angeles, Calif., from Proceedings of the Fourth Annual N.Y. Conf. on Private Property Rights (1999) “Willing Seller Willing Buyer - Park Service Version” - by Bo W. Thott, 1993. (Unique survey of sellers, reprinted by permission of Bo W. Thott, Washington County Alliance, Cutler, Maine) Historic survey posted in full: Private landowners ostensibly selling to the National Park Service are not bona fide sellers but are giving up title to escape the legal expenses of a foredoomed battle against condemnation. “A Perception of Cultural Preservation” — By Carol W. LaGrasse, Reprinted from Positions on Property, Vol. 2, No. 1 (Jan. 1995, PRFA) Buffalo National River Map & Sitton Cemetery Photo Gallery  The National Park Service’s practice in twentieth century parks such as Buffalo National River in the Ozarks, Shenandoah National Park, and Great Smokie Mountains National Park is to include cemeteries in “wilderness” areas and prevent their upkeep, prevent people from visiting cemeteries by prohibiting motor vehicle use by mourners and descendants, and to compound the visitation difficulty by allowing roads and paths to deteriorate. “Culture for Elite Consumer Consumption” - from Positions on Property, Vol. 2, No. 1, Jan. 1995 “The Enormous National Park System,” from Positions on Property, Vol. 1, No. 3, Oct. 1994 (Since the publication of this chart, the National Park System grew astronomically under Pres. Clinton’s executive orders locking up millions of acres federal lands as National Monuments.) “Mileage of Long Trails Under Jurisdiction of National Park Service” - from Positions on Property, Vol. 1, No. 3, Oct. 1994 “One Example: National Park Service Vision-The Heart of Long-Term Preservationist Goals” - from Positions on Property, Vol. 1, No. 3, Oct. 1994 “National Park Service Land Acquisition Apparatus & Land-Use Control Campaigns” - from Positions on Property, Vol. 1, No. 3, Oct.  1994 “The Alaskan Betrayal - How the National Park Service Broke the Promises that were made to sell the Alaskan National Park System to Congress” - By Carol W. LaGrasse, reprinted from Positions on Property, Vol. 1, No. 3 (PRFA, Oct. 1994) The National Park Service systematically negated the compromises under ANILCA, the broad-reaching Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, that allowed the 6-1/2 million acre Denali National Park and Reserve. The Park Service destroyed mining businesses in Denali National Park and the other new national parks in Alaska, yet delayed compensation or simply never compensated the businesses.

Back to:

© 2008 Property Rights Foundation of America, Inc.
All rights reserved. This material may not be broadcast, published, rewritten or redistributed without written permission.