uintahiker
Adventure Guru
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2012
- Messages
- 719
I was thinking earlier this week about places that are NOT National Parks, but that the National Park Service wouldn't hesitate to add them if the opportunity arose. Yes, there's cool spots next to some National Parks, but I was thinking about places that are separate and independent, so that a new National Park unit would be created by the acquisition.
So, rules for properties to add to this list:
1. Private ownership or State ownership- ie land not under Federal control
2. Not adjacent to property currently in the NPS.
3. Worthy of becoming a national playground (park), or for protection (monument)
4. Inclusion on the list is for the critical/most condensed unit possible. IE, No "Utah National Park"
I've got 2 places that come to mind, but there's got to be more out there.
1. The Alamo
2. Antelope Canyon
Where else do you think of?
So, rules for properties to add to this list:
1. Private ownership or State ownership- ie land not under Federal control
2. Not adjacent to property currently in the NPS.
3. Worthy of becoming a national playground (park), or for protection (monument)
4. Inclusion on the list is for the critical/most condensed unit possible. IE, No "Utah National Park"
I've got 2 places that come to mind, but there's got to be more out there.
1. The Alamo
2. Antelope Canyon
Where else do you think of?