-2 - 
 
or disrupting influences caused by human activities such as lumbering or
intensive 
land use for any purpose. Such natural preserves can be located in national

forests, or in state parks or forests and must be formally set aside for
the 
primary purpose, not of intensive recreation but for preservation of these
natural 
conditions. 
3. Large Scenic Mountain Parks. 
The White Mountains have remained as the focus for tourists without diminution

or impairment on the whole, regardless of lunrbering, for the reason that
the 
scenery is enjoyed for the most part from above timber line. However, clear-cutting

on steep spruce slopes has in the past caused temporary eye-sores, and logging

operations lower down, with the resultant slash, have in places and for short

periods offended the eye cf the tourist. 
With the placing of these areas in public ownership as a national forest,

protection of upper slopes and recreational areas, and selective logging
of areas 
not used intensively by the public, the recreational uses of this large area
have 
been fully conserved, including intensive development of skiing, and t'lis
without 
sacrificing the welfare of the residents, communities and industries dependent
on 
the forests for raw materials. A total of 35 per cent of gross income from
these 
national forests goes to local towns and for roads, This would be lost to
these 
towns under national park status. 
The historic policy for this area has been to retain these coordinated land

uses for the maximum good of all, and to resist all efforts either by individuals

or by federal bureaus to change its status to that of a park, federal or
otherwise. 
We do not want this area either over-developed as a park or segregated as
a wilder- 
ness, but prefer to maintain the sane balance of land uses now governing
its manage- 
ment as a National Forest. 
Even partial change in status through the establishment of a National Monument

to include the Presidential Range area will result not only in divided administra-

tion of a natural unit now being handled to the satisfaction of the users,
but as 
indicated in other and recent instances, will merely serve as an entering
wedge for 
agitation to secure full national park status for the region. 
Since this outstanding recreational area does not in our opinion demand park

status the same reasons apply to areas of lesser importance or significance,
namely, 
the Green Mountain areas, now successfully managed for both summer and winter

recreation under state and private ownership and in a National Forest, and
the 
Mt. Katahdin wilderness in Maine, part of which the State now owns. Continued

propaganda by Federal agencies to secure such objectives we regard as inimical
to 
the interests of the region. 
The overwhelming opinion not only within New England as a whole but in each
of 
the states affected is that no extension of national parks is desirable or
necessary 
in these states, and that the land use adjustments required by recreational
needs 
for access and use of scenic, mountain and forest areas can be made more
efficiently 
and adequately and with a greater total of economic and recreational benefit
by 
continuing the present policy of national forests, state parks and state
forests 
and private initiative and enterprise, and by preserving the Maine wilderness
area 
through the exclusion of public roads, and not by its acouisition in whole
or in 
part for national parks.