Folks who enjoy national parks tend to be environmentally conscientious. So how can we serve seafood that is being fished out of existence?

...it is disquieting to feel that the conversion into a National Forest or Park always means the esthetic death of a piece of wild country.

I don't know. You'd have to ask the National Parks Department.

We take too much of our heritage for granted. Harriman State Park is not Mt. Vernon. Nor is it Yosemite. But heritage cannot be measured on a scale...

The question is can you enjoy the parks without leaving them unimpaired?

Do we allow unlimited visitation, or do we restrict numbers to protect a delicate ecosystem? Do we heavily advertise the park, enticing paying visitors, generating needed money for Idaho's park department, or do we sacrifice financial benefits to better preserve natural ones? Do we log diseased trees, interfering with nature, or do we allow trees to rot and fall, possibly endangering lives? Do we inexpensively repair historic structures, or do we meticulously restore them? Do we maintain this park as closely as possible to the condition in which Idaho received it, or do we develop it for multiple uses; allow overnight visitors; permit all-terrain vehicles; provide paths for those unable to navigate unpaved trails?