I was again interested to read (Sunday, Sept. 15) about Roxanne Quimby’s effort to establish a national park from her holdings of Elliotsville Plantation Inc.

Most of the media coverage this time was about her son assuming leadership in accomplishing her wishes. Every time there has been coverage of this proposed park, the focus has been on the Quimby effort to achieve this or support or opposition by local groups or local residents. Virtually nothing has been written about the natural characteristics of the area qualifying it for consideration as a national park.

At the time the National Park Service was organized in 1917, Secretary of the Interior Franklin Lane wrote in a letter to Stephen T. Mather, its first director, that new parks should have “scenery of supreme and distinctive quality or some natural features so extraordinary or unique as to be of national interest and importance.”

Certainly, Baxter State Park and Mount Katahdin, within its boundaries, would fulfill these requirements. I assume, however, the state is not going to incorporate Baxter State Park into a national park.

Certainly, Baxter State Park and Mount Katahdin, within its boundaries, would fulfill these requirements. I assume, however, the state is not going to incorporate Baxter State Park into a national park.

Are there qualifications for a national park in the proposed area other than its being adjacent to Mount Katahdin? I think this issue is central to the consideration being given to the establishment of a national park.

Furthermore, why would it attract more visitors than currently come to hike the mountain, thus helping the local economy. Although as a forester, I am not opposed to national parks, I think more convincing rationale for such a park in north-central Maine is needed.

Robert S. Bond, Hallowell