(2.) Railroads will unavoidably seriously cripple the present tourist routes. They must of necessity occupy the valleys. But it is through these that the tourist route passes, and it is frequently the case that they are not wide enough for both. In many cases the roadway would be forced back upon the hills, and in others its present location would have to be changed. It is certain that the admirable system of roads, which the government is slowly working out, would receive irreparable injury at the hands of any railroad which might be built through that region.
(3.) Railroads would mean the inevitable destruction of the large game. The winter snows are too deep among the hills for game to subsist there. It is necessary to come down into the valleys, where there is more grass and less snow. But, as already stated, it is through these valleys that railroads must pass if at all. The trains would frighten the animals back into the hills, where starvation would await them. Moreover, the loss of game from poaching would be greatly aggravated by the increased facility of clandestine access to that region.
(4.) Railroads would destroy the Park forests. During July, August, and September, there are always long periods of dry weather when the dense bodies of fallen timber, the impenetrable tangles of underbrush, and the luxuriant prairie grass are a mass of inflammable tinder. A spark converts it into a conflagration. A railroad winding its way through this country would render protection against fires, even now a matter of great difficulty, wholly out of the question. Referring to this subject in his annual report for 1894, the Superintendent of the Park says:
“Six months from the entrance of the first locomotive within the limits of the Park, there will not be one acre of its magnificent forests left unburned.”
What such a catastrophe would mean to the future development of the surrounding country may be appreciated by a perusal of our chapter on the Flora of the Yellowstone.
(5.) As a matter of public policy, the granting of a railway franchise in the Park is objectionable because it necessarily creates a perpetual monopoly of a public privilege. There is no practicable way to avoid it. It has been proposed to compel the railroad to share the advantage of this monopoly with the public, by paying a certain percentage of earnings on its Park business to constitute an improvement fund. With Union Pacific history fresh in the public mind, the government will not be likely to enter into a partnership of that precarious nature.
From the foregoing exposition, it is clear that only the most cogent reasons should ever sanction the construction of railroads in the Yellowstone Park. These reasons, from the standpoint of the railroad companies, as set forth by the promoters of a recent bill before Congress, fall under two heads.
In the first place, it is speciously urged that a railroad would render the Park more accessible, cheapen the cost of visiting it, and make it fulfill more perfectly its original design as a park for the people. To all this it may be replied that the people do not want the improvement at the price they must pay for it. By an almost unanimous voice they oppose it. It is true that the Park is not as accessible as one might wish it to be, or as it soon will be. But to make it easily accessible, it is by no means necessary that a railroad should pass through it. A line touching the southern boundary and communicating with the central portions of the country would answer every practical purpose. The pretext that a railroad across the Reservation will greatly aid the tourist is erroneous. The points of interest are so scattered about that a coach would be in any case a necessity, and all the railroad would really save to the tourist would be the distance from the boundary to the belt line.
Neither will such a railroad materially lessen the cost of a visit, which has always been, and will always be, in the main, getting to that region. The Reservation is 1,500 miles from the center of population of the country, and it is this remote location that makes visiting it cost. The outlay after getting there is trifling in comparison with that of coming and going. Whether a railroad pass though the Park, or simply touch its southern border, will not appreciably affect this principal item.
In the second place, it is urged that the Park stands directly in the path of the railroads and so “acts as a blockade to the development of three large states.” As this will always form the staple argument for granting a right-of-way for railroads across the Reservation, it will be well to scrutinize it somewhat carefully.