Originally published in The Vidette-Messenger of Porter County on February 5, 1966.
Trails Said Port Threat
‘DOUGLAS WALL’ーCartoonist offers conception of how non-contiguous areas crisscrossed with trails in southern fringe of proposed Lakeshore acreage will bottle development of harbor and industry. Harbor opponents see this as maneuver by Illinois Sen. Paul Douglas to whittle down economic development in Indiana, thereby aiding Illinois industry, hence name ‘Douglas Wall’.
One of the major bones of contention between proponents of the Indiana harbor, now under construction in North Porter county, and supporters of the proposed Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, soon to be the subject of a House hearing in Washington, is the so-called non-contiguous areas.
The average person, when referring to the lakeshore, often thinks about the land and the sand stretching immediately south of the shore of Lake Michigan, but gives little thought to those marshy areas on the southern fringe of the 11,000-acre parcel.
In S. 360 ー the bill which seeks to establish the lakeshore ー the non-contiguous areas are referred to as “hinterland”.
Supporters of the harbor see in these fringe properties a sharp lever by seaport foes to reduce Indiana’s harbor from a first rate to a third rate facility, because they feel it will strangle their economic development.
For this maneuver ー as well as the many other delaying tactics that have been hurled at the seaport ー they blame Illinois Sen. Paul Douglas. Hence they refer to this southern zone as the “Douglas Wall”.
S. 360 does not clearly define the intent of those “hinterlands” other than that they obviously are to be used to preserve the flora and fauna and for the establishment of trails.
Harbor enthusiasts see in this area only one of the cloudy phases of S. 360. However, some light is believed shed on the federal government’s intent for this area by a portion of this testimony at the Feb. 8, 1965 Senate Subcommittee hearing in Washington.
The report on that hearing includes pertinent testimony offered by George B. Hartzog, Jr., director of the National Park Service. His answer followed a question asked by Sen. Alan Bible, of Nevada, chairman of the subcommittee which held the hearing.
Asked Sen. Bible:
“The problems, I think, that have concerned the committee about these so-called non-contiguous areas: No. 1, the distance from the lake, and No. 2, the fact that you have to go over three railroad tracks and two highways to get there.
“Is this correct? How many highways and how many railroads are there between the lake and these noncontiguous areas?”
Hartzog never quite got around to answering Sen. Bible’s direct question, but this was his reply:
“Sir, our thinking has been that the roads and railroad tracks would either be overpassed or underpassed with trail systems in order to connect the areas of the natural lakeshore.
“We have somewhat the same situation, for example, at Chalmette National Historical Park in Louisiana, where an industrial use road separates the battlefield, for example, from the river.
“We are working on a plan now to provide access to visitors across this road. This is a problem, but we don’t believe it is insurmountable.”
Project Expensive
Sen. Bible: “Do you have any cost figures on this? I suppose if you have an overpass or underpass it gets a little expensive, doesn’t it?”
Hartzog: “Yes, sir. The development schedule is indicated in the book. The development cost is about $5,700,000, and thisー”
Bible: “I'm sorry. I did not hear you.”
Hartzog: “About $5,760,000. This includes roads and trails that would be necessary for access among these detached units.”
Bible: “Now, is that the total cost of developing the non-contiguous areas, the $5.7 million?”
5 Year Figure
Hartzog: “Yes. During the 5 years. This is the first 5-year cost figure that we supplied.”
Bible: “Just for these areas along?”
Hartzog: “No. This is all development.”
Bible: “This is what I was trying to develop. How much does it cost to develop these and how much does it cost to build the trails and overpasses and underpasses to them? Do you have that breakdown?”
Hartzog: “We don’t have it broken down here precisely as to what part relates to the detached areas and what part is inside the main body of the national seashore.
Roads, Trails
“However, in the breakdown we show $15,000 in the first year for roads, $550,000 for roads and trails in the second year, the same amount in the third year, and $250,000 in the fourth year.
“So this would be roughly $1,365,000 for roads and trails. All of this would not be, however, solely for the purpose of linking up the detached units. There would be some trail developments within the principal areas itself.”
Harbor supporters consider this linkup as a scheme by Sen. Douglas to contain economic development in Indiana in order to provide greater industrial advantages to Illinois. That is why they call it the “Douglas Wall”.
