There is a sense that the American prairie is still in its infancy.
It has been almost 30 years since the National Park Service declared that the area should be protected as wilderness and that the national parks are not a substitute for wilderness protection.
The National Park System has been in operation since 1919.
The parks and wildlife refuge system is one of the largest in the world and has over 2.5 million acres.
The system also has the distinction of being one of only two in the United States to have a system of public recreation centers for visitors.
“There are only three in the country that have a recreational center,” said Lisa Fiebert, senior director of conservation for the National Parks Conservation Association (NPPA).
“The park system is very unique.”
But some are concerned that the system could soon be replaced by a new model of reservation management that has been described as an effort to privatize the American wilderness.
The idea has been floated by several different groups in recent years, including the American Society for Natural History and the American Indian Rights and Protections Committee, which is the leading advocacy group for the native American reservations.
“It’s a great idea,” said Scott Sorensen, who heads the National Wilderness Committee of the NPPA.
Sorensan, who was in the Park Service for a decade, said that the proposal would allow a private company to take over the park system, but it would be the first step toward privatizing the system.
Currently, the system is operated by the National Forest System.
But the National Wildlife Federation and the Wilderness Society, which are both members of the NPPA, have criticized the proposal.
The two groups have said that any proposal to privatizing or privatizing-or just taking over-would leave the wilderness system in the hands of a private industry.
The American National Parks Conservancy has said that if it were to be privatized, it would only be for the park service, not the National Recreation and Park Service (NRPS).
The NPS, which runs the national park system as a non-profit, manages about 40 million acres of land in 28 states, and has the highest rate of recreation in the nation.
The Park Service’s mission is to protect the environment, preserve natural resources and provide opportunities for recreation.
The park system has a reputation for being one the nation’s top recreation destinations.
The Wilderness Society has long argued that the parks are being lost to the private sector, but that it should be the people who own the lands who should be in charge.
“The Wilderness Alliance’s mission has always been that the Wilderness and National Parks are public resources and not private assets,” said the Wilderness Coalition’s Ruth Kelleher.
In a press release, the Wilderness Alliance said it is a “national grassroots coalition of nearly 100 local and national organizations that believe that private-owned lands are vital to the future of the national wilderness and our national parks.”
“Our mission is simple: to make sure the national forests, national parks, and wilderness areas are open to the public, to protect their natural resources, and to preserve our national heritage for future generations,” said The Wilderness Coalition.
However, many conservationists worry that the proposed plan could undermine the current system of reservation protection.
For example, the NPPG’s Wilderness Plan, published in 2011, called for a system that would have required reservations to be held by the NPS for up to 40 years.
There is also concern that if the private company were to take ownership of the parks, the government would lose the ability to protect these areas.
A spokesperson for the Park System told The Washington Post that the proposed plan “does not represent the values of the Park and that it will not have any impact on the management of our parks and the management and conservation of natural resources.”
A spokeswoman for the Forest Service also told The Washington Post that “the current plan reflects the values and philosophies of the Department of the Interior.”
“We’re looking at a very complicated system where we have to take the federal land out of the hands, but not the hands out of government,” she said.
One of the biggest problems conservationists are having with the proposal is that it would put the federal government out of a position of negotiating with the private companies to ensure that the land is protected.
While the Park system has taken steps to prevent the privatization of the American Wilderness, it has not taken the lead in ensuring that reservations are managed with a conservation mindset.
“We do have the parks in reserve,” Fieber said.
“The Park Service does manage these lands.
They have a process for management, they are responsible for managing the land and the public lands.
They’re just a different organization.”
However, some have said that the NPA and the Wilderness Coalition