Trading Public Land for Private Gain in the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore
A report for the
Northern Michigan Environmental Action Council
"Congress finds that certain outstanding natural features, including forests, beaches, dune formations, and ancient glacial phenomena exist along the mainland shore of Lake Michigan and on certain nearby islands in Benzie and Leelanau Counties, Michigan, and that such features ought to be preserved in their natural setting and protected from developments and uses which would destroy the scenic beauty and natural character of the area."
(From Public Law 91-49, the enabling statute that established the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, approved on October 21, 1970.)
Prepared by the Michigan Land Use Institute
June 18, 1996
Table of Contents
I. SUMMARY
The Proposal
Purpose of this Report
Report Conclusions
Local Significance
National Significance
II. THE SLEEPING BEAR DUNES NATIONAL LAKESHORE – A SHORT HISTORY
Unparalleled Beauty
How the Park Came to Be
The Park Today
III. EVOLUTION OF THE SWAP PROPOSAL
IV. PRECEDENTS THAT COULD BE SET
Kuras Justification
Close Examination
Precedents
V. A DISCERNIBLE NATIONAL POLICY
U.S. Government Land Exchanges
Kuras Memorandum
The National Park Service View
VI. THE HOMESTEAD RESORT
An Aggressive Expansion Approach
A Dual Strategy
VII. ALTERNATIVES
Suggesting a New Business Approach
Purchasing the Crystal River Parcel
Building Elsewhere
VIII. CONCLUSION
ENDNOTES
This report was made possible by generous contributions from the Sierra Club,
the National Parks and Conservation Association, and interested citizens.
The Homestead Swap
Trading Public Land for Private Gain in the
Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore
A report for the
Northern Michigan Environmental Action Council
by the
Michigan Land Use Institute
SUMMARY
The Proposal
On December 12, 1995, Robert A. Kuras, owner of The Homestead Resort in Leelanau County, and two board members of Friends of the Crystal River, a local environmental group, surprised Northwest Michigan with an announcement. They had reached a compromise in the fierce, decade-old struggle over Mr. Kuras’s plan to fill in wetlands and develop a golf course along a free-flowing and wild reach of the Crystal River.
Under their proposal, Mr. Kuras would swap his 161 acres of marsh and woodland on the river to the National Park Service. He would receive 204 acres of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, including ridge top meadow and forest overlooking Lake Michigan, where he would be able to build an 18-hole championship golf course and private homes.
Purpose of this Report
The Northern Michigan Environmental Action Council commissioned this research report from the Michigan Land Use Institute to understand more fully the implications of the swap proposal. The intent of the study is to:
Local Significance
The proposed Homestead swap has served to intensify discussion about what Northwest Michigan is becoming, and what is quickly being lost. Escalating population growth and deteriorating natural resources have put growth and development at the top of the region’s cultural concerns and political priorities. The Homestead is a prominent symbol of this debate.
In less than two decades, The Homestead has been transformed from a rustic inn on the shores of Lake Michigan into an upscale resort for tourists and condominium owners. The Homestead’s development paralleled the expansion of several other northern Michigan resorts, which added amenities, including golf courses, to both attract and serve increasing numbers of guests.
Mr. Kuras often has stated his desire to be competitive with other resorts by expanding his operations and gaining control of more land. How to fit The Homestead’s constant growth to the scale of the landscape and the community has been a source of spirited debate for years.
The Homestead employs more than 200 people during the peak summer season. Its guests and homeowners frequent shops and restaurants in nearby Leland and Glen Arbor, contributing to the economic stability in both communities. Property taxes paid by Homestead condominium owners have helped to make the Glen Arbor Township government one of the most prosperous in the region.
Unlike other resorts, however, The Homestead is limited in its options for outward expansion since it is bounded by the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore.
National Significance
The proposed Homestead swap threatens the central tenet of the national park ideal, and has brought the goals and management of the National Park System into sharp focus.
Since 1872, as a matter of public policy, the United States has protected its most magnificent and unique natural lands for the permanent enjoyment of all citizens. Allowing the Homestead swap to occur would subvert the national interest by putting the private economic desires of a wealthy developer ahead of the needs of the American community.
National parks are, in effect, a public estate, a pact between a nation and all its people. As such, the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore and its sister parks are among the purest manifestations of American Democracy. Trading such an ideal away for the benefit of a resort owner would make a mockery of a system that has a notable history and popular support.
THE SLEEPING BEAR DUNES NATIONAL LAKESHORE – A SHORT HISTORY
Unparalleled Beauty
Located three hundred miles northeast of Chicago, the 71,000-acre Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore unfolds between the blue waters of Lake Michigan and the dense forests and dun-colored meadows of Leelanau and Benzie counties. This magnificent place, the lower peninsula’s only national park, is a celebration of the unyielding power of sun, ice, and wind.
The great Sleeping Bear, the park’s geographic centerpiece, is a 400-foot sand dune that rears straight up from Lake Michigan’s shallows. Glaciers piled more sand in high ridges behind the shoreline that became covered by forests of beech, maple, and pine. On bright days, a covey of inland lakes shimmer in alpine blue.
The Crystal River flows wild here, arcing through thick forests of cedar rich with plant and animal life, its current cleansed by miles of fresh water marshes. Near Glen Arbor, the river passes by dune swales that are globally rare. And scattered about are the reminders of early settlements: empty pastures, hemlock barns grown gray and weathered, and acres of old cherry orchards that rise and fall with the land.
How the Park Came to Be
Although unrecognized by most visitors, the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore also is a monument to personal sacrifice. It took a consuming nine-year political struggle to establish the Lakeshore, and bitterness in the region from some displaced landowners lasted years longer. The creation of this park was one of the most arduous in the nation’s history. 8
First proposed in 1961 as part of the Kennedy Administration’s plan for a network of 12 national seashores and lakeshores, the plan to set aside land for a park on the coast of Michigan’s Leelanau and Benzie counties met with an "immediate and powerful uproar." 9 It is understandable that many residents of this coastal landscape, where the wind stirs soothing sighs from the pines and the stars seem close enough to touch, would be reluctant to leave.
Nearly 2,000 families owned property within the proposed boundaries of the park, and some vowed that they would never give up control. Public resistance was so strong that it took 12 separate Congressional proposals before the legislation describing the current park boundaries was signed by President Richard Nixon in 1970.
The passage of the legislation marked the mid-point of the struggle. The Park Service still had to acquire the land, through condemnations, purchases, and special arrangements with inholders, most of which were concluded by the early 1980s.
The Sleeping Bear statute promised to preserve permanently an exceptional landscape from any "developments and uses which would destroy the scenic beauty and natural character of the area." 10 The Government deployed its powers of condemnation to gain control of many of the 1,800 individual parcels that make up the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore.
The 204 acres now being sought by The Homestead for a golf course was part of a 487-acre parcel that once belonged to the Huey family. In 1979, after a long court battle, the Government exercised its power of eminent domain and paid the family $1.3 million for the property.
The Park Today
Time has since helped to calm the anger, and the National Lakeshore now is widely regarded as a local and national treasure. More than 1 million people visit the park each year. In surveys by the recreation industry and local media, Sleeping Bear Dunes is regularly identified as one of Northwest Michigan’s favorite places to visit. The clean beaches, clear water, and gentle wooded hills are a reminder of what the region once was, and of the beauty being lost.
Had there been no foresight a generation ago, it is certain that much of the coastal bluffs and interior high lands that now are protected in the park would have been developed with new roads, private homes, condominiums, and businesses.
The idea of permanently protecting exceptional lands for public enjoyment began in 1872, when President Ulysses S. Grant established Yellowstone National Park, the first of its kind in the world. The formation of the National Park system marks one of the singularly stellar impulses of the American character.
That ideal is embodied in the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, which the federal Government purchased and permanently set aside for its beauty, ecological value, and cultural importance. In establishing the park, the United States determined that the national community’s well-being was paramount over any individual’s private economic interests.
EVOLUTION OF THE SWAP PROPOSAL
For a decade, Friends of the Crystal River, a group with 800 members, has joined a coalition of environmental groups in battling Mr. Kuras, the sole stockholder of Bayberry Properties, which owns The Homestead. At issue are a golf course and condominiums that Mr. Kuras wanted to build on his 161 acres of wild freshwater marsh, woodlands and wetlands along the Crystal River just outside the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore.
The Friends of the Crystal River have used public protest, court action, and an effective communications strategy to block the project. Responding with a squadron of lawyers, engineers, and prominent political contacts, Mr. Kuras turned his unbuilt golf course into a rallying cry for the property rights movement. It became a symbol of the perceived excesses of regulations protecting wetlands and the environment.
Mr. Kuras’s campaign attracted the support of State Senator Connie Binsfield, who represented Glen Arbor Township. Ms. Binsfield, who later became Lt. Governor, alerted Governor John Engler, who personally brought it to the notice of the White House during the Bush Administration.11
Despite such high-level attention, Friends of the Crystal River was winning. The group’s successes included a Federal Appellate Court decision upholding a crucial administrative provision of the wetlands protection law. The effect of the ruling was to compel the Government to conduct a further review of the project by the United States Army Corps of Engineers.
The struggle, though, had worn out some of the leaders of the all-volunteer Friends group. In addition, they recognized that until a resolution was reached, the wild reaches of the Crystal River they had labored for so long to protect remained vulnerable to development.
For his part, Mr. Kuras did not relish continuing the fight, according to various published interviews. It was expensive, and cast his luxury resort in an unflattering light. Just as importantly, the change in oversight from the EPA to the Army Corps of Engineers meant that he would have to essentially start over the laborious years-long process to obtain a federal permit to fill in wetlands to build his planned golf course and condominiums.
Thus, contact was established between Mr. Kuras and two board members of Friends of the Crystal River.12 During weeks of private negotiation, Mr. Kuras and the Friends decided they would try to end the conflict by agreeing to jointly support the following proposal: Mr. Kuras would give up ownership of the 161 acres of marsh and woodland along the Crystal River. In exchange, he would acquire clear title to 204 acres bordering his resort of ridge top meadow and forest, with exceptional vistas of Lake Michigan, that would be withdrawn from the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore.13
On December 12, 1995, the two adversaries held an unexpected news conference in nearby Traverse City. Flanked by several of the region’s prominent leaders, including the president of Northwestern Michigan College, Mr. Kuras said the trade would serve an overriding public interest by allowing him to expand the resort and end a fight that had divided the village of Glen Arbor.
The proposal was almost immediately supported by the Traverse City Area Chamber of Commerce, the Traverse City Record Eagle, the Detroit Free Press, and several Leelanau County townships. U.S. Senator Spencer Abraham prepared legislation to be introduced in Congress.14
Just as swiftly, though, the proposal drew opposition from most regional conservation organizations.
In June 1996, after considering the ramifications of the proposal, the board of Friends of the Crystal River passed a resolution opposing any swap of national park land as a means of preserving the river’s wetlands. In addition, Kasson, Empire, Platte, and Cleveland townships have gone on record as being against the Homestead swap proposal.
PRECEDENTS THAT COULD BE SET
Kuras Justification
The Homestead has an unusual configuration. It is made up of a central core, another area nearby with condominiums, and a third undeveloped parcel along the Crystal River. By trading the river property for national park land, Mr. Kuras would consolidate his holdings around the resort’s central core.
In doing so, The Homestead would dramatically increase its market value. Should Mr. Kuras gain title to the park land he seeks, it would allow The Homestead to build a championship golf course, a fully equipped modern clubhouse, and expensive lake-view homes.
In a statement released during the December 12 news conference, Mr. Kuras said, "This resolution would preserve the Crystal River and its surrounding ecosystem; allow The Homestead to move toward its goal of establishing more stable employment for its associates and a more competitive position for the resort in the spring and fall; and create a sustainable, year-round economy for the community."
Close Examination
Close examination reveals that the Homestead swap has strikingly thin justification as an advance for the public interest, a requirement for land transfers involving the National Park Service.
Twice previously, in 1988 and again in 1992, Mr. Kuras proposed almost identical trades. He withdrew the first proposal, and the Park Service rejected the second. 15
Federal officials say the reason they were excluded from the talks last year was to give Mr. Kuras time to build political support for an idea he knew would be opposed by the Department of the Interior.
While approval of the swap would have resounding benefits for Mr. Kuras, the deleterious cost to the national interest would be extraordinary. The objective of the proposed swap is to remove a great chunk of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore for Mr. Kuras’s private benefit. As such it represents a distortion of the national park idea, and if approved by Congress, would have striking consequences for Sleeping Bear Dunes and for every other national park.
Precedents
According to National Park Service officials, the proposed Homestead swap is an entirely unique precedent that could break every convention on land exchanges and undermine the credibility of the national park system.
A DISCERNIBLE NATIONAL POLICY
U.S. Government Land Exchanges
The federal Government, which is the largest landowner in the United States, often exchanges land with private citizens. The primary agencies for these exchanges are: the U.S. Forest Service, (part of the Department of Agriculture), which also leases property to recreation businesses; and the Bureau of Land Management, (a division of the Department of Interior). 23
The National Park Service, though, adheres to much stricter land acquisition and exchange policies than other land management agencies. This is due to its overarching mission – permanent protection of the nation’s most valuable environmental and cultural resources.
Authorization to acquire and exchange land within the National Park Service is contained in several laws. The most pertinent are the 1965 Land and Water Conservation Fund Act, and the enabling statutes that established the national parks, among them the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore.
Kuras Memorandum
In January of 1996, Mr. Kuras completed a lengthy memorandum that sought to prove that land exchanges are commonplace in the National Park Service, and that his proposal deserved swift approval.
In the memorandum, Mr. Kuras:
A close examination of Mr. Kuras’s arguments in favor of the Homestead swap proposal reveals stretches of fact and weaknesses in logic:
- In obvious contrast to these carefully limited exchanges, the proposed Homestead swap would remove a sizable block of land from the National Lakeshore. The Government would receive less land than it traded away. And the swap would involve a major boundary change.
The National Park Service View
According to current and former senior Interior Department officials, the authority to undertake the sort of exchange proposed by Mr. Kuras is not provided for in the law or in regulations.
The proposed Homestead swap violates each of these criteria, say National Park Service officials. Never before has a large block of land been removed from national park boundaries for the primary benefit of one person. The swap violates the key land acquisition provision of the enabling legislation that established the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, legislation passed into law only after prolonged and thorough debate in Congress and the local community. With the proposed Homestead swap, a private interest would prevail over the public interest. 29
THE HOMESTEAD RESORT
The proposed Homestead swap is the latest joust in a match over land and community that has captivated Glen Arbor for a decade. The Crystal River and the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore have become the most visible symbols of the conflict.
In 1974, Mr. Kuras purchased The Homestead from the Huey family, which had owned it since 1942. Before Mr. Kuras bought it, The Homestead was a classic northern Michigan vacation spot, a remote and rustic inn bounded by the beaches of Lake Michigan and the new National Lakeshore. 30
Since then, Mr. Kuras has turned The Homestead into something else entirely – a full-service resort with restaurants, shops, groomed grounds, tennis courts, 9-hole golf course, swimming pools, ski trails, and condominiums strung along the beach and draped across forested bluffs. The Homestead’s swift development parallels the experience of its competitors across northern Michigan.
New golf courses have become a defining feature of most of these expansions, and have helped to turn "mom and pop" lodgings into exclusive destination resorts and conference centers. The number of championship courses in the region – some of them designed by Jack Nicklaus and Arnold Palmer – has more than doubled since 1985. 31
An Aggressive Expansion Approach
Northern Michigan now is recognized as one of the nation’s premier golf destinations, along with Pinehurst, N.C., Myrtle Beach, S.C., and Pebble Beach, Calif. Under Mr. Kuras’s direction, The Homestead has sought to keep pace with this trend in an expensive chase to stay "competitive."
The problem for Mr. Kuras in this quest is that The Homestead is landlocked. The center of the resort’s operations, a parcel of less than 200 acres where Mr. Kuras built a "village," a ski area, and the bulk of the resort’s condominiums, does not have sufficient space for a championship golf course. Lake Michigan is the resort’s western boundary. The private Leelanau School occupies the southern boundary. The National Lakeshore covers the north and eastern boundaries.
To overcome this obstacle, Mr. Kuras purchased parcels of non-contiguous land scattered about Glen Arbor Township. These included the parcel along the Crystal River, where he proposed filling in wetlands to build more homes and a golf course. The Homestead’s efforts have collided for a decade with physical property boundaries, local planning and zoning regulations, and with national environmental policy and law.
A Dual Strategy
Yet, instead of slowing or amending The Homestead’s expansion to take such barriers into account, Mr. Kuras has responded with a dual strategy:
1). He has insisted to employees, condominium owners, and public officials that unless it grows larger, The Homestead will fail.
2). Mr. Kuras also has sought to challenge the law. His current target, with the swap proposal, is the National Park Service and its rules for acquiring and managing land. Earlier, Mr. Kuras challenged the Clean Water Act and its provisions for protecting wetlands.
In 1990, after Mr. Kuras’s proposal to fill the Crystal River wetlands was rejected by the EPA’s regional staff in Chicago, Mr. Kuras portrayed himself as a casualty of overzealous regulators. In the process he became an icon of the property rights movement, and was able to take his case to the highest levels of government.
Governor John Engler helped Mr. Kuras successfully appeal his case directly to the White House. In 1992, former EPA director William K. Reilly overturned the regional decision and cleared the way for Mr. Kuras to build the course. 32
Friends of the Crystal River, by then six years into the struggle, joined several national environmental organizations to file suit. Both the federal District and Appellate courts rejected Mr. Reilly’s move as illegal, which blocked the construction. 33
Throughout, Mr. Kuras has maintained that he is an innocent victim. He is not. A Harvard-educated businessman, Mr. Kuras is well aware of the geographic, economic, and legal limits of his location. In the mid-1980s, when he purchased the Crystal River property, Mr. Kuras served on the Glen Arbor Township Planning Commission, and was familiar with local land use regulations. 34
Given the legal, political, and public resistance to Mr. Kuras’s previous proposals, how much longer he can maintain an expansion-oriented business strategy is very much in question.
ALTERNATIVES
Unless there is a change in Mr. Kuras’s approach, there will be no acceptable solutions, for the environment or the public interest, to the Homestead dispute. This section discusses three alternative approaches: (1) persuading The Homestead to market its unique location at the doorstep of a National Park, (2) buying the Crystal River property, and (3) building a new golf course nearby.
I. Suggesting a New Business Approach
Mr. Kuras’s goal of taking public land for private gain is not authorized by the regulations guiding the National Park Service. His proposal to build a golf course on Crystal River wetlands was thwarted by requirements of the Clean Water Act. Seeking to compete directly with other northern Michigan destination resorts is in collision with national environmental and public interest goals.
A pattern of relentless expansion does not fit the scale of The Homestead’s landlocked site. Nor does it respect The Homestead’s location within an astonishingly beautiful national park.
Therefore, it would be worthwhile to explore a different approach for The Homestead’s market niche. Mr. Kuras can promote The Homestead’s exclusive setting, and reap the profits from an amenity that no other resort could ever match – the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore.
With this approach, Mr. Kuras could promote his cooperation with the goals of the park, and halt his efforts to challenge environmental law and national park policy. If he did so, community opposition would disappear, and Mr. Kuras would be viewed as a good neighbor.
This is an era when people are longing for authenticity, and searching for enjoyment and relaxation in unspoiled areas. Why compete to be like every other resort? The Homestead has a unique, valuable opportunity to re-establish the northern Michigan experience in its appeal to vacationers and home owners.
II. Purchasing the Crystal River Parcel
The National Park Service has expressed concern about the fate of the wetlands that Mr. Kuras owns along the Crystal River, calling them a valuable ecological resource.
However, the Park Service has never recommended that they be included in the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore. This is because the wetlands are included in a 1.3 mile reach of the river that lies close to M-22, a major state road, and County Road 675. In addition, large untouched sections of wetlands and forest along the river’s edge are broken up by small private land holdings.
When asked whether the National Park Service would consider incorporating the 161 acres of Kuras property into Sleeping Bear Dunes, federal officials say they would not oppose the idea. Federal, state, and private funds could be available to buy the property, but there is strong competition for these dollars. It would take a well-organized effort lasting at least three to five years to build the political support to accomplish this goal. Having the National Park Service as a partner in such a campaign would be a major boost.
It is unclear whether Mr. Kuras would be willing to sell the property. Two years ago, he estimated the value of the 161-acre Crystal River parcel at $10 million.35 That estimate, prompted by a proposal to buy the property with money from the state Natural Resources Trust Fund, was based on what real estate appraisers call the "highest and best uses" of the land.
In other words, if Mr. Kuras could build a championship golf course and condominiums on the property, the land might ultimately be worth $10 million. To date, however, he has been barred from doing so by law. Thus the economic value of the land is likely to be considerably less.
Without a comprehensive appraisal, any financial figure attached to the Crystal River parcel is speculation. The parcel has 15,000 feet of river front, which would make up the bulk of its value. As a rough comparison, land along the Platte and Betsie rivers in Benzie County is selling for $100 to $200 a foot.
The sources of funding for such a purchase are varied, and could include the:
Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund – Established in 1964 and administered by the Department of the Interior, the fund derives its revenues from oil and gas leases and royalties. Since 1980, annual appropriations from the fund have averaged $245 million. In fiscal 1996, Congress cut spending from the Fund to $135 million.36
Natural Resources Trust Fund – Established in 1976 and administered by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources, the fund is financed by oil and gas leases and royalties on state lands. The Natural Resources Trust Fund generally spends $20 million to $25 million annually to purchase land for parks and public recreation. Nominations are made between January and April each year. Lands that have high recreational and environmental value receive top priority. A five-member board appointed by the Governor decides which projects deserve funding. Awards of more than $1 million are rare.37
Land Conservancies – The staffs of the Leelanau Conservancy and the Grand Traverse Regional Land Conservancy are familiar with the Crystal River parcel and say it has high ecological value. The Michigan chapter of the Nature Conservancy also is familiar with the issues and the Crystal River parcel. The state chapter has spent as much as $4 million to buy land; the regional conservancies have spent as much as $500,000 on some projects.
The directors of all three groups said they would be interested in facilitating a purchase of the Crystal River property if they could package conservancy money with larger sources of financing, such as the state and federal trust funds. At this juncture, none of the state conservancies said they would be interested in building a campaign around the issue. All agreed, though, that a future campaign might be attractive, since Mr. Kuras’s proposal to build on the river has achieved a high political and public profile in the region and state.38
III. Building Elsewhere
In 1989, the Friends of the Crystal River prepared a survey of suitable sites in Leelanau County for constructing a golf course. The report identified eight parcels of land within seven miles of The Homestead that were large enough for a golf course and housing.
Each of the eight sites identified in 1989 remains undeveloped. The owner of one of the properties, Daniel Palmer, says he is willing to sell Mr. Kuras about 200 of his 900 acres.39
In addition, Mr. Kuras owns 100 acres along Northwood Road, just east of Glen Arbor, that could be used for a golf course, especially if it were added to the dry land included in the 161 acres that he proposes to trade with the Park Service. In years past, Mr. Kuras has said he wanted to reserve this land for developing new homes.
It is not known whether Mr. Kuras would be willing to build a course at some distance from The Homestead. In 1989, when Dr. Palmer first offered his property, Mr. Kuras rejected the idea. He said that the roads were substandard, guests would find it confusing and inconvenient to have to travel so far, and that a new course must be contiguous to The Homestead to be successful.
A close look at this response reveals a flaw in Mr. Kuras’s logic. The Crystal River parcel is not contiguous to The Homestead’s main facilities. In fact, it is roughly one mile away.40
In interviews for this study, resort executives and a leading golf industry consultant said that generally resorts fare best economically when the golf courses are part of a resort’s landscape architecture. However, a championship golf course in Gaylord is proving to be an exception. Owned by Treetops Resort, with a leading design by Tom Fazio, the course is managed by Rick Smith, a professional golfer who gives lessons to Jack Nicklaus. The course is four miles from Treetops, and has been an economic success.41
It also is important to note that guests of The Homestead now can choose from a wealth of fine courses within easy driving distance, many more than existed in 1986 when Mr. Kuras first proposed a championship course on the Crystal River.
The new Arnold Palmer-designed course at Sugarloaf Resort, now under construction, is about 10 minutes to the north. The Grand Traverse Resort, with its famed Jack Nicklaus-designed "The Bear" course, is less than an hour to the east. Crystal Mountain Resort’s 18-hole course is less than an hour to the southwest.
CONCLUSION
Mr. Kuras’s position has been that, if the swap proposal is rejected, he will continue with his battle to build on the wetlands of the Crystal River.42
However, it is unclear how Mr. Kuras could re-invigorate that plan. Many of the supporters of the original golf course project have now publicly stated their desire to preserve the Crystal River. The most ecologically valuable areas of his parcel remain protected by the provisions of the Clean Water Act regulating wetlands. There is no indication that the Army Corps of Engineers would allow thousands of cubic yards of fill to be dumped in the area. The Homestead has not filed a complete application for a permit from the Corps to do so.
Pertinent questions also have been raised about the value of the marshy Crystal River parcel as a site for either a golf course or condominiums. As Mark Stone noted in the April 26, 1996, edition of The Lake Country Gazette, "new residents would either have to stock up on bug repellent or underwrite a massive pesticide spraying program." 43
At the news conference held in late 1995, Mr. Kuras said the proposed swap would serve an abiding public interest. There is no evidence to justify this claim.
The proposal is an attempt by Mr. Kuras to take public lands for his personal benefit. There is no parallel for approving such a proposal in the long history of the National Park Service. Should Congress give serious consideration to subsidizing this wealthy developer, it must be opposed. Failing to do so would yield ominous consequences for the local community and the national interest.
Endnotes
1. United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Letter from National Park Service Director Roger Kennedy to Senator Carl Levin, April 26, 1996.
2. United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Letter from Roger Kennedy to Lt. Gov. Connie Binsfield, April 18, 1996.
3. Interviews with David Givens, Deputy Field Director, National Park Service, Omaha, Neb., May 2, 1996, and Laura Loomis, Associate Director for National Issues, National Parks and Conservation Association, Washington, D.C., May 10, 1996.
4. Interviews with Stewart Udall, former Secretary of the Interior, May 3, 1996, and with George B. Hartzog Jr., former director of the National Park Service, May 6, 1996.
5. Memorandum from Bob Kuras to Tim Quinn, January 6, 1996.
6. Brown, Stephen, Alternative Site Survey Report: Feasible and Prudent Alternative Locations for The Homestead Golf Course and Housing Development, Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council, August 1989.
7. Interview with Ivan D. Miller, Superintendent of the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, Empire, Michigan, May 10, 1996.
8. Op. cit., Udall and Hartzog interviews.
9. Kalt, Brian C., Sixties Sandstorm: The Fight Over Establishment of a Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore 1961-1970, History Graduate Thesis, University of Michigan, April 1, 1994.
10. Congress of the United States, Public Law 91-479, October 21, 1970.
11. Schneider, Keith, "E.P.A. Head Allows Project on a Lake Michigan Marsh," The New York Times, May 9, 1992.
12. Interviews with Megan Watson and Phil Thiel, Maple City, Michigan, May 3, 1996.
13. Press Release, "The Homestead and Citizens Group Reach Compromise on Proposed Golf Course Land," December 12, 1995.
14. United States Senate, Abraham Amendment No. 3570 to the Presidio Properties Administration Act of 1996, March 26, 1996.
15. Op. Cit., Letter from Kennedy to Levin.
16. Interview with Bill Shaddox, Chief, Land Resources Division, National Park Service, Washington, D.C. May 13, 1996.
17. Op. cit., Interviews with Shaddox, Givens, Udall, Hartzog.
18. Ibid.
19. Op. cit., Letter from Kennedy to Levin.
20. Ibid.
21. Ibid.
22. Op. cit., Interviews with Givens and Shaddox.
23. Op. cit., Interview with Shaddox.
24. Op. cit., Memorandum from Kuras to Quinn.
25. United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service, National Park Serivce Land Exchanges, April 8, 1996.
26. Ivan Miller, National Park Service, "Land Exchanges Palmer Property," Empire, Michigan, December 21, 1995.
27. Ivan Miller, National Park Service, "SLBE Boundary Correction Charles Knight Property," Empire, Michigan, undated.
28. Op. cit., Letter from Kennedy to Binsfield; Letter from Kennedy to Levin.
29. Op. cit., Interviews with Miller, Shaddox, and Givens.
30. Traverse City Record Eagle, "Homestead Debate History," January 5, 1993.
31. Interview with David Richards, Michigan golf industry consultant, May 10, 1996.
32. Op. cit., The New York Times.
33. Interview with James Olson, Attorney for Friends of the Crystal River, May 14, 1996.
34. Op. cit., "Homestead Debate History".
35. Interview with Tom Woiwode, Executive Director, Michigan Chapter of the Nature Conservancy, East Lansing, Michigan, May 9, 1996.
36. The Wilderness Society, "Land and Water Conservation Fund," The Land and Water Conservation Fund Coalition, Washington, D.C., April 1996.
37. Interview with Keith Charters, member of the Natural Resources Trust Fund Board, Traverse City, Michigan, May 9, 1996.
38. Interviews with Glen Chown, Executive Director of the Grand Traverse Regional Land Conservancy, Traverse City, Michigan; Brian Price, Executive Director of the Leelanau Conservancy, Leland, Michigan; and (Op. cit.) Tom Woiwode.
39. Conners, Diane, "Groups: Homestead Should Sell River Land, Buy Elsewhere," Traverse City Record Eagle, May 9, 1996.
40. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, "Kuras Properties Draft Application for Permit," Cadillac, Michigan, November 28, 1987.
41. Interview with James MacInnes, President and General Manager, Crystal Mountain Resort, Thompsonville, Michigan, May 10, 1996.
42. Conners, Diane, "Feds May Face Lawsuit if Land Swap Falls Apart," Traverse City Record Eagle, April 28, 1996.
43. Stone, Mark., "Swap or Swipe?", The Lake Country Gazette, Elk Rapids, Michigan, April 26, 1996.