A Green Shrouded Miracle: TOC

A Green Shrouded Miracle
The Administrative History of Cuyahoga Valley National Recreation Area, Ohio

Special History Study

When you ‘re living in an area where everything is owned by a term of years or ~l~fe estates, “you ‘re living in a community with no future. In every year another person is going to die or their term of years is up, and the government is going to come in and tear the house down. So it is a dying environment. It is not one that people want to live in.... You had deteriorating road.c, deteriorating health service, deteriorating fire service. It was a tragic situation and became increasingly apparent to the people that were there that it was not the type of situation that they wanted to live in.¹

Former valley resident and Cuyahoga Valley Homeowners and Residents Association member Leonard Stein-Sapir

Cuyahoga Valley Homeowners and Residents Association

No other group in Cuyahoga Valley National Recreation Area’s (CVNRA) history has resisted National Park Service (NPS) plans and policies as actively or vocally as did the Cuyahoga Valley Homeowners and Residents Association in the late 1970s and early 1980s. The Homeowners Association organized because of the widespread discontent emanating from the Corps of Engineers-directed land acquisition program (see Chapter 9). However, throughout the western United States, disenchanted property owners were organizing against federal acquisition programs. Therefore, the Homeowners Association’s efforts were by no means unique, but did help lend increased visibility to a national organization which stood up in defiance of land-acquiring federal agencies, particularly NPS.

During the tenure of NPS Director George B. Hartzog, Jr. (1964-1972), NPS produced a study comparing the cost of fee acquisition versus permitting the development of private inholdings into townsites. The analysis determined that long-term costs were considerably higher to “allow these environmental cancers to remain than it would to eliminate them.”² In the late 1970s, Interior Secretary Cecil D. Andrus, backed by a group of congressmen led by Phillip Burton (Democrat-California), instructed NPS to acquire in fee the inholdings in western parks. The aggressive policy resulted in grassroots organizing of affected landowners and the formation of what became known as the National Inholders Association (NIA). The NIA nurtured this discontent to such a feverish pitch that the protest movement, which became known as the “Sagebrush Rebellion,” effectively scuttled this federal policy. Sagebrush Rebels called for the wholesale transfer of public lands to the states.³ NIA enjoyed considerable support from corporate America, particularly the extractive industries of mining, oil, and timber and their unquenchable thirst for the vast natural resources on public lands. It was these same corporate it~terests which fought environmentalists in Congress over a wide array of conservation bills enacted in the 1960s and 1970s, and which gleefully used the NIA to fight unfavorable federal laws and regulations.⁴

The Sagebrush Rebellion came in reaction to two decades of unprecedented expansion of the National Park System. It soon became apparent that the tremendous growth of the System had outstripped NPS' s ability to protect and maintain it. Carving parks out of privately-owned lands only encouraged the cries against big government interfering in the interests of individuals and private enterpnse.

With Ronald Reagan’s election in 1980, this anti-government, conservative backlash found a comfortable home in the executive branch. Reagan turned to former Bureau of Outdoor Recreation Director James G. Watt to be secretary of Interior. Watt, a Colorado lawyer, had led the Mountain States Legal Foundation, a conservative group which helped lumber, oil, and mining companies combat environmentalists in the courts. His appointment caused great apprehension in Congress.⁵ James Watt also had ties with the Heritage Foundation, which produced for the Reagan administration a 20-volume plan for eliminating a half-century of liberal policies from the nation's political infrastructure. Watt helped draft recommendations for Interior, among which were to curtail land acquisition and transfer parks not of "national significance" to state or cloacl control. Wat held close to his idealogy which stressed small government and acting in partnership with other jurisdictions, but avoiding federal ownership and administration. He therefore sympathized with the Sagebrush Rebellion, a movement he believed was created because of arrogant federal officials, especially within Interior, who refused to consult with anyone before making land use decisions on public lands.⁶

As secretary of the Interior, James Watt undermined the purpose of the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) by refusing to spend the allocations on land acquisition. In addition to appointing fellow travelers to key Interior posts, he named the head of the NIA, Charles Cushman, to the National Park System Advisory Board, politicizing and decimating the long- held professional image of that body. Under Secretary Watt’ s tutelage, department officials acted with unveiled hostility toward CVNRA, which they believed did not belong in the National Park System. As Bureau of Outdoor Recreation director in 1974, James Watt testified vociferously against CVNRA’s authorization using the same arguments. Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks G. Ray Arnett⁷ authored two memoranda which clearly reflected the Heritage Foundation’s blueprint and were denounced by Congressman John Seiberling as a “hit list.” Arnett directed NPS to evaluate how to achieve the deauthorization of CVNRA, Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area (near Los Angeles), Fire Island National Seashore (near New York City), Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore (near Chicago), and Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore (near Traverse City, Michigan).⁸ Arnett was especially interested in relinquishing management authority and ownership of CVN7RA to the state, even over Governor James Rhodes’ objections. When the actions were made public, Secretary Watt’ disavowed any knowledge of Arnett’s activities and denied any intention to transfer NPS units to the states.⁹ While machinations within the Interior department further stoked the flames of dissent, the Sagebrush Rebellion flickered to life in the Cuyahoga Valley in the summer of 1977 with the formation of the Cuyahoga Valley Homeowners and Residents Association. The group issued the following statement of purpose:

To initiate and maintain communication channels both with our political leaders, representatives and National Park Service officials.

To provide the association membership with current and reliable information about the progression of the Cuyahoga Valley National Recreation Area (CVNRA), and how we can deal with it and the possible steps which can be taken.

To consider pending legislation affecting the membership and to make an effort to influence the legislation in a constructive manner.

To provide a forum for members to discuss developments of problems relating to the CVNRA and to advise the National Park Service as necessary.

To develop a positive posture or plan as to what type park developments will enhance rather than destroy the residential community.

To constantly study the plans and the implementations for plans by the CVNRA and to exert a positive influence on them so as to protect and enhance the residential community as well as the CVNRA.

To encourage homeowners and the residents of the Valley to remain in the Valley so that the residential community may be preserved.¹⁰

The Homeowners Association’s executive committee consisted of Chairperson Patricia Morse, Vice Chairman Martin Griffith, Treasurer Doris Schumacher, Secretary Pro Tempore Ann Porterfield, and Recording Secretary Freida Johnson.¹¹ The group claimed membership of several hundred people, but others have claimed that it actually had few members and did not represent the views of the majority of the community. All valley residents were invited to attend Homeowners Association meetings and while many did, some refused to pay dues allegedly because they were told that “it would go hard on them if they were opposed to the park.”¹² This type of fear and paranoia was common during the active phase of the land acquisition program.

Homeowners Association members charged that NPS, local officials, and the mass media provided no encouragement for residents to remain in their homes. Disenchanted homeowners felt they were unwanted intrusions which NPS only wanted to “force out” of the valley. Morale plummeted when, for example, new plans on a park transportation system appeared to restrict easy movement within the valley community.’¹³ Members were concerned and confused about NPS plans. Attending NPS public information meetings, many residents became frightened and frustrated because they felt outnumbered and intimidated by the larger numbers of people attending from outside the valley. A strong lobbying faction of motorcycle enthusiasts pressing for CVNRA facilities were especially upsetting to residents. According to the Homeowners Association’s Martin Griffith:

I think that most of the residents came out of these hearings with a real sense of frustration because they came with a lot of questions. Very few if any of the questions relating to their properties were ever answered and it seemed like an exercise in futility.

1 think that the community reaction was that the Park Service had the mandate to hold a certain number of hearings. They were holding the hearings. They were doing what they were supposed to do legally, and I don’t think there was afeeling that what was said at these meetings was really going to cut much ice.¹⁴

During the general management plan meetings, there was little or no discussion of the park’s impact on valley communities, but considerable attention was given to impacts on wildlife and flora. Preservation of the community was notably absent. Residents were frustrated when only form letters came from area congressmen. The Homeowners Association, therefore, provided a forum for residents to obtain answers to questions.’¹⁵

Superintendent Birdsell devoted considerable time on the telephone explaining acquisition, park development, and related matters to homeowners. He found that the discontent was largely a communication problem. Reporting to the Midwest Regional Office, Birdsell noted: .... "the rumors and distortions regarding our programs continue to run rampant up and down the valley. Only time will resolve much of this, for there certainly does not seem to be any other way.”¹⁶ Birdsell continued to urge residents to bring questions directly to him for resolution rather than relying on hearsay. He took every opportunity to denounce homeowners who subdivided their land in order to increase its value. In such a manner, the tracts could be sold to the government at inflated prices. Another method was to remove topsoil or piling it up so that the “personal property” had to be purchased separately and then relocated at government expense.

In the fall of 1978, the Homeowners Association filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Cleveland with the aim of obtaining a ruling against the government using eminent domain unless there were approved standards or plans clearly detailing the land Was needed for a specific park development such as a trail or visitor facility. To prosecute the suit, the Homeowners Association retained Bait Craig from Kentucky’s Salmon P. Chase School of Law.¹⁷

Assisting in the legal battle was Peninsula resident and attorney-at-law Leonard R. SteinSapir. Stein-Sapir initially resisted involvement in the Homeowners Association, but changed his mind and became its leader because of what he perceived as continuing deleterious effects of the federal land acquisition program on his community. He had personal reasons as well. An Ohio native living in New York City, Stein-Sapir moved to Peninsula in 1974. Admittedly oblivious of the push to authorize CVNRA, he purchased a 78-acre farm on Oak Hill Road at a bankruptcy auction as an investment as well as a pastoral place to raise his family. After the federal land program began, the Oak Hill Road area became the site of the first CVNRA development plan (see Chapter 15), and fee acquisition, not scenic easement, was the only option available. Because NPS plans were nebulous, many suspected the project was “hatched” simply to silence NPS critics, many of whom were Homeowners Association members in the Oak Hill Road area. Leonard Stein-Sapir, whose own property was targeted, fought back.

As early as 1977, Stein-Sapir spearheaded a petition drive asking Congress to exclude the Oak Hill Road area from CVN7RA. Through investigating NPS plans and maps and determining that no developments were planned for the Oak Hill¹⁸ area, Stein-Sapir circula~d the petition among his neighbors, most of whom enthusiastically signed. As media attention spread word of the petition, these same families came back to Stein-Sapir and asked that their names be dropped. According to Stein-Sapir, his neighbors genuinely feared that if their names remained on the petition, NPS would seek retribution during acquisition negotiations. Stein-Sapir shelved the petition and decided to become not only an outspoken critic of NPS, but to pursue his own case at every level to the bitter end.

When the case went into condemnation, the three-week jury trial saw Stein-Sapir vigorously arguing against the government’s right to take his property. At the end of the first week, the judge determined that NPS did have the right of condemnation under the 1974 act and then went on to the issue of value. Stein-Sapir, who believed that federal prosecutors wanted to damage him because of his Homeowners Association leadership role, successfully defended his own appraisal price by proving that the government’s comparable sales examples were not equitable.¹⁹

The Stein-Sapir case was similar to lawsuits brought by David Hazelwood and Thomas F. Bea? (see Chapter 9) in that it hinged on the section of the park authorization act which stated: “Fee title to such improved properties shall not be acquired unless the secretary finds that such lands are being used, or are threatened with uses, which are detrimental to the purposes of the recreation area, or unless such acquisition is necessary to fulfill the purposes of the act.” So, too, in both the Hazelwood and Bear cases, the courts ruled in favor of NPS. The Hazelwood lawsuit, which was a class-action supported by the Homeowners Association, was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, but the high court in December 1983 declined to hear the case.²⁰

While the legal arena generated much publicity for the Homeowners Association, the media, electronic and print, furnished generous coverage of the group’s other activities which tended to exacerbate their “anti-park” image in the public mindset. A January 1980, gathering in Peninsula to show a park-related film turned into an angry debate between the audience and a spectator: John Seiberling.u Homeowners Association picketing during an April 1980 luncheon meeting of the Cuyahoga Valley Association (CVA) also drew attention²¹ Heated letters to the editor on both sides of the spectrum appeared constantly in area newspapers, culminating in a five-piece 1980 series by The Cleveland Press which focused on the Homeowners Association’s grievances and an editorial which concluded, “some fresh management talent” was needed at CVNRA.²² The Press series ultimately led to a lawsuit alleging libel and slander filed by Leonard Stein-Sapir against Superintendent Birdsell²³ The ultimate move by the group was a direct appeal to Secretary Watt, imploring him to seek the deauthorization of CVNRA.²⁵

The Homeowners Association heavily lobbied the national media to draw attention to its plight. An effective tool to do just that was a documentary film produced by Mark and Dan Jury²⁶ of Waverly, Pennsylvania, entitled “In Condemnation--The Cuyahoga Valley” which enjoyed an advanced showing in New York City in late 1979. The story was picked up by the NBC-TV program “Prime Time Sunday” anchored by newswoman Jessica Savitch and produced by James Gannon. Aired on December 16, 1979, the “Prime Time Sunday” segment on CVNRA lasted five minutes and was part of an overall eleven-minute report on “federal land grabs” at CVNRA, Grand Teton National Park (Wyoming), and Buffalo National River (Arkansas). The report outlined homeowners’ complaints while largely omitting the larger community’s or the NPS’ viewpoints.²⁷

“Prime Time Sunday” interviews with Superintendent Birdsell, NPS Director Whalen²⁸, and Congressman Seiberling²⁹ were conducted, but little of substance was aired. The line of questioning was highly biased and provocative. For example:

Gannon: Do you feel that there has been more disruption to owners than was necessary?

Birdsell: I certainly do not. To the contrary, the law provides for all sin glefamily residential owners living in the valley at the time of the authorization the right to stay on their property the rest of their lives.

Gaimon: A great deal of suffering has occurred in the valley. What is your reaction to that?

Birdsell: I believe suffering is a very strong word to use here. There have been some people who were not excited about the prospect of the park, but there have been landowners who were thrilled with the National Park Service coming here and who have been extremely pleased with their negotiations with the National Park Service.

Gannon: Isn’t something lost in America when we take over so much land?

Birdsell: No, quite to the contrary, for something is being saved for America and for the citizens to benefit from for all time. This land will be for all United States citizens for use in perpetuity rather than being held for only a select few or used for commercial development. Instead of commercial or industrial use, the land will now be preserved and used by all people for all time.

Gannon: Preservation means status quo, does it not, so why not let all the houses remain?

Birdsell: It is impossible to develop a parkfor public use with all private homes remaining. A park cannot be developed on a checker-board pattern , with public lands open for access and privately-owned land not open to trespass. It is necessary to acquire blockr of land for the development of public use for recreation and education, as is called for by the mandate of Congress and in the general management plan for the park.³⁰

The piece did not present viewpoints of any willing seller or those who elected to retain use or a life estate. In fact, “Prime Time Sunday” did not address the issue of retained use.³¹ A similar scathing expose appeared as an editorial in the Wall Street Journal.³²

A successor to the Jury brothers’ “In Condemnation--The Cuyahoga Valley” came in 1983 with a 75-minute documentary entitled “For All People, For All Time.” The same newswoman took notice of what had proven to be an attention-grabbing, emotional story. Jessica Savitch narrated an hour-long documentary sponsored by the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) for its “Frontline” program. Entitled “For the Good of All,” Savitch continued her advocacy journalistic style by tracing the emotional battles of five families and the Homeowners Association in opposing the NPS. The deceased Bill Birdsell was portrayed as the classic villain. Savitch asserted that Birdsell wanted a “wilderness park where every tree and flower and animal would be protected”; that scenic easements were cheaper than fee and would have preserved the community which was “clearly what Congress had intended”; and that NPS “thwarted the will of Congress” and “ignored the law of the land.”³³

The “Frontline” show had substantial impact because it was a PBS documentary which therefore gave it added credibility. The NIA used it to promote the Sagebrush Rebellion by convincing audiences around the country that the government intentionally deceived homeowners regardless of the law. NIA found a receptive public at the Upper Delaware National Scenic River and the proposed Columbia River Gorge park area. Hundreds of people joined a movement at Upper Delaware to get the park deauthorized. As one observer noted:

Viewers come away with the clear impression that the NPS illegallyforced people to move out of Cuyahoga Valley. Yet, the courts have repeatedly ruled that NPS actions were consistent with the law. NPS opponents across the country are using the film--and its one-sided views--as a scare tactic, stirring up misapprehensions and violence among local residents. Unfortunately, this flawed perception of the Cuyahoga Valley NRA will be used again and again to thwart federal land-protection efforts by painting the NPS as a cadre of devious lawbreakers.³⁴

Groups opposed to new federal areas sought speakers from the Cuyahoga Valley Homeowners and Residents Association. In 1986, Homeowners Association officer Martin Griffith traveled to the Columbia River Gorge in the Washington/Oregon area where 41,000 people were to be impacted by a proposed 200,000-acre federal park. Griffith was invited by Columbia Gorge United, a local homeowners group, to tell about CVNRA’s impact on the community. Griffith’s message, which compared CVNRA events to what would happen in the Pacific Northwest should NPS become involved, enjoyed considerable media exposure.³⁵ The specter of CVNRA turmoil has helped stall progress on subsequent new area proposals. Nebraska’s proposed Niobrara National Park/Scenic River floundered in 1989-90 in part because of it.³⁶

NIA founder Charles Cushman had effectively used the Cuyahoga Valley Homeowners and Residents Association’s cause to further his own organization. The Homeowners Association welcomed Cushman as a sympathetic national spokesman, but the local organization’s leadership regarded Cushman with caution because of NIA’s transparent attempt to “leverage [the Homeowners Association’s] situation into a power position for themselves. “³⁷ During the Reagan years, Cushman enjoyed an enhanced position through an appointment to the National Park System Advisory Board³⁸ Another NIA officer, Ric Davidge, became an assistant to Assistant Secretary G. Ray Arnett. Cushman and Davidge helped press the plight of the Homeowners Association before the upper echelon of the Department of the Interior.³⁹ No monetary relationship existed between NIA and the Homeowner's Association, however.⁴⁰

Cushman first brought his version of the western range war to CVNRA in July 1978 when he branded NPS as a bureaucratic tyrant riding roughshod over the rights of private property owners. Cushman was an able performer, appearing as a common man before valley residents clad in a flannel shirt, yet surfacing the next morning on Cleveland television dressed in a dark three-piece business suit portraying a dignified lawyer, the consumate protector of citizen's rights.⁴¹ Cushman returned the following year and met personally with Bill Birdsell who strongly suspected Cushman of tape-recording their conservation. Because of Cuyahoga, Cushman launced a nationwide Freedom of INformation Act request for the complete legislative history of every NPS unit. Cushman also lobbied for investigation of John Seiberling's scenic easement.⁴²

The "Counter Campaign"

Superintendant Bill Birdsell could visualize the Cuyahoga Valley National Recreation Area as a legitimate national park when there were hundreds of people living within it. While Birdsell viewed the small village of Peninsula with its services and shops as an amenity to CVNRA, the widely dispersed, individual residences were not something he wanted to see remain. Birdsell believed CVNRA's future lay in providing green open space to the urbanized Northeast Ohio region. He did not want to administer a patchwork quilt of private/public ownerships with people unable to use the park because the large number of privately-owned tracts prevented having linear trails. Because he did not recognize the existence of a cohesize "valley community," under the willing seller/hardship mechanism of the CVNRA act, Birdsell allowed the land acquisition program to proceed with removing these undesirable enclaves whenever the opportunity arose. His viewpoint was a typical NPS policy, one which managers practiced all across the United States.

When the Homeowners Association dispute erupted, Birdsell imposed his own anti-residents viewpoint on his staff by insisting that accquired tracts be called by their historic names, and not by their recent owners. If structures were not historic and were not going to be retained, Birdsell instructed his staff to call them by their individual tract numbers. IN this manner, he sought to break the bonds that the local community had on these tracts.⁴³

To counter the tide of negative publicity, Birdsell sought support for NPS to produce its own pro-CVNRA documentary to use in the public relations campaign against the Jury brother's film. In a March 1980 appeal to the NPS Harpers Ferry Center(HFC) he wrote:

Their campaign is filled with lies, half-truths, facts out of context, innuendo, etc. This, of course, is to their benefit in distorting the facts of NPS programs. We are concerned that this could have an effect on the future of Cuyahoga Valley being the best possible park to serve the millions of citizens in this area. The time has come when we can no longer sit back as the "good guys" and continue to be on the defensive only. Our "White Smokey Bear Hat" is being badly spoiled by this smear capaign. We must get the facts out to our publics and se the record straight.⁴⁴

Birdsell's proposal that HFC produce a pro-NPS audio-visual program met with a negative response. Departmental policy prohibited developing such programs to promote an agency, its role, or its programs. Even if donated funds were used and it was produced outside NPS, CVNRA could not use such a film. ONsite programs and printed materials remained the only method available to convey a pro-CVNRA message.⁴⁵

Concerned about the public protest, Congressman John Seiberling called a spcial Capitol Hill meeting on May 22, 1980, to discuss ways to turn public opinion around. It makred the first time in NPS history that such a congressional inquiry had been held to address problems at a single NPS unit.⁴⁶ Seiberling's informal meetin was a brainstorming sesion to find ways to accentuate the positive about CVNRA resources and opportunities. The group produced a two- page list of ways to counter the anti-park movement. The fundamental consensus was that CVNRA needed to break from its preoccupation with land acquisition and begin to establish a visible NPS presence. While no new resources were provided in terms of staff or budget, congressional encouragement was given to increasing informational programs and activities.⁴⁷

The “counter campaign” led to the rebirth of the Cuyahoga Valley Association (CVA) as a park friends organization. Ironically, the many citizens groups which helped lobby for CVNRA had evaporated upon the park’s establishment because they assumed NPS could handle everything on its own. It took the crisis generated by the Cuyalioga Valley Homeowners and Residents Association to convince these citizens groups that pro-park advocacy was still important. CVA and Sue Klein of the defunct Cuyahoga Valley Park Federation (CVPF) pressed supporters to engage in a vigorous letter-writing campaign to counter the anti-park initiative.⁴⁸ The pro-park fervor still burned bright as Advisory Commission member Norman Godwin wrote to the Akron Beacon Journal in July 1980:

The Homeowners [Association] like every other private interest group should have their story told but I am tired of hearing their lies rehashed again and again. The Journal is well aware of the benefits millions of Amen cans will glean from the historic, scenic and natural treasures in the CV2VRA. The public wants a park, they paid for a park, and by God they’re going to get a park.... The National Park Service is accomplishing an impossible dream in record time and in the best interest of the public. Park Superintendent Bill Birdsell will go down in history as the hardest working, most thoughtful and talented project manager the NPS ever had.

The valley has been saved; adverse development is stopped and cleanup has begun. If you think it looks bad in places, and I do too, just consider what five more years of strip mining, land filling and housing developments would have wrought. Thanks to the NPS for preserving my parents’ rec area, my rec area, and my children ‘s rec area and making it available to everyone.⁴⁹

Private citizens loyal to the CVNRA worked diligently to correct what they perceived as rampant misinformation being spread across the nation by NIA concerning their park. Norm Godwin visited California to address meetings at Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area. Janet Hutchison maintained extensive contact with a Columbia Gorge support group to correct information being disseminated about CVNRA in the Pacific Northwest.⁵⁰

The most significant result of the NPS counter campaign was the implementation of a cultural arts and special events program. Beginning in the summer of 1981, a series of festivals were held which met with tremendous success. In addition to special event festivals, NPS interpreters staged art and photography competitions, nature shows, and the Cuyahoga Valley Lyceum program. By 1983, CVNRA hosted the National Folk Festival and continued to do so in 1984 and 1985. These high-visibility, special interest activities helped secure for NPS a positive image. Media coverage turned from heavily negative to predominantly positive as attention moved away from the land acquisition program. NPS gave priority to removing vacant structures, a prime target for critics. In 1981, a new visitor center opened in CVNRA’s north end, thereby announcing a real presence in Cuyahoga County.⁵¹

As a more positive image emerged in the early 1980s, the attention paid to the Homeowners Association dwindled. Homeowners Association tactics alienated many officials and as its credibility declined, the public simply lost interest. After the failed legal battle, leaders like Leonard Stein-Sapir moved away, further weakening the organization.⁵²

Superintendent John P. Debo, Jr., established a businesslike working relationship with the Homeowners Association, and only muted criticism has been directed at NPS. It is Debo’s philosophy that if the Homeowners Association did not exist, NPS would have to create it.⁵³

It has been argued that the Cuyahoga Valley’s version of the Sagebrush Rebellion and the legacy of James Watt were beneficial to the evolution and long-term survival of CVNRA. The publicity gave the park increased visibility and helped educate the public about what the valley has to offer. Within NPS itself, CVNRA launched a concerted effort to change the negative image of “the burning river” into a positive one. By weathering the storm of criticism, CVN7RA emerged intact, with greater confidence and a stronger feeling of legitimacy.⁵⁴

FOOTNOTES:
1. Leonard R. Stein-Sapir interview, 25 May 1989.

2. Hartzog, Battling for the National Parks (Mt. Kisco, New York: Moyer Bell Limited, 1988), 5.

3. Ibid.

4. John F. Seiberling to Karen Rikhoff and Janet B. Hutchison, Cuyahoga Valley League of Women Voters of Cuyahoga County, letter, 29 January 1980. Seiberling commented, “These particular industries, having found themaelves unable to intimidate or seduce Senator Bumpers or me, have clearly embarked on a campaign to attempt to embarrass us and the agencies of the government who stand in their way.”

5. According to NPS Director Russell E. Dickenson, Watt had two managerial personas: public and private. Privately, Watt was easy-going and likeable. In public, he became a prophet and an enforcer of conservative Republicanism. Watt did not expect to be in office for long. According to Dickenson: “One of the first things he told me he was that he expected to be fired within 18 months from the day that he and I first talked. And that was simply because he recognized that he was going to adopt a persona of confrantation, and he was going to advocate programs which would simply infuriate the environmentalists. He was trying to turn around a long-standing set of policies, to bring them more in line with his philosophical view of the world. He knew his time was going to be numbered. As it turned out, he was pretty close." See Rusesell E. Dickenson interview, 18 July 1989.

6. Ibid.; John D. Cherry interview, 13 July 1989; National Recreation and Park Association’s Washington Action Report, 12 January 1981; and Amos A. Kermisch, “Cuyahoga Valley Region’s Future May Hang in Balance,” The Plain Dealer, 24 May 1981. After his resignation, Watt became director of the Heritage Foundation.

7. NPS Director Russell E. Dickenson said that the anti-CVNRA activities came from Arnett’s staff, namely Ric Davidge, who was “running wild” within the department trying to implement the Reagan/Heritage Foundation manifesto. Dickenson saw evidence of considerable behind-the-scenes manipulation between Cushman and Davidge. Dickenson believed Amett’s claim of not knowing what his own staff was doing. See Dickenson interview, 18 July 1989.

8. Secretary Watt ignored Arnett (who was appointed by the White House Personnel Office over his objections) and dealt directly with NPS Director Dickenson. The two were friends from earlier years when Watt was director of the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation and Dickenson was NPS deputy director. When Watt became Secretary, he personally requested that Dickenson remain at the helm of NPS. See Russell E. Dickenson interview, 18 July 1989.

9. John Seiberling interview, 7-8 September 1989; Arnett to Dickenson, 29 April 1981 (two memoranda); “Elimination of National Park Here Proposed in Government Memo,” 30 April 1981, “Arnett: Cuyahoga to Stay in Nation’s Park System,” 25 June 1981, and “Watt Criticized on Parks,” 30 May 1981, all in The Cleveland Press; and “Interior Aide Lied, Says Seiberling,” The Plain Dealer, 21 May 1981.

10. Cuyahoga Valley Homeowners and Residents Association literature found in James S. Jackson papers, provided by Margot Jackson. A postscript states: “We do not oppose the park--We suunort the residents. [Emphasis in original] 11. “Valley Residents Want Rights,” letter to the editor, Akron Beacon Journal, 5 August 1977. Committee chairpersons were as follows: Pat Benson and Jean Wilson (roads); Lilly Fleder (public relations); and John F. Pearne (legal).

12. Leonard R. Stein-Sapir interview, 24 May 1989.

13. Homeowners Association to CVNRA Advisory Commission, letter, 20 August 1977, James S. Jackson Papers, provided by Margot Jackson. A Homeowners Association-commissioned study done by the Institute for Liberty and Community does not substantiate the “forced out” charge. Surveying the remaining 480 residential households (150 having sold and relocated), the report asked: “If you have conveyed fee title of your property to the federal government, did you do so, in part, because you felt threatened with condemnation?” Sixty-eight percent said no. When asked if they would do it differently, only 15 percent said they would arrange a scenic easement. See Cuyahoga Valley Report (Concord, Vermont: Institute for Liberty and Community, September 1979).

14. Martin Griffith interview, 22 May 1989.

15. Ibid. Griffith viewed Birdsell as “extremely insensitive to the community,” “dictatorial,” and “confrontational.”

16. Birdsell to Regional Director Dave Beal, 3 March 1978, A22. After requesting an opportunity to address a Homeowners Association meeting, the request was granted six months later on March 23, 1978. Over 100 people attended the three-hour meeting. Ibid., 23 March 1978.

17. Leonard R. Stein-Sapir interview, 24 May 1989; and Steve Hoffman, “Park Land Practices Run into Opposition,” Akron Beacon Journal, 20 August 1978.

18. CVNRA development plans were not conceived until well into the initial land acquisition phase. Funding for phase one of the Oak Hill Day Use Area did not come until 1981 and included development of several lakes for recreation (fishing, ice-skating, etc.) hiking, horse and cross-country ski trails, picnicking, access road and parking, open-field recreation areas, environmental education facilities, and open space for nature study and exploration.

19. Leonard R. Stein-Sapir interview, 24 May 1989. The Peninsula lawyer pressed his case to the highest levels, including a meeting with NPS Director Russell E. Dickenson. Because of the pending litigation, Dickenson courteously listened, but could not say too much on the advice of counsel. See Dickenson interview, 18 July 1989.

20. “Peninsula Owners Sue to Halt Park Takeover,” The Cleveland Press, 20 October 1978, and “Valley Residents Sue to Curb Park Service,” The Plain Dealer, 20 October 1978.

21. Robert Hoiles, “Effect of Court Ruling in Park Suit Debated,” 30 June 1980, and “Valley Park Decision a Victory for the Area,” 5 July 1980, both in Akron Beacon Journal.

22. Betsy Lammerding, “Seiberling Debated by Angry Park Foes,” Akron Beacon Journal, 18 January 1980; and Peter Almond, “Homeowners in Peninsula Fight for Land,” The Cleveland Press, 18 January 1980.

23. Leon Dobbs, “Cuyahoga Valley Residents Protest U.S. Park Buying,” Akron Beacon Journal, 27 April 1980.

24. “The National Park’s Mistakes,” editorial, The Cleveland Press, 24 April 1980; Leonard R. Stein-Sapir interview, 24 May 1989; and Civil Action C80 1133 In the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, Leonard R. Stein-Sapir v. William Birdsell, filed 3 July 1980. The suit was based on Birdsell’s allegations that Stein-Sapir was “trying to rip-off the government” and that his activities were “unethical.” The plaintiff asked the court to award $100,000 in compensatory damages and $200,000 in punitive damages. SteinSapir dropped the suit in the aftermath of Birdsell’s death.

25. Leonard R. Stein-Sapir to Secretary James G. Watt, letter, 20 February 1981. Surprisingly, the department referred Stein-Sapir’ s letter to NPS for response. CVNRA staff prepared the draft reply citing no change in policy. Another response to a Stein-Sapir to Watt letter regarding the Oak Hill Day Use Area, also prepared by CVNRA, went out unchanged with Watt’s signature. See Sheridan S. Steele interview, 25 March 1982.

26. The Jury brothers received their inspiration to film events in the Cuyahoga Valley from what transpired in their own area, namely, the community resistance to the Corps of Engineers’ Tocks Island Dam project which affected 8,000 people in Pennyslvania’s Delaware Water Gap.

27. Leonard R. Stein-Sapir interview, 24 May 1989; and CVHR.4 Newsletter, January 1980.

28. Whalen said that Savitch and Gannon wanted to “do a number on” NPS as well as John Seiberling. They were searching for an opening in order to tie Seiberling personally to unethical conduct, particularly to show that Seiberling benefltted personally from his dealings with NPS. Whalen said that Seiberling is such a gentleman and so far above reproach (near the category of sainthood) that their efforts were laughable. They portrayed NPS as uncaring and unsympathetic to area residents in its zeal to grab as much land as possible, draw a line around it, and call it a national park. Whalen was forewarned about the Savitch interview; any misstatement would be used as the dynamite to help blow the lid off. He was careful not to give her a single comment to use against NPS. In order to protect himself, he recorded the entire interview and had it transcribed and delivered to all representatives and senators on the Interior-related committees. When Savitch learned of Whalen’s actions, she became very angry. See William Whalen telephone conversation with author, 6 September 1989.

29. At the onset of Seiberling’s interview, Savitch began questioning the congressman about the scenic easement Seiberling gave to AMPD before CVNRA was authorized. Because that was not the expressed purpose of the interview, an angry administrative assistant stood in front of the camera to halt the interrogation. See Loretta Neumann interview, 27 June 1989.

30. “What NBC’s ‘Prime Time’ was Told--But Didn’t Use,” The Voice, January 1980.

31. William Canterbury, “Valley Park Homeowners’ Plight on TV,” 16 December 1979, and “Park Chief Calls TV Show a ‘Hatchet Job,” 18 December 1979, both in Akron Beacon Journal.

32. “Wall Street Journal View: The Silent Scandal,” 25 May 1982 reprinted with permission in Akron Beacon Journal, 7 June 1982. See also rebuttal entitled “Park Service Actions Don’t Deserve Attack” in same issue. Cuyahoga Valley Homeowners and Residents Association Vice Chairman Martin 1. Griffith accompanied the New York reporter during his tour of the valley. See “‘Appalling Ignorance’ in Park Story,” letter to the editor by Martin J. Griffith, Akron Beacon Journal, 17 June 1982.

33. “For the Good of All,” narrated by Jessica Savitch and produced for “Frontline,” PBS, 6 June 1983; William Hickey, “Birth of Cuyahoga Park Focus of ‘Frontline’ Show,” The Plain Dealer, 6 June 1983; and David Bianculli, “Cuyahoga Valley Park Story is One-Sided, but Good,” Aicron Beacon Journal, 6 June 1983.

34. Ed Wesely, “Public TV’s Frontline Attack on the National Park Service,” National Parks Magazine, September/October 1984. “For the Good of All” was shown several times at the Upper Delaware River with the warning that what happened at Cuyahoga “can happen here.” So villainous was the portrayal of Bill Birdsell that audiences reportedly reacted with gleeful cheering when the documentary informed them of his death.

35. “Cuyahoga Valley and Columbia Gorge,” Your Community News (Homeowners Association newsletter), August 1986, from the James S. Jackson Papers. The masthead of this publication contains the following: “‘First you get control of the land.’ Karl Marx”.

36. Paul Goodsell, “Scenic-River Foes Enlist Assistance of National Group,” Omaha World-Herald, 2 February 1990. The bill passed in 1991 and was signed by President George H. W. Bush.

37. Leonard R. Stein-Sapir interview, 24 May 1989. NIA was originally incorporated as two groups: National Park Inholders Association and Federal Land Inholders Association, in South Lake Tahoe, California.

38. While Cushman promoted his views to this group, he did not do so very effectively. According to NPS Director Dickenson, “Interestingly enough, there was very little substantive reaction on the part of the board because they recognized an individual who had an ax to grind.., and so the impact on the board was minimal.” See Russell E. Dickenson interview, 18 July 1989.

39. Sheridan S. Steele interview, 25 March 1982. According to NPS Director Dickenson, after the Arnett/Davidge moves of 1981, there was no other serious attempts to divest CVNRA. "There were still some occasional references during meetings within the department," Dickenson commented, "but that would be considered very much in-house and just shop-talk." See Russell E. Dickenson interview, 18 July 1989. 40. Martin Griffith interview, 22 May 1989; and Leonard R. Stein-Sapir interview, 24 May 1989. 41. Review comments provided by Mary Kay Newton and Margot Jackson, letter to author, 20 September 1991.

42. Tyranny of Parks is Charged Here," The Cleveland Press, 11 July 1978; Birdsell, memorandum of meeting with Charles Cushman, 23 June 1979, A44; Birdsell to Regional Director Jimmie L Dunning, 12 July 1979, A22; and "Cuyahoga Valley Park Probe Sought," Akron Beacon Journal, 18 June 1982.

43. Ron Thoman interview, 26 May 1989.

44. Birdsell to Harpers Ferry Center Manager Marc Sagan, 20 March 1980, K3019.

45. Sagan to Birdsell, 1 April 1980.

46. Russel E. Dickenson interview, 18 July 1989. Participants included Seiberling; Senator Howard Metzenbaum; Assistant secretary Bob Herbst; Congressman Ron Mottl; staff members from the following congressional offices of Regula, Vanik, Pease, Glenn, Metzenbaum, Stokes, and Statnton; Janet Hutchinson, Sigreif Buerling; and from NPS: Birdsell, Assistant Superintendant Richard Peterson, Management Assistant Sheridan S. Steele, Chief of Interpretation and Visitor Services Ron Thoman, and Land Accquisition Officer Jack Blanton.

47. Report on CVNRA meeting, 22 May 1980, Washington, D.C.; and Superintendents Report for 1980. For several years, Loretta Neumann of Seiberling’s staff urged Birdsell to move ahead on interpretive programs, signs, and visitor facilities to establish an NPS presence, but nothing ever happened. CVNRA was trapped in a land acquisition mode. See Neumann interview, 27 June 1989.

48. Ron Thoman interview, 26 May 1989; and Sue Klein to CVPF members and friends and affiliates, undated. Klein implored, “We must not allow a greedy few to kill the dream of millions!”

49. GOdWin, letter to the editor, Akron Beacon Journal, 8 July 1980, typewritten copy found in CVPF files.

50. Review comments provided by Mary Kay Newton and Margot Jackson, letter to author, 20 September 1991.

51. Ron Thoman interview, 26 May 1989; Sheridan S. Steele interview, 25 March 1982; and Superintendent’s Report for 1981.

52. Leonard R. Stein-Sapir interview, 24 May 1989; and Susan Smith, “Homeowners Remain Vocal About Park Development,” Akron Beacon Journal, 24 February 1985.

53. John P. Debo, Jr., interview, 25 May 1989.

54. Ron Thoman interview, 26 May 1989.

Table Of Contents