Big Bend Administrative History

Once the Texas legislators had seen the wonders of the Big Bend country, the NPS and park promoters accelerated their lobbying efforts in Austin. Herbert Maier sent to Everett Townsend "a large easel of fine photographs with descriptive labels." Maier told Horace Morelock that Townsend could move the display from one hotel lobby to another in Austin, and can also probably place it in the cloakrooms of the two houses and at functions in Austin where legislators will be present." In so doing, said Maier, "every single legislator will have had at least one chance to view it before the bill is voted on." He further suggested that "our technicians, most of whom are good speakers, can arrange their official travel in such a manner that they can speak at any luncheon or gathering you may have in mind." The Sul Ross president's idea for coordinating a series of public addresses at luncheons and club meetings appealed to Maier, who inquired of Morelock: "It appears to me that someone should be given the task of determining the most strategic functions of that kind in Texas that will eventuate between now and the time the bill comes up for a vote." Maier also acknowledged Morelock's warning that the park promoters would need private monies to implement this plan. "I have no doubt," said the ECW regional officer, "that your fund raising campaign will be a success," as "it is almost impossible to do anything without the expenditure of some funds." [16]

When state representative Albert Cauthorn of Del Rio prepared to speak to his colleagues about the park bill, he too called upon the NPS for information and advice. Everett Townsend passed along to Maier the request of Cauthorn for details of the "area and acquisition cost to Virginia of the Shenandoah National Park." Cauthorn also wanted numbers on the costs incurred by the states of North Carolina and Tennessee to gain approval for Great Smoky Mountains National Park, as well as the federal outlay for development of these facilities. Townsend then asked Maier if Cauthorn could "have on hand data concerning the expenditures during the past few years in the Yellowstone or some of the other larger National Parks, which have been in the process of improving over a long period of years." Then on April 7, Townsend could report to Maier that "over two thousand copies of the inclosed circular have been mailed out to the Hotels of Texas, by the Hotel Association." When Senator Winfield brought up his bill for scheduling on the calendar, Townsend reported proudly that the vote was twenty-one to five. While this offered no indication of the final vote totals, Townsend sensed victory. Yet Townsend found troubling the attitude of the Dallas Times-Herald, which on February 23 had asked the rhetorical question, "But How About The State Deficit?" Townsend sent to Maier a copy of the rather caustic editorial, in which the Times-Herald reminded its readers: "There are lots of interesting ways in which Texas could spend money. But where to get the money is a problem that the legislature is finding hard to solve." The editors remarked that Coke Stevenson "has been a strong advocate of economy," and that "perhaps he is prepared to show how the park expenditure is justifiable at this time." The Times-Herald conceded Stevenson's point that "the park would more than pay for itself by attracting tourists to this state." Yet the editors counseled patience by noting that "the money from tourists would be obtainable only over a period of years." [17]

Such negative commentary challenged Townsend and his fellow park promoters to work all the harder to convince the legislature and governor of the merits of the land-acquisition program. On April 14, Townsend wrote to Herbert Maier with news that advocates of the park bill had met with Governor Allred, "and the Governor promised that he would not veto the Bill should we succeed in getting it up to him." Allred further informed the park sponsors that Walter Woodull, the lieutenant governor (in his capacity as presiding officer of the state senate), "had promised . . . that he . . . would do everything possible to get the Bill up in the Senate." The support of such an important official excited Townsend, as "quite a number of bills have been set for special consideration." Since many of these were of "a controversial nature," Townsend noted that they "have been accumulating on the calendar and many in the ordinary course of action have precedence over the Park Bill." Even though "all these [bills] in order are stacked up on the presiding officer's desk at the beginning of each day's work," nonetheless Woodull "is allowed a certain latitude;" a circumstance that Townsend described as "pulling one from the middle or bottom of the ‘deck.'" Thus he hoped that Woodull would exercise his prerogatives in favor of the Big Bend legislation, and concluded to Maier: "Everything looks good." [18]

Given the circuitous journey that the Big Bend measure had taken to date, one could forgive Maier for being cautious despite the optimism of Everett Townsend. He learned from Ted L. Edwards, superintendent of the CCC camp in Daingerfield, Texas, that media coverage remained positive, but that "the only hitch that I have uncovered at any point is a rumor that major oil companies are looking to the Big Bend Country as a potential supply when the fields now operated that are close to rail heads and tide water are exhausted." Yet Edwards, like Townsend and other advocates of the park, believed that "this will be no obstacle to the passage of the bill and that if conditions in this area are indicative, we have every assurance that the bill will go through." Maier could not operate on such rosy assumptions, however, and he wrote to Conrad Wirth on April 26 with a plea for director Cammerer to send an airmail letter immediately to Governor James V. Allred of Texas. Maier went so far as to draft the lengthy letter for Wirth's review, in which the NPS director would remind the governor that "there has been expended by the Federal government an estimated sum of $12,800,000 in development of state parks in Texas during the past four years." From this the Lone Star state received some 25 recreational areas that drew "hundreds of thousands of people." Cammerer would inform Allred that "in Feb. 1937 the President wrote you and stressed the fact that the period of emergency was over and that the State government would necessarily have to assume responsibility for the investments made;" a condition that Maier found "in accordance with the assurance given by the State in requesting CCC camps for state park development." [19]

Maier's anxiety had arisen from learning that "the appropriation bill reported out by the Texas Senate Finance Committee is inadequate and actually does not even provide for a State Director of Parks." In addition, said the ECW regional official, "it makes no provision for Custodians [superintendents] for the state parks." Maier saw as obvious the fact that "the property which has been built must be protected from vandalism and maintained in a sanitary and usable condition for the public." He and his colleagues "believe it is self-evident that unless adequate State funds for park maintenance are provided, the Federal government cannot continue to approve further expenditures." The FDR administration already had announced a "proposed reduction in the strength of the CCC," and "the major share of the reduction will necessarily fall upon those states making the least effort to comply with the President's request." Maier compared the Texas legislation for state parks with the commitments of other states, and suggested that "if the bill is passed with its present limited provisions, it will be necessary to place future applications from the Texas State Parks Board . . . low in priority compared to those states which have made provision to properly maintain their parks." The NPS should ask Allred at a minimum to "include at least the position of Director of State Parks, which we understand now carries the title of Executive Secretary, together with a Custodian for each park." Maier acknowledged that "our relationship with your State Parks Board as it is conducted through its present Executive Secretary [William J. Lawson] is most satisfactory." It was his hope that "in the event of a permanent Civilian Conservation Corps we may have the opportunity to carry the work now begun to a satisfactory conclusion." Such a partnership could be secured, Maier concluded, if Texas accepted "its responsibility for public recreation in the form of adequate funds for park maintenance." [20]

Soon after the state senate had reported out the state parks bill, word came to Maier that the Big Bend measure faced similar reductions. Everett Townsend wrote on May 12 to Representative R. Thomason to offer his thoughts on the actions of the Lone Star lawmakers. Champions of Big Bend National Park knew that their original request of $2 million had no chance in the 1937 session. "No doubt you are acquainted," said Townsend, "with the snarl in which the legislature has gotten itself and for that reason it has been impossible to bring the Bill up in either House." On April 27, the day after Maier had pleaded with Conrad Wirth to have NPS director Cammerer intercede with the legislature, Townsend had managed to get the Big Bend bill attached to the larger "Departmental Appropriation Bill." The senate had agreed to fund the land-acquisition program at $750,000; an amount that Townsend believed would satisfy the demands of the budget-conscious state representatives. Unfortunately, Townsend admitted to Thomason, "we could not in these amendments to an appropriation Bill set up the entire machinery for the acquisition, transfer, etc., to the government." Instead, park promoters like Townsend "had to content ourselves with the largest sum we could get for the purchase of the lands for a State Park and confine it to the limits set out in your [1935] Congressional act." Fortunately for the NPS, said Townsend, "all legislators understand that this is only the beginning and that it will be made into a National Park." He predicted that "at a later Session we will have no trouble in enacting the necessary legislation to complete it." In the interim, "the sum named is large enough to secure the most desirable areas and to insure future appropriations for the whole set-up." Townsend noted that "as quickly as some of the larger ranches are taken over, I believe it advisable that the Park Service take over the enforcement of protection for the game and of course, I would like to see general improvements continued as far as possible." [21]

Coincident with the aggressive campaign by Big Bend park sponsors, and timed for the legislative vote in mid-1937, was the NPS's contract with Walter Prescott Webb to conduct historical research on the future national park. In an effort to maximize the publicity that Webb could generate on behalf of Big Bend, the park service in January developed plans for the famed Lone Star historian to work on what Herbert Maier told his superiors would be "a readable study of the known history of the Big Bend (since 1850) based on [Lieutenant William H.] Emory and other early authorities, and on information gathered from living persons." Maier wanted Webb to "include brief biographical portraits of some of the outstanding figures in the region's past," and to develop "a study in which the influence of the environment on individuals would be clearly [delineated]." Finally, Webb was to offer "brief sketches of interesting historical points in the park," written "with a light touch and illustrated with photographs and perhaps with drawings." Maier was sure that "Dr. Webb could be depended on to catch the spirit of the region as a whole." In addition, "his interpretation of past life in the Big Bend would be a real contribution to history and would undoubtedly lay open new vistas for further research." [22]

The NPS was fortunate to have someone, said Maier, whose "published volumes have been read widely by the general public, and at the same time have been recognized by historians as being brilliant and sound." Not the least of Maier's hopes was Webb's potential to "generate publicity values in arousing public opinion in support of land acquisition legislation which will be introduced at the next session of the Texas legislature." Webb had "accepted an invitation to deliver a series of public lectures at the University of London;" something that Maier characterized as "an unprecedented honor for a Western historian." Even "a brief note in any historical journal to the effect that the National Park Service had employed Walter Prescott Webb," said Maier, "for even a brief period would receive instant attention from the whole of the historical profession." The ECW regional director asked his superiors to approve a contract for 60 days of work by Webb, payable at $20 per day (for a total of $1,200). Maier told the NPS that "the amount . . . is available from the [CCC] camp allotment to the Big Bend SP-33 camp for this purpose." Maier also solicited endorsements of the contract from members of the NPS advisory board. Dr. Hermon C. Bumpus, an early advocate for park status, advised Arthur E. Demaray, acting NPS director, to support Maier's request, and the latter submitted the proposal to Interior secretary Harold Ickes for final approval. [23]

By early March 1937, Webb had traveled to the Big Bend area to survey the landscape and prepare for his historical research and writing. After a four-day excursion on horseback through the Chisos Mountains, guided by former state game warden Pete Crawford, Webb returned to Austin to correspond with Herbert Maier about the park. Webb accepted the designation of "consulting historian," and authorized publication of a press release on his contract at once. "My preliminary trip to the Big Bend," he told Maier, "was filled with interest." From it Webb would prepare "a general article entitled, subject to your approval, ‘Is the Big Bend park Worth While?'" Webb assumed that he could "meet every argument save one that is being made by the school people who are afraid of losing some mineral rights." He agreed not to "touch that subject at all, because I am of the opinion that the more it is agitated the worse off we will be." Webb did note that "a horseback ride to the South Rim and vaccination by U.S. health service who came to the camp where I was on a smallpox scare, almost put me out." Nonetheless, Webb had commenced reading all that he could find about the Big Bend region, adding: "I only wish that I could convey its charm and spell to the public in written words." He planned to return soon to the future park site "in company with Pete Crawford, who knows the land, the legend, and the history [to] explore the country by car, horse, and, if possible, by boat." Webb especially targeted "some possibilities in those canyons, Santa Helena and others, that are worth considering." The Texas historian closed by asking Maier if he could assist in the lobbying campaign in Austin, and solicited his thoughts on the message that Webb could deliver to the Lone Star lawmakers. [24]

Webb then expressed to Leo McClatchy a particular curiosity in the international park concept, asking the NPS publicist about other such park units worldwide. He also promised to write immediately a newspaper feature in which Webb "tried to portray something of the spirit of the Big Bend region." He also noted that "this afternoon [April 5] an Austin paper, The Dispatch, will start a series of editorials on the Big Bend." Webb had learned that "these will be blocked in on the first page and a copy of the paper will be laid on the desk of each legislator daily." Webb himself would write these editorials, and would seek prior approval from McClatchy before their publication. "The [Dispatch] editor," said Webb, "seems to be of the opinion that the newshawks will pick up the story." Thus if McClatchy had "anything that you want to appear here, let me have it at once." For his part, the NPS publicist could supply Webb with "a history of the origins and development of the National Park System," as he was "in immediate need of the material" for his research. [25]

True to his word, Walter Prescott Webb began earning dividends for the NPS and the Big Bend sponsors by promoting the concept statewide. Webb airmailed to McClatchy on April 7 the first in his series on the future park, which the historian contended "took some time to prepare . . . because it is not an easy matter to encompass the Big Bend and explain it so that an outsider can gain any conception of what it is like." Webb then discussed with McClatchy his plans for "the Santa Helena trip." In conversation with Herbert Maier, Webb had concluded that "the difficulties involved in getting the government to sponsor the trip are too great." Thus Webb had decided to make the raft trip "a private enterprise, to be carried out after I have finished my contract with the National Park Service." While "the results, if any, will of course be used to promote the park," Webb faced a campaign of solicitations from newspapers and magazines in Texas and nationwide. "If you can get Life Magazine to co-operate by accepting one or more articles," said Webb, "that will be fine." For his part, Webb had traveled to San Antonio from Austin to meet with radio station WOAI and the San Antonio Express. The editor of the Express advised Webb to contact the Texas Newspaper Association "to sponsor the undertaking," which Webb believed would have to occur in August, as "there is not time to prepare before the spring rains set in." Webb then revealed the excitement that the Big Bend contract had stimulated in him: "Incidentally, this park work thrills me and I fear that I shall be no good as a teacher from now on." [26]

By April 18, Webb had placed in newspapers statewide the first of two major features about Big Bend and the land-acquisition bill before the Texas legislature. "Big Bend Park Will Put Texas On Travel Map," read a headline in the Dallas Morning News, with the tag line "Another Yellowstone as a Tourist Attraction, Avers Expert of Proposed National Project." After recounting the now-standard evidence of geological and historical distinctiveness, Webb summarized "the first impression of the country - one that does not wear off - [as] that of magnificent confusion." Geologists and biologists had pieced together parts of the natural story, but "the historian has less chance than either of these to assist in the restoration." All that an historian could hope, said Webb, was "to attempt a generalized picture of the place, much simplified, and with the full knowledge that there are exceptions to every statement he makes." Poets and novelists could invoke the "atmosphere and circumstance in which human beings move like microbes across the brilliant yet awesome landscape." Yet even such literary talent could not "convey the sense of unreality and romance that overwhelms the spectator and leaves him with a recurrent nostalgia for a land in which he cannot live." Webb then attempted to describe the geologic forces that shaped the Big Bend country, only to conclude that the future park was "the geologist's paradise and his despair." By this Webb meant "his paradise because he finds on the surface such a variety of formation; his despair because he can hardly classify them, much less explain how they came there." [27]

On the following Sunday (April 25), Webb further regaled Texas newspaper readers with historical tales of significance to the Big Bend. He noted the artifacts found in caves along the Rio Grande by Elmo and Ava Johnson, "the remains of the Basket Makers who disappeared before the white man set foot on the land." Webb recounted the story of Pete Crawford when the former state game warden had chased a herd of wild burros in the Chisos Mountains that local stock raisers wanted killed "because they destroyed the grass needed by the cattle." When the party of hunters trapped the burros in a narrow ravine, the reports from their guns echoed several times, leading Crawford to name the area "Echo Dike." As for the Rio Grande, Webb noted that "in finding its way through the debris of the sunken block, [it] does all sorts of queer things." Eastern visitors might find it modest, yet "to the people of the West, of the Great Plains, and the arid region, it appears a mighty stream." It was the lure of the river, and of its stunning canyons, that Webb devoted most of the space in his April 25 feature. "I wish to say," the Texas historian wrote in conclusion, "that there is something very precious in this wild country, and that is a place of temporary escape from the world we know." Webb found the Big Bend "a place where the spirit is lifted up as it must have been when the white man found America and before he had time to mar it with his improvements." Because "man has not seriously disturbed the Big Bend," wrote Webb, this "recommends it as a National Park site." Had the NPS found the area "thickly settled, it would be out of the picture." But "there it lies in its gorgeous splendor and geological confusion," said Webb, "almost as it fell from the hands of the Creator." Webb then delivered the famous line often quoted in the press and historical works: "Because it seems to be made up of the scraps left over when the world was made, containing samples of rivers, deserts, sunken blocks of mountain and tree-clad peaks, dried up lakes, canyons, cuestas, vegas, playas, arroyos, volcanic refuse, and hot springs, it fascinates every observer." He further addressed the potential of an international park, echoing the sentiments of Everett Townsend: "Men have not always lived in peace here, as one can learn by sitting in camp and listening to the border men - Texas rangers, border patrol, river guards, game wardens, and cow men." But the NPS, and the nation, could redress those grievances, Webb believed, "if the Big Bend of Texas, and the wild region opposite in Mexico, could be converted into an international park devoted to the pleasure and enlightenment of man, and to the promotion of peace and understanding between neighboring nations." [28]

One day after publication of the April 25 story about Big Bend, Herbert Maier wrote to Webb to outline the final product that the NPS needed from its illustrious historical consultant. Maier conceded that a 60-day contract would not generate the definitive treatment of the Trans-Pecos area that the park service would like. Yet if Webb could identify the naming of historical landmarks in the area, and compile "a chronology of the important historical events which have occurred in the region," he could "point the way for further researches by National Park Service technicians in the future." Maier also noted Webb's request "to retain an unofficial or semi-official connection with the Service after the expiration of your present working period." The ECW official wished to assure Webb that "we are very appreciative of this attitude and shall do everything in our power to cement this valuable relationship." [29]

The park service found reason to avail itself of Webb's commitment to promotion of Big Bend National Park when prospects for passage of the land-acquisition bill turned sour in the Texas legislature. While Webb as late as mid-April had discounted the possibility of a river trip through the Rio Grande canyons, suddenly the NPS announced plans for Webb to float the "Grand Canyon de Santa Helena" on May 16. Just days before the vote in Austin on the park bill, Webb joined a party led by Thomas V. Skaggs of McCamey, Texas, who along with fellow McCamey resident Joe Lane, and James W. Metcalfe, acting chief inspector for the U.S. Immigration Service's Border Patrol, would spend the next two days in two steel boats named the Cinco de Mayo and the Big Bend. The Austin Dispatch identified other onshore participants as James Lederer of Bastrop, Texas, who would film the journey, Pete Crawford, who would oversee activities at the base camp at Castolon, William R. Hogan, historian of the NPS from Oklahoma City, and members of the U.S. Border Patrol. The Dispatch told Austin readers that "all branches of the border service are cooperating to make this expedition a success." The CCC had sent a work crew to the railhead in Alpine to bring the steel boats down to the river, and "a new United States Coast Guard Ship is standing by to fly over the exploring party and receive signals of distress if any should develop." Border patrol officers would be stationed at the mouth of the canyon "with a boat which can go up stream to aid the party if trouble develops." In addition, "news of the expedition will be radioed to the outside world through the station at Johnson's Ranch in the bottom of the Big Bend." All of this exertion was for a trip that would take less than 48 hours. Yet The Dispatch noted that "the present expedition is the best equipped one that has attempted the venture, and if successful, may open the way for other parties to follow." [30]

As the foursome and their well-wishers gathered at the town of Lajitas that Sunday, they pondered the state of deliberations on the Big Bend park bill in Austin. The scale of the operation, and the precautions taken by state and federal officials, dramatized the need for maximum publicity and attention to the wonders of the Rio Grande canyons. The Coast Guard plane flew over the river just before the steel boats put into the water, and reported the current as low. The Austin Texan reported that "the Rio Grande at this point has never been popular with navigators," noting "only Dr. Robert T. Hill [in 1899] having gone through heretofore." The Austin Statesman played the story for its dramatic effect, headlining on May 17 with "Webb Defying Canyon Perils." "Treacherous rapids flow through the 2,000-foot high walls of the [Santa Elena] canyon," wrote the Statesman, "and no one is known to have navigated the river at this point." Webb's wife told the Statesman that she had received both a letter and a telegram from her husband while camped at Lajitas, and she expected to hear from him within 24 hours of his completion of the trip. Then the Fort Worth Star-Telegram of May 18 carried the cryptic headline: "No Word From 4 Explorers." "While they had expected to complete their hazardous journey through the dangerous, rock-studded waters this afternoon," said the Star-Telegram, "word as to whether or not they accomplished the feat was not known." The newspaper had called the telephone operator at Marathon, described as "117 miles from the canyon," but "her last report at [7] o'clock was that the voyage had not been completed." The Coast Guard added to the mystery when it informed the paper that it "had men stationed about seven miles from the [Santa Elena] canyon at Castolon, but they had received no report at that time and could be reached by telephone afterward." Then the Associated Press reported on May 19 that Webb and his companions had reached Castolon after "an arduous trip" through the canyon. The Texas historian told the AP reporter that "there was no serious trouble on the 16-mile trip though it had been made with much difficulty." [31]

One day after the news of Webb's successful completion of the Big Bend boat trip, the realities of Texas politics neutralized the public relations bonanza generated by the Rio Grande expedition. Everett Townsend sent a hurried telegram to Milo F. Christiansen of the NPS's office in Little Rock, Arkansas, asking him to tell Herbert Maier of his telegram to Thomason with the news that Governor Allred "is seriously considering the veto" because of "state finances." Townsend suggested to Maier's assistant that the park service "bring every possible influence to bear and if possible include that of the vice-president [John Nance Garner of Texas] and senators." W. B. Tuttle of the San Antonio Public Service Company told Maier that Allred worried about "the failure of the legislature to appropriate funds to meet the State's financial necessities." Tuttle had asked Allred for a personal meeting before the governor took any action on the Big Bend measure, and hoped that Maier could accompany him on such a visit. Harry J. Adams, superintendent of parks for the City of Fort Worth, wired Allred on May 21 to warn that "your failure to approve this bill will greatly embarrass the National Park Service in the program which they have setup for this wonderful and worthy project." In addition, Allred's veto would "seriously retard the entire State Park program." Then Townsend approached Herbert Maier directly on May 21, telling him tersely: "Situation not good." He minced few words by advising the ECW regional director: "Imperative that pressure from Washington continue." Then the longtime promoter of a national park in the Big Bend asked that "if possible, direct endorsements from Mexico City" be sent to Allred to influence his opinion. [32]

Pressure from park advocates motivated Herbert Maier to write two dozen Texas newspaper editors on the best means to lobby the Governor. The latter, said the ECW official, "believes that the State of Texas would benefit immeasurably by establishment of the Big Bend National Park," having said as much in a speech the previous month at the CCC state-park facility at Bastrop. Yet even the $750,000 appropriated by the state's lawmakers (half the original request of the NPS and park sponsors) troubled the governor. Maier asked J.J Taylor of the Dallas News if his paper could highlight the efforts of "the Government of Mexico . . . to acquire, by exchanging publicly-owned lands, the 400,000 privately-owned acres that are to become a National Park in Mexico." This "combined area would be of such international importance," said Maier, "as to attract tourists into Texas from throughout the world." The NPS believed that "a strong editorial in The News right now would help to convince the Governor that he is justified in signing the Big Bend bill because of the increased revenues that will be collected in Texas annually." In addition, "the expense of development would be taken over entirely by the Federal Government." Between visitors' expenses and the taxes collected from them, Maier saw Big Bend bringing into Texas "every year a very minimum of three million dollars." Allred's signature "absolutely assures annual and permanent increased revenues to the State," and Maier advised Taylor: "You can editorially justify signing of the bill along that line alone." The NPS then offered kind words to Taylor for the "splendid support you have given in the past, both in editorial and news columns." All Maier now asked was for the News to "please sew up the whole issue right now with this last clinching editorial." [33]

Maier's campaign with Texas newspaper editors found widespread support, as the Amarillo Daily News declared rhetorically: "By All Means Sign It, Governor." Gene Howe, publisher of the Amarillo paper, noted that the governor meant well in "opposing other appropriation measures that do not make provision for the raising of the money to be expended." In the case of Big Bend, however, "Texas is so badly, badly in need of more parks and lakes and recreational places." Howe claimed that "we have been so backward, so stubborn in developing our wonder places and in providing outdoor recreation for our citizens that it would be little short of a disaster if the governor failed to sign this bill." The Daily News asked its readers: "Think of the millions we waste: think of the pitiable few dollars we spend to attract tourists and to make our state more attractive for our own citizens." Howe conceded that "up here in the Panhandle we are in the other extreme end of the state." Yet Big Bend fit a larger scheme of promotion of Lone Star attractions for Howe and his newspaper. "We want the Big Bend," editorialized the Daily News, "we want the Palo Duro [canyon state park south of Amarillo] improvement carried on and we want more parks and lakes in every district, in every county, if practical, in the whole state." Howe pleaded with Allred: "We are so many years behind the eastern states, governor, that it would be most, most regrettable if this worthy movement was delayed or broken down by your veto." For his part, Howe promised that his paper would "send thousands of West Texas citizens down there to see it." As proof, Howe argued that Texans would "much rather travel in Texas than other states but first you have to have something worth seeing to attract them." [34]

The Amarillo Daily News's editorial stand on the Big Bend measure echoed the campaign that the park service undertook in the days prior to Governor Allred's refusal to sign the bill. Herbert Maier had asked Daniel Galicia and Juan Zinser of the Departemento Forestal, Caza y Pesca, to "arrange to have [Mexican] Ambassador [Josephus] Daniels contact Governor Allred . . . by wire in favor of the appropriation which is now before the Texas State Legislature for purchase of land in the Big Bend." Maier had not known of Daniels's return to the United States, and he apologized to Galicia and Zinser for the diplomatic confusion. Yet Miguel Angel de Quevedo revealed the high regard that he held for the NPS by responding that Galicia "was commissioned to lay this matter before the Charge-de-Affaires of the United States Embassy here and to make known the contents of your letter, having previously made similar representations to Ambassador Daniels relative [to] establishment of Big Bend National Park." Then Quevedo mentioned for the first time the contemplated name for the Mexican portion of the international park, which he called "‘Sierra Del Carmen' National Park." The NPS director followed with his own direct appeal to Allred, sending a telegram on June 5 urging "favorable consideration." The park service, Cammerer declared, was "confident from past experience that indirect benefit to state both financially and socially will greatly exceed requested appropriation." "We realize your problem," said the NPS director, "due to [the] failure of [the] legislature to pass additional tax bills." Yet Cammerer predicted (without substantiating data) that "increased travel to Texas will return money through existing taxes a hundred fold." The director reminded Allred that his agency had "enjoyed cooperating with Texas both in allotment of camps and money for development [of the] Texas state park system." Thus it was Cammerer's hope that "you will see your way clear to assist us in developing our national park system." [35]