Big Bend Administrative History

Roads may have been the overriding concern for local park sponsors as the NPS awaited the reopening of the Chisos CCC camp. Yet for park service planners, the logistics and schedule of work on the ground took precedence. In the summer and fall of 1939, the future of the park had begun to emerge in NPS plans for staffing, facilities, and employment. In particular, the abilities of Ross Maxwell had come to the forefront in the estimation of regional officials. "We should like to keep in closer touch with the work which Dr. Ross Maxwell, junior geologist, is doing," wrote Carl P. Russell, NPS supervisor of research and information. Maxwell was to "submit a monthly report to the Regional Office with a copy to be forwarded to us at the time that Dr. [Charles] Gould's monthly report is submitted." Russell gave as his reason the fact that "we are especially anxious to know what progress is being made upon the geological report for the Big Bend National Park project." With completion of that task, Russell asked Tolson that Maxwell "be assigned to certain geologic problems connected with CCC programs in the State of Texas." In addition, said Russell, the work of the CCC camp in the Chisos "will consist mainly of trail and road construction." He hoped that Maxwell "may be used advantageously in the planning of this work because of his familiarity with the area and his appreciation of the scientific values which may be utilized if the trails and roads are judiciously located." Russell paid particular attention to the advice of "Washington Office geologists [who] advise that one of the most important contributions which Dr. Maxwell could make to the developmental program would be a study of the water supply situation in those parks where CCC camps are operating." For the NPS, "the quantity and quality of the water which may be obtained from such sources and the cost of developing it should be the chief purpose of such an investigation." Hence the request by Russell that Maxwell coordinate his surveys with the Texas State Board of Water Engineers, and his suggestion that the NPS identify sources of underground water where "supplies may be developed and produced at a lesser cost than the existing installations." [44]

Maxwell's role in the development of state parks in Texas had taken on a new meaning with the reopening of the Chisos camp for Big Bend. Herbert Maier, now the assistant to Hillory Tolson, recognized the merits of Carl Russell's inquiry about the use of Maxwell's services. Yet he wanted Maxwell to complete his geological survey of the Big Bend region "at the earliest possible date." Then the regional office would assign to Maxwell "an expert draftsman . . . for a 90 day period at Austin, Texas, and it would not be practical to bring this man, who is working closely with Dr. Maxwell, to the Region III Headquarters on account of travel and per diem." Once these tasks had been accomplished, Maier told the NPS director, Maxwell would be assigned "to the Geological problems in connection with the CCC program in the State of Texas." Maier declared that "this is the work which Dr. Maxwell should actually be performing considering that his salary is being met from camp funds." Yet the NPS wanted "to utilize Dr. Maxwell in an advisory capacity on most of the jobs that are planned for the Big Bend CCC camp because of his familiarity with 'every inch' of the area." The acting Region III director also saw value in keeping Maxwell in Big Bend to identify water supplies. "When [one] considers that the only body of water in the entire area is the Rio Grande," said Maier, "and since it is planned to locate the major tourist development and administrative buildings in the Chisos Mountains," he could find no better person to perform this valuable research than the person conducting Big Bend's first major geological survey. [45]

Park service officials relied upon Ross Maxwell for more than his expertise in matters of science. Because the geologist had spent so much time in the Chisos camp during its first phase, the NPS sought his advice on employee relations and hiring procedures, a key feature of success for such an isolated unit of the CCC. Reflecting his discontent with the operations of the original CCC camp, Maxwell wrote to regional officials in late September to voice his concerns over plans to house married couples and their families. "My personal opinion is — that all wives (CCC superintendent and technical staff and army officers)," wrote Maxwell, "should not be allowed to live in camp." He considered "brief visits OK, but not extended visits." In the earlier arrangement, said the CCC geologist, he had witnessed patterns of "unfriendly relationship that sooner or later [develops], that in time leads to lack of cooperation between the [superintendent], technical staff, and army officers." Such tensions were "very marked at times," reported Maxwell, as "the [superintendent's] wife attempted (so they say and to one whose wife did not live in the camp it appeared to be true) to dominate the domestic activities of the technicians['] wives which lead to an unwarm feeling between the supt. and tech. and between some of the technicians themselves." Maxwell cited an incident where "heated words [were] exchanged between the supt. and C.O.'s [commanding officer's] wives which lead to a great deal of trouble or at least lack of cooperation between the supt. and the army." [46]

To emphasize his frustration with living conditions at the CCC camp, Maxwell told NPS inspector Diggs: "I know from personal experience that the technical men are not very well satisfied to live in the Chisos and have their families in Alpine or Marathon." He speculated that "they would probably not have to stay in camp for weekend duty oftener than once every [two] months." As for his own family situation, Maxwell recalled that "there were several periods when I didn't see my family for a month at a time," and "there were several of the other men who had similar experiences." Then the geologist cut to the heart of the dilemma facing the NPS at Big Bend for the duration of its existence. "Living in none too comfortable quarters and seeing no one except your fellow workers," said Maxwell, "seemed in the past to breed discontent." He recalled "frequent arguments and there was not anyplace to go to find different associations;" a circumstance that "did not help the work program." Maxwell thus recommended that "it may be advisable to allow the men who wish to live in Chisos to do so." As for "men with children, school age probably could not live there permanently, but might want to bring their families out there during the summer." Maxwell had "found it very convenient to have one of the cabins already there," as "I lived by myself, except about every two months the wife would come out for a week." This allowed the geologist to "keep out of the arguments at the Tech. Quarters, and games and other activities in which I was not interested." From this Maxwell learned that "I was on speaking terms with everyone in camp," and concluded that "an arrangement by which the personnel can bring their families as they desire may be the most satisfactory." [47]

His authoritative tone, and the dependence of the NPS upon his knowledge of science, led park planners to address Maxwell's cautions about social tensions within any new CCC camp in the Chisos Basin. John C. Diggs forwarded to Santa Fe Maxwell's comments, reminding Tolson and his advisors that "the situation at Big Bend is somewhat different from that of other camps which have settlements within a few miles of camp." Diggs saw "a distinct advantage in having a limited number of family size apartments which might be occupied during a part of the year by the supervisory personnel." Yet the NPS inspector disagreed with Maxwell on the severity of the problems at Big Bend, noting "that the situation . . . is different in degree only from the average camp in that the distance from settlements is greater." Diggs conceded that "we cannot help but give consideration also [to] the suggestions of Ross Maxwell that he has noted and feels that in the long run it will be very much better tha[t] the families of supervisory personnel do not become permanent camp residents." Instead, the inspector advised his superiors that "we would favor . . . the construction of three or four family apartments preferably temporary to be used in rotation by the families of supervisory personnel." This policy met the approval of the U.S. Army, whose officers would work with the NPS in any new camp in the Chisos. Lieutenant Colonel J. Frank Richmond, district CCC commander at Fort Bliss, informed Diggs that "we have anticipated solving this question by making a point of assigning bachelor personnel who would not require or need separate quarters for families." Richmond conceded that "this, of course, could not always be conveniently done with the Army, and I assume it is more difficult with the Technical Service." Yet the military had a different experience with isolated tours of duty, and Richmond suggested that "married officers with their families present in a place like Chisos Mountains, Big Bend National Park, would be on the job more and be more satisfied with their location than a married man separated from his family due to lack of quarters." In addition, "a married man under favorable circumstances," said the lieutenant colonel, "in a place like this, with his family present, would render better and more contented service than a bachelor who might be hankering to run off to the towns and bright lights." Richmond then remarked, almost as an afterthought, about the financial constraints facing the CCC when it reopened its Chisos camp. "I am for you in every way in this proposition," he told Diggs, "but I am wondering where the money is coming from." The army did not have monies for family quarters construction, "and frankly, I do not think they [the CCC] will allot such funds to the Army." [48]

Selection of those supervisory officials took a good deal of the NPS's time in the last weeks of 1939. J. Atwood Maulding, the park service's director of personnel, paid special attention to the individuals named for the various positions at Big Bend. He recommended to NPS director Cammerer that Curtis R. Byram, "presently assigned to the Cleburne State Park camp SP-53, be considered for transfer." From the CCC's unit at Balmorhea State Park, Maulding named Elmer Davenport to become Big Bend's new senior foreman (with engineering responsibilities), while James T. Carney, Junior, formerly with the Cleburne camp, would become second senior foreman. James T. Roberts of El Paso was tabbed for the position of landscape architect, while Lloyd Wade was one of Maulding's choices for the remaining three slots as senior foreman. Noting Wade's service as the caretaker of the abandoned CCC unit in the Chisos Basin, and his work in other Texas state parks, Maulding nonetheless expressed some concern that "his application . . . does not indicate that he has any technical engineering training or experience and it is not believed that he is qualified for such an assignment." Yet Maulding called for "special consideration" for the loyal employee, and suggested that "appropriate papers should be submitted as early as possible." When it came to the most prominent hire at the camp, Maulding advised the NPS director to move cautiously. "Mr. Everett E. Townsend has been mentioned in connection with possible placement as a mechanic or a member of the facilitating personnel of the camp," wrote the NPS personnel director. He had to report that, like Lloyd Wade, "there is no indication that he has had the experience usually required in filling positions of this type." Maulding reminded Cammerer that Townsend "previously was employed as a project manager at the Big Bend Area under the old FERA Land Program and later, because of his intimate knowledge of that Area and his work in connection with the acquisition activities, was employed as a senior foreman at $2000 per annum." One solution for the NPS would be to appoint Byram, "who is a well qualified engineer," and Davenport and Carney to provide Big Bend with "sufficient engineering services." Thus "in lieu of a third senior foreman (engineering) Mr. Townsend can be given special consideration." [49]

Maulding's careful monitoring of the supervisory team at Big Bend reflected from the intense interest of Texas public officials in their state's first national park, and by the NPS's need for political support from the Texas congressional delegation. Thus Everett Townsend received the "special consideration" that Maulding had suggested, but the "father of Big Bend National Park" had to decline the offer because of his wife's failing health. The level of political influence in the formation of the Big Bend camp surfaced when Townsend informed Representative Thomason of his decision, and the latter corresponded with Conrad Wirth to offer his sympathies. "I am very sorry," said the El Paso Democrat, "that his wife is ill, and sorry also that you will not have the benefit of his services." Thomason hoped that "we will always have his moral support," as Townsend "can help us a lot in that way." The west Texas congressman then inquired of Wirth: "I am interested in knowing whom, if anybody, you have in mind for the place you tendered him." Thomason recommended "Bob Robinson to have something but, of course, if he is not satisfactory in all respects, you can forget it." More problematic for Thomason was his charge that "I have . . . had some criticism because so many of the employees of this camp have come from outside my district." The congressman told Wirth: "I will very much appreciate it if you will try to find some competent person who lives in this section." He noted that the NPS was "importing a superintendent and two or three others which is satisfactory, because you say they are competent." Ignoring the fact that Byram, Carney and Davenport were Texans, and that J.T. Roberts hailed from Thomason's home town, the representative closed by reminding Wirth: "Of course, the most important thing is to do a good job." [50]

With surprisingly little fanfare, the Chisos CCC camp on January 1, 1940, greeted its new work crews. Designated "Texas NP-1," the camp had as its objectives "carrying out certain basic developments such as the building of roads and trails," of "making boundary, tract, topographic and reconnaissance surveys," conducting "hydraulic investigations and other research in reference to the location and production of satisfactory and adequate water supplies," and the "collecting [of] other information of a scientific and engineering nature which will aid the personnel of other professions in the planning of the area." Inspector John Diggs remarked that "the large area of the Project, . . . the great number of tracts of land including several hundred separate parcels distributed over territory of approximately 50 miles in extent in both directions, the rugged terrain and the inaccessibility of large sections except by animal and pack trains and the varied nature and extensiveness of the surveys to be undertaken" made it "highly advisable that at least three qualified Engineers and a landscape architect be made available." Diggs' analysis of the tasks awaiting the CCC camp echoed the voices of veterans of park planning for Big Bend like Herbert Maier, who in late November of 1939 had noted that "one of the first jobs to be undertaken when the camp is established and one that will continue for quite sometime will be that of surveying." Maier wanted "the entire boundary of the park area . . . surveyed and mapped as soon as possible so that the State will know exactly what property to purchase." He also warned that "quite possibly, on account of the property lines and the poverty of some of the owners, in many cases, it will be necessary for most of the property surveys to be carried out by others than the owners, especially in the case of small tracts where it would be a highly costly thing for the owner to bring in a surveyor." The acting regional director also wanted the CCC crews to "have the State property and private property surveyed in the Chisos where work will be carried on, at an early date." This would place the state "in a better position to make its earlier purchases of land that should be acquired for carrying on the work of the CCC." [51]

The most pressing issue awaiting the park service with the opening of the Chisos camp was not road construction, facility design, or employment. Rather it was a letter to NPS director Cammerer from Albert Thomas, a congressman from Houston, inquiring about reports that "many persons have secured free accommodations at the CCC camp . . . while other tourists were required to pay the regular fee." Conrad Wirth, the Washington official with the most intimate knowledge of the situation at Big Bend, informed Thomas on December 14, 1939, that "we are not aware that accommodations at this camp have been made available to anyone with the possible exception of field representatives of this Service engaged in survey or research work on the area." He also noted that "regulations, of course, preclude extending accommodations to tourists or others under any circumstances." Wirth then asked Herbert Maier to investigate the accusation more closely from the regional office. Maier sent John Diggs to the Chisos Basin to discuss the matter with Lloyd Wade, offering as advice the caveat that "at the time that the camp was withdrawn, it was generally understood that abandonment would be temporary and that a company would be returned to the area as soon as some definite legislation could be enacted by the State." For this reason, said Maier, "the Army was willing to leave in place many of the facilities which otherwise would have been removed or salvaged, among which were a number of cots, mattresses, etc." This would permit "official parties, legislators, prominent travelers, in addition to periodic visits by representatives of the State and of this Service [to] be accommodated when the occasion arose." [52]

When Diggs went to interview caretaker Wade, Maier asked the NPS inspector to remember that Wade "was selected largely because of his knowledge of the country and because he cooks well." Wade and Maier had an understanding that he "would provide meals and accommodations for individuals as referred to above." The acting Region III director, however, did not expect that Wade "would do so without cost to ordinary travelers." In addition, said Maier, "while no specific understanding was entered into with the State at the time Mr. Wade took the assignment, it was assumed that, in view of the fact that there are very few travelers in that part of the country, and because it is necessary for Mr. Wade to lay in a store of supplies, etc., he would probable make a few dollars now and then for this extra work." Maier could not say "as to whether Wade had any agreement with the State, considering that this area still falls under the category of a State park." Neither could the Santa Fe official know "whether he complimented some of the travelers and charged others." Maier could envision scenarios where "the impression was given out that individuals were complimented when really their accommodations were paid for by the State or by a chamber of commerce." Maier himself could recall "being a member of Governor-elect [W. Lee] O'Daniel's party at the camp a year ago at which time we were fed a sumptuous steak dinner." Yet the NPS official could not recall "who was the host," theorizing to Diggs that "it may have been the State or it may have been the Alpine Chamber of Commerce." Whatever the circumstances, Maier asked Diggs to "keep the matter more or less confidential and that you go over the arrangement under which Mr. Wade has operated with him the next time you are down there." [53]

Amidst his duties as inspector of Texas CCC units, Diggs traveled in early January to the Chisos Basin and the Alpine area to interview interested parties about the accommodations controversy. By January 30, 1940, he could report to Maier that local sponsors had arranged with Lloyd Wade "to provide meals and overnight lodgings in a portion of the camp buildings at a nominal cost of 50 [cents] per night during the summer season." In the winter, Wade would charge one dollar per night "when it was necessary to provide firewood for the warming of the buildings in which guests were lodged, and meals at 50 [cents] each." Diggs learned that "all charges were made on this basis with the exception of one occasion when the Chambers of Commerce of Alpine and Pecos entertained the Editorial Association." Then "a charge of 40 [cents] per meal was made and two nights of lodging were provided for a charge of 50 [cents]." Wade had agreed to these rates "in order that he might assist the Chambers of Commerce in providing additional publicity of the Project." The NPS inspector learned also that "on a limited number of other occasions Mr. Wade did not make a charge against Army personnel, personnel of this Service and personal friends who visited the Camp in a business or social capacity." Diggs concluded that "at no time were the charges for service excessive and that on those occasions when the charges were less than indicated above the reductions were the personal contribution of Mr. Wade." With the New Year's Day reopening of the camp, said Diggs, "services hereafter will be available through the Camp Commander and the charges will be those established under CCC regulations." [54]

The accommodations controversy had several consequences for the NPS and its partners in the creation of Big Bend National Park. The NPS's Region III contended that any deviation from the original instructions to Lloyd Wade had occurred at the behest of the Texas State Parks Board. For local promoters of the park, however, their concerns were less with the legalities of usage than the paucity of facilities for visitors. To that end, Benjamin Berkeley wrote on February 13 to Representative Thomason with word that "the Bowen Bus Company out of Fort Worth will operate a regular tourist schedule weekly between Fort Worth and the Big Bend National Park." The manager of the Brewster County chamber of commerce did not need to remind Thomason that "if these excursions are to prove a success, of necessity it will be required to obtain lodging and meals at the [CCC] camp in the Chisos Mountains." Berkeley lamented that "since the policy of the new set-up there is not yet definitely determined," the chamber would "greatly appreciate your calling on the new head of the National Park Service [Newton Drury] and securing from him the authority for, I will say, anywhere from 35 to 40 beds and meal accommodations for the traveling public." Should these not be available when the Bowen buses pulled into the Chisos Basin, said Berkeley, "you can readily see how the park movement will be crippled." Berkeley offered a gloomy forecast for the near future in the Chisos basin: "As I view the picture, it would well nigh be impossible to develop adequate facilities for 35 or 40 people anywhere near the scenic section of the park." Thus he warned that "for this and other cogent reasons it is absolutely indispensable that we secure the permission and cooperation of the National Park Service in obtaining these facilities at a minimum cost at the [CCC] Camp barracks." [55]

Reopening the Big Bend CCC program compelled the park service to revisit all of the old questions about planning and cost that had hindered the first phase of facility construction. NPS director Arno Cammerer noted in a letter to Representative Thomason that Berkeley's criticisms were not unknown to his agency. "Mr. Berkeley's statement brings up the whole problem of the establishment of this projected national park," said Cammerer, "because, so far as the National Park Service is concerned, there will be no authority to develop suitable public accommodations within the area until the park is established." The director doubted "that the Civilian Conservation Corps camp located in the area could be thrown open to the public for meals and lodging." The park service would "not object to such an arrangement as a temporary expedient," said its director, "if the Civilian Conservation Corps authorities, the Army, and the Texas State Parks Board were agreeable." For Cammerer, "the solution of the problem Mr. Berkeley presents, together with the many other problems involved in this project, is acquisition of the necessary land and establishment of the proposed national park." Until then, said the NPS director, "it is impossible to apply the full weight of our planning talent in the area, for the purpose of working out detailed layouts and estimates of public accommodations on a scale commensurate with the national interest in the area." Cammerer offered to Thomason the hope that "all understand that, in the meantime, we are forced to stand by, treating public demands for accommodations as added justification for the project." [56]

Cammerer's remarks revealed the park service's dilemma at Big Bend: the need to develop a transportation and administrative infrastructure while local sponsors chafed at delays in constructing visitor facilities. Given the imperatives of political pressure and the high cost of operations in the Chisos Basin, the NPS undertook a master plan in early 1940 that would align the mandates of the CCC (to find work for the unemployed) with the policies of the park service and the demands of local interests. The NPS first conducted an inventory of tasks completed in the first phase of CCC activity (1934-1937), identifying such features as seven miles of truck trails, six miles of horse trails, one latrine, 2,000 feet of pipe line, ten acres of landscaping, and a parking area. Conrad Wirth, now the "Supervisor of Recreation and Land Planning" at the Washington headquarters, suggested to Tolson that "it is logical that at least preliminary general development planning must have gone forward in order to properly guide the above kinds of development." Wirth's office was "not aware of developments now under consideration," and wished "to point out . . . the necessity of putting master planning into such shape as will assist in formulating a logical work program well in advance of construction." As Big Bend "is a proposed future National Park," he advised Tolson that "the authority of the Inspector for plan and job approvals is hereby withdrawn." Instead, "CCC jobs may be approved only by the Regional Director or his authorized representative in the regional office." Ongoing "jobs and plans," said Wirth, "may continue to be prepared and submitted through the [CCC's] Central Design Office, Park Authority, and Inspector, but control of the development should be maintained in the regional office which has familiarity with the area and Service standards and objectives." In particular, Wirth highlighted the "Service memorandum of February 19 which denoted that a serious condition existed at Texas NP-1 because of lack of approved jobs for the working forces." [57]

To initiate the master planning process for the NPS, Harvey H. Cornell, the regional landscape architect in Santa Fe, led a group of park specialists in late February through the Big Bend area. Inspector John Diggs, geologist Ross Maxwell, architect Jerome Miller, and Cornell noted that "the CCC camp has been reoccupied, the current work program relating primarily to improvement of existing roads, construction of new bridle and foot trails, boundary and topographic surveys, and investigation of sources of water supply." Reflecting concerns expressed by Wirth and other NPS officials, "it was agreed that, although the area is still classified as a State Park, the Master Plan be prepared by the Plans and Design Division, Region Three, rather than by the Central Design office in Austin." The preeminent issue facing the future park, said Cornell, was access. "It was apparent," said the architect to Thomas Vint, "that the Texas Highway Commission had definitely accepted the location leading south from Marathon as the main approach road to the park." Cornell admitted that "this road was being exceptionally well maintained and a large amount of permanent work in the way of improvements has been recently accomplished." He believed that "the pressure for an additional approach road leading south from Alpine was less apparent," and that it "had not been favorably considered by the Highway Commission as the location closely paralleled the Marathon Road and included many miles of new alignment." Cornell then predicted that "it will be impossible to hold to one entrance alone." The inspection team concurred in the belief that "in the very near future a new highway will be constructed leading northeast from Terlingua;" a route that would "be a part of the general plan requiring that a major road closely parallel the Rio Grande River for military protection." To Cornell, Maxwell, et al., "it is quite obvious . . . that there will be need for an entrance into the Park in the vicinity of Terlingua, with traffic coming from Alpine, Marfa, and other points northwest of the park." "This arrangement," Cornell hoped, "should satisfy the residents of Alpine in relation to their request for a direct approach to the park." He then added that "from the standpoint of traffic requirements, an additional entrance along the east border of the park is unnecessary and perhaps impractical because of natural barriers." Referring to the "proposed park in Mexico," Cornell and the inspection team concluded that "it appears that the one important entrance will be located at Boquillas." [58]

Once the inspectors had addressed the issue of access to the park site, they turned to the network of roads within the future Big Bend National Park. "The main park roads," Cornell wrote to Vint, "will include connections between the north entrance at Cimarron Canyon and the Basin, a connection leading east to Boquillas, and a connection between the Basin and the possible west entrance near Terlingua." He anticipated that "secondary roads may include a connection to Santa Elena Canyon and a road leading from Boquillas to Mariscal Canyon." As for a "circulatory road on the American side of the Rio Grande," Cornell saw this as "questionable," even though "a circulatory road on the Mexican side of the Rio Grande may be necessary in the ultimate development." [59]

When the inspection team shifted its attention to facility planning, they saw the relationship between well-designed roads and the distinctive features of the Big Bend master plan. "The suggestion that the main lodge development be located in the Basin," said Cornell, "was definitely concurred in." He could report to Vint that "the main park road leading to this location is virtually completed." Further, "the series of Juniper flats above the originally proposed lodge site afford an excellent area for the construction of cabins." As an added bonus, "the view from these flats through the Window is most dramatic," said the NPS landscape architect, while "preliminary investigation would indicate that a series of wells in this location would provide an adequate water supply." The inspectors disagreed, however, with the CCC's idea that the main campgrounds should be located in the basin. "A most suitable location," wrote Cornell, "is in Pine Canyon, referred to locally as Ward Canyon." Ross Maxwell had suggested that "it was quite possible to obtain a suitable water supply in this locality," and the master plan could include cabins interspersed with the campsites. At present the Pine Canyon area could be reached "from the Boquillas road," but "a much shorter alignment is possible as a direct connection between Pine Canyon and the main Park road just north of the Basin." The final concern of the inspectors in facility design was the siting of administrative quarters for NPS personnel. "Eventually this phase of the development might include quite a large number of buildings," said Cornell, "including residences for Park employees." The inspection team found that "the various sites previously under consideration appear to be exposed to views from the main park road." Thus the landscape architect reported that "a site north of the Basin and on the east side of the main park road was tentatively selected as it met space requirements and was quite thoroughly screened from the main park road." [60]

When Cornell and his associates looked at specific features such as the South Rim, the longhorn cattle ranch, and the international park, they saw much potential for the master planners to consider. "It is believed," said Cornell, "that views from the South Rim afford by far the most dramatic interest in the park area as a whole." He feared that "to deny the public access to this particular area could not be too easily justified." Yet "the problem of accessibility is an acute one," the landscape architect warned, "and further study will be necessary to determine the feasibility of approach by means of a park road leading from the Basin to the South Rim." Beyond this logistical hurdle, the NPS realized that "a bridle trail would permit only a small number of park visitors the opportunity to visit this side of the park," and "those who were denied the [privilege] would undoubtedly register a protest." Cornell then speculated that "if a road is impractical it may be possible to construct a tramway from the Basin to the Laguna area and from there continue with a road to the South Rim." Should park planners adopt this suggestion, "a minor development affording overnight facilities adjacent to the South Rim may be necessary." [61]

Referring to the idea of a working cattle operation at Big Bend, Cornell and his colleagues theorized that "a large number of park visitors will be interested in the usual ranch activities common to West Texas." The inspectors acknowledged suggestions that "in some favorable location a typical Ranch be considered as part of the development." Cornell reminded Vint that "this proposal has been discussed in a number of previous reports and should be given thorough consideration." He also reported that "if a Ranch is established in this area we doubt if local private interests would criticize the competitive nature of the development as the nearest 'Dude' Ranch would be many miles distant." The inspectors did recognize that "possible interference with Wildlife requirements would be an important factor in the establishment of a grazing range." [62]

The last item that the inspection team addressed was the "National Park in Mexico." Enthusiasm for the companion park south of the Rio Grande from Big Bend had cooled since the heady days of 1935-1936, and Cornell reported that "very little study was made of the possible park development in the adjoining area in Mexico." Yet the potential of such a venture gripped the imagination of the inspection team in the same manner as it had all others who had contemplated this gesture of goodwill between two nations often at odds with one another. ""It was apparent," wrote the landscape architect, "that the most interesting portion of the proposed park is in the vicinity of the Sierra del Carmen and Fronteriza Mountain ranges, southeast of Boquillas, Mexico." They offered no thoughts on the extent to which NPS master planners should study the international park; a circumstance that reflected the loss of momentum suffered by the concept in the turbulent days of the late 1930s. [63]

To advocates of Texas's first national park, their efforts to generate private funds for land acquisition could not wait for the deliberations of the NPS master planning process. By March, the Texas Big Bend Park Association (TBBPA) had fielded a number of inquiries about the status of the project. Harry Connelly, executive secretary of the Fort Worth-based organization, asked Hillory Tolson to provide him with answers to these questions. Among the items of interest to potential park visitors, said Connelly, were the availability of water to meet the requirements of tourists and campers, the "possibilities of dam[m]ing the Rio Grande to provide an artificial lake for recreational purposes," the NPS's plans for tourist housing and camping accommodations, the park's roads and trails, the "estimated annual expenditure of Federal funds for development and maintenance purposes," and the extent to which plans for development of the area had been made. [64]