Capitol Reef
Administrative History 		NPS Logo


CHAPTER 18:
PLANNING DOCUMENTS SUMMARY (continued)


NATURAL RESOURCES

This section will address only the more general resource management plans. The more specific issue documents, such as grazing, transportation, etc., are mentioned and often analyzed within the appropriate chapters of this Capitol Reef National Park administrative history.


Natural Resource Management Plan and Finding of No Significant Impact - June 1984

Prepared by Norman Henderson, Resource Management Specialist

also contains Backcountry Management Plan - February 1978

Document found in:

  1. Document 158-D-2215, Technical Information Center.

  2. Capitol Reef Superintendent's Files.

  3. Administrative History Notes and Files (partial).

This guiding document for resource management at Capitol Reef provides an overview and needs statement, projected funding needs, and 30 natural resource project statements. There is also a backcountry management plan, dated February 1978.

As expected, the dominant concern of the resource management division in 1984 was grazing. One-third of the project statements are directly concerned with grazing. The second most important issue is water quality, to which five projects are dedicated. Various Fruita management concerns are found in at least four project statements and air quality in three. Other concerns are rare flora and fauna surveys and exotic plant controls.

The backcountry management plan set the guidelines for controlling backcountry use so as to preserve the wilderness quality and visitor experience. In 1984, the only designated campground outside Fruita was the primitive, five-site Cedar Mesa campground. A similar campground was being planned for the North District. Backcountry permits were required for overnight stays, and any camping was to be 1/2 mile from maintained roads, developed areas, or trails, and 100 yards from any water source. Group size in 1984 was limited to 20 persons. Backcountry campers were requested, but not required, to use only stoves rather than building fires. Water purification was recommended, and no soaps or detergents were allowed. Construction of backcountry trails was not considered necessary. Instead, handout maps with route descriptions were to be made available at trailheads.

Wildfires were to be controlled within Capitol Reef "to prevent unacceptable loss of wilderness values, loss of life, damage to property, and the spread of wildfire" to lands outside the park. [20]

These resource management and backcountry management plans were important first steps in documenting the needs and management objectives for Capitol Reef's invaluable natural resources during the 1980s. While now mostly outdated, the information in these documents gives an excellent idea of earlier resource concerns, many of which will involve park management for many years to come.


Final Resources Management Plan - June 1993

Prepared by Norman Henderson, Chief of Resource Management & Science

Recommended by Charles V. Lundy, Superintendent

Document found in:

  1. Capitol Reef Superintendent's Files.

  2. Capitol Reef Resource Management Files.

  3. Administrative History Notes and Files (partial copy).

As the most current management plan for the natural and cultural resources of Capitol Reef National Park, this is an invaluable document for all current and future park managers. Included in this final plan are 55 detailed project statements (up from 30 in 1984), resource management issues and objectives, and division personnel and funding.

Current natural resource issues include:

  1. air quality;

  2. hazardous material accumulation and transport;

  3. exotic plants - specifically tamarisk, Russian olive, Russian thistle and cheatgrass;

  4. pest species - skunks, marmots, deer, raccoons, beaver, tent caterpillars, and orchard invertebrates;

  5. soil erosion;

  6. rare plant, animal, and bird surveying and monitoring;

  7. wetlands;

  8. wilderness - road and rights-of-way boundaries unclear;

  9. water quality and the threats from upstream impoundments;

  10. grazing - its continued impact on all park resources;

  11. Fruita fields and orchards;

  12. road construction - specifically the Burr Trail;

  13. power line right-of-way and construction;

  14. Henry Mountain bison control; and

  15. oil and gas leases along park boundaries.

Cultural Resource concerns include:

  1. vulnerability and incomplete documentation of archeological resources in developed and undeveloped areas;

  2. the need for ethnographic overviews and surveys;

  3. museum collection - lack of space, division of collection for storage purposes; and

  4. cultural landscape nomination.

This is a detailed, comprehensive, and well-organized document that not only structures management objectives but gives a good background on the numerous issues facing Capitol Reef National Park as it enters the twenty-first century. Because of the excellent background information on a full range of resource issues facing Capitol Reef National Park, the narrative portions of this document should be made available to all park employees.

CULTURAL RESOURCES

This section lists the general or multiple-topic cultural resource management documents. Briefly mentioned are the planning documents concerned with the overall Fruita cultural landscape, since it has been a primary concern during the writing of this administrative history. The more specific documents, such as the Fruita Schoolhouse Furnishing Studies, and the numerous archeological surveys, will not be addressed here. Please see Appendix B for a complete list of these documents, on file at the Technical Information Center, Denver, Colorado.

The Capitol Reef Archives, and specifically Box 5, contain primary and secondary information on the history of the Fruita area, including earlier National Historic Register submittals. Other cultural resource documents concerning the archeology and history in the park can be found in the Capitol Reef Resource Management Division files.


Cultural Resources Management Plan: Fruita Living Community Management Plan - Draft 10 November 1975

Prepared by Gerald Hoddenbach, Research Biologist, Capitol Reef National Park.

Document found in:

  1. Box 5, Folder 9A, Capitol Reef Archives.

  2. Orchard Notebook, Capitol Reef Unprocessed Archives.

  3. Administrative History Notes and Files.

While Hoddenbach was the first natural resource specialist hired at Capitol Reef, his interest in the history of Fruita led him to research the area as had no one else before him -- including Charles Kelly. His interviews and primary research are included in his notes now preserved in the Capitol Reef Archives.

This plan to reconstruct a "Fruita Living Community" was an ambitious attempt to combine living history, orchard and historic structure maintenance, possible reconstruction of previously removed homes, and integration of historic natural flora and fauna.

The Fruita Living Community Management Plan foresees some of the recommendations of the 1993 Draft Cultural Landscape Report. While the plan's ambitious goals most likely doomed its approval in 1975, it should, nonetheless, be read by those senior management team members concerned with the management, preservation, and interpretation of the Fruita Rural Historic District.


Historic Agricultural Area Management Plan - February 1979

Prepared by Derek O. Hambly, Superintendent

Approved by James B. Thompson, Regional Director

Document found in:

  1. Document 158 D 18, Technical Information Center, Denver.

  2. Capitol Reef Historic Superintendent's Files.

  3. Administrative History Notes and Files.

This document became the first approved planning document specifically addressing the Fruita historic scene. Earlier efforts, such as those of Kelly and Hoddenbach, had succeeded in documenting the historic quality of the Fruita area. This document built upon those earlier efforts by proposing management guidelines preserving the remaining orchards and structures within the Fruita area.

This Historic Agricultural Area Management Plan was a revision of an earlier, controversial draft. The earlier proposal called for dramatically reducing the amount of fruit trees so as to more closely resemble Fruita in 1930s. This plan was met with almost unanimous disapproval at a local hearing and was thus revised to this 1979 approved plan. [21]

Considerations listed are:

  1. Maintenance Objectives. The objectives are to maintain the integrity of the historic scene, interpret the significance of the period 1920-30 when Fruita was determined to be at its peak, and provide for public fruit harvests.

  2. Adverse Influences. These include modern National Park Service developments, the old Capitol Reef Lodge, paved roads, and utility lines.

  3. Administrative Constraints. Constraints include non-transferable water rights and National Register nomination of the historic district and archeological sites.

Park personnel had determined through personal interviews with former Fruita residents and by examining old photographs that the contemporary, extensive orchards originated in the 1940s. Previous estimates had calculated that there had been about 1,500 trees in the desired 1930s timeframe. The proposal to reduce the amount of trees from the 2,563 in 1978 to only 1,500 trees was extremely unpopular. The goal then was to interpret the 1930s while maintaining the existing number of trees. From this point on, the interpretive path diverges, so as to please both management and public needs. Managers, for instance, wanted to reduce the number of trees to reduce orchard-related maintenance. This position was altered to keep the tree count the same while gradually replacing multiple-fruit orchards with single-variety ones. Local desires for fruit quality and quantity would also be met through this option. The problem was that this management tack would be incongruent with attempts to restore the area to its 1930s condition. To balance out these contradictions Superintendent Hambly proposed the following plan in which the Fruita area would be divided into three zones.

  1. The Development Subzone would contain National Park Service developments such as the headquarters facilities and park housing.

  2. The Historic Farming Subzone would include the Gifford farm, the Brimhall place and the Fruita school. The Gifford farm was to be a living history exhibit and the Fruita school and orchard would also interpret historic Fruita.

  3. The Greenbelt Subzone would consist of eight orchards interspersed with pastures. The orchards would be gradually restructured to single-variety.

This Historic Agricultural Area Management Plan is important for two reasons. It was created in the midst of controversy, which forced park managers to realize how important Fruita was to the local communities. This document also provides the first real management policies for dealing with the Fruita Historic Area. This plan only offered general guidelines as opposed to detailed, day-to-day policies. It also never really answered the troubling question of how to interpret Fruita as if it were in the 1930s, while at the same time increasingly moving toward modern orchard practices. Yet, the document at least acknowledged the need to preserve Fruita as an historic agricultural landscape.


Cultural Resources Management Plan - June 1984

Prepared by George E. Davidson, Chief of Interpretation

Superintendent - Derek O. Hambly

Approved by acting Regional Director Jack W. Neckels

Document found in:

  1. Capitol Reef Superintendent's Files.

  2. Administrative History Notes and Files.

This is the first comprehensive document detailing the cultural resource themes, management policies and constraints, museum and archival collections, history of archeological research, list of historic structures, and cultural resource management problems and selected alternatives.

The cultural resource themes identified were:

  1. prehistoric people;

  2. closing of the frontier (1880s exploration and settlement);

  3. cultural and religious minorities (1895-1937 Fruita); and

  4. the Civilian Conservation Corps.

Management policies and constraints include all the pertinent interpretations and compliance regulations of current National Park Service policy and historic preservation acts. The museum and archival descriptions give a good idea of the state of the park collections in the mid-1980s. The cultural resource problem assessments and alternatives concluded that the following steps were to be taken.

  1. An archeological survey was needed for the entire park. Most urgent was a survey of the southwest side of the park, because of the threat at that time from mineral exploration. A complete photographic survey of rock art within Capitol Reef National Park was also recommended as soon as possible.

  2. Professionally engineered maintenance plans were needed for the various historic structures in the Fruita area, as was professional guidance on managing the park museum collections.

  3. A comprehensive oral history program would be instituted so as to gain more information about Fruita's history.

  4. The park staff was to prepare a Historic Scene Enhancement Plan so as deal with the disharmony between modern, National Park Service developments and historic Fruita.

  5. A proposal to write an administrative history was included but not approved by Acting Regional Director Neckels.

As the first and only cultural resource plan approved by the regional office, this is a valuable document for all park managers. While many of the details are either outdated or difficult to follow, the numerous controlling policies on cultural resources should be known by present and future managers. It is also interesting to compare the status of cultural resource management in 1984 with the cultural landscape reports and annual interpretive plans of the early 1990s.


Orchard Management Plan - June 1988

Prepared by Chief Ranger Noel Poe

Superintendent - Martin C. Ott

Document found in:

  1. Document 158-D-42, Technical Information Center, Denver.

  2. Capitol Reef Superintendent's Files.

  3. Administrative History Notes and Files.

The 1988 orchard management plan was a basic update of the 1979 Historic Agricultural Area Management Plan, although it was more specifically concerned with the fruit trees as opposed to the entire historic landscape. This new plan considered a potential reduction in orchard budget and personnel and greater flexibility in satisfying both fruit harvesters and park management.

The 1988 orchard plan would be fundamentally guided by the desire to preserve the Fruita area as a historic cultural district while at the same time providing fruit in as prudent a manner as possible. To accomplish these goals, the following guidelines were issued.

  1. The 1930s landscape would be approximated by maintaining the same percentages of the Fruita landscape in orchard and fields, as opposed to maintaining the same tree count. For example, so long as the percentage of trees to pasture was kept at 60 percent orchards and 40 percent fields, that would be in keeping with historic photographic analysis of 1930s Fruita.

  2. The optimum number of trees should continue to be 2,500.. Single variety, or block, orchards would be planted for the majority of new orchards. No trees would be taken out unless they are no longer producing. To counter this modern look, there would be at least one, and potentially three historic, multiple-fruit orchards.

Other guidelines issued concerned pruning, irrigation and the price and methods of "U-Pick" fruit, pest management, cover crops, and orchard names.

This is a usable document for park managers because it provides detailed structure while at the same time giving a certain amount of flexibility to orchard management.


Capitol Reef National Park: A Historic Resource Study - June 1992

Prepared by Patrick W. O'Bannon, John Milner Associates, Inc., Philadelphia

Document found in:

  1. Capitol Reef Superintendent's Files.

  2. Administrative History Notes and Files.

  3. Cultural Resources Management Files.

  4. Capitol Reef Visitor Center Library.

This is a contracted historic survey of Capitol Reef National Park. It includes narrative and inventory forms for historic buildings and structures throughout the park. While the historic narrative and inventory forms were the most thorough and detailed in the park's history, there were numerous criticisms to these documents by Capitol Reef staff. Some of these objections pointed to mistakes on the inventory forms and complained that O'Bannon did not spend enough time at Capitol Reef. The most important objection, however, was that O'Bannon did not consider the Fruita landscape eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places. In the researcher's judgment, the National Park Service's removal of buildings and Mission 66 developments had destroyed the historical integrity of the landscape. [22]

Regardless of these objections, O'Bannon's historic resource survey is the first researched history of Capitol Reef National Park. This well-written narrative does an excellent job of summarizing the area's prehistory, the history of Fruita and Pleasant Creek, and of grazing, mining, and National Park Service developments at Capitol Reef from 1937 to the early 1990s. The detailed descriptions of the early homesteads at Fruita have been particularly valuable references in the compilation of the Cultural Landscape Report and this administrative history. The footnotes provide additional sources of information, and there is also an excellent bibliography.

This narrative history, along with the cultural landscape report listed below and this administrative history, should provide present and future managers valuable sources of information regarding the cultural resources at Capitol Reef National Park.


Capitol Reef National Park: Survey Report - June 1992

Prepared by Patrick W. O'Bannon, John Milner Associates, Inc., Philadelphia

Document found in:

  1. Capitol Reef Superintendent's Files.

  2. Administrative History Notes and Files.

  3. Resource Management Files.

This survey report contains the inventory forms for 57 identified historic resources within Capitol Reef National Park. O'Bannon concluded that of these 57 resources, 22 appeared eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places. These 22 were placed within the following historic contexts:

1. early exploration 1870-1885;

2. Mormon settlement and agriculture 1880-1937;

3. grazing 1880-1941;

4. mining 1880-1941; and

5. National Park Service development, 1937-1941. [23]

This survey has a well-written summary of the reasons for its findings, and includes tables listing the contributing or non-contributing status of each of the 57 identified resources.

While the conclusion that Fruita had lost its historic integrity has since been overturned, the individual survey forms should prove a valuable source not only for a multiple property nomination for the park but for added information on historic resources outside the Fruita area. It should be noted, however, that some of the inventoried resources have sketchy, occasionally inaccurate histories. Once the final multiple property nomination is written, that document will supersede much of O'Bannon's work.


Cultural Landscape Assessment: Fruita Rural Historic District - September 1992

Prepared by Cathy Gilbert, Historical Landscape Architect, Pacific West Region, and Kathleen L. McKoy, Historian, Intermountain (formerly Rocky Mountain) Region

Document found in:

  1. Document 158-D-51, Technical Information Center, Denver.

  2. Capitol Reef Superintendent's Files.

  3. Administrative History Notes and Files.

  4. Capitol Reef Visitor Center Library.

  5. Resource Management Files.

The purpose of this document was to evaluate Fruita as an integrated system rather than as a collection of individual structures, as had been the case in the O'Bannon study. The author concluded that, while some aspects of the historic landscape had changed, "the large-scale patterns and relationships have a strong degree of integrity and contribute to the historic character, feeling, and association of the district as a whole." [24] They therefore recommended that Fruita be nominated to the National Historic Register of Historic Places as the "Fruita Rural Historic District." After more than 50 years of struggle over what to do with Fruita, a workable policy decision had finally been reached.

This cultural landscape assessment includes photocopied historic photographs, excellent maps and sketches, and a narrative describing the significant contributing features to and contexts of this rural historic district. On page 44, there is a summary table of the contributing and non-contributing resources within the Fruita district. The last page contains a detailed fold-out map, which outlines the historic district and the locations of contributing structures.

Because of its brevity (less than 50 pages), readability, extremely useful information, and insightful policy recommendations, this document should be read by all park personnel -- especially those in the resource management, interpretation, and visitor protection divisions.


Cultural Landscape Report: Fruita Rural Historic District - Draft submitted July 1993, In Press 1998

Prepared by Cathy Gilbert and Kathleen McKoy

Document found in:

  1. Capitol Reef Superintendent's Files.

  2. Administrative History Notes and Files.

  3. Resource Management Files.

This document is a more detailed supplement to the cultural landscape assessment. The final, approved document will provide management with an excellent narrative history of Fruita, descriptions of existing conditions and recommendations for current care and future studies concerning the Fruita Rural Historic District.

This document has seven sections.

  1. Introduction. Gives a brief historic overview, describes the purpose of the report and states the authors' methodology and scope.

  2. Existing Conditions. Details the boundaries, context and description of the historic district as of 1993.

  3. Landscape History. A thorough narrative history of the Fruita region from prehistoric occupation through Mormon settlement and agricultural practices, to the impact of National Park Service developments. The research for this section includes primary documents never cited before. The endnotes contain valuable sources for future reference.

  4. Analysis and Evaluation. A specific examination of contexts used to evaluate the significance of the Fruita district. It includes an extremely valuable summary of cultural traditions at Fruita, [25] and the most specific information for each orchard ever assembled in one document. There is a description of each contributing structure.

  5. Recommendations. A valuable, policy-oriented section. This section stipulates exactly how the Fruita Rural Historic District should be managed. The recommendations fall into five categories: management concepts, vegetation, circulation, structures and small-scale features.

  6. Appendices. Statement of significance, summary of management documents, pertinent Wayne County Tax Assessor records and land use summary, Fruita deed histories, list of classified structures, and a 1985 list of cultivated and ornamental trees and shrubs in Fruita.

  7. Photographs and maps.

This is an organized, well-written document that finally gives park managers a workable framework from which to manage the entire Fruita area. The final publication should be extremely useful for all present and future park managers. This report should also be recommended reading for all park employees. After all, the idea is to regard the entire Fruita district as a cohesive, interrelated historic zone. All day-to-day activity and long range planning will be coordinated by managers, but its significance should be appreciated by all personnel.


INTERPRETATION

Planning documents specifically related to the Division of Interpretation are rare. Besides the annual statements of interpretation, which have traditionally been only brief overviews of themes and objectives, there is only one interpretive prospectus, completed in 1964, and a brief interpretive plan prepared in 1978. These two documents will be discussed below, along with the 1994 Capitol Reef Annual Statement for Interpretation, which is far more detailed. For information on the status of interpretation at Capitol Reef National Park for the years not covered, please see the park master plans, general management plans, and statements for management, most of which carry some information on the current status and objectives of interpretation within the monument or park. The 1992 Task Directive for a general management plan also calls for an appended interpretive prospectus to be completed by 1996. This prospectus was initiated in 1996, and is still in progress as of 1998.


Interpretive Prospectus - 1964

Superintendent - William T. Krueger

Document found in:

  1. Box 3, Folder 2, Capitol Reef Archives.

  2. Administrative History Notes and Files.

The copy in the park archives is a draft copy. A final draft has not been located. Nevertheless, this is an important document since it describes the status and objectives of interpretation at Capitol Reef National Monument at the close of Mission 66 developments.

This draft document is 20 pages long and includes:

  1. an analysis of visitor types and use patterns;

  2. the interpretive themes (geology, biology, archeology and history);

  3. the proposed function of visitor facilities such as roads, trails and interpretive buildings and shelters;

  4. an outline of the interpretive program, including needed interpretive displays at the visitor center and a detailed list of proposed wayside exhibits, many of which were to have visitor counters;

  5. bibliography (only nine sources pertaining to Capitol Reef); and

  6. "Significant Resources and Values," a five-page narrative describing the unique significance of Capitol Reef to the visitor and the plan to use Scenic Drive and monument trails to attract visitors to turn off the main highway.

This is only a draft document, poorly organized and with much outdated information. It is really useful only for documenting the lack of interpretation at Capitol Reef in the mid-1960s.


Interpretive Plan - 1978

Superintendent - William F. Wallace

Document found in Document 158-D-11, TIC

This document has not been examined by the author, but a short summary is found in the notes of Kathy McKoy, historian for the Intermountain Region. Her notes indicate that this plan was relatively brief and contained little if any new information. According to McKoy, the exhibit themes listed included Fremont Indians, Mormon settlement, geology, and the role of water in a desert environment. Also mentioned were wayside exhibits such as the Fruita schoolhouse, pioneer orchards, mailbox trees, and Scenic Drive.


Annual Statement For Interpretation - Fiscal Year 1994

Prepared by Robert Mack, Assistant Chief Ranger, Interpretation

Superintendent - Charles V. Lundy

Document found in:

  1. Capitol Reef Superintendent's Files.

  2. Administrative History Notes and Files.

Unlike many previous statements for interpretation, this one is a lengthy, detailed description of the current status, problems, and future objectives of Capitol Reef National Park's Division of Interpretation.

Included in this 1994 Annual Statement for Interpretation are:

  1. updated interpretive themes and objectives;

  2. bibliography of basic information and current status of planning documents;

  3. descriptive inventory of interpretive facilities throughout the park;

  4. detailed information on the current operations, visitor use statistics, individual service plans for each of the interpretive programs offered in the park, and a review of the past year's interpretive program (including visitor participation and the instituting of a new outdoor education/outreach program);

  5. future plans, such as expansion of the outdoor education program to include more schools and local tourism operations, Harvest Homecoming craft demonstration, and the creation of a Junior Ranger program and park newspaper.

Because of its detailed descriptions of the interpretive program at Capitol Reef National Park, and the surprising lack of other related planning documents, this 1994 Annual Statement of Interpretation is a valuable resource document.

<<< Previous <<< Contents >>> Next >>>

http://www.nps.gov/care/adhi/adhi18b.htm
Last Updated: 10-Dec-2002