FORT DAVIS Administrative History

Throughout the spring of 1963, NPS devoted more attention to the implementation of the design plans crafted by Bob Utley, Charley Pope, and others of the park service. When Superintendent Michael Becker reported for duty on January 6, 1963, he faced the need for employee housing, although he only had funds that winter for an historian and a supervisory park ranger. The slots for secretary and maintenance chief would soon follow. Because of the limited housing availability in Fort Davis (described by SWR director Thomas Allen as "sub-standard"), and the need to have some custodial personnel on or near the grounds at all times, the park service agreed to design employee housing in the spring of 1963. Becker and his wife had chosen to take a rental on the Mexican east side of Fort Davis; a situation that raised eyebrows among the Anglo establishment of the town. More challenging to the status quo, and an indication of the impact that the park service would have on community sentiments, was Becker's attendance at the Catholic church, making he and his wife the only Anglo parishioners that anyone could remember. [12]

This action by Becker came at a time when the community of Fort Davis struggled to understand the type of individual coming to work at the park, and also the lifestyles that they had cultivated in areas more urban than the Davis Mountains. Becker recalled that his offer of a secretarial position to Etta Koch was accepted immediately, as she had worked for 13 years in the office of Big Bend National Park. The superintendent had little control of one hire: that of the historical architect, Charles Woodbury, assigned to Fort Davis by the San Francisco WODC. Woodbury proved to be a most colorful character; perhaps too colorful, in the words of Bob Utley and other park service officials working on the design of the site. Woodbury had been divorced, had brought to the strict Protestant community a girlfriend with whom he lived, and suffered from alcoholism. Erwin Thompson, Becker's first hire as an historian at the post, remembered that Woodbury had to leave Fort Davis within five weeks of his arrival because of an incident in town one night. After drinking too much liquor (which was hard to procure in a "dry" town like Fort Davis), Woodbury drove down the main street of town at midnight, and then onto a sidewalk. The local sheriff had to arrest Woodbury, incarcerate him overnight, and contact the park to have the architect released on bond. When Thompson went down to the courthouse to inquire about Woodbury, the sheriff noted with some amusement that the NPS employee had been the "first white man ever kept in the local jail." [13]

Where the arrest of Charles Woodbury within weeks of the arrival of NPS staff surprised the local community, the hiring by Michael Becker of Pablo Bencomo as the first chief of maintenance demonstrated that a new social order had come to Fort Davis. The position would be one of great importance to the park service, as the maintenance chief would have to hire and train workers able to meet NPS policy guidelines that exceeded most of the criteria for electrical, plumbing, carpentry, and stone work of the surrounding area. In addition, the park service would pay national wage scales, offer opportunities for training and promotion, and perhaps most important, would pay health and vacation benefits not usually offered by local ranchers and contractors. Interviews with Bencomo's co-workers 30 years later revealed the depth of their respect for his abilities, and for his courage in challenging the racial barriers in Fort Davis. Bencomo, a war veteran and, in the words of seasonal ranger John Mitchell, "the best carpenter in town," had applied for the position after reading about it in the local newspaper. Once Bencomo became the maintenance chief, said Becker in his first monthly report as superintendent, local Hispanic workers poured into his office seeking employment. "There were at least ten to twenty men for each position on the initial [maintenance] crew," Becker wrote in January 1963, and he attributed this successful canvassing of the community to the presence of Bencomo, whom Becker himself described as "the local contractors' top hand." [14]

With good staff and maintenance workers on site, Becker could then discuss with regional and WODC personnel the first phase of actual construction: the six adobe buildings along Officers' Row. Becker agreed with Pope that the best technique would be to place "bond beams" around the roof of each structure upon which to hang the porches. The construction firm of Hal K. Showalter, of Midland, Texas, was thus awarded the first large restoration contract at Fort Davis, to the tune of $59,000. Unfortunately, another bidder, the Robert L. Guyler Company of Lampasas, Texas, protested the award, forcing Becker and the regional office to investigate. Guyler eventually received the "roofs and porches" contract, and the first of many construction crews descended upon Fort Davis to begin the million-dollar project to revive the historical past. Soon thereafter, Becker sought to initiate work on the visitor center/museum complex, but realized that this would take some 15,000 adobes (which were not readily available in the Fort Davis area). Becker remembered from his days at Tumacacori of the adobe makers in the Tucson area, but learned that "the freight rates [from Arizona or New Mexico] make the importation of stabilized adobes . . . impractical and financially objectionable." Thus he asked the regional office for permission to manufacture the mud bricks on site; a situation that would delay work on the visitors center until the fall of 1964 at the earliest. [15]

Adobe construction in the Fort Davis area, while common in the nineteenth century, had given way to stonemasonry or frame construction. Thus the regional office expressed concern about the request, especially in light of criticisms of the technique of "stabilizing" the mud brick with concrete injected into the adobe before drying. One concern of WODC was the fact that the Federal Housing Authority (FHA), which would insure any structures at Fort Davis, wanted assurances that the bricks would not melt before agreeing to underwrite a 30-year loan. Jerry A. Riddell, chief architect for WODC, wanted Superintendent Becker to conduct his own tests on the bricks made on-site, looking for their reaction to "compressive strength, shear, and resistance to moisture." Becker had ordered adobes made in Presidio, Texas, but Riddell wondered if they could endure the demands of park service visitors and maintenance standards. [16]

By the end of the first summer of operations at Fort Davis, Superintendent Becker had a good idea of the scale of work to be done in restoration of the historic buildings, as well as the development of a network of utilities and park service structures for the daily activities of the site. In March 1963, the SWR had completed its "five-year plan" for Fort Davis, calling for accurate and thorough attention to historical detail in all work. Superintendent Becker reported in August that criticism had already begun about the ambitious and costly program for the site, noting that "a rather conservative Australian visitor walked into HB [Historic Building] #2, and before saying Hello he blurted out, "I certainly wouldn't vote for a senator who would appropriate $1,000,000 for a place like this." Becker and his staff understood this type of comment, as the regional, San Francisco, and Washington offices devoted what seemed to be an inordinate amount of attention to the details of the master plan. One example was the decision by the regional director, Thomas J. Allen, to locate the paved entrance road through the cottonwood grove to a parking area south of the planned visitors center. Allen and the NPS planners also wanted the housing compound placed next to the maintenance yard, creating problems of privacy for employee families and requiring landscaping along the highway to camouflage the non-historic structures (which originally were to be made of adobe). [17]

Whatever the degree of higher-level NPS control of Fort Davis planning, Superintendent Becker and his staff could not be influenced by such comments. They instead moved to address questions of worker and visitor safety, water supply, and electric power. One request made by the superintendent was "the reestablishment of the dike system which was initiated during the Army days at Fort Davis." The new historic site, like the old military post, needed protection from drainage down from Hospital canyon. A series of lateral canals would carry water away from the new buildings, and would "control and prevent accelerated erosion of the lands of the Park Service." Water supply and use also concerned the superintendent, who discussed the issue at some length in October 1963 with D.W. Geisinger of the WODC. Geisinger had studied the options at the park service's disposal relative to the site's access to potable water. He concluded that "a water supply providing a steady supply of 3 gpm [gallons per minute] or 9 gpm based on an 8 hour demand day will satisfy domestic future water demand for the next 20 years." At that time the park utilized a well some 300 feet west of the officers quarters, and Geisinger reported the existence of "another well believed to be a good source of water . . . located next to the old church camp site near the head of Hospital Canyon." These wells, if drilled deep enough, could supply Fort Davis with sufficient water for staff, park maintenance, and the new compound of employee housing under consideration, as well as Geisinger's projection of 100,000 visitors annually by 1985. [18]

When Becker approached local utility companies for advice on the water system, as well as electrical power, they did not show much enthusiasm for working with the park service guidelines that required underground routing of pipes and wiring. The distance from the reservoir to the central buildings of Fort Davis also presented problems of cost, as WODC wanted a six-inch water line run underground. Above-ground construction would not only require less labor, but maintenance would be easier. The historic character of the post would be affected adversely, however, with visible power lines and electrical wires; a situation that Becker suggested could be mitigated if NPS built "spur lines for the installation of the fire hydrants and hose houses behind the various buildings on both sides of the parade ground." In similar fashion the park service could install additional electric transformers behind the historic structures to limit the need for an elaborate wiring grid exposed to public view. [19]

Figure 18. HB-2 (Ranger's Office) with storm damage (May 1963).
Courtesy Fort Davis NHS.

Figure 19. Front view of HB-2 (Ranger's Quarters) (April 1963).
Courtesy Fort Davis NHS.

On the heels of Geisinger's water and power report for WODC came Ronald F. Coene of the U.S. Public Health Service in Dallas. On April 2, 1964, Coene visited with Superintendent Becker and his chief ranger, Robert "Bob" Dunnagan, to draft the site's first "environmental health survey." Having had the experience of one year's construction work and visitation (a total of 64,321 persons from January to December 1963), Coene expressed satisfaction with conditions as he found them that spring. He noted that of the six permanent and 12 seasonal employees, only one lived on the grounds (in one of the officers' quarters). Renovation of the various historic structures would provide "only for protection against the elements and will not be used to house anyone, nor will visitors be able to enter them." Coene did warn against the presence of polluted water in wells around the historic site, given the lack of sewage treatment in the Fort Davis area, and he advised Becker to install chlorine treatment equipment as soon as possible. He also suggested abandoning the traditional practice of draining sewage into cesspools, as these would only negate the impact of the chlorination. The public health officer's findings validated the concerns of Superintendent Becker, whose discovery of coliform bacteria in the park's water supply had required him to accelerate the planned 1966 environmental survey to address the real threat to staff and visitors. [20]

The historic structures rehabilitation moved forward quickly in the spring and summer of 1964, drawing much praise from local visitors who marveled at the extent of park service design and construction. Thomas N. Crellin, the historical architect who replaced the controversial Charles Woodbury, prepared a series of reports that commented at length on the original plans and specifications. In May 1964, Crellin offered his advice on the status of rehabilitation work, based upon the same 12-month experience that D.W. Geisinger and Ronald Coene had used to craft their reports on water and power. The first winter of visitation and park service habitation at the site revealed the need for better heating, especially use of oil and electric heat, rather than the first estimate that butane gas would be sufficient. This would then require more heating ducts and redesign of ceilings and walls to accommodate the new piping. Crellin also warned against too much reliance on wooden flooring, as the weight of visitors crossing them could wear them out earlier, thus costing even more money in maintenance and repair.

The historic architect saved his most pointed comments for the process of adobe brick construction underway at the site. "I would question the use of stabilized soil as a surfacing material for the porches," said Crellin. "Judging from the quality of the soil-cement blocks produced here," Crellin told his superiors in Washington, "I doubt that a surface of sufficient hardness could be produced to hold up over an extended period of time." The historic architect conceded that stabilized soil "is used for road surfacing and is placed with optimum moisture content and maximum density." He countered with the argument that "foot traffic tends to follow definite patterns and to concentrate particularly at openings, resulting in severe localized wear." Crellin instead opted for "an integrally colored concrete slab" to "give the same general appearance;" a circumstance in keeping with NPS historic preservation policy since "a soil-cement mixture would require a color additive also." From this would come "a better surface," as "most of the commercial coloring agents contain a surface hardener." [21]

Figure 20. Early staff (left to right): Bob Dunnagan, Erwin Thompson, Tom Crellin, Etta Koch, Michael Becker (Superintendent), and Pablo Bencomo (1963).
Courtesy Fort Davis NHS.

The NPS western office of design and construction then weighed in with their comments on the progress of rehabilitation in June 1964, as the fiscal year drew to a close and funding for 1965's activities drew near. Daniel B. Beard, SWR director, wrote to WODC that month to declare that the pace of work indicated a completion date sometime in fiscal year 1967. In order to meet that deadline, Beard's staff needed to rethink certain assumptions about work and funding. One area of concern had become the post hospital (HB46), which in the original master plan had been targeted for "complete restoration" at a cost of $57,000. The SWR director reminded the chief of WODC that "the Washington office questioned the desirability of completely restoring the hospital," while SWR and park personnel "thought the money might better be used to reconstruct the cavalry and quartermaster corrals." Beard reiterated the opinion of his staff that "this alternative would be a much less ambitious project, [and] would afford additional features of a side of the parade ground not well represented by historic remains and thus visually out of balance." In addition, this shift of funds "would provide a place to house large display items such as the ambulance recently acquired." The hospital could then be "roofed and porched in the same manner as the officers quarters," resulting in financial savings and more rapid completion of the overall rehabilitation of the post. [22]