GUADALUPE MOUNTAINS An Administrative History

CHAPTER II: THE MOVEMENTS TO ESTABLISH A PARK (continued)

The 1940s and 1950s

In spite of the depressed state of the national economy, the 1930s had been a time of expansion and improvement for the parks; the work performed by the Civilian Conservation Corps had been particularly beneficial. The optimism of the park officials who investigated the Guadalupe extension to Carlsbad Caverns was part of that wave of expansion and improvement. The 1940s, however, brought a new Director to the Park Service and new attitudes toward the national park system.

Economies enforced by World War II and the conservative leadership of Director Newton Drury caused the Park Service to languish during the 1940s. Drury came to the Park Service from a successful career in park work in California. He was known for his skill in obtaining public support for preservation of the California redwoods and private financial support for the establishment of park lands. However, during his years as Director of the Park Service, his unaggressive style of management generated criticism from those who believed in a stronger preservation ethic than Drury exhibited. He called for minimal development of the visitor facilities of the parks; restraint seemed to be his guiding principle. [39]

In 1945, Ben Thompson, who was then Chief, Branch of Lands, for the Park Service in Washington, expressed the subsidence of enthusiasm for expansion when he once again addressed the subject of extension of the boundaries of Carlsbad Caverns. He wrote to Regional Director Minor Tillotson in Santa Fe and told him that he foresaw no major boundary changes for the park. He asked Tillotson to encourage the State of Texas to acquire McKittrick Canyon and the Guadalupe Peak section of the Guadalupe Mountains. Thompson intimated that the Park Service would probably be receptive if the state offered to donate the park lands at some later date. [40]

When Conrad Wirth took over as Director of the Park Service in 1951, the entire park system needed renovation. MISSION 66, a program undertaken in the mid-1950s to improve all park access and facilities by 1966, proved to be a high point in development of the national parks. However, the emphasis of MISSION 66 was on upgrading existing parks rather than adding new ones to the system. Throughout the late 1950s and early 1960s, therefore, there was little interest within the Park Service for creating a new park in Texas.

The Early Park Movements

From 1925 to 1945 a relatively sustained effort existed to establish a park in the Guadalupe Mountains of Texas. The effort, however, was highly fragmented. Little substantive exchange took place between interested citizens and park agencies. Boosters were interested in expanding tourism because their communities would experience economic benefits. The spiritual and psychological appeal of the mountains and canyons of the Guadalupes so enthralled them that they gave little thought to the problems involved in administering a large park. Acquisition of the land was the boosters' primary concern.

On the other side, national and state park agencies worried about where they would find the money to acquire, develop, and maintain park lands. The Texas legislature was hesitant to make any move, partly because of lack of funds and partly because every legislator was promoting his district's pet park. [41]

Park Service personnel worked to justify either the creation of a separate Texas national park or an extension to Carlsbad Caverns. Neither plan fit neatly into the financial and ideological frameworks of the Park Service. By some analyses the scenic value of the Texas park was limited. By other analyses, acquisition of the land was the problem since purchase by the federal government was a method yet untried. In addition to those problems, a wide range of viewpoints existed within the Park Service regarding the character and purposes of park lands. The emerging awareness of conservation of unique biota was apparent in the assessments of Wright, Thompson, and Toll. Similarly, Obert recognized the fragility of McKittrick Canyon, but he went further than his associates and addressed development needs and compared them with the resource. He did not consider economic gain or recreational values to be appropriate trade-offs for destruction of the canyon. A generation later, environmentalists concerned with the development of Guadalupe Mountains National Park would express beliefs similar to Obert's.

<<< CHAPTER I

CONTENTS

CHAPTER III >>>