Lake Roosevelt Administrative History

Early Recreational Permits

In addition to industrial and agricultural uses, the Park Service hoped to encourage recreational use of the reservoir lands by allowing leases for summer cabin sites. Although requests began coming in before the agency had even assumed full administrative authority for the area, LARO staff did not begin to concentrate on this issue until 1952. There were a number of concerns that needed resolution before leasing could begin. Among the first of these were questions about the Park Service policy of clustering cabin sites in groups of ten or more. R. T. Paine, president of the Colville Chamber of Commerce, understood the practical reasons for this policy, especially when locating roads and utilities. But he said that local people did not favor such groupings, claiming "that if a person is primarily interested in paved roads and utility developments and groups of homes he has them right on the block on which he lives." The Chamber members suggested instead that LARO set aside all areas considered for public recreational use and then open the rest to summer homes, accelerating development of the area. [20]

Park Service reaction to these ideas was mixed. Thomas J. Allen, National Park Service Assistant Director, explained the agency's policy of arranging the sites to maximize the attraction to both cabin occupants and visitors to Lake Roosevelt. He assured Paine that the Park Service would consider applications for specific sites, considering the merits of each one. Allen told the Regional Director that Paine's ideas had merit, and the agency would like to see if they would help solve the summer home problem in one recreation area, namely LARO. Still, he was troubled by the need to formulate policy for summer homes in the new national recreation areas (NRAs), where he saw the need to balance Park Service planning standards against demands from users, public relations, and delays engendered by prolonged periods of planning. Greider realized that he needed to make progress on the summer home lots at Lake Roosevelt, but he was concerned about a lack of policy, especially since it looked like Allen was willing to abandon the established policy of grouping homes. [21]

Greider and his staff began looking at potential summer home sites in the summer of 1952. They were concerned about the possibility of landslides, so they enlisted the help of Fred Jones, from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), to examine all sites under consideration. The Park Service also sent Harold Fowler, Landscape Architect from the San Francisco office, to look over potential sites in the Kettle Falls District. The recommendations included the North Gorge area (25-30 homes); Nancy Creek (3-4 homes, with crowding); Kettle Falls (5-6 homes at a bare and hot site); Kettle River; Barstow Flats (40-50 homes); and Colville River (4-6 homes). In addition, the group recommended an area on the Spokane Indian Reservation about one mile north of the Spokane River, with access off Highway 25. They considered this site so desirable that they included it despite the difficulty they anticipated in working out an agreement with the Spokane Tribe. The group also eliminated Marcus Island from consideration since Jones believed that the island would disappear within a short time. A few weeks later, LARO Chief Ranger Robert Coombs flew Fowler over the Spokane Arm where he selected three additional sites suitable for 50-80 homes. Greider, however, discounted these sites both because of landslide potential and because LARO had not yet selected areas for recreational development along the Spokane Arm. [22]

Greider added three more areas to the list of potential summer home sites during December 1952 and January 1953. These included the Sherman Creek area, Rickey Point, and Bossburg. LARO spent considerable time working out the problems connected with the Sherman Creek sites since interested applicants included eight or nine prominent citizens from the Colville area. Greider warned that the access road would be costly, but those interested did not seem concerned about bearing this expense. The LARO Superintendent initially did not believe that the Park Service should build such roads because he could not justify the expenditure of public funds to benefit a select few. He later reconsidered and told a group wanting to use the Sherman Creek area that Park Service policy called for the agency to build permanent roads to cabin sites. Due to lack of funds, however, this could not be done for at least a year, and he suggested that the group do rough clearing on the right-of-way to allow them temporary access. [23]

By the spring of 1953, the summer home list had been considerably revised. All of those sites considered the previous August were dropped, replaced with Sherman Creek, Rickey Point, and Bossburg, with a fourth site at Kettle Bridge to be added that summer. Greider expected that Rickey Point would eventually include seventy sites, while Sherman Creek would have ten and Bossburg up to fourteen. [24]

As the Park Service worked on developing its policies for summer cabins, LARO personnel consulted with U.S. Forest Service officials, both locally and regionally, to see how that agency handled such permits. They found that the Forest Service no longer mandated standard lot sizes but instead let the size vary according to topography, usually three-quarters to one acre. The agency provided all access roads to avoid problems with substandard roads that often ruined scenic values of an area. It also gave permittees assistance with planning docks and other marine facilities, again to avoid substandard construction. The agency allowed one residence per lot, along with garages, barns, guest houses, and other structures. Leases had been reduced to twenty years, but following public complaints the Forest Service was considering raising the term to ninety-nine years again. [25]

C. Buddrius family working on their summer cabin at Rickey Point, 1957. Photo courtesy of National Park Service, Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area (LARO.HQ.MENG).

LARO guidelines, when finally released, did not follow Forest Service precedent on many issues. Lot sizes were kept to approximately one-half acre, with annual rents of $25. The term of the lease was for twenty years, with only one attractive, well-built home allowed on each lot. Permittees had to clear all building plans through both LARO and the Department of Health, and all docks, fences, and other structures needed the park's approval. LARO agreed to locate all access roads, but the permittee had to build these initially. Although the Forest Service tried to leave a buffer strip between buildings and water to encourage public use of the beaches, LARO planned to limit such public access at Rickey Point. "It would be undesirable to have the general public utilizing the subdivision water front and other facilities which may be provided by the residents for their use," suggested the Regional Landscape Architect. LARO policy on this point changed dramatically over the next thirty years. [26]

Despite the progress made in summer home development during 1952, Greider was frustrated by delays the following spring. He needed approval for a special use form for these cabins, submitted in January, and he needed help from the regional office to stake lots. With the arrival of spring, local people were expecting approval of permits so they could begin building, and Greider feared that the Park Service would be embarrassed if there were a delay. There were further setbacks when USGS geologist Jones condemned nearly one-third of the Rickey Point development because of landslide potential. Additional problems with rights-of-way held up access roads. Greider finally received approval for the cabin developments in April 1953, and he began staking lots immediately. [27]

Greider noted two changes in policy from that originally announced in the fall of 1952: lease rates had increased to $35 per year and the Park Service had reverted to its old policy of locating cabin sites in groups of ten or more. Under the policy previously advertised for LARO, however, several individuals had applied for isolated sites that would accommodate up to four cabins. Greider believed that the park needed to process these applications as originally announced to avoid further embarrassment. It is not clear if the Park Service approved these exceptions or not, but apparently no individuals took up leases on isolated lots at LARO. Instead, the park confined its plans to Sherman Creek, Rickey Point, and Bossburg, with developments limited eventually to just the first two locations. [28]

During the next few years, the public continued to pressure LARO for additional cabin sites, none of which were approved. The Park Service developed plans for a group of summer homes at Keller Ferry in 1955, and two years later individuals were asking for sites at Haag Cove and on the Spokane Arm. Although LARO Superintendent Hugh Peyton supported the Keller Ferry plans, he resisted increased development elsewhere, fearing that it would preclude future public use. To prevent just such a situation, he had LARO staff put two small campgrounds at Haag Cove in April 1957, complete with a sign. Peyton referred to the installation of these minor developments as "homesteading," and he did this in various places to keep sites in public hands. He also noted another group that was using political pressure to secure first choice of cabin locations on the Spokane Arm. This caused him to suggest public drawings for assigning cabin sites. "By using an impartial method of intermittently allocating these available sites," he suggested, "we could point to our fair method of taking care of this situation and be able to distract from the strength of selfish pressure groups which are springing up like toadstools around the area." The Director's Office approved these proposed changes, along with rewording of the lease to identify these developments as vacation home sites rather than residential lots. [29]

Adjacent landowners occasionally trespassed on government lands, knowingly and unknowingly, when building cabins. In one case, Mr. and Mrs. Paul Moody acquired land at the mouth of Fifteen Mile Creek around 1940, before the boundary line was clear, and they began construction four years later on what they thought was their property. They believed that LARO agreed with their assessment since a ranger never questioned the location of their cabin when he told them ca.1947 that they needed a permit for their dock. By 1958, however, it was clear that the building was on federal lands. Reclamation Field Solicitor Paul Lemargie took a hard line, telling Moody that he could not legally lease the land and asking him how soon they could move their cabin. This provoked an emotional plea to President Eisenhower from the now-retired couple who professed to be "heartbroken" at the thought of tearing down the cabin they had spent fifteen years building. Thus began more than fifteen years of permits, cancellations, and appeals. [30]

The Moody trespass, along with several similar ones, demonstrates the inconsistencies of Park Service permits and enforcement, not just at LARO but also at the regional and national levels. Superintendent Homer Robinson believed that Moody should have known that he was building on federal land since his cabin sat just twenty-five feet from the water, approximately one hundred fifty feet inside the boundary. He suggested that LARO could offer Moody a permit for up to twenty-five years, but he thought that twenty years should be the maximum. "It must be recognized that such action might establish a precedent detrimental to our best interests," he warned. Robinson argued that other trespassers should be given similar consideration, especially since one man was elderly, in poor health, and living on welfare. The case went to National Park Service Director Conrad Wirth, who offered the Moodys a five-year permit with the stipulation that the cabin be removed or revert to the government at the end of the period. [31]

The case did not end that simply. Another emotional plea to the President in 1961 bought the Moodys an additional five years. When the cabin still stood in 1968, LARO Superintendent David Richie had lost his patience with the Moodys and a similar case. He questioned whether these trespasses were "entirely innocent" since the owners should have gotten a boundary survey before building. Furthermore, if the Park Service believed that the land at LARO was for the use of the public, the agency should not tolerate such prolonged trespasses. The regional office overruled Richie, saying that there was no indication that the Moodys' trespass was deliberate and LARO had no plans for public recreation at the site. The "further pursuit of cabin removal seems to place the Government in a very arbitrary position," wrote Raymond O. Mulvany, Acting Regional Director. He asked Richie to keep renewing the special use permits for the lifetime of the tenants, deleting the stipulation that the cabin be removed. [32] The then-elderly couple moved to a new cabin on their own land in 1973, but removal of the offending cabin took at least another year. The foundation, bridge, and outhouse, located on federal land, remained at least several more years. [33]

Since the 1940s, LARO has permitted organizations to secure long-term leases for group camps. Boy Scouts of the Grand Coulee Dam district were the first to apply, securing a one-year special use permit in 1944 for a camp on the northern shore of the reservoir across from Spring Canyon. Four years later, Troop 79 of Wilbur applied for a twenty-year lease for a permanent youth camp along the lake between Jones Bay and Hanson Harbor. Their plans included a lodge, dock, campfire circle, sanitation, water supply, and play area. When not needed by the scouts, the group planned to make the facilities available to other youth groups, including girls. While Greider encouraged such use of park lands, staffers in the regional office had mixed reactions. Despite these differences, LARO approved both the special use permit and the building plans in 1949, in time for the group to pour the foundation before freezing weather set in. [34]

The following year the Council of Churches in Seattle asked for a long-term lease for a summer camp at Lake Roosevelt. Greider initially recommended approval of the lease because of the program's character and statewide nature. The Park Service wanted to see some preliminary plans before approving the lease, but the Council said that it needed the lease before it could proceed with fundraising and planning. The agency believed it should make every effort to help them develop good plans, and the regional office considered having a landscape architect meet with the camp committee to discuss layout and planning. The issues were the same in 1952, with LARO still wanting to see some plans before granting the lease. At some point, the Council dropped the idea and the camp was never built. [35]

LARO permitted another group facility, Camp Na-Bor-Lee, in 1966 when a civic group from Stevens County leased land fifteen miles north of Fort Spokane. As a gesture of both goodwill and good public relations, the Park Service assisted the group in preparing initial plans. The agency stipulated that a substantial part of the development work needed to be completed within five years. [36]

Many who had vacation cabins, either on federal lands or adjoining private lands, wanted to build docks to provide mooring for boats as well as enjoyment for swimmers. The permitting process was easy initially. Reclamation policy in 1943 required a drawing showing the location of the site in relation to the nearest section line. It is probable that the Park Service continued this simple policy when it took over special use permits because there was no need for excessive regulations with very few docks on many miles of undeveloped shoreline. Permits became more complicated by 1963 when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers reminded LARO that anyone applying to do work, primarily dock construction, within the navigable waters of the Columbia River system needed to obtain Corps approval. The Park Service could not waive this requirement for permittees, nor could the Corps waive the need for a special use permit from the Park Service. Despite these extra restrictions, LARO officials recognized by the mid-1960s that individual docks had increased so greatly that they needed to be consolidated in "unit locations" to keep the shoreline free for public use. The park began developing policies and standards for community docks in 1967. [37]