.gif)
Presenting Nature
MENU
Design Ethic Origins
(1916-1927)
Design Policy & Process
(1916-1927)
Western Field Office
(1927-1932)
Decade of Expansion
(1933-1942)
State Parks
(1933-1942)
|
Presenting Nature:
The Historic Landscape Design of the National Park Service, 1916-1942 |
|
III. A POLICY AND PROCESS FOR DESIGN, 1916 TO 1927 (continued)
NATIONAL PARK DESIGN IN THE 1910s
A series of national park conferences brought together conservationists, park superintendents, and members of private organizations to discuss issues of park administration and development. These were held at Yellowstone in 1911, at Yosemite in 1912, at the University of California, Berkeley, and the Panama Pacific Exposition in San Francisco in 1915, and in Washington, D.C., in 1917. Topics included the construction of roads and trails, the role of concessionaires, fire fighting and forest protection, administrative policies, the development of campgrounds, and transportation issues.
At the third conference, held in 1915, Mark Daniels, the first landscape engineer hired by the Department of the Interior to consult on the development of national parks, outlined some of the department's concerns for national parks. He called for a three-tiered system of accommodations that provided hotels or mountain chalets for overnight lodging, permanent camps where visitors would sleep in tents and take meals in a dining room, and camps where visitors would sleep in tents and cook their own food and where groceries could be purchased at a camp store. He defined the park village as a place where, like Yosemite Valley, five or six thousand people could gather at one time for supplies and lodging. In addition to the roads, lodge, tent sites, dining hall, camp store, and gas station, such a village required utilities in the form of a sanitary system, water supply, a telephone system, and electricity, In this way, park villages were comparable to municipalities elsewhere and required careful planning. Daniels planned a village for Yosemite and began the plans for villages at Crater Lake, Mount Rainier, Glacier, and Sequoia. The plans for Yosemite included a study of the architectural character of every building to be constructed over a ten-year period. Locations for buildings were all carefully selected and the type of architecture determined to provide the best arrangement and to be picturesque. Although securing the money to carry out such plans was difficult, Daniels hoped that eventually they would be executed. [5]
Most of the improvements funded in the parks by the United States government until this time had consisted of roads and trails. The proceedings of the 1915 conference provide an idea of the principles and practices that guided this construction. It is clear that at the time the service was being organized a well-rooted philosophy existed that called for development, whatever its function, to be suited to its particular site and to the natural character of the surroundings.
T. Warren Allen, a representative of the Bureau of Public Roads, spoke from his experience in building roads in the national forests. Allen was already involved in making road surveys in Glacier, Sequoia, and Yosemite. Although he had not surveyed roads in Mount Rainier, he recommended a series of radial roads linked with Washington state highways; these would eventually be connected by a rim road. Allen said,
The maximum of usefulness and benefit requires preservation and reproduction, which may be successful only if it is possible to reach all points readily. Roads to subserve commercial interests may be so built as to harmonize with the natural features and, without undue extension or circumlocution make accessible the features of natural beauty. The road as such should be inconspicuous. The cost need usually be no more to construct a road which shall be an harmonious feature of the landscape, though the preliminary study may cost a little more. [6]
Allen outlined the process of building roads in scenic areas. The road should connect features of interest and visitor facilities, as well as link the park with outside routes. The road was first laid out on a topographical map and then examined in the field to ensure that the route was feasible and to make any changes to enhance the view from the road or to take in a waterfall, rock outcropping, or other scenic feature. The road was staked out in such a way that markers were visible from distant points, and then studied from several viewpoints, including nearby trees, and altered to bring out the most attractive view. Barren areas were enhanced by plantings or by the creation of a small lake or pond. The final survey, preparation of plans, and estimated costs followed in a way similar to the construction of country highways. Center-line stakes were placed at 100-foot intervals, called stations, and cross sections were taken at each station to determine the amount of material to be moved. As each plan was prepared, it was closely examined in the field to "see how it fits the ground." In the field, areas requiring cuts and fill to attain a desirable road surface and gradient as well as those requiring culverts and ditches for proper drainage were noted. The final plans were drawn on large sheets of tracing paper, with the road divided into sections, each measuring six to eight miles in length. The plans, which noted all the work to be done, were accompanied by detailed specifications that gave contractors who were bidding on the project instructions on how the work was to be carried out. [7]
Allen called for a main system of roads of "very light grades" in each park. He praised the road being constructed along the old Flathead River Road in Yosemite, which followed easy grades not exceeding 5 percent and passed through pleasant, heavily wooded sections and alongside the creek, crossing it at several points. Allen envisioned park roads as an aesthetic achievement. Foreshadowing the roads program that would evolve more than a decade later, Allen said,
I, as a road builder, have dreamed of road development in the various parks, and have dreamed of seeing such roads, lined and banked with flowers which grow wild in the meadows of the parks and upon the mountain sides, winding unassumingly along the brook, beneath the waterfall and skirting timidly the majestic [8]
The construction of bridges was integral to the building of park roads and presented problems in both engineering and aesthetics. Although by 1915 various methods of construction were being used in the national parks, most park bridges were made from timber cut on site and assembled unhewn. Depending on the diameter and strength of the logs, such bridges could be built to accommodate vehicles as well as pedestrians. At Yosemite, where bridges were fashioned from timber cut nearby and served park visitors as similar ones had pioneers to the area, yellow pine, tamarack, and incense cedar were commonly used. Although log bridges were sturdy, they were subject to decay and had a relatively brief life span. [9]
The issue of what types of bridges were most appropriate in the natural setting of a park was discussed at great length. While many applauded achievements such as the Chittenden Bridge, a concrete melan arch bridge in Yellowstone, others felt that only natural materials of stone and timber should be used. Truss bridges up to 87-1/2 feet long were being constructed in Yosemite. Builders were working on new designs that reduced the distance between the floor and the top chord "so a person could walk over the bridge and get a good view of the scenery without looking through the trusses." Arch construction was preferred because it offered the advantage of raising the elevation of the center point of the bridge and avoiding the interference and vertical dimensions of a trussed superstructure. David Sherfy, Yosemite's resident engineer and one of the national parks' most experienced bridge builders, said he envisioned a day when all park bridges could be made of arch construction and concrete or stone. Sherfy stated,
We are called upon to build different kinds of bridges, and the condition in each locality must determine the kind or character. Where you have a locality in which you can not use an arch bridge for some reason or another, why, I should say, build a girder bridge or a reinforced concrete bridge. [10]
On the construction of trails, one of the most experienced trail builders in the national parks, Gabriel Sovulewski of Yosemite, told the conference that those designing trails needed to be sympathetic to the meaning and intention behind a park's creation. Reflecting the nineteenth-century romanticism of Downing, he said,
Diversion from a straight path to points of interest, regardless of expense, is important and necessary. . . . I believe it is very important that every feature of natural beauty should be taken into consideration and diversion made to bring such features to the eye of the traveler. It will not be necessary to divert from the course laid out, but it is important that trails be laid out along beautiful streams, through different species of timber and interesting undergrowth, alongside and through rich green meadows and dashing brooks abounding in trout, and not omitting a single interesting feature that will attract the attention of the traveling public in order that the trail taken with these features included will be so delightful that the traveler will forget his fatigue in a review of the panorama unfolding before him at each turn. The trail along brooks and meadows will lead the traveler to many other beautiful views and points of interest, and finally he should be led to a picturesque spot where he can rest and establish his camp for as long a time as he desires. [11]
Exploration was the first step in building trails. This required strength, determination, a natural sense of direction, love of work, love of nature, and an ability to sit in the saddle or travel by foot for twelve or fourteen hours if necessary. The location of the trail, once determined on the ground, was marked by leaning limbs against trees or making stone piles that could later be erased. Trail building required a crew of workers headed by a foreman experienced in woodcraft and knowledgeable about sharpening drills and tools and using explosives. Under favorable circumstances, trails were to ascend long steep hills at a grade between 15 percent and 30 percent. Although usually determined by the importance of the trail, a width of four feet was generally recommended. Trail construction required both cutting into the slope by "benching" and laying and back filling dry rubble walls on the downhill slope to support the trail. Overhanging limbs and undergrowth beside the trail were to be cut back. Unlike the grade of a railroad, where evenness was desired, the grade of a trail was varied to allow for better drainage and to give the traveler some relief from a continuous uphill climb. Ditches and other forms of drainage such as water breaks made from logs or preferably flat split rocks embedded in the ground were to be included. Culverts and drains were constructed beneath the trail to allow streams to flow in an uninterrupted course downhill. [12]
Although the techniques for trail building were well established in national parks and forests by 1915, the condition of trails varied greatly from park to park. Improvements, especially regarding the maximum grade, would be made over the next fifteen years by the National Park Service's civil engineers, and in 1934, the first published standards for trail construction were issued. The civil engineers continually sought new solutions for ascending steep grades, traversing high peaks, and circumventing or crossing deep gorges. By the late 1920s, park engineers who continued to supervise the building of trails met these challenges with suspension bridges, tunnels, high-powered drills, climbing equipment, teams of horses, and daring workmen.
The fourth annual conference, held in January 1917, was a momentous occasion. It brought together individuals interested in the recreational, artistic, inspirational, economic, and other aspects of national parks, including officials of the Department of the Interior, members of Congress, representatives of cooperating clubs and associations such as the American Civic Association and General Federation of Women's Clubs, businessmen, educators, and specialists in forestry, natural science, landscape architecture, and wildlife conservation. It was hoped that the conference would result in a body of expert advice that would help the soon-to-be-organized National Park Service formulate policies for the future of the national parks. [13]
The enabling legislation for the National Park Service in August 1916 had spelled out its twofold purpose of preserving the integrity of the parks while making them accessible. The foremost issue, therefore, was how to develop the parks to attract and accommodate people of all economic circumstances. Among the many topics discussed was the physical development of the parks. In his introductory speech, Enos Mills recalled Robert B. Marshall's advice that the parks be developed for all people and that the buildings be attractive and fit harmoniously into the surroundings. Mills believed that making the parks ready for the public was all the publicity and promotion needed to draw tourists. Being ready meant providing transportation and amenities. Expanding on Mill's introduction, William Welch, the chief engineer for the Palisades Interstate Park, spoke on the "making of a recreational park," while others spoke on recreational activities such as hiking, winter sports, and fishing. [14]
Continued >>>
Top
Last Modified: Mon, Oct 31, 2002 10:00:00 pm PDT
http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/mcclelland/mcclelland3b.htm
.gif){kind=small}