Chapter 4:
The First Monuments (continued)
The controversy over Muir Woods juxtaposed two
visions of public good. Newlands represented the utilitarian
perspective, advocating the development of private land to create public
services. Kent believed that the preservation of the redwoods provided a
legacy for future generations. Both positions had merit, and in a way,
the establishment of the national monument forced an accommodation.
Neither side got exactly what it wanted, but both preserved their
long-range objectives. The redwoods were saved, and Newlands built his
reservoir elsewhere.
The divergent points of view that clashed over Muir
Woods foreshadowed the fragmentation of the alliance of preservationists
and conservationists in the dispute over the famous Hetch-Hetchy Valley
reservoir. Although conservationists and preservationists had a natural
affinity, in reality the two philosophies often produced contradictory
programs for the same tracts of land. The terms of Progressive-era
politics had dictated the resolution of the situation at Muir Woods. The
North Coast Water Company was a private business that sought to condemn
Kent's land for the public good, but lost. Public entities stood a
better chance of success when it came to building reservoirs out of
public or private land. In 1913 Woodrow Wilson signed into law a bill
that allowed the inundation of the Hetch-Hetchy Valley in Yosemite
National Park to create a reservoir for the city of San Francisco. In
contrast to the Muir Woods case, the claim of the city was undeniable.
There were no better options, and suspicions of private aggrandizement
did not taint the arguments of the city of San Francisco. Ironically,
Kent became a major proponent of the Hetch-Hetchy dam, and the
controversy severed his friendship with preservationist John Muir.
Born out of competing values, Muir Woods also
differed from its predecessors in other ways. It was the first national
monument created close to a major population center, and the first that
did not contain features that were somehow unique. Unlike earlier
national monuments, its location as much as its stands of redwoods
determined its significance. "There are, of course, many finer stands of
Redwood in California," Olmstead wrote in justifying the acceptance of
Kent's gift, "but there are none owned by the United States nor are
there any which might be acquired except at great expense. Moreover,
(and here is the chief argument for acceptance of the land) there is no
other Redwood grove in the world so remarkably accessible to so many
people. Here is a typical redwood canyon in absolutely primeval
condition, . . . it would be a living National Monument, than which
nothing could be more typically American." [14]
In 1910 Muir Woods was an anomaly among national
monuments. Proximity to San Francisco made Muir Woods worthy of
preservation, and it became a popular picnic ground for day hikers from
the nearby city. As a result of the traffic, Muir Woods became the first
of the monuments to have a resident custodian, whose primary duty was
picking up after picnickers. Muir Woods' problems resembled those of
Central Park rather than those of the other monuments.
Had it been larger, Muir Woods might have been a
candidate for national park status. It contained features similar to
those in some of the national parks. But its small size was an obstacle
to park status, and the urgency surrounding its proclamation and the
ease with which it could be proclaimed a national monument pushed Muir
Woods into the new category. With developmental pressure encroaching on
one of the last tracts of wilderness in the San Francisco Bay area, the
Antiquities Act provided the quickest way to guarantee the safety of the
woodlands.
A similar impetus played a significant role in
establishing the Grand Canyon as a national monument. Development in the
area began in the early 1880s, and Sen. Benjamin Harrison of Indiana
first proposed the region as a national park in 1882. Nothing came of
the effort, and during the 1880s John Hance, who later became famous as
a guide in the region, and P. D. Berry filed homestead claims on
locations within the canyon. After he became president, Harrison
proclaimed the Grand Canyon Forest Reserve in 1893, the first act to
protect the region from private encroachment. Establishment of the
forest reserve prevented further homesteading, although mineral claims
were still permitted within its boundaries. [15]
By the late 1890s tourists began to visit the Grand
Canyon, and amenities became necessary. In 1899 the only way for
visitors to reach the canyon was by stage line or private transportation
from Flagstaff and Ashfork. "Crude hotel camps" offered the only
accommodations. [16] To alleviate the
problem and to cash in on increased business, the Atchison, Topeka, and
Santa Fe Railroad (AT&SF) began construction of a railroad spur from
its terminal in Williams to the very rim of the Grand Canyon. The
company planned a massive hotel, called El Tovar, to stand alongside
their new station.
The Grand Canyon continued to attract public
attention and its popularity grew. In May 1903 President Theodore
Roosevelt deified the Grand Canyon during his only visit. He told an
audience on the canyon rim that he preferred no "building of any kind,
not a summer cottage, a hotel . . . to mar the wonderful grandeur, the
sublimity, the great loneliness and beauty of the Canyon. You can not
improve it. The ages have been at work on it and man can only mar it.
What you can do is keep it for your children, your children's children,
and for all those who come after you, as one of the great sights which
every American, if he can travel at all, should see." [17] The power of the great gorge impressed
Roosevelt. He saw before him the unscarred handiwork of nature and
appreciated its awesomeness. Roosevelt sensed the importance of a place
that could inspire such emotions. This was a place worthy of the
American experience.
To Roosevelt, the Grand Canyon seemed part of the
formation of the identity of the nation. From his perspectives, the
first sight of the continent itself could have been no less
awe-inspiring than an initial view of the Grand Canyon. A reflection of
the hardy spirit that Americans believed created the republic, the Grand
Canyon was in a category by itselftoo precious for commercial
development. Its preservation in a pristine state would be a significant
public good in its own right. It would be evidence of the power of the
Progressive faith in regulated human achievement. When Roosevelt was
told that the AT&SF decided to keep its hotel away from the rim of
the canyon, he saw the decision as evidence of enlightened management
and expressed pleasure at the restraint of the company.
But in the end, the AT&SF ignored Roosevelt's
wishes. Business boomed at the Grand Canyon, and within a year of
Roosevelt's visit, the El Tovar opened, "built upon the very edge of the
canyon, its location afford[ing] the most intimate views of the great
gorge." [18] Despite Roosevelt's use of the
"bully pulpit," the AT&SF was bound only by statute. This private
company was able to proceed because no law prevented its officials from
building where they chose. The Grand Canyon became the first forest
reserve to have a railroad terminus and a commercial lodge.
Yet the El Tovar offered something important at the
Grand Canyon. According to the AT&SF and its staff of paid
publicists, the construction of the railroad spur encouraged tourists,
who began to visit the canyon in droves, and the El Tovar "came out of
crying necessity." Managed by the Fred Harvey Company, the hotel was a
tasteful, expensive place. Its colors were muted, to "harmonize
perfectly with the gray green of its unique surroundings . . . its lines
in harmony with the simplicity" around it." [19] El Tovar offered all the amenities of
first-rate hotels elsewhere, mitigating the lack of facilities near the
Grand Canyon. Yet the arrival of visitors and their accoutrements
intruded upon the solitude of the Grand Canyon. The area boomed so
rapidly that less than five years later Roosevelt felt compelled to
limit its growth.
In 1907 pressure to develop the Grand Canyon area
intensified. Under the terms of the forest reserve, Ralph Henry Cameron,
a local politician who later became a United States senator from
Arizona, staked out mining claims at some of the most advantageous
tourist locations. His domain included the Bright Angel trail, the main
route from the south rim to the bottom of the canyon. But Roosevelt's
establishment of a game reserve in early 1906 prohibited the future
filing of mining claims. Undaunted, Cameron continued to file illegal
mining claims, and under the guise of a firm called the Grand Canyon
Scenic Railway Company, he and his associates tried to secure a
right-of-way to build an electric railway for sightseeing tours along
the rim of the canyon. [20]
When conservationists discovered Cameron's plans,
they mustered their influence. After being "bombarded by some man, who
insisted that there was a trolley line about to be constructed around
the Grand Canyon, which would not add to its natural attractiveness,"
longtime park advocate and civic leader Horace McFarland went to Gifford
Pinchot and "made a loud noise in his ear." Pinchot informed Roosevelt,
who was appalled by the prospect. He converted the game preserve into a
national monument under the administration of the Forest Service.
Monument status protected the Grand Canyon from random legal
encroachment, and the Forest Service, placed in charge of the monument
because it was created from national forest land, staunchly opposed
exploitive private enterprise. [21]
Piecemeal efforts at preservation like that at the
Grand Canyon were characteristic early in the twentieth century. The
establishment of a national monument was not part of any grand plan to
protect America's wonders. Instead, expediency in the face of pressure
dictated the course of preservation. Initially, the government lacked
mechanisms for permanent reservation, and it upgraded the status of the
Grand Canyon in response to a variety of threats. The forest reserve
prohibited all private entries except for mining claims. The game
reserve prevented mining claims, but did not offer formal protection
from exploitive development. The establishment of the monument under the
Forest Service curtailed private development; Pinchot and the Forest
Service took a dim view of capital development on public land. Although
monument status did not exclude commercial development, acquiring
permission to build within the boundaries of the reservation became much
more difficult. The eventual reclassification of the Grand Canyon as a
national park was inevitable as the need for comprehensive
visitor-oriented management became obvious.
An unforeseen result of the formation of the Grand
Canyon National Monument was that this action appeared to put the
government in the position of favoring one organization offering tourist
services over another. Without any public discussion or bidding process,
federal authorities arbitrarily limited competition. This gesture was
characteristic of the managerial elite applying its values to the
society around it. The AT&SF was a successful business, and its
board of directors came from the same social class as most high-level
government officials. They shared perceptions of the world. Cameron and
his friends did not belong to the same network. Cameron was a political
boss who ruled Coconino County, Arizona. In part, the impulse for
reform sprung from the desire to limit the activities of this breed of
political animal and its equivalent in business. In the cultural climate
of 1908, such preferences seemed justified. An established national
entity took precedence over a local one perceived to be exploitive, and
the good of the public outweighed the rights of any individual. Cameron
retained his many mining claims, and he and his associates believed that
they were unfairly prohibited from development. Later Cameron created
havoc with his lawsuits for a number of years, until a federal judge
finally dismissed his contentions.
The Grand Canyon showed that Roosevelt and the GLO
perceived the Antiquities Act from different perspectives. Prior to the
establishment of the Grand Canyon, GLO proclamations established
comparatively small monuments, beginning with a minimum size of 160
acres, one quarter of a section. GLO officials were conscious of the
"smallest area compatible with the proper care and management" clause in
the Antiquities Act, and concerned with a potential backlash, they
limited their suggestions. [22] In
comparison, the 806,400-acre Grand Canyon National Monument was the
largest of the monuments. When an ominous situation threatened something
that he valued, Roosevelt did what he thought was right even when his
efforts smacked of flaunting executive authority. In 1907 he
circumvented western efforts to limit his power to establish national
forest lands by reserving more than seven million acres of forest before
Congress passed legislation restricting his power. [23] By 1908 the only option for permanent
reservation of public land that Roosevelt had left was the Antiquities
Act. With one stroke of his pen at the Grand Canyon, he revived western
fears of federal intervention.
Roosevelt's proclamation of the Mount Olympus
National Monument further upset advocates of decentralization. In his
last forty eight hours in office, the president proclaimed 615,000 acres
of the Olympic peninsula in Washington state as a national monument.
Created at the behest of Congressman William E. Humphrey of Washington,
the new national monument set aside much of the most rugged terrain on
the western side of the Puget Sound and protected it from mining and
timber interests. [24] Again, federal
initiative and commercial development in the West seemed at odds.
The establishment of the Mount Olympus National
Monument was a half-hearted conservation measure. It contained few of
the restrictions that characterized the Grand Canyon and earlier
monuments. During the 1880s, hunters and trappers broached the Olympic
peninsula, and by the early twentieth century, excessive hunting had
decimated its population of Olympic, also called Roosevelt, elk. [25] Intent on protecting the few animals that
remained, Congressman Humphrey appealed to the hunter in the president,
and Roosevelt made one final gesture for conservation. The proclamation
also utilized the scientific justification for establishing a national
monument, but it did not prohibit the development of resources within
the boundaries of the monument. Nonetheless, mining and timber interests
felt unduly restrained.
Commercial interests did not construe the reservation
of a quarter section of archaeological ruins as a threat to
development, but many thought that the Grand Canyon and Mount Olympus
monuments were excessive gestures that restricted large tracts of
valuable land for dubious reasons. Mining companies agitated for the
immediate repeal of the proclamation at Mount Olympus, and in 1915
President Woodrow Wilson reduced its size by half. The Antiquities Act
was a good way to initiate preservation, but it was not a guarantee of
permanence.
Under any interpretation of the Antiquities Act other
than Roosevelt's own, the Mount Olympus National Monument would have
remained a part of the Olympic National Forest. With Congress out of
session and little time left in his administration, the creation of a
congressionally approved designation was out of the question. Mount
Olympus National Monument was Roosevelt's going-away present to himself.
He used the best available means to accomplish his ends, democratic or
otherwise. That he stretched the Antiquities Act in a number of ways
bothered him little. The law was a tool with which to achieve
results.
Within three years of its passage, the Antiquities
Act became much more than a way to preserve antiquities. The sentiments
of the Progressive-era and Theodore Roosevelt's activist vision of
presidential responsibilities led to the creation of national monuments
large and small that contained an array of features. Roosevelt set
precedents that gave GLO and, later, National Park Service officials
considerable freedom in the way that they applied the law.
The real catalyst for Roosevelt's interpretation of
the Antiquities Act was his broad application of the "object of
scientific interest" clause. This ambiguous definition gave him vast
latitude, and without precedents to establish limits, Roosevelt created
his own version of the boundaries of the monument category, ostensibly
preserved as examples of scientific principles in action, Devils Tower,
the Petrified Forest, Muir Woods, the Grand Canyon, and others were
proclaimed as "scientific" national monuments. Yet despite the obvious
scientific merit of some of the monuments, scientific use
did not figure in the reasons behind their establishment.
Nowhere were these ambiguities as obvious as at the
Grand Canyon. The president himself was awestruck by the sight of the
gorge, and the AT&SF built a railroad and a monumental hotel on the
rim of the canyon because nearly everyone who stood there felt the same
way. Because he wanted to preserve the character of the Grand Canyon
from the intrusion of the cable car, Roosevelt put limits on all growth
there, not because it was "an object of unusual scientific interest,
being the greatest eroded canyon within the United States." [26] The Grand Canyon certainly had scientific
importance, but to Americans in 1908, its scenic and cultural attributes
far surpassed its scientific value. Its establishment created a proper
way to present this vast natural affirmation of American culture to
visitors. Scientists bent on research were not battling over the canyon;
hotelkeepers and tour guides were.
On the other hand, there was good reason to establish
Devils Tower as a scientific national monument. It was a unique natural
wonder, dwarfing its only competitor, an unnamed protrusion four miles
away. As Thomas Carter pointed out in 1892, this geologic abnormality
had conservation value as well as historical appeal. Yet after its
establishment, the scientific significance of Devils Tower was
overshadowed by its scenic appeal as the GLO groped to find a purpose
for the existence of the monuments. At the first National Parks
Conference, held at Yellowstone National Park in September 1911, Frank
Bond, chief clerk of the GLO and the person responsible for the national
monuments in the care of the Department of the Interior, proposed that
"an iron stairway, winding if necessary, and securely anchored to the
face of the vertical wall, should be constructed to the top of the
rock." [27] The value of a stairway up the
side of an 800-foot-high monolith was clearly not scientific. Bond tried
to promote tourist interest in the spectacular view from atop Devils
Tower.
Often the GLO or Forest Service took an interest in
an area under consideration for national monument status because of its
scenic merits, but the legal justification rested on its being
established as a scientific monument. Commenting on the proposed Fremont
(Wheeler) National Monument in 1908, Forest Supervisor F. C. Spencer
wrote: "It is not probable that there is any immediate danger of
devastation or vandalism to this bit of scenic beauty, but, with the
settling up of the country, the place will be visited by many tourists,
which will make its acquisition a source of profit for some individual
or company." Spencer recommended a national monument "to prevent such
acquisition and its attendant mercenary use." Despite Spencer's forward
statement about the values of the area, the document that reached
Theodore Roosevelt's desk established a monument "of unusual scientific
interest." [28]
Even a case like this aroused little controversy. The
purported location where the Fremont expedition of 1848 met disaster,
this series of limestone spires in southern Colorado was too remote and
not economically valuable enough for anyone to contest its
establishment. At Spencer's suggestion, the government reserved the
tract to prevent future exploitation. The Wheeler National Monument was
created in advance of widespread public interest to prevent undue
profiteering after the public discovered it.
The term scientific in the Antiquities Act
rapidly came to function as a code word under which scenic areas could
acquire legal protection. This meaning was quite different from the
intention of the anthropologists and archaeologists who had advocated
passage of the Act. In practice, many of the areas proclaimed in the
"scientific" monuments category served as little national parks before
the establishment of the National Park Service. Government officials who
believed in the ethics of Progressive America recognized the scenic
value of many areas and incorporated them into an embryonic national
park system. Regardless of the sentiments of Congress, executive action
reserved such places for the future.
By the end of the Roosevelt administration in 1909,
the national monuments were so diverse that they defied categorization.
There were almost as many "scientific" reasons for the establishment of
a monument as there were national monuments. The Antiquities Act placed
few limits upon potential national monuments, and a variety of locations
came to the attention of the Department of the Interior and the Forest
Service. In different situations, the Antiquities Act could be, and was,
interpreted loosely. The only link among members of the category was
that after the GLO took care of its temporary withdrawals, many of the
remaining areas that entered the system were threatened by what was
perceived to be inappropriate development. By 1909 any clear sense of
the intentions of the framers of the Act had disappeared.
|