Scotts Bluff Administrative History

PART II:
Operating The National Monument (continued)

LAND ACQUISITION, PROBLEMS, AND THREATS

The boundaries of Scotts Bluff National Monument have changed three times since the 1919 proclamation establishing the area. Currently, total acreage is 2,987.97. The last boundary revision designed for the more effective management of the monument was approved by Congress in 1962. A Master Plan brief approved in 1965 stated that the "903.21 acres of land not federally owned within the authorized boundary should be acquired or its development regulated by local zoning or scenic easement acquisition." [23]

A lack of Federal funds for the land acquisition program has made it erratic. A vital segment of property within the authorized boundaries was not acquired for more than seven years because of a shortage of funds. The OTMA purchased the east half of Dome Rock in 1959 from private owners and held it pending the availability of NPS funds. On January 18, 1966, Superintendent Richard L. Holder presented a check for $2,123 to the cooperative association for the 20-acre tract and thus brought the entire historic feature under Federal ownership. [24] In 1973, legislation was requested for raising the funding ceiling for land acquisition, [25] but nothing materialized from the effort.

In 1981, the east boundary of the monument was largely completed when the 50-acre Heppe property was acquired. [26] The same year hopes for completing the remainder of the land acquisition program were dashed when the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) announced that each operating unit of the Federal Government in Fiscal Year 1982 would operate with a budget established at a "minimum acceptable level." The initiative within the Park Service was first called "Core Mission" or "Basic Operations." In a November 20, 1931, proposal, Superintendent Alford J. Banta declared the monument would "postpone indefinitely additional land acquisition." [27] The "freeze" on this management objective is still in effect with two private inholdings of 13.7 and 2.7 acres as yet unacquired.

Park administrators often encounter attempts by private groups to gain access and use of monument lands for purposes other than established NPS policies. An incident similar to the 1954-55 FBC television controversy arose in the late 1960s. In 1968, the Scottsbluff Chamber of Commerce, in an effort to promote the growth of the tourist industry in the region, retained Mark Sumner of the School of Outdoor Drama at the University of North Carolina to draft plans for an amphitheater. The tentative area for the facility was 10 miles south of Gering in the Wildcat Hills State Recreation Area, but the possibility of performing historical dramas within the national monument and other nearby historic sites was also raised. [28]

By mid-1970, the idea gained considerable interest and the "Amphitheater Development Committee" (ADC) was actively pursuing two principal sites--the Wildcat Hills area and Scotts Bluff National Monument. The ADC was assisted by the energetic North Platte Valley Historical Association (NPVHA) which was eager to have its own museum facility incorporated into the amphitheater complex.

The Park Service gave little encouragement to the proposal. Superintendent Rouse explained that the 1962 boundary revision was justified on the grounds of the rapid growth of the city of Gering toward the monument. NPS approval for any commercial development within the park, no matter how desirable, would not only be against stated management objectives, but might open a floodgate of other requests to use monument lands or prompt commercial developers to purchase property near the monument in hopes of potential profits.

The ADC acknowledged NPS concerns and began concentrating on the Wildcat Hills site. The ADC differed with the NPVHA not only on the location issue, but also on including a museum facility in the complex. The growing differences tore the two groups apart. Superintendent Rouse informed the Midwest Regional Director on September 10, 1970:

I am relieved to report that the immediate threat of such a development at our doorstep has diminished. The officers of the NPVHA do not consider the Wildcat Hills area as a good location for development. Therefore, they have withdrawn their interest from the amphitheater group. [29]

With the split of the two interest groups, pressure on the NPS to include an amphitheater on monument grounds ended. The amphitheater was built at Wildcat Hills, but proved to be a financial failure. It has been abandoned and is in a state of disrepair.

Several man-made intrusions are within the authorized boundaries, including State Highway 92, Union Pacific Railroad track, and portions of three canals. The Mitchell-Gering Canal crosses the park just north of the bluffs and the ditch, its adjacent road, and ditchriders house (no longer used) are visible from the principal overlooks on the Summit. The Gering-Fort Laramie Lateral crosses the boundary in several places on the east edge of the park. The Central Canal in the northwest corner of the monument also impacts the area with an adjacent roadway and gate. [30] In September 1980, this gate was left open without NPS authorization for more than a month to allow large dump trucks filled with rock to enter the area. Scotts Bluff Superintendent Robert L. Burns notified the lawyers for the Central Irrigation District that the NPS was "disturbed" that it was not notified of the landfill activity going on within the monument boundaries and questioned the ownership of the right-of-way of the canal across NPS land. He requested that any future proposed construction activity be reported to the NPS with sufficient time to consult with the Midwest Regional Office. He made clear that the Park Service did not look favorably upon any change in the profile of monument lands. [31]

Portions of the NPS water and sewage system are also a visual intrusion on monument property. The water system, constructed during the Depression, includes a pumphouse and well which feeds into 5,000- and 25,000-gallon underground reservoirs. Distribution from the reservoirs to headquarters is via a four-inch water main. The concrete pumphouse contains a 10-horsepower, three-phase electric motor capable of pumping 25 gallons per minute. The water is chlorinated at this station. Headquarters is served by a septic tank and disposal field a quarter-mile away. Sludge from the tank is drained annually into a gully. It has been determined that this spill causes no environmental problems "since it is a dry gully and is far distant from any wells, water supply, or stream which would be contaminated by this discharge." [32]

The deteriorating water system at the monument will be scrapped. A draft water service agreement between the city of Gering and Scotts Bluff National Monument was approved by the City Council on October 11, 1982. The agreement will lead to the connection of a new water system at the monument to that of the city of Gering. The hook-up will cost no more than $400. The NPS will construct 9,300 feet of water line and a 15-square-foot pump station along the Highway 92 right-of-way. Planning for the project began in August 1981 and construction began in the fall of 1983 and is scheduled to be completed in the spring of 1984. The contractor is the A. C. Smith Company of Scottsbluff whose bid was $181,988.21 [33]

A statement summarizing threats to the national monument was prepared in the early 1980s. It reads:

Significant threats to the area emanate from outside the park boundary. Residential development is presently taking place near the eastern boundary of the Monument. Air quality is affected by several agricultural processing plants and one oil refinery [since closed in 1982].

The Chicago-Northwestern Railroad proposes to haul coal from Montana fields to eastern markets and has an agreement with Union Pacific Railroad to operate over some of its track. If the proposal is approved, 16 to 24 coal trains could cross the monument daily on existing Union Pacific track, resulting in increased air and noise pollution. This would also result in a visual intrusion in the area. [34]

This increased railroad activity will begin upon completion of the construction of a connector line now underway.

MASTER PLAN AND STATEMENT FOR MANAGEMENT

In 1956, a master plan was approved to begin a transition beyond the MISSION 66 development program. Approval was withheld by the Regional Director, however, until a recommendation for the construction of an additional residence in the headquarters area was deleted from the plan. [35] Eleven years later, another master plan was approved but was soon after reclassified to a "resource document." An insert in the 1976 document explained:

. . . it became apparent to the National Park Service that many of the proposals being discussed were neither logical nor feasible in the foreseeable future. This determination is based on the usability [sic] of existing facilities for a number of years, fiscal restraints, and present and anticipated visitation. [36]

The principal impetus for the reclassification of the document entailed the long-range considerations which are the "removal of the existing railroad tracks and irrigation canals, possible relocation of the visitor center from the foreground of the prime historic setting, and a study of alternatives for reducing or eliminating the intrusion of Nebraska 92 through the monument." [37]

The railroad tracks and irrigation canals are intrusions on the natural and historic scene, especially in the northern section of the monument where the largely untouched badlands are. If either the railroad or irrigation facilities are abandoned, the recommendation is that the NPS acquire the land involved.

When viewed from the summit, Nebraska 92 and the visitor center complex are definite intrusions on the historic scene. The highway not only bisects the monument, but it "crosses, and overlaps the historic Oregon Trail route from the east entrance to a location several hundred feet west of the visitor center. The highway effectively diminishes the integrity of the historic trail through Mitchell Pass." [38] Relocation of the visitor center complex was discussed earlier, but the Master Plan/resource document states:

Relocation of the visitor center complex, possibly closer to the east entrance, could be considered if removal of Nebraska 92 (or a portion of it) becomes feasible, or when the present structures have outlived their usefulness and maintainability. These alternatives would deemphasize development within the prime historic zone.

The realignment of Nebraska 71 westward is another possibility.... Such a relocation could offer a viable rerouting of Nebraska 92. If it is determined that Nebraska 92 cannot be removed, then other alternatives should be formulated for reducing the intrusion of the highway. [39]

The document goes into greater detail on the monument's short-range needs which are designed to restore the natural and historic setting, provide the proper services to visitors, and protect the environment. In the area of Cooperative Planning and Management, three topics are discussed: zoning buffer, water system, and land classification. The recommendations follow:

1). With the continuing growth and development of the nearby Scottsbluff-Gering communities, the natural and historic setting of the monument will be threatened if incompatible developments are introduced near the authorized boundaries. Continued cooperation with the neighboring communities is necessary to obtain and enforce protective zoning around the area.

2). Connecting the monument to the city of Gering's water system has already been discussed. The existing system is deteriorating and inadequate. Its ability to provide proper fire protection is substandard. Anticipated water demand during peak periods is estimated at 15,000 gallons per day.

3). Scotts Bluff National Monument was included on the National Register of Historic Places on October 15, 1966, in compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. Actual boundary documentation and significance statement were accepted on October 3, 1978. The area is classified and operated as a historical zone of the National Park System.

In the area of Development, the 1976 Master Plan/resource document addresses seven topics: utility lines, visitor center parking, the Country Club, summit parking, visitor center/office space/residences, shuttle system, and trail system. The recommendations follow:

1). One of the major visual intrusions on the historic setting is the unsightly overhead transmission lines paralleling Nebraska 92. The utility lines which serve the visitor center from the east are owned by the Bureau of Reclamation, but the Roosevelt Public Power District has lines on the same poles. When a new substation is built, Bureau of Reclamation facilities will be removed and service lines will be placed underground. (The lines were removed in 1983).

2). Parking at the visitor center in 1976 was hampered by an unstriped, potholed lot in need of repair due to the lack of an adequate subbase. It has since been repaired. Although parking sometimes overflows onto the turf during popular evening programs, the expansion of the lot was not recommended.

3). The purchase of the Country Club on the eastern side of the monument created an opportunity to restore the area to a natural setting. The 86-acre site included a golf course, pro shop, and storage building. After a three-year special use permit expired, the entire development would be eradicated. (Note: Now the date is 1987).

4). Parking at the summit has always been a problem. Vehicular circulation at the summit needs to be improved to provide additional space for parking. There are only 30 spaces which are often filled during peak hours, and thus limits the number of visitors who can enjoy the summit trails and view.

5). The visitor center contains both interpretive and administrative office functions. This combination does not allow sufficient space for visitor use, according to the 1976 plan. Two options are discussed for resolving this conflict:

• Convert the visitor center for interpretive use only; remove administrative offices to one of the existing residences, and then build a new residence within the complex.

• Construct an addition to the visitor center for the needed office space along the northwest side adjacent to the Summit Road and convert the existing building for exclusive visitor use.

One of the most common of visitor complaints does not involve the visitor center, but the summit road and parking. The narrow road does not easily accommodate large recreational vehicles and the unhooking of trailers in the visitor center parking lot is mandatory because they are not permitted to use the summit road. As visitation increases, the problem of congestion becomes more critical each season. An NPS shuttle system from the base to the summit of Scotts Bluff may be the best solution to this problem. If this solution is chosen, it would alleviate the congestion and provide an opportunity for interpretation during the visitors' ride to the summit. The parking capacity at the visitor center would then have to be increased, but would probably create too great a physical and visual intrusion. The relocation of the entire visitor center complex would then have to be considered.

The trail system on the summit is the most widely-used area in the monument. Adverse conditions exist when visitors leave the defined trail, trampling vegetation and damaging potential geological and archeological resources. Expansion of the trail system in other parts of the monument was recommended to lessen the impacts at the summit. The plan suggests a trail to the badlands connecting the lower part of the Summit Trail. It would lead through the Country Club area and connect to the canal road which cuts through the badlands. Riverside Park, which is owned by the city of Scottsbluff across the North Platte from the monument, could be linked to this trail system. The feasibility of this move needed to be studied, and was not approved or rejected by the 1976 plan.

In the area of interpretation, the purpose of the monument is described, and among the recommendations is upgrading the wayside exhibits and protection of the Jackson Collection, including the portion stored in the visitor center basement. [40]

Visitation patterns are also discussed at length in the plan. One-third of the visitors are from the local area, coming mainly on weekends. Another third come from other areas in the State of Nebraska, and the remaining third from other States. Most of this out-of-state visitation represents those who are traveling to major destination points like the Black Hills of South Dakota, or Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks. (Recent park surveys, however, show the following statistics: 22% regional, i.e. within 3-hours driving distance; 56% national; and 1% international [41] ). In 1976, the monument hosted around 175,000 visitors, most of whom arrived during the summer months. Daily peak visitor loads can reach as high as 1,500, but average 1,100 people. Summer evening amphitheater programs are the most popular attractions drawing as many as 750 people.

Such heavy use of the monument's fragile resources, especially in the summit area, results in the acceleration of erosion which creates ugly scars on the natural landscape: "However, most parts of the monument are greatly underutilized. A substantial visitation increase, both in terms of number and length of stay, could be accommodated while maintaining a high-quality experience, particularly if interpretive programs are expanded." [42]

The average visitor at the monument arrives with his family and spends between one and two hours. They usually park at the visitor center and tour the museum first. After touring the interpretive center, most visitors drive to the summit to see the view and walk over some of the foot trails. Some use the summit trail and walk to and from the summit. [43]

An Interpretive Prospectus, approved in April 1978, was compiled by a team from the monument and Harpers Ferry Center. The purpose of the prospectus is to "achieve [the] most effective utilization of existing facilities, with minor alterations" [44] to enhance interpretation. It recommends various alterations in the exhibits and an increased emphasis on the audio-visual program. Rehabilitation of the Jackson Wing's lighting and security systems was seen as the most serious problem. [45]

On June 5, 1978, a new Statement for Management was approved by Midwest Regional Director Merrill D. Beal replacing an earlier plan approved in 1971. Within the document, the current management objectives are stated:

• To preserve and maintain the historic visual integrity of the bluff and Mitchell Pass, and provide for their protection and use.

• To restore the vegetative and wildlife communities of the Monument to a condition as near the historic state as practical and feasible.

• To identify, inventory, and monitor the condition of the geological, paleontological, and cultural resources and to manage and interpret them in a manner consistent with the requirements of historic preservation law and policy.

• To interpret the historical significance of the Monument as it relates to the overland migration and westward expansion.

• To provide access and facilities for the appropriate use of the Monument in a manner consistent with the protection and management of the scenic, scientific, and cultural resources.

• To assist visitors in their use of the Monument and surrounding area through the provision of adequate information.

• To provide for the safety and protection of the visitors, residents, and employees of the Monument. [46]

On November 3, 1981, Jimmie L. Dunning, Midwest Regional Director, approved the Statement for Management and Resources Management Plan (RMP) for Scotts Bluff National Monument.