Chapter 1. Creating Tradition

1. The principal early account of the campfire discussion is found in Nathaniel Pitt Langford, The Discovery of Yellowstone Park: Journal of the Washburn Expedition to the Yellowstone and Firehole Rivers in the Year 1870 (1905; reprint ed., Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1972), ix-xvii, xix-xx, 117-118. See also Hiram Martin Chittenden, Yellowstone National Park: Historical and Descriptive (1895; rev. ed., Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1933), 69. In 1994 Death Valley National Monument was redesignated a national park and expanded to include more acreage than Yellowstone.

2. With Yosemite the federal government divested itself of responsibility for management of the reserved lands, whereas the Yellowstone Act called for the national government's involvement in park management. In addition to the commitment to federal rather than state management, the sheer size and scope of Yellowstone and the 1872 act's more fully developed national park policy statement—mandating for the first time preservation as well as use—make Yellowstone the true benchmark for the national park concept. For a discussion of the authorization of the Yosemite lands as a state-managed park, see Alfred Runte, Yosemite: The Embattled Wilderness (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1990), 18-21; and Richard A. Bartlett, Nature's Yellowstone (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1974), 195-197.

Artist George Catlin's 1832 proposal that the federal government establish a large "magnificent park" on the American plains had no influence. In contrast, an 1865 suggestion by Montana's acting territorial governor, Thomas Francis Meagher, that Yellowstone become a national park, may be seen as part of the background of the park movement. The term "national park" was not used in the Yellowstone Park Act itself, but was used during debates over passage of the act. Aubrey L. Haines, Yellowstone National Park: Its Exploration and Establishment (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1974), xxi, 45, 113, 121, 126. Catlin's proposal is mentioned in Roderick Nash, Wilderness and the American Mind (1967; 3rd ed., New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982), 100-101.

3. Haines, Yellowstone National Park, 58-59, 93-98, 109-110, 114, 120-121, 126-128, 153-155; Aubrey L. Haines, The Yellowstone Story: A History of Our First National Park (Yellowstone National Park: Yellowstone Library and Museum Association 1977), I, 153, 164-166, 172; Alfred Runte, National Parks: The American Experience (1979; rev. ed., Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1987), 44-46; and Runte, Trains of Discovery: Western Railroads and the National Parks (1984; rev. ed., Niwot, Colorado: Roberts Rinehart, 1990), 13-20.

4. Cooke made his remarks in a letter to Northern Pacific official W. Milner Roberts, October 30, 1871. Haines, Yellowstone National Park, 109-110.

between Cooke and Langford "evidently led to some understanding between them concerning the usefulness of Yellowstone exploration in the grand scheme of Northern Pacific Railroad publicity." Similarly, Richard Bartlett, in Nature's Yellowstone (p. 208), states that "the evidence, though fragmentary, is sufficient to credit the inspiration for the creation of Yellowstone National Park to officials of the Northern Pacific Railroad." See also Robin W. Winks, Frederick Billings: A Life (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991), 285-287; and Runte, Trains of Discovery, 13.

In fact, the evidence is slim that the altruistic campfire discussion occurred—and even if it did, it likely reflected the Northern Pacific's aspirations. The Washburn-Doane Expedition left no written record of such a discussion. Nathaniel Langford's original account of the expedition, taken from his field notes, did not even mention the conversation—nor was it mentioned in any of the known diaries or notes written by other participants. Not until thirty-five years later, when he compiled a diary and published it in 1905, did Langford produce his account of the campfire discussion, including a suspicious amount of detail in light of the length of time elapsed. By then, with several new parks created, the national park idea had attained greater popularity; thus, recognition for having helped conceive the idea may have had special appeal to Langford. At about the time Langford's new account appeared, another expedition member, Cornelius Hedges, added to his diary a brief reference to the campfire meeting—altogether a curious rush to amend the record. With such meager historical documentation, the campfire story cannot be proved or disproved. Whether or not it is rooted in historical fact, the story achieved legendary status. Haines, The Yellowstone Story, I, 105, 130, 137-140, 164-165; and Louis C. Cramton, Early History of Yellowstone National Park and Its Relation to National Park Policies (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1932), 19. See also Runte, National Parks, 41-42; and Bartlett, Nature's Yellowstone, 198-208. Ferdinand Hayden's role in establishing Yellowstone's boundaries is mentioned in Runte, National Parks, 46; and Nash, Wilderness and the American Mind, 112.

6. Keith R. Widder, Mackinac National Park, 1875-1895, Reports in Mackinac History and Archaeology no. 4 (Mackinac Island State Park Commission, 1975), 6, 41-46.

7. Barry Mackintosh, The National Parks: Shaping the System (Washington, D.C.: Department of the Interior, 1991), 12-13, 15-17; Runte, National Parks, 65-66, 75-76; Yosemite, 54-55; and Trains of Discovery, 13-54; Lary M. Dilsaver and William C. Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees of Kings Canyon and Sequoia National Parks (Three Rivers, California: Sequoia Natural History Association, 1990), 70-73. In Trains of Discovery (p. 1) Runte characterizes the close ties between the western railroad companies and the national parks as a "pragmatic alliance." National parks promised profits for the companies, and without railroad support many of the major parks "might never have been established in the first place." Richard J. Orsi, in " 'Wilderness Saint' and 'Robber Baron': The Anomalous Partnership of John Muir and the Southern Pacific Company for Preservation of Yosemite National Park," Pacific Historian 29 (Summer-Fall 1985), 136-152, emphasizes the conservation concerns as well as the economic interests of Southern Pacific officials in the company's support of national parks.

As examples of the size of some of the larger parks, at the time of their authorization, Sequoia comprised 161,597 acres; Yosemite, 719,622; Mt. Rainier, 207,360; Crater Lake, 159,360; Mesa Verde, 79,561; and Rocky Mountain, 229,062. With additions and deletions of park lands, the size of the parks would vary over time. Information on original acreage provided by Renee C. Minnick, National Park Service.

8. Hillory A. Tolson, Laws Relating to the National Park Service, the National Parks and Monuments (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1933), 50, 65; Runte, Yosemite, 45-47, 54-55; Dilsaver and Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees, 64-73. Dilsaver and Tweed note (p. 73) a "corporate greed" factor in the creation of the Sierra parks—a reference to the Southern Pacific Railroad Company's support of both the Sequoia and the Yosemite legislation, which would enhance the company's tourism and agricultural interests. Orsi, in " 'Wilderness Saint' " and 'Robber Baron' " (p. 148), credits the Southern Pacific executive and "devoted lover of wilderness" Daniel K. Zumwalt with increasing the size of Yosemite and Sequoia as originally legislated. See also Roderick Frazier Nash, The Rights of Nature: A History of Environmental Ethics (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1989), 35. Forest and watershed protection as a factor in the 1885 establishment of New York's Adirondack Forest Preserve (later State Park) is discussed in Frank Graham, Jr., The Adirondack Park: A Political History (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1978), 70-71, 76-77, 88-91; and Nash, Wilderness and the American Mind, 104-105, 116-121.

9. In National Parks: The American Experience (pp. 14-47) Alfred Runte discusses "monumentalism," a term used to describe the urge to create national parks in areas of the most grand and unusual scenery. He also examines the "cultural nationalism" factor in the park movement, asserting that Americans looked to the monumental scenery of the parks as an affirmation that their young nation was not inferior to Europe. A history of the early national park years is also found in William C. Everhart, The National Park Service (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1972), 3-21.

10. Platt and Sully's Hill are discussed in John Ise, Our National Park Policy: A Critical History (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1961), 139-142. See also Palmer H. Boeger, Oklahoma Oasis: From Platt National Park to Chickasaw National Recreation Area (Muskogee, Oklahoma: Western Heritage Books, 1987). Ise (p. 139) asserts that Sully's Hill was "unworthy" of being a national park. Similarly, Horace M. Albright, the second director of the National Park Service, viewed Platt and Sully's Hill as "totally lacking in national park qualifications. . . . established because of the parochial enthusiasm of local politicians." Horace M. Albright, as told to Robert Cahn, The Birth of the National Park Service: The Founding Years, 1913-1933 (Salt Lake City: Howe Brothers, 1985), 5; see also 223.

11. Hal Rothman, Preserving Different Pasts: The American National Monuments (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1989), 34-116; and Ronald F. Lee, The Antiquities Act of 1906 (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1970), 73-76, 87-96. See also Harold K. Steen, The U.S. Forest Service: A History (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1976), 98-100. Robert W. Righter, in "National Monuments to National Parks: The Use of the Antiquities Act of 1906," Western Historical Quarterly 20 (August 1989), 281-301, analyzes the sometimes deliberate use of the national monument designation as a first step toward creating national parks.

12. Much later, and with the precedent of size long established, President Jimmy Carter would use the Antiquities Act to establish vast national monuments in Alaska.

Today, units of the national park system have approximately two dozen different designations —including national parks, national monuments, national preserves, and national recreation areas, plus a bewildering variety of designations for historic and prehistoric sites. Throughout this study the terms "national park" and "park" are used interchangeably to refer to units of the national park system, whatever their individual designation, unless otherwise specified.

13. Theodore Roosevelt, "Wilderness Reserves: The Yellowstone Park," from Outdoor Pastimes of an American Hunter (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1905), quoted in Paul Schullery, ed., Theodore Roosevelt: Wilderness Writings (Salt Lake City: Peregrine Smith Books, 1986), 148-149.

14. Tolson, Laws Relating to the National Park Service (1933), 26-27. Unless specifically noted, as in this instance, italics in quoted material appear in the original.

15. John F. Reiger, American Sportsmen and the Origins of Conservation (1975; rev. ed., Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1986), 102-111; Michael P. Cohen, The History of the Sierra Club, 1892-1970 (San Francisco: Sierra Club Books, 1988), 6, 24; Nash, Wilderness and the American Mind, 131.

16. Soon after creation of the National Park Service, its first director, Stephen T. Mather, expressed an interest in the dunes along Lake Michigan's shoreline as a possible national park. However, Mather seems to have been primarily interested in the area's recreational potential for serving Chicago, his hometown. Report of the Director of the National Park Service to the Secretary of the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1920 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1920), 85-86.

17. John Muir and Yosemite National Park are discussed extensively in Michael P. Cohen, The Pathless Way: John Muir and American Wilderness (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1984); see especially 260-273, 302-310, 323-338. See also Nash, Wilderness and the American Mind, 125-129, 161-181; Runte, Yosemite, 81-82; Stephen Fox, John Muir and His Legacy: The American Conservation Movement (Boston: Little, Brown, 1981), 3-7, 82-83, 139-147; and Cohen, Sierra Club, 6, 22-33. For a discussion of late-nineteenth-century developments in American ecological science, see Donald Worster, Nature's Economy: A History of Ecological Ideas (1977; 2nd ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 195-197, 205-220.

18. Langford, The Discovery of Yellowstone Park, 117. Recreational tourism in national parks would come to include a great diversity of activities—for instance, sightseeing, automobile touring, camping, museum going, attending campfire talks, fishing, horseback riding, wilderness hiking and camping, motorboating, snowmobiling, even downhill skiing.

19. The wording of the Yellowstone Park Act is found in Tolson, Laws Relating to the National Park Service (1933), 26-27.

20. Anne Farrar Hyde, An American Vision: Far Western Landscape and National Culture, 1820-1920 (New York: New York University Press, 1990), 53-190; Richard A. Bartlett, Yellowstone: A Wilderness Besieged (Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1985), 113-115; Hans Huth, Nature and the American: Three Centuries of Changing Attitudes (1957; rev. ed., Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1972), 73-86, 106-128; Earl Pomeroy, In Search of the Golden West: The Tourist in Western America (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1957), 17-28, 112-125; and William H. Goetzman, Exploration and Empire (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1971), 406. Graham, in The Adirondack Park (pp. 31-44), discusses the first railroad penetration of the Adirondacks and the public and private resorts that soon spread through the area.

21. John C. Paige and Laura Soulliere Harrison, Out of the Vapors: A Social and Architectural History of Bathhouse Row, Hot Springs National Park, Arkansas (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1988), 32-35, 72.

22. Runte, Yosemite, 28-44, 51-53; Robert P. Gibbens and Harold F. Heady, The Influence of Modern Man on the Vegetation of Yosemite Valley, California Agricultural Experiment Station Extension Service Manual, no. 36 (Berkeley: University of California, Division of Agricultural Sciences, 1964), 2-5; James Francis Milestone, "The Influence of Modern Man on the Stream System of Yosemite Valley," Master's thesis, San Francisco State University, May 1978, 77-84; Ise, Our National Park Policy, 71-73, 76-83. Linda Wedel Greene, in Yosemite: The Park and Its Resources (Denver: National Park Service, 1987), details the extensive early development in the valley. See for instance I, 114-163.

Now considered a farsighted statement of national park principles, Olmsted's 1865 report was quickly suppressed, apparently by men who did not fully agree with its philosophy or who feared it might draw funding from their own projects. The report disappeared and was not rediscovered until the early 1950s. It is reproduced in Frederick Law Olmsted, "The Yosemite Valley and the Mariposa Big Trees: A Preliminary Report (1865)," with an introduction by Laura Wood Roper, Landscape Architecture 43 (October 1952), 12-25. See also Laura Wood Roper, FLO: A Biography of Frederick Law Olmsted (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1973), 283-287; Runte, Yosemite, 28-32, 39-40; and Joseph L. Sax, "America's National Parks: Their Principles, Purposes, and Prospects," Natural History 85 (October 1976), 57-87. Sax analyzes the report and its implications for contemporary national park management.

23. Widder, Mackinac National Park, 6, 8-9, 17-26, 37, 42-46; Huth, Nature and the American, 146.

24. The comments were from U.S. Senator Thomas W. Tipton, of Nebraska; from a petition by the Montana State Legislature to Congress; and from the New York Times, February 29, 1872, quoted in Haines, Yellowstone National Park, 118, 121, 126. The Yellowstone Act's wording is in Tolson, Laws Relating to the National Park Service (1933), 26-27.

25. Bartlett, Nature's Yellowstone, 115-120; Bartlett, Yellowstone: A Wilderness Besieged, 115, 129-131; Hyde, An American Vision, 251-252; Ise, Our National Park Policy, 33-34; Chittenden, Yellowstone National Park, 110-111; and Robert Shankland, Steve Mather of the National Parks (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1951), 116-117.

26. Hyde, An American Vision, 253-268; Bartlett, Yellowstone: A Wilderness Besieged, 170-186; Ise, Our National Park Policy, 40; Runte, National Parks, 94; Trains of Discovery, 22-23; Winks, Frederick Billings, 284-292; Laura Soulliere Harrison, Architecture in the Parks: National Historic Landmark Theme Study (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1986), 61-71; Chittenden, Yellowstone National Park, v, 115-116, 240-253. On congressional parsimony, see for example H. Duane Hampton, How the U.S. Cavalry Saved Our National Parks (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1971), 31-39. A detailed history of road construction in Yellowstone is found in Mary Shivers Culpin, The History of the Construction of the Road System in Yellowstone National Park, 1872-1966 (Denver: National Park Service, 1994), I. Use of the U.S. Army to manage Yellowstone or other early national parks does not seem to have been influenced by the army's experience in operating Mackinac National Park.

27. Hyde, An American Vision, 281-293; C. W. Buchholtz, Man in Glacier (West Glacier, Montana: Glacier Natural History Association, 1976), 39-56; and "The National Park as a Playground," Journal of Sport History 5 (Winter 1978), 22-23. Examples of similarities in leasing provisions of national park enabling legislation are found in Tolson, Laws Relating to the National Park Service (1933), 49 (Sequoia and General Grant), 102 (Mount Rainier), 112 (Crater Lake), 123-124 (Wind Cave), 138-139 (Glacier), 155 (Rocky Mountain), 172 (Hawaii), and 189 (Lassen Volcanic).

28. Harlan D. Unrau, Administrative History: Crater Lake National Park, Oregon (Denver: National Park Service, 1988), I, 220; Harrison, Architecture in the Parks, 186; Dilsaver and Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees, 140.

29. Boeger, Oklahoma Oasis, 49-66, 80-107; Harrison, Architecture in the Parks, 40-47.

30. Reports of the Department of the Interior, 1910 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1911), 57; U.S. Department of the Interior, Memorandum for the Press, December 10, 1915, typescript, JHMcF; National Park Conference, 3rd, Berkeley, Calif., 11-13 March 1915, Proceedings (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1915), 14-15.

31. National Park Conference, 1915, Proceedings, 19-20. The kind of development designed by Daniels and future generations of national park landscape architects helps account for the distinctly different appearance of many national park villages when compared to typical American towns having little control over development.

32. Samuel P. Hays discusses Gifford Pinchot and the U.S. Forest Service's interest in gaining control of the national parks in Conservation and the Gospel of Efficiency: The Progressive Conservation Movement, 1890-1920 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1959), 195-198.

33. Most parks had mandates similar to Yellowstone's to preserve natural conditions. As with the leasing provisions, in some legislation the wording was taken verbatim from the Yellowstone Park Act. See for example Tolson, Laws Relating to the National Park Service (1933), 49 (Sequoia and General Grant), 102 (Mount Rainier), 155 (Rocky Mountain), 172 (Hawaii), and 189 (Lassen Volcanic).

34. Dilsaver and Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees, 44-50, 55-60. The authors note (p. 59) that in certain local areas the damage from grazing was "appalling." Runte, Yosemite, 49; Buchholtz, Man in Glacier, 31, 34-40; Ise, Our National Park Policy, 122, 124-125, 172.

35. John D. Varley, "A History of Fish Stocking Activities in Yellowstone National Park between 1881 and 1980," Yellowstone National Park Information Paper, no. 35, January 1, 1980, 2-3; John D. Varley and Paul Schullery, Freshwater Wilderness: Yellowstone Fishes and Their World (Yellowstone National Park: Yellowstone Library and Museum Association, 1983), 101-102; Ise, Our National Park Policy, 128-129; Hampton, How the U.S. Cavalry Saved Our National Parks, 99-100, 112, 158; Runte, Yosemite, 65-66; Dilsaver and Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees, 106; and Annual Report of the Superintendent of National Parks to the Secretary of the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1916 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1916), 50, 60, 72.

36. Reiger, American Sportsmen, 101-109.

37. Ise, Our National Park Policy, 47, 123-124, 178; Dilsaver and Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees, 106; Runte, Yosemite, 90, 127. National park historian Richard Bartlett depicts predator control in the parks as having been a "spillover from the ranching frontier." The war against predators indeed reflected practices on private and public lands throughout the country, practices that would soon be underwritten by the Bureau of Biological Survey. Bartlett, Yellowstone: A Wilderness Besieged, 328-330. See also Thomas R. Dunlap, Saving America's Wildlife (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988), 38-40.

38. Barlett, Yellowstone: A Wilderness Besieged, 316-321; Ise, Our National Park Policy, 23-25, 62-64, 110-111, 123, 178; Hampton, How the U.S. Cavalry Saved Our National Parks, 39-41, 105-110, 121-129; Rieger, American Sportsmen, 129-133; Runte, Yosemite, 86, 90.

39. Curtis K. Skinner et al., "The History of the Bison in Yellowstone Park" [with supplements], 1952, typescript, YELL; George M. Wright, Joseph S. Dixon, and Ben H. Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks of the United States: A Preliminary Survey of Faunal Relations in National Parks, Contributions of Wild Life Survey, Fauna Series no. 1 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1933), 117-118. The Lamar Valley bison, an introduced herd, came from two subspecies, both different from the remnant wild herds located in other areas of the park. Although the wild herds at times interbred with the introduced bison, they were almost always left alone and never received the intensive management given those in the Lamar Valley. Margaret Mary Meagher, The Bison of Yellowstone National Park, National Park Service Scientific Monograph Series no. 1 (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1973), 26-37.

40. Paul Schullery, The Bears of Yellowstone (1986; 3rd ed., Worland, Wyoming: High Plains Publishing Company, 1992), 93-96, 100; Dilsaver and Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees, 146.

41. Stephen J. Pyne, Fire in America: A Cultural History of Wildland and Rural Fire (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982), 227-229; Runte, Yosemite, 62-65; Hampton, How the U.S. Cavalry Saved Our National Parks, 83, 100, 107; Orsi, " 'Wilderness Saint' and 'Robber Baron,' " 155n34.

42. Dilsaver and Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees, 35, 59-62; Runte, Yosemite, 46-47, 60-62; Wright, Dixon, and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks, 33, 101, 131.

43. John W. Henneberger has detailed the history of the national park rangers in "To Protect and Preserve: A History of the National Park Ranger," 1965, typescript, copy courtesy of the author. For early ranger activity, see pp. 18-227.

Chapter 2. Codifying Tradition

1. Robert Sterling Yard, "Making a Business of Scenery," The Nation's Business 4 (June 1916), 10-11.

2. The National Park Service Act is found in Hillory A. Tolson, Laws Relating to the National Park Service, the National Parks and Monuments (Washington, D.C.: Department of the Interior, 1933), 9-11. For an extensive compilation of national park legislation and related documents, see Lary M. Dilsaver, America's National Park System: The Critical Documents (Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 1994).

Robert B. Keiter, in his "National Park Protection: Putting the Organic Act to Work," in David J. Simon, ed., Our Common Lands: Defending the National Parks (Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1988), 81, states that the Organic Act "sets forth an impressive, unambiguous resource preservation mandate." Alston Chase, in Playing God in Yellowstone: The Destruction of America's First National Park (Boston: Atlantic Monthly Press, 1986), 6, comments that the National Park Service's "sole mission is preservation." Similarly, John Lemons and Dean Stout, in "A Reinterpretation of National Park Legislation, Environmental Law (Northwestern School of Law, Lewis and Clark College) 15 (1984), 41-65, argue that the Organic Act's primary mandate is to preserve park resources: "the purpose of natural parks is to preserve pristine ecological processes" (p. 53); and "the most basic fiduciary duties of the [National Park Service] are to reduce development and promote preservation of resources" (p. 65). By contrast, Alfred Runte, in National Parks: The American Experience (1979; 2nd ed. rev., Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1987), emphasizes the parks' tourism and economic potential as key motivating factors for the legislation establishing the National Park Service. See his chapter entitled "See America First," 82-105.

3. J. Horace McFarland to Frederick Law Olmsted, November 11, 1907, JHMcF; National Park Conference, 4th, Washington, D.C., January 2-6, 1917, Proceedings (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1917), 107. See also J. Horace McFarland to Henry S. Graves, February 21, 1911, JHMcF; and House Committee on the Public Lands, Hearings on H.R. 434 and H.R. 8668, 64th Cong., 1st sess., 1916, 52. In a telegram to the 1915 National Park conference, the American Civic Association depicted the parks as great scenic areas "set aside for national recreation." See National Park Conference, 3rd, Berkeley, Calif., March 11-13, 1915, Proceedings (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1915), 10. The "National Park Service" designation is mentioned in Walter L. Fisher to Reed Smoot, February 6, 1912, JHMcF. McFarland's career is detailed in Ernest Morrison, J. Horace McFarland: A Thorn for Beauty (Harrisburg: Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 1995). For an account of the founding of the National Park Service, see 173-193.

4. McFarland recounted his initial proposal in J. Horace McFarland to Gifford Pinchot, February 13, 1911, JHMcF.

5. J. Horace McFarland to Stephen T. Mather, November 22, 1926, JHMcF; J. Horace McFarland, "The Beginnings of the National Park System," 1929, typescript, JHMcF; House Committee on the Public Lands, Hearings on H.R. 434 and H.R. 8668, 1916, 4. McFarland to Pinchot, February 13, 1911; J. Horace McFarland to Frederick Law Olmsted, October 13, 1910; McFarland, "The Beginnings of the National Park System," JHMcF. Robert Shankland, Steve Mather of the National Parks (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1951), 52-53.

6. McFarland to Olmsted, October 13, 1910; F. L. Olmsted, note to files, November 20, 1910, NPS-HC; Shary Page Berg, "Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr.: A Preliminary Investigation," January 1985, typescript, 8, Radcliffe College.

7. Frederick Law Olmsted to John C. Olmsted, December 19, 1910; Frederick Law Olmsted to the President and Council of the Appalachian Mountain Club, January 19, 1912; Frederick Law Olmsted to Mark Sullivan, December 19, 1910, NPS-HC.

8. Shankland, Steve Mather, 20, 36, 40-41.

9. Shankland, Steve Mather, 57-59, 62-63; Horace M. Albright, as told to Robert Cahn, The Birth of the National Park Service: The Founding Years, 1913-1933 (Salt Lake City: Howe Brothers, 1985), 19-21.

10. Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 32-43; Donald C. Swain, Wilderness Defender: Horace M. Albright and Conservation (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970), 38-60.

11. National Park Conference, 1st, Yellowstone National Park, Wyo., September 11-12, 1911, Proceedings (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1912), 1-4, 6-9, 17-19; National Park Conference, 2nd, Yosemite National Park, Calif., October 14-16, 1912, Proceedings (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1913), 5-7, 95, 137, 141; National Park Conference, 1915, Proceedings, 4-5, 11-12, 15-20.

12. National Park Conference, 1911, Proceedings, iii-iv, 1-2; National Park Conference, 1912, Proceedings, 5-7; National Park Conference, 1915, Proceedings, 4-5.

13. National Park Conference, 1911, Proceedings, 5. Among the many other references to American tourists going to Canada or Europe are Committee on the Public Lands, Hearings on H.R. 434 and 8668, 1916, 5-7; and "A National Park Service," New York Times, May 30, 1916, editorial section, typescript copy, 8, NPS-HC.

14. National Park Conference, 1911, Proceedings, 3; National Park Conference, 1912, Proceedings, 9. Fisher's successor, Franklin K. Lane, would reiterate these factors just before passage of the Organic Act. See Franklin K. Lane to Henry L. Myers, July 8, 1916, Kent.

15. National Park Conference, 1912, Proceedings, 94-96. A history of conservation and the concerns for efficiency during this period is found in Samuel P. Hays, Conservation and the Gospel of Efficiency: The Progressive Conservation Movement, 1890-1920 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1959).

16. National Park Conference, 1912, Proceedings, 95. For other expressions of the need for an engineer to oversee the national parks, see National Park Conference, 1911, Proceedings, 111; Franklin K. Lane to Henry L. Myers, July 8, 1916, Kent; House Committee on the Public Lands, Hearings on H.R. 434 and H.R. 8668, 1916, 3. Horace McFarland stated in 1911 that the national parks needed the leadership of "some great landscape engineer of international reputation" who would perform in the same manner as the landscape engineers of the city parks of Boston, Minneapolis, and Kansas City. McFarland to Pinchot, February 13, 1911. And in 1914 an Interior Department official testified on the parks' need for engineers who could handle roads, sanitation, and "scenic problems." House Committee on the Public Lands, Hearings on H.R. 104, 63rd Cong., 2nd sess., 1914, 73. (The Robert Marshall associated with the early national parks was not the individual who championed wilderness areas on public lands and helped found the Wilderness Society in 1935.)

17. U.S. Department of the Interior, Memorandum for the Press, typescript, December 10, 1915, JHMcF. See also Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 9, 24.

18. National Park Conference, 1915, Proceedings, 15-17, 115.

19. Graham Romeyn Taylor, "Washington at Work, II: The Nation's Playgrounds," American Forestry (January 1916), clipping, n.p., Mather-BL; National Park Conference, 1915, Proceedings, 16-17. See also Linda Flint McClelland, Presenting Nature: The Historic Landscape Design of the National Park Service (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1993), 96-97.

20. National Park Conference, 1911, Proceedings, 108-110, 113-114.

21. House Committee on the Public Lands, Hearings on H.R. 434 and H.R. 8668, 1916, 85. Marshall's commitment to utilitarian land uses became even more apparent when, not long after he left the national parks' general superintendency, he became a leading advocate for a huge irrigation project in California's Central Valley. For much of the remainder of his career, he devoted his energies to publicizing and promoting his "Marshall Plan" for agricultural irrigation in the valley. Biographical note on Robert Bradford Marshall, n.d., typescript, Mather-BL.

22. National Park Conference, 1912, Proceedings, 10; House Committee on the Public Lands, Hearings on H.R. 434 and H.R. 8668, 1916, 75; William Kent to R. B. Watrous, January 17, 1916, JHMcF. See also Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 37-39.

23. Reports of the Department of the Interior, 1907 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1907), I, 55-56; Hays, Conservation and the Gospel of Efficiency, 73, 195-197; Harold K. Steen, The U.S. Forest Service: A History (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1976), 114. See also Morrison, J. Horace McFarland, 177-178, 183-184, 188-189.

24. Gifford Pinchot to Frederick Law Olmsted, December 26, 1912, NPS-HC; H. S. Graves to J. Horace McFarland, March 30, 1916, ASLA-LC. The legislation establishing Glacier National Park is found in Tolson, Laws Relating to the National Parks (1933), 138-139.

25. H. Graves to William Kent, draft, March 17, 1916, Kent; Graves to McFarland, March 30, 1916.

26. McFarland to Graves, February 21, 1911; J. Horace McFarland to Gifford Pinchot, March 24, 1911, JHMcF.

27. J. Horace McFarland to Frederick Law Olmsted, April 17, 1916, FLO-LC.

28. William Kent to the Secretary of Agriculture, April 7, 1916, Kent; House Committee on the Public Lands, Hearings on H.R. 434 and H.R. 8668, 1916, 16. Kent's interest in the grazing provision is discussed in Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 36, 45.

29. House Committee on the Public Lands, Hearings on H.R. 434 and H.R. 8668, 1916, 15-17. Much later, Albright recalled that Mather was "strongly opposed, but tended to take the long view" on grazing. He added that "the important thing . . . was to get a National Park Service Act passed; the grazing provision was something we could eventually get rid of." Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 36; see also 37-39.

30. National Park Conference, Proceedings, 1917, 105. McFarland had earlier written that the statement of purpose had been "jealously preserved with much fighting and effort." J. Horace McFarland to H. A. Caparn, October 9, 1916, JHMcF. Frederick Law Olmsted to Frank Pierce, December 31, 1910; Frederick Law Olmsted to J. Horace McFarland, September 13, 1911, NPS-HC.

31. Tolson, Laws Relating to the National Park Service (1933), 10.

32. It is the author's personal observation that even today the statement of purpose is referred to regularly and routinely by National Park Service employees, and it is displayed prominently in many Park Service offices. Other sections of the act are rarely mentioned.

33. Olmsted to Pierce, December 31, 1910. The earliest draft is quoted in Olmsted's letter. Similar to this version of the national parks' purpose, Congress would declare in a law passed in 1978 that the parks were to be protected and managed in a manner that avoids "derogation of the values and purposes for which the parks were established." Redwood National Park Expansion Act, sec. 101b, Public Law 95-250, 16, United States Code. See also Michael A. Mantell, ed., Managing National Park System Resources: A Handbook on Legal Duties, Opportunities, and Tools (Washington, D.C.: Conservation Foundation, 1990), 14-15.

34. Olmsted to Olmsted, December 19, 1910; J. Horace McFarland to Gifford Pinchot, February 12, 1911, JHMcF; Olmsted to Pierce, December 31, 1910.

35. Olmsted to Pierce, December 31, 1910; McFarland to Graves, February 21, 1911. McFarland wrote to Pinchot that the new statement declared, "in fully framed language, the purpose of national parks in a fashion never before undertaken, and not present in any of the loosely drawn legislation under which national parks now exist." McFarland to Pinchot, February 12, 1911. See also J. Horace McFarland to Walter L. Fisher, January 2, 1912.

36. Walter L. Fisher to J. Horace McFarland, December 22, 1911, JHMcF.

37. McFarland to Fisher, January 2, 1912; Walter L. Fisher to J. Horace McFarland, January 30, 1912, JHMcF.

38. Draft of legislation appended to letter from Richard B. Watrous to Frederick Law Olmsted, October 19, 1915, NPS-HC. Although the correspondence reveals no specific evidence, it may be that inclusion of "historic" objects was intended to cover the kinds of resources protected by the 1906 Antiquities Act, which authorized creation of national monuments. By the Organic Act, the National Park Service would be mandated to administer those national monuments then under the jurisdiction of the Interior Department.

39. Olmsted to Watrous, November 1, 1915; Richard B. Watrous to Frederick L. Olmsted, November 13, 1915. NPS-HC.

40. Olmsted to Watrous, November 1, 1915.

41. Olmsted to Pierce, December 31, 1910; Olmsted to the Appalachian Mountain Club, January 19, 1912. Frederick Law Olmsted to James Sturgis Pray, February 3, 1915, NPS-HC. Expressing similar concerns about adverse development, McFarland wrote of the need for a statement to "form a bar against any possibly strained construction which might be damaging to the parks." J. Horace McFarland to Walter L. Fisher, December 19, 1911, JHMcF.

42. Olmsted proposed that the independent board be similar to those used with local park systems around the country; it should be advisory, as opposed to executive, and serve as a check against misuse of the parks by ensuring a "harmonious continuity of policy." Shortly before passage of the Organic Act, Olmsted's proposal was rejected because of the Interior Department's uneasiness about the board's potential power. Less than two decades later, with the Historic Sites Act of 1935, Congress authorized a national park advisory board. Legislative draft appended to letter from Frederick Law Olmsted to J. Horace McFarland, November 21, 1911, NPS-HC; Olmsted to McFarland, September 13, 1911; Watrous to Olmsted, November 13, 1915; McFarland, "The Beginnings of the National Park System." See also Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 36. Authorization of an advisory board is discussed in Conrad L. Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1980), 164-165.

43. Donald C. Swain, "The Passage of the National Park Service Act," Wisconsin Magazine of History 50 (Autumn 1966), 15-17; Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 38; Gilbert H. Grosvenor, "The Land of the Best," National Geographic 24 (April 1916): 327-430; Department of the Interior, National Parks Portfolio (Washington, D.C.: Department of the Interior, 1916).

44. House Committee on the Public Lands, Report No. 700 to Accompany H.R. 15522, 64th Cong., 1st sess., 1916, 2-3; House Committee on the Public Lands, Hearings on H.R. 434 and H.R. 8668, 1916, 5-8.

45. An account of the political strategies and promotional activities is found in Swain, "Passage of the National Park Service Act."

46. William Kent draft memorandum to John D. Muir, E. T. Parsons, Wm. F. Borby, Mrs. R. B. Colby, and members of the Society for the Preservation of National Parks, n.d. (ca. 1913), Kent. Earlier, Kent's donation of a redwood forest area north of San Francisco had led to creation of Muir Woods National Monument. Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 35. Plotting their political strategies, the National Park Service founders frequently met in Congressman Kent's Washington home on the corner of F and Eighteenth streets—the same house where plans had earlier been formulated for passage of the Hetch Hetchy legislation. Morrison, J. Horace McFarland, 186.

47. The quote is from Philip P. Wells, "Conservation of Natural Resources," quoted in Hays, Conservation and the Gospel of Efficiency, 123; see also 5, 122-127, 176-177. For comments on utilitarian and aesthetic conservationists, see Roderick Nash, Wilderness and the American Mind (1967; 3rd ed., New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982), 129-130, 135-139. "Wise use," as employed in the early twentieth century, is not synonymous with the policies of the "wise use" movement of the late-twentieth-century West.

48. Tolson, Laws Relating to the National Park Service (1933), 26, 49, 65, 102, 139.

49. Tolson, Laws Relating to the National Park Service (1933), 10-11; House Committee on the Public Lands, Hearings on H.R. 434 and 8668, 1916, 17.

50. Tolson, Laws Relating to the National Park Service (1933), 3, 11.

Chapter 3. Perpetuating Tradition

1. Joseph Grinnell and Tracy I. Storer, "Animal Life as an Asset of National Parks," Science 44 (September 15, 1916), 377.

2. Horace M. Albright to the Director, November 8, 1928, Entry 17, RG79.

3. H. Duane Hampton, How the U.S. Cavalry Saved Our National Parks (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1971), 175-179; John Ise, Our National Park Policy: A Critical History (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1961), 208. See also letter from the Secretary of War stating that the War Department was no longer able to bear the responsibilities of the Department of the Interior, and that "the time has come for the Interior Department to take over the entire handling of these parks." Secretary of War to Secretary of the Interior, May 1, 1914, quoted in House Committee on the Public Lands, Hearings on H.R. 104, 63rd Cong., 2nd sess., 1914, 66-69.

4. Robert Shankland, Steve Mather of the National Parks (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1951), 247-252; Horace M. Albright, as told to Robert Cahn, The Birth of the National Park Service: The Founding Years, 1913-1933 (Salt Lake City: Howe Brothers, 1985), 64.

5. Horace M. Albright to J. Horace MacFarland, May 28, 1917, JHMcF; Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 54-57.

6. Edgar H. Schein, Organizational Culture and Leadership (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1992), 1-2, 15, 58. Schein adds (p. 12) that an organization's "shared assumptions derive their power from the fact that they begin to operate outside of awareness," and that once the assumptions attain a history of success, they are assumed to be "right and good." Among the manifestations of an organization's culture that he notes (pp. 8-10) are espoused values and formal philosophy, the special skills of group members, the habits of thinking and the shared meanings as group members interact with one another, and "implicit rules for getting along in the organization." For a lengthy analysis of organizational culture in the U.S. Forest Service, see Herbert Kaufman, The Forest Ranger: A Study in Administrative Behavior (Washington, D.C.: Resources for the Future, 1986; originally published by Johns Hopkins University Press, 1960). See also Ashley L. Schiff, Fire and Water: Scientific Heresy in the Forest Service (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1962), 1-14, 164-170.

7. Russ Olsen, Administrative History: Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 1917 to 1985 (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1985), 10, 34-35.

8. Horace M. Albright to Arthur A Shurtleff, November 9, 1929, Entry 18, RG79; Shankland, Steve Mather, 9. By the early twentieth century the demand for landscape architects in the United States had increased considerably for designing resorts, country estates, campuses, city parks, state capitol grounds, subdivisions, and other developments. See Laura Wood Roper, FLO: A Biography of Frederick Law Olmsted (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1973), 397.

9. Stephen T. Mather to Horace M. Albright, January 10, 1922, YELL. See also Stephen T. Mather to Ike E. O. Pace, August 17, 1928, Entry 6, RG79; and Arthur E. Demaray to Ernest Pl. Leavitt, September 28, 1928, Entry 17, RG79. As Horace Albright later described it, the landscape architects were given "power of approval, modification or veto" over plans submitted by concessionaires. Horace M. Albright to Ray Lyman Wilbur, March 5, 1929, Entry 6, RG79.

10. Arno B. Cammerer to Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr., September 11, 1922, Entry 18, RG79; National Park Conference, 7th, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, October 22-28, 1923, "Minutes," typescript, 29-30, NPS-HC. See also Linda Flint McClelland, Presenting Nature: The Historic Landscape Design of the National Park Service, 1916 to 1942 (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1993), 95-96.

11. Paul P. Kiessig, "Landscape Engineering in the National Parks," December 2, 1922, typescript, YELL.

12. Thomas C. Vint to Horace M. Albright, May 22, 1929, Entry 18, RG79. Vint was a professional architect as well as a landscape architect.

13. James S. Pray, comments at February 1916 meeting of American Society of Landscape Architects, copy courtesy Denis P. Galvin; Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 104, 272; Franklin K. Lane to Stephen T. Mather, May 13, 1918, Entry 17, RG79; William C. Tweed and Laura Soulliere Harrison, "Rustic Architecture and the National Parks: The History of a Design Ethic," 1987, typescript, chapter 4, 17-18, copy courtesy of the authors; Albright to Shurtleff, November 9, 1929.

14. The quote is from National Park Service, Office Order no. 228, April 3, 1931, typescript, copy courtesy of Denis P. Galvin. See also McClelland, Presenting Nature, 86-112; Tweed and Harrison, "Rustic Architecture," chapter 4, 17-18; Norman T. Newton, Design on the Land: The Development of Landscape Architecture (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1971), 535-536; and Thomas C. Vint, "National Park Service Master Plans," Planning and Civic Comment (April 1946), 21-24.

15. See Olsen, Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 10, 40-41, 60-61, 66-67; and Vernon L. Hammons, "A Brief Organizational History of the Office of Design and Construction, National Park Service, 1917-1962," 1962, typescript, 6, NPS-HC; Newton, Design on the Land, 535.

16. Olsen, Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 34-37; Hammons, "History of the Office of Design and Construction," 1-2; Albright to Wilbur, March 5, 1929; Shankland, Steve Mather, 147-162; Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 194-195; McClelland, Presenting Nature, 109.

17. Newton, Design on the Land, 534-535; Shankland, Steve Mather, 254-255; Tweed and Harrison, "Rustic Architecture and the National Parks," chapter 4, 17-18; Hillory A. Tolson, Historic Listing of National Park Service Officials, rev. Harold P. Danz (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1986), 26, 94, 156.

18. The quote is from Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 136.

19. John W. Henneberger, "To Protect and Preserve: A History of the National Park Ranger," typescript, 1965, 246-254, copy courtesy of the author. Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 139.

20. National Park Conference, 3rd, Berkeley, Calif., 11-13 March 1915, Proceedings (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1915), 44; Henneberger, "To Protect and Preserve," 285-286, 302-319. Ranger skills needed in national parks were quite similar to those needed in national forests. See Harold K. Steen, The U.S. Forest Service: A History (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1976), 83.

21. The early history of interpretation is discussed in Barry Mackintosh, Interpretation in the National Park Service (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1986), 7-17. See also Henneberger, "To Protect and Preserve," 182-183, 370-371; and Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 147. Beginning in Yosemite in 1914, the parks augmented the permanent ranger staffs with "seasonal" rangers who worked during the summer months, as they still do today. Henneberger, "To Protect and Preserve," 330-331; Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 142-145.

22. Henneberger, "To Protect and Preserve," 253; Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 145, 148.

23. Tweed and Harrison, "Rustic Architecture," chapter 3, 2; Shankland, Steve Mather, 266-267; Henneberger, "To Protect and Preserve," 319-330.

24. For example, Forest Townsley, a ranger at Platt National Park in Oklahoma, paid his own moving expenses when Yosemite offered him a ranger position in 1913. Henneberger, "To Protect and Preserve," 252.

25. Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 146; Henneberger, "To Protect and Preserve," 252-254. The rangers came under the civil service system in 1925, and the superintendents in 1931. See Shankland, Steve Mather, 249.

26. Henneberger, "To Protect and Preserve," 371. In some instances, an assistant superintendent was second in command. See Cameron, The National Park Service, 64.

27. Shankland, Steve Mather, 247-253; Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 63-65.

28. Shankland, Steve Mather, 245-252; Lary M. Dilsaver and William C. Tweed, The Challenge of the Big Trees (Three Rivers, California: Sequoia Natural History Association, 1990), 112.

29. Soon after resigning from the superintendency, Walter Fry began building a natural history program in Sequoia, one of the Service's most successful early efforts in this field. Dilsaver and Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees, 101-103, 112.

30. Henneberger, "To Protect and Preserve," 288, 301-302. See 103-106, 289-298, on Mather's hiring of rangers who would go on to become superintendents at important national parks.

31. National Park Conference, 8th, Mesa Verde National Park, Colorado, October 1-5, 1925, "Minutes," typescript, 1, NPS-HC; Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 146, 200, 218. See also Shankland, Steve Mather, 263, 279-280, for discussions of superintendents conferences.

Included in a 1923 conference brochure "Sing in Yellowstone" were lyrics for a campfire song, no doubt a means by which Mather hoped to develop camaraderie among superintendents.

Entitled "Mather's Gang" and sung to the tune of "Clementine," the song contained a rollcall of the top names in national park management:

Hip hooray, hip hooray,
For the Conference in Yellowstone,
There is Crosby from Grand Canyon
And Nusbaum digging bones,
There is Thompson, Toll and Tomlinson,
And Boles from Hawaii (Ha-wa-e)
There is Cammerer and Mather
Both from Washington, D.C.
Next comes Brazell and Farquhar
From Maine Dorr doth hold forth,
White and Lewis from California,
And Karstens way up north,
Hull and Goodwin and Dr. Waring,
Frank Pinkley and Eakin, too,
Then Reusch and Horace Albright
Now our roll call is through.
But don't forget we have the ladies
And others with smiles and barks*
All banded here together
To boost for National Parks[.]
So once again now let us cheer
For the service one and all
And a big one for Steve Mather
He made the Parks a world-wide call.

*The lyricist apologized for having to complete the rhyme with "Parks."

National Park Service, "Sing in Yellowstone," 1923, NPS-HC.

32. Lane to Mather, May 13, 1918; Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 69. see 69-73 for an almost complete text of the Lane Letter.

33. Lane to Mather, May 13, 1918.

34. In 1921 Mather reiterated much of the Lane Letter's policy statements in Stephen T. Mather, "The Ideals and Policy of the National Park Service Particularly in Relation to Yosemite National Park," in Ansel Hall, ed., Handbook of Yosemite National Park (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1921), 77-86. Hubert Work, "Statement of National Park Policy," memorandum for the Director, March 11, 1925, typescript, NPS-HC. Perhaps because Lane's message was a threshold policy statement, it remained by far the better remembered and more influential of the two secretarial policy letters.

35. Susan L. Flader, Thinking Like a Mountain: Aldo Leopold and the Evolution of an Ecological Attitude toward Deer, Wolves, and Forests (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1974), 100-102; Steen, The U.S. Forest Service, 116-120; and Hal K. Rothman, " 'A Regular Ding-Dong Fight': Agency Culture and Evolution in the NPS-USFS Dispute, 1916-1937," Western Historical Quarterly 20 (May 1989), 143, 153-155.

36. Stephen T. Mather, "Report on Do Functions of the National Park Service Overlap with Those of Other Bureaus?" 1925, typescript, NPS-HC.

37. Mather, "The Ideals and Policy of the National Park Service," 80; Stephen T. Mather, "Progress in the National Parks," Sierra Club Bulletin 11, no. 1 (1920), 6. See also "Director Mather Declares Parks Must Be True Recreation Centers," New York Times, December 12, 1919, Mather-BL.

38. The association's objectives are stated in "The Objects of the National Parks Association," National Parks Bulletin 1 (June 6, 1919), 8. Under Yard the association became an aggressive defender of the parks and, although it developed strong differences with Mather, provided the Service with valuable political support. See Bruce M. Kilgore, "Forty Years Defending Parks," National Parks Magazine 33 (May 1959), 13-16; and Shankland, Steve Mather, 167.

39. John Ise, Our National Park Policy, 198; Tweed and Harrison, "Rustic Architecture," chapter 2, 3. The quote is found in Annual Report of the Superintendent of National Parks to the Secretary of the Interior, 1916 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1916), 1.

40. Albright to Wilbur, March 5, 1929.

41. Mather, "Progress in the National Parks," 5. For a discussion of the railroads' interest in the national parks, see Alfred Runte, Trains of Discovery (1984; 2nd ed., Niwot, Colorado: Roberts Rhinehart, 1990).

42. "The National Park-to-Park Highway," loose-leaf folder, n.d. (ca. 1925), NPS-HC. See also Shankland, Steve Mather, 147-151; and McClellan, Presenting Nature, 77-79.

43. Report of the Director of the National Park Service to the Secretary of the Interior, 1919 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1919), 13; Report of the Director of the National Park Service to the Secretary of the Interior, 1925 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1925), 1.

44. Mather, "The Ideals and Policies of the National Park Service," 81.

45. Shankland, Steve Mather, 57-59; Report of the Director of the National Park Service, 1919, 61-66.

46. Report of the Director of the National Park Service to the Secretary of the Interior, 1924 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1924), 11-14; Work, "Statement of National Park Policy."

47. Stephen T. Mather to John R. White, February 24, 1927, NPS-HC. See Dilsaver and Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees, 182-185, for a discussion of the proposed Sierra Highway, ultimately defeated in the mid-1930s.

48. Shankland, Steve Mather, 157-159; William E. Brown, A History of the Denali-Mount McKinley Region, Alaska (Santa Fe: National Park Service, 1991), 101-107, 163.

49. Shankland, Steve Mather, 153-160; Lloyd K. Musselman, "Rocky Mountain National Park Administrative History, 1915-1965" (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1971), 85; Horace M. Albright, "National Park Planning," American Civic Annual 2 (1930), 52.

50. Musselman, "Rocky Mountain National Park," 90.

51. Mather, "Progress in the National Parks," 6. See also Michael P. Cohen, The History of the Sierra Club (San Francisco: Sierra Club Books, 1988), 9.

52. Typescript policy comment by Superintendent John R. White, attached to letter from Roger W. Toll to the Director, December 2, 1922, NPS-HC; Dilsaver and Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees, 132-135.

53. Tweed and Harrison, "Rustic Architecture," chapter 3, 2-12, and chapter 4, 6-9. See also Ned J. Burns, Field Manual for Museums (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, n.d.), 6-10.

54. Alfred Runte, Yosemite, the Embattled Wilderness (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1990), 154-157; Stephen T. Mather to E. O. McCormick, December 16, 1920, Entry 6, RG79. Neither golf course was built. However, when the Service acquired lands in the Wawona area of Yosemite, a golf course was already there; it remains in use today.

55. Mather, "Progress in the National Parks," 8. For further comments favorable to winter sports, see Mather, "Ideals and Policy of the National Park Service," 85; and Secretary Lane's policy letter to Mather, May 13, 1918.

56. Horace M. Albright to James V. Lloyd, February 13, 1929, Entry 17, RG79. See also Runte, Yosemite, 152-153. For winter sports development in Rocky Mountain National Park (inspired in part by the development going on in Yosemite), see Lloyd K. Musselman, "Rocky Mountain National Park Administrative History, 1915-1965" (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1971), 171-188. Albright's quote is on p. 172.

57. Shankland, Steve Mather, 207-208.

58. Draft of resolution and White's comments are attached to letter from Toll to the Director, December 2, 1922.

59. Toll to the Director, December 2, 1922, and attachments.

60. The Yellowstone dam proposals are discussed in Shankland, Steve Mather, 212-220.

61. Lane is quoted in Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 101.

62. Report of the Director of the National Park Service, 1919, 48; Report of the Director of the National Park Service, 1920 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1920), 21-30.

63. The Yellowstone dam proposals are discussed in Shankland, Steve Mather, 212-220; Ise, National Park Policy, 307-316; and Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Parks, 100-102, 105-107, 113-114.

64. Report of the Director of the National Park Service, 1919, 59.

65. Robert Sterling Yard to Arno B. Cammerer, March 5, 1923, Entry 18, RG79; C. W. Buchholtz, Man in Glacier (West Glacier, Montana: Glacier Natural History Association, 1976), 71. See Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 118, for discussion of opposition to other dams.

66. Dilsaver and Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees, 95-96. Inholdings consisted of stateowned lands as well; however, the service's biggest concern was the privately owned lands. See Ise, National Park Policy, 482-483.

67. Ise, National Park Policy, 179-181. Although it did not involve an actual inholding, Mather's personal supervision of the 1925 dynamiting of a sawmill that had been used during construction of a hotel in Glacier National Park provides a striking example of the concern for protecting park scenery from industrial intrusions. The sawmill was not being dismantled soon enough to suit Mather. See Shankland, Steve Mather, 209.

68. Annual Report of the Superintendent of National Parks (1916), 11-13. See also Ise, National Park Policy, 318.

69. Lane to Mather, May 13, 1918; Report of the Director of the National Park Service to the Secretary of the Interior, 1929 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1929), 10-11. See also Albright to Wilbur, March 5, 1929.

70. Ise, National Park Policy, 42. Although 542 square miles were removed, at the same time 113 square miles of mountainous terrain were added to the park, making the total loss from these land swaps 429 square miles. Ise, National Park Policy, 68-70; Runte, Yosemite, 67-68.

71. Ise, National Park Policy, 215-216; see also 139-140, 286. Albright recalled being "delighted" when Sully's Hill was removed from the system. Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 276.

72. Albright to Wilbur, March 5, 1929.

73. Lane to Mather, May 13, 1918. Regarding a possible addition of the Tetons to Yellowstone, a Saturday Evening Post editor remarked to Albright that "the best part of Yellowstone is not yet in the park." Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 117.

74. Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 40.

75. Lane to Mather, May 13, 1918; Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 63. Zion National Park, established in 1919, brought full national park status to the existing Zion National Monument. Monument status dated from 1909.

76. The quote is from Charles Sheldon, a well-known naturalist and writer, who conceived the idea of a national park in the vicinity of Mount McKinley when he first saw the area and its wildlife. The park legislation that Sheldon promoted received strong support from organizations interested in the conservation of game animals, such as the Boone and Crockett Club and the Camp Fire Club. Brown, "History of the Denali-Mount McKinley Region, 75-92.

77. Albright describes the Service's support for such parks as Grand Canyon and Bryce Canyon in Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 83-84, 189; Ise, National Park Policy, 268.

78. For a complete listing of the parks that came into the system during the Mather era, see Barry Mackintosh, The National Parks: Shaping the System (Washington, D.C.: Department of the Interior, 1991), 17, 22-23.

79. Shankland, Steve Mather, 221-224; "Gift-Parks—The Coming National Park Danger," National Parks Association Bulletin 35, (October 9, 1923), 4-5; Robert Sterling Yard, "Standards of Our National Parks," National Parks Bulletin 8 (April 1927), 1-4; and Kilgore, "Forty Years Defending Parks," 13-15.

80. Albright to Wilbur, March 5, 1918.

81. Stephen T. Mather, "Their 'Incomparable Scenic Grandeur,' " National Parks Bulletin 9 (November 1927), 5. Concerned about a "new and dangerous policy" of lax national park standards, and resisting a proposed Ouachita National Park in Arkansas, Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr., argued that some park proposals addressed "regional needs rather than . . . proper national purposes." Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 229.

82. Report of the Director of the National Park Service, 1921 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1921), 32-33; Shankland, Steve Mather, 184-190.

83. Report of the Director of the National Park Service to the Secretary of the Interior, 1917 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1917), 11.

84. Lane to Mather, May 13, 1918; Work, "Statement of National Park Policy."

85. Mather, "Do Functions of the National Park Service Overlap Those of Other Bureaus?" On Mather's interest in using experts from other bureaus, see National Park Service, "The National Park Service, Its Functions, Its Policies, Its Future," February 1925, typescript, NPS-HC; and Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 23.

An evolving specialty, scientific land and resource management was an applied, commodityoriented, and production-oriented enterprise, emphasizing the propagation and harvest of resources such as trees and fish—the useful products of forests, lakes, and streams. Led by Cornell and Yale, a few universities had begun to develop programs in the applied science of land and resource management. Increasingly, the federal and state bureaus involved in game, fish, and forest management looked to such programs for advice and for new personnel. See A. Hunter Dupree, Science in the Federal Government: A History of Policies and Activities (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986), 236-255; Susan L. Flader, "Scientific Resource Management: An Historical Perspective," in Kenneth Sabol, ed., Transactions, Forty-First North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference (Washington, D.C.: Wildlife Management Institute, 1976), 19-25.

86. Report of the Director of the National Park Service to the Secretary of the Interior, 1923 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1923), 23; Horace M. Albright, "Our National Parks as Wild Life Sanctuaries," American Forests and Forest Life 35 (August 1929), 536.

87. National Park Service, "Policy on Predators and Notes on Predators," 1939, typescript, various pagination, Central Classified File 715, RG79; Report of the Director of the National Park Service, 1924, 10.

88. Horace M. Albright, "Game Conservation in the National Parks," paper presented at the Eleventh National Game Conference of the American Game Protective Association, New York, April 8-9, 1924, Entry 6, RG79; Albright, "Our National Parks as Wild Life Sanctuaries," 505.

89. Brown, History of the Denali-Mount McKinley Region, 135-148.

90. Hillory A. Tolson, Laws Relating to the National Park Service, the National Parks and Monuments (Washington, D.C.: Department of the Interior, 1933), 10. Park Service biologist Victor Cahalane observed in 1939 that the Service's predator control under Mather had "followed the general trend and pattern of thought of the times." Victor H. Cahalane, "The Evolution of Predator Control Policy in the National Parks," Journal of Wildlife Management 3 (July 1939), 235.

91. Report of the Director of the National Park Service, 1918 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1918), 22; Report of the Director of the National Park Service, 1923, 23.

92. Report of the Director of the National Park Service, 1929, 25; Albright, "Our National Parks as Wild Life Sanctuaries," 536.

93. Cahalane, "The Evolution of Predator Control Policy in the National Parks," 230-231.

94. National Park Service, "Policy on Predators and Notes on Predators"; Cahalane, "Evolution of Predator Control Policy," 232-234.

95. Jay Bruce, Sr., Cougar Killer (New York: Comet Press Books, 1953), 135-136. Even though he did not enjoy killing animals, Mather once planned to join Bruce on a cougar hunt near Sequoia National Park. Although there is no evidence that the hunting trip took place, Mather discussed plans for it in Stephen T. Mather to John R. White, October 27, 1920, Central Classified Files, RG79. See also Shankland, Steve Mather, 270. Lewis is quoted in National Park Service, "Policy on Predators and Notes on Predators."

96. Report of the Director of the National Park Service to the Secretary of the Interior, 1926 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1926), 14. By the early twentieth century, the Biological Survey had begun shifting from its earlier emphasis on scientific studies (which were increasingly viewed by Congress as not being useful endeavors) to law enforcement and regulatory work, such as protecting migrating waterfowl populations and controlling predators and rodents. Thomas R. Dunlap, Saving America's Wildlife (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988), 35-39; Donald Worster, Nature's Economy: A History of Ecological Ideas (1977; 2nd ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 262-279; Dupree, Science in the Federal Government, 253.

97. Cahalane, "Evolution of Predator Control Policy," 234; National Park Service, "Policy on Predators and Notes on Predators."

98. National Park Service, "Policy on Predators and Notes on Predators"; R. Gerald Wright, Wildlife Research and Management in the National Parks (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1992), 64. The Biological Survey's comprehensive predator and rodent control programs were also being subjected to widespread questioning and disapproval. Dunlap, Saving America's Wildlife, 48-61.

99. National Park Service, "Policy on Predators and Notes on Predators"; Wright, Wildlife Research and Management, 64. Toll is quoted in Musselman, "Rocky Mountain National Park," 129-130.

100. National Park Service, "Policy on Predators and Notes on Predators."

101. Cahalane, "Evolution of Predator Control Policy," 235; Dunlap, Saving America's Wildlife, 48-61.

102. National Park Service, "Policy on Predators and Notes on Predators."

103. Albright to Wilbur, March 5, 1929; National Park Service, "Policy on Predators and Notes on Predators"; Wright, Wildlife Research and Management, 64.

104. Horace M. Albright, "The National Park Service's Policy on Predatory Mammals, Journal of Mammalogy 12 (May 1931), 185-186.

105. Lane to Mather, May 13, 1918; Report of the Director of the National Park Service, 1919, 35.

106. M. F. Daum to Theodore C. Joslin, January 9, 1929, YELL.

107. Curtis K. Skinner et al., "History of the Bison in Yellowstone Park" [with supplements], 1952, typescript, various pagination, 9, YELL. Albright's quote is from Report of the Director of the National Park Service, 1925, 36. Woodring is quoted in Daum to Joslin, January 9, 1929.

108. Skinner, "History of the Bison in Yellowstone Park," 10. The roundups were initially held for management purposes, but later were staged for public enjoyment as well. See Wright, Wildlife Research and Management, 152.

109. On the Service's management of large grazing and browsing animals in Yellowstone, see Don Despain et al., Wildlife in Transition: Man and Nature on Yellowstone's Northern Range (Boulder, Colorado: Roberts Rhinehart, 1986), 14-57, 72-110.

110. Horace M. Albright to George Bird Grinnell, May 13, 1921, Grinnell; Daum to Joslin, January 9, 1929.

111. Albright to Grinnell, May 13, 1921.

112. See for example Report of the Director of the National Park Service, 1919, 34-35; and Report of the Director of the National Park Service, 1921, 37.

113. Daum to Joslin, January 9, 1929. See also Wright, Wildlife Research and Management, 117.

114. Wright, Wildlife Research and Management, 71; Daum to Joslin, January 9, 1929. See Despain et al., Wildlife in Transition, 28-32.

115. Thomas R. Dunlap, "That Kaibab Myth," Journal of Forest History 32 (April 1988), 61-63; Dunlap, Saving America's Wildlife, 65-68; Shankland, Steve Mather, 272-273.

116. Report of the Director of the National Park Service, 1921, 38; Report of the Director of the National Park Service, 1923, 24.

117. Musselman, "Rocky Mountain National Park," 127; Report of the Director of the National Park Service, 1921, 38. See also Arthur E. Demaray, "Regulations to Govern the Disposal of Wild Animals from Yellowstone National Park," October 26, 1929, Entry 19, RG79.

118. Shankland, Steve Mather, 269; Report of the Director of the National Park Service, 1921, 39; Runte, Yosemite, 130-134; Wright, Wildlife Research and Management, 152-153.

119. Skinner, "History of the Bison in Yellowstone Park"; Albright, "Our National Parks as Wildlife Sanctuaries," 507.

120. Report of the Director of the National Park Service, 1921, 38.

121. Albright is quoted in National Park Service, "Policy on Predators and Notes on Predators." Musselman, "Rocky Mountain National Park," 127-131.

122. Paul Schullery, The Bears of Yellowstone (1986; 3rd ed., Worland, Wyoming: High Plains Publishing Company, 1992), 89-108; Runte, Yosemite, 136-140; Dilsaver and Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees, 145-146.

123. Albright, "Game Conservation in the National Parks."

124. Dilsaver and Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees, 145-146; Wright, Wildlife Research and Management, 111-112; Schullery, Bears of Yellowstone, 104.

125. Report of the Director of the National Park Service to the Secretary of the Interior, 1922 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1922), 39; Annual Report of the Director of the National Park Service (1925), 6-7.

126. Annual Report of the Director of the National Park Service (1926), 14; John D. Varley, "A History of Fish Stocking Activities in Yellowstone National Park between 1881 and 1980," Yellowstone National Park Information Paper no. 35, January 1, 1981, typescript, 1-3, YELL. See also John D. Varley and Paul Schullery, Freshwater Wilderness: Yellowstone Fishes and Their World (Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming: Yellowstone Library and Museum Association, 1983), 102-103.

127. Flader, "Scientific Resource Management," 20-21; Dupree, Science in the Federal Government, 236-238; David H. Madsen, "Report on Fish Cultural Activities," typescript, April 5, 1935, Central Classified File 714, RG79. The United States Commission on Fish and Fisheries was established in 1871 and was renamed the Bureau of Fisheries in 1903.

128. Report of the Director of the National Park Service, 1929, 26; Horace M. Albright to the Director, October 11, 1928, Entry 17, RG79.

129. The resolution of the Ecological Society, and Albright's response to Dr. A. O. Weese, January 23, 1922, are found in Charles C. Adams, "Ecological Conditions in National Forests and in National Parks," Scientific Monthly 20 (June 1925), 570.

130. The park never fully implemented the Tule elk introduction as originally intended, but fenced in the elk for more than a decade before removing them. Runte, Yosemite, 130-134.

131. Lane to Mather, May 13, 1918; Work, "Statement of National Park Policy."

132. Albright to Wilbur, March 5, 1929, 17. On the continued introduction of fish, see for example Annual Report of the Director of the National Park Service (1929), 109; and Varley, "A History of Fish Stocking Activities in Yellowstone National Park," 8, 9, 16, 26.

133. Annual Report of the Director of the National Park Service (1929), 83, 90; Wright, Wildlife Research and Management, 91-92, 97-98, 107.

134. The director's quote is from Mather, "Ideals and Policy of the National Park Service," 79. See also "Yosemite National Park Fire Control Plan, Season of 1928," Entry 17, RG79; H. Duane Hampton, How the U.S. Cavalry Saved Our National Parks, 83, 100, 107; David M. Graber, "Coevolution of National Park Service Fire Policy and the Role of National Parks," in Proceedings —Symposium and Workshop on Wilderness Fire, Missoula, Montana, November 15-18, 1983, U.S. Forest Service General Technical Report, INT-182 (Ogden, Utah: Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, 1985), 345; and Stephen J. Pyne, Fire in America: A Cultural History of Wildland and Rural Fire (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982), 296-297.

135. Pyne, Fire in America, 111-112, 297-298. As an example of skepticism about light burning, biologist Charles C. Adams, who surveyed ecological conditions in several national parks, wrote in 1925 that "from every standpoint, 'light burning' should not be practiced in our national parks." Adams added that "probably no one yet knows enough, and has the financial backing necessary, to practice light burning successfully." Adams, "Ecological Conditions," 571-573. On Forest Service adherence to tradition in fire management, see Schiff, Fire and Water, 15-50.

136. Report of the Director of the National Park Service (1926), 17.

137. John D. Coffman, "John D. Coffman and His Contribution to Forestry in the National Park Service," typescript, n.d., 35, NPS-HC; Annual Report of the Director of the National Park Service (1929), 20; Pyne, Fire in America, 298.

138. Coffman, "John D. Coffman and His Contribution to Forestry," 34-35. See also Olsen, Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 36-43; and Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 194.

139. J. D. Coffman to Frank A. Kittredge, September 3, 1928, Entry 17, RG79; National Park Service, "A Forestry Policy for the National Parks," appended to Ansel F. Hall to the Director, October 29, 1928, Entry 17, RG79; Report of the Director of the National Park Service (1929), 20.

140. Ansel F. Hall, "Minutes of the Regional Forest Protection Board," San Francisco, February 16, 1928, typescript, Entry 17, RG79; Annual Report of the Director of the National Park Service (1929), 22; Dilsaver and Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees, 180.

141. Annual Report of the Director of the National Park Service (1925), 7; Annual Report of the Director of the National Park Service (1926), 16, 41.

142. Annual Report of the Director of the National Park Service (1923), 26.

143. Annual Report of the Director of the National Park Service (1925), 7; Annual Report of the Director of the National Park Service (1926), 16, 41.

144. National Park Service, "A Forestry Policy for the National Parks," 1931, typescript, 7, Entry 18, RG79.

145. Ansel F. Hall, "Minutes of Meeting of the Regional Forest Protection Board, San Francisco, California," February 16, 1928, Entry 17, RG79.

146. Lane to Mather, May 13, 1918. See also Tolson, Laws Relating to the National Park Service (1933), 10-11.

147. Mather, "Ideals and Policy of the National Park Service," 83; Ise, National Park Policy, 302-307; Shankland, Steve Mather, 202; Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 59-60, 73-74.

148. Adams, "Ecological Conditions," 574, 585, 569; Dilsaver and Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees, 146-147.

149. The Ecological Society's resolution and the Park Service's response are found in Adams, "Ecological Conditions," 569-570. The association's statement is in "A Resolution on the National Parks Policy of the United States," Science 58 (January 29, 1926), 115. See also Wright, Wildlife Research and Management, 37.

150. Runte, "Joseph Grinnell and Yosemite," 172-181.

151. Adams, "Ecological Conditions," 563, 584.

152. Adams, "Ecological Conditions," 568.

153. Harold C. Bryant and Wallace W. Attwood, Research and Education in the National Parks (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1932), 48-50; Frank C. Brockman, "Park Naturalists and the Evolution of National Park Service Interpretation through World War II," Journal of Forest History 22 (January 1978), 31-32, 35, 37; Mackintosh, Interpretation in the National Park Service, 11-14. See also National Park Conference, 8th, 1925, "Minutes," 38-41; and Polly Welts Kaufman, "Challenging Tradition: Pioneer Women Naturalists in the National Park Service," Forest and Conservation History 34 (January 1990), 4-16.

154. Ben H. Thompson, "George Melendez Wright: A Biographical Sketch," George Wright Forum 7, no. 2 (1990), 3.

155. Albright to the Director, November 8, 1928.

156. Mather, "Ideals and Policy of the National Park Service," 80, 84.

157. These differing concepts are discussed in Samuel P. Hays, Conservation and the Gospel of Efficiency: The Progressive Conservation Movement, 1890-1920 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1959), 189-198; and Roderick Nash, Wilderness and the American Mind (1967; 3rd ed., New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982), 129, 135-139, 180-181.

158. Lane to Mather, May 13, 1918.

159. The inscription is quoted in Shankland, Steve Mather, 291. Additional castings of this plaque were placed in many other units of the national park system in 1991 to commemorate the Park Service's seventy-fifth anniversary.

160. Adams, "Ecological Conditions," 567-568, 589-590.

Chapter 4. The Rise and Decline of Ecological Attitudes

1. Transfer of the National Park Service's wildlife biologists to the Biological Survey began in early December 1939 and was made official on January 1, 1940. Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1940 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1940), 165; National Park Service, "National Parks: A Review of the Year," American Planning and Civic Annual (1940), 34. The Bureau of Biological Survey had just been transferred from the Department of Agriculture to the Department of the Interior. In 1940 the survey would be merged with the Bureau of Fisheries to become the Fish and Wildlife Service, now known as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

2. Horace M. Albright, "The Everlasting Wilderness," Saturday Evening Post 201 (September 29, 1928), 28. Giving road mileage figures lower than earlier calculations, Albright perhaps did not count the more primitive roads.

3. Ben H. Thompson to Arno B. Cammerer, February 23, 1934, George M. Wright files, MVZ-UC. This statement was later included verbatim in George Wright and Ben Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks of the United States, Fauna Series no. 2 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1935), 123-124.

4. Donald C. Swain, Wilderness Defender (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970), 192; and Swain, "The National Park Service and the New Deal, 1933-1940," Pacific Historical Review 41 (August 1972), 313, 316.

5. On his death, Mather left Albright and Cammerer $25,000 each, partly because he hoped the money would ensure their independence of thought as Park Service leaders. Swain, Wilderness Defender, 193. In "The National Park Service and the New Deal" (p. 316), Swain depicts Cammerer as a "relatively weak director," whom Secretary Ickes did not care for. In contrast to this perception, Cammerer adroitly used his talented staff to promote Park Service programs under the New Deal. George Collins, a longtime, highly placed Park Service employee, recalled that Cammerer "used Mr. Demaray and Mr. Wirth, Ben Thompson, Hillory Tolson and others to his highest and best advantage, and to theirs as well. The service had a growing reputation of efficiency and ability. I think you have to credit [Cammerer] a lot for that." George L. Collins, "The Art and Politics of Park Planning and Preservation," interviews by Ann Lage, 1978 and 1979, Regional Oral History Office, University of California, typescript, 86, NPS-HC. Ickes' disregard for Cammerer is discussed in Thomas H. Watkins, Righteous Pilgrim: The Life and Times of Harold Ickes, 1874-1952 (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1990), 552-555.

6. Arthur E. Demaray to Horace M. Albright, September 21, 1928, Entry 17, RG79; Joseph Dixon to H. C. Bryant, March 7, 1929, Harold C. Bryant files, MVZ-UC; Albright to the Director, October 11, 1928, Entry 17, RG79. In his October 11 memorandum, Albright mentions Wright's belief that the survey should be conducted under Park Service direction. A stronger statement— that Wright was "very anxious" that it be a Park Service project—is found in Joseph Dixon to Horace M. Albright, March 7, 1929, Horace M. Albright files, MVZ-UC.

7. Horace M. Albright to Ray Lyman Wilbur, March 5, 1929, Entry 6, RG79; Ansel F. Hall to the Director, October 17, 1928, Entry 17, RG79; and Ansel F. Hall to Horace M. Albright, November 23, 1928, Entry 17, RG79. Albright had earlier stated to Mather that two important benefits from the survey would be "widening the scope of our educational work . . . and [securing] material for the development of our museums and general educational activities." Albright to the Director, October 11, 1928. Negotiations on the survey were stalled briefly in the winter of 1929 owing to the proposal's being "unduly emphasized as a special achievement" of the Education Division. The division apparently sought too much credit. Dixon to Albright, March 7, 1929.

8. Ben H. Thompson, "George M. Wright, 1904-1936," George Wright Forum (Summer 1981), 1-2; Horace M. Albright to the Director, October 11, 1928; Lowell Sumner, "Biological Research and Management in the National Park Service: A History," George Wright Forum (Autumn 1983), 6-7; George M. Wright to Joseph Dixon, April 26, 1926, George M. Wright files, MVZ-UC.

9. Joseph Grinnell and Tracy Irwin Storer, "The Interrelations of Living Things," in Animal Life in the Yosemite (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1924), 38-39. On Grinnell's influence on Wright, Park Service naturalist Carl P. Russell commented in 1939 that "because of the preparation that [Grinnell] gave George Wright and through the warm friendship that existed between Dr. Grinnell and Mr. Wright, we have a Wildlife Division and a defined wildlife policy." Carl P. Russell to E. Raymond Hall, November 17, 1939, Carl P. Russell files, MVZ-UC. Grinnell's career and his influence on the ideas of Wright and other Park Service biologists are discussed in Alfred Runte, "Joseph Grinnell and Yosemite: Rediscovering the Legacy of a California Conservationist," California History 69 (Summer 1990), 173-181.

10. Thomas R. Dunlap, Saving America's Wildlife (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988), 70-74; Susan L. Flader, Thinking Like a Mountain: Aldo Leopold and the Evolution of an Ecological Attitude toward Deer, Wolves, and Forests (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1978), 28-33; and Donald Worster, Nature's Economy (1985; 2nd ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 214-219.

11. George M. Wright, Joseph S. Dixon, and Ben H. Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks of the United States: A Preliminary Survey of Faunal Relations in National Parks, Contributions of Wildlife Survey, Fauna Series no. 1 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1933), 4, 21.

12. Wright, Dixon, and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1933), 4-5, 19-22.

13. Wright, Dixon, and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1933), 23-28, 33-36, 71.

14. Wright, Dixon, and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1933), 37-38, 44, 94, 132. For additional mention of the need to expand boundaries, see 114, 121, 126, and 131.

15. Wright, Dixon, and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1933), 10.

16. Wright, Dixon, and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1933), 147-148.

17. Wright's quote is found in National Park Service, "Policy on Predators and Notes on Predators," 1939, various pagination, Central Classified File, RG79.

18. Horace M. Albright, "The National Park Service's Policy on Predatory Mammals, Journal of Mammalogy 12 (May 1931), 185-186; Horace M. Albright, "Game Conditions in Western National Parks," November 23, 1932, typescript, YELL; Horace M. Albright, "Research in the National Parks," Scientific Monthly (June 1933), 489.

19. Wright, Dixon, and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1933), 5.

20. Sumner, "Biological Research and Management," 6, 10; Arno B. Cammerer, Office Order no. 226, March 21, 1934, Entry 35, RG79. At this time a branch was administratively higher than a division and usually included several divisions. Harold Bryant had come into the Service as a result of his efforts to promote education in the national parks and his interest in training park naturalists.

21. Horace M. Albright to Wild Life Survey, n.d. (ca. early 1932), Entry 35, RG79; Horace M. Albright, Office Order no. 234 to Superintendents and Custodians, February 29, 1932, Central Classified File, RG79; Cammerer, Office Order no. 226.

22. Victor H. Cahalane, Memorandum on General Procedure of the Wildlife Division, Branch of Research and Education, National Park Service, July 28, 1936, 6-7, Research Division Files, YELL.

23. Horace M. Albright, as told to Robert Cahn, The Birth of the National Park Service: The Founding Years, 1913-1933 (Salt Lake City: Howe Brothers, 1985), 289; John Ise, Our National Park Policy: A Critical History (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1961), 359-363. A detailed history of the Service's involvement with the CCC is found in John C. Paige, The Civilian Conservation Corps and the National Park Service, 1933-1942 (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1985).

24. Complaints that CCC personnel were molesting wildlife and vandalizing park resources are found in, for example, Paul McG. Miller, Memorandum to be Posted on Bulletin Board, June 1, 1935, Entry 34, RG79; and A. E. Demaray to Park Superintendents and Custodians, May 4, 1936, Central Classified File, RG79. In late 1934, biologist Charles J. Spiker complained to Wright that the "havoc wrought" by the crews in Acadia National Park surpassed that in any other park in the eastern United States. The destruction of forests to allow for development at the top of Cadillac Mountain was only part of the "mutilation" of Acadia that concerned Spiker. Charles J. Spiker to Chief of the Wildlife Division, November 13, 1934, Entry 34, RG79.

25. Albright's comment that the superintendents might seek advice from the Wildlife Division was only a request. He wrote to the superintendents, "Should technical advice be desirable I hope you will call upon the Wild Life Division." Horace M. Albright, Memorandum for Field Officers, June 7, 1933, Harold C. Bryant files, MVZ-UC.

26. Sumner, "Biological Research and Management," 9.

27. Sumner, "Biological Research and Management," 9.

28. The estimate is found in Harlan D. Unrau and G. Frank Willis, Administrative History: Expansion of the National Park Service in the 1930s (Denver: National Park Service, 1983), 75.

29. George M. Wright to the Director, February 28, 1934, Central Classified File, RG79.

30. George M. Wright, Memorandum for the Director, December 13, 1935, Central Classified File, RG79.

31. E. Lowell Sumner, "Special Report on the Sixth Enrollment Period Program Posed for Death Valley National Monument," September 10, 1935, Entry 34, RG79. Titus Canyon almost certainly did not become a research reserve. It was not mentioned in a list of such reserves compiled in 1942; see Charles Kendeigh, "Research Areas in the National Parks," Ecology 23 (January 1942), 236-238. And the natural resource management office at Death Valley has no record that the canyon ever received this designation. Today the improved and maintained dirt road up Titus Canyon is probably the most popular and heavily traveled four-wheel-drive road in the park. But a current bighorn management plan calls for closing the Titus Canyon Road during the hot season so that bighorn will have undisturbed access to the spring. Personal communication with Tim Coonan, natural resource management specialist, September 30, 1991, and January 6, 1993.

32. Victor Cahalane to A. E. Demaray, September 14, 1935, Entry 34, RG79. Examples of nonconcurrence are Victor Cahalane, Memorandum for Mr. Demaray, September 14, 1935, Entry 34, RG79, relating to CCC projects in Glacier; and Cahalane, Memorandum for Mr. Demaray, September 23, 1935, Entry 34, RG79, relating to projects in Grand Canyon.

33. M. R. Tillotson to the Director, October 18, 1935, Entry 34, RG79; and Victor H. Cahalane to A. E. Demaray, September 23, 1935, Entry 34, RG79. Since plans for the trail might have been drawn up for some time (or the project could have been an afterthought to building the trail, a kind of incremental development), it is possible that the biologists had no opportunity for an earlier review.

34. Lowell Sumner to George Wright, September 12, 1935, Entry 34, RG79.

35. R. L. McKown to Thomas C. Vint, October 8, 1935, Entry 34, RG79.

36. E. Lowell Sumner to R. L. McKown, October 10, 1935, Entry 34, RG79.

37. E. Lowell Sumner, "Special Report on a Wildlife Study of the High Sierra in Sequoia and Yosemite National Parks and Adjacent Territory," October 9, 1936, YOSE. The Sierra Club quote is found in Michael P. Cohen, The History of the Sierra Club, 1892-1970 (San Francisco: Sierra Club Books, 1988), 86.

38. W. J. Liddle, "Final Construction Report on the Grading of Section A-1 of the Tioga Road, Yosemite Park Project 4-A1, Grading, Yosemite National Park, Mariposa and Tuolumne Counties, California," May 6, 1937, typescript, YOSE. The idea of the Tioga Road as a convenient means of crossing the mountains had also received support from a special executive committee of the Sierra Club, which studied the proposal in 1934. The committee reported that "the function of the Tioga Road must be not only to enable travelers to reach the Tuolumne Meadows and the eastern portion of the park readily and with comfort, but also to care for those who desire to use this highway as a trans-Sierra road." See "Relocation of Tioga Road: Report of the Executive Committee of the Sierra Club on the Proposed Relocation of the Tioga Road, Yosemite National Park," Sierra Club Bulletin 19, no. 3 (1934), 88.

39. E. Lowell Sumner to Joseph Grinnell, February 3, 1938, E. Lowell Sumner file, MVZUC.

40. E. Lowell Sumner, Jr., "Losing the Wilderness Which We Set Out to Preserve," 1938, typescript, NPS-HC.

41. Arno B. Cammerer, "Standards and Policies in National Parks," American Planning and Civic Annual (1936), 13-20.

42. Thomas C. Vint, "Wilderness Areas: Development of National Parks for Conservation," American Planning and Civic Annual (1938), 70.

43. Vint, "Wilderness Areas," 70, 71.

44. Related to this issue are Vint's earlier comments about the Yosemite concessionaire's proposal for a "ropeway" (or tram) to be built to take visitors from the valley floor to Glacier Point. An extended debate in the early 1930s focused mainly on how much the ropeway would intrude on park scenery, rather than on its potential impact on natural resources per se. Vint summed up his comments on the ropeway by noting the acceptability of roads as an alternative: "Roads have precedents in national parks while ropeways do not." Roads would "not be a new type of development. We know something of the effect of roads and can predict or visualize the result more easily." To Vint, the ropeway was a mechanical intrusion, different from that generally accepted in national parks. Given Vint's and the park superintendent's opposition to the ropeway proposal, a road was built, but not a ropeway. See Thomas C. Vint to the Director, November 21, 1930, Entry 17, RG79. Superintendent G. C. Thomson's objections to the ropeway are found in Thomson to the Director, November 17, 1930, Entry 17, RG79.

45. Lary M. Dilsaver and William C. Tweed, in Challenge of the Big Trees: A Resource History of Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks (Three Rivers, California: Sequoia Natural History Association, 1990), 157-196, discuss Superintendent White's efforts to protect Sequoia from certain kinds of development, including backcountry roads.

46. A. E. Demaray, memorandum to the Secretary of the Interior, n.d. (ca. spring 1935), Entry 34, RG79.

47. See for example the extended discussion of road proposals for Mt. McKinley National Park during the 1930s, in William E. Brown, A History of the Denali-Mount McKinley Region, Alaska (Santa Fe: National Park Service, 1991), 171-184, 194-196. Brown writes (p. 172) that "responding to the drumbeat of development and tourism boomers . . . Park Service policymakers and planners envisioned a conventional Stateside park with a lodge at Wonder Lake, more campgrounds, and an upgraded road to accommodate independent auto-borne visitors."

48. National Park Service, "Proceedings," First Park Naturalists' Training Conference, Berkeley, California, November 1-30, 1929, typescript, 152, NPS-HC; Sumner, "Biological Research and Management," 11.

49. Victor H. Cahalane, "Activities of the National Park Service in Wildlife Conservation," n.d., ca. 1935, typescript, Central Classified File, RG79; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1936 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1936), 123.

50. The most thorough reports continued the Fauna series with Nos. 3 and 4. Fauna No. 5 was begun in 1939 and published in 1944. Sumner, "Biological Research and Management," 11; Joseph S. Dixon, Birds and Mammals of Mount McKinley National Park, Fauna Series no. 3 (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1938); Adolph Murie, Ecology of the Coyote in the Yellowstone, Fauna Series no. 4 (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1940); Adolph Murie, The Wolves of Mount McKinley, Fauna Series no. 5 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1944).

51. Harold C. Bryant, "A Nature Preserve for Yosemite," Yosemite Nature Notes 6 (June 30, 1927), 46-48. John Merriam's interest in research reserves is found in Merriam to Members of the Committee on Educational Problems in National Parks, February 12, 1930, with attachments, Entry 17, RG79.

52. National Park Service, "Proceedings," First Park Naturalists' Training Conference, 169, 171-174. Albright's policy on research reserves is stated in Arno B. Cammerer to All Superintendents and Custodians, May 27, 1931, with attachment, Research Reserves file, YOSE. The Fauna No. 1 quote is in Wright, Dixon, and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1933), 147.

53. Designations such as primitive, primeval, wilderness, virgin, and roadless were at times used in association with the reserves. See for instance Director to Wild Life Survey, March 4, 1932, Entry 35, RG79; and Arno B. Cammerer, "Maintenance of the Primeval in National Parks," ca. 1934, typescript, NPS-HC.

54. George M. Wright to the Director, March 14, 1932, Entry 35, RG79.

55. Director to Wild Life Survey, March 4, 1932; George M. Wright, "Research Areas," 1933, typescript, Entry 34, RG79; Kendeigh, "Research Areas in the National Parks," 236-238.

56. Wright to the Director, March 14, 1932; Wright, "Research Areas"; Thompson to Cammerer, February 23, 1934; and U.S. National Park Service, Wild Life Division, "Report for February, 1934," Classified File, RG79. Comments on buffer zones for the national parks are also found in Wright and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1935), 109.

57. Victor H. Cahalane to George M. Wright, September 7, 1935, Entry 34, RG79.

58. H. W. Jennison, Memorandum for Superintendent J. R. Eakin, July 21, 1936, Balds file, GRSM.

59. J. R. Eakin to the Director, July 27, 1936, Balds file, GRSM; Frank E. Mattson, Memo for Mr. Eakin, July 27, 1936, Balds file, GRSM.

60. H. W. Jennison, Memorandum for Superintendent J. R. Eakin, July 21, 1936, Balds file, GRSM; Eakin to the Director, July 27, 1936.

61. A. E. Demaray to J. R. Eakin, September 4, 1936, Balds file, GRSM.

62. The Park Service itself would acknowledge in 1963 that the reserves were "dormant" and that many of the areas had "remained 'on the shelf,' awaiting a more favorable period for their utilization." This statement came at the very time Park Service leaders were withholding genuine support for the proposed Wilderness Act because they did not want restrictions placed on their administrative discretion to control national park backcountry. Sumner, "Biological Research and Management," 10-11. In his history of wildlife management, R. Gerald Wright states that there is "no evidence" that the reserves were ever used as intended. Wright, Wildlife Research and Management in the National Parks (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1992), 19-20. The 1963 statement is found in Conrad L. Wirth, Memorandum to All Field Offices, April 15, 1963, NPS-HC.

63. Wright to the Director, March 14, 1932. Keith R. Langdon, a natural resource management specialist in Great Smoky Mountains National Park, commented on the considerable value Andrews Bald and other research reserves could have had for today's efforts to understand and manage the park's natural resources. If the park had maintained the reserves as originally intended, he stated, we would be "in the cat bird's seat." Personal communication with Keith R. Langdon, July 18, 1991.

64. Wright, Dixon, and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1933), 4, 147-148.

65. Wildlife Division to the Director of the National Park Service, "Report upon Winter Range of the Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd and a Suggested Program for Its Restoration," February 28, 1934, reprinted in Wright and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1935), 85; Douglas B. Houston, The Northern Yellowstone Elk: Ecology and Management (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1982), 24-25. Don Despain et al., Wildlife in Transition: Man and Nature on Yellowstone's Northern Range (Boulder, Colorado: Roberts Rinehart, 1986), 22-24. See also Arno B. Cammerer to Joseph Grinnell, December 10, 1934, with attachment, Arno B. Cammerer files, MVZ-UC; and Victor H. Cahalane, "Wildlife Surpluses in the National Parks," in Transactions of the Sixth North American Wildlife Conference (Washington, D.C.: American Wildlife Institute, 1941), 357-358. Douglas Houston's detailed analysis of the management of the park's northern elk herd, The Northern Yellowstone Elk, 12-15, contradicts the idea that a population crash occurred in 1917-20.

66. Dunlap, Saving America's Wildlife, 69; Wright and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1935), 85-86.

67. George M. Wright to H. E. Anthony, March 15, 1935, George M. Wright files, MVZ-UC. Victor Cahalane later indicated that outside support for the reduction program existed, but that there was "constant protest by a few local organizations." He was not specific, however, about which organizations or individuals supported or opposed reduction. Victor H. Cahalane, "Elk Management and Herd Reduction—Yellowstone National Park," Transactions of the Eighth North American Wildlife Conference (Washington, D.C.: American Wildlife Institute, 1943), 95-97. 68. Olaus J. Murie to Ben H. Thompson, December 27, 1934, Entry 7, RG79; Adolph Murie

to Victor H. Cahalane, July 26, 1936, YELL.

69. Wright, Dixon, and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1933), 118. Albright mentions securing private funds for Rush's research in Horace M. Albright to the Director, October 18, 1937, Central Classified File, RG79.

70. Wildlife Division to the Director, "Report upon Winter Range of the Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd," 85-86; Arno B. Cammerer, Memorandum for Assistant Secretary Walters, November 21, 1933, Central Classified File, RG79. The Park Service also saw overgrazing as a "landscape problem," and Fauna No. 2 advocated close cooperation between the wildlife biologists and landscape architects to address this concern. Wright, Dixon, and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1933), 109-120. It does not appear that the landscape architects became much involved.

71. Joseph Grinnell to Arno B. Cammerer, December 26, 1934, Arno B. Cammerer files, MVZ-UC. Grinnell thus voiced elk management policies much like those the Service would put into effect in the late 1960s, more than three decades after the reduction program had begun.

72. Cammerer to Grinnell, December 10, 1934. A list of annual elk "removals" from 1923 to 1979, including those taken by hunters near the park, is in Houston, Northern Yellowstone Elk, 16-17.

73. Wright to Anthony, March 15, 1935; Murie to Cahalane, July 26, 1936; Rudolph L. Grimm, "Northern Yellowstone Winter Range Studies," 1938, typescript, 28-29, YELL. Although convinced that the range was still overgrazed, Grimm perceived that some "range recovery" had occurred, particularly in the two years just before he wrote his report. However, he credited "favorable climatic conditions" (the end of the drought), rather than the elk reduction program, as the "agency most responsible for the improvement of the range plant cover" (p. 27).

74. National Park Service, Wildlife Conditions in National Parks, 1939, Conservation Bulletin no. 3, Washington, D.C., 1939, 8. Other parks that eventually initiated limited control programs included Yosemite and Sequoia. Wright, Wildlife Research and Management, 77-78. Reduction of the elk population is discussed in Karl Hess, Jr., Rocky Times in Rocky Mountain National Park (Niwot, Colorado: University Press of Colorado, 1993), 15-19.

75. Joseph Grinnell to Arno B. Cammerer, January 23, 1939, Arno B. Cammerer files, MVZUC.

76. Also, both Fauna No. 1 and Fauna No. 2 recommended reestablishing bison in Glacier National Park, in cooperation with local Indian tribes. Wright, Dixon, and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1933), 117, 147; and Wright and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1935), 59-60.

77. Harlow B. Mills to Ben Thompson, June 21, 1935, Entry 34, RG79; Skinner, "History of the Bison in Yellowstone Park." For figures on carrying capacity, see Curtis K. Skinner et al., "History of the Bison in Yellowstone Park" [with supplements], 1952, typescript, various pagination, YELL; M. R. Daum to Theodore C. Joslin, January 9, 1929, YELL; and Margaret Mary Meagher, The Bison of Yellowstone National Park, National Park Service Scientific Monograph Series no. 1 (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1973), 32.

78. Wright and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1935), 59.

79. Specifically regarding elk, Wright noted the situation in Mount Rainier, where nonnative elk from Yellowstone had been transplanted. As a result, in his opinion, it would be "impossible ever to realize the restoration of the native Roosevelt elk to the park." George M. Wright to Arno B. Cammerer, January 18, 1935, Central Classified File, RG79.

80. Edmund B. Rogers to the Director, December 10, 1937, YELL; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1939 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1939), 280-281; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1940), 180-181; Arno B. Cammerer to the Secretary of the Interior, February 6, 1936, YELL. Tolson's brother, Hillory, was a member of the Park Service directorate.

81. Palmer H. Boeger, Oklahoma Oasis: From Platt National Park to Chickasaw National Recreation Area (Muskogee, Oklahoma: Western Heritage Books, 1987), 107, 111-112, 135-137; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1935 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1935), 198; Ise, National Park Policy, 584.

82. Horace M. Albright, "Our National Parks as Wild Life Sanctuaries," American Forests and Forest Life 35 (August 1929), 507.

83. George M. Wright to the Director, December 19, 1931, Entry 35, RG79.

84. Joseph Grinnell to Arno B. Cammerer, November 9, 1933, Arno B. Cammerer files, MVZ-UC.

85. Skinner, "History of the Bison in Yellowstone Park"; Rudolph L. Grimm, "Report on Antelope Creek Buffalo Pasture" (1937), typescript, YELL.

86. In 1945 Victor Cahalane recalled that the Park Service "practiced very limited control of wolves and coyotes in our Alaska areas from about 1932 to 1939 or 1940." Victor H. Cahalane to Mr. Drury, March 14, 1945, Entry 7, RG79. See also Brown, A History of the Denali-Mount McKinley Region, 198.

87. National Park Service, "Policy on Predators and Notes on Predators" (1939), typescript, various pagination, Central Classified File 715, RG79.

88. Albright, "The National Park Service's Policy on Predatory Mammals," 185.

89. National Park Service, "Policy on Predators and Notes on Predators"; Wright, Dixon, and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1933), 147.

90. The quote is from National Park Service, "Policy on Predators and Notes on Predators." Wright and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1935), 71.

91. Curtis K. Skinner to Dr. Mills, March 12, 1935, YELL.

92. Frank W. Childs, "Report on the Present Status of Wildlife Management in Yellowstone National Park with Suggested Recommendations for Future Treatment," April 19, 1935, YELL. There was also interest among Yellowstone's staff in restoring some of the park's extirpated species. Naturalist Assistant Harlow B. Mills wrote to Ben Thompson in 1935: "As a policy I can see no great obstacle in the way of our, at least, attempting the introduction of cougar and wolves into the Park. They were a vital part of the picture at one time, a picture which can never be the same in the Park in their absence. This should be done, I realize, with considerable forethought and care, but I believe that it should be done, nevertheless." Harlow B. Mills to Ben Thompson, June 21, 1935, Entry 34, RG79. This approach was in accord with the recommendations of Fauna No. 1 that "any native species which has been exterminated from the park area shall be brought back if this can be done." See Wright, Dixon, and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1933), 148.

93. Murie, Ecology of the Coyote, 16; Sumner, "Biological Research and Management," 14.

94. C. A. Henderson to David Canfield, November 21, 1935; and David Canfield to C. A. Henderson, November 30, 1935, Entry 34, RG79. Victor H. Cahalane, "Evolution of Predator Control Policy in the National Parks," Journal of Wildlife Management 3 (July 1939), 236.

95. David Madsen, Memorandum for the Director, May 20, 1939, Entry 36, RG79. See also Susan R. Shrepfer, The Fight to Save the Redwoods: A History of Environmental Reform (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1983), 61-63.

96. Joseph Grinnell to Arno B. Cammerer, April 10, 1939, Central Classified File, RG79.

97. Horace M. Albright to the Director, National Park Service, October 18, 1937, Central Classified Files, RG79.

98. Murie, Ecology of the Coyote, 146-148.

99. Thomas Dunlap, in Saving America's Wildlife, 75, indicates that some Park Service officials "wanted to fire" Murie. Alston Chase, in Playing God in Yellowstone: The Destruction of America's First National Park (Boston: Atlantic Monthly Press, 1986), 126-128, describes the "fierce Park Service resistance" that Murie faced during the coyote controversy. Lowell Sumner, in "Biological Research and Management," 15, recalled that, following the coyote study, "Murie's findings, and his personal concepts of ecological management of park resources, continued to be unpopular in various administrative circles." Given that Murie was quickly assigned to a similar study of wolves in Mt. McKinley National Park, however, it is obvious that he had support in high places, very likely from Director Cammerer himself.

100. Horace M. Albright to A. B. Cammerer, January 11, 1939, Central Classified Files, RG79; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1939), 282.

101. Murie, Wolves of Mount McKinley, xiii-xv; Albright to Cammerer, January 11, 1939. Murie's wolf study is discussed in Brown, A History of the Denali-Mount McKinley Region," 198.

102. Madsen to the Director, May 20, 1939.

103. John D. Varley, "Record of Egg Shipments from Yellowstone Fishes, 1914-1955," Yellowstone National Park Information Paper no. 36, May 1979, YELL.

104. David H. Madsen, "Report on Fish Cultural Activities," April 5, 1935, Central Classified File, RG79; Sumner, "Biological Research and Management," 9.

105. Wright, Dixon, and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1933), 63.

106. David H. Madsen to Arno B. Cammerer, October 6, 1933, Central Classified File, RG79; David H. Madsen, "A National Park Service Fish Policy," n.d., ca. early 1930s, typescript, Entry 36, RG79; and Madsen, "Outline of a General Policy of Handling the Fish Problem in the National Parks," May 10, 1932, typescript, Central Classified File, RG79. The records do not indicate whether Madsen was first detailed to the Park Service in 1928 or in the early 1930s.

107. Wright, Dixon, and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1933), 148, 63.

108. Arno B. Cammerer, Office Order no. 323, April 13, 1936, Entry 35, RG79.

109. Cammerer, Office Order no. 323, April 13, 1936; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1936), 124.

110. John D. Varley, "A History of Fish Stocking Activities in Yellowstone National Park between 1881-1980," Yellowstone National Park Information Paper no. 35, January 1, 1981, typescript, 9, 13, 17, 19, 21, 26, 52-53, YELL. The stocking of Mammoth Beaver Ponds took place in 1936, very likely after the park had received the new fish policy issued by Cammerer in mid-April of that year. In the case of McBride Lake, also in the Yellowstone drainage, exotic rainbow trout were introduced in 1936, where previously only native cutthroat trout had existed. Varley, "History of Fish Stocking," 17.

111. Varley, "Record of Egg Shipments"; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior for the Year Ending June 30, 1937 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1937), 44. As another example of fish production and shipment during the 1930s, the collection of approximately sixty million trout eggs in one year from several unspecified national parks, with about half of them being shipped to various states, is mentioned by Cammerer in Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1936), 124.

112. Carl P. Russell, "Opportunities of the Wildlife Technician in National Parks," paper presented at the North American Wildlife Federation conference, St. Louis, Missouri, March 1, 1937, typescript, NPS-HC. Victor H. Cahalane, "Thoughts on National Park Service-Bureau of Fisheries Agreement," draft, August 4, 1939, Entry 36, RG79. Cahalane accepted that the Service would continue its dependency on other agencies for fish culture work. And Director Cammerer had reported in 1937, the year after the new fish policy was issued, that cooperation was closer "than ever before" between the Service and the Bureau of Fisheries and state game departments. It became even closer in 1940, with the transfer of the biologists to the Bureau of Biological Survey and the survey's subsequent merger with the Bureau of Fisheries. Cahalane, "Thoughts on National Park Service-Bureau of Fisheries Agreement"; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1937), 44.

113. Paige, The Civilian Conservation Corps, appendix A, 162. The National Park Service Act authorized the Service to "sell or dispose of timber in those cases where . . . the cutting of such timber is required in order to control the attacks of insects or diseases or otherwise conserve the scenery." Hillory A. Tolson, Laws Relating to the National Park Service, the National Parks and Monuments (Washington, D.C.: Department of the Interior, 1933), 10.

114. Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1933), 157. Some national park areas were particularly affected by prefire development. On the north rim of the Grand Canyon, fire protection preparations by the CCC included improvement of existing roads and construction of primitive fire-access roads and trails, lookout towers, warehouses, a fire cache, maintenance shops, residences, telephone lines, and water ponds. Stephen J. Pyne, Fire in America: A Cultural History of Wildland and Rural Fire (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982), 300.

115. John D. Coffman, "John D. Coffman and His Contribution to Forestry in the National Park Service," n.d., typescript, 36-39, NPS-HC. Because of the CCC's heavy emphasis on forestry, Coffman was also given the huge responsibility of overseeing CCC operations within the national parks. In 1936 the director consolidated oversight of these operations with the Service's state parks assistance program (also funded by the CCC). This expanded office, combining all CCC-related national and state park work, was supervised by Assistant Director Conrad Wirth. Coffman was left free to concentrate on directing forestry management in the parks, which continued to rely on CCC manpower and money. See Coffman, "John D. Coffman and His Contribution to Forestry," 44; Conrad L. Wirth, Park, Politics, and the People (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1980), 118; and Paige, The Civilian Conservation Corps, 39-40, 48, 115.

116. "A Forestry Policy for the National Parks," approved by Horace M. Albright, May 6, 1931, typescript, Entry 18, RG79.

117. Wright, Dixon, and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1933), 33.

118. U.S. Office of National Parks, Buildings and Reservations, "Instructions for Superintendents of Eastern National Park ECW Camps and CW Projects Concerning Roadside Clean-up, Fire Hazard Reduction, Brush Disposal," chapter 9, 3, supplement no. 7 to Forest Truck Trail Handbook (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Forest Service, 1935); George M. Wright to the Director, February 28, 1934, Central Classified File, RG79.

119. Adolph Murie, Memorandum for Ben H. Thompson, August 2, 1935, Entry 34, RG79.

120. L. F. Cook, Memorandum for the Chief Forester, August 28, 1935, Entry 34, RG79.

121. L. F. Cook, Memorandum for the Chief Forester, August 28, 1935, Entry 34, RG79. Riley McClelland, correspondence with the author, September 2, 1993.

122. Murie to Thompson, August 2, 1935; Cook to Chief Forester, August 28, 1935. In Cammerer's 1939 annual report, the director discusses the fire prevention and fire protection work undertaken with CCC funds and enrollees. Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1939), 272-275.

123. Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior for the Year Ending June 30, 1933 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1933), 180-181.

124. George M. Wright to Arno B. Cammerer, August 1, 1935, Entry 35, RG79; Victor H. Cahalane to A. E. Demaray, September 23, 1935, Entry 34, RG79. For comments on CCC involvement in insect and disease control, see Paige, The Civilian Conservation Corps, 101-103.

125. Adolph Murie to George M. Wright, March 26, 1935, Entry 34, RG79. Similar statements regarding insect control are found in Harlow B. Mills to Ben Thompson, June 21, 1935.

126. Cook to Chief Forester, August 28, 1935; and Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1939), 272-274. For similar comments made earlier by Cammerer, see Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1937), 42-43.

127. Sumner, "Biological Research and Management," 13.

128. Russ Olsen, Administrative History: Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 1917 to 1985 (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1985), 63. Under Coffman the Park Service also provided considerable training in forest protection, including techniques in fire, insect, and disease control. In many parks, rangers, park naturalists, and maintenance staffs all received this training. John W. Henneberger, "To Protect and Preserve: A History of the National Park Ranger," 1965, typescript, copy courtesy of the author, 307.

129. Tom Ela, interview with the author, January 26, 1989; Arthur Wilcox, interview with the author, March 17, 1992.

130. As an example of the growing strength of the forestry programs, a list of 137 professionally trained foresters in the National Park Service by 1952 shows most of them in key positions. Robert N. McIntyre, "A Brief History of Forestry in the National Park Service," March 1952, typescript, appendix A, NPS-HC.

131. The quote is from National Park Service, "Growth of the National Park Service under Director Cammerer," 1936, typescript, 1, Entry 18, RG79. See also Unrau and Willis, Expansion of the National Park Service, for a detailed account of Park Service growth and expansion in the 1930s.

132. Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 73-74. See also Paige, The Civilian Conservation Corps, 38-39; and Unrau and Willis, Expansion of the National Park Service, 77. Arno B. Cammerer, "History and Growth—the National Park Service" (1939), typescript, 4, NPS-HC.

133. Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 75-76, 88; Olsen, Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 52-53.

134. The Park Service's CCC programs are discussed in Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 94-127; and Ise, Our National Park Policy, 363-364.

135. National Park Service, "Growth of the National Park Service," 5. For discussion of the survey, see Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 172-173; and Ise, Our National Park Policy, 364.

136. A 1936 internal report stated that the Service had "sponsored" the legislation. National Park Service, "Growth of the National Park Service under Director Cammerer," 5. See also Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1935), 183. Conrad Wirth mentions in his autobiography that the act (reprinted in the book) was passed "at the request of the National Park Service through the Department of the Interior." Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 166-168; Unrau and Willis, Expansion of the National Park Service, 109-120.

137. National Park Service, A Study of the Park and Recreation Problem of the United States (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1941), see for example 122-132; Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 150, 192-193. In 1937 Cape Hatteras National Seashore, on the North Carolina coast, became the first of these areas to come into the national park system. Others followed, mainly in the 1960s and 1970s. See Barry Mackintosh, The National Parks: Shaping the System (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1991), 81-84.

138. Unrau and Willis, Expansion of the National Park Service, 144-145. The quote is from Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1937), 55.

139. The recreational demonstration areas are discussed in Unrau and Willis, Expansion of the National Park Service, 129-143; Paige, The Civilian Conservation Corps, 117-118; and Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 176-190. Wirth's promotion of the program is also discussed in Herbert Evison and Newton Bishop Drury, "The National Park Service and Civilian Conservation Corps," interviews by Amelia Roberts Fry, Berkeley, California, October 24, 1962, and April 19 and 26, 1964, typescript, 64, NPS-HC. Cammerer's quote is in Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1936), 104.

140. Ise, Our National Park Policy, 465-466; Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 184-186. In the 1940s Park Service Director Newton Drury at first opposed the North Dakota unit, believing the eroded lands were definitely below national park standards, then accepted it once its status as a memorial to Theodore Roosevelt was agreed on. David Harmon, At the Open Margin (Medora, North Dakota: Theodore Roosevelt Nature and History Association, 1986), 13-21.

141. National Park Service, "Growth of the National Park Service" (1936), 3.

142. Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 245, 285-286. Albright recalled (p. 286) his belief that "acquisition of the military parks situated in many eastern states would bring a much larger constituency and much broader base, and thus the Park Service would be perceived as a truly national entity." For a list of the sites managed by the National Park Service prior to the reorganization by President Roosevelt, see Mackintosh, Shaping the System, 16-17, 22-23.

143. Background to the reorganization and a list of sites brought into the national park system in August 1933 are in Mackintosh, Shaping the System, 24-43. See also Ise, Our National Park Policy, 352-353.

144. Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 163-166; Mackintosh, Shaping the System, 49.

145. National Park Service, "Growth of the National Park Service," 2; Unrau and Willis, Expansion of the National Park Service, 60-64; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1936), 135.

146. Albright and Cahn, Birth of the National Park Service, 314; Mackintosh, Shaping the System, 26; Olsen, Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 61. The director expressed a desire to return to the "National Park Service" designation in his 1933 annual report. See Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1933), 192.

147. Unrau and Willis, Expansion of the National Park Service, 153-155; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1937), 38.

148. Louis C. Cramton, Memorandum for the Secretary, June 28, 1932, Entry 18, RG79.

149. Cramton, Memorandum for the Secretary, June 28, 1932. The reconnaissance team included superintendents Roger W. Toll (Yellowstone), M. R. Tillotson (Grand Canyon), and P. P. Patraw (Bryce Canyon and Zion). The Organic Act's wording is in Tolson, Laws Relating to the National Park Service (1933), 10.

150. George Collins, in "The Art and Politics of Park Planning and Preservation, 1920-1979," interview by Ann Lage, recalled that Demaray, Wright, and Thompson supported Wirth in his quest for control of recreation management at Lake Mead.

151. George M. Wright to Joseph Grinnell, August 29, 1934, George M. Wright files, MVZUC; George M. Wright, "Wildlife in National Parks," American Planning and Civic Annual (1936), 62. Aware of Wright's abilities, Grinnell wrote to him that given the significance of the recreational study he could think of "no one better fitted than . . . yourself to guide and direct along this important line." Joseph Grinnell to George M. Wright, August 18, 1934, George M. Wright files, MVZ-UC.

152. George M. Wright to Col. John R. White, June 23, 1935, Entry 34, RG79.

153. Collins, "The Art and Politics of Park Planning and Preservation," 52.

154. The organizational charts are found in Olsen, Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 42-61. Conrad Wirth recalled that the superintendents were at first "adamant" in their opposition to establishing regional offices, concerned that they would encroach on the superintendents' authority and affect their lines of communication with the director. The superintendents also feared that the new offices would be headed by men who had risen through the ranks of the CCC, rather than the Park Service. Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 119. Also see Cammerer, "History and Growth of the National Park Service," 5. In early 1937 the Park Service established its travel division to fill, as Cammerer put it, "a long-indicated need for a national clearing house of information on recreational and travel opportunities . . . and to stimulate interest therein both at home and abroad." The division soon opened an office on Broadway in New York City. Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1937), 35-36. See also Swain, "National Park Service and the New Deal," 318.

155. National Park Service, "Growth of the National Park Service under Director Cammerer," 1-3. Numerous parks were authorized during the New Deal era, including Everglades and Big Bend national parks, Blue Ridge and Natchez Trace national parkways, and Joshua Tree, Organ Pipe Cactus, and Capitol Reef national monuments. Mackintosh, Shaping the System, 58-59.

156. National Park Service, "Growth of the National Park Service under Director Cammerer," 4. Further discussion of appropriations during the New Deal is found in Unrau and Willis, Expansion of the National Park Service, 75-76.

157. National Park Service, "Growth of the National Park Service under Director Cammerer," 4. Almost certainly, many of these individuals were not fully trained professionals but nevertheless were working in some aspect of those fields.

158. William G. Carnes, "Landscape Architecture in the National Park Service," Landscape Architecture (July 1951), copy attached to Hillory A. Tolson, Memorandum to Washington Office and All Field Offices, February 15, 1952, NPS-HC; Sumner, "Biological Research and Management," 9.

159. Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1936), 99; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1937), 34.

160. Newton Drury discusses Ickes' interest in Moses' becoming director in Newton Bishop Drury, "Parks and Redwoods, 1919-1971," interviews by Amelia Roberts Fry and Susan Schrepfer, 1959-1972, typescript, 352-353, NPS-HC. Ickes' quote is found in T. H. Watkins, Righteous Pilgrim, 578. See also Swain, "National Park Service and the New Deal," 329-330. Cammerer died of a heart attack in April 1941, less than a year after stepping down to the regional director's position in Richmond. Horace M. Albright, "Reminiscences," interview by William T. Ingerson, Oral History Research Office, Columbia University, 1962, typescript, 543, NPS-HC.

161. Schrepfer, The Fight to Save the Redwoods, 56-64. On the other hand, some opposed the Kings Canyon legislation because a national park would restrict use and development. Details of the complicated campaign to establish Kings Canyon National Park are found in Dilsaver and Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees, 197-214; and Ise, Our National Park Policy, 396-404. See also George M. Wright to John R. White, June 23, 1935, Entry 34, RG79, for Wright's comments on the Forest Service's "treating the Kings Canyon areas as a national park . . . enforc[ing] practically the same rules for its preservation." Wright saw the Forest Service's efforts as an encroachment on traditional Park Service management practices, and thus as one of the "gravest dangers" facing the Park Service.

162. "Wanted: A National Primeval Park Policy," National Parks Bulletin 13 (December 1937), 13, 26; William P. Wharton, "Park Service Leader Abandons National Park Standards," National Parks Bulletin 14 (June 1938), 5.

163. William P. Wharton, "The National Primeval Parks," National Parks Bulletin 13 (February 1937), 3-4.

164. Watkins, Righteous Pilgrim, 554-555; Horace M. Albright, comments in American Planning and Civic Annual (1938), 31-32.

165. Harold L. Ickes to William P. Wharton, May 2, 1939; and William P. Wharton to Harold Ickes, April 10, 1939, Kent. George M. Wright, "The Philosophy of Standards for National Parks, American Planning and Civic Annual (1936), 25.

166. Joseph Grinnell to George M. Wright, April 16, 1935, George M. Wright files, MVZ-UC.

167. Sumner, "Biological Research and Management," 15; Ben H. Thompson to Joseph Grinnell, November 9, 1936, Ben H. Thompson file, MVZ-UC. Thompson did not identify the unit interested in absorbing the wildlife biologists. In 1980 the George Wright Society, dedicated to excellence in resource management in protected areas and on other public lands, was founded in Wright's honor.

168. A. E. Demaray to the Acting Secretary, Department of the Interior, August 30, 1938, Central Classified File, RG79; Sumner, "Biological Research and Management," 15.

169. Watkins, Righteous Pilgrim, 587-590; National Park Service, "A Review of the Year," 34.

170. Ben H. Thompson to E. Raymond Hall, June 13, 1939, handwritten, Ben H. Thompson files, MVZ-UC.

171. Arno B. Cammerer and Ira H. Gabrielson, Memorandum for the Secretary of the Interior, November 24, 1939, Central Classified File, RG79; Sumner, "Biological Research and Management," 15.

Chapter 5. The War and Postwar Years

1. National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, "A Report by the Advisory Committee to the National Park Service on Research," August 1, 1963, typescript, 31.

2. Even Stephen Mather had had experience with the parks prior to becoming director, having assumed oversight of the national parks for Secretary of the Interior Franklin K. Lane in January 1915. Drury's work with the Save the Redwoods League is discussed in Susan R. Schrepfer, The Fight to Save the Redwoods: A History of Environmental Reform, 1917-1978 (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1983), 23-76.

3. For comments on Drury see John Ise, Our National Park Policy: A Critical History (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1961) 3, 443-444; and Ronald Foresta, America's National Parks and Their Keepers (Washington, D.C.: Resources for the Future, 1984), 48-49.

4. Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior, for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1945 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1945), 207; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1943 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1943), 218-219; Conrad L. Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1980), 225; Lary Dilsaver and William C. Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees (Three Rivers, California: Sequoia Natural History Association, 1990), 188.

5. Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1943), 217-218; Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 225-226. Drury's concerns about logistical and communications problems likely to result from the move to Chicago are mentioned in National Parks Association, press release 47, February 5, 1942, Kent.

6. Newton B. Drury, "What the War Is Doing to National Parks and Where They Will Be at Its Close," Living Wilderness 9, May 1944, 11; Newton B. Drury to Secretary of the Interior, July 28, 1950, Entry 19, RG79.

7. Newton B. Drury to Assistant Secretary Doty, August 2, 1950, Entry 19, RG79; Carl P. Russell, "The Trusteeship of the National Park Service," Transactions, Illinois State Academy of Science 36 (September 1943), 19. See also Dilsaver and Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees, 188-189.

8. Newton B. Drury to the Secretary of the Interior, December 18, 1942, NPS-HC; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1943), 197; Drury to Assistant Secretary Doty, August 2, 1950.

9. Charles W. Porter, ed., "National Park Service War Work, December 7, 1941, to June 30, 1944 [and] Supplement, June 30, 1944, to October 1, 1945," typescript, 5-6, NPS-HC. The Sitka spruce issue in Olympic is discussed in Russell, "Trusteeship of the National Park Service," 19-21; Drury, "What the War Is Doing to National Parks," 12; and Ise, Our National Park Policy, 450.

10. Porter, "National Park Service War Work," 7-9; and Newton B. Drury to the Secretary of the Interior, December 18, 1942. Carsten Lien, in Olympic Battleground: The Power Politics of Timber Preservation (San Francisco: Sierra Club Books, 1991), 215-231, recounts how the mindset of the Park Service's own foresters, plus the ties between the park's managers and the local chambers of commerce and fraternal organizations, helped undermine Drury's resolve to prevent Olympic's forests from being cut.

11. Porter, "National Park Service War Work," 9-11; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1943), 208; Ise, Our National Park Policy, 392-395; Lien, Olympic Battleground, 226-231.

12. Newton B. Drury, "National Park Service Reports on Results of Its Study of Olympic National Park Boundaries," March 18, 1947, typescript, OLYM. See also National Park Service, "Study of Olympic National Park Boundaries," March 18, 1947, OLYM.

13. Irving M. Clark, "Protect Olympic Park!" Living Wilderness, June 1947, 2, 6. Drury is quoted in "Olympic Park Boundaries Defended," Living Wilderness 12 (Winter 1947-48), 6. See also Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1947 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1947), 337; Lien, Olympic Battleground, 232- 253; and Irving Brant, Adventures in Conservation with Franklin D. Roosevelt (Flagstaff, Arizona: Northland Publishing Company, 1988), 277-286.

14. The conflict over Olympic's salvage timber program is detailed in Lien, Olympic Battleground, 268-298. By the mid-1950s, sales of windblown timber in Olympic had enabled the park to acquire about thirty-six hundred acres of inholdings—just over one-third of such acreage when the program began. Porter, "National Park Service War Work," 12-13; Hillory A. Tolson to Assistant Secretary Lewis, August 2, 1955, Records of Conrad Wirth, RG79. In the parks for brief assignments (usually during the summer vacation period) and largely free of pressure to conform to mainline Park Service thinking, seasonal naturalists sometimes took a critical view of management practices in the parks. See Lien, 285-286.

15. Newton B. Drury to the Under Secretary, January 14, 1943, Entry 19, RG79; Newton B. Drury, "National Park Service Grazing Policy," National Parks Magazine 78 (July-September 1944), reprint, n.p.; Carl P. Russell, Memorandum for the Director, January 21, 1943, Entry 19, RG79.

16. Porter, "National Park Service War Work," 18-19.

17. Porter, "National Park Service War Work," 18-19; Russell, "Trusteeship of the National Park Service," 23-25. Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1944 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1944), 209-210. John R. White, "Flowers for Cattle: The Demand of Stockmen," National Parks Magazine 17 (July-September 1943), 4-10. Newton B. Drury, "The California Drought and the Resultant Pressure for Grazing in the Sierra National Parks," March 29, 1948, Entry 19, RG79. The Park Service considered, but did not pursue, one other possibility for supplying meat to support the war: shipping to military bases the carcasses taken during big-game reduction programs. The amount of meat available from reduction of elk, deer, and bison would have been a negligible factor in meeting wartime needs.

18. The variety of ranger duties during this period are discussed in Lemuel A. Garrison, The Making of a Ranger: Forty Years with the National Parks (Salt Lake City: Howe Brothers, 1983), 261; and John W. Henneberger, "To Protect and Preserve: A History of the National Park Ranger," typescript, 402, 429-431, courtesy of the author.

19. See for example support of the elk reduction program by Chief Biologist Victor H. Cahalane, in Cahalane, "Wildlife Surpluses in the National Parks," in Transactions of the Sixth North American Wildlife Conference (Washington, D.C.: American Wildlife Institute, 1941), 360-361; and Cahalane, "Elk Management and Herd Regulation—Yellowstone National Park," in Transactions of the Eighth North American Wildlife Conference (Washington, D.C.: American Wildlife Institute), 1943, 99-100.

20. Newton B. Drury to C. N. Feast, March 21, 1945, YELL; Hillory A. Tolson, Memorandum for the Regional Directors, April 3, 1944, with attachment, "Is Hunting the Remedy?" YELL. G. A. Moskey to Julius M. Peterson, January 17, 1944, Central Classified File 715, RG79.

21. Edmund B. Rogers, Memorandum for the Regional Director, July 8, 1943, YELL. Especially with his U.S. Forest Service work in the Southwest, Leopold had acquired in-depth knowledge of the relationship of ungulates with their habitat. Susan L. Flader, Thinking Like a Mountain: Aldo Leopold and the Evolution of an Ecological Attitude toward Deer, Wolves and Forests (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1978), 14-18, 36-121. Yellowstone elk management during this period is discussed in Douglas B. Houston, The Northern Yellowstone Elk: Ecology and Management (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1982), 15-21, 100-101; and Michael B. Coughenour and Francis J. Singer, "The Concept of Overgrazing and Its Application to Yellowstone's Northern Range," Natural Resource Ecology Lab, Colorado State University, 1989, 4-7.

22. Newton B. Drury to Alden Miller, November 13, 1943, Newton B. Drury files, MVZ-UC. The proposed new population level for the Lamar Valley herd was higher than the approximately one hundred head suggested in 1935 by biologist Harlow Mills. Harlow B. Mills to Ben H. Thompson, June 21, 1935, Entry 34, RG79.

23. Drury to Miller, November 13, 1943. See also Carl P. Russell, "Comment on Rogers' Memorandum Regarding Bison Reduction" (with attachment including comments by Chief Biologist Victor H. Cahalane), August 24, 1943, Newton B. Drury files, MVZ-UC; Curtis K. Skinner et al. "History of the Bison in Yellowstone Park" [with supplements], 1952, typescript, various pagination, YELL. The Yellowstone bison populations during this period are discussed in Margaret Mary Meagher, The Bison of Yellowstone National Park, National Park Service Scientific Monograph Series no. 1 (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1973), 26-33.

24. Horace M. Albright to Newton B. Drury, October 29, 1943, Entry 19, RG79.

25. Chief Naturalist, Memorandum for Mr. Drury, November 3, 1943, Newton B. Drury files, MVZ-UC; Horace M. Albright to Newton B. Drury, December 1, 1943, Entry 19, RG79. Local tourism interests, such as the Dude Ranchers Association, were also apprehensive over the bison reduction. See Skinner, "History," supplement, 1942 to 1947, n.p.

26. Newton B. Drury to Horace M. Albright, December 8, 1943, Entry 19, RG79. Drury's interpretation of the 1916 Organic Act surely galled Albright, who, having helped draft the act, never questioned that he understood its intent.

27. Drury to Albright, December 8, 1943.

28. Horace M. Albright to Newton B. Drury, December 13, 1943, Entry 19, RG79; Skinner, "History," supplement, 1942 to 1947; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1944), 221; Horace M. Albright to Newton B. Drury, February 25, 1944, Entry 19, RG79. An alternative means of resolving the overgrazing issue was to remove all bison from the Lamar and Yellowstone river drainages—a suggestion made by Cahalane, but never implemented and perhaps never conveyed to the displeased Albright. See Skinner, "History," supplement, 1942 to 1947.

29. Horace M. Albright to Newton B. Drury, September 7, 1944, Entry 19, RG79. Albright's interest in retaining the Buffalo Ranch is indicated in his letter of September 7, 1944, as well as in Albright to Drury, December 1, 1943. The Service's intention to remove the ranch buildings is noted in Skinner, "History," supplement, 1942 to 1947.

30. Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1944), 221; Newton B. Drury, Memorandum for the Secretary of the Interior, September 15, 1944, YELL; Robert W. Righter, Crucible for Conservation: The Creation of Grand Teton National Park (Niwot: Colorado Associated University Press, 1982), 131-132.

31. Adolph Murie, The Wolves of Mount McKinley, Fauna of the National Parks of the United States, Fauna Series no. 5 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1944), xv-xvii; William E. Brown, A History of the Denali-Mount McKinley Region, Alaska (Santa Fe: National Park Service, 1991), 196-201.

32. Brown, History of the Denali-Mount McKinley Region, 198-199; Victor H. Cahalane to Newton B. Drury, March 14, 1945, copy from the files of William E. Brown.

33. Adolph Murie, "A Review of the Mountain Sheep Situation in Mount McKinley National Park, Alaska, 1945," attached to Newton B. Drury to Alden H. Miller, January 10, 1946, Newton B. Drury Files, MVZ-UC. Drury's comments on the wolf-sheep controversy are in Drury, interview, "Parks and Redwoods, 1919-1971," 362; and Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1946 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1946), 327.

34. Horace M. Albright, "The National Park Service's Policy on Predatory Mammals," Journal of Mammalogy 12 (May 1931), 185-186; and George M. Wright, Joseph S. Dixon, and Ben H. Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks of the United States: A Preliminary Survey of Faunal Relations in National Parks, Contributions of Wild Life Survey, Fauna Series no. 1 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1933), 147.

35. Brown, History of the Denali-Mount McKinley Region, 199-200; Aldo Leopold to J. Hardin Peterson, June 13, 1946, O. Murie.

36. Brown, History of the Denali-Mount McKinley Region, 199-200. For a commentary on the Service's predator policy during this period, see Victor H. Cahalane, "Predators and People," National Parks Magazine 22 (October-December 1948), 5-12.

37. Newton B. Drury to Alden H. Miller, December 18, 1945, with attachment, Newton B. Drury files, MVZ-UC. Problems with bear feeding during this period are discussed in Paul Schullery, The Bears of Yellowstone (1986; 3rd ed., Worland, Wyoming: High Plains Publishing Co., 1992), 104-108; Dilsaver and Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees, 180; and Alfred Runte, Yosemite: The Embattled Wilderness (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1990), 174.

38. Drury to Miller, December 18, 1945; Victor H. Cahalane to Aldo Leopold, May 16, 1942, Central Classified File, RG79.

39. Drury to Miller, December 18, 1945; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1943), 209; Schullery, Bears of Yellowstone, 106-108.

40. Albright to Drury, December 13, 1943; Albright to Drury, February 25, 1944; Albright to Drury, September 7, 1944. Victor Cahalane recalled believing that the national park concessionaires also sought to continue the bear shows. Knowing the shows would keep people in the parks until dark, the concessionaires hoped that the visitors would rent overnight accommodations. Victor H. Cahalane, interview with the author, February 25, 1992.

41. Newton B. Drury to Horace M. Albright, October 30, 1945, Entry 19, RG79; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1944), 222.

42. Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1945), 214; Dilsaver and Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees, 262; Schullery, Bears of Yellowstone, 106; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1952 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1952), 365.

43. To compensate for manpower shortages, the Service used teenage boys and older men in its firefighting crews. Wartime shortages of manpower and equipment are discussed in Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1945), 212; and Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1946), 324.

44. Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1947), 336. See also Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1949 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1949), 320; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1946), 324; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1950 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office), 327; Harold K. Steen, The U.S. Forest Service: A History (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1976), 282. An early 1960s account of the use of the Forest Pest Control Act's funds for pesticides is given in Director, National Park Service to Secretary of the Interior, August 9, 1963, attachment, 8, NPS-HC.

45. See Emil F. Ernst and Charles R. Scarborough, "Narrative Annual Forestry Report of Yosemite National Park for the Calendar Year 1953," typescript, YOSE; and Yellowstone National Park, Superintendent's Annual Report, 1956, typescript, n.p., YELL. An early record of Sumner's concerns about DDT is in E. Lowell Sumner to Victor H. Cahalane, May 14, 1948, Central Classified File, RG79. See also Runte, Yosemite, 176-178.

46. National Park Service, Information Handbook: Questions and Answers Relating to the National Park Service and the National Park System, In-Service Training Series (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1957), 54; Stephen J. Pyne, Fire in America: A Cultural History of Wildland and Rural Fire (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982), 302; Bruce M. Kilgore, "Restoring Fire to National Park Wilderness," American Forests 81 (March 1975), 17.

47. Orthello L. Wallis, "Management of Sport Fishing in National Parks," Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 89 (April 1960), 234-238; Orthello L. Wallis, "Management of Aquatic Resources and Sport Fishing in National Parks by Special Regulations," July 22, 1971, typescript, 2, 6-14, Dennis; Orthello L. Wallis, "Development and Success of Catch-and-Release Angling Programs," paper presented at the Ninety-first Annual Meeting of the American Fisheries Society, September 14, 1961, typescript, 6-8, Advisory Board on Wildlife and Game Management files, MVZ-UC; John D. Varley, "A History of Fish Stocking Activities in Yellowstone National Park between 1881 and 1980," Yellowstone National Park Information Paper no. 35, January 1, 1981, typescript, III, YELL; John D. Varley and Paul Schullery, Freshwater Wilderness: Yellowstone Fishes and Their World (Yellowstone National Park: Yellowstone Library and Museum Association, 1983), 104-105: Paul Schullery, "A Reasonable Illusion," Rod and Reel 5 (November-December 1979), 44-54; National Park Service, "Position Paper: Findings and Recommendations on Fisheries Management Policies in the National Park Service," typescript, January 13, 1987, Supernaugh; Richard H. Dawson, "Assessment of Fisheries Management Options in National Parks," typescript, n.d. (ca. 1987), Supernaugh; National Park Service, A Heritage of Fishing: The National Park Service Recreational Fisheries Program (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, n.d., ca. 1990), 2-3.

48. Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1944), 229. The "exile" to Chicago had been, as Drury saw it, "a severe and expensive handicap, now happily ended." Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1948 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1948), 363. The Fish and Wildlife Service had also been moved to Chicago; thus, Cahalane had been able to continue working closely with Park Service personnel. Cahalane, interview with the author, February 25, 1992.

49. Carl P. Russell, Memorandum for the Director, March 23, 1944, NPS-HC. Following up on Russell's recommendations, Drury noted in his 1944 annual report that research to back up park planning was "essential to intelligent administration" of parks. He added that one benefit would be to "determine the extent of permanent impairment that may result from development of tourist facilities and heavy use of park areas." Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1944), 218-219.

50. Dorr G. Yeager, "Comments on the Impairment of Park Values in Zion National Park," March 23, 1944, NPS-HC.

51. National Park Service, "Research in the National Park System, and Its Relation to Private Research and the Work of Research Foundations," February 10, 1945, typescript, 2, 4-5, 8-12, NPS-HC.

52. National Park Service, "Research in the National Park System, A Narrative Statement on Policy and Research Administration Prepared for the President's Scientific Research Board," April 4, 1947, appended to Newton B. Drury, Memorandum for Thomas B. Nolan, April 7, 1947, NPS-HC.

53. Lowell Sumner, "Biological Research and Management in the National Park Service: A History," George Wright Forum 3 (Autumn 1983), 16; "Research in the National Park System, A Narrative Statement," 5; National Park Service, "Wildlife Resources of the National Park System: A Report on Wildlife Conditions—1948," 18, appended to Hillory A. Tolson, Memorandum for All Field Offices, February 18, 1949, Central Classified Files, RG79.

54. National Park Service, "Wildlife Resources of the National Park System: A Report on Wildlife Conditions—1949," Records of Conrad L. Wirth, RG79.

55. Cahalane, interview with the author, February 25, 1992; William G. Carnes, "Landscape Architecture in the National Park Service," Landscape Architecture (July 1951), reprinted and attached to Hillory A. Tolson, Memorandum to Washington Office and All Field Offices, February 15, 1952, typescript, NPS-HC.

56. Wright, Dixon, and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks of the United States (1933), 147; Drury to Miller, November 13, 1943. See also Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1944), 221.

57. Lowell Sumner, "Wildlife Management," paper presented at the National Park Service Conference, Yosemite National Park, October 18, 1950, Entry 19, RG79; Conrad L. Wirth to Harold E. Crowe, January 7, 1958, NPS-HC.

58. Wright, Dixon, and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1933), 147.

59. Carl P. Russell, Memorandum for the Director, March 23, 1944; Olaus J. Murie to Newton B. Drury, January 11, 1951, O. Murie.

60. The Mission 66 goals are discussed in Ronald F. Lee to Regional Directors, September 8, 1958, NPS-HC; Cahalane, interview with the author, February 25, 1992; Sumner, "Biological Research and Management," 17. Cahalane's successor was Gordon Fredine.

61. Cahalane, interview with the author, February 25, 1992; Conrad L. Wirth to Horace M. Albright, November 5, 1956, Records of Conrad L. Wirth, RG79; Summary Minutes, 38th Meeting, Advisory Board on National Parks, Historic Sites, Buildings and Monuments, Washington, D.C. and Gettysburg National Military Park, Penn., April 23-26, 1958, O. Murie.

62. E. T. Scoyen, memorandum to Washington Office and All Field Offices, April 21, 1958, NPS-HC.

63. Cahalane, interview with the author, February 25, 1992; National Park Service, "Get the Facts, and Put Them to Work," October 1961, typescript, 4, NPS-HC.

64. Olaus J. Murie to Lowell Sumner, August 2, 1958, O. Murie. Another widely respected ecologist, University of Michigan professor Stanley A. Cain, told the Sixth Biennial Wilderness Conference that the Park Service had no "basic ecological research" program, adding that research "fails to approach at all closely the fundamental need of the Service itself." Stanley A. Cain, "Ecological Islands as Natural Laboratories," paper presented at the Sixth Biennial Wilderness Conference, San Francisco, March 20-21, 1959, typescript, 10, NPS-HC.

65. Daniel B. Beard, Memorandum to Chairman, Management Improvement Committee, October 28, 1960, NPS-HC. The committee focused on historical and archeological research as well as natural history.

66. Beard to Chairman, Management Improvement Committee, October 28, 1960; "Report of the National Park Service Mission 66 Frontiers Conference," Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona, April 24-28, 1961, typescript, 131, NPS-HC; W. G. Carnes, "A Look Back to Look Ahead," April 24, 1961, typescript, THRO.

67. National Park Service, "Get the Facts and Put Them to Work," 2.

68. National Park Service, "Get the Facts and Put Them to Work," 1, 26.

69. National Park Service, "Get the Facts and Put Them to Work," 5; Stagner, interview with the author, April 15, 1989. See also R. Gerald Wright, Wildlife Research and Management in the National Parks (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1992), 24-26.

70. Sumner, "Biological Research and Management," 18; Wright, Dixon, and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1933), 147.

71. Raymond Gregg, "A Perspective Report on the National Park Service Program of Interpretation," American Planning and Civic Annual (1947), 31.

Carl Russell, the Service's chief naturalist, was himself a Ph.D. biologist. He had been a close associate of George Wright in Yosemite during the 1920s and continued to support the wildlife biologists. Among the many naturalists, some dedicated individuals, such as Arthur Stupka at Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Edwin McKee at Grand Canyon, and Frank Brockman at Mount Rainier, performed significant research of value to interpretation as well as to natural resource management. See Lowell Sumner, "Biological Research and Management," 16-17. Victor Cahalane remembered that the naturalists who had a background in biology were "often very helpful and cooperated" with the wildlife biologists—some even had "all four feet" in wildlife management. Cahalane, interview with the author, February 25, 1992. See also Hillory A. Tolson, Memorandum for the Regional Directors, February 26, 1944, Central Classified File 715, RG79; Natt N. Dodge, Memorandum for the Regional Director, Region Three, October 27, 1944, Entry 19, RG79; and William R. Supernaugh, "The Evolution of the Natural Resource Specialist: A National Park Service Phenomenon," paper prepared for the Department of Parks, Recreation and Environmental Education, Slippery Rock State University, August 25, 1987, typescript, copy courtesy of the author.

72. Robert N. McIntyre, "A Brief History of Forestry in the National Park Service," March 1952, appendix A, typescript, NPS-HC. The Service had encouraged numerous colleges and universities to provide academic training in forestry as preparation for those wishing to enter the ranger ranks, even issuing a suggested curriculum in 1944 in anticipation of postwar staffing needs. National Park Service, "Recommended College Preparation for Students Planning to Enter the National Park Service through the Park Ranger Civil Service Examination," U.S. Department of the Interior, NPS files, MVZ-UC; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1945), 220.

73. Russ Olsen, Administrative History: Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 1917-1985 (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1985), 76-83; Garrison, Making of a Ranger, 252-255; Henneberger, "To Protect and Preserve," 405-409. Wirth's creation of the new ranger branch stemmed in part from his desire to give the parks better representation in Washington. To this end he brought in as his new associate director the veteran ranger and park superintendent, Eivind T. Scoyen, who was even born in a national park (Yellowstone). Wirth's actions significantly enhanced the voice of the rangers and superintendents in high-level decisionmaking. Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 290-291.

In a late-1940s reversal of prior arrangements, divisions had been designated the primary organizational units, to oversee any number of branches. Olsen, Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 67-69.

74. Victor H. Cahalane to E. Raymond Hall, October 24, 1957, attached to Victor H. Cahalane to David Brower, October 24, 1957, O. Murie. Wirth was persuaded to make this merger by a former Park Service forester who had transferred to the office of the secretary of the interior. (The documents do not reveal this individual's name.) Wirth had to seek approval for this reorganization from the secretary's office, since in the mid-1950s the department had assumed authority to review and approve changes in the Service's organizational structure. See Olsen, Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 76.

75. Cahalane to Hall, October 24, 1957.

76. E. Raymond Hall to Conrad L. Wirth, February 12, 1958, O. Murie. Also, Hall had deplored Park Service forestry practices in a letter to Director Wirth. E. Raymond Hall to Conrad Wirth, January 16, 1958, NPS-HC.

77. Conrad L. Wirth, Memorandum to Washington Office and All Field Offices, February 10, 1958, NPS-HC; and Olsen, Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 80-81; John M. Davis to the Director, January 3, 1958, Records of Conrad L. Wirth, RG79.

78. Wirth, Memorandum to Washington Office and All Field Offices, February 10, 1958; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1959 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1959), 341.

79. Wirth to Washington Office and All Field Offices, February 10, 1958; Scoyen to Washington Office and All Field Offices, April 21, 1958. See also Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1958 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office), 312, 315.

80. Foresta, America's National Parks, 50; Yellowstone National Park, "Superintendent's Annual Report, 1946," typescript, YELL; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1947), 327.

81. Garrison, Making of a Ranger, 257; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1945), 224. The Service's advance planning for postwar development is discussed in Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1943), 215-216; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1944), 218; and Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1945), 225-226.

82. Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1947), 327-328; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1949), 302; Ise, Our National Park Policy, 455. Drury wrote to the United States Chamber of Commerce in April 1948 that the parks immediately needed "all types of construction . . . including employee housing; concessioners; facilities; water, sewer, electric, and communication systems; campgrounds; museums; comfort stations; roads and trails, etc." Newton B. Drury to D. J. Guy, April 27, 1948, Entry 19, RG79. See also Newton B. Drury, "The Dilemma of Our Parks," American Forests 55 (June 1949), 6-11.

83. Ronald Foresta described Drury as being "constantly restrained by his stringent sense of bureaucratic propriety and his dislike of the rough and tumble world of Washington politics" and added that in conservation politics Drury "always seemed more aware of the weakness of his position than its strength." Foresta, America's National Parks, 48-49. See also Ise, Our National Park Policy, 443.

84. Newton B. Drury to Richard M. Leonard, May 12, 1948, Entry 19, RG79. The exact date of Drury's remark about having no money is not given; it is recalled by David R. Brower in his autobiography, For Earth's Sake (Salt Lake City: Peregrine Smith Books, 1990), 220. Michael P. Cohen, in History of the Sierra Club, 126, cites the club's November 1948 statement that the Park Service could not be relied on to protect backcountry because it was so dedicated to intensive public use of the parks.

85. Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1941 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1941), 280; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1944), 219-220; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1945), 215; Conrad L. Wirth, "The Aims of the National Park Service in Relation to Water Resources," American Planning and Civic Annual (1952), 11-14; Ise, Our National Park Policy, 467-469.

86. H. W. Bashore, Memorandum for the Secretary, January 5, 1945, NPS-HC.

87. Newton B. Drury, Memorandum for the Secretary, January 25, 1945, NPS-HC.

88. Michael W. Straus, Memorandum for the Secretary, February 6, 1945, NPS-HC.

89. Newton B. Drury to Charles G. Sauers, December 13, 1950, Entry 19, RG79; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1946), 343; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1948), 353; and Newton B. Drury, Memorandum for the Director's Office and All Field Offices, April 30, 1948, Entry 19, RG79. Drury's attitudes toward recreation areas are also discussed in Newton B. Drury, Memorandum to the Secretary, January 13, 1947, Entry 19, RG79.

90. Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1949), 327. In 1957 the Service would cede recreation management at Millerton Lake to the State of California.

Drury was also willing for some less spectacular natural areas to be removed from the national park system. During his tenure Wheeler and Mount of the Holy Cross national monuments in Colorado were returned by the Park Service to their previous administrators. In addition to lacking sufficient scenic qualities, Wheeler National Monument had remained inaccessible and attracted few visitors, causing the Park Service to lose interest. The appeal of the Mount of the Holy Cross was diminished when rock slides caused the right arm of the cross to slump, changing the appearance of the cross. Rejecting the idea of shoring up the arm as an inappropriate way of treating a symbol of God's work, the Park Service ultimately agreed to return the area to the U.S. Forest Service. These revealing occurrences are discussed in Ferenc M. Szasz, "Wheeler and Holy Cross: Colorado's 'Lost' National Monuments," Journal of Forest History 21 (July 1977), 139, 144.

91. Drury later claimed that the agreement was intended to foster cooperation and did not actually recommend redesignation from monument to national recreation status. Owen Stratton and Phillip Sirotkin, The Echo Park Controversy (University: University of Alabama Press, 1959), 36-38. See also Susan Rhoades Neel, "Newton Drury and the Echo Park Dam Controversy," Forest and Conservation History 38 (April 1994), 57-58.

92. Stratton and Sirotkin, The Echo Park Controversy, 38-40; Neel, "Newton Drury," 60-62; Mark W. T. Harvey, A Symbol of Wilderness: Echo Park and the American Conservation Movement (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1994), 11-34, 61-65. Drury discussed the status of the threats to parks from dam construction in Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1948), 338-340.

93. Newton B. Drury to Charles W. Davis, May 18, 1950, Entry 19, RG79; Newton B. Drury, Memorandum for the Regional Director, Regional Four, June 3, 1948, Entry 19, RG79; Newton B. Drury to Morris Cooke, July 3, 1950, Entry 19, RG79.

94. Harvey, A Symbol of Wilderness, 81-89; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1950), 303-305. Drury indicated (p. 305) that the Park Service's efforts to defeat the Echo Park dam during the spring of 1950 were carried out with Secretary Chapman's full knowledge.

95. Herbert Evison and Newton Bishop Drury, "The National Park Service and Civilian Conservation Corps," interview by Amelia Roberts Fry, Berkeley, California, 1963, typescript, 119, NPS-HC.

The circumstances of Drury's resignation are still controversial. Yet the fact that Chapman forced him to resign is substantiated in documentary evidence. On December 13, 1950, the secretary formally notified Drury that he had to leave the directorship of the National Park Service to take over "advisory duties as Special Assistant to the Secretary as of January 15 next," and that he would have to accept a lower salary. Two days earlier Drury had prepared a handwritten note for his own files, in which he quoted from a conversation with Chapman, who told him, "I expect you to take the other position or resign." Oscar L. Chapman to Newton B. Drury, December 13, 1950; Newton B. Drury, note to files, December 11, 1950, WS. Rejecting Chapman's demand and the offer of a lower-paying position, Drury resigned effective April 1.

Chapman's reasons for forcing Drury out of office are less clear. His stated justification was that he could make "fuller utilization" of Drury's talents in a "department-wide capacity," in which he would help smooth over the many conflicts among the various Interior Department bureaus— an assignment for which Drury seems to have been ill suited. The secretary also claimed that since Associate Director Arthur Demaray had served the Park Service loyally and competently, he should be rewarded with the directorship for a short while before his already-announced retirement. Chapman was willing to force out one longtime employee to benefit another.

Chapman's explanation in 1973 to former Park Service Director George B. Hartzog, Jr., was perhaps more candid, and also was in accord with Drury's statement on the matter. In his autobiography Hartzog recalled a luncheon conversation in which Chapman "expressed his strong view that Drury had been disloyal to him during the fight over the [Echo Park] dam in that Drury was not vigorous in his support of the secretary's decision." Chapman to Drury, December 13, 1950; Charles G. Sauers to Oscar Chapman, February 3, 1951, WS; George B. Hartzog, Jr., Battling for The National Parks (Mt. Kisco, New York: Moyer Bell, 1988), 83.

96. Even before Demaray's appointment, Wirth had been told by Secretary Chapman that he would succeed Demaray as Park Service director. Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 285.

97. Stratton and Sirotkin, The Echo Park Controversy, 51-97; Roderick Nash, Wilderness and the American Mind (1967; 3rd ed., New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982), 209-219; Foresta, America's National Parks, 51. Other perspectives on the Echo Park controversy may be found in, for example, Elmo R. Richardson, Dams, Parks, and Politics: Resource Development and Preservation in the Truman-Eisenhower Era (Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1973), 63-67; Irving Brant, Adventures in Conservation with Franklin D. Roosevelt (Flagstaff, Arizona: Northland Publishing Co.), 308-310; and Harvey, A Symbol of Wilderness. Foresta (pp. 50-51) viewed Drury's handling of the Echo Park affair as "probably his greatest failing as director," because Drury's failure to oppose the dam from the beginning of his tenure as director not only allowed the dam proponents to consolidate their position but also seriously weakened the Service's ultimate role in defending its own park lands. In Foresta's opinion (p. 51), the Service "lost mastery of its own house. The fate of a unit of the National Park System was decided by the interplay of public interest groups and their congressional allies on one side and the Bureau of Reclamation and its allies on the other. The [Park Service] was a bit player in the drama."

98. Wirth, "Aims of the National Park Service," 12-14.

99. On Glen Canyon, see Russell Martin, A Story That Stands like a Dam: Glen Canyon and the Struggle for the Soul of the West (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1989); Harvey, A Symbol of Wilderness, 280-282, 298-301; and Cohen, History of the Sierra Club, 177-179.

100. Wirth, "Aims of the National Park Service," 15. Russell Martin, in A Story That Stands like a Dam, 45-47, discusses the 1930s proposal to create Escalante National Monument along the Colorado and Green rivers through southern Utah. See also pp. 228-229.

101. The differences in management policy between national parks and national recreation areas are discussed in Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1948), 353; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1950), 304; and Newton B. Drury to the Director's Office and All Field Offices, April 30, 1948, Entry 19, RG79.

102. Stratton and Sirotkin, The Echo Park Controversy, 95; and Foresta, America's National Parks, 52. Conrad Wirth had stated earlier that the Park Service intended to make Dinosaur more accessible, noting that if the Service could "get a few people to the [canyon] Rim, so they can see what we have, it will help win that battle." Conrad L. Wirth to William Voigt, November 21, 1951, Records of Conrad Wirth, RG79.

103. Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 234; Lemuel A. Garrison, "Practical Experience Gained from Standards, Policies and Planning Procedures in National Parks," paper presented at the First World Conference on National Parks, 1962, typescript, NPS-HC.

104. Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1956 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1956), 308.

105. Wirth's quote is found in Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1952 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1952), 353.

106. Bernard DeVoto, "Let's Close the National Parks," Harper's Magazine 207 (October 1953), 49-52. Similarly, DeVoto's article "Shall We Let Them Ruin Our National Parks?" in the Saturday Evening Post, July 22, 1950, attacked dam proposals in the West that threatened national parks. This piece helped arouse public opposition to the Echo Park dam proposal. Harvey, A Symbol of Wilderness, 95-103.

107. Foresta, America's National Parks, 50. Until the Korean War ended, Wirth probably would have had little chance of getting such a program under way, although he does not say as much in his autobiography. See Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 234-238.

108. Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 238-239. See also Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1956), 299-300.

109. The planning strategies and the meeting with President Eisenhower are discussed in Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 239-257. The President's final comment after Wirth's presentation was, as Wirth recalled it, "This is a good project; let's get on with it" (p. 256).

110. Conrad L. Wirth, Memorandum no. 2, Mission 66, to Washington Office and All Field Offices, March 17, 1955, NPS-HC; Garrison, Making of a Ranger, 256-258.

111. National Park Service, "Mission 66: To Provide Adequate Protection and Development of the National Park System for Human Use," January 1956, typescript, YELL; National Park Service, Our Heritage: A Plan for Its Protection and Use (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1955); Lemuel A. Garrison, "Guiding Precepts, Mission 66," August 29, 1955, NPS-HC. See also Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 258-260.

112. Garrison, Making of A Ranger, 257; Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 262, 266-270.

113. Carnes, "Landscape Architecture in the National Park Service"; Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 62-63, 240, 249-250. See also Thomas C. Vint, "National Park Service Master Plans, Planning and Civic Comment 12 (April 1946), 21-24 ff.

114. Carnes, "Landscape Architecture in the National Park Service"; Olsen, Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 76-77; Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 292; and Vernon L. Hammons, "A Brief Organizational History of the Office of Design and Construction, National Park Service, 1917-1962," typescript, 6, NPS-HC.

115. Carnes, "Landscape Architecture in the National Park Service."

116. Among Park Service directors, few relished bureaucratic power as much as Wirth. Reflecting on Wirth's personal power and the leadership clique that developed under him, Park Service veteran Russ Olsen recalled how important it was to be a member of Wirth's carpool, where opportunities existed twice daily to influence the director's thinking on special issues. From north of the District of Columbia, the Park Service luminaries traveled south to enter Rock Creek Parkway, then turned left on Virginia Avenue, north on 18th Street, and left into the Interior building parking garage, to Wirth's parking space, A-5. Olsen, interview with the author, February 26, 1990.

117. Devereux Butcher, "Resorts or Wilderness?" Atlantic Monthly 107 (February 1961), 46-47. For an example of Butcher's earlier objections to national park architecture, see Devereux Butcher, "For a Return to Harmony in Park Architecture," National Parks Magazine 26 (October-December 1952), 150-157.

118. Butcher, "Resorts or Wilderness?" 47-48; "A Sky-post for the Smokies," National Parks Magazine 33 (February 1959), inside cover. The Park Service received many letters objecting to the sky-post, but its designers believed they had created "not a monster, but a tower of pleasing and lasting significance"—that even conservationists could not live in " 'cocoons,' avoiding machine-made and manufactured products" such as the reinforced concrete structure on top of Clingman's Dome. John B. Cabot to R. A. Wilhelm, March 10, 1959, GRSM.

119. Weldon F. Heald, "Urbanization of the National Parks," National Parks Magazine 35 (January 1961), 8.

120. Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1958), 304-305; William C. Tweed and Laura Soulliere Harrison, "Rustic Architecture and the National Parks: The History of a Design Ethic," 1987, typescript, chapter 8, 4-5, copy courtesy of the authors.

121. Tweed and Harrison, "Rustic Architecture and the National Parks," chapter 8, 1-6; discussion with Marshall Gingery, July 28, 1989. Laura Harrison, coauthor of "Rustic Architecture and the National Parks," commented that the architects who abandoned the rustic architecture styles during Mission 66 did not want the Service to be tied to rustic "Hansel and Gretel" cottages. Interview with Laura Harrison, February 26, 1991.

122. National Park Service, The National Park Wilderness (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1957), 9, 10, 22, 24-25. An earlier, condensed version of the brochure, with different wording in places, is found in Howard R. Stagner, "Preservation of Natural and Wilderness Values in the National Parks," National Parks Magazine 31 (July-September 1957), 105-106, 135-139.

123. Cohen, Sierra Club, 149. Cohen refers to the "traditional Club strategy—encouraging recreational use of a threatened area." He notes also (p. 181) the similar use of Sierra Club "outings" into the Hetch Hetchy Valley in the early part of the century, in an effort to save it from inundation. Efforts by conservationists to attract attention and visitors to Dinosaur are discussed in Harvey, A Symbol of Wilderness, 156-173, 236-243.

124. Ise, Our National Park Policy, 395; Foresta, America's National Parks, 53-54. Foresta mentions the Stevens Canyon Road in Mount Rainier National Park as another example of road building to help protect a park. See also Stratton and Sirotkin, Echo Park Controversy, 95.

125. David R. Brower, " 'Mission 65' Is Proposed by Reviewer of Park Service's New Brochure on Wilderness," National Parks Magazine 32 (January-March 1958), 4-6.

126. Olaus J. Murie to Conrad L. Wirth, February 6, 1958, O. Murie; Olaus J. Murie to Conrad L. Wirth, December 10, 1957, NPS-HC.

127. Conrad L. Wirth to John B. Oakes, February 12, 1958, NPS-HC; Conrad L. Wirth to Olaus J. Murie, February 14, 1958, NPS-HC.

128. Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 359. See also Runte, Yosemite, 194-197, for a discussion of the Tioga controversy. Runte indicates that in addition to its own motivations for wanting a wider, more modern road, the Park Service had been under steady pressure from commercial and community interests in the Owens Valley to the east of Yosemite—interests that would benefit from increased tourist traffic through the area.

129. The change in club strategy toward more frequent confrontation with public land managers is discussed in Cohen, Sierra Club, 204, 207, 234-238, 249-252. Foresta, in America's National Parks, 59-62, 70-71, examines the changing attitudes among conservationists.

130. Ansel Adams, "Yosemite—1958: Compromise in Action," National Parks Magazine 32 (October-December 1958), 167, 170-172, 190. Ansel Adams, "Tenaya Tragedy," Sierra Club Bulletin 43 (November 1958), 4. For views similar to those of Adams, but less angry, see Anthony Wayne Smith, "The Tioga Road," National Parks Magazine 33 (January 1959), 10-13; and "Yosemite's Tioga Highway," National Parks Magazine 32 (July-September 1958), 123-124.

131. Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 358; Ansel Adams to Harold Bradley, Richard Leonard, and David Brower, July 27, 1957, in Mary Street Alinder and Andrea Gray Stillman, Ansel Adams: Letters and Images, 1916-1984 (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1988), 247.

132. Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 262; George Alderson, "Instant Roads in the National Parks," Sierra Club Bulletin 54 (January 1969), 14; Horace M. Albright to Max K. Gilstrap, April 2, 1956, Records of Conrad L. Wirth, RG79.

133. Brown, History of the Denali-Mount McKinley Region, 218-222.

134. Nash, Wilderness and the American Mind, 220-221. An attempt to pass wilderness legislation in the late 1930s had failed.

135. Brower, " 'Mission 65'," 4; Garrison, Making of a Ranger, 260.

136. Brower, " 'Mission 65'," 4-6, 45.

137. Conrad L. Wirth to Bruce M. Kilgore, February 18, 1958, Records of Conrad Wirth, RG79. Kilgore, a scientist, later became an employee of the Park Service.

138. Conrad L. Wirth to the Washington Office and All Field Offices, February 27, 1959, NPS-HC. Identical comments on zones and corridors are found in L. F. Cook, "Zoning of Areas of Use," 1961, typescript, NPS-HC.

139. Conrad L. Wirth, "Wilderness in the National Parks," Planning and Civic Comment 24 (June 1958), 7.

140. The quote is from Garrison, "Practical Experience Gained from Standards."

141. Cook, "Zoning of Areas of Use"; Garrison, Making of a Ranger, 260.

142. Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 360-361. Other than these remarks, Wirth's extensive account of his years as Park Service director refers only in the most cursory way to the lengthy and involved campaign to enact wilderness legislation. See 283, 328, and 386. Wirth does, however, acknowledge the act's importance (p. 329) and discusses the meaning of wilderness, including quotes from the 1957 wilderness brochure (p. 385).

143. The quote is found in Ise, Our National Park Policy, 650. Additional indications of the Service's opposition to the wilderness bill appear in a number of sources. Cohen, Sierra Club, 133, mentions that the Park Service (along with the Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife) wanted to retain full control over backcountry areas, without interference from wilderness legislation. For comments on Horace Albright's reluctance to support the bill, see Cohen, 230-231. Albright stated at the spring 1958 meeting of the National Parks Advisory Board that "this whole wilderness bill plan is such a futile project—so much money, time and effort put into it and there is not a chance of the bill going through Congress." Excerpts from minutes of Advisory Board meetings, April 23-26, 1958, typescript, NPS-HC. See also Nash, Wilderness and the American Mind, 226; Foresta, America's National Parks, 69; and Craig W. Allin, The Politics of Wilderness Preservation, Contributions in Political Science, ed. Bernard K. Johnpoll, no. 64 (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1982), 110-111.

144. Howard R. Stagner, interview with the author, April 15, 1989. Former Park Service manager John W. Henneberger also recalled the Service's reluctance to support the wilderness bill. John W. Henneberger, interview with the author, June 17, 1989.

145. Wirth to Crowe, January 7, 1958.

146. Wilderness Society, The Wilderness Act Handbook (Washington, D.C.: Wilderness Society, 1984), 5-6; Hillory A. Tolson, Laws Relating to the National Park Service, the National Parks and Monuments (Washington, D.C.: Department of the Interior, 1933), 10.

147. Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 281-283; Ise, Our National Park Policy, 519-520; Cohen, Sierra Club, 260; Donald C. Swain, Wilderness Defender: Horace M. Albright and Conservation (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970), 306-308.

148. Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 260-261, 281; Carnes, "A Look Back to Look Ahead."

149. In his autobiography Wirth also claimed that the commission used about forty contractors to conduct different studies, including universities and bureaus of the federal government such as the Geological Survey and the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. Thus, he asked, "Why not the National Park Service?" In fact, the Service was accused of cooperating with the commission "only when it had to"—an indication of its basic resistance to the study. Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 281-283; Foresta, America's National Parks, 62.

150. Foresta, America's National Parks, 63-65. Horace M. Albright to George B. Hartzog, Jr., January 15, 1971, Hartzog. The introduction and summary recommendations for the 1962 report reviewed the history of the nation's recreational planning and management, but did not even mention the National Park Service or the 1936 Park, Parkway, and Recreation Area Study Act. Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission, Outdoor Recreation for America: A Report to the President and to the Congress (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1962), 1-10. Wirth's 1962 annual report noted matter-of-factly that the Park Service's survey work had become the responsibility of the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1962 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1962), 103-104.

151. Alston Chase, Playing God in Yellowstone: The Destruction of America's First National Park (Boston: Atlantic Monthly Press, 1986), 27-28.

152. Righter, Crucible for Conservation, 8-9, 148-149; Robert H. Bendt, "The Jackson Hole Elk Herd in Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks," in Transactions of the Twentyseventh North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, March 1962 (Washington, D.C.: Wildlife Management Institute, 1962), 191-193.

153. Bendt, "The Jackson Hole Elk Herd," 193, 197-198.

154. With Grand Teton's dam and artificially enlarged lake, and with hunting and grazing allowed in the park, Superintendent Bill wondered if the national park should instead be a national recreation area. Harthon L. Bill to the Regional Director, January 31, 1961, NPS-HC. See also Wright, Wildlife Research and Management, 46-52, for a discussion of public sporthunting in the national parks.

155. Conrad L. Wirth to Anthony Wayne Smith, February 20, 1962, Advisory Board on Wildlife and Game Management Files, MVZ-UC. Earlier, in 1953, Sumner had written a strong and well-articulated indictment, entitled "Why Public Hunting Cannot Be Permitted in the National Park System," stating his belief that public hunting in the parks would "undermine the sciences of ecology and game management." Sumner based much of his argument on the rights of the "non-shooting" public (which he claimed made up ninety-two percent of the nation's population). "Shooters" were a "minority group," who had obtained the "special privilege" of hunting on public lands, and only in the national parks did the right of the nonhunting public to "protect its property in ways of its own choosing" exist. In reality, Sumner asserted, the sportsmen's associations were seeking to obtain "outside control of park wildlife for their own special form of recreation through local game departments which by their own admission are the agents of the shooters." Lowell Sumner, "Why Public Hunting Cannot Be Permitted in the National Park System," January 19, 1953, Records of Conrad L. Wirth, RG79.

156. Wirth to Smith, February 20, 1962.

157. Anthony Wayne Smith to Conrad L. Wirth, March 21, 1961, letter published in National Parks Magazine 35 (May 1961), 15, 19.

Wirth's February 20 letter is found on pp. 14, 19. In February 1963, as the debates on hunting continued, Ira N. Gabrielson, president of the Wildlife Management Institute and former head of the Fish and Wildlife Service, expressed his belief that the Park Service's recreational tendencies directly influenced attitudes toward public hunting in national parks. Writing to biologist A. Starker Leopold, Gabrielson claimed that the Service's promotion of "mass recreation" had caused the public to have "wrong impressions of the parks' functions." The result was a greater acceptance of public hunting in the parks. He added, "If a national park is, in fact, to be a mass recreation area then barring hunting is somewhat illogical." Ira N. Gabrielson to A. Starker Leopold, February 18, 1963, Advisory Board on Wildlife and Game Management File, MVZ-UC.

158. Howard Zahniser to Olaus Murie, March 22, 1961, O. Murie; Carl W. Buchheister to Stewart L. Udall, November 9, 1961, Records of Conrad Wirth, RG79. Buchheister, the Audubon Society president, stated in his letter to Udall that reductions of "excessive and injurious herds of big game are in order in the National Parks," but that recreational hunting was "irreconcilable" with national park purposes.

159. Lemuel A. Garrison to Regional Director, Region Two, March 24, 1961, YELL.

160. Lemuel A. Garrison to Regional Director, Region Two, May 12, 1961, Records of Conrad L. Wirth, RG79; Regional Director, Region Two, to the Director, May 22, 1961, Records of Conrad L. Wirth, RG79.

161. Conrad L. Wirth, "Wildlife Conservation and Management in the National Parks and Monuments," September 14, 1961, Records of Conrad L. Wirth, RG79.161.

162. Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 310-311; John A. Carver, paper presented at the National Park Service Conference of Challenges, Yosemite National Park, October 13-19, 1963, typescript, NPS-HC. Wirth's formal submission of his policy statement to Secretary Udall came on October 25, 1961. Given the many informal communication channels within the Interior Department, it is almost certain that the secretary's office would have known of the statement by the time it was issued, if not before. Conrad L. Wirth to the Secretary of the Interior, October 25, 1961, Advisory Board on Wildlife and Game Management Files, MVZ-UC.

163. Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (1962), 86; Houston, The Northern Yellowstone Elk, 17; Wright, Wildlife Research and Management, 48-49.

164. National Academy of Sciences, "A Report by the Advisory Committee"; U.S. Department of the Interior, news release, April 25, 1962, NPS-HC; Stewart L. Udall to A. Starker Leopold, April 27, 1962, Advisory Board on Wildlife and Game Management Files, MVZ-UC; F. Fraser Darling and Noel D. Eichhorn, Man and Nature in the National Parks, 2nd ed. (Washington, D.C.: Conservation Foundation, 1969) 14-15; Wright, Wildlife Research and Management, 32. A third investigation got under way when the secretary requested that the Conservation Foundation examine the effects of human activity on national parks.

165. Lowell Sumner to A. Starker Leopold, May 16, 1962, Advisory Board on Wildlife and Game Management Files, MVZ-UC.

166. Lowell Sumner, "A History of the Office of Natural Science Studies," in "Proceedings of the Meeting of Research Scientists and Management Biologists of the National Park Service," Horace M. Albright Training Center, April 6-8, 1968, typescript, 4, Dennis.

167. Cahalane, interview with the author, February 25, 1992. See also Foresta, America's National Parks, 47-50.

168. Adams, "Yosemite—1958," 172. Wirth's views reflected the general consensus at the 1961 superintendents conference and were clearly expressed in his conference address. In part, belief that Mission 66 was inadequate resulted from the growth of the national park system. The establishment of new parks created additional construction and development demands, and helped raise the total number of park visitors in 1966 to 133 million, rather than the 80 million anticipated at the beginning of Mission 66. Conrad L. Wirth, "Catching Sight of the New Frontier," paper presented at the Mission 66 Frontiers Conference of the National Park Service, Grand Canyon National Park, April 24-28, 1961, NPS-HC; Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 260-262, 280. For visitation figures from World War II to the mid-1950s, see Foresta, America's National Parks, 50.

169. Wirth to Crowe, January 7, 1958.

Chapter 6. Science and the Struggle for Bureaucratic Power

1. Horace M. Albright, interview by [] Erskine, Washington, D.C., January 28, 1959, typescript, 33, NPS-HC. Mission 66 did not have a definite ending date; some of its projects were not completed until well after 1966.

2. Conrad L. Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1980), 199, 260-261.

3. Additions to the national park system during this period are listed in Barry Mackintosh, The National Parks: Shaping the System (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1991), 80-84. See also Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 261.

4. Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 301. George B. Hartzog, Jr., Remarks Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Society of Landscape Architects, Yosemite National Park, May 9, 1966, typescript, NPS-HC; George B. Hartzog, Jr., Memorandum to Each National Park Service Employee, January 3, 1967, NPS-HC. The quote is from George B. Hartzog, Jr., to Secretary of the Interior, October 12, 1965, NPS-HC. See also George B. Hartzog, Jr., "Parkscape U.S.A.: Tomorrow in Our National Parks," National Geographic 130 (July 1966), 48-92. Lacking the highly visible construction and development that distinguished Mission 66, Parkscape U.S.A. did not catch the public attention that its predecessor program had.

5. Greater backcountry use is one example of the pressure placed on the parks during this period. For instance, by the mid-1960s annual use of Yosemite backcountry was on the rise; it would increase 250 percent between 1968 and 1975, when it peaked at 219,000 "visitor nights" per year, then began to decrease. Similarly, backcountry use in Shenandoah National Park rose from 34,000 in 1967 to a high of 121,000 in 1973. National Park Service, "Wilderness Management Plan," Yosemite National Park, 1989, 2, YOSE; Robert R. Jacobsen, "The Management of Wilderness in Shenandoah National Park," expanded portion of a talk given to a U.S. Forest Service Wilderness Workshop at Gorham, New Hampshire, October 19, 1982, typescript, 2, Dennis. The effects of vastly increased backcountry use in Great Smoky Mountains National Park, one of the most heavily visited large natural parks in the system, are discussed in Susan P. Bratton, Linda Stromberg, and Mark E. Harmon, "Firewood-Gathering Impacts in Backcountry Campsites in Great Smoky Mountains National Park," Environmental Management 6 (January 1982), 63-71; William E. Hammitt and Janet Loy Hughes, "Characteristics of Winter Backcountry Use in Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Environmental Management 8 (March 1984), 161-166. See also George Alderson, "Instant Roads in the National Parks," Sierra Club Bulletin 54 (January 1969), 14.

6. Hartzog, "Parkscape U.S.A.," 52, 57. See also Arthur R. Gómez, Quest for the Golden Circle: The Four Corners and the Metropolitan West, 1945-1970 (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1994), 130-148, for a discussion of reservoirs, highway improvements, and new park proposals relative to local and regional tourism interests and to energy development in the Four Corners area. Interior secretary Udall envisioned a "Golden Circle" of parks and other recreation areas, predominantly in Arizona and Utah.

7. Hartzog, "Parkscape U.S.A.," 52, 57. Russell Martin, A Story That Stands like a Dam: Glen Canyon and the Struggle for the Soul of the West (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1989), 45-47, 228-229; Mark W. T. Harvey, A Symbol of Wilderness: Echo Park and the American Conservation Movement (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1994), 280-282, 298-301.

8. Anthony Wayne Smith, "Campaign for the Grand Canyon," National Parks Magazine 36 (April 1962), 12-15. Smith, executive secretary of the National Parks Association, asserted (p. 13) that the Bureau of Reclamation had become so powerful within the Department of the Interior that it was able to prevent the Park Service from making public its plans for expanding Grand Canyon National Park to the north, in an area targeted by the bureau for water control. Smith stated that "not until Director Wirth took the stand in [litigation against the Marble Canyon dam proposal], under subpoena of the [National Parks] Association, was it possible for the Service to make these plans public." The fight to protect Grand Canyon National Park ultimately centered on the proposed Marble Canyon and Bridge Canyon dams, which failed to gain approval. See Marc Reisner, Cadillac Desert (London: Stecker and Warburg, 1990), 283, 293-301. Ronald A. Foresta, in America's National Parks and Their Keepers (Washington, D.C.: Resources for the Future, 1984), 59-74, discusses the Park Service's declining status with the conservationists and environmentalists of the 1960s and 1970s.

9. Macintosh, Shaping the System, 102-103.

10. Department of the Interior, "Law Enforcement in Areas Administered by the National Park Service," Issue Support Paper no. 9, in "Recreation Use and Preservation," Fiscal Year 1970, typescript, 1, Hartzog; National Park Service, "1970 Summary Reports, Law Enforcement and Traffic Safety," Hartzog.

Director Hartzog's anticipation of park law-enforcement problems was evidenced in his 1965 statement that "Yosemite Valley is a great metropolitan area in the summertime . . . [so the Park Service has] all of the problems that you have in a metropolitan environment anywhere else in the United States in Yosemite Valley in the summertime." George B. Hartzog, Jr., "The National Parks, 1965," interview by Amelia R. Fry, Regional Oral History Office, University of California, Berkeley, April 4, 1965, typescript, NPS-HC.

Hartzog had instructed the Yosemite staff to take care of the increasingly difficult situation; nevertheless, the Park Service remained inadequately prepared. Russ Olsen, interview with the author, February 26, 1990. The riot in Yosemite's Stoneman Meadow is discussed in Alfred Runte, Yosemite: The Embattled Wilderness (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1990), 202. Jack Hope, in "Hassles in the Park," Natural History 80 (May 1971), 20-23, 80-91, gives an account of the riot that is critical of the Park Service.

11. Department of the Interior news release, "New Park Law Enforcement Division Readied for 1971 Vacation Season," March 6, 1971, Hartzog. Details of the planned law-enforcement training program were stated earlier in Deputy Assistant Director, Park Management, to Director, November 13, 1970, Hartzog; George B. Hartzog, Jr., to Hon. Julia Butler Hansen, February 4, 1971, Hartzog. Russ Olsen also described Hartzog's ability to seize opportunities: if he could "make people and dollar mileage" he would "take a program and run," as with law enforcement. Russ Olsen, interview with the author, February 26, 1990. See also Russ Olsen, Administrative History: Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 1917 to 1985 (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1985), 93.

12. William R. Supernaugh, interview with the author, March 10, 1989. Longtime park superintendent Robert Barbee recalled that at Yosemite in the early 1970s an "empathy team" was established, which "wore beads and tried to explain the role of parks to hippies"—an example of the Service's effort to bridge the cultural gap. By contrast, biologist Susan Bratton, who worked in Great Smoky Mountains National Park in the 1970s, remembered the tougher image of the ranger that emerged during this period of increased law enforcement. "The old, gentle rangers," she said, were "replaced by SWAT teams," sometimes drawn from Vietnam War veterans. Robert D. Barbee, interview with the author, July 24, 1989; Susan P. Bratton, interview with the author, March 20-21, 1989. M. Peter Philley and Stephen F. McCool, in "Law Enforcement in the National Parks: Perceptions and Practices," Leisure Sciences 4 (1981), 355-371, discuss the relationship between the rangers and law enforcement in the parks. See especially 369.

13. The Service's increased interest in safety resulted in a number of measures taken in Yellowstone itself, as well as the evaluation and updating of safety programs throughout the national park system. The lawsuit was settled for $20,000, but the Hechts continued to give constructive criticism of national park safety standards. Statement prepared by J. H. Hast on James L. Hecht, Admr., etc. v. United States, Civil No. 344-71R, U.S.D.C., E.D. Virginia, typescript, January 14, 1974, Hartzog; George B. Hartzog, Jr., to James L. Hecht, October 21, 1970, Hartzog; George B. Hartzog, Jr., to Martin A. Cohen, January 6, 1971, Hartzog; Richard Halloran, "Boy's Death Spurs a Safety Campaign in National Parks," clipping from the New York Times, November 12, 1970, Hartzog; James L. Hecht to Ronald H. Walker, December 10, 1973, Walker; Richard W. Marks, interview with the author, November 14, 1989.

14. Director Hartzog shared President Johnson's deep dedication to the values of the Great Society, and he got to know the ex-President well when the Park Service was establishing the Lyndon B. Johnson National Historical Park in Texas. Both dynamic leaders, the two men developed a strong affinity for each other. Dining at the Lawyers Club in Washington in January 1973 when the announcement came of Johnson's sudden death, Hartzog, shaken by the news, recalled to his dinner guest his friendship with Johnson and their common sense of purpose. Among other incidents, he told of his last trip to the Johnson Ranch, when he and the former President enjoyed a visit on the front porch of the Texas White House. At one point in their conversation, Johnson leaned over and slapped Hartzog on the knee, saying "George, I wish to hell I had known you when I was President because between the two of us we could have remade the fucking world." This story is related by Robert M. Utley, a former highly placed Park Service official and one of the dinner guests at the Lawyers Club, in Richard W. Sellars and Melody Webb, "An Interview with Robert M. Utley on the History of Historic Preservation in the National Park Service, 1947-1980," National Park Service, Southwest Cultural Resources Center, Professional Papers no. 16, 1988, typescript, 41. See also George B. Hartzog, Jr., Battling for the National Parks (Mt. Kisco, New York: Moyer Bell, 1988), 191-195.

15. Barry Mackintosh, Interpretation in the National Park Service: A Historical Perspective (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1986), 67-71; Special Assistant to the Director, National Park Service, to Assistant to the Secretary, January 26, 1970, Hartzog. A discussion of the origins of "Summer in the Parks" is found in Hartzog, Battling for the National Parks, 141-142.

16. Mackintosh, Interpretation in the National Park Service, 52-53; Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 348; William C. Everhart, The National Park Service (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1972), 50-51; Olsen, Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 90-91. In late 1963 Wirth had opened another training facility—the Horace M. Albright Training Center, in Grand Canyon National Park—with a primary focus on training national park rangers (Wirth, p. 268).

17. Vernon L. Hammons, "A Brief Organizational History of the Office of Design and Construction, National Park Service, 1917-1962," ca. 1962, typescript, 6, NPS-HC; National Park Service, Denver Service Center, "Annual Report," 1981, 33, TIC; Denver Service Center, "On Board Count, 1981 to 1993;" National Park Service, "Composition of DSC Workforce," March 1983, Falb; John Luzader, "Some Chapters in the History of NPS Professions," manuscript, V-1, TIC; Denver Service Center, "Annual Report," 1990, 35 TIC.

18. G. Frank Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time: The National Park Service and the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980" (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1985), discusses the Park Service's deep involvement in the Alaska legislation and the early efforts to manage the new parks. See especially 69-156, 159-171, 237-296. See also Foresta, America's National Parks, 84-87, for a discussion of the decline of the Park Service's political strength, resulting from the Alaska effort and other developments of this period.

19. Joel V. Kussman, "National Park Service Wilderness Program," paper presented at the Society of American Foresters National Convention, October 1983, typescript, n.p., Dennis; National Park Service, Wilderness Task Force, "Report on Improving Wilderness Management in the National Park Service," September 3, 1994, typescript, 14-16, TIC; Michael McCloskey to George Hartzog, January 4, 1967, Hartzog; Director to Directors, Midwest, Northeast, Pacific Northwest, Southeast, Southwest and Western Regions, October 12, 1972, Hartzog; John W. Henneberger, interview with the author, June 17, 1989; "Park Wilderness in Danger," National Parks Magazine 38 (October 1964), 2. The commission had recommended six classifications for public-use lands: three for recreational lands; two for natural areas (specifically, "primitive areas" and "unique natural areas"); and one for historical and archeological sites.

Faced with probable passage of the Wilderness Act (and likely in an effort to ensure continued, unrestricted authority over national park backcountry), the Service by early 1963 had begun to identify potential wilderness areas. Nevertheless, revealing the long-standing ambivalence within the Service, an internal task force report prepared in 1994—thirty years after passage of the Wilderness Act—admonished the Service that it "should be proud" of wilderness areas in the parks and that it "should view the term 'wilderness' in a positive light." Director to All Regional Directors and Chief, Field Design Offices, January 11, 1963, Hartzog; National Park Service, Wilderness Task Force, "Report on Improving Wilderness Management in the National Park Service," 16.

20. The Great Smokies' transmountain road was intended as an alternative to a 1943 commitment to build a highway along the shore of Fontana Lake. Forming part of the south boundary of the park, this Tennessee Valley Authority reservoir had inundated an existing road used by anglers and other locals. Neither the transmountain nor the lakeshore road proposal came to fruition. Luther J. Carter, "Wilderness Act: Great Smoky Plan Debated," Science 153 (July 1, 1966), 39-42; "Park Wilderness Planning: An Editorial," National Park Magazine 41 (February 1967), 2; National Park Service, Wilderness Task Force, "Report on Improving Wilderness Management in the National Park Service," 15; National Park Service, "General Management Plan, Cumberland Island National Seashore, Georgia," January 1984, typescript, 1-2, TIC. This analysis of the Service's response to the Wilderness Act benefited from a discussion with Jim Walters, National Park Service, Santa Fe, June 13, 1995.

The complex histories of wilderness designation in Fire Island National Seashore and Shenandoah National Park are discussed in Foresta, America's National Parks, 123-127; and Jacobsen, "The Management of Wilderness in Shenandoah National Park." Efforts in both parks were affected by the 1975 Eastern Wilderness Act, which eased the stipulations of size and primitive condition for proposals in the eastern United States. In Haleakala National Park, wilderness studies led to designation of the Kipahulu Valley as both a wilderness and a "scientific reserve," similar to the research reserves of the 1930s. Prized for its rare flora and fauna, having no trails, and closed to public access, it remains one of the most restricted natural areas in the park system. Henneberger, interview with the author, June 18, 1989; Donald Reeser, discussion with the author, June 21, 1995; National Park Service, "General Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement, Haleakala National Park," January 1995, typescript, 15-16, Reeser.

21. Stanley Hulett, et al., "The National Park Service—A Prospectus for the Next Ten Years: A Special Report to the Director," February 2, 1973, typescript, Walker. Just two years before this prospectus was prepared, Horace Albright had written to Hartzog of his concern that the Service might take on too many responsibilities. As an old man who long before had pushed aggressively to build Park Service programs, Albright now feared that the Service was "already too big for one man and his few associates to plan for, direct and administer, do the job well, and keep morale high throughout the huge organization, without killing themselves." Unless it exercised caution, the Service would become a "size approaching that of a large industrial organization." Horace M. Albright to George B. Hartzog, Jr., January 15, 1971, Hartzog.

National park analyst Ronald Foresta viewed the situation during the era of expansion as one in which parks had become a "highly prized distributive good." In a time of public concern for outdoor recreation, members of Congress could gain favor with their constituencies by creating new parks. Foresta, America's National Parks, 78-79, 93. It took the administration of President Ronald Reagan to bring expansion of the national park system to a virtual halt. James M. Ridenour, Park Service director during the administration of President George Bush, believed that the system had come to include a number of unworthy parks. In 1993, studies for reduction of the system were proposed in a bill introduced in the House of Representatives. See James M. Ridenour, The National Parks Compromised: Pork Barrel Politics and America's Treasures (Merrillville, Indiana: ICS Books, 1994), 16-19; and H.R. 1508, A Bill to Provide for the Reformation of the National Park System, 103d Cong., 1st sess., March 29, 1993. Similar efforts continued through mid-decade. Dwight F. Rettie, Our National Park System (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1995), 163-170, discusses the funding and staffing problems generated by an expanding park system.

22. National Park Service, Part Two of the National Park System Plan: Natural History (Washington, D.C.: Department of the Interior, 1972), foreword, 1, 37.

23. A. Starker Leopold et al., "Wildlife Management in the National Parks," in Transactions of the Twenty-eighth North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, ed. James B. Trerethen (Washington, D.C.: Wildlife Management Institute, 1963), 32, 34, 43; National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, "A Report by the Advisory Committee to the National Park Service on Research," typescript, August 1, 1963, 1; Bruce M. Kilgore, "Above All . . . Naturalness: An Inspired Report on Parks," Sierra Club Bulletin, 48 (March 1963), 3. "Wildlife Management in the National Parks" is the formal title of the Leopold Report. Because the National Academy Committee was chaired by William Robbins, the academy's report is sometimes referred to as the Robbins Report.

24. Conrad L. Wirth to the Secretary of the Interior, August 9, 1963, NPS-HC; A. Starker Leopold to Stewart Udall, March 4, 1963, NPS-HC. Similar views were expressed by former chief biologist Victor H. Cahalane, in Cahalane to A. Starker Leopold, March 26, 1963, Victor H. Cahalane Files, MVZ-UC.

25. Leopold et al., "Wildlife Management in the National Parks," 34-35.

26. National Academy of Sciences, "A Report by the Advisory Committee," 1.

27. National Academy of Sciences, "A Report by the Advisory Committee," x, xi, 31, 43.

28. National Academy of Sciences, "A Report by the Adivisory Committee," 3, x, 21, 58.

29. National Academy of Sciences, "A Report by the Advisory Committee," 44-48. At the time the report was issued, the assistant directors reported to the director, because no deputy or associate director positions existed. Olsen, Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 83.

30. National Academy of Sciences, "A Report by the Advisory Committee," 53, 66-67, 71, 74.

31. Conrad L. Wirth to All Field Offices, July 26, 1963, Advisory Board on Wildlife and Game Management files, MVZ-UC.

32. Howard R. Stagner, interview with the author, April 15, 1989; Conrad L. Wirth to the Secretary of the Interior, September 16, 1963, NPS-HC. Park Service superintendent Robert Barbee recalled that the National Academy's report was "critical [of the Park Service] and forgotten." Barbee, interview with the author, July 24, 1989.

The National Academy Report was issued about two months before Conrad Wirth announced his retirement; to some this suggested that he was leaving in reaction to the criticism. Furthermore, surprisingly strong disapproval of the Service was expressed by Assistant Secretary of the Interior John Carver at the October 1963 superintendents conference in Yosemite (the conference at which Wirth advised the Park Service of his upcoming retirement in early 1964). The assistant secretary scolded the Service for its stubborn resistance to turning over programs to the newly created Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, and for acting too independently in matters of importance to Secretary Udall. In a hurtful remark, Carver attacked the Service for what he saw as its "mystic, quasi-religious" esprit de corps, which he compared to that of the Hitler Youth Movement (he was referring to the Service's "ranger mystique"). This affront to the Park Service and to Wirth stimulated further speculation that such disapproval had prompted the director's resignation. However, Wirth states in his autobiography that in early 1963, long before the criticisms surfaced, he had told Secretary Udall of his intention to resign at the end of the year. There appear to have been professional differences and differences of style between Wirth and Udall that may have brought Wirth to his decision. A holdover from the Truman-Eisenhower years, Wirth was not one of the "New Frontiersmen." John A. Carver, paper presented at the National Park Service Conference of Challenges, Yosemite National Park, October 13-19, 1963, typescript, NPS-HC; Wirth, Parks, Politics, and the People, 297-314.

33. National Academy of Sciences, "A Report by the Advisory Committee," x, 31; National Park Service, "Get the Facts, and Put Them to Work," October 1961, typescript, 4, NPS-HC; published in George Wright Forum 3 (Autumn 1983), 28-38. Howard Stagner's efforts to get prestigious scientific committees to review Park Service science programs were recalled by Lowell Sumner in a 1968 address to Service biologists. Lowell Sumner, "A History of the Office of Natural Science Studies," in "Proceedings of the Meeting of Research Scientists and Management Biologists of the National Park Service," Horace M. Albright Training Center, April 6-8, 1968, typescript, 4, Dennis. Starker Leopold was himself influenced by the reports of Stagner and the National Academy, and in his address to the October 1963 superintendents conference he reiterated their blunt criticism, at times quoting directly from them. A. Starker Leopold, "Wildlife Management in the Future," 11-12, address given at the National Park Service Conference of Challenges, Yosemite National Park, October 1963, appended to Acting Director to All Field Offices, December 6, 1963, NPS-HC.

34. Wirth's comment is in Director, National Park Service, to Secretary of the Interior, August 9, 1963.

35. For the organizational chart effective in 1963, see Olsen, Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 83.

36. Leopold et al., "Wildlife Management in the National Parks," 32, 34, 43.

37. For example, Assistant Director Howard W. Baker acknowledged to Starker Leopold in December 1965 that the Service was aware that resource management would present "complexities well beyond our present sophistication of ecological interactions." Baker added that it may take "many years, or perhaps decades" to arrive at an understanding of the parks' ecology and its relation to human activity. Howard W. Baker to A. Starker Leopold, December 29, 1965, Advisory Board on Wildlife and Game Management Files, MVZ-UC.

38. George B. Hartzog, Jr., to All Field Offices, March 29, 1965, NPS-HC.

39. Robert M. Linn, "The Natural Resources Committee—A Functional Concept," attached to Deputy Director to Natural Resources Committee Members, June 16, 1967, NPS-HC. In a somewhat similar way (and with somewhat similar results), U.S. Forest Service management contended with the question of independent internal scientific research. See Ashley L. Schiff, Fire and Water: Scientific Heresy in the Forest Service (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1962), 169-181.

40. Director, National Park Service to Secretary of the Interior, September 16, 1963, with attachments, NPS-HC; National Academy of Sciences, "A Report by the Advisory Committee," 66; Sumner, "Biological Research and Management in the National Park Service: A History," George Wright Forum 3 (Autumn 1983), 20; Olsen, Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 85.

41. George Sprugel, Howard Stagner, and Robert M. Linn, "National Parks as Natural Science Research Areas," Trends in Parks and Recreation 1 (July 1964), n.p.; Marietta Sumner et al., "Remembering Lowell Sumner," George Wright Forum 6, no. 4 (1990), 37; comments by Robert M. Linn, in "Proceedings of the Meeting of Research Scientists and Management Biologists of the National Park Service," April 6-8, 1968, 19; Garrett A. Smathers, "Historical Overview of Resources Management Planning in the National Park Service," 1975, typescript, 10-11, NPSHC; and National Park Service, "Natural Resources Management Handbook," July 1968, part 1, chapter 2, 1; Roland H. Wauer, "Natural Resource Management—Trend or Fad?" George Wright Forum 4, no. 1 (1984), 27.

42. National Academy of Sciences, "A Report by the Advisory Committee," 66, 48-49.

43. Robert M. Linn, "The Science Program in the National Park Service," typescript, April 11, 1973, Dennis. George Sprugel, Jr., interview with the author, November 5, 1992. William Supernaugh also noted that many superintendents resented scientists being in their parks without being under their control. Supernaugh, interview with the author, November 4, 1993.

44. Sumner, "A History of the Office of Natural Science Studies," 3.

45. Olsen, interview with the author, February 26, 1990; Supernaugh, interview with the author, November 4, 1993; Roland H. Wauer, interview with the author, November 8, 1993.

46. Director to Secretary of the Interior, September 16, 1963, 5-6; Linn, "The Natural Resources Committee—A Functional Concept."

47. Acting Assistant Director, Administration, to Washington Office and All Field Offices, February 12, 1964, 3, Dennis. The Division of Resources Management and Visitor Protection received official sanction in the Service's revised organizational chart of December 1965. See Olsen, Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 85.

48. Harthon L. Bill to Director, July 7, 1965, with attachment, Garrison; Supernaugh, interview with the author, November 4, 1993.

49. The quote is from Supernaugh, interview with the author, November 4, 1993.

50. Linn, "The Natural Resources Committee—A Functional Concept"; Linn, "The Science Program in the National Park Service"; Acting Assistant Director to S. Herbert Evison, September 13, 1966, NPS-HC (the acting assistant director's name is not indicated); Sumner, "A History of the Office of Natural Science Studies," 1.

51. Linn, "The Natural Resources Committee—A Functional Concept." Linn's statement had been written in late 1966.

52. Sprugel, Stagner, and Linn, "National Parks as Natural Science Research Areas," n.p.; Sumner, "Biological Research and Management," 21; Hartzog to All Field Offices, March 29, 1965. Hartzog took a pragmatic view of some research proposals, as evidenced by his reaction to Sprugel's request to study wild boars—a destructive, nonnative species in Great Smoky Mountains National Park, where Hartzog had once been stationed. When Sprugel told the director he needed to research the boars to know what to do with them, Hartzog roared: "Do with them? Do with them? I can tell you what to do with them. Shoot the goddamn beasts." This incident was witnessed by Robert M. Utley, who related it in correspondence with the author, January 17, 1994.

53. Sprugel, interview with the author, November 5, 1992.

54. Hartzog, Battling for the National Parks, 103. Linn, "The Science Program in the National Park Service," 8.

55. Linn, "The Science Program in the National Park Service," 8.

56. Sumner, "A History of the Office of Natural Science Studies," 2, 6.

57. Sprugel, interview with the author, November 5, 1992; Linn, "The Science Program in the National Park Service," 8, 9.

58. Sprugel, interview with the author, November 5, 1992; Smathers, "Historical Overview of Resources Management," 10. Sprugel's situation as chief scientist is further discussed in Alston Chase, Playing God in Yellowstone: The Destruction of America's First National Park (Boston: Atlantic Monthly Press, 1986), 247-248.

59. Harold Simons, "Science: Sense and Nonsense," BioScience (September 1966) 607-608. Sprugel, interview with the author, November 5, 1992.

60. Olsen, Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 87. In his initial rejection of the job offer, Leopold wrote that it would be "impossible" to assume another large responsibility, and added that he was aware that "you can't accomplish everything in your lunch hour and I had better practice that bit of knowledge." A. Starker Leopold to George Hartzog, Jr., April 12, 1967, Hartzog.

61. Leopold, "Wildlife Management in the Future," 11-12.

62. Robert M. Linn to George Sprugel, Jr., May 16, 1967, Sprugel. Linn observed to Sprugel that the lack of representation was "one of the problems in the way the job was set up" when Sprugel was in office.

63. Clifford P. Hansen to Frank Dunkle, May 3, 1967, Hartzog; Résumé of Proposed National Park Service Natural Science Research Act, typescript, n.d., Hartzog.

64. Linn to Sprugel, May 16, 1967; George Sprugel, Jr., to Robert M. Linn, May 31, 1967, Sprugel; Harthon L. Bill to Frank H. Dunkle, June 15, 1967, Hartzog. Linn also met with Hartzog and Hansen on the science proposal. He later recalled that at the time he suspected Hansen's real concern was control of the Yellowstone elk management issue. Robert M. Linn, interview with the author, December 10, 1992.

65. A. Starker Leopold to George Hartzog, March 27, 1968, Leopold; A. Starker Leopold to George Hartzog, March 26, 1968, Leopold; Olsen, Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 89.

66. Linn, "The Science Program in the National Park Service," 9. The regionalization is also discussed in Chief Scientist to NPS Scientists and Hydraulic Engineers, December 1, 1971, Dennis. When Hartzog regionalized the scientists, he made a similar rearrangement of the Service's history programs.

67. Robert M. Linn, correspondence with the author, October 25, 1992.

68. In reflecting on the scientists' dilemma, Lee Purkerson, veteran natural resource mangager at Redwood National Park, remarked that when Park Service scientists develop expertise in certain areas there are sometimes too many demands made on their time. They become what Purkerson called biopoliticians. Lee Purkerson, interview with the author, June 14, 1989. For parallel circumstances within the U.S. Forest Service, see Schiff, Fire and Water, 169-173. See also John G. Dennis, "Building a Science Program for the National Park System," George Wright Forum 4, no. 3 (1986), 17-18. Writing to Park Service Director Gary Everhardt in 1975, Purdue University biologist Durward L. Allen gave his opinion on the problems that occurred when scientists were not independent of superintendents. Allen commented that "in the field of natural sciences it is a mistake for management offices to be doing their own research. When done in this way, fact-finding tends to lose credibility with both scientists and the public." Durward L. Allen to Gary Everhardt, December 12, 1975, Linn. Park Service veteran Robert Utley, in correspondence with the author, January 17, 1994, recalled that those with high academic credentials who came into the Service during this era "did not harmonize with the old-line management, or even with Hartzog himself." He added that Hartzog developed a "growing disenchantment" with them and "an apprehension that they might gain more power than they should."

69. Linn, "The Natural Resources Committee—A Functional Concept."

70. Linn, interview with the author, October 26, 1992; Chief Scientist to Scientific Function Personnel, February 8, 1972, Dennis; Linn, correspondence with the author, October 25, 1992.

71. Linn, "The Science Program in the National Park Service," 9.

72. Ken Baker to Lowell Sumner, January 24, 1972, Leopold; Lowell Sumner to A. Starker Leopold, February 11, 1972, Leopold; A. Starker Leopold to Lowell Sumner, February 25, 1972, Leopold. Baker expressed similar concerns to the newly appointed regional chief scientist in San Francisco, in Ken Baker to Wally Wallis, April 6, 1972, Leopold. It is likely that Hawaii Volcanoes management was using at least part of the science money to address a resource management program of great urgency—the intensified (and ultimately successful) effort to eradicate exotic goats from the park.

73. Wauer, "Natural Resource Management—Trend or Fad?" 24-25.

74. Associate Director to All Regional Directors and Director, Denver Service Center, August 27, 1973, Dennis. The consequences of Hartzog's reorganization of the science programs are discussed in R. Gerald Wright, Wildlife Research and Management in the National Parks (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1992), 29-31. Citing an interview with longtime Park Service biologist Glen Cole, Wright states (p. 30) that the reorganization "diffused the power that the science program had accumulated over the previous decade . . . diminished the ability of scientists to react in a unified manner to service-wide problems . . . [and] created a staff of 'management scientists' who were required to work on those projects management considered to be important and not to work on those projects management did not want done or want to know anything about."

75. Submitted as a memorandum, the Leopold and Allen review was shorter and much less comprehensive than the 1963 Leopold Report. Durward L. Allen and A. Starker Leopold to the Director of the National Park Service, July 12, 1977, Dennis. The quote is from National Park Service, Briefing for Regional Director, Subject: Science Program Reorganization, to Be Given on January 16-17, 1978, Waggoner.

76. Resistance of the Park Service directorate to improving the bureaucratic status of science in accord with Assistant Secretary Herbst's wishes is discussed in Robert M. Linn, correspondence with the author, October 22, 1993, and by Wauer, interview with the author, November 8, 1993. See Olsen, Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 99-101, for the organizational changes during this period.

77. Robert M. Linn to Gary Everhardt, November 29, 1975, Linn. See also Olsen, Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 85-95.

78. Linn, interview with the author, December 10, 1992. Hartzog's resignation came in late 1972, after decisions he made at Biscayne National Monument (now a national park) were seen by President Nixon as an affront to his friend C. G. (Bebe) Rebozo, a frequent user of the park. Apparently, the Nixon White House already wanted to remove Hartzog and put in one of its own people, such as Ronald Walker, who had been on Nixon's staff. See Hartzog, Battling for the National Parks, 233-247.

79. Richard H. Briceland, interview with the author, February 14, 1989. Ronald Foresta, in America's National Parks, 89-90, discusses the shifts in power during the post-Hartzog era.

80. Briceland, interview with the author, February 14, 1989. Yellowstone Superintendent Robert Barbee later recalled being ambivalent about this proposal, not unalterably opposed to it. He believed that its effect on park management would have been "as much symbolic as real." Barbee, interview with the author, July 24, 1989.

81. Jacob Hoogland, "The National Environmental Policy Act," in Michael A. Mantell, ed., Managing National Park System Resources: A Handbook on Legal Duties, Opportunities, and Tools (Washington, D.C.: Conservation Foundation, 1990), 41; John W. Henneberger, interview with the author, June 18, 1989.

82. William R. Supernaugh, "The Evolution of the Natural Resource Specialist: A National Park Phenomenon," paper prepared for the Department of Parks, Recreation and Environmental Education, Slippery Rock State University, August 25, 1987, typescript, 8-10, copy courtesy of the author; Supernaugh, interview with the author, March 10, 1989; Wauer, "Natural Resource Management —Trend or Fad?" 27; and Roland H. Wauer, "The Role of the National Park Service Natural Resources Manager," NPS Cooperative Park Studies Unit, College of Forest Resources, University of Washington, February 1980, typescript, 1-15.

83. Bruce M. Kilgore, "Views on Natural Science and Resource Management in the Western Region," keynote address at the NPS Pacific Northwest Region, Science/Resources Management Workshop, April 18-20, 1978, NPS Cooperative Park Studies Unit, College of Forest Resources, University of Washington, 1979, 7.

84. Separation had occurred in a number of parks by about the late 1970s, for example at Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, to which Supernaugh transferred in 1974 as a ranger with resource management duties. In a park with demanding law-enforcement needs, the resource management responsibilities grew rapidly during Supernaugh's tenure—a specialization that, he recalled, was "driven by the new environmental laws." In time these duties were separated from the ranger division, emerging as a new division that utilized persons trained in natural resource management.

Similarly, professionalization occurred at Channel Islands National Park, established in 1980, where natural resource management was initially "a collateral duty for island rangers." With an unusually clear mandate for scientific resource management, this park quickly converted a ranger position to resource management. Soon afterward, it hired a professional resource manager and established a separate resource management division. However, many other parks, such as Yellowstone, kept resource management under the control of the rangers, as did most small parks. Wauer, "Natural Resources Management, Trend or Fad?" 27; Supernaugh, interviews with the author, March 10, 1989, November 17, 1992, and November 4, 1993; Supernaugh, "Evolution of the Natural Resource Management Specialists," 8-10; Gary E. Davis, correspondence with the author, August 16, 1993; Bob Krumenaker, "Resource Management and Research in the NPS: An Uneasy Relationship," Ranger 7 (Spring 1991), 10-13; Olsen, Organizational Structures of the National Park Service, 97.

85. Memorandum of Understanding between University of Washington and National Park Service, United States Department of the Interior, April 14, 1970; Michael Soukup et al., "Cooperative Park Studies Units in the National Park Service: An Analysis by the Regional Chief Scientists," April 1988, typescript, 2, 7-8; Associate Director, Natural Resources, to Deputy Assistant Secretary, August 4, 1983, Dennis; Linn, "The Science Program in the National Park Service," 11; Napier Shelton and Marie Zack, "Scientific Research in the National Parks," August 1980, typescript, n.p., copy courtesy of Napier Shelton.

86. Officially established in 1973, the University of Massachusetts studies unit formalized an existing working relationship between the Park Service and biologist Paul J. Godfrey, who had undertaken research for the Service at Cape Lookout National Seashore, near Cape Hatteras, before taking a position with the university's botany department. Director, National Park Service, to Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, July 26, 1973, CAHA. Robert D. Behn and Martha A. Clark, "The Termination of Beach Erosion Control at Cape Hatteras," Public Policy 27 (Winter 1979), 99-127, provide an overview of the history of the stabilization concerns. See also Paul J. Godfrey, "Management Guidelines for Parks on Barrier Beaches," Parks 2, no. 4 (1978), 5-10; Robert Dolan and Harry Lins, The Outer Banks of North Carolina, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1177-B (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1986), 38; and National Park Service, Management Policies (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1978), chapter 4, 22.

87. Napier Shelton, ed., "The National Park Service and Environmental Quality—An Overview," Park Science 6 (Summer 1986), 2, 3; Keith Yarborough, interview with the author, January 9, 1989; Samuel H. Kunkle, interview with the author, October 29, 1993.

88. National Academy of Sciences, "A Report by the Advisory Committee," 71; Director, National Park Service, to Secretary of the Interior, September 16, 1963. The use of the Jackson Hole Biological Research Station as a model is discussed in Natural Sciences Consulting Committee to Director, October 17, 1966, NPS-HC.

89. Gary Y. Hendrix, interview with the author, February 28, 1989; Susan Murphy, "Everglades Research Center Opens," South Dade News Leader, October 22, 1977, EVER.

90. Hendrix, interview with the author, February 28, 1989; Everglades National Park, "South Florida Research Center Base Funding History," typescript, 1989, EVER; Michael Soukup and Robert F. Doren, "Reorganization of the South Florida Research Center," Park Science 13 (Summer 1993), 1, 4. In the same issue of Park Science is an example of Nathaniel Reed's continuing concerns about science and resource management at Everglades: "Dare to Save the Everglades," p. 3.

91. Bratton, interview with the author, March 20-21, 1989. In a handwritten letter, Bratton described to veteran Great Smoky Mountains naturalist Arthur Stupka her concern about the "lack of management in the Park," adding that she hoped to " 'advertise' some of the problems among the scientific community." Susan Bratton to Arthur Stupka, April 15, 1974, Bratton.

92. Bratton, interview with the author, March 20-21, 1989. As an example of the park's disinterest in natural history research during the period before Bratton and Evison arrived, Bratton stated that the park had "given away" a large assortment of birds, mammals, and salamanders that naturalist Arthur Stupka had collected in the park over many years. A brief history of the Uplands Laboratory is found in John McCrone et al., "Uplands Field Research Laboratory, Regional Review Team Package," June 21, 1982, typescript, GRSM.

93. National Park Service Science Center, "Annual Report," May 1976, appendix B: Captain, NPS Science Sub-Task Force to National Park Service Task Force Chairman, May 23, 1975, attachment, 12-13, TIC; National Park Service Science Center, "Annual Report," May 1975, 2-4, TIC; Henneberger, interview with the author, June 18, 1989.

94. National Park Service "Proposal to Accomplish Ecological and Environmental Management of Coastal Zones and Major Upland Parks Utilizing NASA's Mississippi Test Facility/Slidell Computer Center," September 12, 1972, draft, Dennis; National Park Service, "History of Science in NPS," typescript, 4, Waggoner; Gary S. Waggoner, interview with the author, August 10, 1993. Waggoner, who was stationed at the center, believed the office also suffered from the regional chief scientists' desire to maintain close control of research in their regions; thus they viewed the center as a competitor for a "limited pot of money to do research."

95. National Park Service Science Center, "Annual Report," May 1976, 2, and appendix B, 2, 3, 16. As Susan Bratton recalled it, the center often had to seek projects, such as a mimosa control proposal at Great Smoky Mountains—a project that was considered unessential and tended to undermine the center's credibility. Bratton, interview with the author, March 20-21, 1989. About the time the science center was terminated, the Park Service set up the Coastal Field Research Laboratory, using facilities near Bay Saint Louis. This effort was designed to coordinate research on the southeastern barrier islands and beaches. Stephen V. Shabica, "Southeast Regional Office Coastal Research Laboratory, NSTL Station, Mississippi—Research Perspectives," 1979, October 16, 1978, CAHA.

96. Robert M. Linn to George Sprugel, Jr., April 7, 1967, Sprugel.

97. Lary M. Dilsaver and William C. Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees (Three Rivers, California: Sequoia Natural History Association, 1990), 316; William R. Supernaugh, correspondence with the author, October 28, 1993; "Channel Islands National Park, 1992 Annual Report— Natural and Cultural Resources Management," copy courtesy of Gary E. Davis; Gary E. Davis, correspondence with the author, August 16, 1993.

98. Purkerson, interview with the author, June 14, 1989; National Park Service, "Redwood Renaissance," brochure, n.d. (ca. 1980s); James K. Agee, "Issues and Impacts of Redwood National Park Expansion," Environmental Management 4 (September 1980), 409-419. Douglas Warnock, Redwood superintendent during the 1980s, recalled being told by representatives of timber companies clear-cutting lands adjacent to the park that the redwoods were "just like tomatoes—when they're ripe you pick 'em." But the public paid a price for this. In addition to the money needed to restore the forest, the government paid the companies that clear-cut the lands hundreds of millions of dollars for the expansion acreage, much of it stripped and barren because of the cutting. Most of this acreage was upslope from the original national park lands, and, if not restored, would—through erosion—devastate the downslope, old-growth park redwoods and the streams. Moreover, additional federal funds had to be expended to restore the streams and their aquatic life, including commercially important salmon populations, which were seriously affected by the silting that followed the clear-cutting. Douglas G. Warnock, interview with the author, June 13, 1989; National Park Service, "The Redwood National Park Watershed Rehabilitation Program: A Progress Report and Plan for the Future," June 1984, typescript, 3-5, REDW; U.S. Secretary of the Interior, "Report to Congress in Compliance with Section 104(a), P.L. 95-250, on the Status of Implementation of the Redwood National Park Expansion Act of March 27, 1978," Sixth Annual Report, typescript, 3-5, REDW.

99. Linn, comments in "Proceedings of the Meeting of Research Scientists and Management Biologists of the National Park Service," April 6-8, 1968, 7; Assistant Director, Service Center Operations, to Director, September 1, 1972, Hartzog.

100. Assistant Director, Service Center Operations, to Director, September 1, 1972.

101. William P. Gregg, interview with the author, July 14, 1993.

102. Gregg, interview with the author, July 14, 1993; Henneberger, interview with the author, June 18, 1989.

103. Gregg, interview with the author, July 14, 1993; R. Gerald Wright, interview with the author, August 11, 1993, and October 28, 1993. To gain a broader understanding of resources, the Service hired from diverse disciplines, such as wildlife, geology, and aquatic science.

104. Wright, interview with the author, August 11, 1993. Wright worked at the service center from 1972 to 1975.

105. Wright, interview with the author, August 11, 1993.

106. National Park Service, State of the Parks—1980, A Report to the Congress (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1980), 36; Supernaugh, interview with the author, November 4, 1993; National Academy of Sciences, "A Report by the Advisory Committee," x, xi, 31, 43.

107. Leopold et al., "Wildlife Management in the National Parks," 39-40, 42.

108. Leopold et al., "Wildlife Management in the National Parks," 34, 35-37.

109. Leopold et al., "Wildlife Management in the National Parks," 29, 32, 43. The committee may have been influenced by Fauna No. 1's goal of maintaining a stable scene—that there was "one point in time which satisfies wild-life survey requirements as regards a particular [park]. This is the period between the arrival of the first whites and the entrenchment of civilization in that vicinity." George M. Wright, Joseph S. Dixon, and Ben H. Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks of the United States: A Preliminary Survey of Faunal Relations in National Parks, Contributions of Wild Life Survey, Fauna Series no. 1 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1933), 10.

110. A. Starker Leopold, "Wildlife Management in the Future," address presented at the Yosemite National Park Conference of Challenges, October 1963, typescript, appended to George B. Hartzog, Jr., to All Field Offices, December 6, 1963, 4-5, NPS-HC.

111. Udall's May 1963 declaration is cited in the management policy book, Compilation of the Administrative Policies for the National Parks and National Monuments of Scientific Signifi- cance (Natural Area Category) (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1970), 23. (The administrative policies of the Service were commonly referred to as management policies.) See also Hartzog, Battling for the National Parks, 102; Mackintosh, Shaping the System, 63-64; National Park Service, "National Park Wilderness Planning Procedures," August 8, 1966, typescript, 3, NPS-HC; and National Park Service, Wilderness Task Force, "Report on Improving Wilderness Management in the National Park Service," 15-16. The National Park Service's Denver Service Center library houses an extensive collection of the handbooks.

112. National Park Service, Administrative Policies (1970), 77. For the full text of the Lane Letter and Leopold Report, see 68-71 and 97-112.

113. Stagner, interview with the author, April 15, 1989.

114. See Michael A. Mantell, ed., Managing National Park System Resources: A Handbook on Legal Duties, Opportunities, and Tools (Washington, D.C.: Conservation Foundation, 1990), 12-15.

115. National Park Service, Administrative Policies (1970), 17.

116. National Park Service, Administrative Policies (1970), 22-26; Hartzog's September 1967 memorandum is on pp. 113-116.

117. Hartzog's announcement was dated before the meeting with Udall and McGee took place, and its release may have been delayed until after the meeting—perhaps an indication that the Service had already decided to change its elk policy and was gathering support from the two officials. George B. Hartzog, "Management Program, Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd, Yellowstone National Park," March 1, 1967; attached to National Park Service news release, "National Park Service Director Hartzog Initiates Elk Management Program for Yellowstone National Park," March 1, 1967, Hartzog; Hearings before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, United States Senate, Ninetieth Congress, First Session, on Control of Elk Populations, Yellowstone National Park (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1967), 1, 6-7, 33-34, 89-90; Hartzog, Battling for the National Parks, 104, 252-253; Wright, Wildlife Research and Management, 42-44, 78-79, 89; Karl Hess, Jr., Rocky Times in Rocky Mountain National Park: An Unnatural History (Niwot, Colorado: University Press of Colorado, 1993), 22-23. See also Michael B. Coughenour and Francis J. Singer, "The Concept of Overgrazing and Its Application to Yellowstone's Northern Range," 1989, typescript, 8, YELL.

118. Hearings before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, on Control of Elk Populations, 89-90; National Park Service, "Management Objectives for Northern Yellowstone Elk," September 19, 1967, typescript, Hartzog; National Park Service, "Natural Control of Elk," December 5, 1967, typescript, Hartzog. A paper prepared in 1971 by Yellowstone biologist Glen Cole declared predators to be "non-essential" to natural regulation. Glen F. Cole, "An Ecological Rationale for the Natural or Artificial Regulation of Native Ungulates in Parks," draft paper prepared for the Thirty-sixth North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, Portland, Oregon, March 7-10, 1971, Hartzog. As recently as 1995, a park document acknowledged that termination of the elk reduction was "due largely to public controversy." Yellowstone National Park, Resource Management Plan, approved 1995, typescript, PS page 0001, YELL.

119. Wright, Thompson, and Dixon, Fauna of the National Parks (1933), 147. William Barmore to Glen Cole, cited in Charles Edward Kay, "Yellowstone's Northern Elk Herd: A Critical Evaluation of the 'Natural Regulation' Paradigm," Ph.D. diss., Utah State University, 1990, 8-9. William J. Barmore, "Conflicts in Recreation—Elk versus Aspen in Yellowstone National Park," paper presented at the Twentieth Annual Meeting of the American Society of Range Management, Seattle, February 13-17, 1967, typescript, 1, YELL. Kay (pp. 7-10) repeatedly charges that the park acted with little or no scientific information. Indicative of this, no significant northern range research was cited by Cole in his 1971 paper, "An Ecological Rationale for the Natural or Artificial Regulation of Native Ungulates in Parks," 15-18. Much later, in 1980, Barmore would modify his position, reducing the emphasis on the effects of grazing and attributing changes in aspen to a variety of causes. William Barmore, "Population Characteristics, Distribution and Habitat Relationships of Six Ungulates in Northern Yellowstone Park," final report, 1980, n.p., YELL.

120. Leopold et al., "Wildlife Management in the National Parks," 38-41, 43. Leopold stated to the Senate committee that "we recommended that direct control continue. And I have not changed my mind on this." Hearings . . . on Control of Elk Populations, Yellowstone National Park, 20; National Park Service, "National Park Service Director Hartzog Initiates Elk Management Program for Yellowstone National Park." See also Jack K. Anderson to Horace M. Albright, December 22, 1970, Hartzog. Hartzog states flatly in his autobiography that direct reduction was "consistent with the Leopold Report." Hartzog, Battling for the National Parks, 104.

121. A. Starker Leopold, interview by Carol Holleuffer, June 14, 1983, Sierra Club Oral History Project, typescript, 19; A. Starker Leopold to Boyd Evison, June 9, 1983, Leopold-FRM.

122. Paul Schullery, The Bears of Yellowstone (1986; 3rd ed., Worland, Wyoming: High Plains Publishing Company, 1992), 109.

123. John J. Craighead and Frank C. Craighead, Jr., "Management of Bears in Yellowstone National Park," July 1967, typescript, YELL; Schullery, Bears of Yellowstone, 118-120; Chase, Playing God in Yellowstone, 149-152.

124. Frank C. Craighead, Jr., Track of the Grizzly (San Francisco: Sierra Club Books, 1979), 194-195; Schullery, Bears of Yellowstone, 113, 120. The Service's concern that a gradual closing of the dumps should not result in an incident such as those that occurred at Glacier is expressed in Deputy Chief Scientist Robert M. Linn to Associate Director Joseph P. Linduska, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, May 21, 1968, Leopold.

125. John Craighead to Jack K. Anderson, July 24, 1970, YELL; Craighead and Craighead, "Management of Bears in Yellowstone National Park," iii-iv. Later, Frank Craighead, Track of the Grizzly (p. 194), wrote that the project was not "initiated or significantly funded" by the Park Service.

126. In the late 1970s, John Craighead wrote to Yellowstone historian Paul Schullery, charging that at the time of the controversy "very little" of the park's grizzly bear management "could be backed by scientific evidence" and that the park's position on bear management was "taken without the benefit of any field research. I emphasize the any, since the decisions that were made and later had to be defended were not based on any NPS research." Schullery later wrote that certainly "nobody in the Park Service knew [the key grizzly bear data]." He added that "in fact there was no one in the world with [the Craigheads'] scientific credentials as grizzly bear authorities." As a former park archivist at Yellowstone, Schullery also commented that the park had done a "lousy job" of keeping records on bears. In 1974 a National Academy of Sciences review panel stated that the park's research program was still "inadequate to provide the data essential for devising sound management policies for the grizzly bears of the Yellowstone ecosystem." John Craighead to Paul Schullery, April 6, 1978, Leopold-FRM; Schullery, Bears of Yellowstone, 124, 120-121. The academy's quote is in Schullery (p. 144).

127. Craighead, Track of the Grizzly, 195 (see also 196-199); Bill Gilbert, "The Great Grizzly Controversy," Audubon 78 (January 1976), 69. Park Service objection to the Craigheads' use of the media is expressed in, for example, Jack K. Anderson to Dr. John J. Craighead, February 9, 1971, Leopold.

128. Jack K. Anderson to John J. Craighead, April 7, 1969, YELL.

129. Jack K. Anderson to John J. Craighead, July 9, 1970, YELL; Anderson to John Craighead, April 7, 1969; National Academy of Sciences, "A Report by the Advisory Committee," 62; Natural Sciences Advisory Committee, draft report, attached to A. Starker Leopold to George Hartzog, October 6, 1969, Leopold. The committee did not take a position on the how fast the dumps should be closed. Schullery comments in The Bears of Yellowstone (p. 135) that termination of the Craigheads' research at this point was a "great misfortune." The research would not only have been valuable to the park, but would have been "priceless for managers of other areas." See also Craighead, Track of the Grizzly, 201-202.

130. Nathaniel P. Reed to Robert Barbee, February 14, 1983, Leopold—FRM. For a conspiratorial view of the controversy, see Chase, Playing God in Yellowstone, 142-194. Chase indicates possible Park Service malfeasance in attempting to justify its grizzly bear management actions (see for example pp. 155-160). He traces the continuing controversy into the 1980s (pp. 157-194). See also Frederic H. Wagner et al., Wildlife Policies in the U.S. National Parks (Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1995), 102-103; and Craighead, Track of the Grizzly (for example, pp. 196-197), which angrily accuses the Park Service of creating difficulties and obstructions for the Craigheads. Schullery's Bears of Yellowstone, 114-146, is more supportive of the Park Service and at times critical of the Craigheads.

Stressing the point of Park Service responsibility (which had long been explicit in legislation), Glen Cole told a 1970 meeting of Park Service scientists and resource managers that the "situation has reached a stage where the Park Service must assert that it is responsible both for the preservation of the grizzly and for the protection of visitors within Yellowstone National Park. This responsibility cannot be transferred to other individuals or agencies. While basic studies of park fauna are encouraged, these cannot take precedence over operational management which is necessary for human safety and, ultimately, for the preservation of the grizzly population itself." Glen F. Cole, "Grizzly Bear Management in Yellowstone National Park," in National Park Service, "Proceedings of the Meeting of Research Scientists and Resource Managers of the National Park Service," April 18-20, 1970, typescript, 34, NPS-HC.

131. Chase, Playing God in Yellowstone, 148, 155; Wright, Wildlife Research and Management, 114-115; Craighead, Track of the Grizzly, 226; Schullery, Bears of Yellowstone, 118, 135-136, 143-144. On the safety issue, biologist Cole had reported to Anderson in August 1969 that, statistically, "the grizzly bear represents a low risk to Yellowstone Park visitors." Supervisory Research Biologist to Superintendent, August 18, 1969, Leopold. Yet the initial bear mortality count after closure was unusually high because the Service was making an extra effort to protect park visitors at a time when, with the dumps closed, the bears were believed to be more likely to seek other sources of human foods, as in campgrounds.

132. Yellowstone National Park, "Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team," September 1979, typescript, Wauer; Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team, Briefing Statement, July 9, 1981, typescript, YELL; Schullery, Bears of Yellowstone, 142-161; Wright, Wildlife Research and Management, 114-118.

133. Edward C. Stone, in "Preserving Vegetation in Parks and Wilderness," Science 150 (December 3, 1965), 1261-67, discusses the Service's failure to develop an understanding of plant ecology.

134. Leopold et al., "Wildlife Management in the National Parks," 37. Following Secretary Udall's request for a report, Lowell Sumner had written to his friend Starker Leopold to express alarm that insect control was being "expanded and extended." Sumner urged the committee to "present an opinion on this subject." E. Lowell Sumner to A. Starker Leopold, May 16, 1962, Advisory Board on Wildlife and Game Management files, MVZ-UC.

135. Leopold et al., "Wildlife Management in the National Parks," 33. Like the Service's biologists, Starker Leopold had long believed that fire policies needed revision. As early as 1952 he had predicted that the Service would "eventually come around to controlled burning," as biologist Bruce Kilgore later recalled it. In the mid-1950s Leopold told a wilderness conference that fire was a "dominant molding element" for national park flora. In Kilgore's recollection, Leopold had stated that he was "convinced that ground fires some day will be reinstated in the regimen of natural factors permitted to maintain the parks in something resembling a virgin state and that conditions in the parks would force this issue sooner or later." Recalled in Bruce M. Kilgore to A. Starker Leopold, November 29, 1957, Bruce M. Kilgore files, MVZ-UC.

136. Director, National Park Service, to Secretary of the Interior, August 9, 1963, attachment, 8-9.

137. Rachel Carson, Silent Spring (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1962). Murie stated that the spraying program in Grand Teton had affected 318,604 trees, with a total of 328,809 gallons of fuel oil mixed with 101, 071 pounds of the chemical ethylene dibromide. The 1966 program would, he predicted, treat more than seventy thousand lodgepole pines. Adolph Murie, "Pesticide Program in Grand Teton National Park, National Parks Magazine 40 (June 1966), 17-19.

138. Stanley A. Cain to Paul M. Tilden, July 21, 1966, A. Murie; Pete Hayden, discussion with the author, April 22, 1993; National Park Service, Administrative Policies (1970), 20-21; National Park Service, "Pest Control, National Park System," May 1977, 1-4, TIC.

139. Director, National Park Service, to Secretary of the Interior, August 9, 1963, attachment, 3; Bruce M. Kilgore, "Research Needed for an Action Program of Restoring Fire to Giant Sequoias," in "The Role of Fire in the Intermountain West," Intermountain Fire Research Council Symposium, 1970, typescript, 177-178. Cook's opposition to releasing a study in Sequoia by Richard J. Hartesveldt was recalled by former chief scientist Robert M. Linn in a discussion with the author, March 22, 1993. Cook had once been the park forester in Sequoia. Dilsaver and Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees, 170.

140. William B. Robertson, Jr., "A Survey of the Effects of Fire in Everglades National Park," February 15, 1953, typescript, 7, 11, EVER. See also Kilgore, "Restoring Fire," 17.

141. Kilgore, "Research Needed for an Action Program," 175-176; Robertson, "A Survey of the Effects of Fire in Everglades National Park," 14; David M. Graber, "Coevolution of National Park Service Fire Policy and the Role of National Parks," in Proceedings—Symposium and Workshop on Wilderness Fire, Missoula, Montana, November 15-18, 1983 (Ogden, Utah: Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, 1985), 346-347. On Indians and fire, Graber, for instance, writing to Starker Leopold (his former professor), stated that in Sequoia the "limited evidence at our disposal suggests that Indians were a major factor in the 'natural' fire cycle." David M. Graber to A. Starker Leopold, April 5, 1983, Leopold-FRM. See also the chapter on fire and the American Indian in Stephen J. Pyne, Fire in America: A Cultural History of Wildland and Rural Fire (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982), 71-83.

142. Kilgore, "Research Needed for an Action Program," 174, 177-178; Dilsaver and Tweed, Challenge of the Big Trees, 263-265. In 1975 Kilgore stated that there were "still individual and organizational hangups that sometimes get in the way of trying new concepts in forest management." These hangups were, he believed, "gradually being overcome." Bruce M. Kilgore, "Integrated Fire Management on National Parks," in "Proceedings of the 1975 National Convention of the Society of American Foresters," typescript, 2, Hartzog. Additional comments on reluctance to accept changes in fire policies are found in Bruce Kilgore, "From Fire Control to Fire Management: An Ecological Basis for Policies," in Kenneth Sabol, ed., Transactions: Forty-first North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference (Washington, D.C.: Wildlife Management Institute, 1976), 478. See also Kilgore, "Restoring Fire to National Park Wilderness," 17; and Stephen J. Botti and Tom Nichols, "The Yosemite and Sequoia-Kings Canyon Prescribed Natural Fire Programs, 1968-1978," n.d., typescript, 4, YOSE.

143. National Park Service, Administrative Policies (1970), 17.

144. Kilgore, "Research Needed for an Action Program," 173. Many critics believed that in certain situations prescribed burning would not be effective; others such as former director Horace Albright simply opposed altogether the change from traditional fire suppression policies. In July 1972 Albright had written to Director Hartzog to express opposition to proposed new fire policies "before something terrible happens." He warned that Yellowstone superintendent Jack Anderson would need "only one 'experiment' to burn up Yellowstone Park." To the park's claim that fire has a natural ecological role, Albright replied, "I don't think so at all," and stated flatly that Yellowstone "was not created to preserve an 'ecosystem.' " Horace M. Albright to George B. Hartzog, July 12, 1972, Hartzog; Yellowstone National Park, "Information Paper No. 16," March 1972, YELL. See also Horace Marden Albright, speech given at the Eleventh Cosmos Club Award, April 15, 1974, 14-15, Hartzog; and Horace Albright, "Former Directors Speak Out," American Forests 82 (June 1976), 51.

145. Kilgore, "Integrated Fire Management," n.p.; Kilgore, "From Fire Control to Fire Management," 483; Pyne, Fire in America, 303. See Schiff, Fire and Water, 51-115, on the U.S. Forest Service management's longtime resistance to controlled burning.

146. Department of the Interior, news release, December 12, 1974, Garrison; Department of the Interior, news release, February 18, 1976, Garrison; John F. Chapman, "The Teton Wilderness Fire Plan," Western Wildlands (Summer 1977), 15; National Park Service, Management Policies (1978), chapter 4, 13.

147. National Park Service, Administrative Policies (1970), 56; National Park Service, "Actions Recommended in the Leopold Report to Advance the Ability of the Public to View Wildlife," July 3, 1967, 3-5, Dennis. An early 1980s report stated that most parks had exotic species. John G. Dennis, "National Park Service Research on Exotic Species and the Policy behind That Research: An Introduction to the Special Session on Exotic Species," 1980, prepared for "Proceedings of the Second Conference on Scientific Research in National Parks," November 1979, San Francisco, typescript, 241-243, 245, Dennis; Wright, Wildlife Research and Management, 92; Wright, Dixon, and Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks (1933), 148. The Leopold Report's brief mention of exotics in national parks is found in Leopold et al., "Wildlife Management in the National Parks," 32, 34.

148. Wright, Wildlife Research and Management, 95-101; Milford R. Fletcher, discussion with the author, August 22, 1995; National Park Service, "European Wild Hogs in Great Smoky Mountains National Park," May 1, 1985, typescript, 32, 36-41, GRSM.

149. James K. Baker and Donald W. Reeser, Goat Management Problems in Hawaii Volcanoes National Park: A History Analysis and Management Plan (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1972), 2-5.

150. Donald W. Reeser, "Establishment of the Resources Management Division, Hawaii Volcanoes National Park," paper presented at the George Wright Society meeting, Jacksonville, Florida, November 1992, typescript, n.p., Reeser.

151. Reeser, "Establishment of the Resources Management Division," n.p.; George B. Hartzog, Jr., to Earl Pacheco, October 20, 1970; Robert L. Barrell to Michio Takata, November 23, 1970, Reeser; National Park Service, Administrative Policies (1970), 56. In August 1963, responding to the Leopold Report, the Park Service had specifically acknowledged the "most extreme examples of severe ecological dislocation" caused by exotics in Hawaiian parks. Director, National Park Service, to Secretary of the Interior, August 9, 1963.

152. Anthony Wayne Smith to George B. Hartzog, Jr., May 12, 1971. The Hawaii Botanical Society denounced Hartzog's decision merely to control rather than to eradicate the goats, arguing that the Park Service's true mandate was "protection of native plant and animal species under pristine conditions." Hawaii Botanical Society, "Resolution Regarding Goats in National Parks in Hawaii," April 5, 1971, typescript, Reeser.

153. George B. Hartzog, Jr., to Anthony Wayne Smith, June 17, 1971.

154. A view similar to that of Balaz is expressed in Edward A. Hummel to Hon. Patsy T. Mink, June 22, 1971, Reeser. Ken Baker to Bob Linn, July 2, 1971, Reeser; Gene J. Balaz to William L. Canine, May 4, 1971, Reeser; Reeser, "Establishment of the Resource Management Division," n.p.

155. Reeser, "Establishment of the Resources Management Division." Through hunting, trapping, and fencing, rangers at Hawaii Volcanoes also waged war on feral pigs. Following the lead of Hawaii Volcanoes, Haleakala National Park resolved its exotic goat problem by fencing and killing, and was rid of most goats by the end of the 1980s. Wright, Wildlife Research and Management, 105-107; Russell W. Cahill to Ruth Gay, March 30, 1972, Reeser.

156. Douglas B. Houston, Edward G. Schreiner, Bruce Moorhead, Mountain Goats in Olympic National Park: Biology and Management of an Introduced Species (Denver: National Park Service, 1994), 10-12, 190-197; Wagner et al., Wildlife Policies, 104-105; Rolf O. Peterson and Robert J. Krumenaker, "Wolves Approach Extinction on Isle Royale: A Biological and Policy Conundrum," George Wright Forum 6, no. 1 (1989), 14-15; Stephen Nash, "The Wolves of Isle Royale," National Parks 63 (January/February 1989), 21-26, 42; Wright, Wildlife Research and Management, 101-105, 142-143.

157. "Science and the NPS Work Session," attached to Boyd Evison to Participants, April 11, 1978, typescript, DEVA.

158. National Parks and Conservation Association, "NPCA Adjacent Lands Survey: No Park Is an Island," National Parks and Conservation Magazine 53 (March 1979), 4-9, and (April 1979), 4-7. The National Parks and Conservation Association was formerly the National Parks Association.

159. The Redwood National Park Expansion Act has been viewed as somewhat ambiguous in its declaration on protecting park resources. See United States General Accounting Office, Parks and Recreation: Limited Progress Made in Documenting and Mitigating Threats to the Parks (Washington, D.C.: General Accounting Office, 1987), 51-57; Robert B. Keiter, "National Park Protection: Putting the Organic Act to Work," in David J. Simon, ed., Our Common Lands: Defending the National Parks (Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1988), 76-78; and Mantell, Managing National Park System Resources, 14-15. The Park Service itself, in National Park Service, National Parks for the Twenty-first Century: The Vail Agenda (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service [1993]), 126, stated that the act "appears to authorize the Service to take reasonable measures to protect park resources from degradation" (emphasis added), noting also that "the Service has been reluctant to use this authority, and courts have not vigorously enforced this provision." For an extended discussion of the "Emergence of External Threats as a Policy and Management Issue," see John C. Freemuth, Islands under Siege: National Parks and the Politics of External Threats (Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 1991), 9-36.

160. Wauer, interview with the author, November 8, 1993; and National Park Service, State of the Parks—1980. An account of the evolution of State of the Parks is found in Roland H. Wauer, "The Greening of Natural Resources Management," Trends 19, no. 1 (1982), 2-6; Wauer, "Natural Resources Management—Trend or Fad?" 24-28; William R. Supernaugh, "Threats to Parks: Five Years Later," paper prepared at Slippery Rock University, December 6, 1985, typescript, 1-4, copy courtesy of the author; William R. Supernaugh, "An Assessment of Progress Made between 1980 and 1992 in Responding to Threats to the National Park System," thesis, Slippery Rock University, January 1994, 1-4, copy courtesy of the author.

The congressmen emphasized that they did "not have in mind" traditional park administrative and facility concerns, such as "personnel and equipment; local concessions, operational problems, [or] maintenance inadequacies." Rather, they were expressly interested in natural resource problems such as "air or water pollution, encroaching development, troublesome visitor use pressures, . . . adverse adjacent resource uses, exotic plant and/or animal intrusion, . . . rights to exercise incompatible uses within the park[s], and the like." Phillip Burton and Keith G. Sebelius to William Whalen, July 10, 1979, NPS-HC.

161. State of the Parks—1980, ix, 3-5.

162. State of the Parks—1980, viii, 34-36. The inadequacy of documentation on the parks' resources and their threats is discussed on 5-7.

163. Wauer, interview with the author, November 8, 1993.

164. State of the Parks—1980, ix-x; Wauer, interview with the author, November 8, 1993.

165. National Park Service, State of the Parks: A Report to the Congress on a Servicewide Strategy for Prevention and Mitigation of Natural and Cultural Resources Management Problems (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1981), 2-13. See also Supernaugh, "An Assessment of Progress Made between 1980 and 1992," 16, 25-27, 34-35, 69-70, 75-78; and Wauer, "The Greening of Natural Resource Management, 2-7. During the 1970s, while head of natural resource management activities in the Service's southwest region, Wauer had developed a prototype natural resource management training program, first at Bandelier National Monument, then at other parks in the region. At the same time he had urged completion of the region's resource management plans. Later, seeking Servicewide implementation, he put these two elements into the State of the Parks reports. Wauer, interview with the author, November 8, 1993; and the author's personal recollections.

166. National Park Service, State of the Parks: A Report to Congress, 4, 9, 35; National Park Service, "Summary of 'State of the Parks' in the Southwest Region," January 25, 1980, author's files.

Chapter 7. A House Divided

1. National Park Service, draft, Our National Parks: Challenges and Strategies for the Twenty-first Century (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1991), 112-113.

2. F. Fraser Darling and Noel D. Eichhorn, Man and Nature in the National Parks: Reflections on Policy (1967; 2nd ed., Washington, D.C.: Conservation Foundation, 1969); Conservation Foundation, National Parks for the Future: Task Force Reports (Washington, D.C.: Conservation Foundation, 1972); Durward L. Allen and A. Starker Leopold, to the Director of the National Park Service, July 12, 1977, Dennis; National Park Service, State of the Parks—1980, A Report to the Congress (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1980); National Park Service, State of the Parks: A Report to the Congress on a Servicewide Strategy for Prevention and Mitigation of Natural and Cultural Resources Management Problems (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, January 1981). The National Parks and Conservation Association reports include Investing in Park Futures: A Blueprint for Tomorrow, vol. 2, Research in the Parks: An Assessment of Needs (Washington, D.C.: National Parks and Conservation Association, 1988); National Parks: From Vignettes to a Global View (Washington, D.C.: National Parks and Conservation Association 1989); and A Race against Time: Five Threats Endangering America's National Parks and the Solutions to Avert Them (Washington, D.C.: National Parks and Conservation Association, 1991).

3. National Park Service, draft, Our National Parks, 105; National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, Science and the National Parks (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1992), 10-11 (see p. 42 for a partial listing of reports since the Leopold Report); National Park Service, National Parks for the Twenty-first Century: The Vail Agenda (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, [1993]), 128 (hereafter referred to as the Vail Agenda). A more recent analytical study was conducted by a committee headed by Utah State University ecologist Frederic H. Wagner. See Frederic H. Wagner et al., Wildlife Policies in the U.S. National Parks (Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1995).

4. George M. Wright, Joseph S. Dixon, and Ben H. Thompson, Fauna of the National Parks of the United States: A Preliminary Survey of Faunal Relations in National Parks, Contributions of Wild Life Survey, Fauna Series no. 1 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1933), 148; National Park Service, "Research in the National Park System, and Its Relation to Private Research and the Work of Research Foundations," February 10, 1945, typescript, 4, NPS-HC; National Park Service, "Get the Facts, and Put Them to Work," October 1961, typescript, 1-2, NPS-HC. Director, National Park Service, to Secretary of the Interior, September 16, 1963, attachment, 4, NPS-HC; Assistant Director, Operations, to All Field Offices, October 14, 1965, NPS-HC.

5. National Park Service, State of the Parks—1980, viii-ix, 5-7, 34-35; R. Gerald Wright, Wildlife Research and Management in the National Parks (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1992), 184-185; Shenandoah National Park, "Natural Resource Inventory and Long-Term Ecological Monitoring System Plan for Shenandoah National Park," August 1991, 6-25, copy courtesy of Robert J. Krumenaker; Gary E. Davis, "Design of a Long-Term Ecological Monitoring Program for Channel Islands National Park, California," Natural Areas Journal 9 (2) (1989), 80-82; Channel Islands National Park, "1992 Annual Report—Natural and Cultural Resources Management," copy courtesy of Gary E. Davis; Robert Cahn, "Inventory and Monitoring in the National Park System," 1988, draft, NPS-HC; National Parks and Conservation Association, From Vignettes to a Global View, i, 5-7, 10; National Park Service, draft, Our National Parks, 48; National Park Service, Vail Agenda, 129, 131-132. See also National Park Service, Twelve-Point Plan: The Challenge, The Actions (Denver: National Park Service, 1986), 2-3.

6. William R. Supernaugh, "An Assessment of Progress Made between 1980 and 1992 in Responding to Threats to the National Park System," thesis, Slippery Rock University, January 1994, copy courtesy of the author, 158-160, 163, 165-166. See also United States General Accounting Office, Parks and Recreation: Limited Progress Made in Documenting and Mitigating Threats to the Parks (Washington, D.C.: General Accounting Office, 1987), 12, 24-25, 36.

7. Supernaugh, "An Assessment of Progress Made between 1980 and 1992," 75-89, 96-110. William H. Walker, Jr., interview with the author, October 17, 1995; Roland H. Wauer, interview with the author, November 8, 1993. See also William H. Walker, Jr., "The Natural Resource Specialist Trainee Program," Trends 23, no. 2 (1986), 39-42; and United States General Accounting Office, Parks and Recreation, 32.

8. Abigail Miller, correspondence with the author, December 12, 1995, provided the principal data for the budget and staffing comparisons and helped sort out much contradictory information. The difficulties in tracking funding and staffing during this period are apparent in the diverse conclusions reached in different reports. See National Park Service, State of the Parks—1980, 36; National Academy of Sciences, Science and the National Parks, 6-7, 77-79; Wagner et al., Wildlife Policies, 94-96; and National Parks and Conservation Association, Research in the Parks, 33-35. Regarding fully professional resource managers, a 1995 internal document stated that the Service had "just under 500 permanent and temporary full-time" such positions located in the parks. Bob Krumenaker and Abby Miller, "The Natural Resource Management Challenge: The NR-MAP Report," March 3, 1995, typescript, 4, copy courtesy of Robert J. Krumenaker.

9. National Academy of Sciences, Science and the National Parks, 9; National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, "A Report by the Advisory Committee to the National Park Service on Research," August 1, 1963, typescript, x; David A. Haskell, "Is the U.S. National Park Service Ready for Science?" George Wright Forum 10, no. 4 (1993), 102.

10. Shenandoah National Park, "Natural Resource Inventory and Long-Term Ecological Monitoring System Plan," 9-15; Krumenaker and Miller, "The Natural Resource Management Challenge," 3-5.

11. Carlsbad Caverns National Park, "Cave and Karst Management Plan," 1995, typescript, 34-37, copy courtesy of Dale Pate; discussions with Ronal C. Kerbo and Dale Pate, January 29, 1996. Lechuguilla's numerous vertical inclines and other conditions that require advanced technical caving skills form a barrier to extensive public use.

12. Rolf O. Peterson, The Wolves of Isle Royale: A Broken Balance (Minocqua, Wisconsin: Willow Creek Press, 1995), 165-188; Rolf O. Peterson and Robert J. Krumenaker, "Wolves Approach Extinction on Isle Royale: A Biological and Policy Conundrum," George Wright Forum 6, no. 1 (1989), 10-15; Gary E. Davis and William L. Halvorson, Science and Ecosystem Management in the National Parks (Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1996), 74-95; discussion with Robert J. Krumenaker, February 9, 1996. Possible causes for the drop in the wolf population include diminished food supply, decline in genetic variability, and a recently introduced canine disease.

13. National Academy of Sciences, Science and the National Parks, 27. The most thorough Park Service study of the northern range is Douglas B. Houston, The Northern Yellowstone Elk: Ecology and Management (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1982). A more general account is found in Don Despain et al., Wildlife in Transition: Man and Nature on Yellowstone's Northern Range (Boulder, Colorado: Roberts Rinehart, 1986). For accounts of recent research, see Francis J. Singer, "Yellowstone's Northern Range Revisited," Park Science 9 (Fall 1989), 18-19; and Research Division, Yellowstone National Park, "Interim Report, Yellowstone National Park Northern Range Research," April 1992, typescript, YELL. Forthcoming is Douglas B. Houston and Margaret Mary Meagher, Yellowstone and the Biology of Time: Photographs Across the Century, to be published by the University of Oklahoma Press in 1998. In addition to Alston Chase, Playing God in Yellowstone: The Destruction of America's First National Park (Boston: Atlantic Monthly Press, 1986), critical analysis of the natural regulation policy includes Frederic H. Wagner et al., Wildlife Policies (Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1995), see for example 48-58, 127-134; and Charles Edward Kay, "Yellowstone's Northern Elk Herd: A Critical Evaluation of the 'Natural Regulation' Paradigm," Ph.D. diss., Utah State University, 1990.

14. Chase, Playing God in Yellowstone, 247-260; Karl Hess, Jr., Rocky Times in Rocky Mountain National Park: An Unnatural History (Niwot: University Press of Colorado, 1993), 77-88, 98-100.

15. A discussion of the definition of ecosystem management and the concept's potential is found in National Park Service, "Ecosystem Management in the National Park Service," September 1994, typescript, 1-8, copy in author's files.

16. The Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (sometimes referred to as the Greater Yellowstone Area) has been scrutinized and administered by a complex of coordinating associations, among them the Greater Yellowstone Coordinating Committee and the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team. The latter was established by the Interior Department in 1973 and directed first by the Grizzly Bear Steering Committee, then by the Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee. The Greater Yellowstone Coalition was formed in 1983 to represent major environmental organizations. See Chase, Playing God in Yellowstone, 159, 180, 363-367. Gray wolf recovery is being coordinated by the Northern Rocky Mountain Wolf Recovery Team, in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Analysis of many aspects of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem is found in Robert B. Keiter and Mark S. Boyce, eds., The Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem: Redefining America's Wilderness Heritage (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1991).

17. The Greater Yellowstone Coordinating Committee, "The Greater Yellowstone Postfire Assessment," March 1989, typescript, vii-ix, 1-4, YELL; Special Directive 89-7, Acting Director to Directorate, Field Directorate, WASO Division Chief and Park Superintendents, with attachments, July 12, 1989, YELL; Yellowstone National Park, "Yellowstone National Park Wildland Fire Management Plan," March 1992, 16-17, 47-61, YELL. A critical analysis of Yellowstone's fire policies is found in Stephen J. Pyne, "The Summer We Let Wild Fire Loose," Natural History [98] (August 1989), 45-49. A perspective from within the Service is Paul Schullery and Don G. Despain, "Prescribed Burning in Yellowstone National Park: A Doubtful Proposition," Western Wildlands 15 (Summer 1989), 30-34.

18. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Northern Rocky Mountain Wolf Recovery Team, "Northern Rocky Mountain Wolf Recovery Plan," August 3, 1987, iv-vi, 1-11; Northern Rocky Mountain Wolf Recovery Team, "Yellowstone Wolf Tracker: A Monthly Bulletin on Wolf Recovery in Yellowstone" (April 1995), YELL.

19. Partnership and external programs are discussed in Dwight F. Rettie, Our National Park System: Caring for America's Greatest Natural and Historic Treasures (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1995), 7, 39, 172-173.

20. National Park Service, Vail Agenda, 1, 4, 128, 137.

21. National Park Service, Vail Agenda, 11, 29, 104, 106, 111.

22. National Park Service, Vail Agenda, 18.

23. National Park Service, Vail Agenda, 105-121, 123, 124-142. For comparison see National Park Service, State of the Parks—1980, viii-ix, 20-23; National Parks and Conservation Association, From Vignettes to a Global View, 4-12; National Academy of Sciences, Science and the National Parks, 8-13, 87-111. The academy (pp. 41-57) notes the similarity of recommendations made over time.

24. National Park Service, Vail Agenda, 95-97. Even though the Agenda vacillated in its commitment to full compliance by the Service, it recommended (p. 126) "more effective and positive use" of environmental laws to deal with problems outside park boundaries—apparently seeking full compliance by other land-managing bureaus.

25. National Park Service, Vail Agenda, 113; Jake Hoogland, "Defending the Pristine Canyons," and "NEPA Compliance—What Have We Done?" in Courier 35 (June 1990), 16, 9. Two years after official publication of the Vail Agenda, national park authorities Robert and Patricia Cahn commented on the Service's continuing reluctance to give full-faith compliance to the National Environmental Policy Act. See "Policing the Policy," National Parks 69 (September-October 1995), 37-41.

26. Even as the Vail conference was urging environmental leadership, the Park Service was cooperating with a major chemical company in a recycling program for a number of parks. This resulted in promotional advertisements on national television, featuring the company's involvement with Everglades National Park and suggesting a kind of innocence by association—although chemical pesticides have been a major cause of species extinction nationwide and around the world, and portions of Everglades itself have been devastated by use of toxic, environmentally harmful pesticides and chemical fertilizers on nearby lands. Everglades National Park, "Recycling Proposal for Everglades National Park," 1993, EVER.

The damaging effects of agricultural chemicals draining from adjacent lands into Everglades had even been recognized in the park's own literature. A 1989 park report stated that an estimated thirty thousand acres of "native Everglades wetlands have already been destroyed due to the introduction of nutrient-rich water [saturated with fertilizer ingredients such as nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium] from upstream agricultural lands." Statement by hydrologist Daniel Scheidt, in National Park Service, "Everglades National Park: Status of Major Issues," February 1, 1989, EVER. Among many other examples, see National Park Service, "An Assessment of Fishery Management Options," January 1979, 9, EVER. See also Rettie, Our National Park System, 188- 193, for a discussion of the benefits and problems resulting from corporate support of park programs. Although not specifically addressing pesticide concerns, Rettie comments (p. 192) that in such commercial arrangements the Service should be "sensitive to . . . constructive association." He adds as examples that commercials for cigarettes and liquor "should not be associated with the national park system."

27. Samuel P. Hays, in collaboration with Barbara D. Hays, Beauty, Health, and Permanence: Environmental Politics in the United States, 1955-1985 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), details broadening environmental interests in the post-World War II era. (A succinct statement is found on pp. 21-39.)

28. Such caution can influence the outcome of the ecosystem management efforts. Park Service reluctance to speak out even on issues directly threatening parks is discussed in Joseph L. Sax and Robert B. Keiter, "Glacier National Park and Its Neighbors: A Study of Federal Inter-Agency Cooperation," in David J. Simon, ed., Our Common Lands: Defending the National Parks (Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1988), 175-240. Soon after the Vail conference, veteran Park Service manager Richard B. (Rick) Smith chided the Service for not having taken a "strong stand on major environmental issues such as overgrazing of public lands, irresponsible mineral development, or the failure to add to the nation's Wilderness Preservation System." Rick Smith, letter to the editor, Park Science 12, (Spring 1992), 14.

29. The Park Restoration and Improvement Program did not provide much funding beyond what had been regularly appropriated. A discussion of park construction budgets is found in Rettie, Our National Park System, 180-183.

30. Rettie, Our National Park System, 7, 172-173. Under President Jimmy Carter, the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation had been abolished. Its functions were taken over by the newly created Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service, which also assumed direction of the Park Service's National Register and related external cultural resource programs. All of these activities were returned to the Park Service in 1981 by Secretary Watt. See William R. Lowry, The Capacity for Wonder: Preserving National Parks (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1994), 71; Napier Shelton and Lissa Fox, An Introduction to Selected Laws Important for Resources Management in the National Park Service (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1994), 23-24.

31. Denver Service Center, "Professional/Technical Staffing of Denver Service Center, 1986-1992," Falb. The employee figures represent numbers of individuals on board; some were in less-than-full-time and some in temporary positions.

32. National Academy of Sciences, Science and the National Parks, 54, 60, 105, 111; National Park Service, Vail Agenda, 42, 104.

33. Figures for Carlsbad Caverns National Park provide an example of the scope of tourismrelated management and economics in just one park. In 1991 the 46,766-acre park contained 76 known caves and 33,125 acres of wilderness. Visits to the park that year totaled 679,450, with daily figures as high as 5,000—people mostly there to see the vast cavern for which the park had been established in 1923. To accommodate the public, the park had eleven miles of paved roads, with pullouts and roadside exhibits; ten miles of gravel roads; a picnic area; thirty miles of backcountry trails; three miles of cavern trails; four elevators descending 750 feet into the caverns; a restaurant in the caverns; a large visitor center with exhibits, theater, restaurant, souvenir and book sales areas, a nursery, and a kennel; and water, electrical, and sewage systems.

In 1991 the park had the equivalent of ninety-five full-time employees; the concessionaire employed about thirty-five people year-round, plus fifty-five for the summer season. The park's support organization (or "cooperating association") employed eighteen people in permanent or seasonal positions. Total payroll for all employees amounted to about $3.3 million. (Three of the full-time Park Service employees were natural resource managers.)

Much of the payroll went for living expenses in local communities. In addition, in 1991 tourism to Carlsbad Caverns generated approximately $50 million in benefits to the local economy (the local area defined as within about a hundred-mile radius), $5 million in "secondary" benefits, and $3.5 million in increased tax revenues. Tourism-related jobs in the area were estimated at 1,636. Glen Kaye, "New Mexico Parks and Their Economic Impact," 1992, typescript, copy courtesy of the author; discussions with Ronal C. Kerbo and Dale Pate, January 29, 1996.

34. Before the social revolutions of the 1960s and 1970s, all Park Service leaders were white males. In the 1970s, women and minorities began to attain leadership roles; however, their ascendancy seems not to have had any effect on overall natural resource policy and practice—mainly, it diversified the composition of the decisionmaking cadres. Through early 1997, with women and minorities serving as superintendents, regional directors, and associate and deputy directors, the Park Service directorship remained the last bastion of the white male. A history of women's involvement with the national parks is found in Polly Welts Kaufman, National Parks and the Woman's Voice (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1996).

35. In a 1993 article on resource management, park superintendent Jonathan B. Jarvis remarked critically that "there are cultural barriers within the NPS that prevent research and resource information from playing a significant role in management decision making." Jarvis provided his own list of cultural attributes, among them "old school, scenery management," superintendents' lack of understanding of research, and the assignment of resource managers to ranger divisions. Jonathan B. Jarvis, "Action vs. Rhetoric: Resource Management at the Crossroads," Park Science 13 (Summer 1993), 10. See also Jonathan B. Jarvis, "Principles and Practices of a Research and Resource Management Program," George Wright Forum 8, no. 3 (1991), 2-11. In recent years, for example, Everglades Superintendent Michael V. Finley was recognized by the Florida Audubon Society as government Conservationist of the Year; and the National Parks and Conservation Association has honored superintendents Bill Wade (Shenandoah), Robert Barbee (Yellowstone), and Regional Director Boyd Evison with its Stephen Tyng Mather Award for achievements in resource protection and preservation. Mather Award information from Laura Loomis, National Parks and Conservation Association.

36. Joseph Sax and Robert Keiter, in "Glacier National Park and Its Neighbors," 175-240, reveal the persistence of tradition in park management. The powerful allegiance a culture can have to its fundamental assumptions has been analyzed by sociologist Edgar Schein, who states that "to understand a group's culture, one must attempt to get at its shared basic assumptions. . . . Once a set of shared basic assumptions is formed . . . it can function as a cognitive defense mechanism. . . . [In defense of a group's cultural values], it is easier to distort new data by denial, projection, rationalization, or various other defense mechanisms than to change the basic assumption. . . . Culture change, in the sense of changing basic assumptions is, therefore, difficult, time consuming, and highly anxiety provoking." Edgar H. Schein, Organizational Culture and Leadership (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1992), 26.

37. A list of annual numbers of visits throughout the system is found in Rettie, Our National Park System, 252-254. On the Service's continual popularity with the public, see 125, 147n.

38. National Parks and Conservation Association, From Vignettes to a Global View, 6; National Academy of Sciences, Science and the National Parks, 10, 88; National Park Service, Vail Agenda, 134. Perhaps revealing an uncertainty about the role of science in park management, the Agenda mentioned (p. 29) that the Park Service was the "apparent natural home of scientific resource management and research" (emphasis added).

39. National Park Service, Science and the National Parks II: Adapting to Change (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, [1993]), viii, 10. Among others, the committee included former Alaska regional director Boyd Evison, Sequoia superintendent Thomas Ritter, and Big Bend superintendent Robert Arnberger. In a somewhat similar vein, Park Service natural resource manager Robert J. Krumenaker observed earlier that "without a specific mandate for research we have backed into it through a need for information." He asserted that an "internal mandate clearly exists . . . even if many managers choose not to see it." Bob Krumenaker, "Resource Management and Research in the NPS: An Uneasy Relationship," Ranger 7 (Spring 1991), 11.

40. National Parks and Conservation Association, A Race against Time, 17, 25.

41. As the international programs evolved in the 1970s, the majority of requests from other nations were for planners and landscape architects to advise on the development and management of parks and protected areas, many newly authorized. Once these countries developed their own planning expertise, such requests tapered off and the new focus was assistance in interpretation. At the peak of the programs in the early 1980s, an average of about 175 requests were received annually. Then, by mid-decade, shortages of funds and staffing (both foreign and domestic—the State Department funded most Park Service efforts) brought a decline in international programs. Limited assistance to foreign countries continues to be provided in fields such as park management, ranger and protection work, and interpretive activities. Robert C. Milne, interview with the author, September 25, 1995. The National Park Service, in the Vail Agenda, 87, asserts that the "evolution, growth, and development of NPS interpretation has been one of the most significant contributions that the agency has made in the world park movement." See also 77-78.

42. Department of the Interior, news release, "Scientific Research to Be Reorganized under National Biological Survey at Interior Department," April 26, 1993, Office of the Secretary, Department of the Interior. See also Wagner et al., Wildlife Policies, 107-110, for speculation on "potential gains and losses" from the new research arrangement; and Rettie, Our National Park System, 219-220.

43. National Park Service, Restructuring Plan for the National Park Service (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1994), 1-3; National Park Service press release, "National Park Service Reorganization Marks Most Significant Organizational Change in Agency's 79-Year History," May 15, 1995, National Park Service, Office of Public Affairs, Washington, D.C.

44. National Park Service, Vail Agenda, 34.

45. National Park Service, Vail Agenda, 106.