An extremely important area that benefited from Mission 66 was Independence National Historical Park, in Philadelphia. The story about Independence would fill a book in itself. It was authorized on June 28, 1948, and from March 16, 1959, through August 21, 1964, there were nine amendments extending the boundary lines. Independence Hall and the square on which it stands belong to the city of Philadelphia and are assigned to the federal government for the purpose of restoration, preservation, interpretation, and management. The hall contains the chamber in which the Declaration of Independence was signed and Congress Hall. Independence Hall was in such bad condition that it was unsafe for public visitation. We removed and stored much of the flooring and paneled inside walls. Then we built a steel frame and floor beams and actually fastened the outside walls to this frame and replaced the panel walls and the floors. We used donated and Mission 66 money, and some specially appropriated funds. We and the nation as a whole should be particularly grateful to Judge E. O. Lewis, of Philadelphia, who got some ten bills through Congress and helped on appropriations that made the project possible. Without doubt, Independence National Historical Park is one of our most important historic sites if not the most important.

The buildings of the Independence Hall complex in Philadelphia were greatly strengthened during Mission 66 to preserve the site when many very important matters were worked out in establishing our nation.

Another very fine project carried out during Mission 66 was the new visitor center at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. We had a cyclorama that we acquired when Gettysburg National Military Park was transferred to the National Park Service by the army in 1933. It was a big painting on canvas some twenty feet wide and more than two hundred feet long, and it was poorly displayed in an old building and rapidly going to pieces. We built a circular room in the visitor center of such a size that the cyclorama could be spread all the way around the inside wall and thus depict the whole battle of Gettysburg in this single enclosure. It took over a year to restore the canvas, which had to have several sections replaced.

The Jefferson National Expansion Memorial National Historic Site was a long time in coming, but it is a very attractive, well-designed memorial commemorating the Louisiana Purchase. Photo by M. Woodbridge Williams, courtesy National Park Service.

Also a great pride and joy to us was the archaeological work we did on Jamestown Island and in Yorktown, Virginia, which are connected by the Colonial Parkway through Williamsburg. We built a visitor center at Jamestown to tell the stories of the first permanent English settlement there and one at Yorktown to tell of the culminating battle of the American Revolution. Another eastern project was carried out at the Statue of Liberty in New York harbor. While it wasn't completed during Mission 66, it was started and well along by 1966. We removed the fill inside an old fort that serves as a setting for the Statue of Liberty and put a roof over the space between the walls of the old fort and the pedestal of the statue, giving us a big room all around the pedestal, which now is the Museum of Immigration.

The Gateway Arch, key symbol of the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial in Saint Louis, was "topped off" when the final section was inserted on October 28, 1965. Photo by Robert Arteaga, courtesy National Park Service.

Still another big project was the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial, in Saint Louis. It was authorized in 1935, but construction was not started until Mission 66. We received $15 million for the total development, which among other things included a 630-foot high stainless steel arch designed by architect Eero Saarinen to commemorate the spirit of the pioneers and western expansion of the nation. It was under construction when I left office in 1964. The big arch contains conveyances to carry people to the top of the structure. When the plans and specifications were drawn up and let for bid, the lowest acceptable proposal came within a few hundred thousand dollars of our total authorization. Inasmuch as this type of construction had never before been attempted, I felt we couldn't take a chance on anything going wrong that might require additional funds easily exceeding our balance. I informed Representative Clarence Cannon of Missouri, chairman of the Appropriations Committee of the House of Representatives, that I could not go ahead with such a small margin of reserve funds unless I had some real assurance from the Missouri delegation that they would protect the service if anything went wrong. In a meeting with the Missouri congressmen we explained that we felt that the bid was a good one from a good firm but that the small balance in the authorization set by Congress was not enough to cover an emergency if one should arise, which was a possibility in the type of construction we were undertaking. The only thing we wanted was to lay the problem before them, explaining that if they agreed to back us and help to bail us out if necessary, we would consider going ahead with the contract. They voted unanimously to back us and requested us to sign the contract. Although our money held out, we had to go back and seek further authorization to cover the rest of the improvements.

One more project should be mentioned, the Stevens Canyon road in Mount Rainier National Park, in the state of Washington. In Horace Albright's time, about 1928, the service started building a road from Paradise down Stevens Canyon so as to approach Paradise from the east as well as the west and to have a connection with Yakima Park without driving half way around Mount Rainer outside the park. This project had been receiving small amounts of funds when available year after year since 1929, with only about three months of work possible each season before everything was snowed in. Every spring when the workmen started in again, they spent half of the time first cleaning out the rock slides caused by the spring thaw. By 1956 the road was about one-third finished, and the worst part was yet to be done. With Mission 66 we let a much bigger three-year contract that permitted working from both ends and storing big equipment near the job. The three-year contract finished the job with the exception of some wall construction that could not be properly estimated until the road was built.

The Tioga Road in Yosemite National Park is seen here going over toward the headwaters of Tenaya Creek, a branch of the Merced River. It is one of the most scenic roads in the country. Courtesy National Park Service.

Looking down Tenaya Creek from Tioga Road in Yosemite National Park, with Half Dome in the distance. Courtesy National Park Service.

During Mission 66 definite steps were taken to move as many of the administrative, government housing, and utility buildings and shops as possible out of the national parks to reduce their interference with the enjoyment of park visitors. In Yosemite a new employee residential and service area was established outside the park at El Portel. The concessionaires were moved from the center to one side of Yosemite Valley, thus restoring the meadows and greatly improving both service to the public and the scenic values. At Mount Rainier National Park the headquarters area was moved out of the park to a location below the heavy snow line and closer to public facilities, such as stores, churches, and schools. The general policy of moving business and administrative activities out of the parks when possible is a sound one. A great deal was done, but a lot remains to be done. If this policy is fully carried out, the parks will be much better protected from overcrowding and will better serve the visiting public, and the living conditions of the government employees will be substantially improved.

Village store in Yosemite Valley. Mission 66 called for moving all development out of the meadows in the valley. With ready cooperation from the concessionaires, the buildings were removed and new ones erected in the village on the side of the valley. Courtesy National Park Service.

Five years after the Mission 66 program was launched at the conference in the Great Smoky Mountains, we met at Grand Canyon to reexamine it. We concluded that the concept was sound and had found immediate support at the higher levels of government and with people in general. In the beginning we actually thought we were being too bold, but now, seeing what we had done and what we had yet to do, we realized that we had not planned big enough. Although Mission 66 had been revised and brought up to date each year to meet changing conditions, we found that instead of having the urgency behind us, we were facing a new dimension—an action program was required that would dwarf the first five years of Mission 66. In the past we had been permitted the luxury of a time lag between recognition of our needs and their ultimate realization, but no longer was that the case. We realized that we were getting ever closer to our very last chance to round out the park system as a whole. Time was going against us. Our new additions to round out the system were beginning to come in faster than we could plan for their protection, development, and management. There was another factor to consider. In the beginning we were pioneers. We launched a very popular program, and we accomplished a lot. But by the time of our meeting at Grand Canyon, we realized that we had company, that many other federal bureaus had come forward with similar programs to meet the challenges of the sixties—the population explosion and the social and cultural developments.

The degree to which subsequent developments in the nation's park and recreation movement were stimulated by the success of Mission 66 should not be underestimated. In the fall of 1957 President Eisenhower sent a message to Congress calling for the establishment of the National Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission to study the nation's recreation resources, and the legislation was approved by Congress and signed by the president on June 28, 1958. Though not connected to the Park Service, this act nevertheless embodied several basic principles that the National Park Service had followed through the years, including those provided in the Park, Parkway, and Recreational-Area Study Act of 1936. The 1936 act was the best we could get at the time, but it did not provide us basic authorization to do a complete job; whereas the 1958 act established a commission to look into the overall national recreation requirements and make definite recommendations on ways to implement a plan for nationwide park and recreation programs at all levels of government. I am egotistical enough to feel that the presentation of Mission 66 at President Eisenhower's cabinet meeting and the success of the program somewhat influenced the president's desire to go forward with a broad, all-inclusive national program. It is interesting to note that the bureaus that were connected with the CCC program in the thirties had continued an informal committee discussion group that was still operating at the time the Outdoor Recreation bill was introduced in Congress. Also, in the winter of 1956-57, municipal, state, and national park people had organized the Committee of Fifteen, consisting of five persons from each level of government, who were meeting under the auspices of the 1936 act for the purpose of drawing up legislation that would provide funds for the study and implementation of a nationally coordinated system of parks and recreation areas at all levels of government to be financed through federal aid on a matching basis. The legislation would also provide in its draft form an outline of standards of professional qualifications for park and recreation administrators.

President Dwight D. Eisenhower cuts the ribbon to open the Virginia section of the George Washington Parkway from Key Bridge over the Potomac River to the Belt way, November 3, 1959. With the president, left to right: Harry Thompson, regional director, National Capital Parks; National Park Service Director Conrad L. Wirth; Representative Joel T. Broyhill, of Virginia; and Assistant Secretary of the Interior Roger Ernst. Photo by Abbie Rowe, courtesy National Park Service.

Several functional aspects of the president's new committee were difficult for me to understand. For instance, the ORRRC used some forty contractors to do various studies, including thirteen universities and seven bureaus of federal departments. Two of the bureaus were in the Department of the Interior, namely the Geological Survey and the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. Why not the National Park Service? I must say, however, that a good many of the contractors came to the service for information and help, for we were the only ones who had the facts they needed without their spending a great deal of time and money. Again, only once was I invited to attend one of the ORRRC meetings, and that was after I had complained because they were considering recommending the establishment of a new bureau, the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation (BOR), to plan and finance a national recreation program. We felt that a new bureau was not necessary; it was our responsibility. When I went to the meeting I found that they had already decided on the new bureau, and I didn't have a ghost of a chance to change their minds. I was even bucking our own secretary. Possibly they reasoned that a separate planning agency would do a better job. I do want to say in all sincerity that ORRRC did a very good job and should receive the everlasting gratitude of everybody. Its success can be traced to the deep feeling, active interest, and sound judgment of its chairman, Laurance S. Rockefeller. He possessed the talent and wisdom to solicit diverse opinions and put them and his own thinking together before reaching a conclusion.

Just before our meeting at the Grand Canyon in 1961, President John F. Kennedy had sent a message to Congress dealing primarily with conservation, with special reference to parks. In it he said:

America's health, morals, and culture have long benefited from our National Parks and Forests and our fish and wildlife opportunities. Yet these facilities and resources are not now adequate to meet the needs of the fast-growing, more mobile population, and the millions of visitor days which are now spent in federally owned parks, forests, wildlife refuges, and water reservoirs will triple well before the end of this century. To meet the Federal government's appropriate share of the responsibility to fill these needs, the following steps are essential:

A. To protect our remaining wilderness areas, I urge Congress to enact a wilderness protection bill along the general lines of S174.

B. To improve both the quality and quantity of public recreational opportunities, I urge Congress to enact legislation leading to the establishment of seashore and shoreline areas such as Cape Cod, Padre Island, Point Reyes, for the use and enjoyment of the public. Unnecessary delay in acquiring these shores which are vital to an adequate public recreational system will cause tremendously increased costs.

C. For similar reasons I am instructing the Secretary of the Interior in cooperation with the Secretary of Agriculture and other appropriate Federal, State, and local officials and private leaders to formulate a comprehensive federal recreation land program, conduct a survey to determine where additional national parks, forests, and seashore areas should be proposed. Take steps to assure that land acquired for the construction of Federally financed reservoirs is sufficient to permit future development for recreation purposes, and establish a long-range program for planning and providing adequate open spaces for recreation facilities in urban areas.

The Wilderness Bill, of course, was about to be enacted; and reports of the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission were soon to be issued that recommended the establishment of the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation which would be provided with funds to acquire lands needed for federal park and recreation purposes and to aid the states and their political subdivisions in the planning, acquisition, and development of parks and recreation areas. Cape Cod was authorized by Congress in August, 1961, and Padre Island and Point Reyes national seashore areas in September, 1962.

Although Mission 66 may not have been the action that triggered a general reawakening of government to its responsibilities in the field of conservation and recreation—a responsibility I believe was being neglected—it certainly was the first program of its kind and generated many similar programs by other bureaus, commonly referred to as multiple land-use programs. Secretary of the Interior Fred A. Seaton, in a letter to me of November 21, 1959, wrote: "Mission 66 has provided the conservation movement of the entire nation with renewed vigor. It has inspired similar long-range conservation programs by other federal agencies and by state and country organizations." I believe that Mission 66 had an effect on the entire country almost as great as the CCC program had in the thirties. Conservation as a whole took a big step forward in both the CCC and Mission 66 periods.