Wildlife Management in the National Parks
Wildlife Management in the National Parks:
The Leopold Report
Advisory Board on Wildlife Management appointed by
Secretary of the Interior Udall
A.S. Leopold (Chairman), S.A. Cain, C.M. Cottam,
I.N. Gabrielson, T.L. Kimball
March 4, 1963
The Honorable Stewart Udall
Secretary of the Interior
Washington 25, D.C.
Dear Mr. Secretary:
Your Advisory Board on Wildlife Management transmits herewith a
report entitled "Wildlife Management in the National Parks."
In formulating the conclusions presented in this report, the Board
made a major effort to familiarize itself with actual conditions in the
parks and monuments. The full Board visited Yellowstone and Grand Teton
National Parks where the elk situation has been acute. Individual Board
members inspected a number of other parks which in the judgment of the
National Park Service have current wildlife problems. Between us in the
last few years we have seen nearly all of the major parks and monuments,
including those in Hawaii and Alaska. Our recommendations are based
principally upon our own knowledge of the parks and their problems.
Additionally, we have endeavored to understand and to evaluate the
full specimen of opinions and viewpoints on park management. In
September at Jackson Hole the Board met with five directors of state
game departments. In December in Washington we met with five executive
officers of conservation organizations. Many other individuals and
groups have offered advice and information. All of this was informative
and helpful, but we want to make clear to you that our conclusions were
not reached by weighing opinions and counter-opinions. The conclusions
represent our own collective thinking.
The report as here presented is conceptual rather than statistical
in approach. We read thousands of pages of reports, documents, and
statistical tables, but used these data only sparingly to illustrate
specific points. Emphasis is placed on the philosophy of park
management and the ecologic principles involved. Our suggestions are
intended to enhance the esthetic, historical, and scientific values of
the parks to the American public, vis a vis the mass recreational
values. We sincerely hope that you will find it feasible and
appropriate to accept this concept of park values.
Stanley A. Cain
Clarence M. Cottam
Ira A. Gabrielson
Thomas L. Kimball
A. Starker Leopold, Chairman
In the Congressional Act of 1916 which created the National Park
Service, preservation of native animal life was clearly specified as one
of the purposes of the parks. A frequently quoted passage of the Act
states "...which purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and
historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the
enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave
them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations."
In implementing this Act, the newly formed Park Service developed a
philosophy of wildlife protection, which in that era was indeed
the most obvious and immediate need in wildlife conservation. Thus the
parks were established as refuges, the animal populations were protected
from hunting and their habitats were protected from wildfire. For a time
predators were controlled to protect the "good" animals from the "bad"
ones, but this endeavor mercifully ceased in the 1930's. On the whole,
there was little major change in the Park Service practice of wildlife
management during the first 40 years of its existence.
During the same era, the concept of wildlife management evolved
rapidly among other agencies and groups concerned with the production of
wildlife for recreational hunting. It is now an accepted truism that
maintenance of suitable habitat is the key to sustaining animal
populations, and that protection, though it is important, is not of
itself a substitute for habitat. Moreover, habitat is not a fixed or
stable entity that can be set aside and preserved behind a fence, like a
cliff dwelling or a petrified tree. Biotic communities change through
natural stages of succession. They can be changed deliberately through
manipulation of plant and animal populations. In recent years the
National Park Service has broadened its concept of wildlife conservation
to provide for purposeful management of plant and animal communities as
an essential step in preserving wildlife resources "...unimpaired for
the enjoyment of future generations." In a few parks active manipulation
of habitat is being tested, as for example in the Everglades where
controlled burning is now used experimentally to maintain the open
glades and piney woods with their interesting animal and plant life.
Excess populations of grazing ungulates are being controlled in a number
of parks to preserve the forage plants on which the animals depend. The
question already has been posed -- how far should the National Park
Service go in utilizing the tools of management to maintain wildlife
The concept of park management
The present report proposes to discuss wildlife management in the
national parks in terms of three questions which shift emphasis
progressively from the general to the specific:
1) What should be the goals of wildlife management in the
2) What general policies of management are best adapted to
achieve the pre-determined goals?
3) What are some of the methods suitable for on-the-ground
implementation of policies?
It is acknowledged that this Advisory Board was requested by the
Secretary of the Interior to consider particularly one of the methods of
management, namely, the procedure of removing excess ungulates from some
of the parks. We feel that this specific question can only be viewed
objectively in the light of goals and operational policies, and our
report is framed accordingly. In speaking of national parks we refer to
the whole system of parks and monuments; national recreation areas are
discussed briefly near the end of the report.
As a prelude to presenting our thoughts on the goals, policies, and
methods of managing wildlife in the parks of the United States we wish
to quote in full a brief report on "Management of National Parks and
Equivalent Areas" which was formulated by a committee of the First World
Conference on National Parks that convened in Seattle in July, 1962.
The committee consisted of 15 members of the Conference, representing
eight nations; the chairman was Francois Bourliere of France. In our
judgment this report suggests a firm basis for park management. The
statement of the committee follows:
"1. Management is defined as any activity directed
toward achieving or maintaining a given condition in plant and/or animal
populations and/or habitats in accordance with the conservation plan for
the area. A prior definition of the purposes and objectives of each park
Management may involve active manipulation of the plant and animal
communities, or protection from modification or external influences.
2. Few of the world's parks are large enough to be in fact self-
regulatory ecological units; rather, most are ecological islands subject
to direct or indirect modification by activities and conditions in the
surrounding areas. These influences may involve such factors as
immigration and/or emigration of animal and plant life, changes in the
fire regime, and alterations in the surface or subsurface water.
3. There is no need for active modification to maintain large
examples of the relatively stable "climax" communities which under
protection perpetuate themselves indefinitely. Examples of such
communities include large tracts of undisturbed rain-forest, tropical
mountain paramos, and arctic tundra.
4. However, most biotic communities are in a constant state of
change due to natural or man-caused processes of ecological succession.
In these "successional" communities it is necessary to manage the
habitat to achieve or stabilize it at a desired stage. For example, fire
is an essential management tool to maintain East African open savanna or
5. Where animal populations get out of balance with their habitat
and threaten the continued existence of a desired environment,
population control becomes essential. This principle applies, for
example, in situations where ungulate populations have exceeded the
carrying capacity of their habitat through loss of predators,
immigration from surrounding areas, or compression of normal migratory
patterns. Specific examples include excess populations of elephants in
some African parks and of ungulates in some mountain parks.
6. The need for management, the feasibility of management methods,
and evaluation of results must be based upon current and continuing
scientific research. Both the research and management itself should be
undertaken only by qualified personnel. Research, management planning,
and execution must take into account, and if necessary regulate, the
human uses for which the park is intended.
7. Management based on scientific research is, therefore, not only
desirable but often essential to maintain some biotic communities in
accordance with the conservation plan of a national park or equivalent
The goal of park management in the United States
Item 1 in the report just quoted specifies that "a prior definition
of the purposes and objectives of each park is assumed." In other words.
the goal must first be defined.
As a primary goal, we would recommend that the biotic associations
within each park be maintained, or where necessary recreated, as nearly
as possible in the condition that prevailed when the area was first
visited by the white man. A national park should represent a vignette of
The implications of this seemingly simple aspiration are stupendous.
Many of our national parks -- in fact most of them -- went through periods
of indiscriminate logging, burning, livestock grazing, hunting and
predator control. Then they entered the park system and shifted abruptly
to a regime of equally unnatural protection from lightning fires, from
insect outbreaks, absence of natural controls of ungulates, and in some
areas elimination of normal fluctuations in water levels. Exotic
vertebrates, insects, plants, and plant diseases have inadvertently been
introduced. And of course lastly there is the factor of human use -- of
roads and trampling and camp grounds and pack stock. The resultant
biotic associations in many of our parks are artifacts, pure and simple.
They represent a complex ecologic history but they do not necessarily
represent primitive America.
Restoring the primitive scene is not done easily nor can it be done
completely. Some species are extinct. Given time, an eastern hardwood
forest can be regrown to maturity but the chestnut will be missing and
so will the roar of pigeon wings. The colorful drapanid finches are not
to be heard again in the lowland forests of Hawaii, nor will the
jack-hammer of the ivory-bill ring in southern swamps. The wolf and
grizzly bear cannot readily be reintroduced into ranching communities,
and the factor of human use of the parks is subject only to regulation,
not elimination. Exotic plants, animals, and diseases are here to stay.
All these limitations we fully realize. Yet, if the goal cannot be fully
achieved it can be approached. A reasonable illusion of primitive
America could be recreated, using the utmost in skill, judgment, and
ecologic sensitivity. This in our opinion should be the objective of
every national park and monument.
To illustrate the goal more specifically, let us cite some cases. A
visitor entering Grand Teton National Park from the south drives across
Antelope Flats. But there are no antelope. No one seems to be asking the
question -- why aren't (they) there? If the mountain men who gathered here
in rendezvous fed their squaws on antelope, a 20th century tourist at
least should be able to see a band of these animals. Finding out what
aspect of the range needs rectifying, and doing so, would appear to be a
primary function of park management.
When the forty-niners poured over the Sierra Nevada into California,
those that kept diaries spoke almost to a man of the wide-spaced columns
of mature trees that grew on the lower western slope in gigantic
magnificence. The ground was a grass parkland, in springtime carpeted
with wildflowers. Deer and bears were abundant. Today much of the west
slope is a dog-hair thicket of young pines, white fir, incense cedar,
and mature brush -- a direct function of overprotection from natural
ground fires. Within the four national parks -- Lassen, Yosemite, Sequoia,
and Kings Canyon -- the thickets are even more impenetrable than
elsewhere. Not only is this accumulation of fuel dangerous to the giant
sequoias and other mature trees but the animal life is meager,
wildflowers are sparse, and to some at least the vegetative tangle is
depressing, not uplifting. Is it possible that the primitive open forest
could be restored, at least on a local scale? And if so, how? We cannot
offer an answer. But we are posing a question to which there should be
an answer of immense concern to the National Park Service.
The scarcity of bighorn sheep in the Sierra Nevada represents
another type of management problem. Though they have been effectively
protected for nearly half a century, there are fewer than 400 bighorns
in the Sierra. Two-thirds of them are found in summer along the crest
which lies within the eastern border of Sequoia and Kings Canyon
National Parks. Obviously, there is some shortcoming of habitat that
precludes further increase in the population. The high country is still
recovering slowly from the devastation of early domestic sheep grazing
so graphically described by John Muir. But the present limitation may
not be in the high summer range at all but rather along the eastern
slope of the Sierra where the bighorns winter on lands in the
jurisdiction of the Forest Service. These areas are grazed in summer by
domestic livestock and large numbers of mule deer, and it is possible
that such competitive use is adversely affecting the bighorns. It would
seem to us that the National Park Service might well take the lead in
studying this problem and in formulating cooperative management plans
with other agencies even though the management problem lies outside the
park boundary. The goal, after all, is to restore the Sierra bighorn. If
restoration is achieved in the Sequoia-Kings Canyon region, there might
follow a program of reintroduction and restoration of bighorns in
Yosemite and Lassen National Parks, and Lava Beds National Monument,
within which areas this magnificent native animal is presently extinct.
We hope that these examples clarify what we mean by the goal of park
Policies of park management
The major policy change which we would recommend to the National
Park Service is that it recognize the enormous complexity of ecologic
communities and the diversity of management procedures required to
preserve them. The traditional, simple formula of protection may be
exactly what is needed to maintain such climax associations as
arctic-alpine heath, the rain forests of Olympic peninsula, or the
Joshua trees and saguaros of southwestern deserts. On the other hand,
grasslands, savannas, aspen, and other successional shrub and tree
associations may call for very different treatment. Reluctance to
undertake biotic management can never lead to a realistic presentation
of primitive America, much of which supported successional communities
that were maintained by fires, floods, hurricanes, and other natural
A second statement of policy that we would reiterate -- and this one
conforms with present Park Service standards -- is that management be
limited to native plants and animals. Exotics have intruded into nearly
all of the parks but they need not be encouraged, even those that have
interest or ecologic values of their own. Restoration of antelope in
Jackson Hole, for example, should be done by managing native forage
plants, not by planting crested wheat grass or plots of irrigated
alfalfa. Gambel quail in a desert wash should be observed in the shade
of a mesquite, not a tamarisk. A visitor who climbs a volcano in Hawaii
ought to see mamane trees and silver-swords, not goats.
Carrying this point further, observable artificiality in any form
must be minimized and obscured in every possible way. Wildlife should
not be displayed in fenced enclosures; this is the function of a zoo,
not a national park. In the same category is artificial feeding of
wildlife. Fed bears become bums, and dangerous, Fed elk deplete natural
ranges. Forage relationships in wild animals should be natural.
Management may at times call for the use of the tractor, chain-saw,
rifle, or flamethrower but the signs and sounds of such activity should
be hidden from visitors insofar as possible. In this regard, perhaps the
most dangerous tool of all is the roadgrader. Although the American
public demands automotive access to the parks, road systems must be
rigidly prescribed as to extent and design. Roadless wilderness areas
should be permanently zoned. The goal, we repeat, is to maintain or
create the mood of wild America. We are speaking here of restoring
wildlife to enhance this mood, but the whole effect can be lost if the
parks are overdeveloped for motorized travel. If too many tourists crowd
the roadways, then we should ration the tourists rather than expand the
Additionally in this connection, it seems incongruous that there
should exist in the national parks mass recreation facilities such as
golf courses, ski lifts, motorboat marinas, and other extraneous
developments which completely contradict the management goal. We urge
the National Park Service to reverse its policy of permitting these
nonconforming uses, and to liquidate them as expeditiously as possible
(painful as this will be to concessionaires). Above all other policies,
the maintenance of naturalness should prevail.
Another major policy matter concerns the research which must form
the basis for all management programs. The agency best fitted to study
park management problems is the National Park Service itself. Much help
and guidance can be obtained from ecologic research conducted by other
agencies, but the objectives of park management are so different from
those of state fish and game departments, the Forest Service, etc., as
to demand highly skilled studies of a very specialized nature.
Management without knowledge would be a dangerous policy indeed. Most of
the research now conducted by the National Park Service is oriented
largely to interpretive functions rather than to management. We urge
the expansion of the research activity in the Service to prepare for
future management and restoration programs. As models of the type of
investigation that should be greatly accelerated we cite some of the
recent studies of elk in Yellowstone and of bighorn sheep in Death
Valley. Additionally, however, there are needed equally critical
appraisals of ecologic relationships in various plant associations and
of many lesser organisms such as azaleas, lupines, chipmunks, towhees,
and other non-economic species.
In consonance with the above policy statements, it follows logically
that every phase of management itself be under the full jurisdiction of
biologically trained personnel of the Park Service. This applies not
only to habitat manipulation but to all facets of regulating animal
populations. Reducing the numbers of elk in Yellowstone or of goats on
Haleakala Crater is part of an overall scheme to preserve or restore a
natural biotic scene. The purpose is single-minded. We cannot endorse
the view that responsibility for removing excess game animals be shared
with state fish and game departments whose primary interest would be to
capitalize on the recreational value of the public hunting that could
thus be supplied. Such a proposal imputes a multiple use concept of park
management which was never intended, which is not legally permitted, nor
for which can we find any impelling justification today.
Purely from the standpoint of how best to achieve the goal of park
management, as here defined, unilateral administration directed to a
single objective is obviously superior to divided responsibility in
which secondary goals, such as recreational hunting, are introduced.
Additionally, uncontrolled public hunting might well operate in
opposition to the goal, by removing roadside animals and frightening the
survivors, to the end that public viewing of wildlife would be
materially impaired. In one national park, namely Grand Teton, public
hunting was specified by Congress as the method to be used in
controlling elk. Extended trial suggests this to be an awkward
administrative tool at best.
Since this whole matter is of particular current interest it will be
elaborated in a subsequent section on methods.
Methods of habitat management
It is obviously impossible to mention in this brief report all the
possible techniques that might be used by the National Park Service in
manipulating plant and animal populations. We can, however, single out a
few examples. In so doing, it should be kept in mind that the total area
of any one park, or of the parks collectively, that may be managed
intensively is a very modest part indeed. This is so for two reasons.
First, critical areas which may determine animal abundance are often a
small fraction of total range. One deer study on the west slope of the
Sierra Nevada, for example, showed that important winter range, which
could be manipulated to support the deer, constituted less than two per
cent of the year-long herd range. Roadside areas that might be managed
to display a more varied and natural flora and fauna can be rather
narrow strips. Intensive management, in short, need not be extensive to
be effective. Secondly, manipulation of vegetation is often
exorbitantly expensive. Especially will this be true when the objective
is to manage "invisibly" -- that is, to conceal the signs of management.
Controlled burning is the only method that may have extensive
The first step in park management is historical research, to
ascertain as accurately as possible what plants and animals and biotic
associations existed originally in each locality. Much of this has been
A second step should be ecologic research on plant-animal
relationships leading to formulation of a management hypothesis.
Next should come small scale experimentation to test the hypothesis
in practice. Experimental plots can be situated out of sight of roads
and visitor centers.
Lastly, application of tested management methods can be undertaken
on critical areas.
By this process of study and pre-testing, mistakes can be minimized.
Likewise, public groups vitally interested in park management can be
shown the results of research and testing before general application,
thereby eliminating possible misunderstanding and friction.
Some management methods now in use by the National Park Service seem
to us potentially dangerous. For example, we wish to raise a serious
question about the mass application of insecticides in the control of
forest insects. Such application may (or may not) be justified in
commercial timber stands, but in a national park the ecologic impact can
have unanticipated effects on the biotic community that might defeat the
overall management objective. It would seem wise to curtail this
activity, at least until research and small scale testing have been
Of the various methods of manipulating vegetation, the controlled
use of fire is the most "natural" and much the cheapest and easiest to
apply. Unfortunately, however, forest and chaparral areas that have been
completely protected from fire for long periods may require careful
advance treatment before even the first experimental blaze is set. Trees
and mature brush may have to be cut, piled, and burned before a creeping
ground fire can be risked. Once fuel is reduced, periodic burning can be
conducted safely and at low expense. On the other hand, some situations
may call for a hot burn. On Isle Royale, moose range is created by
periodic holocausts that open the forest canopy. Maintenance of the
moose population is surely one goal of management on Isle Royale.
Other situations may call for the use of the bulldozer, the disc
harrow, or the spring-tooth harrow to initiate desirable changes in
plant succession. Buffalo wallows on the American prairie were the
propagation sites of a host of native flowers and forbs that fed the
antelope and the prairie chicken. In the absence of the great herds,
wallows can be simulated.
Artificial reintroduction of rare native plants is often feasible.
Overgrazing in years past led to local extermination of many delicate
perennials such as some of the orchids. Where these are not reappearing
naturally they can be transplanted or cultured in a nursery. A native
plant, however small and inconspicuous, is as much a part of the biota
as a redwood tree or a forage species for elk.
In essence, we are calling for a set of ecologic skills unknown in
this country today. Americans have shown a great capacity for degrading
and fragmenting native biotas. So far we have not exercised much
imagination or ingenuity in rebuilding damaged biotas. It will not be
done by passive protection alone.
Control of animal populations
Good park management requires that ungulate populations be reduced
to the level that the range will carry in good health and without
impairment to the soil, the vegetation, or to habitats of other animals.
This problem is world-wide in scope, and includes non-park as well as
park lands. Balance may be achieved in several ways.
(a) Natural predation. - Insofar as possible, control through
natural predation should be encouraged. Predators are now protected in
the parks of the United States, although unfortunately they were not in
the early years and the wolf, grizzly bear, and mountain lion became
extinct in many of the national parks. Even today populations of large
predators, where they still occur in the parks, are kept below optimal
level by programs of predator control applied outside the park
boundaries. Although the National Park Service has attempted to
negotiate with control agencies of federal and local governments for the
maintenance of buffer zones around the parks where predators are not
subject to systematic control, these negotiations have been only
partially successful. The effort to protect large predators in and
around the parks should be greatly intensified. At the same time, it
must be recognized that predation alone can seldom be relied upon to
control ungulate numbers, particularly the larger species such as bison,
moose, elk, and deer; additional artificial controls frequently are
(b) Trapping and transplanting. - Traditionally in the past
the National Park Service has attempted to dispose of excess ungulates
by trapping and transplanting. Since 1892, for example, Yellowstone
National Park alone has supplied 10,478 elk for restocking purposes.
Many of the elk ranges in the western United States have been restocked
from this source. Thousands of deer and lesser numbers of antelope,
bighorns, mountain goats, and bison also have been moved from the parks.
This program is fully justified so long as breeding stocks are needed.
However, most big game ranges of the United States are essentially
filled to carrying capacity, and the cost of a continuing program of
trapping and transplanting cannot be sustained solely on the basis of
controlling populations within the parks. Trapping and handling of a big
game animal usually costs from $50 to $150 and in some situations much
more. Since annual surpluses will be produced indefinitely into the
future, it is patently impossible to look upon trapping as a practical
plan of disposal.
(c) Shooting excess animals that migrate outside the parks. -
Many park herds are migratory and can be controlled by public hunting
outside the park boundaries. Especially is this true in mountain parks
which usually consist largely of summer game range with relatively
little winter range. Effective application of this form of control
frequently calls for special regulations, since migration usually occurs
after normal hunting dates. Most of the western states have cooperated
with the National Park Service in scheduling late hunts for the specific
purpose of reducing park game herds, and in fact most excess game
produced in the parks is so utilized. This is by far the best and the
most widely applied method of controlling park populations of ungulates.
The only danger is that migratory habits may be eliminated from a herd
by differential removal, which would favor survival of non-migratory
individuals. With care to preserve, not eliminate, migratory traditions,
this plan of control will continue to be the mayor form of herd
regulation in national parks.
(d) Control by shooting within the parks. - Where other
methods of control are inapplicable or impractical, excess park
ungulates must be removed by killing. As stated above in the discussion
of park policy, it is the unanimous recommendation of this Board that
such shooting be conducted by competent personnel, under the sole
jurisdiction of the National Park Service, and for the sole purpose of
animal removal, not recreational hunting. If the magnitude of a given
removal program requires the services of additional shooters beyond
regular Park Service personnel, the selection, employment, training,
deputization, and supervision of such additional personnel should be
entirely the responsibility of the National Park Service. Only in this
manner can the primary goal of wildlife management in the parks be
realized. A limited number of expert riflemen, properly equipped and
working under centralized direction, can selectively cull a herd with a
minimum of disturbance to the surviving animals or to the environment.
General public hunting by comparison is often non-selective and grossly
Moreover, the numbers of game animals that must be removed annually
from the parks by shooting is so small in relation to normally hunted
populations outside the parks as to constitute a minor contribution to
the public bag, even if it were so utilized. All of these points can be
illustrated in the example of the north Yellowstone elk population which
has been a focal point of argument about possible public hunting in
(e) The case of Yellowstone. - Elk summer in all parts of
Yellowstone Park and migrate out in nearly all directions, where they
are subject to hunting on adjoining public and private lands. One herd,
the so-called Northern Elk Herd, moves only to the vicinity of the park
border where it may winter largely inside or outside the park, depending
on the severity of the winter. This herd was estimated to number 35,000
animals in 1914 which was far in excess of the carrying capacity of the
range. Following a massive die-off in 1919-20 the herd has steadily
decreased. Over a period of 27 years, the National Park Service removed
8,825 animals by shooting and 5,765 by live- trapping; concurrently,
hunters took 40,745 elk from this herd outside the park. Yet the range
continued to deteriorate. In the winter of 1961-62 there were
approximately 10,000 elk in the herd and carrying capacity of the winter
range was estimated at 5,000. So the National Park Service at last
undertook a definitive reduction program, killing 4,283 elk by shooting,
which along with 850 animals removed in other ways (hunting outside the
park, trapping, winter kill) brought the herd down to 5,725 as censused
from helicopter. The carcasses of the elk were carefully processed and
distributed to Indian communities throughout Montana and Wyoming; so
they were well used. The point at issue is whether this same reduction
could or should have been accomplished by public hunting.
In autumn during normal hunting season the elk are widely scattered
through rough inaccessible mountains in the park. Comparable areas, well
stocked with elk, are heavily hunted in adjoining national forests.
Applying the kill statistics from the forests to the park, a kill of
200-400 elk might be achieved if most of the available pack stock in the
area were used to transport hunters within the park. Autumn hunting
could not have accomplished the necessary reduction.
In mid-winter when deep snow and bitter cold forced the elk into
lower country along the north border of the park, the National Park
Service undertook its reduction program. With snow vehicles, trucks, and
helicopters they accomplished the unpleasant job in temperatures that
went as low as -40° F. Public hunting was out of the question. Thus,
in the case most bitterly argued in the press and in legislative halls,
reduction of the herd by recreational hunting would have been a
practical impossibility, even if it had been in full conformance with
park management objectives.
From now on, the annual removal from this herd may be in the
neighborhood of 1,000 to 1,800 head. By January 31, 1963, removals had
totalled 1,300 (300 shot outside the park by hunters, 600 trapped and
shipped, and 406 killed by park rangers). Continued special hunts in
Montana and other forms of removal will yield the desired reduction by
spring. The required yearly maintenance kill is not a large operation
when one considers that approximately 100,000 head of big game are taken
annually by hunters in Wyoming and Montana.
(f) Game control in other parks. - In 1961-62, excluding
Yellowstone elk, there were approximately 870 native animals
transplanted and 827 killed on 18 national parks and monuments.
Additionally, about 2,500 feral goats, pigs and burros were removed from
three areas. Animal control in the park system as a whole is still a
small operation. It should be emphasized, however, that removal programs
have not in the past been adequate to control ungulates in many of the
parks. Future removals will have to be larger and in many cases repeated
annually. Better management of wildlife habitat will naturally produce
larger annual surpluses. But the scope of this phase of park operation
will never be such as to constitute a large facet of management. On the
whole, reductions will be small in relation to game harvests outside the
parks. For example, from 50 to 200 deer a year are removed from a
problem area in Sequoia National Park; the deer kill in California is
75,000 and should be much larger. In Rocky Mountain National Park 59 elk
were removed in 1961-62 and the trim should perhaps be 100 per year in
the future; Colorado kills over 10,000 elk per year on open hunting
ranges. In part, this relates to the small area of the national park
system, which constitutes only 3.9 per cent of the public domain;
hunting ranges under the jurisdiction of the Forest Service and Bureau
of Land Management make up approximately 70 per cent.
In summary, control of animal populations in the national parks
would appear to us to be an integral part of park management, best
handled by the National Park Service itself. In this manner excess
ungulates have been controlled in the national parks of Canada since
1943, and the same principle is being applied in the parks of many
African countries. Selection of personnel to do the shooting likewise is
a function of the Park Service. In most small operations this would
logically mean skilled rangers. In larger removal programs, there might
be included additional personnel, selected from the general public,
hired and deputized by the Service or otherwise engaged, but with a view
to accomplishing a task, under strict supervision and solely for the
protection of park values. Examples of some potentially large removal
programs where expanded crews may be needed are mule deer populations on
plateaus fringing Dinosaur National Monument and Zion National Park
(west side), and white-tailed deer in Acadia National Park.
Wildlife Management on National Recreation Areas
By precedent and logic, the management of wildlife resources on the
national recreation areas can be viewed in a very different light than
in the park system proper. National recreation areas are by definition
multiple use in character as regards allowable types of recreation.
Wildlife management can be incorporated into the operational plans of
these areas with public hunting as one objective. Obviously, hunting
must be regulated in time and place to minimize conflict with other
uses, but it would be a mistake for the National Park Service to be
unduly restrictive of legitimate hunting in these areas. Most of the
existing national recreation areas are federal holdings surrounding
large water impoundments; there is little potentiality for hunting.
Three national seashore recreational areas on the East Coast (Hatteras,
Cape Cod, and Padre Island) offer limited waterfowl shooting. But some
of the new areas being acquired or proposed for acquisition will offer
substantial hunting opportunity for a variety of game species. This
opportunity should be developed with skill, imagination and (we would
hopefully suggest) with enthusiasm.
On these areas as elsewhere, the key to wildlife abundance is a
favorable habitat. The skills and techniques of habitat manipulation
applicable to parks are equally applicable on the recreation areas. The
regulation of hunting, on such areas as are deemed appropriate to open
for such use, should be in accord with prevailing state regulations.
New National Parks
A number of new national parks are under consideration. One of the
critical issues in the establishment of new parks will be the manner in
which the wildlife resources are to be handled. It is our recommendation
that the basic objectives and operating procedures of new parks be
identical with those of established parks. It would seem awkward indeed
to operate a national park system under two sets of ground rules. On the
other hand, portions of several proposed parks are so firmly established
as traditional hunting grounds that impending closure of hunting may
preclude public acceptance of park status. In such cases it may be
necessary to designate core areas as national parks in every sense of
the word, establishing protective buffer zones in the form of national
recreation areas where hunting is permitted. Perhaps only through
compromises of this sort will the park system be rounded out.
The goal of managing the national parks and monuments should be to
preserve, or where necessary to recreate, the ecologic scene as viewed
by the first European visitors. As part of this scene, native species of
wild animals should be present in maximum variety and reasonable
abundance. Protection alone, which has been the core of Park Service
wildlife policy, is not adequate to achieve this goal. Habitat
manipulation is helpful and often essential to restore or maintain
animal numbers. Likewise, populations of the animals themselves must
sometimes be regulated to prevent habitat damage; this is especially
true of ungulates.
Active management aimed at restoration of natural communities of
plants and animals demands skills and knowledge not now in existence. A
greatly expanded research program, oriented to management needs, must be
developed within the National Park Service itself Both research and the
application of management methods should be in the hands of skilled park
Insofar as possible, animal populations should be regulated by
predation and other natural means. However, predation cannot be relied
upon to control the populations of larger ungulates, which sometimes
must be reduced artificially.
Most ungulate populations within the parks migrate seasonally
outside the park boundaries where excess numbers can be removed by
public hunting. In such circumstances the National Park Service should
work closely with state fish and game departments and other interested
agencies in conducting the research required for management and in
devising cooperative management programs.
Excess game that does not leave a park must be removed. Trapping and
transplanting has not proven to be a practical method of control, though
it is an appropriate source of breeding stock as needed elsewhere.
Direct removal by killing is the most economical and effective way
of regulating ungulates within a park. Game removal by shooting should
be conducted under the complete jurisdiction of qualified park personnel
and solely for the purpose of reducing animals to preserve park values.
Recreational hunting is an inappropriate and non-conforming use of the
national parks and monuments.
Most game reduction programs can best be accomplished by regular
park employees. But as removal programs increase in size and scope, as
well may happen under better wildlife management, the National Park
Service may find it advantageous to employ or otherwise engage
additional shooters from the general public. No objection to this
procedure is foreseen so long as the selection, training, and
supervision of shooting crews is under rigid control of the Service and
the culling operation is made to conform to primary park goals.
Recreational hunting is a valid and potentially important use of
national recreation areas, which are also under jurisdiction of the
National Park Service. Full development of hunting opportunities on
these areas should be provided by the Service.
National Academy of Sciences Advisory Committee on Research in the National Parks
National Academy of Sciences Advisory Committee on Research in the National Parks:
The Robbins Report
A Report by The Advisory Committee to the
National Park Service on Research
National Academy of Sciences - National Research Council
W.J. Robbins (Chairman), E.A. Ackerman, M. Bates, S.A. Cain,
F.D. Darling, J.M. Fogg, Jr., T. Gill, J.M. Gillson, E.R. Hall,
C.L. Hubbs, C.J.S. Durham (Executive Secretary)
August 1, 1963
National Academy of Sciences
OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
2101 CONSTITUTION AVENUE
WASHINGTON 25, D. C.
August 1, 1963
The Honorable Stewart L. Udall
The Secretary of the Interior
Washington, D. C. 20240
Dear Secretary Udall:
Your letter of April 25, 1962 asked the advice
and assistance of the National Academy of Sciences in the planning and
organizing of an expanded program of natural history research by the
National Park Service. I am pleased to transmit herewith the report of
the committee that was appointed by the Academy to respond to that
request. Supplemental material is being gathered together in an appendix
which will be forwarded to you as soon it is completed.
We have felt a special responsibility in
undertaking this task. The challenge of preserving both the beauty and
the substance of a significant portion of our environmental heritage, in
the interests of this and future generations, is one that calls for the
best that those with appropriate knowledge and competence can give. Our
committee under the chairmanship of William J. Robbins, has devoted
sustained and careful thought to the several aspects of the
Dr. Robbins assures me that the committee
members will be glad to discuss with you any parts of their report if
you would find that helpful.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE ON RESEARCH
A Committee of the National Academy of Sciences, appointed at the request of
the Secretary of the Interior, was instructed to report on the natural history
research needs and opportunities in the National Park Service, in particular on
those of the national parks. The Committee included:
National Academy of Sciences - National Research Council
||Dr. William J. Robbins|
Associate Director for International Science Activities
National Science Foundation
Washington, D.C. 20418
|Mr. C.J.S. Durham|
Division of Biology and Agriculture
National Academy of Sciences
Washington, D.C. 20418
Dr. Edward A. Ackerman
Carnegie Institution of Washington
1530 P Street, N. W.
Washington 5, D.C.
Dr. Marston Bates
Department of Zoology
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, Michigan
Dr. Stanley A. Cain
Department of Conservation
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, Michigan
Dr. F. Fraser Darling
30 East 40th Street
New York 16, N.Y.
Dr. John M. Fogg, Jr.
9414 Meadowbrook Avenue
Philadelphia 18, Pa.
Dr. Tom Gill
International Society of Tropical Foresters
1500 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Washington 5, D.C.
Dr. Joseph L. Gillson (Retired)
formerly with The Department of Geology and Geophysics
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge 39, Mass.
Dr. E. Raymond Hall
Museum of Natural History
University of Kansas
Dr. Carl L. Hubbs
Professor of Biology
Scripps Institution of Oceanography
La Jolla, California
The report submitted to the Secretary describes how the Committee conducted
its study and surveys the development of the national parks idea, which
originated in the United States and has reached its fullest expression there. It
calls attention to the responsibilities and obligations which stem from the
worldwide recognition and appreciation of the leadership of the United States in
It discusses some of the historical aspects of the establishment of national
parks, the first of which was Yellowstone National Park in 1872, and highlights
the characteristics of some of the 31 parks now in existence. The report asserts
that the national parks of the United States are among the most valuable
heritages of this country; that in setting these lands aside the people and the
government of the United States demonstrated particular wisdom; and that the role
of national parks in the lives of our citizens is dramatically enlarging.
The objectives or purposes of the National Park Service are discussed in the
light of the origin of the national parks and the various Acts of Congress which
deal with them. The conclusion is reached that the Service should strive first to
preserve and conserve the national parks with due consideration for the enjoyment
by their owners, the people of the United States, of the aesthetic, spiritual,
inspirational, educational, and scientific values which are inherent in natural
wonders and nature's creatures. The Service should be concerned with the
preservation of nature in the national parks, the maintenance of natural
conditions, and the avoidance of artificiality, with such provisions for the
accommodation of visitors as will neither destroy nor deteriorate the natural
features, which should be preserved for the enjoyment of future visitors who may
come to the parks.
Each park should be regarded as a system of interrelated plants, animals,
and habitat (an ecosystem) in which evolutionary processes will occur under such
control and guidance as seems necessary to preserve its unique features.
Naturalness, the avoidance of artificiality, should be the rule.
Each park should be dealt with individually, and the National Park Service in
consultation with appropriate advisers should define their objectives and
purposes for each park. These will vary from park to park and in general should
be those for which the park was originally established, with special
consideration for the specific natural phenomena (biological, geological,
archeological) which instigated its establishment.
The report points out that the National Park Service has the responsibility
of administering the national parks in accordance with the purposes for which
they are or may be set aside by specific Acts of Congress and emphasizes that
knowledge about the parks and their problems is needed to discharge this
responsibility. Such knowledge comes from research, especially research in
An examination of natural history research in the National Park Service shows
that it has been only incipient, consisting of many reports, numerous
recommendations, vacillations in policy, and little action.
Research by the National Park Service has lacked continuity, coordination,
and depth. It has been marked by expediency rather than by long-term
considerations. It has in general lacked direction, has been fragmented between
divisions and branches, has been applied piecemeal, has suffered because of a
failure to recognize the distinctions between research and administrative
decision-making, and has failed to insure the implementation of the results of
research in operational management.
In fact, the Committee is not convinced that the policies of the National
Park Service have been such that the potential contribution of research and a
research staff to the solution of the problems of the national parks is
recognized and appreciated. Reports and recommendations on this subject will
remain futile unless and until the National Park Service itself becomes
research-minded and is prepared to support research and to apply its
It is inconceivable that property so unique and valuable as the national
parks, used by such a large number of people, and regarded internationally as one
of the finest examples of our national spirit should not be provided adequately
with competent research scientists in natural history as elementary insurance for
the preservation and best use of the parks.
It is pointed out, however, that the results of research can neither be
predicted or prejudged. The results may not always be pleasant. They may indicate
that a facility should not have been built, that a road should have been routed
another way, that visitors into a particular region should not be encouraged in
large numbers and without control. It may even indicate that a particular park
has deteriorated so far that it can never be returned to its former state. It is
the very integrity of these conclusions, however, that make it essential that
they be brought to bear upon the management problems of the national parks.
The report presents the pressing need for research in the national parks by
citing specific examples in which degradation or deterioration has occurred
because research on which proper management operations should have been based was
not carried out in time; because the results of research known to operational
management were not implemented; or because the research staff was not consulted
before action was taken. In still other situations problems are recognized for
the solution of which research is needed, but where none has been undertaken or
planned or, if planned, has not been financed.
Attention is called to the meager dollar support given to research and
development in the natural sciences in the national parks. In the National Park
Service as a whole less than one per cent of the appropriation in 1960, 1961, and
1962 was devoted to research and development while the proportion for comparable
government agencies was in the neighborhood of 10 per cent. In fact, unless
drastic steps are immediately taken there is a good possibility that within this
generation several, if not all, the national parks will be degraded to a state
totally different from that for which they were preserved and in which they were
to be enjoyed.
Particular attention is called to the precarious condition of the Everglades
National Park and the big trees in California.
As a result of the study made by the Committee a series of twenty
recommendations are made.
- The objectives or purposes of each national park should be defined.
- The natural history resources of each park should be inventoried and mapped.
- A distinction should be made between administration, operational management,
and research management.
- A permanent, independent, and identifiable research unit should be
established within the National Park Service to conduct and supervise research in
natural history in the national parks and to serve as consultant on natural
history problems for the entire National Park System.
- The research unit in natural history in the National Park Service should be
organized as a line arrangement, with an "Assistant Director for Research in the
Natural Sciences" reporting to the Director of the National Park Service.
- Most of the research by the National Park Service should be
- The National Park Service should itself plan and administer its own
mission-oriented research program directed toward the preservation, restoration,
and interpretation of the national parks.
- Research should be designed to anticipate and prevent problems in
operational management as well as to meet those which have already developed.
- A research program should be prepared for each park.
- Consultation with the research unit in natural history of the National Park
Service should precede all decisions on management operations involving
preservation, restoration, development, protection and interpretation and the
public use of a park.
- Research on aquatic life, as well as on that existing on and above the land,
should be pursued to assist in determining general policies or the maintenance of
natural conditions for their scientific, educational, and cultural values.
- Research should include specific attention to significant changes in land
use, in other natural resource use, or in economic activities on areas adjacent
to national parks likely to affect the parks.
- Research laboratories or centers should be established for a national park
when justified by the nature of the park and the importance of the research.
- The results of research undertaken by the National Park Service should be
publishable and should be published.
- Additional substantial financial support should be furnished the National
Park Service for research in the national parks.
- Cooperative planning as a result of research should be fostered with other
agencies which administer public and private lands devoted to conservation and to
- Universities, private research institutions, and qualified independent
investigators should be encouraged to use the national parks in teaching and
- Consideration should be given to including in the budget of the National
Park Service an item for aid to advanced students who wish to conduct research in
the national parks.
- A Scientific Advisory Committee for the National Park Service should be
established, and Scientific Advisory Committees for individual parks are
- Action in implementing the recommendations of the present Committee's report
should be taken promptly.
At the request of the Secretary of the Interior, the President of the National
Academy of Sciences appointed an Advisory Committee to the National Park Service
on Research and instructed it to submit to the Secretary of the Interior a report
on the natural history research needs and opportunities in the National Park
The agreement between the National Park Service and the National Academy of
Sciences, dated June 29, 1962, states that advice and assistance on a research
program are needed because the national parks are complex natural systems which,
for their care, management, development, use, protection and interpretation,
require a broad ecological understanding and continuous flow of knowledge about
the characteristics of the national parks and monuments, the nature of normal and
man-imposed forces at work within them and of the relation of man to these
natural environments and because they constitute a scientific resource of
increasing value to scientists in this country and abroad.
The Committee was specifically instructed to:
"A. Conduct a study of national park research accomplishments, needs,
resources, values, and opportunities in the natural sciences and in such related
fields as may be deemed appropriate by the Academy; and
"B. To submit to the Secretary of the Interior a report which shall:
- Describe in reasonable detail the methods used in performance of the
study described in "A" above; and
- Set forth in reasonable detail any relevant and material data gathered or
disclosed as part of said study, or in connection with it; and
- Set forth the Academy's findings and recommendations for a research
program designed to provide the data required for effective management,
development, protection, and interpretation of the national parks; and to
encourage the greater use of the national parks by scientists for basic
In making its study and recommendations the Committee has devoted its
attention mainly to those 31 areas specifically designated as national parks,
though the Committee recognizes that some areas otherwise labeled (especially a
number of the national monuments) should be included with the national parks
because of their area and/or character.1
The Committee has given most consideration to the role of natural history in
the national parks. At the same time, it has not forgotten that important factors
affecting the proper maintenance of the natural features of the national parks
include visitor use, access by road, land use in surrounding areas and the
location and architecture of man-made facilities; and that archeology and human
history as well as natural history are related to the overall consideration of
the Committee's directive. The Committee has not endeavored to propose research
programs for solving the problems of any specific park, though it calls
attention to some existing problems in particular parks.2
In its study the Committee has recognized numerous problems which deserve
investigation because of their importance for the national parks. Not all of them
were believed to be pertinent to the major directives of this Committee and not
all could be considered adequately in the time at its disposal. Some are
mentioned and briefly discussed below; others are considered at more length
For example, what are the objectives or purposes of the national parks? There
is some confusion and uncertainty, even within the National Park Service itself,
about the proper purposes and objectives for which the national parks should be
administered. Yet it is obvious that a definition of objectives is of prime
importance, and the Committee considered this question at some length.
What is the effect of the rapidly increasing number of visitors on the
national parks? The magnitude of this problem impressed the Committee when
figures on attendance were examined. In 1933 nearly 3,500,000 visits were made to
the areas administered by the National Park Service. By 1962, this number had
increased to 88,500,000; and it is estimated that in 1972 the total number of
visits will have reached the fantastic figure of 126,000,000. A considerable
proportion of visitors go to the national parks.
In 1962, for example, 32,000,000 visits were made to the national parks,
which include 0.6 per cent of the total area of the United States. It is
estimated that in 1972 there will be nearly 41,000,000 visits to the national
Figures for individual parks are equally impressive. In 1951 about 500,000
visits were made to Grand Teton National Park; in 1962 the number was nearly
1,800,000, and the estimate for 1972 is 2,600,000. Graphs of numbers of visitors
annually to a number of national parks during the past 20 or 30 years are
presented.3 They reveal that with the exception of Crater Lake and
Carlsbad Caverns attendance has been rapidly increasing for those parks which had
500,000 visitors or more in 1962. These are, in general, the larger parks and
readily accessible to centers of population. With one exception (the Virgin
Islands National Park) attendance for those with fewer than 500,000 visitors in
1962, has reached a constant level or has decreased. This emphasizes that parks
must be considered individually, generalizations are not necessarily correct,
except for the aggregate.
It is obvious that the large numbers concentrated in the summer months in
many of the national parks present a group of serious problems which range from
simple logistics to human relations and the impact of people on the plants,
animals and habitat of the park itself. Why do visitors come to the national
parks? What proportion simply pass through the park without planning a stop over?
How many leave the roads and penetrate the wilderness areas? How far should
provision for camp, cabin, or lodge accommodations meet the demands for such
facilities? Should the number of visitors to a park be limited? What is the
effect of a park on visitors and what is their effect on a park? Since the
results of a special investigation under the aegis of the Conservation
Foundation on the effects of people on the parks will be reported separately to
the Secretary, this Committee did not pursue the visitor problem extensively.
What is the proper place of the national parks in the totality of Federal
land management? How are proper uses of the national parks coordinated with
those of other public lands? What harm or benefit results from management
practices or the lack thereof on lands adjacent to the national parks and
vice versa? To what extent do the national parks suffer from uses
which do not conform to the legally expressed purposes? What are the attitudes of
local and state authorities toward a national park? Is its national and
international importance fully appreciated locally; is its economic contribution
correctly judged; is it considered to be something in which to take pride or an
area to be exploited without regard to effects on the park? What are the
interrelations in research between natural history and archeology, history,
landscape design and architecture in the National Park Service? How is research
of the United States Geological Survey, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife,
the Forest Service and the National Park Service correlated?
These questions and many others came before the Committee and were discussed;
on many the Committee is not prepared to express a judgment; on others
recommendations will be found at the end of this report.
1Reference to national parks hereafter will apply only to those 31
areas; reference to the National Park System will include the 31 national parks
and other areas administered by the National Park Service.
HOW THE COMMITTEE CONDUCTED ITS STUDY
The Committee held five meetings.
The first was held in Washington, D.C., December 7-8, 1962, where it was
addressed by Park Service officials, including Director Conrad Wirth, Assistant
Director Jackson Price, and Howard Eckles, Assistant to the Secretary's Science
The second meeting, combined with a field trip, was held in Everglades
National Park, January 10-12, 1963.
On the evening of January 10, the Committee was briefed on research problems
of the Everglades, and on the following day it made an extensive tour of the
park, including an airplane inspection as well as on-the-ground visits to some of
the park's more critical spots, such as water diversion projects, deteriorating
bird refuges, experimental controlled-fire burns, various areas which show
vegetation changes and effects of fire, hurricanes, and flooding.
The third meeting was held in Washington, D.C., March 8-9, 1963, where the
Committee discussed organization and staffing of the Park Service Research
The fourth meeting was held in Grand Teton and Yellowstone National Parks,
June 14, 15, and 16. An executive session of the Committee was held at Jackson
Lake Lodge, Sunday, June 16. During the preceding two days, the Committee made a
tour of approximately 200 miles in the two parks. At various inspection points in
the Yellowstone Park, the Committee was briefed on such topics as the fisheries
studies in Yellowstone Lake, grizzly bear ecology and elk migration studies, the
biology of the Northern Yellowstone elk herd, northern winter range studies,
black bear distribution, the hydrobiology of Madison River and headwater streams
and hydrothermal problems.
In Grand Teton National Park the Committee discussed with officials such
problems as the impact of visitors on the Park (visits increased from 144,000 in
1946 to 1,800,000 in 1962); the ski and snowplane, and other mass recreational
areas; the geology of the Teton Range; forest pest control; the national elk
refuge, and the Jackson Hole Biological Research Station which has about 20
researchers in alpine ecological problems, range-type studies and other problems.
The Committee was briefed also on places for proposed location of roads and
facilities in accordance with preservation of park features. The fifth and
concluding meeting was held in Washington, July 19, when the Committee considered
a final report.
During the course of its investigation the Committee, individually and
collectively, consulted with upwards of 100 persons with special competence in
its field of inquiry, including Park Service officials and employees,
representatives of other Federal agencies, scientists with State and local
institutions and agencies, and private investigators. The resources of the
National Academy of Sciences - National Research Council were made available to
the Committee, as well as those of the National Science Foundation. The Committee
consulted books, papers, reports and memoranda on the parks. Individual members
visited many parks, other than the three mentioned, and one member visited all of
DEVELOPMENT OF THE NATIONAL PARKS
As background for its study the Committee was concerned with learning
something of the development of national parks in the United States.
In his history of the United States, Henry Adams pointed out that in 1800,
the Nation as it then existed held 5,300,000 persons. Nearly one-fifth of the
people were Negro slaves; the true political population consisted of four and
one-half million free whites, or fewer than one million able-bodied males. The
land was still untamed; forest covered every portion, except here and there a
strip of cultivated soil; the minerals lay "undisturbed in their rocky beds; and
more than two-thirds of the people clung to the seaboard within 50 miles of
tidewater, where alone the wants of civilized life could be supplied. The center
of population rested within 18 miles of Baltimore and the interior of the country
was little more civilized than when La Salle and Hennepin found their way to the
Mississippi more than a century before."
Adams added that with the exception that half a million people had crossed
the Alleghenies and were struggling with difficulties of their own "in an
isolation like that of the Jutes or Angles in the Fifth Century," America had
changed little in more than half a century. The old landmarks stood nearly where
they had before. The same bad roads and difficult rivers, connecting the same
small villages "stretched into the same forests as when the armies of Braddock
and Amherst pierced the northern and western wilderness; nature was rather
man's master than his servant, and the five million Americans struggling with the
untamed continent seemed hardly more competent than the beavers and buffalo which
for countless generations made bridges and roads of their own."
How do we find our country today? We have a population of more than
180,000,000. We have and are building an almost incomprehensible network of
highways, turnpikes and speedways. We can cross the wide continent in less time
than it took to send a letter from Baltimore to Washington in 1800.
Domestically, we are faced with the challenge of growth. Our postwar
industrial expansion, although not as great as some would like, is changing the
face of the land and the habits of millions. In the early days Americans with few
exceptions, were too interested in the exploitation of a continent to be
concerned about conservation of natural resources. Thomas Jefferson practiced
contour farming on his Virginia plantation, Patrick Henry is reported to have
said that "he is the best patriot who fills the most gullies," and Washington
himself stated that the proper management of land was the thing least understood
in Virginia. But general interest in conservation is of fairly recent origin.
It is somehow fitting that one of the earliest of the prophetic voices raised
on behalf of the creation of national parks was that of an artist. In 1833,
George Catlin, the great painter of Indians and the West, published in the
Daily Commercial Advertiser the hope that the western regions "might in
the future (by some great protecting policy of government) be preserved in their
pristine beauty and wildness, in a magnificent park, where the world could see
for ages to come'' the primitive environment and its native inhabitants.
The next important voice raised in behalf of Catlin's park conservation plan,
Huth, in Nature and the American,1 reports, was that
of Emerson, who in 1844, in a speech entitled "The Young American," stated that
the "interminable forests should become graceful parks for use and delight." And
in 1847, a similar idea was suggested by the painter Thomas Cole, who felt that
it was necessary to save and perpetuate the disappearing wilderness.
National parks, as we know them today, first came into being when the Congress by
the Act of March 1, 1872, created Yellowstone National Park. That park was
"dedicated and set apart as a public park or pleasuring ground for the benefit
and enjoyment of the people." Establishment of Yellowstone National Park pointed
the way to a new type of land use which has served to guide this country and
other nations of the world.
During the first three-quarters of the nineteenth century, the geysers and
hot springs of the Yellowstone region had been seen by a few trappers and
hunters. Their stories of the wonders of that wilderness area filtered to the
outside world. At first disbelieved, their persistence finally led to the
explorations of the Washburn-Langford-Doane Expedition in 1870. The members of
that party confirmed the rumors of the outstanding natural features of the
Cornelius Hedges, a member of the Washburn-Langford-Doane Expedition,
propagated the new idea regarding the disposition of public lands. He proposed
that the Yellowstone area should not be privately exploited, but should be
preserved as a national park for the benefit of all of the people for all time.
No other national parks were created until 1890, when the Yosemite, Sequoia,
and General Grant National Parks in California were established, followed in 1899
by Mount Rainier National Park in Washington. Others have been created since
1900, bringing the present total to 31. The latest is Petrified Forest National
Park, established December 9, 1962.
The most important legislation affecting national parks, and perhaps the most
far-reaching in its effects since the approval of the Act establishing
Yellowstone National Park, is the Act of June 8, 1906. That Act gave the
President of the United States authority "to declare by public proclamation
historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of
historic or scientific interest that are situated upon the lands owned or
controlled by the Government of the United States to be national monuments."
The national parks and national monuments that came into being between 1900
and 1915 were administered by three different departments. There was no unified
or systematic federal plan or policy for the protection, administration, and
development of the areas whose characteristics and uses were closely related
In 1915, Secretary of the Interior Franklin K. Lane, realizing the important
and distinctive type of conservation represented by these areas and the
advantages of unifying the parks and monuments into an integrated system,
appointed Stephen T. Mather as his assistant to devote his energies entirely to
park matters. Under Secretary Lane's guidance, Mr. Mather and his assistant,
Horace M. Albright, drafted the bill which became the Act of August 25, 1916,
establishing the National Park Service as a bureau of the Department of the
In connection with the Federal Government's reorganization in 1933, many
additional areas were transferred to the National Park System. Section 2 of
Executive Order 6166 of June 10, 1933, issued pursuant to the Act of March 3,
1933 (47 Stat. 1517), relating to reorganization of the Executive Department,
transferred the monuments, military parks and allied areas, and the National
Capital Parks, administered by other federal agencies, to the National Park
Service on August 10, 1933. Executive Order 6228 of July 28, 1933, clarified
Executive Order of June 10, 1933, in that it limited the national cemeteries
transferred from the War Department to National Park Service jurisdiction to
those contiguous to, or connected with, national military parks and
It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that the massive growth of
population throughout the world -- in the United States from four million in 1700
to more than 200 million predicted by the close of the century -- is a direct
threat to survival unless we learn the lesson of conservation and wise use of our
natural resources, and the term "wise use" includes conservation of spiritual and
intellectual values as well as material ones. National parks and the national
park idea, which originated in the United States, are powerful influences
contributing to this wise use of natural resources.
1University of California Press.
RESOURCES OF THE NATIONAL PARKS
The National Park System includes 187 units comprising 22,967,763.55 acres of
which 22,560,437.64 acres are federally owned. Of the 187 areas, 31 are known as
national parks and cover 13,561,082.46 acres of which all but 228,165.78 acres
are federally owned.1 The 31 national parks are located in
24 of the 50 States and in the Virgin Islands.
The national parks, together with some of the national monuments, comprise a
bewildering array of notable examples of scenic beauty, desert solitudes, unique
geology, archeology and paleontology, and an unequaled range of plant and animal
life. There are rugged coastal areas (Acadia, Maine; Olympic, Washington);
spectacular mountain and desert scenery (Big Bend, Texas); colorful and unique
caverns with magnificent and curious formations (Carlsbad Caverns, New Mexico;
Mammoth Cave, Kentucky; Wind Cave, South Dakota); a lake of deepest blue in the
heart of an inactive volcano (Crater Lake, Oregon); the largest remaining
subtropical wilderness in the United States (Everglades, Florida); superb
mountain scenery with glaciers and lakes (Glacier, Montana; Mount McKinley,
Alaska; Mount Rainier, Washington); spectacular river canyons (Grand Canyon,
Arizona; Kings Canyon, California); active and inactive volcanoes (Lassen
Volcano, California; Hawaii Volcanoes, Hawaii); cliff dwellings of ancient man
(Mesa Verde, Colorado); geysers and hot springs (Yellowstone, Wyoming, Montana
and Idaho; Hot Springs, Arkansas); island and mountain wilderness areas (Isle
Royale, Michigan; Olympic, Washington); the Grand Tetons in Wyoming; Great Smoky
Mountains of North Carolina and Tennessee; Blue Ridge Mountains in Virginia;
groves of giant sequoias (California); the mountains and waterfalls of Yosemite;
tropical plant and animal life (Virgin Islands). Some features of each park
represent the best and perhaps only examples of their kind in the United States.
In some instances, these features are unique or nearly unique in the world: the
geysers of the Yellowstone National Park, the giant sequoias, the redwoods, the
temperate rain forest of the Olympic Peninsula, the Grand Canyon.
Even a casual examination of the natural resources of the National Park System
of the United States inspires admiration for those who conceived the idea, pride
in the possession of such natural treasures, and sympathy for those who have the
responsibility for their management.
It emphasizes also that in the preservation of these natural resources, the
United States has an obligation to the world community. At the First World
Conference on National Parks held in Seattle, Washington, 1962, the leadership of
the United States in the field of park preservation was universally recognized.
The Secretary of the Interior pledged the efforts of this country to continue
this leadership by maintaining the quality of our parks and by sharing our
experience with other interested countries. That we may be worthy of our
reputation, that the people of the United States may continue to enjoy their
national parks and that we may wisely advise other countries upon request, this
Committee has given its attention and consideration to the role of research in
natural history in the national parks and has made its recommendations.
It is our conclusion that the national parks of the United States represent
one of the most valuable heritages of this country; that in setting aside these
lands the people and government of the United States have demonstrated particular
wisdom; and that the role of national parks in the lives of our citizens is
dramatically enlarging. The Committee is likewise convinced that unless drastic
steps are immediately taken there is a strong possibility that within this
generation we will see reduction of several if not all of our parks to a state
totally different from that for which they were preserved and for which they were
to be enjoyed.
1The National Park Service is eliminating private inholdings as
rapidly as appropriations permit because their usage does not conform to the
purpose for which the parks were established.
PURPOSES OF THE NATIONAL PARKS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
Before an activity can be administered or managed, before its problems can be
defined, investigated or solved, one must be completely clear about the
objectives and one must have a fairly good idea of what, in a given set of
circumstances, the changes in those circumstances are likely to be in order that
they may be anticipated. Unless the purposes and objectives of the national parks
are determined and clearly and generally understood, the management of the
plants, the animals, the habitat in which they live and of man in his impact upon
them is likely to be ineffective, and may even be harmful and destructive.
What are the objectives or purposes of the national parks? Who has the
responsibility for seeing to it that the objectives are attained?
Purposes originally understood for each park are contained in the legislative
act establishing it. The National Park Service has the responsibility for
administering the national parks, and receives its overall authority from the Act
of Congress, approved August 25, 1916, by which the National Park Service was
established in the Department of Interior. The latter Act states:
"The Service thus established [the National Park Service] shall
promote and regulate the use of the Federal areas known as
national parks, monuments and reservations hereinafter specified by such means
and measures as conform to the fundamental purpose of the said parks, monuments,
and reservations, which purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural
and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment
of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them
unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations."1
By the legislation referred to above the National Park Service is confronted
with the responsibility of administering, in accordance with the provisions of
the various acts, areas which vary widely in size, in states of preservation, in
geology, biology, and climate and in actual or potential impact of man and his
activities within and without the park.
In some instances, by specific legislation, administrative orders or
agreements, uses are authorized which may be considered as not conforming to the
purpose of the National Park System as defined in the Act of 1916.2
There are differences of public opinion on the major purposes of the national
parks. One extreme wishes the national parks to be developed as neon-lighted
vacation resorts; another wishes them left as nearly primeval as possible. Should
a major aim of the national parks be the attraction of more and more visitors, by
adding more paved roads, more resort buildings, larger and more numerous trailer
camps, greater mass recreational facilities,3 golf courses,
ski lifts, motorboat marinas, tennis courts, and amusement concessions?
The unique character of the national parks, the existence and extensive
development of other areas specifically designed and administered for mass
recreation and the injunction that the national parks are to be "conserved
unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations" dictate that the preeminent
objectives and purposes of the national parks are and should be their
preservation and conservation with due consideration for the enjoyment by their
owners, the people of the United States, of the aesthetic, spiritual,
inspirational, educational, and scientific values which are inherent in natural
wonders and nature's creatures. The Committee believes that the purpose of the
national parks should be the preservation of nature, the maintenance of natural
conditions, the avoidance of artificiality, with such provisions for the
accommodation of visitors as will neither destroy nor deteriorate the natural
features which should be preserved for the enjoyment of future visitors who may
come to the parks.
Differences of opinion exist on the place of management in the administration
of the national parks. On the one hand it is said that management or
artificial control of the native biological resources of a park is contrary to
the concept of preservation and conservation; that the plants and animals in a
national park should be left undisturbed to multiply, survive or disappear as
natural forces might dictate. On the other hand, it is said that no national park
is large enough or adequately isolated to be, in fact, a self-regulatory
ecological unit, but is subject to direct and indirect modification by
activities (visitors, for example) within the park, and by the effect of changes
in the area surrounding a park. According to this point of view, limitation of
herds of elk, supervision of visitors to a park, control of water levels, proper
location of roads and other facilities, controlled burning, even the decision to
leave untouched some areas in a park, are necessary functions of management if a
park is to survive in anything like the condition which meets the purpose for
which it was established. This Committee believes that management4
of national parks is unavoidable.
The statement in Management of National Parks and Equivalent Areas
formulated by a committee of the First World Conference on National Parks
that was convened in Seattle in July 1962, serves to illustrate the concept:
"Management is defined as any activity directed toward achieving or
maintaining a given condition in plant and/or animal populations and/or habitats
in accordance with the conservation plan for the area. A prior definition of the
purposes and objectives of each park is assumed. Management may involve active
manipulation of the plant and animal communities, or protection from
modification or external influences."
It is not enough, however, to urge that the purposes of the national parks
should be the preservation of nature, the maintenance of natural conditions. Any
administrator honestly attempting to satisfy this recommendation is immediately
faced with the questions -- What state of nature? What natural conditions? The
biological nature, the condition of a national park when first established, with
rare exceptions, has not persisted; factors within and without the limits of a
park have modified it, some times profoundly. Should the management of a
national park endeavor to restore a park to its primitive condition, maintain it
as now, or aim for some state in between?
In a report on Wildlife Management in the National Parks, prepared by
a committee appointed by the Secretary, it is recommended that the goal of park
management in the United States should be to maintain, or where necessary,
restore the biotic associations as nearly as possible to the condition that
prevailed when the area was first visited by white man. This wildlife management
report recognizes that the implications of this "seemingly simple aspiration are
stupendous," and that most, if not all, national parks as they now exist have a
complex biological history ranging from indiscriminate exploitation by logging,
burning, livestock grazing, and hunting, through artificial protection from
fires, insect pests, predators, and changes in normal fluctuation of water
levels. Exotic vertebrates, insects and plants, as well as plant diseases and
pests have been inadvertently introduced; and some endemic species of living
things are even now extinct. The activities of people within and in the vicinity
of a national park have profoundly modified some of them.
The present Committee views with sympathy the ideal of making a national park
"a vignette of primitive America," so eloquently presented in the wildlife
report mentioned, and appreciates as keenly as the authors of the report the
difficulties in even approaching such an ideal. In some instances because of the
paucity of historical records it would be impossible to determine what the
condition of a particular park was when white man first saw it. Changes, some
irreversible, and current activities, in some instances impossible to control, in
areas surrounding a park, as well as the impact of increasing numbers of visitors
suggest that the ideal, though admirable, may not be fully attainable; yet it is
desirable to move in that direction.
The Committee recognizes that national parks are not pictures on the wall;
they are not museum exhibits in glass cases; they are dynamic biological
complexes with self-generating changes. To attempt to maintain them in any fixed
condition, past, present, or future, would not only be futile but contrary to
nature. Each park should be regarded as a system of interrelated plants, animals
and habitat (an ecosystem) in which evolutionary processes will occur under such
human control and guidance as seems necessary to preserve its unique features.
Naturalness, the avoidance of artificiality, should be the rule.
This Committee suggests that each park be dealt with individually and that
the National Park Service, in consultation with appropriate advisors, define the
objectives and purposes for each park. These will vary from park to park and, in
general, should be those for which the park was originally established, giving
special consideration to the specific natural phenomena (biological, geological,
archeological) which instigated its establishment.
In some instances the original particular objective of a national park is
specific, and comparatively simple to define, though it may be difficult to
accomplish. For example, the preservation of the organ pipe cactus, of ancient
cliff dwellings, of a limited but unique group of living organisms, of colorful
and spectacular erosion forms. For other parks the objectives are numerous and
complex. They involve not only several special natural phenomena but the totality
of the habitat and its biology, the ecosystem. McKinley, as a great mountain,
cannot be separated from the tundra which surrounds it. The giant sequoia is
unique, but it would lose part of its value if divorced from the natural setting
in which it exists.
Objectives, insofar as possible, should be clear and definite, not diffuse;
e.g., the best possible spectacle of wildlife in a natural setting, the
restoration of a natural meadow, the introduction of bighorn sheep into an area
from which they have disappeared, the protection (restoration) of the water
table, control of surplus destructive elk, deer, or other hoofed animals. In
setting up such specific objectives, it must be recognized, however, that each is
a part of a whole and cannot be considered as an isolated phenomenon.
Some parks, because of their size, their remoteness or isolation contain
areas which approach primitive conditions. Every effort should be made to
preserve these areas, not only because they may be "vignettes of primitive
America," but because of their scientific value as outdoor natural laboratories
in which the working of natural laws can be observed to greater advantage than
anywhere else and because each such area is a refuge of plant and animal species
-- a nature's biological bank in which a biological reserve can exist and from
which species may spread to adjacent areas. It should be recognized, however,
that with time these areas, too, change.
Such natural undisturbed areas could be preserved for research and park
interpretation by developing and applying the concept of zoning5
which would also dictate the type of use permitted in each
zone. Parks and/or areas within a park might be zoned as follows:
- Natural undisturbed areas. These are undisturbed ecological areas into
which a visitor would be conducted or permitted by special permission. They would
serve as examples and standards of natural conditions characteristic of the
particular area as well as refuges for wild plants and animals.
- Naturalistic areas. These are regions which are wild (natural) in
appearance but affected to some degree by use or by outside influences. They
would be maintained to give, so far as possible, "a reasonable illusion of
- Public use areas.
- Park Service facility areas.
1The underlining is that of the Committee.
2 Such nonconforming uses include: Borax mining in Death Valley;
prospecting and mining in McKinley Park; hunting in McKinley Park in connection
with prospecting; copper mining in Organ Pipe Cactus; grazing rights in various
parks; TV relay stations in Shenandoah National Park and Death Valley; use of
part of White Sands, New Mexico, National Monument as an Air Force impact area
for missile testing.
3 The Committee means by mass recreational facilities those which
are primarily for amusement or which require elaborate construction or extensive
and/or artificial modification of the natural features of a park.
4Management as applied to the national parks in the United States
is understood to be primarily for the purpose of or to lead in the direction of
preservation or restoration of natural conditions.
5The term "zoning" as applied here to existing national parks in
the United States refers to areas rather than belts.
NATURAL HISTORY RESEARCH IN THE NATIONAL PARKS
The National Park Service bears the responsibility of administering the
national parks of the United States for the purpose for which they are or may be
set aside by specific Acts of Congress. The Service is also charged with the
responsibility of preserving these lands for the use and enjoyment of the public
and for interpreting meaningfully the natural features. Finally, it must
administer these lands as part of a complex public land system. National parks
are units of the public domain and have a definable role within the totality of
Carrying out these responsibilities requires knowledge about the parks and
their problems and this can only come from research. Too frequently operational
management acts even when the necessary information for action is fragmentary, or
is lacking. Scientific research furnishes the knowledge and understanding of the
complex natural elements of the national parks and their interaction with one
another on which effective management can be based.
What is the past and present status of research in natural history in the
national parks? Its status has been and is one of many reports, numerous
recommendations, vacillations in policy and little action, insofar as actual
financial support is concerned.
In 1929, the Secretary of the Interior appointed a Committee on Educational
Problems in the National Parks to devise an educational or interpretive program
for park visitors. Confronted with vast gaps in the scientific knowledge
essential for this activity, the Committee recommended a research program to
gather scientific information for the museum, education, and wildlife
Research as an activity of the National Park Service was made
official with the creation, July 1, 1930, of a Branch of Research and
Education to coordinate the new educational program.
Also in 1930, a comprehensive ecological management survey of the
fauna of the national parks was launched and privately financed by the
late George M. Wright. Beginning in 1931, this survey was gradually
integrated into and financed by the Branch of Research and Education as
an official National Park Service function. In the first publication
resulting from this research program, Fauna Series No. 1 (1932)
of the National Park Service, the wildlife research and management
policies of the Service were officially formulated. Fauna No. 1
analyzed the major ecological situations prevailing in each park in the
early thirties and recommended numerous management solutions as well as
more research. It analyzed the Yellowstone elk situation, which had been
a cause for concern since 1911, warned of further range destruction,
urged elk control and further research.
In 1935, a second publication on wildlife research and management,
Fauna No. 2, was produced. By that time, seven current biological
research projects were described and the practice was established of
designating and protecting as "research reserves" unique, unusually
fragile scientific areas within the parks.
Between 1932 and 1940, 28 research reserves were listed in Ecology as
established in 10 national parks and other areas under the National Park Service.
There were approximately 25 biologists in the National Park Service at that time,
mostly in field positions, financed from Civilian Conservation Corps funds. About
half of the time of this staff of field biologists was spent in ecological
reviews of proposed development projects; the other half was divided between
wildlife management and research, which at that time were considered for
practical purposes to be indistinguishable components of the total program.
Fauna No. 4, Ecology of the Coyote in the Yellowstone, by Adolph
Murie (1940), exemplifies the best of the biological research carried out by the
Service during this period. In this publication, Murie repeated the warnings of
severe range destruction by elk in the Yellowstone and indicated that a
two-thirds reduction was necessary.
Moral support to research was given during this period by the Advisory Board
on National Parks, Historic Sites, Buildings and Monuments, which has
consistently urged greater support for research in natural history.
In November, 1939, in accordance with a reorganization program of the
Department, the National Park Service biologists were transferred to the Fish and
Wildlife Service, now called the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, but
their stations and duties unchanged. The word "research" was dropped from the
Branch of Research and Education of the National Park Service. With the outbreak
of World War II, nearly all of these biology positions lapsed, owing to the
abolition of the CCC from which funds for most of the positions had been derived.
A comparable staff and program in geology, established during the 30's, was
eliminated preceding World War II and has not been restored.
Fauna Series No. 5, The Wolves of Mount McKinley, by Adolph
Murie (1944) marked the last of the Fauna Series for the next 17 years.
The resident Park Naturalists contributed much, particularly in the earlier
years, to the knowledge of the parks through observation, collections and
inventories of park resources, and through some basic research. The geological
research of Edwin McKee at Grand Canyon is a most notable example, but the
observations of Arthur Stupka at Great Smoky Mountains, Frank Brockman at Mount
Rainier, and the early work of Milton Skinner at Yellowstone, also illustrate the
research opportunities and accomplishments of that period.
World War II reduced the naturalist staffs to a minimum. After the war the
National Park Service reestablished eight biologist positions under the Division
of Interpretation, which was the lineal descendant of the old Branch of Research
and Education. The number of biologists was not restored to pre-war strength
despite the increasing pressures on park resources; a situation experienced by no
other professional group within the National Park Service except the
On February 10, 1945, the National Park Service issued a statement on
Research in the National Park System, and its Relation to Private Research and
the Work of Research Foundations. Its recommendations covered natural history
as well as history and archaeology and advocated a research program to provide a
constant flow of knowledge on the interrelations of life forms (ecology)
essential for interpretation and management and an adequate staff of biologists.
A list of 77 needed biological research programs was included, with priorities.
The years passed -- but little happened.
During the period 1948-1957, research biologist Walter Kittams was stationed
in Yellowstone to study the chronically serious elk situation and recommend
corrective measures. He produced voluminous illustrated reports showing the
spread of ecological destruction and urging an adequate elk-reduction
In 1953, the National Park Conference advocated research as a basic tool for
interpretation and management. This led to inclusion in the Administrative Manual
of a policy statement in support of research.
In 1956, the first (and last) meeting of National Park Service biologists
since 1939 was held in Washington. A list of suggestions for strengthening and
implementing the Service's biological program was submitted by the conferees,
but was not implemented.
In 1957, a position of aquatic biologist was reestablished to handle
research, interpretation, and management of fisheries and related aquatic
resources. A previous fishery position had existed between 1934 and 1940.
In 1957, members of the first Everglades National Park Research Conference
met to consider the urgent need for a research program to provide answers as soon
as possible to various threats to the park's ecological existence. Special funds
from the Service's Water Resources Branch were allocated annually for several
years (until the first regular research funds finally were secured) for a study
by the University of Miami of the park's freshwater needs -- which study was
recognized as being by far the most acute and immediate need. However, even with
special funds derived from other sources, financing of this study never
approached the $20,000 annually which the University has shown would be the
minimum required for ecological field research covering the subject. A research
project on the ecologically essential role of fire in the park received no
In 1958, the first research funds became available for natural history
(ecology and geology). The total allocated in the National Park Service for this
purpose was $28,000, in subsequent years reduced to $26,880 by a four per cent
administrative overhead deduction. The annual amount allotted for natural history
research has remained at this low level to the present. However, miscellaneous
year-end moneys, and, at the local level, occasional contributions from park
budgets, and donations, may have equalled or exceeded the formal allotments. The
pump-priming effect of even so small a research budget as $28,000 (supplemented
by year-end and other miscellaneous small funds, as mentioned) stimulated
research institutions and scientific collaborators to produce for the Service,
by 1962, several dozen manuscript reports on critical ecological problems. The
majority of these reports have indicated the most immediately needed corrective
On February 10, 1958, the National Park Service reorganized the Divisions of
Interpretation (Natural History) and Ranger Activities "to strengthen both the
research and protection phases of biological resource conservation." This
reorganization made a "clear-cut division of responsibilities between interpretation
and conservation functions in the field areas with respect to biological research
and management." It transferred one of the eight Service
biologists to the Division of Ranger Activities, with responsibilities for all
operational functions, and gave the Division of Interpretation (Natural History)
the responsibility "for developing and carrying out a program of research on
biological resources." In that year also, biologist Coleman Newman completed his
four-year research on the ecology of The Roosevelt Elk of Olympic National
In 1961, the Advisory Board on National Parks, Historic Sites, Buildings and
Monuments recommended an expanded research program, stating that history and
archaeology have proved the value of research, but that research in natural
history has remained inadequate. The National Park Service revived the
long-dormant Fauna Series with No. 6, The Bighorn of Death Valley by
Welles and Welles, summarizing an ecological research project that had been
partially financed out of the Service's annual allotment.
In January 1962, the National Park Service issued a prospectus on a
proposed Comprehensive Natural History Research Program.
In 1963, the Secretary's Committee on Wildlife Management in the
National Parks issued a report on Wildlife Management in the National
Parks which included recommendations on the control of elk herd in
Yellowstone National Park. This report dealt with a problem of concern
since 1911 on which recommendations were made in Fauna Series No.
1 (1932) published by the National Park Service, again in Fauna
Series No. 4 (1940), and again in a series of reports during the
The Department of Interior is well aware of the unsatisfactory status of
natural history research in our national parks. Secretary Udall in a letter of
April 25, 1962, addressed to Dr. D.W. Bronk, then President of the National
Academy of Sciences, said:
"The National Park Service has long recognized that broad ecological
knowledge is indispensable to the integrity and general welfare of the national
parks. During recent decades, however research undertaken by the Service has of
necessity, consisted largely of projects stimulated by crises in park management,
planning, protection, and interpretation. Some more broadly based and fundamental
studies in the national parks have been made by scientists from universities,
other federal agencies, and research organizations such as the Carnegie and
Smithsonian Institutions, but no coordinated or long range plan of investigations
has been developed. As a result, the needs of some areas have been fairly
adequately met; in others, the accomplishments bear a haphazard relationship to
actual needs; while for the remainder, comprising far too many areas, little has
been done." The Committee agrees with Secretary Udall.
Research by the National Park Service has lacked continuity, coordination,
and depth. It has been marked by expediency rather than by long-term
considerations. It has in general lacked direction, has been fragmented between
divisions and branches, has been applied piecemeal and has suffered because of a
failure to recognize the distinctions between research and administrative
decision-making, and has failed to insure the implementation of the results of
research in operational management. Too few funds have been requested; too few
appropriated. In fact, the Committee is not convinced that the policies of the
National Park Service have been such that the potential contribution of research
and a research staff to the solution of the problems of the national parks is
recognized and appreciated. Reports and recommendations on this subject will
remain futile unless and until the National Park Service itself becomes
research-minded and is prepared to support research and to apply its
These harsh comments are not to be interpreted as a criticism of much of the
personnel of the Park Service. The Committee has been most favorably impressed by
the quality of the men, their dedication to their profession and the morale which
exists in the Service. There are simply too few research people and these few are
inadequately supported. The Committee was shocked to learn that for the year 1962
the research staff (including the Chief Naturalist and field men in natural
history) was limited to 10 people1 and that the Service budget for
natural history research was $28,000 -- about the cost of one campground comfort
The Committee recognizes also that a limited amount of excellent research in
natural history has been carried on by the Park Service and that much has been
accomplished by independent investigators with the encouragement and cooperation
of the Park Service. In fact, the accomplishment of research in natural history
in the national parks should be a matter of pride to the Service in view of the
limited funds and personnel available for that purpose. A list of publications
and reports (far too many of these have not been published) is appended to this report.2
It is inconceivable to this Committee that property so unique and valuable as
the national parks, used by such a large number of people and regarded
internationally as one of the finest examples of our national spirit, should not
be provided with sufficient competent research scientists in natural history as
elementary insurance for the preservation and best use of parks. The national
parks idea originated in the United States, and, in spite of all deficiencies,
the parks are far beyond anything similar elsewhere in the world. The need for
sound knowledge on which to make decisions was expressed to the Committee in
strong terms by several of those responsible for the operational management of
some of the more important parks. Such knowledge results from research. An
examination of research in natural history accomplished by the National Park
Service, projects now under way and the conditions in various national parks
forcefully demonstrate the need for an expanded research staff adequately
supported and emphasizes the urgency of immediate action.
One of the first needs is a complete inventory of each of the national parks
including information on such items as topography, geology, climate, water
regime, soil, flora and fauna, land use and archeology, with distribution maps
where appropriate. Insofar as historical records permit, the inventory should
include past as well as present conditions. An inventory furnishes a base from
which changes in biology and habitat can be judged and by which management
practices can be planned.3 It supplies also a major part of the
information by which a park and its significance can be presented (interpreted)
to the public.
The Committee found that a great deal of inventory information has been
accumulated for some parks and that much of it is effectively presented in
attractive form for the pleasure and instruction of the public. There are,
however, obvious deficiencies, the correction of which demands research. Most
significant is a lack of detailed information on geology, aerial photography,
adequate maps of topography, soil types and the distribution of plants and
The place of natural history research in the national parks is demonstrated
by the clear and present danger to some parks because research on which proper
management operations should have been based was not carried out in time; because
the results of research known to operational management were not implemented; or
because the research staff was not consulted before action was taken. In still
other situations problems are recognized for the solution of which research is
needed but none has been undertaken or planned, or if planned, has not been
The condition of the Everglades National Park in its entirety is perhaps the
most precarious. This park is the third largest in the National Park System and
is the largest semi-tropical wilderness in the United States, a vast primitive
area of prairie, swamp, and bay with unusual birds, fish, animals and plants in
extraordinary and intimate ecological relationships. Its existence depends upon
water, not only the annual quantity but the seasonal distribution which
determines alternate periods of flooding and of drought. The development of
canals and the diversion north of the park of water for agricultural and domestic
uses has interfered so seriously with the normal supply of water that the future
of the Everglades as a park is threatened and adjacent areas seriously affected.
Insufficient fresh water in the Everglades influences the salinity of Florida Bay
with potential deleterious effects on fisheries in the Bay and on its role as a
main nursery ground for the Tortugas pink shrimp. A canal into Coot Bay has
destroyed that area as a bird feeding center and additional canals contemplated
for the convenience of motor boats will have further harmful effects on the
ecology of the area. The importance of water for this park is clearly recognized
and is a matter of serious concern to the management. However, much more
information is needed on the ecology of the Everglades, on the effects of
seasonal variations in the water supply and on the best and most intelligent way
to provide water. Far too little research on these and related problems is under
way. The adverse effect of the canal into Coot Bay should be corrected and
further development of canals undertaken, if at all, only after thorough
investigation. The Committee considers the future of the Everglades National
Park a problem of pressing national concern.
The dangerous condition of the giant sequoias of the Mariposa grove in
Yosemite National Park is another situation which disturbed the Committee. These
trees, some of them 2,000 years or more in age and the largest living things on
earth, are unique; they occur in limited areas in California and nowhere else in
the world. However, roots of older trees have been damaged by artificially
induced high water tables, by roadways, motor traffic and visitor paths close to
the trees. Because of the loss of a substantial portion of the root system some
trees have fallen and others leaned so badly that it was necessary to fell them.
Vandalism by visitors who have removed bark, injured the cambium or otherwise
harmed the trees is also a factor. Of greatest importance is that young sequoias
are choked out by competing plants and natural reproduction is not occurring. The
Committee is pleased to note that research is under way looking toward the
preservation of these extraordinary trees. It is hoped that the investigation is
not too late and that suitable management practices can be introduced to save the
Other situations which demonstrate the need for research and/or adequate
research staff in natural history in the National Park Service were noted by
members of the Committee in their visits to the national parks or were called to
their attention. Some of these were the following:
Recommendations have been made in the past to curtail development of public
accommodations in the Great Basin of Big Bend National Park. The Great Basin of
the Chisos mountains is a remarkable physiographic feature of great beauty, now
being defaced and the habitat of rare animals thus degraded. The ecology of such
an unusual area should have been investigated before development in order at
least that knowledge of its characteristics could have been preserved, if the
basin itself cannot be.
In Yellowstone National Park problems of maintenance and the necessity of
relocating some roads because of unstable roadbeds near hydrothermal features,
as well as interference with these features, could have been reduced or
eliminated had a prior geological study of underground features been made. For
example, a road between Bonita Pool, Daisy Geyser and a parking area caused
compaction of the center cap of Bonita and contributed to the dormancy of the
Daisy Geyser. Plans are now in preparation to relocate the road. The importance
of prior research is illustrated by experience at Beryl Spring. Investigations by
a hydrothermal geologist employed during the construction of a bridge and new
road prevented destruction as well as expensive construction.
In the mid-1930's, crested wheat grass, not indigenous to the area, was sown
on some previously cultivated lands to furnish forage for grazing animals. Most
of this grass disappeared during a series of unfavorable growing seasons between
1944 and 1953, but some native grasses survived. This experience emphasizes the
need for investigation of the ecology of vegetation as a basis for operational
management. A study of the development of vegetation in limited areas protected
from overgrazing by fencing would reveal those plants best adapted to the region
and furnish the information needed for intelligent management.
Slippage brought on by construction operations greatly delayed the
construction of Sections 15A6 and 15A7 of the Foothills Parkway in the Great
Smoky Mountains National Park. Adequate geological investigations would have
shown that the tilting of rock strata with layers of clay between the rocks would
allow slippage and preventive steps could have been taken. Construction along
8G-l and 8G-2 on the Foothills Parkway (U.S. 73 to Butterfly Gap) caused a flow
of freshets of sand into the stream and silting of waters on adjacent lands. This
resulted in claims against the United States Government. Geological research
before construction would probably have detected the weak condition of the
sandstone and suggested measures to prevent the silting.
A water system project in Mount McKinley National Park, for which a swatch of
vegetation fifty feet or more in width was clear-cut and bench-graded around the
hillside for upwards of a mile, proved to be useless and is known locally as the
"$90,000 icicle." This scar on the virgin wilderness and failure to accomplish
the purpose could have been avoided if an investigation had been made prior to
Road construction in areas of permafrost in Mount McKinley National Park have
resulted in serious and continued problems in road maintenance. Had research
guidance been obtained from scientists experienced with permafrost in different
locations, the magnitude and type of construction would have been suggested for
critical areas, and the problems now existing would not have developed or would
have been much reduced. Road construction on tundra slopes has produced bleeding
scars which will heal slowly even with man's help. The extreme gullying and
"raveling out" of slopes resulting from cuts and fills have dismayed some who
made the plans. Botanists and geologists have long known the disastrous erosion
which follows disturbance of the delicate equilibrium of soil and plants of
tundra slopes. Research on a small-scale pilot project should have preceded the
road construction to determine how to hold physical and aesthetic damage to a
Big Meadow Swamp was a unique park feature in Shenandoah National Park
containing many plant species of unusual distribution and interest. The flora of
this area has been under study for nearly 25 years. In 1962, the Park Service
decided to extend the neighboring camp grounds into the swamp area with the
result that the water level has been reduced by drainage, the flora has been
seriously damaged in the construction and use of the camp site, and the ecology
has been permanently altered.
In each of these examples, and there are others, operational management
decisions were made by the National Park Service without benefit of adequate
information such as comes from research, and the parks suffered serious damage.
A review of the areas included within the National Park System has also
brought to light current need for specific research:
The causes of limited reproduction of the saguaro cactus in Saguaro National
Monument are imperfectly known. Since the older cacti in the monument, when it
was acquired in 1933, are dying out, some means to insure reproduction are
essential to the continuance of this park for the purpose for which it was
Organ pipe and sinita cacti are not reproducing in Organ Pipe Cactus National
Monument. The effects of a herd of approximately 800 cattle on the desert plant
life are imperfectly known.
Numbers of surface streams and permanent springs in Big Bend National Park are
not as large as they once were. The causes of this reduced water supply and its
effects upon the animal life are not known. The reasons for the disappearance of
bear from this park are not known.
The failure of Ponderosa Pine, Douglas Fir and Arizona Cypress to reproduce
in this park has not been investigated. Modification of park features due to
influences outside of the park require study to assess their effects upon the
park and to provide guidance in restoration and further protection.
The only water supply in Carlsbad Caverns National Park is from Rattlesnake
Spring -- an out-holding on which the park has some first rights to part of the
flow. The present total flow from the spring is reported to be far less than
when the park was first established, and a nearby stream which once ran year
round is now dry most of the time. Causes for the reduced flow from Rattlesnake
Spring are suspected but not confirmed. The deer population in this park may be
too large. The mountain mahogany is overbrowsed to the point that it may not be
able to reproduce. The deer population has not been investigated.
A dam on the Green River downstream from Mammoth Cave National Park prevents
the water level in the cave from falling as far as it once did. The effects on
the biology of the cave, on cave formations and on the solution rates are not
The finest wild flower display in Acadia National Park is that of Rhodora
(Rhodendron Canadense) in Great Meadow, near Sieur de Merits
Spring, in late May or early June. Since 1956, this display has been modest as
compared to earlier years. The cause for this deterioration may be associated
with changes in the water table caused by dams built by beavers. Adequate
research on the ecological relations between the activities of the beaver and the
mass display of Rhodora flowers is needed.
In calling attention to these specific examples for which research in natural
history should have been done before action was taken, and in emphasizing the
great need for research on existing problems, the Committee is fully aware of the
excellent but limited researches that the Park Service has been able to
accomplish. The demonstration that it is necessary to maintain a ratio of at
least 70 per cent grass cover to 30 per cent bare soil if the elk ranges of the
Grand Tetons and Yellowstone are protected from destructive soil erosion, and
that areas damaged by over grazing have a ratio of 30 per cent grass to 70 per
cent bare soil, is one fundamental finding for the proper management of elk herds
in these parks.
The discovery by Welles and Welles that it is not disease, predators or
competition with wild burros that threatens the desert bighorn sheep in the
southwest but competition with man for ancestral watering places, offers a
solution for the preservation of that species.
The discovery of the differences in the causes for large-scale invasion of
mountain meadows above 7,500 feet by lodgepole pine in the national parks of the
High Sierra, and for the excessive invasion by forest on the floor of Yosemite
Valley at 4,000 feet should suggest reasonable methods of management for
preserving these meadows.
Other examples of research accomplished could be cited but the Committee
considers that the amount is too little, the problems solved are too few and the
need is too great for the status of research in natural history in the national
parks to remain in its present anemic condition.
1Total number NPS employees 5359; in Washington
386; in regional offices 1126; in National Parks 1638; in
other Field areas 2209.
2See Appendix 5.
3The Committee has been impressed by the management
plans developed by the Nature Conservancy of Britain. Of the eighty-five National
Nature Reserves in Britain, more than half are now under approved management plans,
each of which is a document of from twenty to one hundred pages prepared according
to a standard pro forma pattern. The Committee recognizes that plans
devised for the nature reserves in Britain are not applicable in toto to the
national parks of the United States but believes that they contain suggestions of
value, and has submitted to the Secretary of the Interior with this report
examples of the management plans prepared by the Nature Conservancy of
ORGANIZATION OF A RESEARCH PROGRAM
It is of the utmost importance that a research program in the natural
sciences be inaugurated in the National Park Service and integrated smoothly into
the continuing functions and activities of the Service in such a way as to insure
that the results of such a program will be utilized in the decision-making
process of operational management. A research program will provide the parameters
and guidelines for operation. Its role in the National Park Service should not be
simply an advisory function. It should be a line responsibility in the National
Park Service organization.
The research organization within the National Park Service should be distinct
from administration and the operational management organization. Management
criteria for a research program are not identical with those for operational
functions; they differ at headquarters as well as in the field. Research contract
review and negotiation are not the same as with construction contracts. Research
field personnel cannot fulfill their assignments effectively under the same
personnel management policies as are most satisfactory for maintenance
In the final analysis the success of a research program in the National Park
Service will depend upon the capabilities of the individuals who have the
responsibility for planning, managing and executing this activity. In order to
bring the necessary scientific knowledge and judgment to bear upon the research
problems confronting the Park Service, and in order that the research program may
achieve rapport with the scientific community at large, the scientific personnel
must be of the highest professional quality.
As a line responsibility in the administration of the National Park Service,
the research program in natural science will involve a heavy administrative
burden. Not only will the development, review, and management of a research
program require considerable imaginative and administrative effort but, in order
to focus research conclusions upon general park management problems, considerable
time and effort will be required on administrative procedures and
Following the principle that scientific personnel directly involved in
research responsibilities should not be distracted with administrative and
operational matters, it is suggested that the research program be established
under an Assistant Director for Research in the Natural Sciences who will be
responsible for the administration of the research programs and for other
activities directly related to the research program functions. It is further
recommended that a Chief Scientist be appointed to direct the natural history
research activities and the natural history research staff. The Chief Scientist
would report immediately to the Assistant Director.
The Assistant Director to whom the responsibility for the research program is
assigned, should be a scientist, thoroughly conversant with the general concepts
of the problems to be encountered. He should have experience in working with
other scientists and with research programs, and be knowledgeable in
administrative techniques involved in reviewing, developing, and managing
scientific programs. He must, particularly, recognize and be sympathetic with the
importance of freedom of action which scientific investigation requires.
The Committee recommends that a nucleus of highly competent scientists be
assembled in the headquarters of the National Park Service primarily to develop a
research program in natural history, and to determine the exact extent and nature
of the research problems confronting the parks with an assessment of priorities
to be pursued. This nucleus should comprise at least 10 individuals including the
present staff. Increases in staff, together with field personnel, should be based
on the conclusions of this central group, and be determined by it.
Since the research problems of the National Park Service will involve complex
biological and physical situations, emphasis should be placed on selecting
scientists for the directing staff who have broad competence in their fields
rather than merely specialists in particular areas or problems. Specialists,
where necessary, may be sought when the problems of the parks are further
Since the research program will directly relate to operational management
policies of the national parks, the research program in natural history in the
National Park Service should be mission-oriented; that is, it should be concerned
with the problems involved in the preservation of the natural features of a park,
their restoration, where necessary and possible; and the development of sound
information for the interpretation of the parks to the interested public. The
scientific investigators must, however, be free to pursue experiments which are
in their judgment the most promising within the defined areas of the mission.
The National Park Service should not attempt to include on its natural
history staff competence for every type of problem requiring mission-oriented
research. Problems, specialized in nature, the solution for which may be
anticipated within a limited period of time (one to five years), lend themselves
to contractual arrangements for the needed research.
The permanent research staff in natural history of the National Park Service
should be set up with the following criteria in mind:
It should include personnel of high scientific and administrative ability
qualified to plan and direct a natural history inventory of the national parks;
to assess the nature of the research problems encountered in each park and assign
priority to the study and solution of these problems; to develop and direct a
Service capability to conduct research on problems of long-term duration, common
to multiple areas and involving interdisciplinary study; to review, approve, and
coordinate proposed research in national parks by independent investigators; and
to negotiate and manage research contracts for mission-oriented projects of
specific problems of finite duration in which the best competence available is
outside the Service.
It should be clearly realized by the Department of the Interior and by the
Park Service that the results of research cannot be predicted nor prejudged. The
results may not always be pleasant. They may indicate that a facility should not
have been built, that a road should have been routed another way, that visitors
into a particular region should not be encouraged in large numbers and without
control. It may even indicate that a particular park has deteriorated so far that
it can never be returned to its former state. It is the very integrity of these
conclusions, however, that this Committee feels must be brought to bear upon the
management problems of our national parks.
An important element of research activity is the line of communication
between those directing and managing the program in Washington and those
executing the research. During the course of the Committee' s investigations, two
occasions were discovered in which research reports submitted by field
naturalists were either held in the regional office and not forwarded to
Washington or were misdirected upon arrival in the Washington office. Examples
were noted of research activities conducted by independent researchers in
national parks about which the Washington Office was uninformed. Regional
offices have negotiated research contracts without authorization by or previous
knowledge of the Washington office. In some instances, duplication of research
efforts resulted or low-priority projects were supported. In order to prevent
such occurrences, communication between research personnel should be direct from
field to the Office of the Chief Scientist. Regional offices serve as useful
supporting services to field research activities, but the direction of the
professional scientific research program should center on the Office of the Chief
The National Park Service should immediately seek authority to hire the Chief
Scientist and his top scientific staff at the highest possible salary levels
(GS15). The Service should also seek authority to hire research personnel under
excepted positions where necessary. This authority would greatly reduce the
problem of securing adequate research staff and would permit utilization of
personnel for relatively short periods of time (one to three years) from
universities and other non-governmental organizations.
Policies of rotation of field research personnel should be developed in such
a way as to allow the individual sufficient time in a location to accomplish
effective research and yet not be excluded from appropriate professional
opportunities and advancement. These policies should take into account also the
importance that must be placed upon continuing familiarity with developments in
the fields of science. Field research personnel should have the important benefit
of association and regular contact with those planning and administering the
program in Washington and should be encouraged also to participate in scientific
gatherings and meetings within their respective disciplines and to exchange their
results within the scientific community. Finally, research personnel should be
encouraged to improve their capabilities by further study, and should be
permitted to take advantage of government assignments or scholarships for such
Research in natural history conducted by the National Park Service should be
of such quality that the results are worthy of publication and provision should
be made for prompt publication either in established journals or publications
sponsored by the National Park Service. It is in the public interest that the
results of research be published. The policy of publication will be an element in
attracting to the research staff qualified scientists who will find through this
means one method of participating in the scientific community; and the research
publications will play an important part in developing the interpretation program
of the Service. It should be understood, however, that not all research results
will be of a publishable nature, particularly studies conducted on specific
operational problems through which a problem is solved but little new knowledge
Facilities to support research may be required in connection with some of the
national parks. Although much field work can be conducted satisfactorily without
a nearby laboratory some research projects are made more productive by or
actually require a readily accessible field laboratory with supporting living
accommodations for the research personnel.
The Committee suggests that in the establishment of a research facility the
following criteria are pertinent:
It should be established and controlled by the National Park Service; it
should not duplicate facilities conveniently available to independent
investigators or the National Park Service personnel elsewhere; it should be
located in park areas already zoned for facilities and not in a natural area; it
should be as simple and inconspicuous as its purposes permit. Wherever possible,
consideration should be given to the desirability of constructing research
centers outside the limits of a park. Some of these might be supported,
administered and used jointly with other agencies or organizations.
Interpretation of the National Parks is closely associated with the research
program in natural history as well as with the operational management. Through
its interpretation program the National Park Service presents the natural
features of the parks in their historic setting. To do this adequately requires
the information developed by the research program and requires also methods and
facilities for presenting the data to the public and a staff qualified to serve
as interpreters of the information and its significance. During the summer months
members of the interpretive staff are fully occupied in that activity; at other
times of the year they could assume other duties which might well include, for
those individuals interested and qualified, assignment to research duties or
participation in field research. The Committee believes that interpretive
personnel should be organized separately from the research personnel in natural
history but well integrated with it. Although depending on the natural history
research staff for information within its competency, the interpretive staff
should be well grounded in science and skilled in modern techniques and media of
dissemination of information to the public.
Greater use of the parks will involve deeper penetration into the areas
adjacent to facilities and access roads. The Committee notes that today only
about five per cent of park users penetrate farther than one-half a mile from the
facilities and access routes. Heavier use of the national parks indicates a
larger and deeper penetration and, if this occurs without impairing the parks, it
will have to be done, in large part though not exclusively, on a guided basis.
Such guiding should be included with interpretive activities. Therefore, the
size of the interpretive staff in some of the parks areas will have to be greatly
The Committee believes that the overall role and importance of research in
natural history in the proper preservation, restoration and interpretation of the
national parks is a subject which could profitably receive continued attention by
the Advisory Board of National Parks, Historic Sites, Buildings and Monuments.1
The Committee believes also that a Scientific Advisory Committee should be
established to advise the Assistant Director of Research in the Natural Sciences
and the Chief Scientist on such overall policy matters in natural history as may
In addition, ad hoc scientific advisory committees for individual parks are
useful. Such committees would consist of individuals familiar with the particular
region and with special competence in the area in which the particular research
problems might fall.
Financial support is a limiting factor in determining the extent of any
program. The Committee has considered the problem of how much money could
justifiably be devoted to supporting research in the national parks. To determine
the cost of meeting the research needs of each park and arriving in this way at a
sum total was not considered by the Committee to be feasible at this time. An
examination, however, of the annual appropriations for comparable bureaus
disclosed the following:
The dollars devoted to research and development and scientific information
in the Department of the Interior as a whole ranged from 10 to 12 per cent of the
total appropriation in the years 1960, 1961 and 1962, for the Department of
Agriculture about 3 per cent and for the Department of Commerce from 9.8 to 24
per cent (Table I). The figures for comparable Services or Bureaus within these
Departments show the National Park Service was next to the lowest, with less
than one per cent of its annual appropriations devoted to research and
development. In fact, the percentage for the National Park Service is
substantially behind the percentage (2.8%) of the gross national product devoted
to research and development and behind that (1.8%) of net sales in private
industry. An overall consideration of the figures in Table I suggests that 10% of
the annual appropriation should be a reasonable basis for estimating the cost of
research and development. This would have meant for the year 1962 an allotment
for research and development in the National Park Service of approximately
$10,000,000 instead of the $930,000 actually available.
The budget of the 31 national parks in 1962 was $42,754,866. Applying the 10
per cent yardstick the amount of money available for research and development in
the 31 national parks alone should have been not less than $4,275,000.
It is essential in future research appropriations and allocations within the
National Park Service, which includes archeology, history, interpretation,
landscape design and architecture, that natural history research be given support
commensurate with the extent of the land in the national parks, the use of these
lands, the preservation of national parks in the overall system and the key
position of natural history in the preservation, restoration and interpretation
of the parks.
The money spent on research and development by the National Park Service in
1962 amounted to one cent per visitor, or 0.6 cent per acre.
From Federal Organization for Scientific Activities
1962, NSP 62-37
All Figures in thousands of dollars
|Department of Interior
|R&D Sci. Info.||75,000||89,000
|Fish & Wildlife Service
|R&D Sci. Info.||21,000||26,000
|Bureau of Mines
|R&D Sci. Info.||25,000||30,000
|U.S. Geological Survey
|R&D Sci. Info.||23,000||26,000
|Bureau of Land Management
|R&D Sci. Info.||88||94
|National Park Service
|R&D Sci. Info.||726||878
|Bureau of Reclamation
|R&D Sci. Info.||1,500||1,900
|Department of Agriculture
|R&D Sci. Info.||133,000||178,000
|R&D Sci. Info.||16,000||20,000
|Department of Commerce
|R&D Sci. Info.||56,000||80,000
|National Bureau of Standards
|R&D Sci. Info.||17,000||34,000
|Coast & Geodetic Survey
|R&D Sci. Info.||100||410
| Weather Bureau
|R&D Sci. Info.||5,000||7,000
1The Advisory Board of National Parks Historic Sites,
Buildings and Monuments was established under the Historic Sites Act in 1935 (Section 3).
Briefly the Act states that an Advisory Board will be established to advise and
recommend to the Secretary of the Interior on matters concerning National Parks
and the preservation, conservation, and restoration of Historic Sites, Buildings,
and Monuments. The Advisory Board consists of 11 persons representing competence
in the fields of history, archeology, architecture and human geography. The term
of appointment is at the pleasure of the Secretary of the Interior and by
administrative decision has been set so that several positions rotate each year.
As of June 1963, the Board was composed of the following individuals:
Harold P. Fabian, Chairman, (Former Director of Utah State Parks)
Stanley A. Cain, Vice Chairman, (Chairman, Department of Conservation,
University of Michigan)
E.B. Danson, Jr., Secretary, (Director, Museum of Northern Arizona)
Mrs. N.S. Dryfoos, (Wife of the late Publisher of New York Times)
Dr. Melville B. Grosvenor (President, National Geographic Society)
Dr. John A. Krout, (Director of History, Arizona State University)
Mr. Sigurd F. Olson, (Author)
Mr. Earl H. Reed, (Architect, The American Institute of Architects)
Dr. R.G. Sproul, (President Emeritus, University of California)
Dr. W.E. Stegner, (Director of Creative Writing Institute, Stanford
Dr. R.L. Stearns, (Citizens Committee on Modern Courts, Inc.)
USE OF THE NATIONAL PARKS BY SCIENTISTS FOR BASIC RESEARCH
Although the word "research" does not appear in the National Park Service Act
of 1916, when new parks were created their use by scientists was soon advocated.
In 1902, an invitation to so use them was specifically included in the Act
establishing Crater Lake National Park.
Outside institutions, recognizing the value of these areas for research,
accepted the Service's invitation. In 1914, the University of California began in
Yosemite the first of its series of scientific monographs and shorter
publications on the ecology of western national parks and monuments.
In 1917, the annual report of the Director of the National Park Service
"It is our hope to encourage the general use of all parks as fields for
The list of publications and reports appended to this report demonstrates the
research which has resulted from this encouragement.
The mission of the National Park Service is to preserve and conserve the
national parks for the proper enjoyment of them by their owners, the people of
the United States, and by future generations. Research carried on by the National
Park Service should be governed primarily by this mission.
National Parks are, however, more than areas of importance for the aesthetic,
spiritual, inspirational and educational values inherent in their physiographic
and biological features. They are irreplaceable natural laboratories in which
scientific studies can be carried out which would not be possible in even the
most elaborate and conventional man-made laboratory. In the national parks it is
possible to study the structure, interrelations and behavior of biological
communities, discover how they are adapted to their environment and compare them
with the artificial communities elsewhere created by the clearings, drainage, and
contamination, and by the introduction of exotic animals and plants by man. They
offer the opportunity to pursue long-term ecological studies difficult if not
impossible to conduct elsewhere. Such studies by university scientists and
independent investigators should be systematically encouraged by the National
Park Service. For example, Isle Royale National Park is an area with a nearly
undisturbed balance of plants and animals including moose, wolves, and beaver; it
is an unrivaled laboratory in which to learn the role played by each species in
an ecological system and by comparison with other areas to learn the effect of
man on the land and the living things which inhabit it.
The National Parks contain unique or nearly unique plants and animals which
may be of great scientific importance.
The thermophilic algae and other organisms in hot springs offer challenging
questions of a fundamental character. What accounts for their ability to survive
at temperatures considerably above those which are lethal for most organisms? The
blind fish and other organisms in Mammoth Cave and other blind organisms in
Carlsbad Caverns raise another series of questions which are basic to the problem
of evolution and the loss of organs through disuse. Can natural selection account
for the origin of these creatures or are principles at work with which we are ill
The genus Tripsacum has become important in maize (Zea Mays)
breeding, and the discovery that T. floridanum hybridizes readily with
maize and produces highly fertile hybrids has aroused a great deal of interest in
Tripsacum as a source of breeding material. The University of Illinois has
three men devoting virtually all their time to research on hybrids of maize and
Tripsacum, much of it on hybrids between maize and T. floridanum.
T. floridanum occurs in the Everglades National Park; and Dr. Paul
Mangelsdorf, "dean" of students of the genetics of maize, has this to say:
"T. floridanum is confined to southern Florida and its natural
habitats are constantly being encroached upon by the construction of residential
areas, highways, and airports. I first collected this species beside a shell road
just south of Homestead. When I looked for it there again last September the road
had been paved and the Tripsacum had disappeared. It is still to be found
in empty lots in Homestead and indeed as far north as Coral Gables but these
empty lots will eventually be built on and the Tripsacum will be
destroyed. All of these facts point to the importance of maintaining the
Everglades National Park, if for no other reason than to preserve this grass
which is related to maize, and which is an endemic to the southern part of
Florida. I suspect that the Everglades National Park has other endemics which are
of botanical interest but probably none is so closely related to America's
principal food plant, corn."
Glaciers in the Cascade Mountains are advancing in contrast to the steady
retreat of those almost everywhere else in the world, including glaciers in
Olympic National Park. A comparative study of the glaciers of the Cascade
Mountains and those of nearby Olympic National Park might contribute to our
understanding of the mechanics of glaciation and the Pleistocene era.
The Grand Canyon of the Colorado still serves as a classic laboratory for the
study of geologic history of the formation of this continent. The Grand Tetons
and Jackson Hole form one of the finest examples in the world of blockfault
mountain building, exposing a very fine geologic sequence from Precambrian to
Mesozoic. Glacier National Park presents an equally fine example of overthrust
The temperate rain forest of Olympic Park, the subtropical Everglades, the
desert flora of Big Bend National Park provide nearly unique situations for
For those interested in the vulcanology of the Pacific Basin, Lassen Volcanic
Park and Hawaii Volcanoes contain some of the most active volcanic regions in the
northern western hemisphere.
Climatological investigations involving the geysers of Yellowstone National
Park are being conducted by the Atmospheric Service Research Center of the State
University of New York; ecological and geological studies are being conducted at
Mammoth Cave; and glaciological studies in McKinley National Park.
The narrow, deep, well-watered gorge of McKittrick Canyon, a part of Carlsbad
Caverns National Park in the Guadalupe Mountains, offers a striking contrast to
the desert conditions of the surrounding terrain. In this narrow canyon,
scientists have found an association of plants and animals which represent a
relict from the Pleistocene era. More than 20 species of insects new to science
have been discovered; four of them belong to new genera and it is likely that
more new species, both plant and animal, exist there. An abundance of small and
uncommon reptiles has been discovered. McKittrick Canyon offers to the biologist
an opportunity to study an unusual example of evolution, and the ecological
relations of organisms carried over from ancient times.
The isolated, high-altitude valley of Paradise Park in Rocky Mountain
National Park has been virtually unmolested ecologically since the last glacial
epoch. Many situations like McKittrick Canyon and the valley of Paradise Park
exist in the national parks and offer the biologist an opportunity to study the
interrelations of plants, animals and their habitat unmodified and undisturbed by
man. They are rapidly disappearing elsewhere. This is not the place to list all
the opportunities for research in the national parks. They are numerous and
fundamental and range widely in the physical and biological sciences.
The Committee urges that the Park Service encourage research activities by
independent investigators in these and other fields in the national parks. There
are opportunities available that will increase general scientific knowledge and
provide insight into basic scientific questions. The Committee does not believe
that the Park Service itself should engage extensively in such research
activities, however. There are sufficient research problems directly related to
park management questions to absorb most of the efforts which can appropriately
be directly supported by the Park Service. The Committee feels that independent
research conducted in the national parks should be carried out with the full
knowledge and permission of the Service and that cooperation between Park Service
research personnel and independent research personnel should be encouraged.
Independent researchers should realize that the Park Service, with its
responsibilities to preserve the parks and to make them available to the public,
must exercise its responsibility to insure that no research activity is harmful
to the parks nor interferes with the preservation of natural conditions and
public enjoyment. On the other hand, the Park Service must honor the basic
freedom of the independent investigator to pursue his objectives, within the
limits of these responsibilities, without interference.
Furthermore, the Park Service should avoid interference with independent
research which has been authorized within the parks. Recently, in Mammoth Cave
National Park, a beetle study plot in the cave was severely damaged when workmen,
improving the visitor access in another area of the cave, dumped rubble and
boulders down a shaft directly above the study plot. Similarly, in Shenandoah
National Park a mammal study plot, without warning, was bulldozed into a new
The Park Service should make every effort to support and accommodate
independent research effort, and should recognize that basic research of this
kind will enhance the importance of the national parks and will contribute to the
interpretational functions of the Service and to our national scientific
Closely related to the use of the national parks for basic research is their
use for teaching and for research by advanced students. The Committee believes
that there is considerable opportunity for advanced students to engage in
research problems in the national parks. The National Park Service has engaged in
a program part of which was directed towards this purpose: the Student
Conservation Program. These efforts have demonstrated that such advanced student
training can be beneficial to the park and to the individual. The concept of
cost-sharing by the Park Service and interested private capital in the Student
Conservation Program might offer an arrangement which would well serve the Park
Service needs in research staff at the field assistant level and might reduce the
necessity of maintaining the number of individuals required throughout the entire
year on the permanent staff of the Park Service.
This Committee has stated that in its opinion the National Park Service must
manage to some degree the lands which fall within the National Park System. The
Committee has stated further that the management of any enterprise cannot be
effective unless the objectives of the enterprise are clearly defined and well
understood, and plans are devised to accomplish the objectives.
Plans must be based on information of the resources (inventory) of the
activity, on its problems, and on its relation with other similar activities; and
they must be implemented by adequate and competent personnel, properly organized,
motivated, and supported financially.
Research is an essential part of the program outlined above and its use a
necessity in each of the steps. These elementary principles apply to the national
parks as well as to a business or any other organized activity.
The Committee has based its recommendations on these considerations, as well
as on its acquaintance with the parks and their problems and begs leave to submit
1. The objectives or purposes of each national park should be defined.
COMMENT: Each national park was established because of the potential
esthetic, educational, scientific and cultural values of its natural history
and/or its human history. The features of a park which make the values possible
of attainment should be carefully defined to serve as the basis for operational
management. They should be preserved and restored, where necessary, and
provisions made for their proper enjoyment and use by the people. The objectives
should exclude the use of the national parks for amusement or such mass
recreation as requires elaborate facilities or extensive and/or artificial
modification of the natural features of a park. The Committee endorses, in this
respect, the conclusion of the report: "Wildlife Management in the National
Parks." Zoning of a national park into, for example, natural undisturbed areas,
naturalistic areas, public use areas and Park Service facility areas is
2. Inventory and mapping of the natural history resources of each park should
COMMENT: Such an inventory should cover the past as well as the
present, and include information on topography, geology, climate, water regime,
soil types, flora and fauna and natural communities. Mapping, including aerial
maps, should cover species distributions, natural communities, land use,
archeology and such other mappable features as may be of importance in the
An inventory serves as a basis for judging changes, good or bad, in the
condition of a park, supplies the information necessary for interpreting the
area to the public, and is essential for proper operational management, as well
as for further research.
3. A distinction should be made between administration, operational
management, and research management.
COMMENT: Research is essential to solve problems of operational
management whether the latter concerns preservation, restoration,
interpretation or the use of the parks by the public. Administration, the
management of research and the management of operations require somewhat
different though well recognized administrative procedures. In most situations,
the following steps are involved:
1) Identification and definition of the problem or situation;
2) Research, or fact finding, based on observation and/or experimentation;
3) Administrative action which involves decision on a course of action,
grounded on the findings and recommendations of research and such other
considerations as may be involved; and
4) Operational management, which means the implementation of the decisions by
the appropriate operational division.
4. A permanent, independent, and identifiable research unit should be
established within the National Park Service to conduct and supervise research
in natural history in the national parks, and to serve as consultant on natural
history problems for the entire National Park System.
COMMENT: In order to maintain objectivity, the principal research
organization should be independent of operational management. It should provide
knowledge which would allow predictions of the consequences of alternate lines
of action or inaction. Close liaison should be maintained between the research
unit and the administrative and operating divisions in order that the results of
research may be adequately applied. All branches of the service should
participate fully in identifying problems and in preparing programs and budgets
for research. The research staff should have complete freedom in the execution
of an approved research program, in evaluating the results, in reporting the
findings and in making recommendations based on the findings. There should be
free communication on research ideas and research accomplishment from anywhere in
the National Park Service to and from the top research staff. Provision should
be made to enable the research staff to maintain close association with other
5. The research unit in natural history in the National Park Service should be
organized as a line arrangement with an "Assistant Director for Research in the
Natural Sciences" reporting to the Director of the National Park Service.
COMMENT: A nucleus of highly competent scientists headed by a Chief
Scientist should be assembled in the headquarters of the National Park Service.
This nucleus should comprise at least 10 individuals -- including the present
staff. The scientific group in Washington should be supported by an appropriate
staff of natural history specialists available for field assignments and other
research. The committee emphasizes that quality is more important than numbers
and that a selective and flexible approach to research problems is likely to be
most profitable in the long term. Field research personnel should report directly
to the Washington staff, and should be administered by personnel management
policies compatible with their responsibilities.
6. Most of the research by the National Park Service should be
COMMENT: The National Park Service should direct its in-service
research mainly toward the problems involved in the preservation and/or
restoration of the national parks for the esthetic, educational and scientific
values and toward the adequate interpretation of these values. The solution of
some of the problems may extend beyond the conventional bounds of natural history
and involve, at least temporarily, contributions by, for example, economists,
social scientists, and engineers. The problem should be emphasized and
assistance for its solution sought wherever competence may be found. When
appropriate, mission-oriented research should be carried out on a contract basis
with universities or private research organizations.
7. The National Park Service should itself plan and administer its own
mission-oriented research program directed toward the preservation, restoration,
and interpretation of the national parks.
COMMENT: The mission of the Service in the preservation of the total
environment is a unique responsibility. The research program necessary to support
this objective is of a scope and character different from that of any other
institution or land management agency. The Service must therefore accept the
responsibility for the planning, administration and conduct of its own research
program. While it may, and is encouraged to utilize the specialized services
of other agencies and institutions, it cannot abrogate its responsibilities for
the direction and execution of its own mission-oriented research program.
8. Research should be designed to anticipate and prevent problems in
operational management as well as to meet those which have already developed.
COMMENT: A limited staff which has inadequate support can deal only
with immediate "brush fire" problems; that is to say, it can deal only with
situations which have already become critical and perhaps irreparable. A research
staff adequate in competence and numbers can conduct research from long-term
considerations, detect problems before they become critical and offer alternate
choices of action for their solution.
9. A research program should be prepared for each park.
COMMENT: A basic goal of management should be to perpetuate and where
necessary restore the values which justified the parks' creation and maintenance.
A program of research studies needed to provide management with the information
required to reach this goal should be established and implemented with the
requisite funds and personnel.
10. Consultation with the research unit in natural history of the National
Park Service should precede all decisions on management operations involving
preservation, restoration, development, protection and interpretation, and the
public use of a park.
COMMENT: The Committee discovered or had its attention called to
numerous instances in which consultation with qualified scientists would have
prevented or modified a development or operation which had harmful effects on a
park or required expensive changes to prevent or correct such effects.
Operational management is sensible of this need, as judged by frequent
unsolicited comments to the Committee, but is handicapped by limited research
staff available for consultation or by failures in communication.
11. Research on aquatic life, as well as on that existing on and above the
land, should be pursued to assist in determining general policies for the
maintenance of natural conditions for their scientific, educational, and cultural
COMMENT: The Committee recognizes that serious management problems for
the preservation and restoration of aquatic life in the parks exist and that
research is needed to arrive at rational decisions on these problems. They arise
in part from the use of rotenone or other poisons as a fish management tool, the
effects on aquatic life of motorboat traffic, sport fishing, the introduction of
exotic forms and their effects on native aquatic life. The so-called "barren"
lakes and streams are devoid of game fish but are of considerable scientific
interest because of that fact. Each of these raise questions which can be
properly settled only through the results of research.
12. Research should include specific attention to significant changes in land
use, in other natural resource use, or in other economic activities on areas
adjacent to national parks, and likely to affect the parks.
COMMENT: The problems of operating a park to meet objectives given the
National Park Service by legislation are closely related to events in areas
surrounding each of the parks. Effective, economical administration of each park
could be materially aided by timely research of a modest extent on resource use
in such surrounding areas. This research could be carried on jointly with the
other agencies directly concerned.
13. Research laboratories or centers should be established for a national park
when justified by the nature of the park and the importance of the research.
COMMENT: Such research laboratories or centers should not only serve
the staff of the National Park Service but also scientists from universities and
independent research organizations. Control of such centers should remain with
the National Park Service. The location of such centers, and access to them,
should be such as will not destroy other values of a park nor interfere with the
proper use and enjoyment of a park by the public. Consideration should be given
to establishing research centers, whenever possible, outside the limits of a park
in some instances supported, administered and used jointly with other agencies or
14. The results of research undertaken by the National Park Service should be
publishable and should be published.
COMMENT: Research in natural history carried out by the National Park
Service should be of such quality that the results are worthy of publication and
should be published. Although the research conducted by the National Park Service
should be directed primarily toward park problems, it is in the public interest
that the results be made available through publication, either in established
journals or in a series sponsored by the National Park Service. It is recognized
that on occasion research may be undertaken the results of which are not of
general interest and do not require publication. Such investigations should be
exceptions and not the rule. Additional substantial financial support should be
furnished the National Service for research in the national parks.
15. Additional substantial financial support should be furnished the
National Park Service for research in the national parks.
COMMENT: The Committee could not in the time available and from the
data at hand, estimate the total cost of research, based upon the needs of each
park. The Committee noted, however, that on the average, approximately 10 per
cent of the annual budget was devoted in 1962 to research and development by
those government agencies comparable to the National Park Service. The Committee
considers this to be a reasonable basis for establishing a research budget and
recommends that research in the National Park Service be supported at a level
consistent with that of comparable agencies.
The Committee strongly urges that in future research appropriations and
allotments within the National Park Service natural history research be given
support commensurate with the key position of natural history in the
preservation, restoration and interpretation of the parks. The number, variety
and extent of the national parks, their unique character and international
significance, as well as the complexity of their problems suggest that the
allotment of money to research be of the order recommended above.
16. Cooperative planning as a result of research should be fostered with other
agencies which administer public and private lands devoted to conservation and to
COMMENT: Various agencies in the federal government, the states,
municipalities, universities, and other private or public organizations
administer lands devoted to conservation and to recreation of one type or
another. The National Park Service should be fully cognizant of the resources,
objectives, and activities of these areas, and cooperate fully with those
responsible for their administration, especially as related to natural history
17. Universities, private research institutions, and qualified independent
investigators should be encouraged to use the national parks in teaching and
COMMENT: The national parks are a national and international scientific
resource. In some respects, their natural history is unique or nearly so. They
are outdoor laboratories of great scientific value and should be made available
to independent investigators when the research work does not threaten
deterioration of the park or interfere with its appropriate use by the public and
when it can be effectively facilitated by the staff of the National Park Service.
18. Consideration should be given to including in the budget of the National
Park Service an item for aid to advanced students who wish to conduct research in
the national parks.
COMMENT: A program of this character should be considered in part a
training program and a practical source of future personnel. Support for field
work by advanced students is frequently inadequate, especially in natural
history. It is recognized that the supervision of students places
responsibilities on park personnel, and that provision for adequate supervision
should be a part of any plan of the nature recommended. An expansion of those
aspects of the Student Conservation Program concerned with the support of
advanced students as Assistant Ranger Naturalists should be considered.
19. A Scientific Advisory Committee for the National Park Service should be
established, and Scientific Advisory Committees for individual parks are
COMMENT: Such Advisory Committees should be working committees
concerned with park problems. It should be clearly understood, however, that
advisory committees are advisory, not decision-making bodies. The practice of
engaging the assistance of ad hoc committees for special park problems
should be continued.
20. Action in implementing the recommendations of this Committee's report
should be taken promptly.
COMMENT: Time is an essential factor in dealing with forces that
threaten the existence of certain indigenous animal and plant species and
threaten or otherwise degrade park values, in some instances beyond the
possibility of restoration. Among these factors are excessive human use,
overgrazing, the invasion of park areas by aggressive exotic flora and fauna and
interference with water supply. Studies are urgently needed to provide the basis
for prompt action.
THE EVERGLADES NATIONAL PARK
(Excerpts from the Minutes of the Committee's Meeting at
Everglades National Park, January 10-12, 1963)
Although the Committee realizes that it cannot deal with all the problems of
all the national parks individually, but must concentrate on guiding principles
of research, comments on some of the parks visited, especially the Everglades
National Park, will illustrate its thinking.
Everglades is the third largest national park in the United States, being
exceeded only by Yellowstone and Mount McKinley. Its preservation as a vast
primitive area of prairie, swamp, and bay, teeming with many forms of wildlife,
constitutes a national problem.
Located at the southern tip of the Florida Peninsula, Everglades is bounded
on the north by a rich agricultural area supplying winter fruits and vegetables
to snowbound northern states, and on the northeast by Miami -- one of the
fastest-growing cities in the country. Around its shores, on east, south, and
west, and in its bays and harbors, are some of the nation's finest fishing
The Committee noted the lack of sufficient scientific data on which to base
claims to a proper supply of water for the Park. During its meeting at
Everglades, the Committee adopted the following resolutions and recommendations
relating to water1 and other problems.
1. An example of the need for more research in national parks is seen in
Everglades National Park. A crisis there has resulted in part from the diversion
of natural water flow essential to preservation of the ecosystem and in part from
insufficient information, attributable to inadequate provision of funds and to
the lack in the past of full awareness at higher administrative levels of the
need for such research.
2. Pursuant to its examination of National Park research problems in the
United States, the National Academy of Sciences Advisory Committee on Research in
the National Parks has visited and studied the Everglades National Park. As a
result of this study and discussion thereof, the Committee unanimously agreed
a) The present water deficit in the Park between the months of November and
March is not natural, and is caused by diversion to areas beyond the Park
boundaries of water which flowed into the Park under natural conditions.
b) This water deficit is causing detrimental changes in the vegetation and
wildlife of the Park, for which the Park was created. It is of such extent that
if the conditions are not reversed the numbers of fish, birds, and other wildlife
will be reduced to disastrously low levels.
3. In its agreement with the National Park Service the National Academy of
Sciences will, among other things, "set forth the Academy's findings and
recommendations for a research program designed to provide the data required for
effective management and protection of the national parks."
Because of the
natural dynamics of ecological systems, the protection of the significant natural
features of many, if not all, national parks requires action.
For example, vegetation seems to proceed by a process of natural succession
toward a climax of approximate stability, long-term and dynamic. The National
Park Service needs to decide whether to allow natural succession to proceed of
itself everywhere or whether to interfere, if it would result in the loss of
species and communities that were an integral part of the complex of the parks
at the time the parks were formed and for which, in part, they were created.
The necessity for such a decision can be illustrated in the Everglades
National Park by the existence of communities dominated by pine (Pinus
elliotti var. densa), which are natural in south Florida because of the
periodic lightning-caused fires and, probably, prehistoric Indian-set fires.
Complete fire protection would result in the eventual elimination of the
pine-dominated community and its animal associates, because the progressively
developing hardwood undergrowth stops the reproduction of pine.
The Service has to decide, in such cases, which of the alternative results
its policy is directed toward, and beyond that it must decide which policy agrees
best with park purposes in preservation, what it is that is to be preserved.
The Service should conduct adequate research on (1) the effects of fire, past
and present; and (2) the conditions under which fire can be used as a management
tool to preserve the natural conditions of a park. The problem referred to here
is not unique; it is true also for Sequoia and for many other species.
This is not a general approval of indiscriminate burning or an attack on fire
4. Research is needed to clarify the role of annual flooding and desiccation
in the ecology of the lower Everglades.
5. Research is needed to permit more precise definition of the relation
between fresh-water supply and the biological productivity of Everglades
6. Research is needed on vegetation changes in the Everglades resulting from
diminished fresh-water supply.
7. Research is needed (synthesizing 4, 5, and 6 above) leading to prediction
of the optimum fresh-water supply and the likely effects, in terms of ecological
changes, upon the Everglades of volumes at various levels below optimal flow.
8. Research is needed through such techniques as vegetation mapping, aerial
photography (or photogrammetry), and pollen analysis, and through studies of the
history of the plant cover and its rejuvenation from the effects of such factors
as fire, hurricane, and flooding. The Committee believes that the Everglades
National Park offers a unique opportunity for these and related studies.
9. Research is needed on population trends and ecological requirements of
rare and threatened species like the American crocodile, the reddish egret, and
the roseate spoonbill.
10. Research on the following is needed at Fort
Jefferson National Monument, which is administered by the Park Service:
a) Sea turtle nesting
b) Terrestrial arthropod of the Dry Tortugas Keys
c) Land flora of the Dry Tortugas Keys
d) Marine resources of the Dry Tortugas Keys
e) Tern colony studies; life history and behavior of terns
f) Tortugas bird migration studies
The Committee also wishes to call attention to the August 10, 1962, Robertson
Report, which presented a comprehensive research program in natural history for
the Everglades National Park. The 37-page report is a competent one, covering in
great detail the fields of botany, zoology, and archeology. Dr. Robertson
"The nationally significant features of Everglades National Park are almost
entirely biological, and many aspects of the natural history of the area are
still little known. The area is not closely comparable with any other, and
research findings in a given field obtained elsewhere are seldom directly
applicable. Much of the biology of the area appears to depend upon minute
variations in environmental factors and delicate fluctuating balances, between
flooding and desiccation and between salt and fresh water. Though vast, the area
is not large enough to be in control of its own ecological destiny. Various alien
forms of land use around its periphery threaten serious ecological deterioration.
Dozens of species of animals and plants are restricted to the area, and, being
represented by small populations that occupy limited ranges, are continually
under threat from adverse ecological change, natural disaster, and
"The above facts combine to make the need for an active program of natural
history research particularly acute in Everglades. No phase of Park operations
can afford to proceed without careful evaluation of possible effects upon natural
history values. Construction programs and plans for channeling visitor use have
continual need for such information. Interpretation activities require research
findings not only to do a proper job of forcefully illustrating difficult
concepts by exhibits and other forms of presentation but also in order to broaden
and refresh the program continually.
"The present report undertakes to review the natural history fields of
greatest importance in Everglades, showing research in progress and presenting
project outlines for research that appears to be needed in the next several
years. The range of possible worthwhile natural history research in Everglades is
so nearly unlimited that it would be futile even to attempt a complete listing.
Obviously, our present interest must be concentrated upon the most critical
needs, leaving much interesting and valuable biological research of more limited
significance for a later day."
This report was "lost" for several months and was only accidentally
discovered during the Committee's visit to the Everglades.
1See Appendix 3 for a
more extended discussion of the Everglades Park water problem by Dr. Gillson,
Geologist member of the Committee.
SOME ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH NEEDS OF YELLOWSTONE
TETON NATIONAL PARKS
(Excerpts from the Minutes of the Committee's Meeting at Grand
Teton - Yellowstone Park, June 14-16, 1963)
The Committee found that a comprehensive research program for both the
Yellowstone and the Grand Teton National Parks, stressing the ecological
approach, had been outlined in the general direction of the Committee's report.
The Committee also found, however, that neither the scientific staff nor funds
for the research necessary -- if the parks' management is to comply with the laws
and regulations governing the areas -- are available.
The following outlines of research needs in these two parks were presented by
local Parks officials to the Committee:
Yellowstone National Park
I. Ecology of the Northern Yellowstone Winter Range
A. Justification. In many parts of the Park the activities of modern
man, in altering ecosystems and causing a severe loss of soil, have created an
imbalance between the ungulate populations and their habitat. The areas most
seriously affected are the northern Yellowstone and Gallatin ranges where these
animals congregate in the winter. Although the management is energetically
attempting to improve unsatisfactory conditions on the northern Yellowstone
range, its program is rather crude and is based on inadequate information.
Moreover, not enough is known about what management is doing, what changes and
refinements are needed, or for that matter, what the purposes are.
1. To describe ecological condition on the northern Yellowstone winter range
before the advent of modern man. The description, to provide a basis for
evaluating current conditions, should include:
a) Climate, geology, and soils;
b) The mosaic of plant and animal communities;
c) The interrelationships of plants and animals, particularly in relation to
dominant species like ungulates.
2. To describe current ecological conditions in detail, including:
a) Current climate and climatic trends;
c) The vegetation mosaic and the factors creating it;
d) Successional patterns in the various biotic communities and their dynamic
e) Interrelationships of dominant animals like elk, deer, bighorn sheep,
moose, buffalo, antelope, and beaver with their habitat;
f) Interspecies and intraspecies relationships of dominant animals
(competition for food, space, etc.).
3. To describe and evaluate:
a) How and to what degree current ecological conditions vary from the
b) The factors that have caused deviations from original conditions, and how
they have operated;
c) The extent to which it is practicable or possible to re-create original
ecological conditions where ecological damage or deterioration (like soil loss)
4. To formulate a management program designed to restore original ecological
conditions as nearly as practicable.
The proposed ecological study of the northern Yellowstone winter range would
provide much information directly applicable to other critical winter range areas
in the Park (such as the Upper Gallatin winter range and Hayden Valley).
Moreover, the approach and the techniques developed would be a guide for research
in other areas of the Park where ecological problems are somewhat different, and
so would lead to continuing coordination and integration of research effort
throughout the National Park Service. A study of the ecology of ungulate summer
range, though of lower priority than winter range studies, is needed also; a
comparable research approach would certainly be required for it.
II. The Ecology of the Black Bear in Yellowstone National Park
A. Justification. Although bears are in general tolerant of human
beings and their activities, so that most Park visitors have an opportunity to
see and photograph them, they do, every year, cause a significant number of
injuries to visitors and a considerable amount of damage to property. Therefore,
management and control of the bear population are essential. The current black
bear management program is not based on adequate knowledge of its effect on the
1. To understand over-all black bear ecology in the Park, with emphasis on
determining bear numbers and distribution and on describing population
2. To describe and analyze the behavior of bears toward visitors.
3. To devise methods for evaluating the effects of management and control
measures on the bear population.
4. To develop an effective management program designed to maintain the black
bear population in its "natural" ecological role, while providing visitors with
opportunities to view black bears and still keeping injuries and property
damages at an acceptable minimum level.
III. An Evaluation of the Park's Aquatic Resources with Emphasis on
A. Justification. National Park Service objectives concerning
fisheries resources require the maintaining of native fish populations in
as natural a condition as possible while providing recreational fishing at a
level compatible with the natural ability of the fisheries to support
themselves. On many Park waters the pressure of demands for fishing facilities is
heavy and growing heavier. Little information is available about natural
conditions in most Park waters or the effect that fishing is having on them. The
factual basis for sound management of most Park waters is lacking.
An adequate problem analysis is needed. This, with subsequent delineation of
specific projects and objectives, should be made by capable aquatic ecologists
and fishery biologists if over-all program coordination and maximum results are
to be attained. Objectives should include sufficient study of aquatic ecology,
fish population dynamics, and associated fishing demands to permit evaluation of
the effects of fishing and recognition of undesirable ecological conditions. The
most heavily used or otherwise ecologically sensitive Park waters should be
studied first. Efforts should be made to determine the "fishing load" that
specific Park waters can support without deterioration of aquatic ecosystems. The
findings of the studies should be synthesized into sound management programs for
specific Park waters with emphasis on methods of collecting information needed
for routine management and innovations for regulating and distributing the
IV. Research Needs of Lower Priority include:
A. The ecology of forest vegetation. Here the objectives should be:
1. A description and evaluation of the pattern of forest vegetation that
should be sought in relation to the pattern now existing.
2. Description of successional patterns in forest vegetation especially in
relation to the effect of:
a) Control of forest fires
b) Insect and disease control programs
c) Climatic factors
3. Formulation and testing of management techniques designed to accomplish
B. An evaluation of the direct effect of visitors on important natural
Consideration of Park problems by the proposed ecological research "planning
team" would result in changes in and additions to this list of needed research
projects. It is proposed that these and other projects relating to specific Park
needs be well planned, well coordinated, and well directed, but that additional
research by individuals or groups into problems of specific interest to them,
even though it may not seem to pertain to Park problems, continue to be
encouraged. In the long run, the results of such studies will add to our
understanding of the Park's ecology.
Grand Teton National Park
The most pressing research needs in Grand Teton National Park may be classed
as biological, geological, archeological, and human history. Basic research is
needed in all these fields to provide a background of information for
application in management and interpretation operations. Considerable applied
research in the biological field is also needed to identify management problems,
test solutions to problems, and develop criteria and standard methods for
Practically all research on Park biota and physical features would be of
value for increasing the effectiveness of interpretive and management operations,
but the research jobs that should have the highest priority involve situations
where problems are either apparent or suspected. A listing of such high-priority
A. Biological Research
1. An ecological classification of the vegetation of Grand Teton National
Scope: A quantatative classification of natural vegetative units.
Purpose: To provide an organized description of all natural vegetative units
that will serve as a foundation for detailed autecological and synecological
research on both plants and animals and will permit more effective communication
in interpretive and management operations.
2. Plant ecology.
Scope: Autecological and synecological research on the vegetation within
Grand Teton National Park.
Purpose: To provide basic reference data on plant ecology to serve as a
foundation for animal-habitat interrelationship research, management operations,
and interpretive work.
3. Moose ecology.
Scope: Integrated quantitative studies of the life habits of moose, their
population dynamics, their habitat interrelationships, and their relationships
to other animals.
Purpose: To provide basic reference data on the moose, to identify factors
regulating population numbers, and to suggest practices needed for the management
of moose populations and their habitat.
4. Ecology of the Snake River Cutthroat Trout within Grand Teton National
Scope: Life history, population dynamics, ecology, and management of the
Purpose: To provide basic reference data on the cutthroat, to identify
factors regulating populations, and to suggest needed management practices.
5. Bighorn sheep ecology.
Scope: Integrated quantitative studies of life habits of bighorn sheep,
their population dynamics, their habitat interrelationships, and their
relationships to other animals.
Purpose: To provide basic reference data on the bighorn sheep, to identify
factors limiting population increases, and to suggest practices needed for
management of bighorn populations and their habitat.
B. Geological Research
1. Pliocene paleontology.
Pliocene mollusks, ostracods, diatoms, pollen, and vertebrate fossils range
from common to prolific. They have been studied in only a few places, and no
extensive collections have been made. Collection and identification of these
assemblages should properly be a long-range study involving specialists in each
field. Material is well preserved. The data would be useful not only in
interpreting climate and environment during Pliocene time but also in charting
the evolution of plant and animal life in this area during the last 10 million
years and in determining how it was affected by the rise of the Teton Range and
the foundering of Jackson Hole.
2. Late Tertiary volcanism.
Geochemical and petrographic studies should be made of Miocene, Pliocene, and
Pleistocene pyroclastic and igneous rocks in the Teton Park area. The Miocene
rocks comprise the thickest (7,000 feet) nonmarine sequence of that age anywhere
in North America. They are mafic and derived from local vents in and adjacent to
Grand Teton National Park. The Pliocene rocks are felsic in composition, are
about 7,000 feet thick, but represent a completely different volcanic cycle.
This study should be integrated with a similar one in Yellowstone National Park.
The combination of data from the two areas would be of great value in determining
the why and when of both volcanic and tectonic events in the region.
3. Carboniferous paleontology.
The Mississippian and Pennsylvanian faunas of the Berry Creek area, in the
northern part of Teton Park, are exceptionally well preserved and abundant. They
consist chiefly of marine brachiopods and corals. Their study is of regional
significance, for they will supplement data on the distribution of faunas in
other national parks and adjacent areas in the Rocky Mountain region.
4. Rock age determinations.
The Precambrian, Cambrian, Jurassic, Cretaceous, and Cenozoic rocks contain
biotite, glauconite, potash feldspars, and other minerals suitable for either
rubidium-strontium, potassium-argon, or lead- alpha age determinations. About a
dozen are now available on Precambrian rocks of the Teton Range and one on the
middle Pliocene. Many more are needed. This would be an expensive undertaking,
but it is important because Teton Park and adjacent areas have the most complete
sedimentary record known in North America and it seems likely that a remarkably
precise time scale could eventually be compiled.
5. Determination of continuing crustal movement.
Tiltmeters should be installed along several lines extending across the floor
of Jackson Hole and into the Teton Range, both in and adjacent to Teton Park.
They would given quantitative data on the rapidity of the sinking of Jackson Hole
and the rising of the Teton Range and also disclose whether all or some of the
movement is along the Teton fault. Army Engineers have spent many millions of
dollars during the last 10 years in trying to keep the Snake River from moving
westward, adjacent to Teton Park. The tiltmeter program would help to determine
whether this expenditure is economically justified and also whether the movements
of the valley floor could affect proposed adjacent reclamation projects that
could be detrimental to the natural values of the Park.
6. Gravity survey.
A gravity survey of this seismically active area should be made and correlated
with the surface geological data.
7. Effects of glaciers on flora.
Ancient stumps, now far above timberline, are known in this area. The types of
trees that grew, and their carbon 14 age, should be determined so that the
postglacial, but pre-recent, altithermal time can be bracketed. This information,
in turn, can be used in plotting climatic variations and the rate of return of
floras after the last ice age.
C. Archeological Research
1. Jackson Lake artifacts.
A study of artifacts along the shore of Jackson Lake and adjacent areas,
supplemented by Lawrence, Nelson, Stewart, and other collections from Jackson
Hole (including also material in possession of the Park Service), would
contribute to an understanding of the Indian cultures of the Park. Nothing along
this line has ever been attempted.
2. Travel routes of the Indians.
A study of the artifacts along travois trails and migration routes, with
special reference to the Conant Pass route around the north end of the Teton
Range, should be made before the artifacts are picked up by amateur collectors or
the trails obliterated by time.
D. Historical Research
1. Post fur trade history.
A study and documentation as complete as possible should be made of the period
from about 1840 to the present time. The purpose of this job would be to provide
information for background interpretive material and to document the information
before it is completely lost.
The committee took no formal vote on these two Park research programs but
considered that they were valid and should be carried out.
THE WATER SUPPLY PROBLEM OF THE EVERGLADES
Southern Florida is a low-lying peninsula of prairie and swamp. Only a small
portion of the area stands at an elevation above 25 feet, and the extreme
southern part lies almost at sea level. Prior to 1900 it was almost uninhabited
except by the Seminole Indians. That part known as the Everglades is the eastern
half of the peninsula south of Lake Okeechobee. The Everglades Park, which was
not established until 1947, lies south of latitude 25 45' (which is about the
latitude of Miami) and does not include the coastal strip about 25 miles wide,
extending from Miami south to Key Largo. (see Plate I)
Prior to the drainage of the northern Everglades, the whole area was a vast
solitude of saw grass and water with "hammocks" of trees, various slough areas
and higher ridges of pine land. Along the south and west coasts were extensive
forests of mangroves. The rainfall is heavy, averaging about 57 inches per year,
but the rains come almost entirely in the summer months, leaving the winter and
spring very dry. There is a great variation in the amount of annual
Prior to the digging of drainage ditches, the area now occupied by the Park,
received a large amount of water flowing slowly down from the north, and during
the summer most of the area was covered with water. The Kissimmee River which
flows southward from Central Florida, drains a large area south of Orlando, and
discharges into Lake Okeechobee. In its natural state, the lake had no
well-defined outlet. Before the digging of the canals, the lake would fill to
overflowing in the summer months and the water would flow over its banks, and
spill slowly through the swampy areas and sloughs, moving generally outward to
the tip of the Peninsula.
Hurricanes caused heavy flooding. The hurricane of 1928 during which there
was a wind velocity of 150 miles per hour, caused a "tidal wave" on the lake 13
feet high, which flowed over the land to the south and drowned hundreds of
people. Following this catastrophe, the Federal Government undertook an
extensive flood control project to drain away the flood waters from the rich
agricultural land south of the lake.
However beneficial the drainage was to the agricultural community, there were
many side effects. Gerald Parker of the U.S. Geological Survey
"It is doubtful that the drainage enthusiasts ever envisioned that,
among other results of their operations, they would induce or cause:
- Shrinkage, compaction, oxidation, burning and general subsidence of the
organic soils . . . as much as 5 feet over extensive cultivated areas.
- Development of wide shallow "subsidence valleys" along each drainage
- Increase frost damage, which formerly had been held in check in the muck
and peat soils by the ever present water which gave off heat as it froze. (Parker
wrote this before the winter of 1962-3 when the loss by freezing of vegetable
crops was enormous. Note by author of this paper.)
- Reduce the original capacity of the canals, thus contributing to
- Cessation of the processes that had built up the muck and peat in the first
- Changed ecologic conditions seriously affecting wildlife of the drained
areas, resulting in species migration or near extinction.
Water problems have become of prime importance. Whereas we in this area were
first concerned only with getting rid of water, or practicing flood control, we
now are greatly concerned (with effects caused by inadequacy of water)."
It is not possible to state accurately how much water formerly flowed into and
through the area now occupied by the Park. A publication dated May 22, 1950, by
the Flood Control District, as quoted by Lamar Johnson of Lake Worth in a report
which he wrote in July, 1958, entitled, "A Survey of the Water Resources of
Everglades National Park," page 7, is as follows:
"The estimated discharge along the 40-mile front at the present location of
Tamiami Trail during the pre-drainage period, was:
"Average rainfall year - 2,315,000 acre feet
Dry rainfall year - Negligible
Wet rainfall year - 10,744,000 acre feet"
An acre foot is approximately 325,800 gallons.
These figures indicate not only the tremendous amount of water which flowed
through that area in wet years, but also testify to the great fluctuation in
quantities from wet to dry years.
A program of stream flow measurement was begun in 1940 by the U.S. Geological
Survey. The average flow through the 43 mile reach of the Tamiami Trail for the
17 years, 1941-1957, was 473,200 acre feet, with a minimum discharge of 80,120
acre feet and a maximum of 1,437,000 acre feet. Thus the average flow was only
20% of the "pre-drainage period" and the maximum was only 15% of the original
maximum. Further, in not one year of the seventeen years, did the maximum flow
even approach the average of the pre-drainage period. It is that fact that
is most discouraging in the study of the water situation of south Florida.
The resulting lowering of the water table within the area of the Park, is
indicated most convincingly by the fact that the vista of the vast sea of saw
grass is now broken by the presence of abundant willows which have sprung up here
and there. More serious is the diminishing number of colorful sea birds, which
come into rookeries in the sloughs within the Park area during the spring months,
feeding on young fish which had been spawned during the previous period of high
water. Whereas these birds used to come into the Park area to raise their young
by the hundreds of thousands, now the numbers are in the thousands, since there
is not enough food available for the larger number.
If the Everglades had a principal reason for having been made a National Park
it was to protect these birds which thousands of tourists and bird watchers were
coming to see and admire every year.
Can the supply of water for the Everglades Park be increased to anything like
the quantity that formerly flowed into the area? This is the burden of this
discussion. It must be remembered that the Park was not established until 1947,
by which time the damage done by the drainage of the northern Everglades was well
Greater Miami and Its Water Supply
East and northeast of the Everglades Park is a huge municipal complex within
Dade County, called "Greater Miami", which includes the city of Miami itself,
Miami Beach, Hialeah, Coral Gables, and numerous smaller communities. Fort
Lauderdale is north in Broward County, and Palm Beach still further north in Palm
Beach County. The present population of Dade County is estimated at about 1¼
million, but the area is one of the fastest growing in the country. The
population has been doubled every 10 years, and if this rate continues, the
population will reach 2 million by 1970, and 4 million by 1980. One shudders at
the thought that 1980 is only 16 years away, less than the time since the end of
World War II, which to those who were active in it, seems a very short time ago.
Four million people take up a lot of room. One thinks of Los Angeles or Chicago
each with 500 square miles of fairly densely built-up city. When that many people
have come to live in Greater Miami, there will hardly be an open field or wood
lot in the eastern half of Dade County. Most of the residential area of Greater
Miami is built on the "Atlantic Ridge", (see Plate II) a coastal
sand strip of Pleistocene deposition. Outside of "downtown" Miami most of the
people live in individual homes surrounded by lawns and the present planners seem
to believe that this condition will continue. It must be remembered, however, that
even in "suburbia", streets, driveways, and sidewalks take up one third of the available
area, and community service facilities such as shopping centers with their huge
parking areas bring the paved-over surface to about half of the total.
Greater Miami is blessed by having available to it one of the largest sources
of fresh water of any city in the United States, except those cities located
along the shores of the Great Lakes. All of this water comes from wells driven
into a formation immediately underlying the Atlantic Ridge called the Biscayne
aquifer. This aquifer is kept supplied now by water from rains so that there is
now no conflict of interest between the water needs of the great municipal area,
and the needs of the Everglades Park. Whether this happy situation can continue
will be analyzed on subsequent pages.
The Biscayne aquifer, named after Biscayne Bay Plate III) extends
along the Eastern coast from southern Dade County north into coastal Palm Beach
County, as a wedge-shaped underground reservoir having the thin edge to the west.
It underlies the Everglades as far north as northern Broward County, but is thin
under the Park itself.
Gerald Parker has described the Biscayne aquifer as follows:2
"The Biscayne aquifer is a hydrologic unit of water-bearing rocks ranging in age from
upper Miocene through Pleistocene. The important members are the Miami oolite and
the Fort Thompson formation, both of which are very porous, and permit very free
movement of water."
"The aquifer is at once one of the area's greatest natural resources and one
of its most difficult assets to protect. It rests on a gently sloping impermeable
floor of clay, silt and dense marl. No saline intrusion can work its way upward
through these materials, but the Biscayne aquifer is leaky above and on all
sides. Rain finds ready access to the aquifer, and with Miami's 60 inches of rain
fall per year, the aquifer is kept nearly full much of the time. The aquifer is
open to the ocean on its seaward side, and the fresh water of the aquifer
discharges into salty bay and ocean water."
The drainage canals have cut through the upper part of the aquifer, thus
bleeding off some of its reserves, and these canals connecting with the sea, have
permitted salt water to come inland during high tide, and much damage from this
salt water intrusion has occurred, so that many wells have had to be abandoned.
The danger has been recognized, and tidal traps have been installed in the canals
near their points of discharge into the Bay or ocean. These traps let fresh water
flow out at low tide, but close automatically against the rising tide, like a
Tremendous quantities of water are stored in the Biscayne aquifer, but most
of this is "dead storage", that is, so much of it lies below sea level, that the
water table cannot be drawn down by heavy pumping without inviting salt water to
flow in from the sea.
Parker has estimated that there is an annual net gain of new water from
recharge by rain of .15 to .45 billion gallons per year in each square mile of
surface. Using a median figure of .3 billion gallons per year per square mile of
area, one may make an approximation of the "safe yield" that can be pumped from
the aquifer, without depleting the reserve.
The area in Dade County within which wells can be drilled for water to supply
existing or future populated areas is a zone roughly 20 miles east-west by 40
miles north-south, giving an area of 800 square miles for recharge. Thus there
may be a potential supply of water from the Biscayne aquifer of 240 billion
gallons per year which may be pumped, without depleting the reserves, or causing
excessive draw down which will invite salt water invasion.
When the population reaches four million, and a large part of that area is
taken up by "suburbia" about half of that suburban area will be paved. This will
reduce the recharge, since water that falls on streets, sidewalks and the
enormous parking lots around shopping centers flows down sewers. It can be hoped
that by that time storm sewers will have been built in the suburban area, and the
discharge collected and returned to the ground through recharge wells,
Ranney-type collectors, or ponds established in areas not yet then completely
It is pertinent and important at this point to introduce the reader to the
Conservation Areas which have been established (Plate I). These have been a most
wise development. There are three of these, No. 1, No. 2 and No. 3, graded at
elevations so that water from No. 1 will flow into No. 2 and from 2 into 3. The
Conservation Areas are bounded by levees, the construction of which is presently
almost complete. The purpose of the Conservation areas is to intercept flood
water running out of the canals before it is lost out to sea, and to store it so
that the Biscayne aquifer will be kept recharged.
If the recharge into the aquifer used by the present well fields is reduced,
some wells may be drilled further west in order to have the benefit of the
recharge from the water in the Conservation Areas. A western location for these
wells, further away from the danger of salt water infiltration is advantageous.
There the water level can be lowered by more intensive pumping, and more water
will run into the ground from the conservation areas. That was the purpose of
these conservation areas, and the recharge into these western wells will supply
the water for the urban area.
At the present location of the wells, little or no recharge could result from
these conservation areas, since the distance is too far to give any effective
gradient. Hence any water standing on the Conservation area 3 will seep gradually
south into the Park. When the wells are moved west into area 3-B, or area 3
itself, the recharge will tend to exhaust the standing water in Conservation area
3, (except in flood years) and there will be less water to move down into the
Park. That is when the flow into the Park will indeed by greatly reduced.
If there are any alternatives, now is the time to consider them as advance
At the present time the average community in the United States uses about 150
gallons of water per day per person. This quantity includes industrial
requirements, if any; water to sprinkle lawns and gardens, to fill swimming
pools, to cool the compressors used for air conditioning, sanitary water to flush
toilets, and, finally, for such domestic use as bathing, cooking, and for thirst
quenching. Biscayne aquifer is adequate for the requirements of over 4 million
people (based on present requirements). Hence, so far as the inhabitants of
Greater Miami are concerned, they will not have to turn else where for water
until well into the 1980's. They are thus much better off than most other
communities in the United States.
Generally, the wells in the Biscayne aquifer are easily developed. They are
either of open-hole, rock wall construction, or they are finished with a sand
point. Most of the wells are of the former type and are from 1¼ to 18 inches
in diameter. A common well in the area is 6 inches in diameter and from 50 to 65
feet deep, with 3 to 10 feet of open hole in highly permeable sandy limestone
below the bottom of the casing. The yield ranges from 1,000 to 1,500 gpm, with a
draw down during pumping of less than 4 feet; recovery occurs almost immediately
after pumping stops. Most municipalities in the Greater Miami area are now served
by the supply of the city of Miami, most of which is pumped from a well field in
the Miami Springs-Hialeah area. Currently, about 60 million gallons per day are
pumped. Some of the adjacent municipalities, such as Opa Locka, North Miami and
North Miami Beach, have their own public water supplies.
The Miami area makes considerable use of wells for fire-fighting purposes. In
order to obtain large quantities of water for this purpose, wells have been
drilled at strategic locations over most of the settled area. Each well will
supply a fire-fighting "pumper" with at least 1,000 gpm. Probably no other large
city in the country has such facilities.
The possibility of developing well water to supplement the natural flow into
the Everglades Park is good. Parker and Associates state in Water Supply paper
1255, p 178:
"In the Everglades National Park area, the Biscayne aquifer is composed of
rocks of the Miami oolite and Fort Thompson formation. These rocks are riddled
with solution holes and are highly permeable . . . the aquifer is not thick
however; at the Tamiami Trail it is only about 20 feet thick . . . the quality of
the water several miles inland from the Bay of Florida or the Gulf of Mexico is
good, being a typical calcium bicarbonate type water . . . excellent wells for
potable water could be developed and would be capable of yielding as much as
several thousand gallons per minute . . . it would be essential to stay as far
away from salt water sources as possible to prevent contamination by encroachment
of sea water."
The flooding of Conservation Area No. 3 to supply recharge to the Biscayne
aquifer for the benefit of the Greater Miami area will also benefit wells that
might be drilled on the Park side of the Tamiami Trail. The modest thickness of
the aquifer limits the draw down that can be operated in each well, but the cone
of influence around each will therefore not be too great, and a number of wells
can be drilled. Greater Miami will obviously put its wells either in the 3-B
area, or lined up along Levee 67, in order to keep as short a pipe line distance
to its mains as is possible. The Park can tap the aquifer all along the Tamiami
Trail, a distance of 12 miles and along the west side, south of Tamiami Trail. It
is not unreasonable to expect that 25 to 40 wells might be put into operation
along these lines. These wells might yield as much as 250 acre feet per day. They
could be operated during the dry season of the spring months, contributing 25,000
acre feet into the Rookeries at the very time it is needed most.
During wet years, when ample water is flowing down from the heavily flooded
area of Conservation Area No. 3, and water is standing all over the north part of
the Park, these wells should not be needed, but in dry years, they would be a
Salt Water Infiltration
It has been mentioned that salt water encroachment into the Biscayne aquifer
is a constant threat and has occurred and caused some wells to be abandoned.
Fortunately the danger has been appreciated, and remedial measures have been
taken. The subject is discussed at length in Florida Information Circular No. 9,
by Howard Klein, Tallahassee, 1957. Figure I of that report shows six maps
delineating the progressive salt water encroachment for the period 1904 -
The only serious threat in the Miami area now is from careless over pumping.
The water supplies in the Biscayne aquifer are like money in the bank. In times
of need, it is a natural impulse to overdraw. If the ground water level is
lowered below sea level near the ocean shore, or near the salt marshes, salt
water will come in, and once in an aquifer, the salt is difficult to flush out.
During times of high water levels, salty wells can be pumped to waste, with the
hope that additional infiltration of fresh water can be induced,
In the Park area, salt water encroachment has taken place. In a well 13 miles
southwest of Royal Palm State Park, the chloride content is high. Since most of
the extreme southern part of the Park is at or below sea level, the surface water
is salty, and is inhabited by marine species.
Florida Bay is an anomaly, since the water in it is saltier than in the open
ocean, due to inadequate circulation through the narrow connections at its
opposite ends. A serious effect was noted at Flamingo during the visit of the
Committee in January. There a canal had been dug to give motor boats access to
Coot Bay and on through to Whitewater Bay. This canal is allowing the super-salty
water of Florida Bay to pass into the under-salty water of Coot Bay. The harm in
that situation is that baby shrimp are hatched in the brackish waters of Coot
Bay, and are killed if the water becomes super-salty. The canal is so big that
simple tidal traps will not serve. It will require regular locks which will have
to be opened and closed for the benefit of the motor boats.
Incredible as it may seem, a large part of Greater Miami is not served by
sewers, but rather each home or group has septic tanks which have been emplaced
in the top of the very permeable Biscayne aquifer. That such a practice has not
led to repeated epidemics is surprising, and must be a proof of the efficacy of
chlorine. The built-up parts of the cities of Miami and Miami Beach are served by
a sewage system, with a treatment plant on Virginia Key, which is the next island
south of the one on which Miami Beach is located. The effluent is pumped out to
sea. Whether any of it gets back on the beach is not reported in the travel
Obviously septic tanks will not be adequate for very long, considering the
steep rate of growth of the population. Collection and treatment of all sewage
except in the most outlying communities must be installed.
Dade County has taken a very wise decision and has passed a law stating that
by early 1965, no "hard" detergents can be used or sold in the county. This vote
resulted from difficulties with foaming in sewerage lines and in septic tanks.
This elimination of hard detergents makes possible the use here proposed for
piping the effluents from primary sewage settling tanks which eliminate solids,
both organic and inorganic, out to oxidation ponds or lagoons and from them
decant the purified water into the sloughs in the Park. Hard detergents are
poisonous to fish, even in very minor concentrations. The new soft detergents
Several chemical companies are known to have the soft alkylate detergents
ready. These companies include Monsanto Chemical Company, Allied Chemical and Dye
Corp., Union Carbide Corp., California Chemical Company (Standard Oil of
Calif.), Continental Oil Company, and Ejay Chemical Company (Standard Oil of
N.J.). The rapid degradation of the soft detergents, which are called linear
alkylate sulfonates, by bacterial action has been described in a recent article
in "Chemical and Engineering News" for June 24th, 1963, p. 37.
On the assumption that within a very few years, Greater Miami will have to
collect and treat all of its sewage, it is pertinent to estimate how much
effluent would be obtained as water which can subsequently be purified by
oxidation in ponds or lagoons. Ignoring the run-off from storm sewers, which
run-off should be essentially clean water and which as above suggested should be
collected separately and put back into the Biscayne aquifer through recharge
wells, Ranney collectors or ponds in new city parks, the amount of sanitary
sewage effluent can be estimated.
It has been stated that the water use per person per day in the typical
American community is 150 gallons. How much of this will come out as the fluid
effluent from the primary stage in a sewage treatment plant involving essentially
only sedimentation or settling out of the solids?
It is fortunate that Miami does not now have, and probably never will have
large chemical plants which have chemical wastes to discharge which can neither
be neutralized nor sufficiently diluted and which would kill the bacteria which
cause purification in oxidation ponds, and which chemicals could later kill fish
which might be planted in these ponds. Hence the effluent will be reasonably free
from chemical wastes.
In a climate such as that of southern Florida, where a substantial amount of
water used is for lawn sprinkling, and for cooling the compressors in air
conditioning, it can be assumed arbitrarily that of the 150 gallons of water used
per day per person, 25 gallons of this will never reach a sewer, but rather will
be evaporated or will soak into the ground. According to Fair, Geyer and
Norris3 the volume of wet sludge from the primary sedimentation of raw
sewage has a volume of 37.8 cu. ft. per 1,000 persons in the community, and the
sludge contains 95% water. This is only .0378 cu. ft. per person, and hence the
water loss with the sludge is insignificant, most of it is separated as almost
clear effluent. However, to be conservative, and for easy calculations, it is
assumed that the effluent will amount to 100 gallons per day, per person.
Oxidation ponds or lagoons are now an accepted method of treatment of
effluent water. The oxidation pond is an artificial lake into which this effluent
flows. The pond is shallow and absorbs air at the surface so that aerobic
bacteria thrive and reduce the B.O.D. (biological oxygen demand). According to
Steel4 there are 188 communities in Texas served by oxidation ponds,
and many others in other southwestern States. Although these ponds are used in
the north, they are not effective during the winter when the ponds are frozen
Steel estimates that a pond should have an area of one acre per 500 persons
contributing to the sewage. The retention period is about 25 days, or, for
convenience in calculations, a month. Assuming a population of 1,000,000
persons, contributing 100 million gallons per day of effluent, or 3 billion
gallons per month, this is equivalent to 9,200 acre feet. If the pond has an
effective depth of 3 feet, the pond to give a month's retention time for the
effluent from the treatment of the sewage produced by 1,000,000 persons will have
an area of a little over 3,000 acres, or 4½ square miles. This is an
insignificant requirement in the Southwest Dade Area, for example, which contains
about 235 sq. miles.
Steel says that depths in practice vary from 2.5 to 4 feet. Lesser depths
encourage emergent aquatic vegetation which fosters mosquito breeding, and
interferes with convection currents and movements in the water, thus reducing
oxygen intake. The soil in the bottom should be relatively impervious to avoid
rapid seepage. He states further that a number of studies indicate the
feasibility of returning treated sewages to the ground water for any industrial
purpose or for irrigation with no restrictions as to crops. Studies made in
California indicate that after filtration through four feet of sandy loam, a
primary effluent or a completely treated sewage will comply bacteriologically
with the U.S. Public Health Standards. Steel says that there appears to be no
reason except aesthetic, why treated sewage should not be used, where conditions
are favorable, to replenish dwindling ground waters by seepage from open basins
or recharge wells and to use such ground waters for public use as well as
industrial and agricultural uses. No objections to the ponds have been reported
by residents living one-quarter of a mile from oxidation ponds.
Babbit and Bauman5 say that the cultivation of fish in
dilute sewage plant effluents can be done successfully. These authors also report
on the replenishment of ground water by seepage from such ponds, citing a reference
by G.T. Orlob and R.G. Butler.6
An outstanding advantage of the use of sewage effluent to supplement water
supplies in the Everglades Park is that the quantity is approximately uniform
throughout the year, and as the population of the urban area increases, the
quantity of effluent will rise in direct proportion. Looking forward to the year
1970, when there will probably be 2 million people living in Dade County, there
could be available 200 million gallons per day as effluent from the primary
sedimentation stage in the sewage treatment plant. This is 613 acre feet per day,
or 215,000 acre feet per year. With 4 million people in 1980, the quantity could
be 430,000 acre feet per year, wet year or dry. As the thirsty population of the
municipal area has pushed its well fields out into the Conservation Area No. 3,
and greatly reduced the seepage south into the Park during dry years, this may be
about all the water that will seep into the Park since that flowing south from
the Tamiami Trail may have been previously intercepted by the recharge into the
ground in the underlying aquifer. This quantity will at least be as much as the
Park has received from along the Tamiami Trail on the average for the last 17
years, and a great deal more than has been available during dry years.
The Dade County Water Conservation District
This district was organized in 1945 and has power to carry out any measures
to conserve water resources, construct necessary works and to establish the
levels to be maintained in all fresh waters of the County. It has power to levy
taxes to pay for its operations. Canals were enlarged to reduce flood heights,
and gated control structures in the canals were built to hold up levels in dry
weather. The work of the Conservation district has been most effective in
controlling salt water infiltration, and the body is to be commended most highly
for its continued devotion to duty.
The Federal Water Control Project
The Conservation Areas which have been repeatedly mentioned and which are
shown on Plate I have been built by a Federal Project. The destructive floods of
1947 resulted in the passage of a federal law, (House Document 643, 80th
Congress, 2nd Session), which appropriated money for the control of the level of
Lake Okeechobee and for control of floods in the St. Johns and Kissimmee Rivers.
The State of Florida created the Central and Southern Flood Control District. In
Dade County, the Federal project is practically the same as the project for the
County Conservation District. Federal funds have been appropriated at the rate of
several million dollars annually. This money has been spent principally for the
construction of levees. Numbers L-30, L-31, L-33 and L-67A have been completed,
and L-28 is well advanced. These levees are designed to enclose large areas,
called Conservation Pools. These extend south from a point west of West Palm
Beach down to the Tamiami Trail. The area of each, the storage capacity, and the
amount of water which it is estimated will be stored in them is as follows:
|Pool No.||Area Sq. Miles
|Amount of Water To|
Be Stored, Acre Feet
The reason that Pool No. 1 will store much more water than its capacity is
that the water will pass continually down into the other pools. Pool No. 1 has
been designated as a Wildlife Refuge. Presumably all land within these
Conservation Areas is federally owned, and none can be sold or leased for private
occupancy without an Act of Congress.
It must be repeated for emphasis that the creation of these Conservation
Pools or Areas is a most constructive step forward in improving the water supply
situation in the whole area. The essential reason for the creation of them was to
provide a place for the storage of flood water without seeing it all drained out
to sea, and lost forever; and hence to provide water for re charge of the
Biscayne aquifer. It has been pointed out that so long as the wells serving
Greater Miami are all several miles to the east of Conservation Area No. 3, no
recharge of the aquifer will come from the water on the Conservation Area. There
is not head enough to move water that far. Hence the 1,696,000 acre feet of water
in Conservation Area No. 3, standing an average of three feet deep over the 926
square miles will partly evaporate, but some will seep down through the Tamiami
Trail into the Park. The engineer, Lamar Johnson whose report has been quoted
several times, estimates that the amount will be 588,000 acre feet, as compared
with the present seepage of 473,200 acre feet along the same frontage. This is a
Another important area where much additional water can get into the Park is
along the north-south boundary between the Park and the Southwest Dade Area. Mr.
A. Van V. Dunn, Formerly Chief, Branch of Water Resources, National Park Service,
made an estimate that an average of 160,000 acre feet of water could be pumped
into the head of Shark River Slough by two pumps of large capacity installed at
points respectively 7 miles and 10 miles south of the Tamiami Trail along that
common boundary of Park and the Southwest Dade Area. Neither these pumps, nor
even the levee called "67 Ext" to be built along that boundary are yet in place,
nor even assured. These pumps will not raise water from wells, but rather
standing water in the head of Shark River Slough within the Southwest Dade Area.
Presumably this water would be available only during the wet season, and perhaps
not then if heavy pumping by future wells which may be drilled in the Southwest
Dade Area induces infiltration for recharge.
Of the two pumps shown on Mr. Dunn's map (not reproduced here) the one
planned seven miles from the Tamiami Trail will be installed instead just south
of the Tamiami Trail. The other pump at 10 miles south of the Trail is still
under consideration for future installation.
During wet years, when the storage capacity of Conservation Area No. 3 is
filled, then there will be a large amount of excess water, much of which will
flow freely south into the Park along the Tamiami Trail. The problem then will be
to retain enough of this water north of the Shark River Slough, so that it will
not run off too rapidly into the Gulf of Mexico and be dissipated. To retain
this flood water, it is recommended that consideration be given to the
construction of a levee, 18 miles long and running in a southeasterly direction.
The center point of this proposed levee will be in the middle of the Shark River
Slough, some 15 miles due south of the Tamiami Trail. To be specific, that center
point will be in Section 22, T.56 S, R. 35 E. The location of the suggested levee
is shown on Plate I.
The purpose of the levee is not to retain all of the water until it
evaporates, but rather to retard its southwestward flow, so that the rookeries
will have plenty of water during the nesting season. During dry years there will
be no water to retain behind this proposed levee. In such years, if the rookeries
receive any water it will have to come from the discharge of the Park wells, and
from the sewage effluent.
Conclusions and Recommendations
It is concluded that there is no possibility of ever restoring to the
Everglades Park the amount of water that area received in "predrainage
canal" times. However, the establishment of the Conservation Areas by the
construction of levees by the Federal Water Control Project has been a most
constructive development, and will add some water to the Park area from seepage
during dry and normal years, and during wet years, there will be a great deal of
water available to the Park, running down from the Conservation Areas.
At the present time, there is no conflict of interest for available water for
the needs of the people of Greater Miami, and for the Park, and so long as the
needs of the people can be met from wells in or near their present positions,
there will be no conflict. Up until 1980, when the population of Greater Miami
may reach 4 million, the needs of the people should be satisfied from wells
drilled well east of the Park Area, and east of Conservation Area No. 3. 1980 is
only sixteen years away; hence it is very pertinent to look beyond that time when
a conflict of interest can develop between people and Park.
Additional water for the Park can be made available through wells drilled in
the Park along its northern boundary, and its western boundary south of 40-mile
Bend. Recharge of the aquifer will be promoted by the water seeping down from
Conservation Area No. 3.
Another source, and one which could grow in quantity as the population of
Greater Miami grows, is the effluent water from oxidation lagoons, treating the
liquid effluent from Sewage Treatment Plants. Such water is not odoriferous, and
within the tolerance of Public Health rules for infiltration to ground water for
human consumption. Fish thrive in such waters. This effluent water could be a
regular and continual supply, available in equal quantities in dry as well as wet
years, and available in regular increments throughout the year. It could be a
most helpful supplement during dry years.
*Prepared by Joseph L. Gillson, Geologist member of the Committee.
1Soil and Crop Science of Florida, Proc. vol. 20,
1960, pp 213-4.
2Parker, G.G. et al., "Water Resources of
Southeastern Florida," U.S. Geological Survey, Water Supply Paper 1255, 1955,
3Water Supply and Waste Water Disposal, John
Wiley, 1954, p. 771.
4Steel, E.W., Water Supply and Sewerage,
McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1960, p. 478.
5Sewerage and Sewage Treatment, John Wiley &
Sons Book Co., New York, 1958, p. 392.
6Journal Sanitary Engineering Section American
Society Civil Engineers, Paper 1002, June 1956.
LIST OF NATURAL SCIENCES PUBLICATIONS
A - List of National Park Service Natural History publications as they pertain
to National Parks, published by Government or Natural History Associations,
B - List of publications by National Park Service personnel (as individuals)
in Professional Journals.
C - List of publications by Non-National Park Service personnel of Natural
History investigations in National Parks.
PUBLISHED RESEARCH PERTAINING TO NATIONAL PARKS
C - Wheeler, George C. The Amphibians and Reptiles of the North Dakota
Badlands. University of North Dakota; Theodore Roosevelt Nature and History
C - Griggs, Robert F., George Washington University. The Vegetation of
the Katmai District. Ecology, Vol. 17, No. 3, July 1936.
A - Potts, Merlin K. and Russell K. Grater. Mammals of Mount Rainier
National Park. Mount Rainier Natural History Association, 1949.
C - White, John R. and Samuel J. Pusateri. Sequoia and Kings Canyon
National Parks. Stanford University Press, 1949.
A - Evans, Willis A. and Orthello L. Wallis. Fishes of Yosemite National
Park. Yosemite Nature Notes, Vol. XXIII, No. 1, January 1944.
A - Dixon, Joseph S. Birds and Mammals of Mount McKinley National Park
Alaska. Fauna Series No. 3, 1938; GPO, Washington.
A - Murie, Adolph. Ecology of the Coyote in the Yellowstone. Fauna
Series No. 4, 1940, Conservation Bulletin No. 4; GPO, Washington.
A - Murie, Adolph. The Wolves of Mount McKinley. Fauna Series No. 5,
1944; GPO, Washington.
C - Anderson, Sydney. Mammals of Mesa Verde National Park, Colorado.
University of Kansas Publications, Vol. 14, No. 3, July 24, 1961. 67 pp.
A - Taylor, Walter P. and William T. Shaw. Mammals and Birds of Mount
Rainier National Park. GPO, Washington, 1927.
B - Sumner, Lowell and Joseph S. Dixon. Birds and Mammals of the Sierra
Nevada. (With records from Sequoia and Kings Canyon); University of
California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1953.
C - Hastings, James Rodney, University of Arizona and Stanley M. Alcorn, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Tucson. Physical Determinations of Growth and Age
in the Giant Cactus. Journal of the Arizona Academy of Science, Vol. 2, No.
1, August 1961.
C - Alcorn, Stanley M. Natural History of the Saguaro. U.S. Dept. of
Agriculture; 1959-1960 Colloquia Papers; The University of Arizona, Arid Lands
C - Hastings, James Rodney Precipitation and Saguaro Growth. University
of Arizona; 1959-1960 Colloquia Papers; The University of Arizona, Arid Lands
A - Robertson, William B., Jr. , and Joseph Curtis Moore. Checklist of
Everglades National Park Birds.
C - Donnelly, Thomas Wallace, Princeton University. Geology of St. Thomas
and St. John, Virgin Islands. (179 pp. multilithed; supported by a $3,000
grant from Jackson Hole Preserve, Inc., and the work was carried out under
agreement with the NPS); 1959.
C - Ross, Clyde P. and Richard Rezak. The Rocks and Fossils of Glacier
National Park: The Story of Their Origin and History. (GPO, Washington;
Geological Survey Professional Paper 294-K.); 1959.
C - Rossman, Darwin L. Geology and Ore Deposits in the Reid Inlet Area,
Glacier Bay, Alaska. (Geological Survey Bulletin 1058-B - U.S. G.P.O., 1958.
iii, 33-59); 1959.
C - Geology of Geikie Inlet Area, Glacier Bay, Alaska. James F. Seitz.
(Geological Survey Bulletin 1058-C - U.S.G.P.O., 1958. IV, 61-120 pp); 1959.
C - Benson, Norman G., Oliver B. Cope and Ross V. Bulkley. Fishery Management
Studies on the Madison River System in Yellowstone National Park. (Fish
and Wildlife Service, Special Scientific Report-- Fisheries No. 307); 1959.
C - Kruse, Thomas E. Grayling of Grebe Lake, Yellowstone National Park,
Wyoming. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Fishery Bulletin 149); 1959.
C - Lennon, Robert E. and Phillip S. Parker. Applications of Salt in
Electrofishing. (Fish and Wildlife Service, Special Scientific Report--
Fisheries No. 280. From
research in Shenandoah and Great Smoky Mountains National Parks); 1959.
C - Lennon, Robert E. The Electrical Resistivity Meter in Fishing
Investigations. (Fish and Wildlife Service, Special Scientific
Report-- Fisheries No. 287. Product of cooperative research in Shenandoah and
Great Smoky Mountains National Parks); 1959.
C - Altmann, Margaret. Group Dynamics in Wyoming Moose During the Rutting
Season. Journal of Mammalogy, Vol. 40, No. 3, August 1959); 1959.
B - Cahalane, Victor H. A Biological Survey of Katmai National
Monument. (Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, Vol. 138, No. 5); 1959.
C - Koford, Carl B. Prairie Dogs, Whitefaces, and Blue Grama. (The
Wildlife Society: Wildlife Monographs No. 3, December 1958.
Mr. Koford's studies included work at Wind Cave, Theodore Roosevelt
and Devils Tower National Monument); 1959.
C - Woodbury, Angus M., et al. Ecological Studies of the Flora and Fauna
in Glen Canyon. University of Utah Press: (Anthropological Papers No. 40);
B - Barmore, William J., Jr. Bighorn Sheep and their Habitat in Dinosaur
National Monument. Master's thesis, Wildlife. 134 pp. (offset duplicated)
C - Ross, C.P. Geology of Western Slope, Glacier National Park. (U.S.
Geological Survey Pro. Paper 296, "Geology of Glacier National Park and the
Flathead Region. . ."); 1960.
C - Aller, A.L., Montana State University. Ecology of Cedar-Hemlock
Forest. (Paper in Ecology 41:1, Jan 1960, "Composition of the Lake
McDonald Forest, Glacier National Park"); 1960.
C - Taber, R.D. and R.S. Hoffman, Montana State University.
Alpine-Wilderness Ecology. (Glacier); (2 reports on hoary marmot and
overall progress report submitted. Notes on Sorex in Journal of Mammalogy,
41:2, May 1960); 1960.
C - Glacier Studies; NPS; USGS; U.S. Forest Service; (Glacier);
(Preliminary results in paper to AAS, New York, Dec. 1960. Abstract in G.S.A.
Bulletin, Dec. 1960); 1960.
C - Bailey, Vernon. Animal Life of the Carlsbad Cavern. U.S. Biological
Survey, Monographs of the American Society of Mammalogists, No. 3; The Williams
and Wilkins Company, Baltimore, 1928.
A - McDougall, W.M. and Omer E. Sperry. Plants of Big Bend National
Park. GPO, Washington, 1951.
C - Applegate, Elmer I. Plants of Crater Lake National Park. The
American Midland Naturalist, Vol. 22, No. 2, September 1939.
A - Standley, Paul C. Plants of Glacier National Park. GPO, Washington,
C - Brown, Clair A. Ferns and Flowering Plants of Isle Royale Michigan.
Emergency Conservation Work (Civilian Conservation Corps)
A - Ashton, Ruth E. Plants of Rocky Mountain National Park. GPO,
A - Brockman, C. Frank. Flora of Mount Rainier National Park. GPO,
A - McDougall, W.B. and Herma A. Baggley. Plants of Yellowstone National
Park. GPO, Washington, 1936.
A - McDougall, W.B. and Herma A. Baggley. Plants of Yellowstone National
Park. Second Edition, thoroughly revised and rewritten; Yellowstone
Interpretive Series No. 8; Yellowstone Library and Museum Association, 1956.
C - Jones, George Neville. The Flowering Plants and Ferns of Mount
Rainier. University of Washington Publications in Biology, Vol. 7,
C - Gehlbach, Frederick R. and Robert Rush Miller. Fishes From Archaeological
Sites in Northern New Mexico. The Southwestern Naturalist 6(1): pp.
2-8, June 10, 1961.
C - Gehlbach, Frederick R. and James K. Baker. Kingsnakes Allied with
Lampropeltis mexicana: Taxonomy and Natural History, Copeia, No. 2,
July 20, 1962, pp. 291-300.
B - Wallis, O.L. Trout Stocking-Frequency Cycles and a Device to Determine
Age Classes of Trout Present. Progressive Fish-Culturist 25(1): pp. 15-22,
A - Wright, George M., 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. Fauna No. 1; May 1932. iv + 157
pp. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
A - Wright, George M. and Ben H. Thompson. Fauna of the National
Parks of the United States - Wildlife Management in the National
Parks. Fauna No. 2; July 1934. viii + 142 pp. Government Printing
Office, Washington, D.C.
C - Cushman, R.B., Chief, Ground Water Div., USGS. Hydrology of Mammoth
C - White, William B., Penna. State Univ. Investigation of Sulfate and
Clay Minerals. (Mammoth Cave) (Report to be presented at Denver AAAS
meetings in June 1962.)
A - Craighead, F.C. and W.B. Robertson. Effects Hurricane "Donna."
C - Alcorn. Some Hosts of Erwinia Carnegieana. Plant Disease Reporter,
August 15, 1961, Vol. 45, No. 8.
C - Hastings and Alcorn. Physical Determinations of Growth and Age in the
Giant Cactus. Journal of the Arizona Academy of Science, August 1961, Vol. 2,
C - Alcorn. Natural History of the Saguaro. Arid Lands Colloquia,
University of Arizona, 1960-1961.
C - Wauer, Roland H. A Survey of the Birds of Death Valley. The Condor
64(3): pp. 220-233, May-June 1962.
C - Drs. Miller and Stebbins. Distribution of the Vertebrate Animals of
Joshua Tree National Monument. (Continuing long-term project)
ACADIA NATIONAL PARK
C - Chapman, Carleton A. and Robert L. Rioux. Statistical Study of
Topography, Sheeting, and Jointing in Granite, Acadia National Park, Maine.
American Journal of Science, Vol. 256, February 1958.
C - Chapman, Carleton A. Granite Replacement in Basic Dikes Mount Desert
Island, Maine. Illinois Academy of Science Transactions, Vol. 47, 1955.
C - Chapman, Carleton A. and Paul S. Wingard. Physical Control and Age of
Dike Formation in the Maine Coastal Region. Bulletin of the Geological
Society of America, Vol. 69, September 1958.
C - Tyson, Carroll and James Bond. Birds of Mt. Desert Island Acadia
National Park, Maine. The Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia,
BIG BEND NATIONAL PARK
A - McDougall, W.B. and Omer E. Sperry. Plants of Big Bend National
Park. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, 1951.
C - Sperry, Omer E. A Check List of the Ferns, Gymnosperms, and Flowering
Plants of the Proposed Big Bend National Park of Texas. Sull Ross State
Teachers College Bulletin, Vol. XIX, No. 4, 1938.
C - Jenkins, Hubert 0. Glaciation in Big Bend National Park Texas.
Sacramento State College Foundation, June 30, 1958.
C - Hubbs, Clark and Victor G. Springer. A Revision of the Gambusia nobilis
Species Group, with Descriptions of Three New Species, and Notes on Their
Variation, Ecology, and Evolution. Texas Journal of Science, Vol. IX, No. 3,
C - Hubbs, Carl L. Fishes from the Big Bend Region of Texas.
Transactions of the Texas Academy of Science, 1938-1939.
C - Borell, Adrey E. and Monroe D. Bryant. Mammals of the Big Bend Area of
Texas. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1942.
BRYCE CANYON NATIONAL PARK
C - Gregory, Herbert E. A Geologic and Geographic Sketch of Bryce Canyon
National Park. Zion-Bryce Museum Bulletin No. 4, March 1940.
C - Marine, I. Wendell. Ground-Water Resources of the Bryce Canyon National
Park Area, Utah - With a section on the Drilling of a Test Well. Geological
Survey Water-Supply Paper 1475-M.
CARLSBAD CAVERNS NATIONAL PARK
C - Horberg, Leland. Geomorphic History of the Carlsbad Caverns Area, New
Mexico. The Journal of Geology, Vol. 57, No. 5, Sept. 1949.
C - Wetmore, Alexander. Bones of the Great Horned Owl from the Carlsbad
Caverns. The Condor, Vol. XXXIII, Nov. 1931.
C - Baker, James K. The Manner and Efficiency of Raptor Depredations on
Bats. Journal of the Cooper Ornithological Society, Vol. 64, No. 6, Nov.-Dec.
1962, pp. 500-503.
CRATER LAKE NATIONAL PARK
C - Applegate, Elmer I. Plants of Crater Lake National Park. The
American Midland Naturalist, Vol. 22, No. 2, Sept. 1939.
C - Diller, J.S. Geological History of Crater Lake. Government Printing
C - Moore, Bernard N. Deposits of Possible Nuce Ardente Origin in the
Crater Lake Region. The Journal of Geology, Vol. XLII, No. 4, May-June
B - Smith, Warren D. and Carl R. Swartzlow. Mount Mazama: Explosion Versus
Collapse. Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, Vol. 47, 1936.
C - Williams, Howel. The Geology of Crater Lake National Park, Oregon.
Book; Carnegie Institution of Washington Publication 540; 1942.
C - Farner, Donald S. The Birds of Crater Lake National Park. Book;
University of Kansas Press, 1952.
C - Hasler, Arthur D. Fish Biology and Limnology of Crater Lake,
Oregon. The Journal of Wildlife Management, Vol. 2, No. 3, July 1938.
C - Farner, Donald S. and James Kezer. Notes on the Amphibians and Reptiles
of Crater Lake National Park. The American Midland Naturalist, Vol. 20, No.
2, October 1953.
C - Farner, Donald S. Notes on the Food Habits of the Salamanders of Crater
Lake, Oregon. Copeia, No. 4, 1947.
C - Sternes, G.L. Climate of Crater Lake National Park. Published by
Crater Lake Natural History Association; 1963. 14 pp.
EVERGLADES NATIONAL PARK
A - Dilley, Willard E. Preliminary Checklist of Trees of Everglades
National Park. 1953 - Revised January 1957.
C - Schroeder, Melvin C. and Howard Klein. Geology of the Western
Everglades Area, Southern Florida. Geological Survey, Circular 314, 1954.
C - Small, John K. Vegetation and Erosion on the Everglade Keys. The
Scientific Monthly, Vol. XXX, January 1930.
C - Moore, Joseph Curtis. The Status of the Manatee in the Everglades
National Park, with Notes on its Natural History. Journal of Mammalogy, Vol.
32, No. 1, February 1951.
C - Iversen, E.S. and D.C. Tabb. Subpopulations Based on Growth and Tagging
Studies of Spotted Seatrout, Cynoscion nebulosus, in Florida. Copeia, No. 3,
Sep. 28, 1962, pp. 544-548.
C - Tabb, Durbin C. and Albert C. Jones. Effect of Hurricane Donna on the
Aquatic Fauna of North Florida Bay. Transactions of the American Fisheries
Society, Vol. 91, No. 4, Oct. 1962, pp. 375-378.
C - Tabb, Durbin C., David L. Dubrow, Raymond B. Manning. The Ecology of
Northern Florida Bay and Adjacent Estuaries. Florida State Board of
Conservation Technical Series No. 39, November 1962. 81 pp.
B - Robertson, William B., Jr. Fire and Vegetation in the Everglades.
Proceedings First Annual Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference, Mar. 1-2, 1962.
Published by Tall Timbers Research Station, Tallahassee, Florida, pp. 67-80.
C - Tabb, Durbin C., David L. Dubrow and Andrew E. Jones. Studies on the
Biology of the Pink Shrimp, Penaeus duorarum Burkenroad, in Everglades National
Park, Florida. Florida State Board of Conservation, Technical Series No. 37,
32 pp. 1962.
C - Thomas, Lowell P. Distribution and Salinity Tolerance in the Amphiurid
Brittlestar, Ophiophragmus Filograneus (Lyman, 1875). Bulletin of Marine
Science of the Gulf and Caribbean, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 158-160, March 1961.
C - Manning, Raymond B. Some Growth Changes in the Stone Crab, Menippe
Mercenaria (Say). Quart. Journ. Fla. Acad. Sci. 23(4): pp. 273-277,
C - Tabb, Durbin C. and Raymond B. Manning. A Checklist of the Flora and
Fauna of Northern Florida Bay and Adjacent Brackish Waters of the Florida
Mainland Collected During the Period July 1957 through September 1960.
Bulletin of Marine Science of the Gulf and Caribbean, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp.
552-649, December 1961.
B - Robertson, William B., Jr. Birds 1962 Florida Region. Audubon
Field Notes, Vol. 16, No. 5, pp. 468-473, October 1962.
GLACIER NATIONAL PARK
C - Lane, Carroll and Mildred Adams Fenton. Algae and Algal Beds in the
Belt Series of Glacier National Park. The Journal of Geology, Vol. XXXIX, No.
7, October-November 1931.
A - Alden, William C. Glaciers of Glacier National Park. Government
Printing Office, 1914.
A - Elrod, Morton J. Some Lakes of Glacier National Park. Government
Printing Office, 1912.
A - Dyson, James L. The Geologic Story of Glacier National Park.
Special Bulletin No. 3, Glacier Natural History Association, 1949.
A - Bailey, Vernon and Florence Merriam Bailey. Wild Animals of Glacier
National Park. Government Printing Office, 1918.
C - Weckwerth, Richard P. and Vernon D. Hawley. Marten Food Habits and
Population Fluctuations in Montana. (Glacier National Park) The Journal of
Wildlife Management, Vol. 26, No. 1, Jan. 1962, pp. 55-74.
GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK
A - McDougall, W.B. Plants of Grand Canyon National Park. Grand Canyon
Natural History Association; Bulletin No. 10, January 1947.
A - McDougall, W.B. Plants of Grand Canyon National Park (Errata and
Addenda). Grand Canyon Natural History Association; Bulletin No. 10
Supplement, July 1948.
C - Gilmore, Charles W. Fossil Footprints from the Grand Canyon.
Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, Vol. 77, No. 9, January 30, 1926.
C - Gilmore, Charles W. Fossil Footprints from the Grand Canyon: Second
Contribution. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, Vol. 80, No. 3, July 30,
C - Schenk, Edward T. and Harry E. Wheeler. Cambrian Sequence in Western
Grand Canyon, Arizona. The Journal of Geology, Vol. L, No. 7,
B - McKee, Edwin D. Three Types of Cross-Lamination in Paleozoic Rocks of
Northern Arizona. American Journal of Science, Vol. 238, November 1940.
B - McKee, Edwin D. Structures in Modern Sediments Aid in Interpreting
Ancient Rocks. Cooperation in Research, Carnegie Institution of Washington,
Publication No. 501, 1938.
C - Bassler, R.S. A Supposed Jellyfish from the Pre-Cambrian of the Grand
Canyon. Proceedings of the United States National Museum, 1941.
B - McKee, Edwin D. Grand Canyon Climates During the Age of Mammals.
Museum Notes, Museum of Northern Arizona, Vol. 4, No. 10, April 1932.
B - McKee, Edwin D. and Edward T. Schenk. The Lower Canyon Lavas and
Related Features at Toroweap in Grand Canyon. Journal of Geomorphology, Vol.
V, December 1942.
C - Luss, Richard Swann. Fossil Footprints from the Grand Canyon of the
Colorado. American Journal of Science, Art. XXI, May 1918.
B - McKee, Edwin D. and Charles M. Bogert. The Amphibians and Reptiles of
Grand Canyon National Park. Copeia, No. 4, December 1934.
A - Bailey, Vernon. Mammals of the Grand Canyon Region. Natural History
Bulletin No. 1, Grand Canyon Natural History Association, June 1935.
A - Garth, John S. Butterflies of Grand Canyon National Park. Bulletin
No. 11, Grand Canyon Natural History Association, September 1950.
GRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK
C - Reed, John F. The Vegetation of the Jackson Hole Wildlife Park
Wyoming. The American Midlany Naturalist, Vol. 48, No. 3.
C - Fryxell, Fritiof M. The Geology of Jackson Hole. National Parks
Magazine, January-March 1944.
C - Horberg, Leland, R.W. Edmund, and F.M. Fryxell. Geomorphic and
Structural Relations of Tertiary Volcanics in the Northern Teton Range and
Jackson Hole, Wyoming. The Journal of Geology, Vol. 63, No. 6, November
C - Horberg, Leland and Fritiof Fryxell. Pre-Cambrian Metasediments in
Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming. American Journal of Science, Vol. 240,
C - Fryxell, Fritiof M. Glacial Features of Jackson Hole,
Wyoming, Augustana Book Concern, Rock Island, Illinois, 1930.
C - Fryxell, Fritiof M. Jackson Hole National Monument, The Geologic
Story. National Parks Magazine, January-March 1944.
C - Fryxell, F.M. and Leland Horberg. Alpine Mudflows in Grand Teton
National Park, Wyoming. Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, Vol.
C - Murie, Olaus J. Food Habits of the Coyote in Jackson Hole, Wyoming.
Circular No. 362, United States Dept. of Agriculture, October 1935.
C - Nakamura, Mitsuru. A Survey of Pasteurella tularensis Infection in the
Animals of the Jackson Hole Area. Zoologica, Scientific Contributions of the
New York Zoological Society, Vol. 35, Part 2, Aug. 1950.
C - Altmann, Margaret. Social Behavior of Elk, Cervus Canadensis Nelsoni,
in the Jackson Hole Area of Wyoming. Behaviour, Vol. IV, 2, 1952.
C - Spencer, Warren P. The Drosophila of Jackson Hole, Wyoming--A Taxonomic
and Ecological Survey. The American Midland Naturalist, Vol. 43, No. 1,
C - Levi, Lorna R. and Herbert W. Levi. A Report on Land Snails of the
Jackson Hole Region, Wyoming. The Nautilus, Vol. 65, No. 2, October
C - John, Kenneth R. Comparative Rates of Survival of Normal and Deformed
Chub, Gila Atraria Girard, in Two Ocean Lake, Teton County, Wyoming.
Proceedings of the Pennsylvania Academy of Science, Vol. XXXI, 1957.
GREAT SMOKY MOUNTAINS NATIONAL PARK
C - Lennon, Robert E. Angling on Little Pigeon River, Great Smoky Mountains
National Park, 1953. April 1954.
C - Lennon, Robert E. The Electrical Resistivity Meter in Fishery
Investigations. January 1959.
C - Cain, Stanley A. Ecological Studies of Vegetation of the Great Smoky
Mountains of North Carolina and Tennessee. The Botanical Gazette, Vol. XCI,
No. 1, March 1931.
C - Healer, L.R. A Preliminary List of the Fungi of the Great Smoky
Mountains National Park. Castanea, Jour. So. App. Bot. Club, Vol. II,
C - Cain, Stanley A. An Ecological Study of the Heath Balds of the Great
Smoky Mountains. Butler University Botanical Studies, Vol. I, Paper No. 13,
C - Gates, William H. Balds of the Southern Appalachians. (Pam.)
Louisiana State University Press, 1941.
C - Wilson Charles W., Jr. The Great Smoky Thrust Fault in the Vicinity of
Tuckaleeche, Wear, and Cades Coves, Blount and Sevier Counties, Tennessee.
Journal of the Tennessee Academy of Science, Jan. 1935.
B - Stevenson, Henry M. and Arthur Stupka. The Altitudinal Limits of
Certain Birds in the Mountains of the Southeastern States. The Migrant, Vol.
19, No. 3, September 1948.
C - Komarek, Edwin V. and Roy Komarek. Mammals of the Great Smoky
Mountains. Bulletin of the Chicago Academy of Sciences, Vol. 5, No. 6,
B - Stupka, Arthur. Report on Progress Made in a Survey of the Natural
History of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Tennessee Academy of
Science, Vol. XIII, No. 1, January 1938.
B - King, Willis. Notes on the Distribution of Native Speckled and Rainbow
Trout in the Streams at Great Smokey Mountains National Park. Journal of the
Tennessee Academy of Science, Vol. XII, No. 4, October 1937.
C - McCracken, R.J., R.E. Shanks, and E.E. Clebsch. Soil Morphology and
Genesis at Higher Elevations of the Great Smoky Mountains. Soil Science
Society of America Proceedings, Vol. 26, No. 4, July-August 1962, pp.
C - Barr, Thomas C., Jr. The Genus Trechus (Coleoptera: Carabidae
Trechini) in the Southern Appalachians. The Coleopterists' Bulletin, Vol. 16,
No. 3, Sep. 1962, pp. 65-92.
C - Shanks, R.E. and J.S. Olson. First-Year Breakdown of Leaf Litter in
Southern Appalachian Forests. Science, Vol. 134, No. 3473, pp. 194-195, July
C - Norris, D.H. and A.J. Sharp. The Known Distribution of Herpetineuron
Toccoae (Sull. & Lesq. Card.) The Journal of the Hattori Botanical
Laboratory No. 24, Oct. 1961. pp. 110-114.
C - Shanks, Royal E. Climates of the Great Smoky Mountains. Ecology,
Vol. 34, No. 3, July 1954, pp. 354-361.
C - Shanks, R.E. and E.E. Clebsch. Computer Programs for the Estimation of
Forest Stand Weight and Mineral Pool. Ecology, Vol. 43, No. 2, Spring 1962,
C - Mundt, J. Orvin. Occurrence of Enterococci in Animals in a Wild
Environment. Depts. of Bacteriology and Food Technology, Univ. of Tennessee,
Knoxville, Tenn. Applied Microbiology 11(2): pp. 136-140, March 1963.
A - Stupka, Arthur. Notes on the Birds of Great Smoky Mountains National
Park. The Univ. of Tennessee Press. Published with the cooperation of the
Great Smoky Mountains Natural History Association. vii + 242 pp.
HAWAII NATIONAL PARK
C - St. John, Harold. Endemism in the Hawaiian Flora, and a Revision of the
Hawaiian Species of Gunnera (Haloragidacene) Hawaiian Plant Studies, 11.
Proceedings of the California Academy of Science, Fourth Series, Vol. XXV, No.
16, November 15, 1946.
C - Hinds, Norman E.A. Maui and the Maui Group, Hawaii. The Bulletin of
the Geographical Society of Philadelphia, Vol. XXIII, No. 4, October 1925.
C - Finch, R.H. Discussion. A Criticism of Graton's "Confectures Regarding
Volcanic Heat." American Journal of Science, Vol. 245, March 1947.
C - Wilson, R.M. Ground Surface Movements at Kilauea Volcano, Hawaii.
University of Hawaii Research Publications No. 10, 1935.
C - Jagger, T.A. National Standards of Volcano and Earthquake Research.
Monthly Bulletin of the Hawaiian Volcano Observatory, Vol. XIII, No. 3, March
C - Baldwin, Paul H., Charles W. Schwartz, and Elizabeth Reeder Schwartz.
Life History and Economic Status of the Mongoose in Hawaii. Journal of
Mammalogy, Vol. 33, No. 3, August 1952.
C - Baldwin, Paul H. The Hawaiian Goose, Its Distribution and Reduction in
Numbers. The Condor, Vol. 47, No. 1, January-February 1945.
ISLE ROYALE NATIONAL PARK
C - Koelz, Walter. A Survey of the Lakes of Isle Royale, With an Account of
the Fish Occurring in Them. 1929.
C - Povah, Alfred H.W. New Fungi from Isle Royale. Mycologia, Vol.
XXIV, No. 2, March-April 1932.
B - Murie, Adolph. The Moose of Isle Royale. Miscellaneous Publications
No. 25, University of Michigan Museum of Zoology, July 1934.
C - Hubbs, Carl L. and Karl F. Lagler. Fishes of Isle Royale, Lake
Superior, Michigan. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and
Letters, Vol. XXXIII, 1947. Pub. 1949.
C - Adams, Charles C. An Ecological Survey of Isle Royale, Lake
Superior, Wynkoop Hollenbeck Crawford Co., State Printers, Lansing,
C - Allen, Durward L. and L. David Mech. Wolvers versus Moose on Isle
Royale. National Geographic Magazine. February 1963 issue. pp. 200-219.
LASSEN VOLCANIC NATIONAL PARK
C - Finch, R.H. and C.A. Anderson. The Quartz Basalt Eruptions of Cinder
Cone, Lassen Volcanic National Park, California. Bulletin of the Dept. of
Geological Sciences, Vol. 19, No. 10, 1930.
C - Williams, Howel. A Recent Volcanic Eruption Near Lassen Peak,
California. Bulletin of the Dept. of Geological Sciences, Vol. 17, No. 7,
C - Day, Arthur L. Possible Causes of the Volcanic Activity at Lassen
Peak. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 12, Nos. 2 and
3, June-September 1922.
C - Diller, J.S. The Volcanic History of Lassen Peak. Government
Printing Office, 1918.
C - Diller, J.S. The Eruptions of Lassen Peak California. The Mazama,
Vol. IV, No. 3, December 1914.
C - Day, Arthur L. and E.T. Allen. The Temperatures of Hot Springs and the
Sources of Their Heat and Water Supply -- The Source of the Heat and the
Source of the Water in the Hot Springs of the Lassen National Park. The
Journal of Geology, Vol. XXXII, No. 3, April-May 1924.
MAMMOTH CAVE NATIONAL PARK
C - Barr, Thomas C., Jr. The Blind Beetles of Mammoth Cave, Kentucky.
The American Midland Naturalist, Vol. 68, No. 2, pp. 278-284, October 1962.
University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, Indiana.
C - Hall, John S. Notes on Plecotus Rafinesquii in Central Kentucky.
Journal of Mammalogy, Vol. 44, No. 1, 20 Feb. 1963, pp. 119-120.
C - Jegla, Thomas C. and John S. Hall. A Pleistocene Deposit of the
Free-Tailed Bat in Mammoth Cave, Kentucky. Journal of Mammalogy, Vol. 43, No.
4, 7 Dec. 1962, pp. 477-481.
MOUNT RAINIER NATIONAL PARK
C - Hopson, Clifford A., Aaron C. Waters , V . R. Bender, and Meyer Rubin.
The Latest Eruptions from Mount Rainier Volcano. The Journal of Geology 70
(6): pp. 635-647, November 1962.
OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK
C - Kitchin, E.A. Birds of the Olympic Peninsula. Book available in
Pioneer Memorial Museum; 1949.
C - Jones, George Neville. Botanical Survey of the Olympic Peninsula.
Book in Park files; 1936.
C - Church, P. E. and R.P. Sharp. Blue Glacier Studies. National
Academy Sciences IGY Bulletin No. 11; 1958.
C - LaChapelle, Edward. Annual Mass and Energy Exchange on the Blue
Glacier. Jour. Geophysical Res., Vol. 64, No. 4; 1959.
C - Kamb, Barclay W. Ice Petrofabric Observations from Blue Glacier,
Washington, in Relation to Theory and Experiment. Jour. Geophysical Res.,
Vol. 64 (11): 1891-1909; 1959.
C - Allen, C.R., W.B. Kamb, and R.P. Sharp. Structure of the Lower Blue
Glacier, Washington. Jour. Geology, Vol. 68(6): 601-625; 1960.
C - Sharp, Robert P., Samuel Epstein, and Irene Vidziumas. Oxygen-Isotope
Ratios in the Blue Glacier Olympic Mountains, Washington, U.S.A. Jour.
Geophysical Res., Vol. 65(12): 1960.
VIRGIN ISLANDS NATIONAL PARK
C - Seaman, George A. and John E. Randall. The Mongoose as a Predator in
the Virgin Islands. Journal of Mammalogy, Vol. 43, No. 4, November 1962, pp.
C - Kumpf, Herman E. and Helen A. Randall. Charting the Marine Environments
of St. John, U.S. Virgin Islands. Bulletin of Marine Science of the Gulf and
Caribbean, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 543-551, Dec. 1961.
YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK
C - Benson, Norman G. Limnology of Yellowstone Lake in Relation to the
Cutthroat Trout. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Research Report #56.
C - Bulkley, Ross V. Fluctuations in Age Composition and Growth Rate of
Cutthroat Trout in Yellowstone Lake. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Research
C - Schaefer, V.J. Final Report, 1961 Yellowstone Field Research
Seminar. Publ. #1, Atmospheric Sciences Research Center, State University of
New York, Albany, 1961.
C - Bulkley, Ross V. and Norman G. Benson. Predicting Year-Class Abundance
of Yellowstone Lake Cutthroat Trout. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife
Research Report No. 59. 1962. iv + 21 pp.
C - Craighead, Frank C., John J. Craighead and Richard S. Davies. Radio-tracking
of Grizzly Bears. Bio-Telemetry, Pergamon Press, Oxford, London, New
York, Paris. 1963. pp. 133-148.
YOSEMITE NATIONAL PARK
C - Hartesveldt, Richard J. The Effects of Human Impact Upon Sequoia
gigantea and Its Environment in the Mariposa Grove, Yosemite National Park,
California. Thesis. xxii + 310 pp. (Offset duplicated)