Assateague Island Administrative History

Thus was stated the primary purpose of Assateague Island National Seashore in its 1965 authorizing legislation. In this rather amorphous chapter, encompassing some of the major visitor pursuits and those park functions aimed at serving and regulating them, we touch upon what the seashore is most about. We shall pass over swimming and sunbathing, most popular of all but undemanding of more than routine management supervision, and go to selected activities that have particularly occupied Assateague's administrators.

Information/Interpretation

The first Park Service facility at the seashore for informing visitors what they might enjoy there was the small geodesic dome in the traffic circle at the Virginia end approach, opened July 3, 1966. A temporary information booth at the Maryland end went into service July 13. The dome remained as a visitor information station through the summer of 1968, when its function was assumed by a larger dome at the Virginia beach (Chapter VI). The booth in Maryland was superseded by the headquarters visitor center, which opened in July 1967. [1]

Following a joint interpretive planning conference at Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge in November 1968, the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife and the National Park Service prepared interpretive prospectuses focusing on their respective Assateague interests. The NPS prospectus, prepared by Supervisory Staff Curator Raymond S. Price of the Harpers Ferry Museum Support Group, was approved in June 1969. "The interpretive program, constructed around the theme of environmental awareness, will develop the dependence of the barrier island and the recreational environment on outside influences," it proclaimed in the idiom of the incipient environmental education movement. The program objectives would be to provide information on recreational resources and activities; to interpret Assateague's natural history, emphasizing man's role in its conservation; and to interpret Assateague's human history, emphasizing man's inability to establish himself permanently on the changing island. [2]

Proposed interpretive media included a mobile interpretive facility (a four—wheel—drive vehicle mounting a rear—projection screen and other equipment) and cartoon signs featuring Charles Schultz's "Peanuts" characters warning people to avoid damaging the dunes. Commenting on the prospectus before its approval, Superintendent Bertrum C. Roberts questioned the mobile interpretive device as possibly "'force feeding' the city visitor with a media he may well be trying to get away from." [3]

Still containing the mobile facility and references to the proposed connecting road down the island, the prospectus was en route to the printer in March 1973 when Superintendent Thomas F. Norris, Jr., had it shelved. "Many aspects of the current prospectus are based on proposals and development schedules which have been eliminated or tend to suggest themselves as being 'ripe for elimination' in light of recent NEPA guide lines and current environmental thinking," he wrote his regional director. Five years later, describing the Price prospectus as "invalid," Norris reported that a new interpretive prospectus would be undertaken as the Assateague general management plan and the Harpers Ferry Center five—year interpretive planning program were put in final form. [4]

The first interpretive beachwalks and campfire programs were offered on both ends of the island in 1969. In 1970—71 a more varied interpretive program included evening programs in a screened amphitheater (to keep out the biting insects) at Toms Cove. Evening programs in Maryland were held in the headquarters visitor center. New exhibits were installed at the headquarters center in 1973, followed by a saltwater aquarium in 1975. In 1974 "numerous marsh and clam walks" were underway, and popular interpretive canoe trips were inaugurated in the North Beach marshes with 10 donated aluminum canoes. [5]

A wooden platform overlooking Toms Cove was completed in June 1975, and five large "metal photos" depicting historic scenes of the area were installed on its railings. In 1976—77 the Service constructed a 3/4—mile nature trail through the adjoining marsh, complementing the similar Candleberry Trail constructed in 1973 in Maryland. [6] Eastern National Parks and Monuments Association, which had established a sales agency at Assateague in 1969, provided funds for 750 feet of boardwalking along the Toms Cove trail. Interpretive Specialist Sandra K. Hellickson prepared a guide booklet for the Virginia trail and Chief of Interpretation Larry G. Points wrote the Candleberry Trail guide.

As part of a five—year plan to upgrade interpretation at Assateague, NPS interpretive planners at Harpers Ferry Center again raised the idea of a mobile interpretive van in 1978. Superintendent Norris shared his predecessor's resistance to the proposal:

Our years of experience have shown us that the great majority of day—use visitors are here for sun, sand, and surf. Through our handouts and bulletin boards, these people are aware of our interpretive offerings. Some of them participate, but most are not here for that kind of thing and we force nothing upon them. To assume that these people will utilize the van in numbers enough to justify the expense is a considerable gamble. [7]

The van proposal was dropped, but other components of the five—year plan were implemented. They included the film "A Very Special Place," which the staff released in an official premiere in February 1981; a new information desk and other modifications completed in October 1981 in the headquarters visitor center; exhibits for the Toms Cove visitor center, installed in July 1982; and a wayside exhibit plan still in progress at this writing.

The Harpers Ferry Center's Division of Publications produced a 176-page illustrated handbook on Assateague in 1980. Because its map appeared to show Toms Cove Hook as belonging to the National Park Service rather than to Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge, Refuge Manager J. C. Appel refused to allow the publication to be sold in the refuge, including the Toms Cove NPS visitor center. The NPS regional office appealed Appel's prohibition to the Fish and Wildlife Service regional office, which over ruled the refuge manager on the issue. [8]

Camping

The first Service campground at Assateague was delineated in the inner dune area of North Beach in 1968. Because it lacked designated sites, there was no easy way to prevent overcrowding. It was replaced by a 126—site campground with fees in 1970, at which time three campsites for backpackers accommodating up to 20 hikers each were designated along the beach. [9] One was at Toms Cove Hook, where a youth group camping area was also established.

"While there is clamor for more public campgrounds on the island in the Maryland section," Superintendent Roberts wrote Senator Charles McC. Mathias, Jr., of Maryland in 1971, "we have concluded that to attempt to meet such a demand will destroy this resource." He described the Service policy of limiting crowding by designating campsites and noted that private campground on Chincoteague Island were meeting the demand in Virginia. "It is more difficult to establish this posture in Maryland," he declared, "because the Assateague State Park policy is to accommodate campers in spite of impact on the resource." [10]

The popularity of the interpretive canoe trips led the seashore to establish a bayside canoe—in camping system in 1976.

VIP Visitors

A select segment of the public got special treatment during the early years of the national seashore. As improved properties were acquired in Maryland, several formerly private dwellings became available for Service use. Two of these, the Bradley house and the Riden house, were reserved for vacationing members of Congress and ranking Government officials.

The Bradley house was occupied during 1967 and 1968 by a succession of distinguished personages, including Undersecretary of the Interior Charles F. Luce, Senator Henry M. Jackson, Representative Jerome R. Waldie, Ben Wattenberg, and H. Barefoot Sanders, Counsel to the President. During this period Secretary of the Interior Stewart L. Udall and his family regularly stayed in the Riden house. After Udall left office in 1969, the Bradley house was converted to seasonal park employee quarters, and the Riden house assumed the function of accommodating other visiting VIPs. [11]

Although these guests put an extra burden on the seashore staff, Superintendents Roberts and Norris viewed the high—level contacts they made as valuable in furthering park aims. Roberts held several strategy sessions with Udall while the Secretary was in residence. Members of the congressional Interior committees who had gained a personal appreciation of Assateague were more inclined to be sympathetic when the park needed its appropriations ceiling for land acquisition raised. Representative Joe Skubitz of the House Interior committee got acquainted with the problems caused by off—road vehicles and became supportive of Service efforts to control their use. [12]

The VIP accommodations were phased out in the mid—1970s after adverse publicity in Jack Anderson's syndicated newspaper column and elsewhere. Assateague was one of several units of the National Park System accused of showing such undemocratic favoritism. Although the visiting officials had been charged for their accommodations, the rates were extremely low, and the Service found it difficult to publicly defend the practice of catering to those responsible for overseeing its functions. Like the Bradley house, the Riden house was turned over to park employees. Assateague's highest—ranking visitor ever was President Richard M. Nixon. The President arrived on the seashore headquarters lawn by helicopter on August 4, 1972 for a weekend at the beach house of Thomas B. McCabe, board chairman of the Scott Paper Company and a wealthy Republican supporter. (McCabe's property had been acquired by the Government in 1969 but he retained occupancy rights.) Nixon's retinue included Charles G. (Bebe) Rebozo, Robert Abplanalp, and John N. Mitchell, then running his reelection campaign. [13]

The Thomas B. McCabe house, north of Assateague State Park, Maryland, c. 1964. Occupied by President Richard M. Nixon Aug. 4-6, 1972. Protective dune line, foreground, reconstructed 1982 where vehicle located.

The presidential visit required extensive preparations and heavy logistical support. A U. S. Park Police detail was called in to help the Secret Service secure the perimeter of the McCabe property, and the park headquarters was largely taken over for communications purposes. The seashore staff obtained at least some lasting benefit from the disruption, however. Previously the park had experienced difficulty getting the oversand vehicles it needed for management purposes. Just before the President's arrival, five new four—wheel—drive vehicles magically appeared, and they remained at the seashore thereafter. Among them was a large van that was put to use shuttling lesser VIPs to the Riden house. [14]

Visitor Fees

The Chincoteague—Assateague Bridge and Beach Authority had collected a toll at its bridge for public entry to its facilities at Toms Cove Hook beginning in 1962. The Park Service acquired the Authority's interests in October 1966 and with the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife (BSFW)continued entrance fee collection at the Virginia bridge in May 1967. Initially revenues were credited to both bureaus equally, but following a solicitor's opinion assigning primacy to the wildlife refuge, BSFW assumed acountability for all income in July. (Under the Refuge Revenue Sharing Act, 25 percent of the collections went to Accomack County.) Fee collection was suspended in the summer of 1970 after Congress failed to renew legal authorization for the activity, but it was resumed in 1971. [15]

An entrance fee (as opposed to the user fee first charged for camping in 1970) was collected at the Maryland portion of the seashore beginning in 1971. Part of its justification was uniformity, to preclude Virginia complaints of unequal treatment. The balance was threatened in 1973, when implementation of Public Law 92—347 amending the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act prevented BSFW from collecting entrance fees for refuge recreational facilities. Again opining that BSFW had primary jurisdiction over the entire Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge, including Toms Cove Hook, the Interior Solicitor's Office ruled out entrance fees there. Uniformity was maintained by dropping the Maryland fee as well. Through a legislative error, authority for camping fees also ceased in August 1973. Maryland seashore campers overstayed, NPS rangers found time limits difficult to enforce, and public complaints ensued. [16]

Camping fees were restored in 1974, and a $1—per—vehicle user fee for the Maryland developed area was established in lieu of the former entrance fee—a distinction surely lost on the public. The following year the Service approached Representative Thomas N. Downing of Virginia with a legislative proposal to authorize an equivalent entrance fee at the south end; Downing was firmly opposed, and the Service retreated. [17]

Still seeking to right the balance, the Service instituted a user fee in the summer of 1977 at Toms Cove Hook. It was charged for occupants of cars only during the peak seven—hour period of the day. Responding to objections from the Chincoteague town manager, Secretary of the Interior Cecil D. Andrus stated that the fee was only for use of the beach facilities, that it would insure equal treatment for seashore users in Maryland and Virginia, and that it would encourage more pedestrian and bicycle travel to the beach from Chincoteague campgrounds and motels, thereby reducing automobile traffic. [18]

The Virginia user fee survived until 1979. It was abandoned after Cleveland F. Pinnix, consultant to the House Subcommittee on National Parks, and Sharon Allender of the Solicitor's Office successfully contended that the facilities at Toms Cove did not meet the criteria required for fee collection. That being the case, the charge was a de facto entrance fee and thus unlawful within the bounds of the wildlife refuge. [19]

Once again the balance was destroyed as only Maryland beachgoers were charged. Abandoning efforts to regain uniform fees, Superintendent Richard S. Tousley discontinued the Maryland user fee in June 1981. Tousley's s successor, Michael V. Finley, was behind the move as Tousley's assistant and firmly supported the no—fee policy, assuring its continuation for the foreseeable future. [20]

Concessions

The Chincoteague—Assateague Bridge and Beach Authority, operating under a Government lease in Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge, in turn assigned responsibility for beach facilities at Toms Cove to a concessioner, the Assateague Beach Corporation (ABC). Beginning in 1962, ABC built and operated a bathhouse, restaurant, and other public use development at the beach end of the Authority's access road. Before acquiring the interests of the Authority in October 1966, the Service requested a legal opinion as to the continuing rights of ABC. The Solicitor's Office concluded that the Interior Department would supplant the Authority in its contractual role with ABC and would be bound to perform the contract unless ABC were willing to terminate or renegotiate it. [21]

In its first years of seashore operation, the Service was dissatisfied with the performance of its inherited concessioner, whose facilities and standards it judged deplorable (Chapter VI). Superintendent Roberts approached the management of the Authority, which still existed pending final payment of its outstanding obligations. The Authority cooperated by expressing the view that its intent in the concession contract did not entail any Federal obligation to ABC. On this basis the Solicitor's Office reversed its opinion. [22]

Roberts informed Louis J. Steacker, ABC's principal, of the latest legal opinion in June 1970 and notified him that his contract would terminate with the impending dissolution of the Authority. The relationship was finally severed three years later, concluding food service at Toms Cove; ABC's other functions were absorbed by NPS. ABC thereupon filed suit in the U.S. Court of Claims for recovery of approximately $1 million in damages. A hearing was held in October 1974, at which the Government conceded liability for breach of contract and damages of $100,000. In December 1975 the judge recommended an award of $114,408. [23] ABC did not deal.

Public Transportation

Public transportation to and on Assateague was a favorite theme of those advocating elimination or restriction of private automobile access. The master plan team briefly considered public transportation in 1967 but rejected it as infeasible. The Morris plan for Assateague sponsored by the National Parks Association the following year would have banned automobiles and conveyed all visitors by bus (Chapter III). The Service regarded the automobile ban as inconsistent with its legal mandates and judged that buses would be insufficiently patronized to justify their expense.

A limited form of public transportation was tried on Toms Cove Hook in 1970 and 1971. A "sand tram" consisting of a tractor with sand tires pulling modified farm trailers ran along the beach between the parking area and the vicinity of the Coast Guard station in an attempt to disperse the crowds. The Toms Cove concessioner operated the tram, charging adults a dollar and children 50 cents. Superintendent Norris found its use by only 2,208 visitors in 1970 disappointing and judged the efforts at interpretation en route "only moderately successful." [24] Extension of the automobile road down the hook in 1971 helped discourage greater use of the sand tram that year, and the venture was abandoned thereafter.

In June 1976 a contract transportation study was completed by Vollmer Associates of New York. Because the Maryland end of Assateague was considered to have no significant traffic problems, the study focused on the Virginia end where cars sometimes backed up into the town of Chincoteague on peak summer weekends. The contractor was asked to evaluate the feasibility of a bus system from Chincoteague to the beach.

Vollmer recommended transporting people from and to the major lodging concentrations and campgrounds via reconditioned British double—decker buses for public appeal. Seashore staff were not impressed, believing that beach—goers with all their gear would be unlikely to foresake their cars unless automobile access were much restricted. Regional Director Chester L. Brooks expressed concern about high maintenance and repair costs of the British buses and handicapped access to their upper decks. His preference was for "elephant trains" for their economy and expandability to meet varying needs. Donald Benson of the Denver Service Center called the proposed buses "a bit 'Mother Goosey'!!" The Vollmer plan was not implemented. [25]

In its 1982 General Management Plan for Assateague, the Service pledged itself to "encourage the development of a privately operated shuttle bus service from the town of Chincoteague." There was little expectation that such service would be forthcoming soon.

Law Enforcement

Law enforcement concerns inevitably accompany heavy public use. Miscreants caused problems for the Service on Assateague from the beginning. Three arsonists burned two hunting camps, Pine Tree Lodge and Valentine Lodge, in February 1966. Vandals removed historic wooden markers from the Green Run Cemetery that April. Uncontrolled camping and beach buggy use were prevalent in Maryland, with resultant littering. Much of the public assumed that authorization of the national seashore automatically meant Federal acquisition; as a result, they displayed little regard for the extensive private property. With its limited manpower and no assistance from the Worcester County sheriff's department, the Service found trespassing difficult to prevent. [26]

Even after the private lands were acquired, jurisdictional complications affected law enforcement. The Service took title for the United States only to the mean high water line in Maryland, leaving the beach and water below that point to the state. (BSFW had acquired Federal title to the low water line in Virginia.) Superintendent Norris sought a formal long—term use and occupation agreement with each state giving the United States administrative control 1000 feet seaward, his object being to remove any Federal jurisdictional hiatus along the waterfront. In 1973 the Solicitor's Office judged that by its legislation setting the national seashore boundaries one—half mile beyond the mean high water line, "Congress created a sufficient Federal interest in the lands and waters therein to enable the Park Service to regulate the conduct of visitors who enter this area whether or not the United States owns the lands." The Service was nevertheless advised to seek concurrent jurisdiction with the states to preclude any contentions of Federal overreaching. [27]

Superintendent Roberts had begun the effort to obtain concurrent jurisdiction from Maryland in 1966. Without such a grant of power from the state, the Service had only proprietary jurisdiction and could not prosecute for violations of state law on its land. Public Law 94—458 of October 7, 1976, directed the Secretary of the Interior to "diligently pursue" concurrent jurisdiction within all units of the National Park System, but two years later Superintendent Norris cited this as still a goal at Assateague. [28] In 1982 Superintendent Finley was designated Maryland state coordinator to obtain concurrent jurisdiction for all national parklands in the state. Excellent progress was being made at this writing.

The Service's presence in Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge was another factor complicating its law enforcement work. Its regulations were in Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations; the refuge regulations were in Title 50. Fears that Title 36 might be unenforceable in the refuge were realized when Public Law 94—223 of February 27, 1976, defined the National Wildlife Refuge System as administered exclusively by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Chapter V). This development forced the Park Service to withdraw its Title 36 oversand vehicle regulations from application to Toms Cove Hook. The Fish and Wildlife Service published revised regulations under Title 50 to fill the gap, and it empowered the NPS district ranger in Virginia to enforce Title 50 violations there. [29]

The Virginia district ranger was also deputized as a county sheriff to handle traffic violations not adequately covered by the Code of Federal Regulations. He could now prosecute serious offenses like drunk driving through the state court system. Several other park rangers were deputized by the Fish and Wildlife Service as Federal game agents to handle waterfowl hunting violations. [30]

The Park Service found operating under Title 50 difficult. The refuge manager required citations to be processed through him, and for some time violations had to be heard by a U.S. magistrate in Norfolk—much farther away than Salisbury, Maryland, where Title 36 violations were heard. Until the U.S. District Court resolved this difficulty, allowing Title 50 violations to be heard in Salisbury, Service rangers tended to be reluctant to cite for relatively minor recreation—related violations in Virginia. In addition, the effectiveness of seasonal rangers was often impaired by delays in their deputization. Efforts to easy the situation have not been entirely successful, making law enforcement the greatest remaining problem of the interagency relationship in the refuge. [31]

Oversand Vehicle Use

No aspect of public recreation at Assateague has required more management attention or engendered more controversy than off—road or oversand vehicle use.

Off—road vehicles (ORVs) have plied the beaches and dunes of Assateague since the late 1920s. "The Model A Ford opened up the beach," Robert Phillips of Berlin, Maryland, a long—time local resident, recently recalled. He drove his father's new 1928 Model A down from Ocean City on partially deflated tires and found many others doing the same. [32] After the cutting of Ocean City Inlet in 1933 left Assateague surrounded by water, Alfred Peters started operating a small ferry from the mainland. Intended primarily for transporting his cattle grazing on the is land, it was also used by vehicles carrying surf fisherman and hunters. Leon Ackerman inaugurated a larger five—car ferry about 1950 in connection with his Ocean Beach real estate venture, and it too was patronized by recreational ORVs. [33]

The Park Service found "beach buggy" use widespread when it arrived on the scene in 1965—66. Many local vehicle owners were members of the Assateague Beach Buggy Association, formed in 1965 and renamed Assateague Mobile Sportfishermen's Association (AMSA) in 1968 upon its affiliation with the United Mobile Sportfishermen's Association. Their primary purpose was to lobby for continued and expanded beach access in the face of conservationist pressures to restrict or eliminate ORVs. Seeking to counter the bad image of ORVs among environmentalists, AMSA promulgated a code of conduct prohibiting indiscriminate dune driving, littering, and other offensive practices. Its members, numbering 857 in 1973, voluntarily assisted the Service in beach clean—up projects as well as by installing and repairing sand fences and planting beach grass to encourage dune construction. [34]

Not all ORV drivers were so cooperative, making restraints necessary. By 1970 the Service had installed posts and cables to keep the vehicles on a designated track from North Beach some four miles south, where a fenced "bullpen" was established for self—contained camping units. Tents and campers removed from pickup beds were prohibited in the enclosure, but trailers were allowed. [35]

Superintendent Roberts took a dim view of ORVs. "The National Park Service, with respect to Assateague Island, has every evidence to believe at this time that with the increased use of sand vehicles and the absolute need to protect the natural resources of beach zones, vehicle use on these fragile areas must be phased down and out," he wrote in 1970. Later that year he expressed similar views to another park superintendent:

In brief, the staff here recognizes that beach vehicles are destined to be banned from the public beaches. The only question is when such activity will cease to be a pleasure and become a total nuisance. Each season the number and variety of beach vehicles increases and it is just a matter of time until the outcry against them becomes stronger than the great political pressure exerted by them. [36]

Influenced by the Committee to Preserve Assateague and other conservation sentiment, Maryland's Joint Executive—Legislative Committee on Assateague Island in 1972 recommended further restrictions on ORVs and their banning "if determined to be detrimental to the island's ecology, or disruptive, physically or aesthetically, to the enjoyment of the natural barrier island." A year later Superintendent Norris took steps to prohibit new all—terrain vehicles like the Honda ATC—90. The ATC—90 could not be licensed for highway use, enabling Norris to ban it under Code of Federal Regulations provisions declaring state law applicable to vehicles within parks. [37] His case was weak, because unregistered snowmobiles were allowed in certain other parks and the lightweight Hondas were less likely to cause damage than heavier dual—purpose vehicles already present. Motorcycles were also banned, even when licensed. The NPS posture was simply to prevent opening the beach to new classes of vehicles, regardless of their relative merits.

After widespread public review and comment, final rulemaking on the ORVs was prepared in July 1974 and subsequently published in Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations, section 7.65. Under the regulation, a permit system was inaugurated in January 1975 by which a maximum of 12 vehicles per mile would be allowed at any time on designated portions of the beach in Maryland and Virginia. In the spring of 1976 the regulation was amended to more clearly define allowable vehicles and establish fees for the permits. Some 3,400 annual permits were sold for $5 that year, about 1,000 less that had been issued free in 1975. [38]

In 1979 more than 5,300 permits were sold to ORV owners who made over 32,000 trips in Assateague's 15—1/2 miles of oversand zone (12 in Maryland, 3—1/2 in Virginia). Twenty—eight percent of all citations in the seashore that year were written for ORV violations. At the request of Assistant Secretary Robert L. Herbst, who was concerned about the trend, the Park Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service began joint funding of a two—year, $50,000 study of ORV and other human impacts on the island's dune and beach systems. The Park Service's Denver Service Center contracted the first year's study to Applied Biology, Inc., of Atlanta that July. [39]

The results were inconclusive. "[T]he nature of their research and the contents of the final report were not of the best scientific standards.... [T]he number of transects and samples taken from those transects were far too small to provide any conclusive results on which to base management decisions," John F. Karish, regional scientist for the NPS Mid—Atlantic Region, said of Applied Biology's product in September 1980. Karish contracted the second year's study with the University of Virginia's Department of Environmental Science, specifying emphasis on Fox Hill Levels and Toms Cove Hook where ORV use was particularly heavy. [40]

The draft final report, submitted by William E. Odum and Raymond Dueser in April 1982, stated rather tentatively its implications for management:

ORVs appear to have a negative primary impact on incipient (developing) dune lines on the open beach at Toms Cove Hook. This may affect the future dune field as this beach continues to grow seaward.

ORVs may have a negative secondary impact on dunes and dune vegetation at Fox Hill Levels through altering dune geomorphology, plant cover and, ultimately, surface groundwater salinity.

Karish and Superintendent Finley both judged the study results inadequate once again for management decisionmaking on ORV use. Karish planned to return the draft for revision but had little expectation that firmer data would be forthcoming. [41]

The 1979 "Preferred Planning Alternative for Assateague Island Comprehensive Plan," a chapter in the planning process initiated by the amendatory legislation of 1976, gave no bayside access to ORVs in Maryland except for holders of retained rights and hunters during open seasons. Pressure from AMSA and intervention by Representative Robert E. Bauman led the Service, following consultation with the Committee to Preserve Assateague and the National Parks and Conservation Association, to compromise on a cabled access to the bay at Fox Hill Levels in 1980. This provision appeared in the subsequent General Management Plan. [42]

The General Management Plan incurred the hostility of AMSA on another proposal: the banning of trailers from the "bullpen" enclosure. Originally envisioned as an "overnight parking area" where surf fishermen with ORVs could pull their rigs off the beach for the night, it had evolved into a de facto camping area where self—contained trailers were detached and left for longer periods. ORV owners who had acquired trailers for use there were especially upset about the prospect of exclusion and received some sympathy from seashore management when they charged unreasonable discrimination. It appeared that some time might pass before the trailer ban was enforced. [43]

Mindful of the widespread opposition to its activity, AMSA went on the offensive in July 1981 by proposing that an additional 10.5 miles of Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge beach—from the state line to just above the Toms Cove visitor center—be opened to ORVs. It also wanted passage through the refuge fence at the state line so vehicles could drive through to and from Maryland. Refuge Manager Dennis F. Holland sought comment on the proposal, and Superintendent Tousley responded for the Park Service with objections. He noted that approximately half the beach fronting the undeveloped portions of Assateague was already accessible to ORVs; that providing entry to the refuge at the state line would complicate wildlife management and refuge closure; that the greater access to the island just above the line could increase trespassing on retained rights properties there; and that funds to police the expanded use were unlikely to be forthcoming. [44]

The Delmarva Advisory Council held a hearing on the AMSA proposal in September at the refuge headquarters. Of 11 speakers, 10 were opposed. Five of them advocated a total ORV ban in the Virginia portion of the is land, contending the vehicles were already given too much freedom by the Park Service in Maryland. The opposition of the Chincoteague Town Council was noted, and Dennis Holland reported that of 1,157 written responses received, only 55 supported AMSA. [45] (A month later, after AMSA had enlisted the United Mobile Sportfishermen's Association in a letter—writing campaign on its behalf, the responses totaled 3,115 for and 4,882 against.)

In March 1982 the Interior Department turned down the AMSA request. To mollify the sportfishermen, Assistant Secretary G. Ray Arnett's office proposed that an additional two miles of beach directly below the Toms Cove visitor center be opened to ORVs between November 1 and April 30. In response, all six Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia senators and seven Republican congressmen representing the Delmarva Peninsula signed a protest letter to Secretary James G. Watt. While applauding the decision against AMSA's proposal, they argued against any increased ORV use in the refuge on the grounds that existing problems of erosion, wildlife protection, and law enforcement would be aggravated. [46]

Nor was AMSA satisfied. The two miles were on a narrow stretch of the beach undergoing storm rehabilitation, a paved road paralleled the stretch just inland, and the opposition threatened a lawsuit that would tie the matter up indefinitely. AMSA thus decided to encourage Interior to abandon the compromise. On May 18 Secretary Watt wrote the protesting members of Congress that he would keep ORV use in the refuge at its current level—a decision for which he gained rare editorial praise in the Washington Post. [47]

With an Administration generally favoring recreational use taking this hold—the—line stand, and absent clear scientific evidence of significant ecological harm from legal ORV activity at Assateague, continuation of the status quo appeared likely for the foreseeable future.

Endnotes

¹Gordon U. Noreau, "History of Assateague Island National Seashore" (typescript at Assateague Island National Seashore headquarters, 1972, rev. 1974), pp. 12, 14.

²"Interpretive Prospectus for Assateague Island National Seashore," 1969, copy in Interpretation and Visitor Services Division file, NPS Mid—Atlantic Regional Office, Philadelphia, Pa. (hereinafter cited as IVSD-MARO).

³Memorandum, Roberts to Regional Director, Northeast Region, NPS, May 13, 1969, file K1817, Assateague Island National Seashore headquarters hereinafter cited as ASIS).

⁴Memorandum, Acting Team Manager William W. Smith, Northeast Team, Denver Service Center, to Director, Northeast Region, Mar. 2, 1973, file K1817, ASIS; memorandum, Norris to Director, Northeast Region, Mar. 21, 1973, file K1817, ASIS; memorandum, Norris to Regional Director, Mid—Atlantic Region, Apr. 13, 1978, file K1819, ASIS.

⁵Noreau, "History of Assateague," pp. 18—19; letter, Regional Director Chester L. Brooks, Northeast Region, to Herbert Sachs, June 13, 1974, IVSD MARO.

⁶Squad Meeting Minutes, June 9, 1975, file A40, ASIS; memorandum, Acting Superintendent Earl W. Estes to Refuge Manager, Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge, Nov. 9, 1976, file K1815, ASIS.

⁷Memorandum, Norris to Chief, Division of Exhibits, Harpers Ferry Center, Feb. 21, 1978, file K1815, ASIS.

⁸Memorandum, Stuart H. Maule to Regional Director, Mid-Atlantic Region, Dec. 22, 1980, IVSD-MARO; interview with Chester O. Harris, Mar. 2, 1982.

⁹Noreau, "History of Assateague," pp. 17-19.

¹⁰Letter, Roberts to Mathias, Jan. 22, 1971, file D18, ASIS.

¹¹Guest reservation correspondence in file A6019, ASIS.

¹²Interviews with Roberts and Harvey D. Wickware, May 21, 1982; interview with Norris, May 24, 1982.

¹³Jim Jackson, "President Visits Assateague," Eastern Shore Times, Berlin, Md., Aug. 10, 1972, ASIS clipping file.

¹⁴Memorandum, Thomas F. Norris, Jr., to File, Aug. 9, 1972, file A60, ASIS; interview with Gordon U. Noreau, May 25, 1982.

¹⁵Memorandum, Assistant Secretary Stanley A. Cain to Director, BSFW, and Director, NPS, Mar. 28, 1967, file A4415, ASIS; memorandum, Cain to Director, BSFW, and Director, NPS, Aug. 8, 1967, file A4415, ASIS.

¹⁶Memorandum, Regional Solicitor William W. Redmond to Director, Northeast Region, NPS, Mar. 19, 1973, NPS Office of Legislation, Washington, D.C. (hereinafter cited as WASO-170); "Fees," Briefing Book statement c. 1974, WASO-170.

¹⁷"Fees," WASO-170; memorandum, James M. Lambe to File, Sept. 19, 1975, WASO-170.

¹⁸Letters, Town Manager David R. Quillen, Chincoteague, to Senators William L. Scott and Harry F. Byrd, Jr., Feb. 9, 1977, file F5419, ASIS; letters, Andrus to Scott and Byrd, Apr. 8, 1977, file F5419, ASIS.

¹⁹Superintendent's Annual Report, 1979 Calendar Year, Mar. 11, 1980, file A2621, ASIS; interview with Michael V. Finley, May 19, 1982.

²⁰Finley interview.

²¹Noreau, "History of Assateague," p. 31; memorandum, Assistant Solicitor Bernard R. Meyer to Director, NPS, Oct. 26, 1966, file C3823, ASIS.

²²Memorandum, Roberts to Director, Northeast Region, Apr. 20, 1970, file C3817, ASIS.

²³Letter, Roberts to Steacker, June 30, 1970, file C3817, ASIS; Noreau, "History of Assateague," p. 31; Assateague Beach Corporation v. United States of America, No. 196—73, U. S. Court of Claims; letter, Herbert Pittle, Dept. of Justice, to Solicitor H. Gregory Austin, Interior, Jan. 5, 1976, file C3817, ASIS.

²⁴Letter, B.C. Roberts to William J. Duddleston, July 21, 1970, file A72, ASIS; letter, Norris to Duddleston, June 8, 1971, file A72, ASIS.

²⁵Vollmer study in file D18, ASIS; memorandum, Brooks to Manager, Denver Service Center, July 19, 1976, with Benson comment attached, file D18, ASIS.

²⁶Memorandum, Chief Ranger Harvey D. Wickware to Superintendent, Assateague, Sept. 13, 1966, file W34, ASIS; Noreau, "History of Assateague," p. 13.

²⁷Memorandum, Norris to Land Acquisition Officer, Assateague, Sept. 28, 1971, file L1425, ASIS; memorandum, Acting Regional Solicitor William H. Thornton, Jr., to Director, Northeast Region, NPS, June 27, 1973, file A2623, ASIS.

²⁸Letter, Roberts to Spencer P. Ellis, Dec. 29, 1966, file W3815, ASIS; memorandum, Norris to Regional Director, Mid—Atlantic Region, Nov. 27, 1978, file A2623, ASIS.

²⁹"History of Relationship, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service—National Park Service, Toms Cove Hook Area," appended to Noreau, "History of Assateague."

³⁰Superintendent's Annual Report, 1975 Calendar Year, Feb. 17, 1976, file A2621, ASIS.

³¹"History of Relationship, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service—National Park Service, Toms Cove Hook Area"; interview with Melvin L. Olsen, May 20, 1982.

³²Interview with Phillips, May 19, 1982.

³³Ibid.

³⁴Noreau, "History of Assateague, p. 13; interview with William Shockley (President, AMSA), May 18, 1982; Orlando Wooten, "Sportsmen Donate Time, Work in Isle Conservation Program," The Sunday Times, Berlin, Md., Mar. 18, 1973, ASIS clipping file.

³⁵Noreau, "History of Assateague," p. 18; letter, B.C. Roberts to Charles E. Elliott, Apr. 8, 1970, file A3815, ASIS.

³⁶Roberts statement prepared for Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge hearing, May 18, 1970, file W4217, ASIS; memorandum, Roberts to Superintendent, Coulee Dam National Recreation Area, Oct. 26, 1970, file W34, ASIS.

³⁷"Report to the Governor by the Joint Executive—Legislative Committee on Assateague Island," March 1972, p. 52, copy in file D18, ASIS; letter, Norris to W. W. Wright, Aug. 27, 1973, file W4217, ASIS.

³⁸Federal Register, May 29, 1974, pp. 18658—59; 36 CFR 7.65; Superintendent's Annual Report, 1976 Calendar Year, Feb. 2, 1977, file A2621, ASIS.

³⁹Superintendent's Annual Report, 1979 Calendar Year; memorandum, Herbst to Director, FWS, and Director, NPS, Oct. 24, 1978, NPS Office of Park Planning and Environmental Quality, Washington, D.C. (hereinafter cited as WASO-130); memorandum, Regional Director Richard L. Stanton, Mid—Atlantic Region, to Director, Jan. 3, 1979, WASO-130; memorandum, Regional Scientist John F. Karish to Chief, Contracting Division, Mid—Atlantic Region, Sept. 3, 1980, Resource Preservation Division, Mid—Atlantic Regional Office.

⁴⁰Memorandum, Karish to Chief, Contracting Division, Sept. 3, 1980.

⁴¹Odum and Dueser, "Draft Final Report, Natural and Recreational Influences on Fox Hill Levels and Toms Cove Hook, Assateague Island, Va.," copy at ASIS; interview with Karish, May 24, 1982; Finley interview.

⁴²Memorandum, M.V. Finley to Director, Jan. 20, 1982, file D18, ASIS.

⁴³Letter, Thomas F. Norris, Jr., to Barry Mackintosh, July 23, 1982 author's possession; interview with J. Fred Eubanks, Apr. 2, 1982; Finley interview.

⁴⁴Memorandum, Tousley to Holland, Aug. 24, 1981, file A4415, ASIS.

⁴⁵"Off—Road Vehicle Plan on Assateague Hit," The Evening Sun, Baltimore, Sept. 30, 1981, clipping in file A4415, ASIS; Memorandum, M.V. Finley to Mel Olsen, Oct. 1, 1981, file A4415, ASIS.

⁴⁶Dennis Collins, "Battle Zooms Into Overdrive Over Use of Assateague Beaches," Washington Post, Apr. 18, 1982, p. D16; congressional letter Mar. 26, 1982, file A4415, ASIS.

⁴⁷Letter, Rep. Roy Dyson to Judith C. Johnson, May 6, 1982, file A4415, ASIS; letter, Watt to congressional delegation, May 18, 1982, Refuge Management Division, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.; "Assateague: Keeping the Peace" (editorial), Washington Post, May 29, 1982.