Capitol Reef Administrative History

This section summarizes the numerous National Park Service planning documents for the national monument and park, from the initial investigation in 1934 through 1994. Documents specific to an individual issue are usually summarized within pertinent chapters. The purpose of this final chapter is to give park managers some idea of the information contained in the larger, often multi-topic management plans and resource surveys, and to provide document locations. Another purpose is to summarize the content of each document.

Capitol Reef's planning documents can be organized into six groups:

1. Initial Investigations and Reports

2. General Management Plans, Development Outlines, and Statements for Management

3. Wilderness and Land Protection Plans

4. Natural Resources

5. Cultural Resources

6. Interpretation

Included in each summary are the document's known location(s), its date and source (if known), background information, and a general list of the topics it covers. Each summary will conclude with an annotation regarding the document's utility for future park managers and personnel.

Not included within this list of planning documents are the various Superintendent's Annual Reports from Zion (before the monument was officially activated) from 1937 to 1950; the Superintendent's Monthly Reports, 1950 to 1967; the Log of Significant Events from 1967 to 1971; or the Superintendent's Annual Reports after 1977. These contemporary summaries of management concerns, found in either the park archives or historic superintendent's files, have proven invaluable in the writing of this administrative history. These reports should be read by all incoming managers at Capitol Reef National Park.

Initial Investigations And Reports

Report On Proposed Wayne Wonderland National Monument - 1934

By Roger W. Toll, Superintendent, Yellowstone National Park [1]

Document found in:

1. Records of the National Park Service, Record Group 79 (hereafter referred to as RG 79), Accession 79-60A-354, Container 63179, Box 1, File NPS-000, National Archives - Rocky Mountain Region, Denver, Colorado (hereafter referred to as NA-Denver).

2. RG 79, Entry 20, Box 11, National Archives, Washington, D.C. (hereafter referred to as NA).

3. Box 1, Folder 2, Capitol Reef Archives.

4. Files compiled during research and writing of Capitol Reef Administrative History (hereafter referred to as Admin. History Files).

In early November 1933, Roger W. Toll, Superintendent at Yellowstone and designated investigator of proposed National Park Service sites in the Western United States, made his second trip to south-central Utah to investigate the possibilities of creating a Wayne Wonderland National Monument. The Utah State Legislature had recently passed a resolution to include three units in Wayne County in a new national park or monument. Toll's task was to examine and assess each unit and make recommendations to National Park Service Director Arno B. Cammerer. [2]

Toll's 1934 report contains detailed legal descriptions for the three proposed units, discusses the general scenic and scientific features of each, and gives a little detail on land ownership, history of the project to date, and the divided local sentiment toward a national monument in the area. There is also a brief listing of significant features and how their names were derived, a short bibliography, and an itinerary of Toll's tour of the area.

The most important features of this report are Toll's recommendations. In his opinion, Unit #1 (Velvet Ridge between Torrey and Bicknell) was not worthy of inclusion. Instead, Toll recommended that Units #2 and #3, which included most of the original monument boundaries plus a good-sized portion of the Upper Fremont River Canyon, be immediately withdrawn from entry and the area designated as Wayne Wonderland National Monument.

This report is extremely important because it is the first detailed analysis of Capitol Reef by a National Park Service official. Descriptions of roads, Fruita, and prospective accommodations are useful, but the most significant contribution of this document is the detailed study of the potential boundaries and Toll's recommendation that the area be considered as a future national monument as opposed to a national park. This report was the first necessary step toward the creation of Capitol Reef National Monument in 1937.

Proposed Wayne Wonderland (Capitol Reef) National Monument - 1935

By Preston P. Patraw, Superintendent, Zion National Park

Document found in:

1. RG 79, Accession 79-60A-354, Container 63179, Box 1, File CR 101, NA-Denver.

2. Box 1, Folder 2, Capitol Reef Archives.

3. Photographs are found in Capitol Reef Photo collection, Capitol Reef Unprocessed Archives.

4. Administrative History Notes and Files.

In August 1935, Zion National Park Superintendent Preston Patraw conducted a further investigation of the proposed national monument. The narrative of this report is more detailed and descriptive than Toll's. It covers the following topics:

1. general location and description;

2. accessibility;

3. general characteristics of area;

4. land ownership and values;

5. local sentiment;

6. potential water supplies and tourist facilities; and

7. name for proposed monument. (Patraw recommends changing name from Wayne Wonderland to Capitol Reef.)

Also included in the Patraw report is a list of the land plats within the proposed boundaries -- including each of the landowners at Fruita and a tabulated list of alienated and open lands by legal description. Incorporated within the Patraw report is a cursory list of wildlife reported in the Capitol Reef area, compiled by Wildlife Technician A. E. Borrell. As part of the Patraw investigation, numerous photographs were taken by George Grant and several aerial photographs with the proposed boundaries sketched in were provided.

The significance of the 1935 Patraw Report l lies in:

1. its recommendation to change the name from Wayne Wonderland to Capitol Reef, the term given to the area of the Waterpocket Fold on both sides of the Fremont River canyon where many sandstone domes were shaped like capitol rotunda;

2. the stretching of the southern boundary down to the Garfield County line;

3. the elimination of Fish Creek Cove from consideration;

4. a discussion of negative sentiment toward the monument from area ranchers; and

5. the 1935 compilation of specific landownership boundaries.

Special Report on Flora and Fauna - 20 October 1939

By Joseph S. Dixon, Field Naturalist

Document found in:

1. RG 79, Entry 7, Box 2063, File 207, NA.

2. Document #158-D-49, Technical Information Center, Denver.

3. Box 1, Folder 5, Capitol Reef Archives.

4. Administrative History Notes and Files.

Considering that this is the monument's first detailed report by a National Park Service naturalist, Dixon's report is disappointing. Of its eight pages, five are spent almost exclusively discussing the location and construction of the Hickman Bridge trail, then under construction by the CCC. The sections on anthropology and flora are too brief to be of much value, and the faunal lists cover only a few common species. Dixon recommends further study of the area, improving the road to allow for better visitor access, and continued concession competition. Aside from the list of common species found in the region and photos of the Hickman Bridge trail, this report is not of great value or significance.

Special Report - Capitol Reef National Monument - May 1940

By W. B. McDougall, Regional Biologist

Document found in:

1. RG 79, Accession 79-60A-354, Container 63179, Box 1, File 204-10, NA-Denver.

2. Document # 158-D-48, TIC.

3. Box 1, Folder 5, Capitol Reef Archives.

4. Administrative History Notes and Files.

This is another disappointing report. Because of transportation problems and threats of rain, Regional Biologist McDougall spent only about a day in the monument, never leaving the main road. He provides a short list of plants and observes evidence of overgrazing. He also mentions that the CCC-constructed ranger station is almost completed. The lack of detailed information on the natural resources of Capitol Reef National Monument during its early years is an unfortunate omission.

General Management Plans, Development Outlines And Task Directives

Development Outline For Capitol Reef National Monument - 1 March 1938

Submitted by Preston P. Patraw, Superintendent, Zion National Park

Document found in:

1. RG 79, Accession 79-60A-354, Container 63180, Box 2, File CR-600-01 Master Plans, NA-Denver.

2. Administrative History Notes and Files.

This is the earliest known formal planning document relating specifically to Capitol Reef National Monument. At the time of the document's submittal, the monument was less than one year old and had no allocated budget or personnel.

The 1938 development outline is only three pages long. The first page and a half discuss the monument's location and potential. Specifically mentioned are the campaign to improve the road through the monument and the desire to focus tourist accommodations in Torrey rather than inside the monument. Fruita is identified as the logical place to locate monument headquarters, and the desire to purchase the private inholdings in Fruita as soon as possible is clearly stated.

The minimal existing road system (Utah 24 through Capitol Gorge and a spur south to Pleasant Creek) and trails ("barely passable saddle trail to Hickman Bridge") are only briefly mentioned, as is the out-of-service single telephone line through Capitol Gorge.

Besides the fairly early suggestion to purchase the inholdings and locate the headquarters at Fruita, the significance of this brief document lies in its project plans. The 1938 development outline recommends a paved highway be constructed from the west boundary through Fruita and then either follow the Fremont River, Grand Wash, or Pleasant Creek. It also recommends maintaining minor but oiled road status into Grand Wash (if not chosen for the main route) and Capitol Gorge. Proposed additions to the trail system included saddle and foot trails from Grand Wash to Hickman Bridge and from the Fremont River west of Fruita to the "upper plateau." A single stock driveway was also to be either built or designated.

Construction needs were listed as a "ranger-checking station," museum, and sewage disposal systems. Other listed needs were: boundary survey and postings; archeological survey and mapping; range survey and mapping; geological survey and mapping; boundary, stock driveway, and stock drift fencing; and maintenance of the existing but very poor telephone line.

General Development Plan - 1939 - Drawing Nm CR 2004a

Document found in:

1. #158 20001, National Park Service, Denver Service Center, Technical Information Center, Denver.

2. Drawer 9, Folder 1, Capitol Reef Archives (incomplete).

This is a set of colored maps showing existing and proposed developments for Capitol Reef National Monument. There is no known text that corresponds with these maps.

Development Outline For Capitol Reef National Monument - January 1943

Submitted by Paul R. Franke, Superintendent, Zion National Park

Document found in:

1. RG 79, Accession 79-60A-354, Container 63180, Box 2, File CR-600-02, NA-Denver.

2. Administrative History Notes and Files.

This is a fairly detailed narrative on existing conditions, landholdings, significant themes, and future objectives at a time when there was still no budget or paid custodian for the monument. [3]

The significant theme of Capitol Reef is its geology, with the secondary theme being archeology. The monument is noted as "unique in National Park areas," as the only place set aside for preservation and interpretation of the Fremont Culture.

Populations of the nearby communities are estimated and the various access routes are discussed. Visitation is estimated at 2,100 for 1941 and 1,000 for 1942. It also mentions that Doc Inglesby had been asked to monitor a U.S. Weather Bureau station.

The only encumbrance mentioned is Utah 24 through Capitol Gorge, which was the only right-of-way in the monument. According to this 1943 development outline, preliminary survey work by the Federal Roads Administration and the Utah State Highway Commission had been completed in 1940 for a new road through the Fremont River canyon. It recommends that the abandoned telephone line be removed.

As far as water rights are concerned, the Fremont River and Pleasant Creek are listed as good quality, and Sulphur Creek as alkaline. The specific water rights held by the residents of Fruita are listed. Only Fremont River water, considered usually "roily" or muddy, is mentioned.

The specific acreages of state, county, and private inholdings are shown in this document, which estimates 1,000 acres of orchards within the monument. There are also revealing details concerning the voiding of all known mining claims within the monument.

The only significant policy statements in the 1943 development outline concerned the Fruita inholdings and the need for boundary adjustments. Zion National Park Superintendent Paul Franke believed that the private property within the monument should not be acquired by the National Park Service because of the hardship that the loss of tax revenues would place on the county. Franke argued that encouragement and cooperation would help maintain the properties "in conformity with standards to be established," and that only "small units of water" need be purchased for future park development.

Superintendent Franke recommended that the northeast boundary line, which ran along the southern edge of Utah 24, be changed to coincide with sectional lines. This would bring an additional 1,032.32 scenic acres to the monument. Franke also urged that the Floral Ranch on Pleasant Creek be acquired, even though it was not within monument boundaries.

The 1943 development outline is a useful and valuable document. It gives an excellent idea of the National Park Service's initial perceptions of the area, its significant features, interpretive themes, and current accessibility at a time when little investment (besides CCC construction projects) had been made at Capitol Reef. The development outline also lists private, state, county, and federal acreage, water rights allocations, and the specific mining claims and the process in which they were invalidated. This is the first planning document that reverses earlier plans to purchase Fruita inholdings, and the first to call for changing the monument boundary away from the highway and for including the Floral Ranch.

Master Plan And Development Outline - January 1949

Submitted by Charles J. Smith, Superintendent, Zion National Park

Document found in:

1. RG 79, Accession 79-60A-354, Container 63180, Box 2, File CR-600-01, NA-Denver.

2. Administrative History Notes and Files (partial copy).

This is the most detailed planning document to date. It may have been significant in finally activating Capitol Reef National Monument and acquiring funding for a full-time employee.

The document is divided into two parts: the first details the current conditions and problems and the second is a planning prospectus. The standard descriptions of the area, its accessibility, climate, and general statistics have not changed since 1943. Page 13, however, contains an excellent table listing statistics related to government property, miles of boundary, roads and trails, and the lack of a campground. Visitation for 1948 is given as 4,834 cars for a total of 17,094 people.

The 1949 development theme for Capitol Reef places the "high class of visitor," including adventurers, students, artists, and writers, as the type of tourist most often seen in the area. According to the document, "It would seem that this class of use should set the theme for development." [4]

Objectives for Capitol Reef included:

1. acquisition of a full time employee;

2. construction of sanitary facilities, a campground, "suitable and proper" lodging, gas, and grocery supplies and an information station; and

3. advanced planning for the eventual paved highway through the monument. Yet, until the new highway's route was known, the final site of the monument's headquarters would have to be delayed.

A constant theme throughout the document is the dilemma over what to do with the private inholdings at Fruita. Superintendent Smith recommends that the residents of Fruita should not be bought out, at least for the present. Yet the document also notes that the limitations and uncertainty of future development of the inholdings, and their detrimental aesthetic qualities, seem to make continued private ownership of Fruita undesirable.

Other topics covered by the 1949 Master Plan Development Outline include:

1. a need for minor boundary revisions and a definitive boundary survey;

2. private land and water rights status;

3. visitor trends, use and problems; and

4. the current problem of poor concessions.

Another significant feature of the 1949 master plan Development Outline is the first known, detailed analysis of the monument's interpretive themes. These themes, in order, are:

1. geology and paleontology;

2. archeology;

3. history; and

4. National Park Service purpose and story.

Future personnel needs listed include a permanent superintendent, ranger, and a maintenance man to be supplemented during the summer by seasonal rangers, naturalists, and day laborers. The only usable building was the Chesnut property, since the CCC ranger station was without water and a finished interior.

Attached to the 1949 development outline is a rough draft of a fire protection plan, which gives detailed information on the current roads and trails, future construction needs, and contemporary tree, insect, and grazing control measures.

This document is an excellent source for establishing Capitol Reef's themes, problems, and anticipated needs immediately prior to its official activation in 1950.

Master Plan And Development Outline - December 1953

Prepared by Charles Kelly, Superintendent, Capitol Reef National Monument.

Document found in:

1. RG 79, Accession 79-67A-337, Container 919498, Box 1, File D18, NA-Denver.

2. Administrative History Notes and Files (partial copy).

The 1953 master plan was written by Charles Kelly, in part to clear up deficiencies in the 1949 plan. Yet, in many instances, virtually the same data are found here as in the 1949 master plan and development outline. The 1953 master plan narrative has four sections: an introduction, general information, detailed examinations of monument operations, and proposed developments.

The operations section includes an operations prospectus and detailed information on the current interpretive themes and practices, the state of forestry, soil and water conservation, and concessions. It is also apparent that by 1953 the dilemma over private inholdings at Fruita had not yet been resolved. The development section concentrates on current conditions and potential needs. Construction proposals include a water system and campground, a museum and office building, a utility area with associated buildings, and additional residences.

Special problems at the monument in 1953, listed in order, are:

1. uranium mining within the monument boundaries;

2. the location of headquarters and the need to purchase lands for future development; and

3. the current decision to maintain the private village of Fruita.

This is yet another valuable document. A complete copy should be placed in the park archives.

MISSION 66 PROSPECTUS - April 17, 1956

Likely prepared at Zion National Park.

Besides this final, director-approved draft, there are several preliminary drafts found alongside -- some with more details than others. There is also a general narrative prospectus, which lists some of the needs and proposed changes for Capitol Reef, found in Box 3, Folder 3, Capitol Reef Archives.

Since the final Mission 66 Prospectus submitted in April 1956 is the most detailed and only draft known to have been approved, it is the one that will be examined here. This document, related drafts and correspondence can be found in:

1. RG 79, Accession 79-67A-337, Container 919498, Box 1, File A9815, NA-Denver.

2. Administrative History Notes and Files (partial collection).

The Mission 66 Prospectus was the guiding document for changing Capitol Reef National Monument from a sleepy backroads curiosity to a fully functioning, increasingly popular unit of the national park system. Nevertheless, virtually all Mission 66 developments at Capitol Reef were delayed until the present highway through the Fremont Canyon was completed in 1962. In the six-year gap between prospectus and actual money allocation, some of the goals and specific plans were changed.

The document's statement of significance and the management and development theme stress the geologic magnificence and beauty of the Waterpocket Fold. Of secondary importance are the archeology, history, and flora and fauna. In 1956, National Park Service officials believed that the adventurous elite, which had always constituted the majority of visitors to the monument, would inevitably be joined by "less specialized" visitors, all staying for one to several days at a time. [5] A significant problem noted in these introductory statements is the lack of a campground and other adequate visitor accommodations, better roads, trails, a visitor center, and other "assurances of health and bodily comfort." [6] Another dilemma is the lack of level ground on which to build these accommodations. The prospectus also clearly states the inevitability of a paved road through the monument in the near future.

A proposed organization chart is included along with an appendix containing tables detailing the proposed phase in of new positions and associated costs in administration, protection, interpretation, and maintenance.

Visitation by 1966 was projected to be 300,000 as opposed to the less than 20,000 visitors in 1956. Facilities needed to accommodate this dramatic increase included: a 50-car campground at Fruita (to be expanded later to 100 sites or supplemented by a 50-site campground at Pleasant Creek); the building of a visitor center; an expanded interpretive program; and the building of adequate maintenance facilities, park housing and improved roads and trails.

The recommended concessions policy was to prohibit additional overnight or motor tour concessions within the monument until 1966. Grocery and camping supplies, food and drink, and a gas station would be encouraged and handled through special-use permits. This concessions policy was to be re-evaluated in 1966.

There are two significant features of the Mission 66 Prospectus that forever changed management policies at Capitol Reef. One was the proposal to close Capitol Gorge to through traffic once the main highway was rerouted through the Fremont River canyon. The old highway would become a scenic drive designed to encourage visitors to spend more time within the monument. [7]

The other significant decision was to purchase all the private inholdings and associated water rights at Fruita and the Pleasant Creek properties adjacent to the monument boundary. The document also urged that all 1,900 acres of state land be exchanged as soon as possible. The main reason for this final decision to transfer Fruita from private to National Park Service control was the overriding need for land and water to accommodate rising visitation. Management of the orchards is never addressed.

Another proposal called for changing the western boundary to "legal subdivision lines," thereby removing uncertainty and conflicts associated with the current boundary along the ever-changing highway and, as a result, provide additional protection to the western viewscape. [8]

This is a crucial document in the management history of Capitol Reef National Monument and Park. This Mission 66 Prospectus provided the foundation and framework for bringing Capitol Reef National Monument into the modern era. Although some of the staffing and construction estimates proved incorrect, determinations to purchase Fruita and Pleasant Creek lands, adjust boundaries, and change visitor circulation patterns would drive park policies in the headquarters area for the next 40 years.

Mission 66 Associated Maps And Drawings - 1957-1966

Documents found in:

1. Drawer 9, Folders 2-5, Capitol Reef National Park Archives.

2. Technical Information Center, Denver, Colorado (see Appendix B for document # for each specific map or drawing).

3. RG 79, Accession 79-65A-580, Container SB202684, Box 1, File D18, NA-Denver (1959 Master Plan drawings).

Throughout the Mission 66 era, there were several different proposals for developing the Fruita area. These maps, drawings, and mylar overlays indicate up to eight campground loops covering all of the Gifford and Mulford properties, a visitor center on the site of the Capitol Reef Lodge, and various road realignments.

These drawings, dated 1957, 1958, 1959, 1962, 1964, along with the complete 1966 master plan, are excellent sources for researching Mission 66 Developments at Capitol Reef -- the most dramatic changes ever made within the monument or park.

Master Plan Narrative - Draft, July 27, 1961

Document found in:

1. RG 79, Accession 79-67A-505, Container 342490, Box 1, File D18, NA-Denver

2. Admin. History Files

This narrative re-emphasizes the policy statements first found in the Mission 66 Prospectus. The arguments for turning the old highway into a dead-end scenic drive and the need to purchase the private inholdings at Fruita are presented in greater detail. Other immediate and potential problems are also listed in this brief, five page narrative.

Master Plan Of Capitol Reef National Park - September 1964

Prepared by William T. Krueger, Superintendent, Capitol Reef

Document found in:

1. Box 3, Folder 1, Capitol Reef Archives.

2. Administrative History Notes and Files.

This document helps place Capitol Reef developments and current and projected problems at a time when a majority of Mission 66 projects had been completed. The highway along the Fremont River was two years old; the visitor center, campground, and water treatment plant were nearly finished; and all but 14.83 acres (the Bird lodge and Gifford properties) had been purchased. There are excellent details concerning current accessibility to the area, population trends of the neighboring communities, and interesting descriptions of nearby features. The 1964 master plan describes the monument's negligible fire history, soils, dominant vegetation, common wildlife, and stream descriptions. It also provides visitor use comparisons between 1958 and 1963, showing dramatic increase due to the new, paved highway through the monument. Visitation in 1975 was estimated to be close to 400,000. Yet, it was projected that only half of those would ever turn off the highway and take a closer look at the monument.

This document is useful in demonstrating management concerns as Mission 66 at the monument is winding down. The various routes of accessibility to the area and surrounding features are historically important but there is little here of significance to current or future park management policies.

Master Plans 1964-67

Document location -

1. Partial copies of 1964 Design Analysis and 1965 Management Program narratives are found in the Administrative History Notes and Files and in the notes of Kathy McKoy, historian from the Intermountain Regional Office (Colorado Plateau) and co-author of the 1993 Draft Cultural Landscape Report. The original source is not known.

2. The 1979 General Management Plan Task Directive states that the last approved master plan was submitted in 1967. Yet, there are no known copies in the Capitol Reef Archives, Technical Information Services documents or at the National Archives-Rocky Mountain Region in Denver, Colorado.

The 1964 design analysis chapter of the master plan, is a five-page outline of existing conditions; final Mission 66 construction plans for the visitor center, maintenance area and Capitol Gorge information and exhibit shelter; and various management concerns. Of note is the acknowledgment that the orchards must be maintained in order to retain water rights acquired as part of the purchase of the various inholdings.

The management program narrative is in Chapter 3 of a September 1965 master plan prepared by Superintendent William T. Krueger (but never approved by the regional director). This document is an extensive, 37-page examination of current conditions and perceived needs for better management of the monument's resources. Discussed are the needs to:

1. ensure adequate protection of the fragile biotic resources from arbitrary road, trail, and building construction;

2. control tent caterpillars, fall webworms, and grasshoppers in the Fruita area;

3. foster and maintain good relations with area stockmen;

4. maintain special-use permit for fruit orchards to continue vegetation of the Fruita area, provide traditional fruit-picking opportunities for local communities, and preserve at least a portion of Fruita for its "early pioneer atmosphere";

5. conduct more studies on what to do with deer, beaver, and other mammal overpopulation in the Fruita area;

6. work with upstream users of the Fremont River and Sulphur Creek to protect water quality;

7. work with other agencies to reduce soil erosion within and surrounding the monument;

8. expand both the Visitor Protection and Interpretive Divisions;

9. acquire both the Capitol Reef Lodge and Gifford Motel;

10. work with local communities to provide quality accommodations outside the monument boundaries, since none are to be built at Fruita;

11. provide more staff training, professional growth opportunities, and research of monument resources; and

12. construct a second four-unit seasonal apartment building and three permanent employee residences by 1975.

Overall, this document describes Capitol Reef's status toward the end of Mission 66 construction. Management was still adjusting to rapid changes caused by the purchase of inholdings, the construction of the Fremont River canyon highway and the increase in visitation over the previous five years.

Master Plan - December 1973

Prepared by The Environmental Associates: Architects Planners

Landscape Architects, Salt Lake City, Utah

Document found in:

1. Document 158 D-9, TIC.

2. Copy in Administrative History Notes and Files.

Submitted two years after Capitol Reef became a national park, this contracted master plan stressed transportation and other improvements needed to provide access and better management of park lands, now 600 percent larger than the old national monument. While the specific objections to this document are unknown, it was considered inadequate and was not approved by the National Park Service. [9]

The 38-page master plan narrative, which contains many planning maps, is accompanied by a lengthy transportation study required by the park's enabling legislation. [10] The descriptions of natural and cultural resources are brief and contain no new or in-depth information.

The 1973 Capitol Reef Master Plan emphasized "basic concepts to provide preservation and restoration of the natural ecological interrelationships and for a development scheme compatible with this theme as well as to serve the inspirational and recreational needs of a growing society." [11]

The master plan proposes some interesting ideas, some of which have been instituted and some which have not. One proposal was to have two distinct districts in addition to the Fruita headquarters area. For the Fruita area, recommendations include:

1. gradually phasing out the campground once private facilities outside the park are built;

2. providing interpretation in a manner that encourages visitors to leave their cars; and

3. paving Scenic Drive from Fruita to Pleasant Creek, where an interpretation station would be built.

North District recommendations are to:

1. pave the Cathedral Valley and Hartnet roads and manage them as a one-way scenic loop drive;

2. build a ranger station and residences in upper Cathedral Valley;

3. acquire the water rights to Deep Creek so that the diversion north would be eliminated and wildlife can be reintroduced; and

4. manage the Deep Creek/Paradise Flats/Spring Canyon region as a primitive zone.

South District recommendations are to:

1. pave the Notom Road but keep the Burr Trail gravel and dirt;

2. close the Halls Creek jeep road, restore the vegetation where possible, and manage the area as a primitive zone;

3. build a ranger station and residences at the junction of the Burr Trail and the Notom Road;

4. construct interpretive trails in the vicinity of the Burr Trail; and

5. allow a utility corridor through Oak Creek Canyon.

General Management Objectives are to:

1. manage the entire park on a year-round basis;

2. centralize park management and administration;

3. institute a comprehensive research program for natural and cultural resources;

4. acquire all lands and interests concerning mining and grazing;

5. cooperate with the Bureau of Land Management in the grazing phaseout;

6. construct adequate housing for park employees;

7. design a "vigorous" public relations campaign with local communities; and

8. conduct a study to determine future concession potential.

Resource Management recommendations are to:

1. restore all land, wildlife, and vegetation to pre-settlement conditions, except in the Fruita area;

2. fence the park boundary;

3. manage Fruita as a pre-1930 living farm; and

4. manage the orchards "according to good agricultural practices" while retaining their historic appearance. [12]

While this master plan was not approved by park managers and regional officials, there are some thought-provoking ideas in this first comprehensive document after park creation that should be examined by present and future managers at Capitol Reef.

Task Directive - General Management Plan - 1979

Prepared by Rocky Mountain Region, Capitol Reef and Denver Service Center

Document found in Administrative History Notes and Files.

This task directive outlines the need for a general management plan for Capitol Reef since the last significantly outdated master plan in 1967. This document is important because it identifies specific management problems and lists the status of relevant documents.

Unbelievably, there was no park-wide management plan eight years after Capitol Reef National Park was created. This task directive lists the numerous management problems faced by an overwhelmed park staff with little long-term guidance.

These problems included:

1. doubling of visitation and 600 percent increase in land since the last master plan was approved;

2. inadequate camping space;

3. uncertainty surrounding proposed road improvements and realignments;

4. lack of adequate housing and maintenance facilities;

5. an overcrowded visitor center too small to accommodate the increasing flow of tourists;

6. lack of information on floodplains;

7. uncertainty as to what to do with Sleeping Rainbow Ranch on Pleasant Creek, North and South District roads, and other possible facility developments in the more remote areas of the park; and

8. numerous resource management issues.

One reason mentioned for the lack of a master plan was the realization that the park's resources were largely unknown. Once a preliminary, "only partly successful" inventory was completed in 1975, funds were programmed but not given priority status until FY 81.

This task directive also lists the scope of work, time tables, preliminary funding estimates, and staff responsibilities for that general management plan and associated environmental impact statement, statement of findings, and supplemental wilderness proposal to be completed by 1983.

Final Environmental Impact Statement/General Management Plan/Statement of Findings - October 1982

Project Coordinator - Allen R. Hagood, Denver Service Center

Superintendent - Derek O. Hambly

Document found in:

1. Document 15883-07 D, Technical Information Center, Denver.

2. Capitol Reef Unprocessed Archives.

3. Superintendent's Files.

4. Administrative History Notes and Files.

This is the final, director-approved draft that became the primary planning document for Capitol Reef National Park from 1982 through the late 1990s. After two years of analysis, scoping, public input, and writing, National Park Service officials determined to balance limited compromise of park resources with some upgrades in visitor facilities and accessibility. The preferred alternative will be the only section addressed in this study, since it is impossible to cover all the material in this document. However, the thorough information the study contains on existing developments, current and future management problems, various development alternatives, and the public response to them, are a valuable resource and should be given adequate attention by all current and incoming park managers.

Not all the preferred alternatives, which together formed Capitol Reef National Park's management plan, are listed here. Instead, only those items relevant in the 1990s will be mentioned. Please see the GMP's Table 1, pages 31-36 and Appendix B: Plan Rationale and Methods, pages B-1 through B-7 for more complete information. Also see the various development maps for each area listed below found on pages 39-50.

Headquarters District recommendations call for:

1. adding a two-story, 3,440-square-foot addition to the visitor center and an adjoining first aid building;

2. expanding visitor center parking by 10 spaces and realigning the entry road;

3. widening and paving the Goosenecks Overlook Road;

4. doubling the existing campground by adding a 50-site loop, a group site, and expanding the water/sewage system;

5. realigning the campground entrance, adding a 10-car trailhead parking area at the old entrance, building a two-mile loop trail from the campground to the visitor center, and relocating the amphitheater;

6. removing all lodge buildings, employee trailers, and the Sprang Cottage, and then rehabilitating these areas to a "pastoral scene";

7. building four duplexes and three additional seasonal apartments in the existing residence area and expanding the water/sewage system accordingly; and

8. retaining all existing roads, trails with the addition of nine wayside exhibits.

Pleasant Creek recommendations call for:

1. providing a 10-20 car parking and trailhead orientation area;

2. adding trails to Tantalus Flats, Oak Creek, and Sheets Gulch; and

3. providing a small corral and a two-site campground for equestrian use.

South District recommendations call for:

1. adding separate five-car parking and orientation pull-outs along the Notom Road at the Burro, Five Mile, Sheets, and Cottonwood drainages;

2. adding a one-mile trail from Bitter Creek Divide to Oyster Shell Reef;

3. closing the Upper Muley Twist road and constructing a new 2.5-mile gravel road to and a 15-car parking area at Strike Valley Overlook; and

4. building a ranger station and utility area at the bottom of Burr Trail and a primitive, 10-site campground and residence area at the top of Burr Trail.

The 1982 Capitol Reef General Management Plan specified that Burr Trail and Notom Road were not to be improved by the National Park Service. If state or county agencies proposed improvements, the National Park Service was to have a significant role the in design and regulation of these roads. There were also to be no developments in Halls Creek. North Coleman Canyon was selected as a preferred utility corridor, rather than the Oak Creek Corridor proposed in the rejected 1973 master plan. [13]

North District recommendations are to:

1. forego National Park Service upgrading of roads into the district, while retaining regulatory rights and design approval in the event of state or county improvements;

2. provide wayside exhibits at Gypsum Sinkhole and Glass Mountain but not provide additional parking;

3. provide a five-car parking area and route markings into North Cathedral Valley;

4. restrict camping to the existing Hartnet campground; and

5. prohibit any additional developments in the North District.

Also included in the 1982 Final Environmental Impact Statement/General Management Plan are:

1. a detailed analysis of the effects of this plan on the park's natural and cultural resources and the socioeconomic impact on the surrounding region; and

2. a Statement of Findings listing existing and proposed structures were within the 100- and 500-year floodplains.

Boundary adjustments were also proposed. The plan recommended that Blue Flats and mostly state-owned sections near Sandy Ranch and in the Circle Cliffs be excluded from the park. In exchange, the National Park Service desired tracts in the upper Sulphur Creek area and a small section including Glass Mountain. These boundary adjustments would also result in a natural boundary with the Circle Cliffs. These adjustments were countered by proposals from the Bureau of Land Management and Wayne and Garfield County officials. Since those counter proposals called for transferring a much larger amount of park land over to the BLM, they were totally unacceptable to National Park Service officials. In the end, the 1982 boundary proposal was dropped altogether. [14]

As regional officials and Capitol Reef management continue the process toward a new general management plan in 1996, this 1982 document should prove valuable. There is no question that this document is now outdated. Yet, it did provide a useful, and desperately needed planning focus for Capitol Reef National Park.

Statements For Management - August 1977; May 1979; September 1981; December 1984; July 1987; October 1989

Documents found in:

1. Document 158-D-17,A-E, Technical Information Center.

2. SFMs for 1984-1989 found in Superintendent's Files.

3. SFMs for 1984-1989 found in Administrative History Notes and Files.

These documents give excellent details on current management concerns, planning document status, natural and cultural resource research and threats, land use trends, visitor use analysis, and cooperative agreements and special-use permits. They have proven extremely helpful in the compilation of Capitol Reef's administrative history. They are a source of information for anyone researching past resource issues or changing management concerns over the past 20 years.

Task Directive - General Management Plan, Development Concept Plans, Interpretive Prospectus And Environmental Impact Statement -1992

Prepared by Rocky Mountain Regional Office and Capitol Reef staff, Christopher C. Marvel, Team Captain

Recommended by Superintendent Charles V. Lundy

Document found in:

1. Capitol Reef Superintendent's Files.

2. Administrative History Notes and Files.

This is the proposal to draft a new general management plan/environmental impact statement, two development concept plans, and an interpretive prospectus, all to be completed by 1996. Included in this document are the time tables, issue identifications, applicable data, and funding and staffing requirements for this ambitious project that "will provide the National Park Service with direction for long-range management, development, and use of Capitol Reef National Park." [15]

This task directive provides the latest information on current resources, water rights, rights-of-way, and other administrative and resource concerns. Until the 1998 general management plan is completed, this will likely be the most up-to-date document concerning park issues.

WILDERNESS AND LAND PROTECTION PLANS

Wilderness Proposal - 1967

Document found in:

1. Box 2, Folders 3-4, 8-12, Capitol Reef Archives.

2. Associated maps, Box 2, Folders 9 and 12, Drawer 9, Folder 4, Drawer 11, folders 4-6, Capitol Reef Archives.

3. Administrative History Notes and Files (partial copy).

According to the requirements of the 1964 Wilderness Act, all areas of the national park system with more than 5,000 contiguous roadless acres were to be evaluated for wilderness designation. The first draft wilderness proposal for Capitol Reef National Monument was submitted for public review in September 1967 (Box 2, Folder 7 - Capitol Reef Archives); public hearings were held in Loa, Utah on December 12, 1967 (Box 2, Folder 3-4); and written comments were also accepted at that time (Box 2, Folder 8-11). A formal wilderness recommendation was not submitted to Congress until April 1971. Of course, by this time President Lyndon Johnson had already expanded Capitol Reef National Monument, and enabling legislation for a national park was well on its way toward passage. This made any wilderness recommendations for the old monument obsolete.

The initial proposal called for five units within the old monument boundaries. The Fremont, Grand Wash, Capitol Gorge, and Pleasant Creek canyons and a 1/8-mile buffer zone surrounding the entire monument formed the basic boundaries of the wilderness units. The December hearing transcript and the hundreds of letters responding to these recommendations demonstrate how Capitol Reef managers were placed in the difficult position between local resident desires for little to no wilderness and environmentalist's pressures for more wilderness.

The most contentious discussions concerned the 1/8 mile buffer that National Park Service officials believed "the minimum essential for present and future management needs" [16] and the exclusion of the bisecting canyons. These canyons were omitted from the wilderness plans since they contained roads, were used as stock driveways, or both. The environmentalists believed that these driveways and grazing uses were not incompatible with wilderness. They also believed that the buffer zone, proposed in other contemporary National Park Service wilderness plans, was an unnecessary limit. At the December hearings, and through later correspondence, local ranchers were promised that the stock driveways would be guaranteed. The 1/8-mile buffer was never specifically addressed in that later correspondence.

These documents pertaining to the 1967 Wilderness Proposal are, of course, outdated by the expansion of the monument in 1969 and the creation of the national park in 1971. Yet, the testimony and written statements, as well as the various detailed maps of the proposal, give an excellent idea of the local, conservationists, and National Park Service concepts of wilderness in the late 1960s.

Proposed Wilderness: Draft Environmental Statement - June 1974

Prepared by Denver Service Center, Allen R. Hagood, project coordinator.

Document found in:

1. Document 15874-73, Technical Information Center.

2. Administrative History Notes and Files

This is a detailed, well-written account of Capitol Reef National Park's numerous resource issues that would have an impact on any proposed wilderness. The wilderness plan, examined more thoroughly in the September 1973 "Wilderness Study, Capitol Reef National Park," breaks the park down into nine proposed units covering 181,230 acres (or 75 percent) of Capitol Reef. In this document, the nine units are only summarily discussed.

Most of this draft environmental statement is concerned with a thorough analysis of existing developments, the natural environment, the region's economy, and past, present, and future land use concerns. The resource descriptions and supplemental maps provide an excellent source for general information about resource conflicts that park managers have faced since the national park was established in 1971. Notably, this draft environmental impact statement was withdrawn in 1983, when preliminary proposals to increase the wilderness to 91 percent of park lands were introduced. The 1998 general management plan is to address the need for another formal wilderness proposal.

Wilderness Recommendation - November 1974

Document found in:

1. Document 158-D-703-A, Technical Information Center, Denver.

2. Capitol Reef Superintendent's Files.

3. Capitol Reef Unprocessed Archives.

This is the last formal wilderness proposal submitted to Congress for Capitol Reef National Park. The document includes the formal recommendation for wilderness, the December 1973 Draft Wilderness Study, public hearing and written response analysis, the views of other government agencies, and a map of Capitol Reef's wilderness. [17] This wilderness proposal was submitted to Congress with other area parks in March 1978. No other record has been found that could determine why the wilderness recommendation was never brought to a vote. In 1984, the wilderness recommendation was revised upward to include almost 90 percent of the park. Yet, the Department of the Interior did not submit this plan to Congress. In lieu of formal congressional approval, the entire area proposed for wilderness status in 1984 is, as of 1994, treated as wilderness in all park management decisions.

The analysis of public hearings and written responses contains a summary table of the 300 responses and a general description of views by conservationists, local interest groups, and other agencies. There are several letters included in this section that will give park managers a good idea of the various national and local viewpoints toward wilderness management at Capitol Reef National Park. Perhaps the most important response was from Utah Governor Calvin L. Rampton's office, which opposed any official wilderness designation for the Utah parks until the completion of a comprehensive master plan that addressed local considerations. [18]

As the last extensive wilderness recommendation, this document is important in understanding what areas are considered of wilderness quality, and varied reactions to proposed wilderness in the park. The document is, of course, somewhat dated, and consequently, many of the resource conflicts have been altered in some way. Thus, while useful, this document should be used to supplement the 1982 Capitol Reef General Management Plan and the statements for management throughout the rest of the 1980s.

Land Protection Plan - 28 March 1984

Recommended by Superintendent Robert W. Reynolds

Approved by Acting Regional Director Jack W. Neckels

Document found in Capitol Reef Superintendent's Files. [19]

As the first land protection plan for Capitol Reef National Park, this is an interesting document pertaining to the contemporary landownership status for the park and alternatives for acquiring non-federal lands within Capitol Reef.

Included in the 1984 Land Protection Plan is a summary list of current ownership which included 19,000 acres of state sections, the .42-acre tract in Fruita owned by the descendants of Amasa Pierce, funding status, and acquisition priorities. There is also a map showing the location of non-federal land tracts and a table of acquisitions to date.

The potential conflicts over the state sections and a brief description of the Pierce-owned tract in Fruita are found in the document, as are the various alternatives for acquiring these lands. The final recommendation was to leave tract 01-161, the private .42-acre plot, alone for the time being, but to consider eventual "friendly condemnation." State lands were to be exchanged through the Project Bold program, which was never enacted. A second alternative was to exchange the state lands for federal lands in other areas of Utah through the Federal Land Policy Management Act of 1976. Mineral leases were to be left alone, since their monetary value was uncertain. Grazing was also to be only monitored for the time being.

Although somewhat dated, this document contains some useful information on landownership during the 1980s.

NATURAL RESOURCES

This section will address only the more general resource management plans. The more specific issue documents, such as grazing, transportation, etc., are mentioned and often analyzed within the appropriate chapters of this Capitol Reef National Park administrative history.

Natural Resource Management Plan and Finding of No Significant Impact - June 1984

Prepared by Norman Henderson, Resource Management Specialist

also contains Backcountry Management Plan - February 1978

Document found in:

1. Document 158-D-2215, Technical Information Center.

2. Capitol Reef Superintendent's Files.

3. Administrative History Notes and Files (partial).

This guiding document for resource management at Capitol Reef provides an overview and needs statement, projected funding needs, and 30 natural resource project statements. There is also a backcountry management plan, dated February 1978.

As expected, the dominant concern of the resource management division in 1984 was grazing. One-third of the project statements are directly concerned with grazing. The second most important issue is water quality, to which five projects are dedicated. Various Fruita management concerns are found in at least four project statements and air quality in three. Other concerns are rare flora and fauna surveys and exotic plant controls.

The backcountry management plan set the guidelines for controlling backcountry use so as to preserve the wilderness quality and visitor experience. In 1984, the only designated campground outside Fruita was the primitive, five-site Cedar Mesa campground. A similar campground was being planned for the North District. Backcountry permits were required for overnight stays, and any camping was to be 1/2 mile from maintained roads, developed areas, or trails, and 100 yards from any water source. Group size in 1984 was limited to 20 persons. Backcountry campers were requested, but not required, to use only stoves rather than building fires. Water purification was recommended, and no soaps or detergents were allowed. Construction of backcountry trails was not considered necessary. Instead, handout maps with route descriptions were to be made available at trailheads.

Wildfires were to be controlled within Capitol Reef "to prevent unacceptable loss of wilderness values, loss of life, damage to property, and the spread of wildfire" to lands outside the park. [20]

These resource management and backcountry management plans were important first steps in documenting the needs and management objectives for Capitol Reef's invaluable natural resources during the 1980s. While now mostly outdated, the information in these documents gives an excellent idea of earlier resource concerns, many of which will involve park management for many years to come.

Final Resources Management Plan - June 1993

Prepared by Norman Henderson, Chief of Resource Management & Science

Recommended by Charles V. Lundy, Superintendent

Document found in:

1. Capitol Reef Superintendent's Files.

2. Capitol Reef Resource Management Files.

3. Administrative History Notes and Files (partial copy).

As the most current management plan for the natural and cultural resources of Capitol Reef National Park, this is an invaluable document for all current and future park managers. Included in this final plan are 55 detailed project statements (up from 30 in 1984), resource management issues and objectives, and division personnel and funding.

Current natural resource issues include:

1. air quality;

2. hazardous material accumulation and transport;

3. exotic plants - specifically tamarisk, Russian olive, Russian thistle and cheatgrass;

4. pest species - skunks, marmots, deer, raccoons, beaver, tent caterpillars, and orchard invertebrates;

5. soil erosion;

6. rare plant, animal, and bird surveying and monitoring;

7. wetlands;

8. wilderness - road and rights-of-way boundaries unclear;

9. water quality and the threats from upstream impoundments;

10. grazing - its continued impact on all park resources;

11. Fruita fields and orchards;

12. road construction - specifically the Burr Trail;

13. power line right-of-way and construction;

14. Henry Mountain bison control; and

15. oil and gas leases along park boundaries.

Cultural Resource concerns include:

1. vulnerability and incomplete documentation of archeological resources in developed and undeveloped areas;

2. the need for ethnographic overviews and surveys;

3. museum collection - lack of space, division of collection for storage purposes; and

4. cultural landscape nomination.

This is a detailed, comprehensive, and well-organized document that not only structures management objectives but gives a good background on the numerous issues facing Capitol Reef National Park as it enters the twenty-first century. Because of the excellent background information on a full range of resource issues facing Capitol Reef National Park, the narrative portions of this document should be made available to all park employees.

CULTURAL RESOURCES

This section lists the general or multiple-topic cultural resource management documents. Briefly mentioned are the planning documents concerned with the overall Fruita cultural landscape, since it has been a primary concern during the writing of this administrative history. The more specific documents, such as the Fruita Schoolhouse Furnishing Studies, and the numerous archeological surveys, will not be addressed here. Please see Appendix B for a complete list of these documents, on file at the Technical Information Center, Denver, Colorado.

The Capitol Reef Archives, and specifically Box 5, contain primary and secondary information on the history of the Fruita area, including earlier National Historic Register submittals. Other cultural resource documents concerning the archeology and history in the park can be found in the Capitol Reef Resource Management Division files.

Cultural Resources Management Plan: Fruita Living Community Management Plan - Draft 10 November 1975

Prepared by Gerald Hoddenbach, Research Biologist, Capitol Reef National Park.

Document found in:

1. Box 5, Folder 9A, Capitol Reef Archives.

2. Orchard Notebook, Capitol Reef Unprocessed Archives.

3. Administrative History Notes and Files.

While Hoddenbach was the first natural resource specialist hired at Capitol Reef, his interest in the history of Fruita led him to research the area as had no one else before him -- including Charles Kelly. His interviews and primary research are included in his notes now preserved in the Capitol Reef Archives.

This plan to reconstruct a "Fruita Living Community" was an ambitious attempt to combine living history, orchard and historic structure maintenance, possible reconstruction of previously removed homes, and integration of historic natural flora and fauna.

The Fruita Living Community Management Plan foresees some of the recommendations of the 1993 Draft Cultural Landscape Report. While the plan's ambitious goals most likely doomed its approval in 1975, it should, nonetheless, be read by those senior management team members concerned with the management, preservation, and interpretation of the Fruita Rural Historic District.

Historic Agricultural Area Management Plan - February 1979

Prepared by Derek O. Hambly, Superintendent

Approved by James B. Thompson, Regional Director

Document found in:

1. Document 158 D 18, Technical Information Center, Denver.

2. Capitol Reef Historic Superintendent's Files.

3. Administrative History Notes and Files.

This document became the first approved planning document specifically addressing the Fruita historic scene. Earlier efforts, such as those of Kelly and Hoddenbach, had succeeded in documenting the historic quality of the Fruita area. This document built upon those earlier efforts by proposing management guidelines preserving the remaining orchards and structures within the Fruita area.

This Historic Agricultural Area Management Plan was a revision of an earlier, controversial draft. The earlier proposal called for dramatically reducing the amount of fruit trees so as to more closely resemble Fruita in 1930s. This plan was met with almost unanimous disapproval at a local hearing and was thus revised to this 1979 approved plan. [21]

Considerations listed are:

1. Maintenance Objectives. The objectives are to maintain the integrity of the historic scene, interpret the significance of the period 1920-30 when Fruita was determined to be at its peak, and provide for public fruit harvests.

2. Adverse Influences. These include modern National Park Service developments, the old Capitol Reef Lodge, paved roads, and utility lines.

3. Administrative Constraints. Constraints include non-transferable water rights and National Register nomination of the historic district and archeological sites.

Park personnel had determined through personal interviews with former Fruita residents and by examining old photographs that the contemporary, extensive orchards originated in the 1940s. Previous estimates had calculated that there had been about 1,500 trees in the desired 1930s timeframe. The proposal to reduce the amount of trees from the 2,563 in 1978 to only 1,500 trees was extremely unpopular. The goal then was to interpret the 1930s while maintaining the existing number of trees. From this point on, the interpretive path diverges, so as to please both management and public needs. Managers, for instance, wanted to reduce the number of trees to reduce orchard-related maintenance. This position was altered to keep the tree count the same while gradually replacing multiple-fruit orchards with single-variety ones. Local desires for fruit quality and quantity would also be met through this option. The problem was that this management tack would be incongruent with attempts to restore the area to its 1930s condition. To balance out these contradictions Superintendent Hambly proposed the following plan in which the Fruita area would be divided into three zones.

1. The Development Subzone would contain National Park Service developments such as the headquarters facilities and park housing.

2. The Historic Farming Subzone would include the Gifford farm, the Brimhall place and the Fruita school. The Gifford farm was to be a living history exhibit and the Fruita school and orchard would also interpret historic Fruita.

3. The Greenbelt Subzone would consist of eight orchards interspersed with pastures. The orchards would be gradually restructured to single-variety.

This Historic Agricultural Area Management Plan is important for two reasons. It was created in the midst of controversy, which forced park managers to realize how important Fruita was to the local communities. This document also provides the first real management policies for dealing with the Fruita Historic Area. This plan only offered general guidelines as opposed to detailed, day-to-day policies. It also never really answered the troubling question of how to interpret Fruita as if it were in the 1930s, while at the same time increasingly moving toward modern orchard practices. Yet, the document at least acknowledged the need to preserve Fruita as an historic agricultural landscape.

Cultural Resources Management Plan - June 1984

Prepared by George E. Davidson, Chief of Interpretation

Superintendent - Derek O. Hambly

Approved by acting Regional Director Jack W. Neckels

Document found in:

1. Capitol Reef Superintendent's Files.

2. Administrative History Notes and Files.

This is the first comprehensive document detailing the cultural resource themes, management policies and constraints, museum and archival collections, history of archeological research, list of historic structures, and cultural resource management problems and selected alternatives.

The cultural resource themes identified were:

1. prehistoric people;

2. closing of the frontier (1880s exploration and settlement);

3. cultural and religious minorities (1895-1937 Fruita); and

4. the Civilian Conservation Corps.

Management policies and constraints include all the pertinent interpretations and compliance regulations of current National Park Service policy and historic preservation acts. The museum and archival descriptions give a good idea of the state of the park collections in the mid-1980s. The cultural resource problem assessments and alternatives concluded that the following steps were to be taken.

1. An archeological survey was needed for the entire park. Most urgent was a survey of the southwest side of the park, because of the threat at that time from mineral exploration. A complete photographic survey of rock art within Capitol Reef National Park was also recommended as soon as possible.

2. Professionally engineered maintenance plans were needed for the various historic structures in the Fruita area, as was professional guidance on managing the park museum collections.

3. A comprehensive oral history program would be instituted so as to gain more information about Fruita's history.

4. The park staff was to prepare a Historic Scene Enhancement Plan so as deal with the disharmony between modern, National Park Service developments and historic Fruita.

5. A proposal to write an administrative history was included but not approved by Acting Regional Director Neckels.

As the first and only cultural resource plan approved by the regional office, this is a valuable document for all park managers. While many of the details are either outdated or difficult to follow, the numerous controlling policies on cultural resources should be known by present and future managers. It is also interesting to compare the status of cultural resource management in 1984 with the cultural landscape reports and annual interpretive plans of the early 1990s.

Orchard Management Plan - June 1988

Prepared by Chief Ranger Noel Poe

Superintendent - Martin C. Ott

Document found in:

1. Document 158-D-42, Technical Information Center, Denver.

2. Capitol Reef Superintendent's Files.

3. Administrative History Notes and Files.

The 1988 orchard management plan was a basic update of the 1979 Historic Agricultural Area Management Plan, although it was more specifically concerned with the fruit trees as opposed to the entire historic landscape. This new plan considered a potential reduction in orchard budget and personnel and greater flexibility in satisfying both fruit harvesters and park management.

The 1988 orchard plan would be fundamentally guided by the desire to preserve the Fruita area as a historic cultural district while at the same time providing fruit in as prudent a manner as possible. To accomplish these goals, the following guidelines were issued.

1. The 1930s landscape would be approximated by maintaining the same percentages of the Fruita landscape in orchard and fields, as opposed to maintaining the same tree count. For example, so long as the percentage of trees to pasture was kept at 60 percent orchards and 40 percent fields, that would be in keeping with historic photographic analysis of 1930s Fruita.

2. The optimum number of trees should continue to be 2,500.. Single variety, or block, orchards would be planted for the majority of new orchards. No trees would be taken out unless they are no longer producing. To counter this modern look, there would be at least one, and potentially three historic, multiple-fruit orchards.

Other guidelines issued concerned pruning, irrigation and the price and methods of "U-Pick" fruit, pest management, cover crops, and orchard names.

This is a usable document for park managers because it provides detailed structure while at the same time giving a certain amount of flexibility to orchard management.

Capitol Reef National Park: A Historic Resource Study - June 1992

Prepared by Patrick W. O'Bannon, John Milner Associates, Inc., Philadelphia

Document found in:

1. Capitol Reef Superintendent's Files.

2. Administrative History Notes and Files.

3. Cultural Resources Management Files.

4. Capitol Reef Visitor Center Library.

This is a contracted historic survey of Capitol Reef National Park. It includes narrative and inventory forms for historic buildings and structures throughout the park. While the historic narrative and inventory forms were the most thorough and detailed in the park's history, there were numerous criticisms to these documents by Capitol Reef staff. Some of these objections pointed to mistakes on the inventory forms and complained that O'Bannon did not spend enough time at Capitol Reef. The most important objection, however, was that O'Bannon did not consider the Fruita landscape eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places. In the researcher's judgment, the National Park Service's removal of buildings and Mission 66 developments had destroyed the historical integrity of the landscape. [22]

Regardless of these objections, O'Bannon's historic resource survey is the first researched history of Capitol Reef National Park. This well-written narrative does an excellent job of summarizing the area's prehistory, the history of Fruita and Pleasant Creek, and of grazing, mining, and National Park Service developments at Capitol Reef from 1937 to the early 1990s. The detailed descriptions of the early homesteads at Fruita have been particularly valuable references in the compilation of the Cultural Landscape Report and this administrative history. The footnotes provide additional sources of information, and there is also an excellent bibliography.

This narrative history, along with the cultural landscape report listed below and this administrative history, should provide present and future managers valuable sources of information regarding the cultural resources at Capitol Reef National Park.

Capitol Reef National Park: Survey Report - June 1992

Prepared by Patrick W. O'Bannon, John Milner Associates, Inc., Philadelphia

Document found in:

1. Capitol Reef Superintendent's Files.

2. Administrative History Notes and Files.

3. Resource Management Files.

This survey report contains the inventory forms for 57 identified historic resources within Capitol Reef National Park. O'Bannon concluded that of these 57 resources, 22 appeared eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places. These 22 were placed within the following historic contexts:

1. early exploration 1870-1885;

2. Mormon settlement and agriculture 1880-1937;

3. grazing 1880-1941;

4. mining 1880-1941; and

5. National Park Service development, 1937-1941. [23]

This survey has a well-written summary of the reasons for its findings, and includes tables listing the contributing or non-contributing status of each of the 57 identified resources.

While the conclusion that Fruita had lost its historic integrity has since been overturned, the individual survey forms should prove a valuable source not only for a multiple property nomination for the park but for added information on historic resources outside the Fruita area. It should be noted, however, that some of the inventoried resources have sketchy, occasionally inaccurate histories. Once the final multiple property nomination is written, that document will supersede much of O'Bannon's work.

Cultural Landscape Assessment: Fruita Rural Historic District - September 1992

Prepared by Cathy Gilbert, Historical Landscape Architect, Pacific West Region, and Kathleen L. McKoy, Historian, Intermountain (formerly Rocky Mountain) Region

Document found in:

1. Document 158-D-51, Technical Information Center, Denver.

2. Capitol Reef Superintendent's Files.

3. Administrative History Notes and Files.

4. Capitol Reef Visitor Center Library.

5. Resource Management Files.

The purpose of this document was to evaluate Fruita as an integrated system rather than as a collection of individual structures, as had been the case in the O'Bannon study. The author concluded that, while some aspects of the historic landscape had changed, "the large-scale patterns and relationships have a strong degree of integrity and contribute to the historic character, feeling, and association of the district as a whole." [24] They therefore recommended that Fruita be nominated to the National Historic Register of Historic Places as the "Fruita Rural Historic District." After more than 50 years of struggle over what to do with Fruita, a workable policy decision had finally been reached.

This cultural landscape assessment includes photocopied historic photographs, excellent maps and sketches, and a narrative describing the significant contributing features to and contexts of this rural historic district. On page 44, there is a summary table of the contributing and non-contributing resources within the Fruita district. The last page contains a detailed fold-out map, which outlines the historic district and the locations of contributing structures.

Because of its brevity (less than 50 pages), readability, extremely useful information, and insightful policy recommendations, this document should be read by all park personnel -- especially those in the resource management, interpretation, and visitor protection divisions.

Cultural Landscape Report: Fruita Rural Historic District - Draft submitted July 1993, In Press 1998

Prepared by Cathy Gilbert and Kathleen McKoy

Document found in:

1. Capitol Reef Superintendent's Files.

2. Administrative History Notes and Files.

3. Resource Management Files.

This document is a more detailed supplement to the cultural landscape assessment. The final, approved document will provide management with an excellent narrative history of Fruita, descriptions of existing conditions and recommendations for current care and future studies concerning the Fruita Rural Historic District.

This document has seven sections.

1. Introduction. Gives a brief historic overview, describes the purpose of the report and states the authors' methodology and scope.

2. Existing Conditions. Details the boundaries, context and description of the historic district as of 1993.

3. Landscape History. A thorough narrative history of the Fruita region from prehistoric occupation through Mormon settlement and agricultural practices, to the impact of National Park Service developments. The research for this section includes primary documents never cited before. The endnotes contain valuable sources for future reference.

4. Analysis and Evaluation. A specific examination of contexts used to evaluate the significance of the Fruita district. It includes an extremely valuable summary of cultural traditions at Fruita, [25] and the most specific information for each orchard ever assembled in one document. There is a description of each contributing structure.

5. Recommendations. A valuable, policy-oriented section. This section stipulates exactly how the Fruita Rural Historic District should be managed. The recommendations fall into five categories: management concepts, vegetation, circulation, structures and small-scale features.

6. Appendices. Statement of significance, summary of management documents, pertinent Wayne County Tax Assessor records and land use summary, Fruita deed histories, list of classified structures, and a 1985 list of cultivated and ornamental trees and shrubs in Fruita.

7. Photographs and maps.

This is an organized, well-written document that finally gives park managers a workable framework from which to manage the entire Fruita area. The final publication should be extremely useful for all present and future park managers. This report should also be recommended reading for all park employees. After all, the idea is to regard the entire Fruita district as a cohesive, interrelated historic zone. All day-to-day activity and long range planning will be coordinated by managers, but its significance should be appreciated by all personnel.

INTERPRETATION

Planning documents specifically related to the Division of Interpretation are rare. Besides the annual statements of interpretation, which have traditionally been only brief overviews of themes and objectives, there is only one interpretive prospectus, completed in 1964, and a brief interpretive plan prepared in 1978. These two documents will be discussed below, along with the 1994 Capitol Reef Annual Statement for Interpretation, which is far more detailed. For information on the status of interpretation at Capitol Reef National Park for the years not covered, please see the park master plans, general management plans, and statements for management, most of which carry some information on the current status and objectives of interpretation within the monument or park. The 1992 Task Directive for a general management plan also calls for an appended interpretive prospectus to be completed by 1996. This prospectus was initiated in 1996, and is still in progress as of 1998.

Interpretive Prospectus - 1964

Superintendent - William T. Krueger

Document found in:

1. Box 3, Folder 2, Capitol Reef Archives.

2. Administrative History Notes and Files.

The copy in the park archives is a draft copy. A final draft has not been located. Nevertheless, this is an important document since it describes the status and objectives of interpretation at Capitol Reef National Monument at the close of Mission 66 developments.

This draft document is 20 pages long and includes:

1. an analysis of visitor types and use patterns;

2. the interpretive themes (geology, biology, archeology and history);

3. the proposed function of visitor facilities such as roads, trails and interpretive buildings and shelters;

4. an outline of the interpretive program, including needed interpretive displays at the visitor center and a detailed list of proposed wayside exhibits, many of which were to have visitor counters;

5. bibliography (only nine sources pertaining to Capitol Reef); and

6. "Significant Resources and Values," a five-page narrative describing the unique significance of Capitol Reef to the visitor and the plan to use Scenic Drive and monument trails to attract visitors to turn off the main highway.

This is only a draft document, poorly organized and with much outdated information. It is really useful only for documenting the lack of interpretation at Capitol Reef in the mid-1960s.

Interpretive Plan - 1978

Superintendent - William F. Wallace

Document found in Document 158-D-11, TIC

This document has not been examined by the author, but a short summary is found in the notes of Kathy McKoy, historian for the Intermountain Region. Her notes indicate that this plan was relatively brief and contained little if any new information. According to McKoy, the exhibit themes listed included Fremont Indians, Mormon settlement, geology, and the role of water in a desert environment. Also mentioned were wayside exhibits such as the Fruita schoolhouse, pioneer orchards, mailbox trees, and Scenic Drive.

Annual Statement For Interpretation - Fiscal Year 1994

Prepared by Robert Mack, Assistant Chief Ranger, Interpretation

Superintendent - Charles V. Lundy

Document found in:

1. Capitol Reef Superintendent's Files.

2. Administrative History Notes and Files.

Unlike many previous statements for interpretation, this one is a lengthy, detailed description of the current status, problems, and future objectives of Capitol Reef National Park's Division of Interpretation.

Included in this 1994 Annual Statement for Interpretation are:

1. updated interpretive themes and objectives;

2. bibliography of basic information and current status of planning documents;

3. descriptive inventory of interpretive facilities throughout the park;

4. detailed information on the current operations, visitor use statistics, individual service plans for each of the interpretive programs offered in the park, and a review of the past year's interpretive program (including visitor participation and the instituting of a new outdoor education/outreach program);

5. future plans, such as expansion of the outdoor education program to include more schools and local tourism operations, Harvest Homecoming craft demonstration, and the creation of a Junior Ranger program and park newspaper.

Because of its detailed descriptions of the interpretive program at Capitol Reef National Park, and the surprising lack of other related planning documents, this 1994 Annual Statement of Interpretation is a valuable resource document.

CONCLUSIONS

This has only been a brief summary of the more important planning documents pertaining to Capitol Reef National Monument and National Park. The purpose of this section is to give park managers a useable finding aid when these documents need to be consulted. If a document is not found in the above list, please check the bibliography of the appropriate special resource issue section. The author also recommends that this list be periodically updated.

As of this writing, Capitol Reef and regional personnel are in the midst of preparing a new series of planning documents to be finished by 1996. In this process, and in all future planning discussions, these past documents should be consulted. Park managers should understand why past planning attempts have either succeeded, failed or become lost in obscurity. Future management decisions must not be made in a historical vacuum.

FOOTNOTES

¹ All plans written by National Park Service personnel unless otherwise noted.

² See Chapter 8 for details of the early efforts to establish a national monument in the area.

³ As of 1943, Charles Kelly received rent-free use of the Chesnut/Holt house and its orchard in exchange for minimal custodial duties. He was not a full-time employee until 1950, when the monument was officially activated and given its own budget.

⁴ 1949 Development Outline, 4

⁵ Mission 66 Prospectus, April 1956, 2.

⁶ Ibid., 3.

⁷ Ibid., 12.

⁸ Land, water rights, and boundary adjustments information are provided on page 19.

⁹ Task Directive - General Management Plan, 1979, 2.

¹⁰ See Chapter 16 for an analysis of this transportation study.

¹¹ 1973 Master Plan, 20.

¹² 1973 Capitol Reef Master Plan, 35.

¹³ See Chapter 16 for details on utility corridors.

¹⁴ See Chapter 12 for more details on this boundary proposal.

¹⁵ 1992 Task Directive, i.

¹⁶ Description of Wilderness Proposal for Capitol Reef National Monument, September 1967, 5.

¹⁷ The complete transcript of the public hearing on August 1974 in Loa and Salt Lake City is found in Document 158-D-52, TIC.

¹⁸ Wilderness Recommendation, November 1974, 60-61; also see the negative response from the State Planning Coordinator on pages 62-64.

¹⁹ According to Richard Young, Rocky Mountain Region Chief of Land Resources, the 1984 Land Protection Plan was updated with no significant changes in January 1986 and June 1988; see Document 158-D-71, TIC.

²⁰ 1978 Backcountry Plan, II-9.7.

²¹ For a more in-depth history of Fruita management policies, see Chapter 14.

²² See Chapter 14 for more details on this issue.

²³ The 1941 date was the break-off since, to be eligible for the NHR, the resource should be 50 years old. The survey was completed in 1991.

²⁴ Cultural Landscape Assessment, September 1992, Introduction.

²⁵ Also see David R. M. White, "By Their Fruits Ye Shall Know Them: An Ethnographic Evaluation of Orchard Resources At the Fruita Rural Historic District, Capitol Reef National Park, Utah," report prepared for National Park Service, Rocky Mountain Region, 1993.