Chapter One: "They have grown up like Topsy" [1]
Administration of American Parks Before 1933

Today, the 14,627 people of the National Park Service are responsible for the administration of 334 units that comprise the National Park System. [2] This is a far cry from the day some fifty-five years ago,when eleven people manned the central office in Washington D.C., and the National Park System consisted of fifteen national parks and twenty national monuments. [3]

The development of the National Park Service and the system it administers was evolutionary. This study examines one phase in this process--the 1930s. In that decade--surely one of the most significant and creative in the service's history--both the organization and the system it administers were transformed.

Any history of the National Park Service does not begin with the establishment of the bureau. Rather, it must begin some forty-five years earlier, on March 1, 1872. On that day, President Ulysses S. Grant signed an act that set aside a "tract of land . . . near the head-waters of the Yellowstone River . . . as a public park or pleasuring-Ground for the benefit and enjoyment of the people." [4]

The creation of Yellowstone National Park was the world's first attempt to preserve a large wilderness area as a national park. The national park idea, as expressed first there, quite rightly may be considered to be one of America's unique contributions to world civilization. [5] Neither the president nor Congress realized what they had done, however, would be emulated all over the world. Nor did the Yellowstone National Park enabling act nor the separate acts that established additional national parks that followed represent a conscious effort to create a national park system. [6]

Between 1872 and August 16, 1916, when a bureau to administer them was finally established, Congress set aside fourteen additional national parks: Mackinac Island (March 3, 1875), Sequoia (September 25, 1890), Yosemite (October 1, 1890), General Grant (October 1, 1890), Mount Rainier (March 22, 1899), Crater Lake (May 22, 1902), Wind Cave (January 9, 1903), Sullys Hill (April 27, 1904), Platt (June 29, 1906), Mesa Verde (June 29, 1905), Glacier (May 11, 1910), Rocky Mountain (January 26, 1913), Hawaii (August 1, 1916), and Lassen Volcanic (August 9, 1916). [7]

In the meantime, a growing number of people, scholars and non-scholars alike, were becoming increasingly concerned over the destruction of the nation's antiquities, and loss, therefore, of a considerable body of knowledge about its past. Of particular concern was the damage inflicted by the "pothunters" on the prehistoric cliff-dwellings, pueblos, and Spanish missions in the Southwest, although sites elsewhere were certainly not immune. [8] In 1906, following a lengthy, if uncoordinated campaign, Representative John F. Lacey of Iowa secured passage of his "Act For the Preservation of American Antiquities." [9]

The Antiquities Act provided for the creation of a new kind of reservation. Thereafter certain objects of historic, prehistoric, or scientific interest could be declared "national monuments." Avoiding the cumbersome legislative process required for the establishment of national parks, the act authorized the president to set aside such sites on the public lands by proclamation. [10]

Of particular importance to this study, the Antiquities Act did not place administrative responsibility of all national monuments in one agency. Rather, jurisdiction over a particular monument would remain with "the Secretary of the department having jurisdiction over the lands on which said antiquities are located." [11] As a result, both the Agriculture and War departments as well as Interior would administer monuments until 1933, when Executive Order 6166 transferred all to the Department of the Interior. [12]

In 1911 Frank Bond, chief clerk of the General Land Office, ventured that, differences in process of establishment aside, national parks and monuments were as alike as "two peas in a pod." [13] In practice his observation had a certain validity. Three of the monuments administered by the Interior Department later formed nuclei of national parks. [14] Additionally, several national monuments administered by the Department of Agriculture--Lassen Peak and Cinder Cone, Grand Canyon, and Mount Olympus--became national parks. [15]

Yet, as difficult as it was sometimes to perceive, there was a difference between national parks and national monuments. Through the period under discussion, at least, the difference would be reflected in the administration of the two areas. Generally, the monuments were smaller, although this distinction disappeared when one considered Katmai and Glacier Bay national monuments, which were 2,792,137 and 2,803,137 acres respectively. [16] Although obviously a most subjective thing, the national parks were generally thought to have met some higher standards than did the national monuments--were areas of outstanding scenic grandeur. [17]

Administratively, national monuments were areas deemed to be worthy of preservation, and were set aside as a means of protection from encroachment. A national park, on the other hand, was an area that would be developed to become a "convenient resort for people to enjoy." [18]

On September 24, 1906, President Theodore Roosevelt issued a proclamation setting aside Devils Tower, a 650-foot-high volcanic shaft on the Wyoming plains, as the first national monument. [19] Between that date and August 25, 1916, Presidents Roosevelt, William H. Taft, and Woodrow Wilson set aside nineteen more sites to be administered by the Department of the Interior.

Seven of those sites were of historical or prehistorical significance: El Morro (December 8, 1906), Montezuma Castle (December 8, 1906), Chaco Canyon (March 11, 1907), Tumacacori (September 15, 1908), Navajo (March 20, 1909), Gran Quivera (November 1, 1909), and Sitka (March 23, 1910). [20]

Twelve others, like Devils Tower, were of scientific significance. With the exception of Sieur de Monts (July 8, 1916) in Maine, they were in the West: Petrified Forest (December 18, 1906), Muir Woods (January 9, 1908), Natural Bridges (April 16, 1908), Lewis and Clark Cavern (May 11, 1908), Mukuntuweap (July 31, 1909), Shoshone Cavern (September 21, 1909), Rainbow Bridge (May 30, 1910), Colorado (May 24, 1911), Papago Saguaro (January 31, 1914), Dinosaur (October 4, 1915), and Capulin Mountain (August 9, 1916). [21]

The twelve national parks and thirteen national monuments that existed before 1910 had, in the words of Secretary of the Interior Walter L. Fisher, "grown up like topsy." [22] Congress had set aside certain areas, and had provided meager funds for their administration. It had not, however, provided for any central administrative machinery, other than assigning that function to the Secretary of the Interior.

The Department of the Interior displayed little more interest in the parks than did Congress. Before 1910, no official or division in Interior was anything more than nominally responsible for the national parks. What little attention was given then came from whomever had extra time, or the inclination to do so. [23]

This meant that there existed, into the second decade of the century, essentially no central administration for the national parks. Nor had there been any effort to spell out a general national administrative policy for the parks before 1915, when Mark Daniels so attempted. [24]

Although the Secretary of the Interior was responsible for the administration of the parks, any actual control existed on paper only. Each of the twelve national parks was a separate administrative unit, run as well, or as poorly, as the politically-appointed superintendent did so. [25] Congress made no general appropriation for the national parks; money was made available to each separate park. The amount received varied, generally, in a direct ratio to the superintendent's political influence. [26] As late as 1916, rangers were appointed by the individual parks, not the department, and could not be transferred from park to park. [27] It was no easier to transfer equipment between parks, nor were approaches to common problems often shared. [28]

In his 1914 testimony on a bill to create a National Park Service, Secretary of the Interior Adolph C. Miller stated that the situation "is not so serious, but it is very bad." [29] Miller was an optimist. Physical developments in the national parks, particularly with respect to sanitation facilities, were hopelessly inadequate for the growing number of park visitors. [30] Mount Rainier, Crater Lake, Mesa Verde, and Glacier national parks received little more than custodial care. [31] The civilian administrators had early proven themselves incapable in Yellowstone, Sequoia, General Grant, and Yosemite, and had been replaced by the Army. [32] Although the army officers performed a creditable job, the arrangement in Yellowstone, at least, resulted in a most confusing administration at the park level:

All appropriations for improvements were expended by an office of the Engineer Corps who was completely independent of the Interior Department or the park superintendent. The management and protection was in the hands of an army officer appointed by the Secretary of War . . . . [33]

Administratively, the national monuments under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior were separate from the national parks. From the passage of the Antiquities Act until the creation of the National Park Service, the General Land Office was responsible for the administration of the national monuments. [34]

Having a clearly defined responsibility in this case did not mean, however, more efficient administration. Congress steadfastly refused to appropriate even the modest sum of $5,000 requested for preservation, administration, and protection of all units. [35] When an appropriation was finally made in 1916, it was only $3,500. [36]

Because no appropriation was forthcoming it was not possible to provide on-site custodial care. The person charged with immediate supervision of Montezuma Castle, Petrified Forest, Tumacacori, and Navajo national monuments, for example, was Grutz W. Helm, whose office was in Los Angeles. [37]

The story that emerges from the records is one of decay, spoliation, and vandalism of the national monuments. It is little wonder that the commissioner requested in 1913 that responsibility for the national monuments be transferred from his bureau back to the department. [38]

In many respects, Tumacacori National Monument was a special case, because the Forest Service actually administered the site at the local level, while ultimate jurisdiction remained in the Department of the Interior. This somewhat complicated matters. The problems of protection there, however, were illustrative of those that existed elsewhere.

While responsible for the area, the Forest Service made no improvements, and the only direct supervision came when forest rangers happened to visit the site in the course of other duties, something that did not happen often. By August 1913, Forest Service personnel indicated that "Tumacacori Mission . . . is suffering misuse and is in a very dilapidated condition." [39] Recognizing that the estimated $5,000 needed to prevent further deterioration would not be available, R.T. Galloway, acting Secretary of Agriculture, requested that the Interior Department provide $100 to enclose a stock-proof fence. [40]

The fence was constructed, but only after the money was transferred from the department to the bureau, then to the Chief of the Los Angeles Land Office Field Division, who, in turn authorized Robert Selkiak, forest supervisor in Tucson, to construct the fence. [41] Selkiak then arranged for construction.

The problems arising from the lack of a central administrative organization did not go unnoticed by the friends of the national parks. As early as 1908, a small group of enthusiasts, led by Horace J. McFarland, president of the American Civic Association, began to lobby for the creation of a separate bureau to administer the parks. [42] Between that date and 1916, some sixteen bills that proposed a new bureau to administer the parks were introduced in Congress. [43]

Within the Interior Department, too, the first steps were taken to centralize administration of the national parks. In 1910 the Secretary of the Interior came forward with a proposal for a park bureau and in 1911, a conference at Yellowstone Park represented the first formal effort at cooperation at the park level. [44]

In the absence of legislation establishing a park bureau, successive Secretaries of the Interior--Walter L. Fisher and Franklin K. Lane--tried to place park administration on a more coherent basis. By the end of 1910, general responsibility over the parks had been assigned to W. B. Acker, an assistant attorney in the secretary's office. [45]

Acker was also responsible for the Bureau of Education, eleemosynary (charitable) institutions in the District of Columbia, territories of Hawaii and Alaska, and the department's investigative staff. [46] Moreover, he had little money to expend, and a small staff at his disposal. He was, however, devoted to the national parks, and his efforts on their behalf represented the first, halting steps toward a centralized administration.

In 1913 Secretary Lane upgraded park supervision and coordination to the assistant secretarial level and appointed Adolph C. Miller, chairman of the Department of Economics at Berkeley, to fill the position. [47]

Miller received instructions to solve the problem of park administration. The next year, he assigned direct administrative responsibility to a General Superintendent and Landscape Engineer of the National Parks, with offices in San Francisco. [48] Mark Daniels, a landscape engineer, filled the position on a part-time basis while continuing in his private practice. When Daniels resigned before the end of the year, Robert C. Marshall of the U.S. Geological Survey became the first full-time administrator of the national parks. Not only was Marshall's position a full-time one, but he also had his office in Washington, D.C. [49]

The appointment of a full-time general superintendent of the national parks with at least a small staff to assist him would prove to be a significant step toward establishing a unitary and coherent administration of the national parks. [50] The most important step taken by the Interior Department in that regard, however, was the hiring of Stephen T. Mather and Horace M. Albright.

Albright arrived first--as a clerk in the office of Assistant Secretary Miller on May 31, 1913. [51] The twenty-five-year-old Albright had already proven himself an able administrator when he was directed to keep Mather, who replaced Miller as assistant secretary in January 1915, "out of trouble." [52]

The quietly efficient and tough-minded Albright perfectly complemented the energetic, extroverted, if sometimes erratic, Stephen Mather. [53] They quickly established a working relationship based on mutual trust and respect that is rare in any organization. Neither expected to remain in government service for more than a year. [54] Fortunately they did not leave as they had anticipated. The subsequent history of the national parks and the National Park Service is inextricably bound up with the careers of these two remarkable men.

Stephen Mather was a self-made millionaire, whose success in the private sector rested as much on his publicity skills as it did on organization ability. It is small wonder, then, that his first inclination as Assistant Secretary of the Interior was to launch a drive to give the national parks greater visibility. Directed by a former journalist, Robert Sterling Yard, the "educational campaign was a smashing success." [55] Not only did park visitation increase dramatically that first year, but the resulting publicity played no little role in the successful effort to create a separate national park bureau. [56]

The decade-long effort to secure passage of a bill creating a parks bureau in the Department of the Interior had become bogged down by congressional indifference and a bitter conflict within the ranks of the conservationists. By the summer of 1916, however, those who championed the creation of a park bureau emerged victorious, and on August 25, President Woodrow Wilson signed "An Act to establish a National Park Service, and for other purposes." [57]

The act provided for the creation of a National Park Service that would

promote and regulate the use of the Federal areas known as national parks, monuments, and reservations hereinafter specified by such means and measures as conform to the fundamental purpose of the said parks, monuments, and reservations, which purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.

As is so often the case, however, the act did not address a number of questions raised in the debates over it. Of particular importance here, it did not, as many of its supporters hoped it would, bring administration of all federal parks and monuments together in a single agency. That step would not be taken for nearly seventeen years.

The act provided for appointment of a director, whose annual salary would be $4,500, an assistant director, chief clerk, draftsman, messenger, and "such other employees as the Secretary of the Interior shall deem necessary . . . ." Because no money for the new bureau was provided until April 17, 1917, the new organization could not be formed until that time, and the interim organization under Robert Marshall continued to function. [58]

Mather had originally intended that Marshall would be the first director of the new service. He had begun to lose confidence in Marshall's administrative ability, however, and at the end of the year, Marshall returned to his old position at Geologic Survey. [59]

Instead, Secretary Lane appointed Mather as first director and Albright as assistant director. Frank W. Griffith became chief clerk. Others in the office included Arthur E. Demaray and Isabelle Story from Marshall's staff, Nobel J. Wilt, a messenger, and five clerks. [60]

The year 1917 was not the most propitious time for launching a new federal bureau. On April 6 of that year the nation entered World War I, and money and attention were naturally diverted to the war effort. To make matters worse, Stephen Mather suffered a nervous collapse in January, and was hospitalized. It would be more than a year before he could return to work. [61] That the agency took form, and was able to function as well as it did was a tribute to the ability of the twenty-seven-year-old acting director--Horace M. Albright. [62]

A wide range of policy and administrative issues, beyond the immediate organizational and funding questions, faced Albright and Mather when the latter returned to Washington. Relationships between the new central office and parks that traditionally had been independent had to be established. Both men wanted to put park administration on a "business-like" basis, using the expertise found in other governmental agencies to avoid unnecessary growth. [63] Relationships with these organizations had to be worked out. The military still occupied Yellowstone National Park; as long as they were there, the National Park Service would not have full responsibility for the areas in its charge. In a wartime atmosphere, the very existence of parks was threatened. A clear policy regarding development had to be formulated. The national monuments suffered from years of neglect. These units had to be incorporated fully into the park system, and an effective method of administering them was necessary. Finally, it was clear that some additional parks to round out the system were needed. Yet no clear standards for national parks had heretofore been enunciated.

These issues could not be dealt with in a vacuum. What was needed, despite Mark Daniels' efforts to do so in 1915, [64] was the articulation of a general policy that would provide a sound basis for administration of the National Park System. On May 13, 1918, a letter from Secretary of the Interior Franklin K. Lane to Mather did just that:

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Washington, May 13, 1918.

Dear Mr. Mather: The National Park Service has been established as a bureau of this department just one year. During this period our efforts have been chiefly directed toward the building of an effective organization while engaged in the performance of duties relating to the administration, protection, and improvement of the national parks and monuments, as required by law. This constructive work is now completed. The new Service is fully organized; its personnel has been carefully chosen; it has been conveniently and comfortably situated in the new Interior Department Building; and it has been splendidly equipped for the quick and effective transaction of its business.

For the information of the public an outline of the administrative policy to which the new Service will adhere may now be announced. This policy is based on three broad principles: "First, that the national parks must be maintained in absolutely unimpaired form for the use of future generations as well as those of our own time; second, that they are set apart for the use, observation, health, and pleasure of the people; and third, that the national interest must dictate all decisions affecting public or private enterprise in the parks."

Every activity of the Service is subordinate to the duties imposed upon it to faithfully preserve the parks for posterity in essentially their natural state. The commercial use of these reservations, except as specially authorized by law, or such as may be incidental to the accommodation and entertainment of visitors, will not be permitted under any circumstances.

In all of the national parks except Yellowstone you may permit the grazing of cattle in isolated regions not frequented by visitors, and where no injury to the natural features of the parks may result from such use. The grazing of sheep, however, must not be permitted in any national park.

In leasing lands for the operation of hotels, camps, transportation facilities, or other public service under strict Government control, concessioners should be confined to tracts no larger than absolutely necessary for the purposes of their business enterprises.

You should not permit the leasing of park lands for summer homes. It is conceivable, and even exceedingly probable, that within a few years under a policy of permitting the establishment of summer homes in national parks, these reservations might become so generally settled as to exclude the public from convenient access to their streams, lakes, and other natural features, and thus destroy the very basis upon which this national playground system is being constructed.

You should not permit the cutting of trees except where timber is needed in the construction of buildings or other improvements within the park and can be removed without injury to the forests or disfigurement of the landscape, where the thinning of forests or cutting of vistas will improve the scenic features of the parks, or where their destruction is necessary to eliminate insect infestations or diseases common to forests and shrubs.

In the construction of roads, trails, buildings, and other improvements, particular attention must be devoted always to the harmonizing of these improvements with the landscape. This is a most important item in our program of development and requires the employment of trained engineers who either possess a knowledge of landscape architecture or have a proper appreciation of the esthetic value of park lands. All improvements will be carried out in accordance with a preconceived plan developed with special reference to the preservation of the landscape, and comprehensive plans for future development of the national parks on an adequate scale will be prepared as funds are available for this purpose.

Wherever the Federal Government has exclusive jurisdiction over national parks it is clear that more effective measures for the protection of the parks can be taken. The Federal Government has exclusive jurisdiction over the national parks in the States of Arkansas, Oklahoma, Wyoming, Montana, Washington, and Oregon, and also in the Territories of Hawaii and Alaska. We should urge the cession of exclusive jurisdiction over the parks in the other States, and particularly in California and Colorado.

There are many private holdings in the national parks, and many of these seriously hamper the administration of these reservations. All of them should be eliminated as far as it is practicable to accomplish this purpose in the course of time, either through congressional appropriation or by acceptance of donations of these lands. Isolated tracts in important scenic areas should be given first consideration, of course, in the purchase of private property.

Every opportunity should be afforded the public, wherever possible, to enjoy the national parks in the manner that best satisfies the individual taste. Automobiles and motorcycles will be permitted in all of the national parks; in fact, the parks will be kept accessible by any means practicable.

All outdoor sports which may be maintained consistently with the observation of the safeguards thrown around the national parks by law will be heartily indorsed and aided wherever possible. Mountain climbing, horseback riding, walking, motoring, swimming, boating, and fishing will ever be the favorite sports. Winter sports will be developed in the parks that are accessible throughout the year. Hunting will not be permitted in any national park.

The educational, as well as the recreational, use of the national parks should be encouraged in every practicable way. University and high-school classes in science will find special facilities for their vacation-period studies. Museums containing specimens of wild flowers, shrubs, and trees, and mounted animals, birds, and fish native to the parks and other exhibits of this character will be established as authorized.

Low-priced camps operated by concessioners should be maintained, as well as comfortable and even luxurious hotels wherever the volume of travel warrants the establishment of these classes of accommodations. In each reservation, as funds are available, a system of free camp sites will be cleared, and these grounds will be equipped with adequate water and sanitation facilities.

As concessions in the national parks represent in most instances a large investment, and as the obligation to render service satisfactory to the department at carefully regulated rates is imposed, these enterprises must be given a large measure of protection, and generally speaking, competitive business should not be authorized where a concession is meeting our requirements, which, of course, will as nearly as possible coincide with the needs of the traveling public.

All concessions should yield revenue to the Federal Government, but the development of the revenues of the parks should not impose a burden upon the visitor.

Automobile fees in the parks should be reduced as the volume of motor travel increases.

For assistance in the solution of administrative problems in the parks relating both to their protection and use the scientific bureaus of the Government offer facilities of the highest worth and authority. In the protection of the public health, for instance, the destruction of insect pests in the forests, the care of wild animals, and the propagation and distribution of fish, you should utilize their hearty cooperation to the utmost.

You should utilize to the fullest extent the opportunity afforded by the Railroad Administration in appointing a committee of western railroads to inform the traveling public how to comfortably reach the national parks; you should diligently extend and use the splendid cooperation developed during the last three years among chambers of commerce, tourist bureaus, and automobile highway associations for the purpose of spreading information about our national parks and facilitating their use and enjoyment; you should keep informed of park movements and park progress, municipal, county, and State, both at home and abroad, for the purpose of adapting whenever practicable, the world's best thought to the needs of the national parks. You should encourage all movements looking to outdoor living. In particular, you should maintain close working relationship with the Dominion parks branch of the Canadian department of the interior and assist in the solution of park problems of an international character.

The department is often required for reports on pending legislation proposing the establishment of new national parks or the addition of lands to existing parks. Complete data on such park projects should be obtained by the National Park Service and submitted to the department in tentative form of report to Congress.

In studying new park projects you should seek to find ''scenery of supreme and distinctive quality or some natural feature so extraordinary or unique as to be of national interest and importance." You should seek "distinguished examples of typical forms of world architecture," such, for instance, as the Grand Canyon, as exemplifying the highest accomplishment of stream erosion, and the high, rugged portion of Mount Desert Island as exemplifying the oldest rock forms in America and the luxuriance of deciduous forests.

The national park system as now constituted should not be lowered in standard, dignity, and prestige by the inclusion of areas which express in less than the highest terms the particular class or kind of exhibit which they represent.

It is not necessary that a national park should have a large area. The element of size is of no importance as long as the park is susceptible of effective administration and control.

You should study existing national parks with the idea of improving them by the addition of adjacent areas which will complete their scenic purposes or facilitate administration. The addition of the Teton Mountains to the Yellowstone National Park, for instance, will supply Yellowstone's greatest need, which is an uplift of glacier-bearing peaks; and the addition to the Sequoia National Park of the Sierra summits and slopes to the north and east, as contemplated by pending legislation, will create a reservation unique in the world, because of its combination of gigantic trees, extraordinary canyons, and mountain masses.

In considering projects involving the establishment of new national parks or the extension of existing park areas by delimination of national forests, you should observe what effect such delimination would have on the administration of adjacent forest lands, and wherever practicable, you should engage in an investigation of such park projects jointly with officers of the Forest Service, in order that questions of national park and national forest policy as they affect the lands involved may be thoroughly understood.

Cordially, yours,

MR. STEPHEN T. MATHER,     Director, National Park Service.

FRANKLIN K. LANE, [65]     Secretary.

The principles enunciated were substantially reaffirmed by Secretary of the Interior Hubert Work seven years later, [66] and again in 1932. [67] They remain the foundation of National Park Service administration today.

Stephen Mather served as director of the National Park Service for twelve years, retiring January 12, 1929. [68] His replacement as director was Horace Albright, who for the previous ten years, had served as both superintendent of Yellowstone National Park and Assistant Director of the National Park Service (field). [69]

Few people have left a greater imprint on any organization than Stephen Mather left on the National Park Service. The record of his administration was remarkable. When he became director, the system consisted of fourteen national parks and twenty national monuments, with a total of 10,850 square miles. [70] When he resigned, the system encompassed twenty national parks and thirty-two national monuments with a total area of 15,696 square miles. [71] Just as important, Mather had managed to stave off a series of efforts to establish national parks that he believed to be inferior, and he defeated repeated efforts to exploit those that existed. [72]

He carried on the publicity campaign he had begun as Assistant Secretary of Interior, and in the process stamped the national parks indelibly into the American consciousness. Recognizing that "scenery is a hollow enjoyment to a tourist who sets out in the morning after an indigestible breakfast and fitful sleep on an impossible bed," Mather had made development of park facilities a high priority, and had developed a coherent concessions policy to insure visitor comfort. [73] In 1918, after no little difficulty, Mather managed to secure removal of the troops from Yellowstone. After that date, the National Park Service was solely responsible for the areas under its charge. [74]

The impact of Mather's administration of the National Park Service is greater than the sum total of these accomplishments. With the help of Horace Albright, he built a small, overworked organization into one that came to enjoy a reputation for efficiency, responsiveness, and devotion to its charge unparalleled in the federal government. The men who guided the service until the end of the 1930s, moreover, had served under Stephen Mather. They did not deviate far from the course he had set. Even today, some fifty-three years after he left the service, the ideals and policies enunciated by Stephen Mather serve as a guide for the National Park Service.

No person was better qualified to succeed Mather as director than Horace Albright. He had been deeply involved in the administration of the park system at all levels since 1913, and had, it will be recalled, served as acting director of the service in the first, difficult months after passage of the NPS enabling act. His four years as director during the early days of the Great Depression would confirm his stature as a skillful and far-seeing administrator.

In December 1928, after it had become clear that he would be the new director, Albright wrote to Robert Sterling Yard, stating his conception of his role as director:

My job as I see it, will be to consolidate our gains, finish up the rounding out of the Park system, go rather heavily into the historical park field, and get such legislation as is necessary to guarantee the future of the system on a sound permanent basis where the power and the personality of the Director may no longer have to be the controlling factors in operating the Service. [75]

Albright's administration did not, as he indicated, represent a break with Mather's but was, rather, an extension of it. He fought to maintain the high standards for parks established by Mather, managing to bring in Carlsbad Caverns (May 14, 1930), Isle Royale (March 31, 1931), and Morristown (March 1, 1933), as well as eleven national monuments. [76] As had Mather, Albright successfully opposed inclusion of substandard areas and went a step further when he secured elimination of Sullys Hill, a clearly inferior park. [77]

Mather previously had obtained civil service coverage for park rangers; Albright continued the drive for professionalization of the Service by securing the same for superintendents and national monument custodians in 1931. [78] In the early 1920s, Mather had instituted an education (interpretation) program with offices in Berkeley, California. [79] Albright reorganized and coordinated the work by creating a Branch of Education in the Washington office, headed by Dr. Harold C. Bryant, whose title was Assistant Director in charge of Branch of Education. [80]

Mather was a brilliant, but sometimes erratic administrator, whose administrative style was a highly personal one. Albright took steps, as he said he would, to create a more orderly administration that depended less on personal relationships. Of particular importance in the 1930 reorganization of the service was the delegation of authority among staff officers, something Mather had been unable, or unwilling to do. [81]

None of this is to say that Albright was a mere shadow of his former boss. He was too forceful a man for that. Moreover, if anything, his view of the mission of the National Park Service was broader than Mather's. This was most vividly expressed in Albright's approach to historical areas.

Mather increased appropriations for the national monuments while he was director. [82] In 1923, moreover, he attempted to create a more effective administration of the national monuments in the Southwest by appointing Frank "Boss" Pinkley as Superintendent of the Southwest Monuments. [83]

Yet, his overriding concern was with the scenic areas of the system--he paid scant attention to the historical and prehistorical areas. Albright was a long-time history buff who believed that the National Park Service had a responsibility to preserve significant aspects of the nation s past along with the great scenic areas. [84] With the able help of U.S. Representative Louis Cramton of Michigan, Albright brought the National Park Service much more deeply into the field of historic preservation. [85]

In 1930 Albright proudly reported that the establishment of George Washington Birthplace National Monument marked "the entrance of this service into the field of preservation on a more comprehensive scale." [86] Establishment of George Washington Birthplace National Monument was followed closely by Colonial National Monument on July 3, 1930, and passage of a bill on March 2, 1933, establishing the first national historical park--Morristown. [87] In 1931 Albright gave institutional status to a history program in the Park Service when he hired Dr. Verne E. Chatelain as chief of the division of history in Dr. Harold Bryant's branch of research and education. [88]

Perhaps Albright's greatest contribution to historic preservation in the National Park Service was in his efforts to secure administrative responsibility of the battlefields and other historical areas administered until 1933 by the War Department. Even before the Park Service existed, Albright believed they should be administered as part of the national park system. [89] Beginning in 1917 he attempted to secure passage of a bill that would transfer administration of the areas to the Park Service. [90] Effective August 10, 1933, just one day after Albright retired, Executive Order 6166 transferred all the historical battlefields and monuments administered by the War Department, sixteen national monuments under the jurisdiction of the Agriculture Department, and the parks of the national capital to the Department of the Interior.

As indicated previously, the Antiquities Act of 1906 left administration of federal parks and monuments fragmented between the departments. Between 1906 and 1933, six presidents set aside twenty-one national monuments on land administered by the Agriculture Department.

All twenty-one, which were the responsibility of the Forest Service, were in the western states. Sixteen were judged significant because of their scientific value: Lassen Peak and Cinder Cone (May 16, 1908); Grand Canyon (January 11, 1908); Pinnacles (January 16, 1908); Jewel Cave (February 7, 1908); Wheeler (December 7, 1908); Mount Olympus (March 2, 1909); Oregon Caves (July 12, 1909); Devil's Postpile (July 6, 1911); Lehman Caves (January 24, 1922); Timpanogos Cave (October 14, 1922); Bryce Canyon (June 8, 1923); Chiricahua (April 18, 1924); Lava Beds (November 21, 1925); Holy Cross (May 11, 1929); Sunset Crater (May 26, 1930); and Saguaro (March 1, 1933). [91]

Five more were of historical importance: four of these--Gila Cliff Dwellings (November 16, 1907), Tonto (December 19, 1907), Walnut Canyon (November 30, 1915), and Bandelier (February 11, 1916)--were significant archeological remains in the Southwest. The fifth, Old Kasaan (October 15, 1910), was the ruins of a former Haida Indian village in Alaska. [92]

Five of the areas were transferred to the National Park Service before 1933. Grand Canyon, Lassen Peak and Cinder Cone, and Bryce formed the nuclei of national parks. Pinnacles and Bandelier were transferred for administrative purposes in 1910 and 1932, respectively. [93]

Before 1933 the Forest Service was able to turn aside all efforts to transfer administrative responsibility of the national monuments under its jurisdiction to the National Park Service, and they were a continuing irritant in relations between the two agencies throughout the period. [94] Yet a review of the records indicate that Forest Service officials paid scant attention to the national monuments they administered. In 1916 the minutes of the Service Committee (Washington office staff) included this reference to a report compiled by a Forest Service employee:

We were not giving some of the smaller national monuments, such as the Cliff Dwellers of the Gila Forest, the proper care and supervision to which they were entitled. It was his feeling that we should at least make reasonable efforts to improve the facilities for reaching such places and also to furnish proper shelter and camping facilities for visitors. This, Mr. Potter believes, need not involve a great expenditure of funds, but he felt that trails to these places should be built as soon as possible and such plans made for the comfort of visitors as could be with the funds at our disposal. In this connection, Mr. Potter thought that it would be advisable to have a plan of improvement worked out for each national monument in the Forests with a view to developing them on a systematic basis and thereby increase their value to the recreation side of the National Forest plans. [95]

The Service did not take the advice, however, and did not, apparently develop any standards or regulations governing the monuments beyond those developed jointly by the Secretaries of Agriculture, War, and Interior in 1906. [96] Other than a simple listing, neither the annual reports of the Secretary of Agriculture nor the Forester during the period contain any references to the monuments.

No single office in Washington, D.C., was charged with the responsibility of administering the national monuments. Rather, each monument was administered separately on the local level as part of the larger forest unit in which it was located. [97] No separate appropriations were made for the monuments, and they received only minor part-time supervision. [98] That supervision of the national monuments was not more than a minor undertaking by the Forest Service was indicated in statements regarding Executive Order 6166 in 1933. Transfer of the monuments would not be economical, said R.Y. Stuart, because

with, perhaps the exception of a single employee, transfer of jurisdiction over monuments would not permit any reduction in the administrative requirements or costs of National Forest management. [99]

The Secretary of War, in addition, had jurisdiction over ten national monuments that had been set aside on military reservations. Five of these were military sites--Big Hole Battlefield, Montana (June 23, 1910); Fort Marion, Florida (October 15, 1924); Fort Matanzas, Florida (October 15, 1924); Fort Pulaski, Georgia (October 15, 1924); and Castle Pinckney, South Carolina (October 15, 1924). The rest were of a non-military nature: Cabrillo, California (October 14, 1913); Mound City, Ohio (March 2, 1923); Statue of Liberty, New York (October 15, 1924); Meriwether Lewis, Tennessee (February 6, 1925); and Father Millet Cross, New York (September 5, 1925). It is interesting to note that, of the ten monuments, only two were in the West, one was in the mid-West, and seven were in the East. [100]

Beginning on August 19, 1890, moreover, with the establishment of Chickamauga-Chattanooga National Military Park, the secretary's jurisdiction was extended over what came to be, in effect, a national military park system. [101] By 1933 this system, which was primarily in the East, consisted of four different types of units--eleven national military parks, twelve national battlefield sites, two national parks, and three miscellaneous monuments: [102]

National Military Parks

Chickamauga-Chattanooga (August 19, 1890)
Shiloh (December 27, 1894)
Gettysburg (February 11, 1895)
Vicksburg (February 24, 1899)
Guilford Courthouse (March 2, 1917)
Moores Creek (June 2, 1926)
Petersburg (July 3, 1926)
Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania County Battlefields Memorial (February 19, 1927)
Stones River (March 3, 1927)
Fort Donelson (March 26, 1928)
Kings Mountain (March 3, 1931) 103

National Parks

Abraham Lincoln (April 17, 1916)
Fort McHenry (March 3, 1925) 104

National Battlefield Sites

Antietam (August 30, 1890)
New Orleans (Chalmette) (March 4, 1907)
Kennesaw Mountain (February 8, 1917)
White Plains (May 18, 1926)
Brices Crossroads (February 21, 1929)
Tupelo (February 21, 1929)
Monocacy (March 1, 1929)
Cowpens (March 4, 1929)
Appomattox (June 18, 1930)
Fort Necessity (March 4, 1931) 105

Miscellaneous Memorials

Kill Devil Hill Monument (March 2, 1927)
New Echota Marker (May 28, 1930)
Camp Blount Tablets (June 23, 1930) 106

According to the 1931 revised regulations for all sites under the jurisdiction of the War Department, the Office of the Quartermaster General in Washington had "charge of national military parks and national monuments and records pertaining thereto." [107] Since the previous year, general administrative responsibility for a particular site belonged to the corps commander of the area in which it was located. [108] On the site level, supervision was in the hands of a superintendent who, in the case of military sites, at least, had a military background and was able to demonstrate a passing knowledge of military history. [109]

In practice, however, administration of parks and monuments was much less orderly than it appeared to be on paper. At the Washington level, apparently, one or two part-time clerks in the Quartermaster General's office were assigned to oversee the "non-military function" (parks and monuments) along with their other duties. [110] Actual administrative responsibility was divided between several offices. For a period, the district engineers were assigned responsibility for recommending establishment of national monuments. [111] After 1926 the Adjutant General's office, through the Army War College, recommended the level of memorialization at the various areas. [112] In the case of Chickamauga-Chattanooga, Shiloh, Gettysburg, and Vicksburg, separate commissions, responsible to the Secretary of War, were effective administrators into the 1920s. [113]

From the perspective of the National Park Service, the War Department's administration of its parks and monuments was inadequate. It had not resulted in proper protection of the areas, nor had the War Department made an effort to develop an adequate program for the visiting public. The department had produced no literature to help visitors, and the paid guides that were available generally had little expertise. [114]

The 1931 War Department Regulations for military parks and monuments indicated that the areas were set aside to provide "inspirational value to future generations," and to provide visitors with the opportunity to study the actions that had taken place there. [115] The latter was not interpreted to mean the casual visitor, however. The primary purpose behind establishment of military parks--and this was indicated in legislation, and repeated over and over again by professionals in the department and by Congressional supporters--was to set aside those areas that would serve as outdoor textbooks in strategy and battle tactics for serious students of military science. [116] As such, the battlefields were to be maintained as nearly as possible as they were when the battles were fought. An examination of the available records indicates that while under the jurisdiction of the War Department, the battlefields fulfilled this function.

One final group of parks, memorials, and monuments that would come into the National Park System under Executive Order 6166 was the National Capital Parks system in Washington, D.C. [117] With its origin in the 1790 act establishing the City of Washington, the National Capital Parks would become the oldest part of the system. [118]

The National Capital Parks included such sites as Washington Monument; Lincoln Memorial; Rock Creek Park; George Washington Memorial Parkway; sixty miscellaneous structures, memorials, and monuments scattered around the capital; Curtis-Lee Mansion in Virginia; and Fort Washington in Maryland. [119]

Beginning in 1925, administrative responsibility for the National Capital Parks was lodged in the Office of Public Buildings and Public Parks of the National Capital, whose director was responsible to the president. [120]

The director had other duties. He was responsible for maintaining and caring for all public buildings in the city, including the White House. [121]

With the growth of the city, moreover, he had become a member and disbursing officer for a number of commissions established to facilitate completion of projects: Arlington Memorial Bridge Commission, Rock Creek and Potomac Park Commission, National Park and Planning Commission, Zoning Commission of the District of Columbia, National Memorial Commission, Lincoln Memorial Commission, Ericsson Memorial Commission, and Public Buildings Commission. [122]

From the first decade of the twentieth century, a growing number of the nation's preservationists/conservationists believed that the fragmentation of administration authority over the federal government's parks and monuments was neither economical nor effective in providing the proper protection for the areas set aside. After 1916 many of those individuals, although certainly not all, concluded that administration of the parks and monuments should be unified in the new park bureau. What followed was a seventeen-year-long campaign to unify administration of federal parks and monuments, that when successful in the reorganization of 1933, would transform the National Park Service.