Chapter Four: New Initiatives in the Field of Recreation and Recreational Area Development

Social conditions underwent marked changes in America during the 1920s and early 1930s. Such factors as mass production of automobiles, development, and expansion of the national highway system, shortened hours in the work week, and more days of leisure for the working man, together with a considerable rise in unemployment, greatly increased the demand for multiple-use recreational areas throughout the nation. [1] As early as 1920 Henry S. Graves, Chief Forester of the U.S. Forest Service, described the growing demand for outdoor recreational space by the American people:

Within the last few years there has been a widespread and spontaneous movement for outdoor recreation. Thousands who formerly spent their vacation days abroad or some nearby resort are traveling long distances by rail or motor to visit the mountains, lakes, and forests of our country.

In part this movement is explained by the betterment of roads, the wide ownership of automobiles, the diversion of travel from Europe by the circumstances of the war, the advertising of our recreation opportunities, and by the prevailing prosperity. A deeper cause is the existence of a new appreciation of outdoor recreation, a new impulse to seek the wholesome environment of the hills and forests and to refresh mind and body through the vigors of mountain and camp life. [2]

Accordingly, Graves argued that the formulation of a national recreation policy was necessary. Such a policy was needed to set forth the principal objectives of national recreation, identify the opportunities and needs of recreational development, establish the basic principles underlying the purposes of the various federal reservations, and delineate the functions of each in the implementation of a national recreational program. As part of this policy he urged that the federal government cooperate jointly with the states, counties, municipalities and local quasi-public organizations to establish recreational areas. Included in his recommendations were programs to preserve scenic values along highways and to promote wildlife conservation. [3]

Responding to the increasing demand for recreational development, the National Conference on Outdoor Recreation was organized in 1924 at the request of President Calvin Coolidge. The conference, which met in Washington, D.C., on May 22-24, 1924, drew some 309 delegates from 128 national organizations that were "interested in the promotion and development of one or more kinds of recreation, in the use of which the land, water, forest, plant, scenic or wild life resources of the United States are essential." The primary function of the conference was to assist in the formulation of a national policy which could "coordinate the activities of federal, state, county, municipal, and unofficial agencies in the field of outdoor recreation and to promote the development of the recreational resources of the country and stimulate their use." A secondary function of the conference was the promotion of the conservation and wise administration of the nation's natural resources. [4]

Two years after the conference Congress responded to the growing pressure for more recreational areas by passing the Recreation and Public Purposes Act. This law authorized the Secretary of the Interior to exchange, sell, or lease unreserved non-mineral public lands to the states and their political subdivisions for recreational development. The act permitted states, counties, and municipalities to acquire land for recreational purposes at low cost. [5]

In 1928 the Joint Committee on Recreational Survey of Federal Lands of the American Forestry Association and the National Parks Association published a report entitled Recreation Resources of Federal Lands. The report included a section on the necessity for a national recreation policy and the various land planning elements that were required in the formulation of such a policy:

Recreation as a recognized use of Federal lands has grown under conditions of opportunism and departmental individualism . Its dominating growth factor is economic pressure rather than coordinated planning and development by the departments of the Government. But it is an inescapable fact that recreation as a public use of Federal lands cannot be turned aside. Almost a quarter of our population is turning today to public reservations for outdoor recreation. Federal land is their property. They demand participation in its use to satisfy their recreational wants, and their demands must be met. Sooner or later the Federal Government, as an obligation of its stewardship, must plan and provide in a forward looking way for a clearly defined adjustment of recreation to the other uses of these public reservations.

City planning can make possible adequate playgrounds and parks to meet local needs, and counties and states can provide large parks and forests for transient enjoyment and relaxation out-of-doors, but man cannot replace the wilderness and the remaining wilderness of America, modified as inevitably it has been, is now found only in Federal ownership. It is then the great responsibility of the Federal Government to provide those forms of outdoor life and recreation which it alone can give and which are associated only with the wilderness.

Land planning or the dedication and classification of the land and its resources to highest service is the fundamental basis upon which the development of outdoor recreation as a national institution must rest. Upon the Federal Government, as an obligation of its stewardship, is imposed the duty to plan and provide in a forward looking way for the complete development of the economic and social resources of its vast estate. The era of exploitation has passed. Federal land planning must find its proportionate place in the mosaic of nation planning and in coordination with city and regional land planning if a rapidly expanding population is to permanently enjoy the material and spiritual rewards to which it is entitled and which a country abundantly endowed by nature affords. [6]

During the 1930s the National Park Service responded to the growing demands for recreational opportunities by taking the lead in the specialized fields of national recreational planning and recreational area development. Because of its expertise and experience in park planning, the agency greatly expanded its consultant services and cooperative relationships with the states in recreational land-use planning and development, thereby playing a significant role in the growth of the emerging state park and recreation systems. [7] Furthermore the National Park Service secured enactment of the comprehensive Park, Parkway and Recreation-Area Act of 1936 and initiated four new types of federal parks areas--recreation demonstration areas, national parkways, national seashores, and national recreation areas. [8]

The participation of the National Park Service in the fields of recreational planning and development stemmed in large part from the widened responsibilities assigned to the bureau under the Emergency Conservation Work (ECW) program and other relief programs beginning in 1933. Federal cooperation was extended to the state, county, and metropolitan governments for the development of park and recreation area facilities through the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) and relief funding in April 1933. In that month various bureaus of the Department of the Interior, including the National Park Service, were assigned the responsibility of providing technical, professional design, and planning supervision to work projects of the CCC. The National Park Service was designated to supervise the work of the Corps not only in areas of the National Park System but also in state, county, and municipal park and recreation areas in cooperation with the governing bodies having jurisdiction over those areas. [9]

When the CCC program was commenced in April 1933, the Park Service's Chief Forester, John D. Coffman, was called to Washington from Berkeley to take charge of the program in the National Park System and act as the liaison officer for the various bureaus of the Department of the Interior. Later that year, when it became apparent that the state and local park CCC work supervised by the Park Service would develop into a large program, a separate organization was established with Assistant Director Conrad L. Wirth, Chief of the Branch of Planning, in charge of the State Park ECW program. The new organization was similar to that for the National Park System under Coffman, complete with professional capabilities for the planning and supervision of all phases of work operations. At its peak the State Park ECW organization had administrative oversight of 483 CCC camps employing nearly 100,000 enrollees and consisted of a technical and professional staff numbering several thousand. In January 1936 the general administration of ECW activities in the National Park System was consolidated with the administration of the larger State Park ECW program under the newly-created Branch of Planning and State Cooporation headed by Wirth. [10] The responsibilities of the branch were as follows:

Supervision over the compilation of data covering advance planning for the national park system; coordination with the State park and recreational authorities and State planning commissions and other agencies; supervision over Federal participation in State park and recreational activities, including Emergency Conservation Work; and the conducting of a continuing recreational survey in cooperation with National Resources Committee. [11]

The National Park Service became more deeply involved in the field of national recreational planning and development through its participation on the National Resources Board, created by executive order on June 30, 1934.The board was established "to prepare . . . a program and plan of procedure dealing with the physical, social, governmental, and economic aspects of public policy for the development and use of land, water, and other national resources." [12]

The Service was assigned the responsibility of preparing the portion of the report dealing with "National and State Parks and Related Recreational Activities." The objective of the report was to study the recreation facilities and needs of the national, state, and local park systems and to develop a framework for a broad national recreation program To prepare this section of the National Resources Board report, the Recreation Division of the board was established in the National Park Service with George M. Wright, Chief of the Wildlife Division, as its director and Herbert Evison, Supervisor of State Park Emergency Conservation Work, as assistant director. The substance of the Park Service's portion of the report was prepared by a committee consisting of Wright, Evison, Chief Forester Coffman, and Assistant Director Wirth with the aid of L.H. Weir, a recreation specialist associated with the National Recreation Association. [13]

The Recreation Division of the National Resources Board submitted its final report, entitled "Recreational Use of Land in the United States," on November 1, 1934. The limited time allotted for the preparation of the report did not allow for a detailed study of the underlying facts regarding recreation needs and existing facilities throughout the nation. It did document, however, the fact that the total area of all national, state, and local parks, bird and game refuges, and privately-owned recreation areas amounted to some 21,000,000 acres, a total that the Recreation Division suggested should be multiplied four-fold to meet existing demands. The report also showed that most states and their political subdivisions lacked comprehensive plans for park systems and that the interrelationship of parks, parkways, and recreation areas was even less understood. The report documented the need for a broad and exhaustive nationwide survey of park and recreation needs and facilities and one of its primary recommendations was that such a study be undertaken. [14]

Meanwhile, the National Park Service was proceeding with its efforts to obtain new comprehensive land planning legislation from Congress to continue on a permanent basis the cooperation with the states that it had established through the ECW program. The need for such legislation stemmed from the fact that planning information for selecting and developing additional park and recreation areas to round out park systems was meager on the state and local levels. Few states had formulated long-range plans on the basis of indepth studies of land utilization and recreation needs. An inventory and analysis of existing park, parkways, and recreation facilities at the federal, state, county, municipal, and private levels was necessary to establish and maintain standards that were both adequate and feasible in terms of available resources for the increasing demand of leisure-time needs of the nation. There was a need to bring together the plans or proposals for future development that had been drawn up at those various levels, to analyze and appraise the findings, and to make recommendations. The probability that the submarginal lands being retired for recreational purposes would eventually come under the jurisdiction of the states also served as a strong motivation for drafting new land planning legislation. [15]

On May 28, 1934, Secretary of the Interior Harold L. Ickes submitted the draft of "A bill to aid in providing the people of the United States with adequate facilities for park, parkway, and recreational-area purposes, and to provide for the transfer of certain lands chiefly valuable for such purposes to States and political divisions thereof," to both Rene L. DeRouen, chairman of the House Public Lands Committee, and Robert F. Wagner, chairman of the Senate Committee on Public Lands and Surveys. Along with the drafts, Ickes provided the objectives and rationale behind the proposed legislation:

This legislation proposes to establish a cooperative and helpful relationship between the Federal Government and the park agencies in the several States comparable with relationships already existing in the field of forestry, education, etc. It is offered and urged for passage primarily because it is believed that it will assist greatly in promoting such park and recreational development in them [sic] States as will complement the public service rendered by the national parks and as will ultimately give this country a system of park and recreation areas genuinely national in scope and usefulness.

The bill provides that the Department of the Interior, acting through the National Park Service, shall represent the Federal Government in this proposed new relationship; that the National Park Service shall undertake a comprehensive study of the park, parkway, and recreational-area programs of the United States and of the several States and political subdivisions thereof; that it cooperate with and seek the assistance of Federal officers and employees, private agencies and individuals, State and local officers and employees, in the conduct of such study; and that the services of this Bureau shall be available for cooperation with the States and subdivisions thereof in selection and delimitation of park and recreation areas, and in planning the sound development of such areas.

It provides also for transfer to the States, or to political subdivisions of the States, subject to approval by the President, of lands acquired under the Federal program for purchase of submarginal lands, whenever these lands are found to be chiefly valuable for park or recreation purposes.

Few present-day undertakings possess such social importance to the Nation as a whole as those designed to provide increased opportunity for healthful and profitable employment of leisure time. The park systems of today--national, State, and local--are making a magnificent contribution to solution of the "leisure-time" problem. It is because of the conviction that their social service can be materially increased by cooperation rendered by the Department through the National Park Service, which is so well equipped for the task, that I earnestly request favorable action on this proposed legislation. [16]

The bills (H.R. 9788 and S. 3724) were acted upon favorably subject to several amendments by both the House Committee on Public Lands and the Senate Committee on Public Lands and Surveys. They were introduced late during the second session of the 73d Congress, however, and failed to pass the House. [17] Similar bills (H.R. 6594 and S. 738) were introduced during the first session of the 74th Congress and again both committees acted favorably subject to a few amendments. [18] The National Conference on State Parks, American Planning and Civic Association, Association of State Foresters, and other conservation and land-use planning organizations endorsed the legislation, but it was not brought to a vote in Congress. [19]

The bill was reintroduced during the second session of the 74th Congress, and the House bill (H.R. 10104) was taken up in place of the Senate version. As summarized in Senate Report 1694, H.R. 10104 provided

. . . for a study by the Secretary of the Interior, through the National Park Service, other than on lands under the jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture, of the park, parkway, and recreational-area programs of the United States and of the several States and political subdivisions thereof, and of the lands throughout the United States chiefly valuable as such areas; authorized cooperation and agreements with other Federal agencies and instrumentalities, and States and political subdivisions thereof; and authorized acceptance of donations and gifts from private agencies, instrumentalities, and individuals. The Secretary was further authorized to aid the several States and political subdivisions in planning, establishing, improving, and maintaining such areas therein, such aid to be made available through the National Park Service in cooperation with regional interstate or State agencies. . . . With the approval of the President, the Secretary was authorized to transfer to any State or political subdivision thereof, by lease or patent any right, title, or interest in lands heretofore or hereafter acquired by the United States or any agency or instrumentality thereof if the land was chiefly valuable for park, parkway, or recreational-area use, and in lands donated or devised to be devoted to the purposes of the act as the Secretary might accept on behalf of the United States. Provision was made for submission of the transfer to Congress and for its taking effect after the expiration of 60 calendar days. The consent of Congress was given to the States to enter into compacts or agreements with reference to planning, establishing, developing, improving, and maintaining parks, parkways, and recreational areas, with the condition that a representative of the National Park Service and a representative from each of the several Federal departments and agencies having jurisdiction of lands involved should participate in the negotiations. [20]

As noted above H.R. 10104 contained a provision excluding from the purview of the bill all lands under the jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture. According to Secretary Ickes this provision had been added "because of the determined, and what I believe to have been the unreasoned opposition of the Forest Service." The enactment of the bill, however, could not be secured until such a provision was made. Later Ickes would remark in a letter to President Roosevelt:

It is needless for me to point out to you that the amendment which was adopted to satisfy the opposition of the Forest Service greatly reduces the value of the study and survey which the bill authorizes. It is difficult to appreciate why an agency of the Government should insist on excluding lands under its jurisdiction from legislation which would do nothing more than authorize the National Park Service to make a survey and study of public and private lands for the purpose of determining their value in satisfying the park and recreational needs of the States and communities of the country. Indeed, it is somewhat amazing to me that the Forest Service should feel that its lands should be exempt from a study to be conducted in furtherance of a recognized public interest or treated differently than other lands of the United States in public and private ownership. [21]

The bill was reported favorably by the House Committee on Public Lands, and it passed the House with little opposition. [22] More opposition was voiced in the Senate, however, indicating a measure of hostility to the National Park Service and to the further expansion of the park system. Some western Senators expressed a concern that the establishment of more parks would reduce the availability of grazing lands and that Congress could not often act in time to prevent transfers, however unwise they might be. [23]

On February 11, 1936, however, the Senate Committee on Public Lands and Surveys reported favorably on H.R. 10104 as passed by the House subject to a number of amendments. [24] The amended bill recommended by the committee contained these provisions:

The substitute reported by the committee limits the bill to a study of park, parkway, and recreational-area programs and authorizes no transfers of land. It is further provided that no such study shall be made in any State without the consent and approval of the appropriate State authorities. There is retained the authority of the Secretary to aid the several States and political subdivisions thereof in planning park, parkway, and recreational-area facilities and in cooperating with one another to accomplish those ends; but all authority with respect to establishing, improving, and maintaining such areas, as well as cooperation with regional interstate agencies, is omitted. The provision authorizing the consent of Congress to State compacts is retained but no provision is made for participation by any representative of the United States. [25]

Finally on June 23, 1936, both houses of Congress agreed to the Senate version of the bill. As passed, the act (Public Law No. 770-1/2) read:

An Act to authorize a study of the park, parkway, and recreational-area programs in the United States, and for other purposes, approved June 23, 1936 (49 Stat. 1894).

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, that the Secretary of the Interior (hereinafter referred to as the "Secretary") is authorized and directed to cause the National Park Service to make a comprehensive study, other than on lands under the jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture, of the public park, parkway, and recreational-area programs of the United States, and of the several States and political subdivisions thereof, and of the lands throughout the United States which are or may be chiefly valuable as such areas, but no such study shall be made in any State without the consent and approval of the State officials, boards, or departments having jurisdiction over such lands and park areas. The said study shall be such as, in the judgment of the Secretary, will provide data helpful in developing a plan for coordinated and adequate public park, parkway, and recreational-area facilities for the people of the United States. In making the said study and in accomplishing any of the purposes of this Act, the Secretary is authorized and directed, through the National Park Service, to seek and accept the cooperation and assistance of Federal departments or agencies having jurisdiction of lands belonging to the United States, and may cooperate and make arrangements with and seek and accept the assistance of other Federal agencies and instrumentalities, and of States and political subdivisions thereof and the agencies and instrumentalities of either of them (16 U.S.C. sec. 17k).

Sec. 2. For the purpose of developing coordinated and adequate public park, parkway, and recreational-area facilities for the people of the United States, the Secretary is authorized to aid the several States and political subdivisions thereof in planning such areas therein, and in cooperating with one another to accomplish these ends. Such aid shall be made available through the National Park Service acting in cooperation with such State agencies or agencies of political subdivisions of States as the Secretary deems best. (16 U.S.C. sec. 17L.)

Sec. 3. The consent of Congress is hereby given to any two or more States to negotiate and enter into compacts or agreements with one another with reference to planning, establishing, developing, improving, and maintaining any park, parkway, or recreational area. No such compact or agreement shall be effective until approved by the legislature of the several States which are parties thereto and by the Congress of the United States. (16 U.S.C. sec. 17m.)

Sec. 4. As used in sections 1 and 2 of this Act the term "State" shall be deemed to include Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and the District of Columbia. (16 U.S.C. sec. 17n.) [26]

Reaction to the passage of the act was mixed. Director Cammerer noted in his 1936 annual report that the act "will, it is hoped, be a vital factor in making possible the continuation of the close relationship between the States and the National Park Service already established, regardless of the extent to which the emergency work may be continued." [27] On the other hand, President Roosevelt informed Secretary Ickes on June 25 that, while he had approved H.R. 10104, the bill was "too narrow." He suggested that "the preliminary work be done by the National Park Service but that when this is done, the National Resources Committee receive the preliminary report of the National Park Service and invite the comment and suggestions of the Department of Agriculture and its several agencies." What he wanted was "a completely comprehensive report substantially approved by all Federal agencies having anything to do with recreation." [28]

An outline of the procedure to be followed in conducting the recreational study was published in January 1937. According to the document, the scope of the study was defined as follows:

The study that is conducted within each State should be as complete as possible, in order that adequate recommendations may be made and so that the National Park Service may make a comprehensive report on a Nation-wide basis. Such a study must include an inventory and analysis of existing park, parkway and recreational facilities whether Federal, State, county, municipal, or private and existing plans or proposals for future development; potential areas studies for possible acquisition and development by any of these agencies, an analysis and appraisal of findings; and recommendations. [29]

In terms of organization the National Park Service, through its Branch of Recreational Planning and State Cooperation under Conrad L. Wirth, would administer and coordinate the study on a nationwide basis with the cooperation of park, conservation, and planning agencies of the states, their political subdivisions, civic groups, and local organizations. The staff in the Washington office would work through the regional office staffs whose field supervisors and representatives would coordinate the study with the various state and local agencies.

The study had three major objectives:

1. Secure factual material and available data relative to existing facilities, population, and potential areas

2. Make an analysis and appraisal of the findings

3. Formulate definite plans and recommendations for meeting the present and future recreation needs of the nation. [30]

By June 15, 1937, the National Park Service had developed a policy outlining its relationship with the agencies of the various states and their political subdivisions in carrying out the Park, Parkway, and Recreational-Area Study. A method for creating a study organization in each state was developed, and the scope of the federal government's authority to assist the states in forming interstate compacts was defined. [31]

In his annual report in 1937, Director Cammerer listed the expectations that the agency had for the study. The study was expected to result, he said,

in the preparation and adoption of a comprehensive plan to serve as a guide to the States and be the basis upon which future cooperation will be extended to the States by this Department in the planning, acquisition, and development of park, parkway, and recreational areas. Similar studies also will be made on a regional basis--chiefly in areas near large population centers and frequently covering sections of two or more States--and on a national basis. [32]

In February 1938 Director Cammerer was more explicit in defining his expectations of the study. Commenting on the urgent need for a coordinated study and integrated approach to the country's fast-growing recreational needs, he observed:

In many States there is at present no general recreation policy. Three distinct steps were indicated in the tentative report on park, parkway and recreational area study: first, location of the site and compilation of data pertaining thereto; second, reconnaissance investigation in order to determine areas worthy of consideration; and third, actual investigation and appraisal of potential resources. From the inventory of potential areas will be selected those most suitable for development to meeting existing needs; areas that should be acquired and held for anticipated future needs; and areas that should be conserved because of unusual scenic, historical, or educational value.

No fixed precedents for such studies existed; they must be considered as exploratory. Use of recreational areas is a social activity, and the basis of all social activity is people. Around people--populations--all recreational planning should center. [33]

During fiscal year 1938 arrangements were completed in forty-three states for the conduct of the Park, Parkway, and Recreational-Area Study and tentative final reports were completed for Illinois, Mississippi, Virginia, Nevada, Louisiana, Tennessee, and Pennsylvania. These reports contained preliminary plans and recommendations for meeting the recreational needs of each state. Districts of heavy population had been scrutinized, and their recreational needs analyzed along with sociological profiles and economic studies and such related analyses as transportation facilities. Existing parks and potential areas had been studied as well as the physiography, archeology, climate, history, and social composition of the states. The preliminary studies were reviewed and approved by the National Park Service as the basis for further study and returned to the states with detailed suggestions for their completion. [34]

By June 1939 a total of twenty-three state reports had been completed, and fourteen had been published by the states. Work was being continued toward the preparation of more complete and comprehensive plans for integrated systems of recreational areas and facilities based upon suggestions by the Park Service and state agencies. To correlate the plans of the states and provide the framework for a national recreation plan, the Park Service had commenced the preparation of the first edition of the nationwide report. [35]

Seven state reports were completed during fiscal year 1940 and four more in fiscal year 1941, making a total of thirty-four completed. [36] In 1941 the Park Service published its comprehensive report, entitled A Study of the Park and Recreation Problem in the United States. The report contained a review of the entire problem of recreation and of the status and needs of the national, state, county, and municipal park systems in the United States. The topics covered in the report were: recreation habits and needs of the people; aspects of recreation planning; existing public outdoor recreation facilities on city, county, state, and federal lands; park and recreation area administration, including organization, operations, personnel, budget, and public relations; finance; and legislation at all levels of government. The report included a brief description and a map of each state, giving physical characteristics, indicating the existing conditions of the state and local parks, and recommending additions and development proposals for the systems. [37]

Shortly after the passage of the Park, Parkway, and Recreational-Area Study Act in June 1936, the National Park Service commenced a number of special studies and activities that would serve as adjuncts to the recreational survey. The studies included an examination of the progress of the municipal and county park movement in the United States between 1930 and 1935, research in aviation and other modes of travel in relation to recreational planning, and preliminary work for an extensive survey of world parks. [38]

The "Municipal and County Parks in the United States 1935" was completed by October 1937 and published the following year. The study was conducted in cooperation with the National Recreation Association and consisted of data collected from 1,216 cities and 77 counties in every state. The data was compared with material gathered in the same field in two previous studies made by the National Recreation Association in 1925-26 and 1930 to ascertain the extent to which the state and local park system had expanded during the preceding decade. [39]

By June 1937 a three-volume digest of laws relating to state parks was compiled and made available to park and conservation authorities. As a result of this study, a set of principles was developed for incorporation into new state legislation relating to parks and recreation. Concurrently, a compilation of state laws relating to archeological issues was also prepared. [40]

Over the next three years, a CCC staff lawyer, Roy A. Vetter, expanded the digest to include all laws relating to local parks and recreation activities in every state and the territories of Hawaii and Alaska. The Digest of Laws was published in 1940 to fill the need for a reference source to the state and local laws and ordinances relating to park and recreational development. [41]

As part of the recreational study, the National Park Service began publication of a volume, entitled Yearbook--Park and Recreation Progress, in 1937. The Yearbook was designed to disseminate progressive thought on park and recreation conservation policies and activities and to serve as a clearinghouse of information and discussion on the nationwide park and recreation movement. After its enthusiastic reception by federal, state, local, and civic leaders in the park and recreation movement in 1937, the National Park Service determined to make it a regular annual publication. Following an editorial policy established after publication of the 1937 edition, the annual volumes, which were published through 1941, contained numerous articles by leaders in the park and recreation field outside the federal government on such subjects as legislation, administrative organization, planning, and facility development. The volumes also contained articles and discussions on current thought and trends in park and recreational planning and development by Park Service personnel. [42]

Another significant Park Service publication that served as an adjunct to the recreation study was the three-volume work issued under the principal title Park and Recreation Structures in 1938. Prepared by Albert H. Good, a landscape architect in the Washington office, the publication was printed in three parts: "Administration and Basic Service Facilities," "Recreational and Cultural Facilities," and "Overnight and Organized Camping Facilities." Each volume discussed structural undertakings appropriate to natural park and recreational area environments both in the national and state park systems complete with drawings, plans, and photographs. The volumes were designed to provide data to the many persons involved in ECW and public works projects who had little expertise in constructing park facilities. [43]

One of the outgrowths of the recreational study was the increasing involvement of the Park Service in providing consultation to states interested in establishing interstate compacts to administer recreational areas. Beginning in 1936 some states, in consultation with the National Park Service, undertook consideration of facilitating joint regional action in administering and developing park and parkway areas where mutual interests and benefits were involved. New York and New Jersey had jointly created the Palisades Interstate Park Commission. At the request of Missouri and Illinois, the Park Service began providing professional and technical assistance in the formulation of plans for establishment of an interstate compact to administer and develop Alton Lake and adjacent lands and a proposed interstate parkway leading to the lake. During the same period the Appalachian Trail Conference had referred to the Park Service its proposal for an interstate compact to protect and develop the Appalachian Trail from Maine to Georgia. [44]

Later in 1938 the proposal for a national Mississippi River Parkway from the headwaters of the Mississippi in Itasca State Park, Minnesota, to the Gulf of Mexico was a direct outgrowth of the recreational study. Nine of the ten states bordering the Mississippi River sponsored the proposal and each appointed a parkway planning commission. By 1940 six states had enacted legislation enabling them to cooperate with the federal government in the planning and development of the parkway, and bills authorizing a survey to determine a suitable route for the parkway were pending in both houses of Congress. The Park Service favored the bills in principle, but took the position that definite action should await the formulation of a national plan for parkways. [45]

During fiscal year 1941 the National Park Service initiated recreation studies in New England as well as in the central-southeastern region of the United States which comprised the Tennessee and Cumberland river watersheds. Concerning the growth of regional studies, the Park Service annual report noted:

During the development of individual State plans, it became evident that certain problems could not be met adequately within the limits of State boundaries. Each State plan has to consider existing and proposed facilities in adjoining States within reasonable distance of its borders, as well as nearby residents in adjacent States who may visit its park and recreational areas. Consideration also has to be given to outstanding recreational resources such as mountain areas and bodies of water that are of more than State significance. It is expected that regional studies will enable State and Federal agencies to adjust their individual programs to effect proper coordination. [46]

The Park Service also extended its cooperation with the states to include new services in the late 1930s. Together with the Corps of Engineers, state planning commissions, and conservation districts, it aided in planning "proper recreational use of lakes and pools created by flood-control projects." The Park Service provided consultation services, research, demonstrations, and information exchanges with state and local park systems relative to legislation, finance, personnel, administration, maintenance, area protection, and program organization policy formulation. One of its primary contributions was the promotion of sound, periodically revised master plans for the development and management of state and local park systems. [47]

Interrupted by World War II, the recreation study and related activities were resumed by the National Park Service with the inception in 1956 of the Mission 66 program under the direction of Conrad L. Wirth who had assumed the bureau directorship on December 9, 1951 . The pressures for open spaces, parks, and recreation areas, as well as for the preservation of wilderness areas, became so great that the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Act was passed in 1958, establishing the National Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission. The concept and purpose of this commission was similar to that of the Park, Parkway and Recreational-Area Study, and it published a comprehensive report in 1964, entitled Parks for America: A Survey of Park and Related Resources in the Fifty States and a Preliminary Plan. Two of its principal recommendations were the establishment of a Bureau of Outdoor Recreation as a separate bureau in the Department of the Interior to allot funding for planning, land purchase, and development of state and local park systems and passage of a Land and Water Act, to provide funding for land acquisition and park development at the federal, state, and local park system levels. [48]

Broadening of the National Park System concept to include recreational areas with the addition of the George Washington Memorial Parkway was one of the elements of the reorganization of 1933. During the remainder of the decade the Park Service initiated four new types of Federal park areas as a result of its growing involvement in the field of recreational planning and development. These types included recreational demonstration areas, national parkways, national recreation areas, and national seashores. The planning and development of these new park classifications marked the emergence of the National Park Service as the leading federal agency in the field of recreation.

Among many other features, Title II of the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) of June 16, 1933, authorized the creation of the Federal Emergency Administration of Public Works to administer a program of public works "to conserve the interests of the general public." The projects were to include "conservation and development of natural resources, including control, utilization, and purification of water, prevention of soil or coastal erosion." This established the legislative basis for a program authorizing federal purchases of land considered to be submarginal for agricultural purposes but valuable for recreational utilization. As the recreational demonstration area program would unfold, such lands were to be purchased and developed as parks and later turned over to the states and municipalities for permanent administration.

On July 18, 1934, the Federal Emergency Administration of Public Works allotted and transferred $25,000,000 from the $3,300,000,000 appropriation in the .4th Deficiency Act (Fiscal Year 1933 for NIRA) to the Federal Surplus Relief Corporation to construct a program of public works projects. These projects had been determined by the Land Program Committee of the Federal Emergency Relief Administration (FERA)--a committee established in January 1934 to coordinate a program for the reutilization of submarginal lands. Consisting of John S. Lansill, director, Secretary of the Interior Harold L. Ickes, Secretary of Agriculture Henry A. Wallace, Harry L. Hopkins, FERA administrator, and W. I. Myers, governor of the Farm Credit Administration, this committee worked through coordinators appointed by the cooperating departments and agencies.Conrad L. Wirth was designated the coordinator for the Department of the Interior, and Matt Huppuch of the National Park Service served as his alternate. [49]

As described in a memorandum of July 16, 1934, the Land Program of FERA was to have six objectives. These were:

(1) Conversion of poor land to other and more proper uses;

(2) Prevention of the misuse of land by erosion or other causes, and a restoration of land productivity;

(3) Improvement of economics and social status of families occupying poverty farms;

(4) Improvement of the economic and social status of "industrially stranded population groups," occupying essentially rural areas, including readjustment and rehabilitation of Indian population by acquisition of lands to enable them to make appropriate and constructively planned use of combined land areas in units suited to their needs;

(5) Reducing the costs of local governments and of local public institutions and services; and

(6) Encouragement of land-use planning by setting up experimental projects which will serve as reputable demonstrations of types of adjustments applicable to various regions in the United States.

The Land Program would have three phases:

(1) The purchase of land.

(2) The conversion of land purchased to a use, beneficial to the peoples of the United States.

(3) The permanent rehabilitation of the population at present living on land purchased.

Four major types of projects would be carried out under the Land Program including demonstration agricultural, recreational, wildlife, and Indian lands projects. [50]

Of the $25,000,000 allotment made to the Federal Surplus Relief Corporation, $5,000,000 was to be used for the acquisition of certain lands for recreational demonstration use, and the National Park Service was designated to develop this phase of the program. The bureau had played an active role in the formulation of the FERA Land Program, and earlier in June 1934 Director Cammerer had indicated that the Park Service was already involved in drawing up guidelines for such areas:

Three types of areas are being studied. The first and largest of these comprises a few well located regional recreational areas, consisting of from 10,000 to 15,000 acres that may be used by large numbers of visitors. The second type consists of smaller tracts of 1,500 to 2,000 acres in close proximity to the larger industrial centers for use by people of the lower income group and underprivileged children, for family camps, children-group camps, and organization camps. The third type is composed of tracts of 20 to 50 acres along well traveled highways that may be used as picnic areas by the traveler or family groups seeking a day's outing. These areas have been termed "wayside." Since the need of the last two types of areas is deemed most urgent, they are being given first consideration. [51]

The direct responsibilities of the Park Service in the demonstration recreational areas program included: (a) selection of areas; (b) acquisition of options and other pertinent data; (c) development of plans; (d) execution of such work as could be done by the CCC and FERA; and (e) preparation of agreements with the states and their political subdivisions regarding development, management, and maintenance of the areas. [52]

The recreational demonstration areas program became a major thrust of the National Park Service efforts in recreational planning and development in fiscal year 1935. A number of these projects were initiated under the authority of Executive Order 6983, dated March 6, 1935, to carry out the provisions of the National Industrial Recovery Act. [53] In his annual report for fiscal year 1935, Director Cammerer observed that the agency had undertaken

. . . studies of submarginal lands with a view to recommending reallocation of certain areas as demonstration projects to provide low-cost recreational facilities for concentrated urban populations, especially the underprivileged group . Studies were made in each of the 48 States in cooperation with State planning boards and State park authorities. In general the projects, when completed, will be turned over to State agencies for administration. Several, however, needed to extend the present national-park and monument system, are being considered for retention in Federal control.

During the past year 58 recreational demonstration projects, located in 88 counties and involving 827,120 acres, were established or given preliminary approval for investigation. A total of 578,650 acres was appraised and 397,878 acres optioned. Twenty-two projects, which when developed will furnish recreational facilities to more than 20,000,000 people within a radius of 50 miles, were approved for acquisition and development, involving 339,650 acres at a cost of $2,810,366. Of the more than 1,200 families living on the tracts proposed for purchase, about 250 will require financial assistance in rehabilitation or resettlement.

During the year thirteen CCC camps had been established to develop these demonstration projects, and plans called for the use in part of thirty-one camps for that purpose in fiscal year 1936. [54]

By Executive Order 7028, dated April 30, 1935, the entire Land Program was transferred from FERA to the Resettlement Administration of the Department of Agriculture. Under this new arrangement land for recreational demonstration areas was to be acquired by the Resettlement Administration and developed under plans formulated by the National Park Service. [55]

By June 1936 there were under development forty-six recreational demonstration projects in twenty-four states. Nearly 500,000 acres were in process of acquisition with Resettlement Administration funds at a cost of approximately $5,000,000 to date. The areas were readily accessible to some 30,000,000 people, and the majority of the areas were being planned for the organized camping facility needs of the major metropolitan areas. It was anticipated that at least ten organized camps, each with a capacity of from 100 to 125 campers, would soon be in operation. In addition, other recreational facilities, including picnic areas, trails, and artificial lakes, had been developed. Wildlife, fire protection, and general development programs had also been initiated in many of the areas, using the technical assistance of Park Service personnel. [56]

On November 14, 1936, President Roosevelt signed Executive Order 7496, transferring the forty-six recreational projects, together with real and personal property, contracts, options, and personnel from the Resettlement Administration to the National Park Service. The order also transferred the balances of the development allotments outstanding for the projects as well as the necessary authority to complete and to administer the projects. [57]

After the transfer to the Park Service all land acquisition and related legal activities for the recreational demonstration areas were placed under the Recreational Demonstration Project Land Acquisition Section of the Branch of Recreational Planning and State Cooperation with Tilford E. Dudley as chief. Planning for acquisition was centralized in this section with area attorneys assigned to project, district, and regional offices as necessary and answering directly to Dudley. Regional officers were given the responsibility for accepting land options and providing general administrative oversight of the projects. [58]

The National Park Service implemented the recreational demonstration area program with enthusiasm. In June 1937 Director Cammerer described these areas as constituting "a unique form of land use increasingly valuable to the American people, affording outlets for out-of-door recreation accessible to congested populations, and retiring from agricultural use unarable lands of no economic worth." At the time forty-seven organized campgrounds were under construction in twenty-four recreational demonstration areas, and fifteen campgrounds had just been completed for use that summer. Waysides were being developed along main highways in Virginia and South Carolina for the accommodation of those seeking one-day outings. Some 12,000 relief workers and 4,500 CCC enrollees were assigned to the Park Service projects. Thus far, a total of 99,513 acres had been acquired for the program, and of this total 3,607 had been acquired during fiscal year 1937. While the Park Service still intended to turn the majority of the areas over to the states after development, it had determined to retain several under its jurisdiction for incorporation into the National Park System. [59]

Considerable progress was made in the planning, layout, and development of camping facilities in the recreational demonstration areas during fiscal year 1938. According to the annual report of Director Cammerer for that year:

Forty-eight of sixty-four organized camps under construction on 34 of those areas were scheduled to be completed and in use for the summer of 1938. Thirty-one of these were furnished before the end of the fiscal year. These facilities, which received 100,000 camper-days use and provided recreation for 1,000,000 day-use visitors in 1937, include adequate systems of control roads, water and sanitary systems, central administration and service groups. . . . General conservation treatment is also applied on each area, and in some instances certain portions are set aside as wildlife refuges.

Thirteen wayside parks contiguous to principal highways in Virginia and South Carolina were also under development with each area being equipped with picnic facilities and water and sanitary facilities.

Altogether, the recreational demonstration area development had been carried out by some 8,000 relief workers and 2,300 CCC enrollees in fiscal year 1938. A total of 352,874 acres had been acquired for the areas, title to 253,361 acres of which was cleared that year. [60]

The Park Service published a brochure, entitled "An Invitation to New Play Areas," during the spring of 1938 that described the objectives and facilities of the recreational demonstration areas:

Recreational Demonstration Areas are large tracts of land established and developed by the National Park Service within range of population centers, to partly meet recreation deficiencies.

Purposely located where they would be accessible to large numbers of people, these parks offer new recreational opportunities of variety, thus fulfilling their designation as demonstrations in the use of lands well adapted to recreation.

. . . The areas which lie closest to the large industrial cities are best known for their organized camping facilities which are used by hundreds of camping organizations. These camps were planned primarily to meet the needs of social and welfare and other non-profit agencies unable to finance the purchase of land and construction of their own facilities. In addition to these facilities the areas offer thousands of miles of clear streams, protected from soil erosion, numerous lakes, picnic areas, bathhouses and playfields. . . .

Means for nearly every type of camping are provided on these Federal recreation areas. There are public campgrounds for family tents and trailers. For the hiker with his pack there are trailside campsites and trailside shelters. For organized groups there are trail lodges; permanent all-weather buildings accommodating from 8 to 20 persons; organized tent campsites for groups of 25 to 30 people, at which water and sanitary facilities are available. Permanent organized camps with camper capacity ranging from 24 to 120 persons are fully equipped with all needed buildings and either sleeping cabins or tent platforms.

The organized camps are available to both large and small responsible groups which operate them for a weekend, for several weeks, or for the entire summer season.

The permanent organized camps normally consist of a central unit including the central dining and recreation hall, office, camp store and other service structures. Outlying from this central group are several camp units each consisting of campers and counsellors' sleeping cabins distributed around a unit lodge and combination latrine and washhouse. The unit lodge is the community building equipped with a simple outdoor kitchen where the campers can cook and eat their meals as a unit if they so desire. They are so constructed as to be suitable for use by small groups throughout the year.

Groups using the camps supply their own movable equipment. On most of the areas Government-owned cots are available for use. It is also possible in some cases for small groups using the camps to make arrangements with agencies holding seasonal permits for use of their movable equipment which they store in the camps. These arrangements, however, are entirely private transactions between the two groups.

On a number of the areas activity programs of nature study, crafts and dramatics are offered. Some of these activities are encouraged through means of local advisory groups of citizens who assist the National Park Service in endeavoring to offer the fullest social benefits to communities within reach of these areas. [61]

By June 1939 the National Park Service had acquired 374,537 acres for the recreational demonstration area program. Declarations of taking had been filed to acquire all remaining tracts for which funds were available. Sixty organized camps and numerous picnic areas and public bathing facilities had been or were nearing completion. There had been a 400 percent increase in the number of camper-days during the past year as well as a similar increase in day-use patronage. One area, Swift Creek Recreational Demonstration Area in Virginia, alone had more than 100,000 visitors. In addition to the summer use of organized camps, there was a great increase in short-term camping throughout the year. The summer camping programs were operated by county governments, community chest agencies, city boards of education, YMCA and YWCA organizations, youth committees, and in South Carolina directly by the Division of State Parks. An even greater variety of agencies used the camps on weekends and holidays. [62]

As further development of recreational demonstration areas began to slow in fiscal year 1940, the National Park Service issued a general statement of policy regarding the objectives, successes, and values of such areas. According to a memorandum issued by Director Cammerer on September 18, 1939,

These areas were purchased and developed for the purpose of demonstrating a better type of land use and to provide recreational facilities where in many cases there existed great deficiencies in such facilities. Today the majority of these areas represent a most effective demonstration in better land use. They have had considerable effect upon local economy. The development and use of these areas are a major contribution to the park and recreational area program of the United States and they have made possible outdoor recreational opportunities to hundreds of thousands of people who would not have had such experiences had it not been for these areas and facilities. This use presents a very desirable opportunity for the education of the people in the essentials of park and recreational conservation and a training school (of youth particularly) in the proper use of all park areas.

The public relations value of these areas is of importance to the Service primarily because there are millions whose only opportunity to come into direct contact with the work of the National Park Service is through their personal experience with these areas. [63]

Although funding and development programs for the recreational demonstration areas began to decline in fiscal year 1940, some improvements necessary to complete partially-finished projects continued to be made, and visitation and public use of the areas' facilities continued to increase In 1940 visitation to the areas doubled for the third consecutive year. Approximately 600 rural and urban organizations from 200 different communities used the group camping facilities which could accommodate some 7,500 persons at a time. [64]

By 1941 it became increasingly clear the recreational demonstration areas were becoming a financial drain on the bureau. No regular appropriation for the administration and operation of the areas had been passed by Congress, and efforts to transfer them to the states had been rebuffed. Inadequate funding "made it inadvisable to attract public attention to the recreational opportunities available." Nevertheless, the 100 organized campgrounds had been in continuous use throughout the summer of 1940, and approximately 1,000 organizations made use of the facilities for weekend and holiday camping throughout the year. The picnic areas, group tent camping sites, public campgrounds, and bathing facilities were used to capacity.

The Kings Mountain and Cheraw recreational demonstration areas and four waysides in South Carolina were leased to the Division of State Parks of the South Carolina Forestry Commission for administration and operation of the organized campgrounds, refectories, and public bathhouses. Arrangements were made for the state recreation directors to supervise the activity programs in many of the other states. Because many of the areas were near military and industrial defense installations, the recreational demonstration areas were being used increasingly by personnel in the armed forces and war-related industries. [65]

ln October 1941 the Park Service published An Administrative Manual for Recreational Administrative Areas. The purpose of the manual was to provide for the uniform proper use, management, protection, and maintenance of the areas and to reiterate the agency objectives for their establishment. According to the manual the objectives and types of areas established by the Park Service were:

In developing these 46 projects in an effort to alleviate in some small degree, a long-felt need for increased recreational facilities--particularly among the lower income groups--an important objective has been that of demonstrating the practicability of such a program to the various State and local governments with the belief that they, in turn, might profit from the foundations laid by the Federal Government. In this connection, four distinct types of projects were inaugurated to provide varied forms of recreation to meet a variety of individual needs.

The types of areas, that comprised approximately 400,000 acres, were:

Vacation Areas

There are 31 separate vacation areas among the .46 recreational demonstration projects, embracing children's camps, family camps, and industrial and social organization camps, offering opportunities for low income groups of populous urban and rural sections, public and semi-public organizations and others to enjoy low cost vacations of outdoor life for short periods.

In addition, a majority of these areas provide facilities for day use and picnicking.

Wayside Areas

The 13 wayside developments provide facilities for picnicking, play, and relaxation to the traveling or "day's outing" public. The areas are readily accessible, being located along principal highways, and usually cover from 30 to 50 acres, depending largely upon the topography.

National Park and Monument Extensions

There are 11 separate areas included in the projects adjoining and to be added to existing national parks and monuments. These areas, acquired and developed through the use of Emergency Relief Act funds, will become a part of the national park system and provide additional recreational facilities for which regular funds were not available.

State Scenic Area Extensions

There are seven such extensions which will become a part of the park systems of the respective States in which they are located. These lands, in most cases, were improperly used lands adjoining recreational holdings, and were acquired so that they might be put to more advantageous use in connection with the recreational programs of the States, but for which funds were not available from the States to purchase and develop them.

The manual also included a list of the recreational demonstration areas. It should be noted that the sixty-two separate areas listed below is not identical with the list of legally designated forty-six recreational demonstration projects, some of which consisted of two or more areas:

With several exceptions it was not the intention of the National Park Service to administer the recreational demonstration areas indefinitely. Once planned and developed they were to be turned over to the states or municipalities. In 1939 an act (H.R. 3959) passed Congress authorizing the Secretary of the Interior to convey or lease them to the states or local government units when they were prepared adequately to administer them. President Roosevelt, however, vetoed the bill on August 11, 1939. He believed that some of the projects might be of use to other federal agencies, that the legislation should be amended so that the transfers not involve the federal government in legal or moral commitments, and that the transfer should require presidential approval. [67]

A bill incorporating the changes recommended by President Roosevelt passed Congress on June 6, 1942. The act contained an additional provision that the grantees must use the recreational demonstration areas exclusively for public parks and recreational and conservation purposes. If they failed to do so the lands would revert to the federal government. [68] By 1946 virtually all recreational demonstration areas had been conveyed to the states, the last such transfer taking place in 1956. [69]

The modern parkway idea, as it is understood in the United States today, had it origins in county and municipal undertakings such as Westchester County Parkway in New York built between 1913 and 1930. Parkways, like highways, may serve either a commercial or a recreational function. According to a report issued by the Natural Resources Board in 1934, more than half of the traffic over the highway system in the United States during the preceding year had been recreational traffic. The report estimated that 60 percent of the total use of the American automobile was for recreational purposes. The increasing population of the country and its needs for outdoor travel made construction of scenic highways or parkways highly desirable. [70]

While the Westchester County parkways were being constructed, Congress began to apply the "parkway" idea locally in the District of Columbia. Congress authorized its first parkway project in 1913--the four-mile Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway that connected Potomac Park with Rock Creek Park and the Zoological Park. Some fifteen years later on May 23, 1928, Congress authorized construction of the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway that would link the District of Columbia with Mount Vernon in commemoration of the bicentennial of Washington's birth. The act specifically called for the "planting of shade trees and shrubbery and for other landscape treatment, parking, and ornamental structures" as well as right-of-way provisions to protect adequately the beauty of the highway. On May 29, 1930, this highway was renamed the George Washington Memorial Parkway and enlarged to extend from Mount Vernon to Great Falls, Virginia, and from Fort Washington to Great Falls, Maryland (Alexandria and the District of Columbia excepted). The George Washington Memorial Parkway was added to the National Park System as part of the reorganization of 1933, becoming the first recreational area to be incorporated into the system. [71]The Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway was also transferred with the other National Capital Parks, although it was not classed as a separate unit of the National Park System.

In actuality the first parkway to be built and administered by the Park Service and the first parkway to be authorized by Congress beyond the District of Columbia vicinity was the Colonial Parkway in Colonial National Monument. This parkway, however, was always considered as an integral part of the monument rather than a separate administrative unit. When the monument was authorized on July 3, 1930, the legislation providing for its establishment directed the Secretary of the Interior

to make an examination of Jamestown Island, parts of the city of Williamsburg, and the Yorktown battlefield . . . and areas for highways to connect said island, city, and battlefield with a view to determining the area or areas thereof desirable for inclusion in the said Colonial National Monument, not to exceed two thousand five hundred acres of the said battlefield or five hundred feet in width as to such connecting areas. . . .

In 1931 the Park Service let contracts for grading the first nine miles of what would ultimately become a twenty-three mile parkway between Yorktown and Jamestown. [72]

A new era for national parkways began with Congressional authorization of the Blue Ridge and Natchez Trace parkways in the 1930s. Both parkways began as public works projects during the New Deal and were later transformed into units of the National Park System. The National Park Service considered these two parkways as "pioneers in their respective fields of national recreational and historical motor travel." [73] These parkways were not short county or metropolitan roadways serving local travel needs but rather protected interstate roadways traversing hundreds of miles of scenic and historical rural landscape. According to a Park Service pamphlet printed in January 1938 the national parkways were a new type of development in the park system consisting of

an elongated park area devoted to recreation, which features a pleasure vehicle road through its entire length and is kept free of commercialism. [74]

The parkway was a road constructed in a manner that would protect, yet make available for public enjoyment the outstanding scenic and historic points of interest along the route. A particular aim of the parkways was to prevent the erection of billboards, signs, and other works that might mar or detract from the natural beauty along the roadway. [75]

In answer to the question of "what is a parkway, and what is the difference between it and an ordinary expressway or highway," the National Park Service formulated a definition of this type of road in 1938. A parkway was defined as a development of the highway that differed from the usual highway in at least eight respects. According to this definition that was articulated to Congress by Assistant Director Arthur E. Demaray in 1938, the parkway (1) was designated for noncommercial, recreational use; (2) sought to avoid unsightly buildings and other roadside developments that mar the ordinary highway; (3) was built within a much wider right-of-way to provide an insulating strip of park land between the roadway and the abutting private property; (4) eliminated frontage and access rights and preserved the natural scenic values; (5) preferably took a new location, bypassing built-up communities and avoiding congestion; (6) aimed to make accessible the best scenery in the country it traversed, hence the shortest or most direct route was not necessarily a primary consideration; (7) eliminated major grade crossings; and (8) had entrance and exit points space at distant intervals to reduce interrruptions to the main traffic stream. [76]

The Skyline Drive in Shenandoah National Park served as a prototype for the Blue Ridge Parkway. President Herbert Hoover, who vacationed at his camp on the Rapidan River in the area being acquired for Shenandoah, promoted the idea of the Skyline Drive along the crest of the Blue Ridge. Initial planning for the parkway began by the National Park Service at Hoover's behest in 1931 and four work camps were established in 1932 to begin work using relief funds. [77]

Among other provisions of the National Industrial Recovery Act, the Federal Emergency Administrator of Public Works was authorized to prepare a comprehensive program of public works, including the construction, repair, and improvement of public highways and parkways. Senator Harry F. Byrd of Virginia, along with others, seized the opportunity to propose the construction of a scenic roadway linking Shenandoah and Great Smoky Mountains national parks as a public works project. In November 1933 President Roosevelt and Secretary Ickes embraced the proposal provided that the states of Virginia and North Carolina donated the necessary rights-of-way. The states agreed to do so and on December 19, 1933, the National Park Service received an initial allotment of $4,000,000 to start the project. Planning for the Blue Ridge Parkway was to be carried out by the Park Service while actual construction was to be the responsibility of the Bureau of Public Roads. [78]

Extensive field reconnaissances were made of the nearly 500-mile distance between the two parks in 1933-34, and during fiscal year 1935 some 90 percent of the parkway route was located. In the latter year bids were received for the construction of the first section of 12.5 miles south from the Virginia-North Carolina state line to Roaring Gap. Plans were initiated for the development of a group of areas along the parkway route for "scenic preservation and recreational use." As construction proceeded on 120 miles of the parkway in fiscal year 1936 two recreational demonstration areas were commenced along the parkway with Works Project Administration funding. [79]

On June 30, 1936, President Roosevelt signed into law an act establishing the Blue Ridge Parkway as a unit of the National Park System. The law provided that

all lands and easements conveyed or to be conveyed to the United States by the States of Virginia and North Carolina for the right-of-way for the projected parkway . . . together with sites acquired or to be acquired for recreational areas in connection therewith, and a right-of-way for said parkway of a width sufficient to include the highway and all bridges, ditches, cuts, and fills appurtenant thereto, but not exceeding a maximum of two hundred feet through Government-owned lands as designated on maps heretofore or hereafter approved by the Secretary of the Interior, shall be known as the Blue Ridge Parkway. . . .

The law authorized the National Park Service and the U.S. Forest Service to correlate and coordinate recreational development on lands within their respective jurisdictions that were in close proximity. The Bureau of Public Roads would build and maintain the parkway and authorization was granted for the connection of the parkway with local forest roads. [80]

By June 1939 Director Cammerer was able to report that 113 miles of the parkway were graded and surfaced, an additional 20 miles graded, and 90 miles under grading contracts. The Roanoke-Asheville unit was the first section of the parkway to be opened for travel. During the following year a continuous paved unit between Adney Gap, Virginia, and Deep Gap, North Carolina, was opened to travel, and bids for concessions to operate motor services and eating facilities were solicited. [81]

The Blue Ridge Parkway was well on its way to completion by June 1941. In addition to the 140-mile paved unit, 150 miles were graded and hard surfaced, and another 170 miles were graded or under grading contracts. Some 750,000 visitors had used the parkway and its facilities during the preceding year. [82]

The 469-mile parkway was largely completed by the early 1970s. Today the scenic parkway, averaging 3,000 feet above sea level, embraces several large recreational areas, interprets mountain folk culture, and preserves scenic resources. Over the years the Park Service has developed a five-fold mission for the parkway which has become one of the best known and most heavily used recreational areas established by the bureau in the 1930s:

(1) to link the Shenandoah and Great Smoky Mountains National Parks through the mountains of western Virginia and North Carolina, (2) to provide quiet leisurely motoring, free from the distractions and dangers of the ordinary speed highway, (3) to give the visitor an insight into the beauty, history, and culture of the Southern Highlands, (4) to afford the best type of recreational and inspirational travel, and (5) to protect and preserve the natural scenery, history, and wildlife within the Parkway confines. [83]

The Natchez Trace Parkway was the second major national parkway to be authorized during the 1930s. It was a projected 500-mile roadway through a protected zone of forest, meadows, and fields which generally followed the historic route of the Natchez Trace from Nashville, Tennessee, to Natchez, Mississippi. The Old Natchez Trace was once an Indian path, then a wilderness road, and finally from 1800 to 1830 a highway binding the old Southwest to the Union made famous by Andrew Jackson's use both before and after the Battle of Chalmette. [84]

While construction of the Blue Ridge Parkway was getting underway in fiscal year 1934, preliminary studies were made of the proposed Natchez Trace Parkway. On May 21, 1934, Congress authorized an appropriation of $50,000 for a survey to determine the feasibility of building such a parkway, and survey and location work were carried out in collaboration with the Bureau of Public Roads. Following the completion of the survey in late 1935, the project was allotted $1,286,686 in Works Project Administration funds and plans were prepared and submitted to the State of Mississippi for more than twenty-five miles of right-of-way acquisition. [85]

Contracts for the construction of thirty-four miles on three Mississippi sections of the Natchez Trace Parkway between Jackson and Tupelo were awarded on June 30, 1937. The contracting process followed acceptance of title to the rights-of-way for the three sections by the federal government. The rights-of-way were acquired on the basis of 100 acres to the mile in fee simple, plus an additional 50 acres per mile of scenic easement control. [86]

On May 18, 1938, Congress passed legislation adding the Natchez Trace Parkway as a unit of the National Park System. The language and provisions of the act were almost identical to that in the act for the establishment of the Blue Ridge Parkway. [87]

By June 1940 grading and bituminous surfacing were completed in a thirty-four mile section of the parkway between Jackson and Tupelo, Mississippi The following year it was reported that an additional sixty miles were either graded or under construction in Mississippi, and a nine-mile stretch of parkway north of the Tennessee-Alabama border was also under construction. The first contract for the construction of a five-mile section between the Tennessee-Alabama border and Florence, Alabama, was advertised for bids to be opened early in July 1941. [88]

Construction of the Natchez Trace Parkway proceeded slowly over the years. By 1979 some 333 miles of the projected 4.48-mile parkway were completed. The finished portion linked many historic and natural features including Mount Locust, the earliest inn on the Trace, Emerald Mound, one of the largest Indian ceremonial structures in the United States, Chickasaw Village and Bynum Mounds in Mississippi, and Colbert's Ferry and Metal Ford in Tennessee. [89]

While the Blue Ridge and Natchez Trace parkways were placed under construction, a number of other national parkway proposals were surveyed and studied by the Park Service. The list of parkway proposals investigated by the agency during the 1930s included:

1. Oglethorpe National Trail and Parkway from Savannah to Augusta, Georgia
2. Extension of Blue Ridge Parkway to New England via Maryland, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York
3. Green Mountain Parkway in Vermont
4. Extension of George Washington Memorial Parkway to Wakefield, Virginia
5. Parkway connections between Washington, D.C., and Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, and between Great Falls, Virginia, and Harpers Ferry, West Virginia

A number of other parkway proposals were recommended to the Park Service for consideration:

1. Mississippi River Parkway, extending from Itasca State Park, Minnesota, to the Gulf of Mexico, following the general course of the river
2. Parkway extensions from the southern terminus of the Natchez Trace Parkway at Natchez, Mississippi, to the vicinity of Laredo, Texas, and from the northern terminus of the Natchez Trace at Nashville, Tennessee, to the vicinity of Louisville, Kentucky
3. Anthony Wayne Parkway from Fort Wayne, Indiana, to Toledo, Ohio, following the general course of the Maumee River, and on to Detroit, Michigan
4. Parkway along the Oregon Trail and the Columbia River Gorge. [90]

The growing popularity and use of both national and state parkways already developed and the numerous surveys and proposals for additional parkways prompted many to call for the formulation of a national parkway system plan by 1939. The problem of judging the merits of each new parkway proposal from a national perspective was becoming more complicated as the number of proposals increased. A national system plan would effect a coordinated and integrated system of national parkways and would serve as a basis for the consideration of individual proposals for national parkways and the coordination of the various state parkway programs. [91]

Another new type of federal recreation area in the National Park System grew out of large-scale, multipurpose power development and reclamation projects such as the Boulder Dam (later renamed Hoover Dam) project. The Boulder Canyon Project Act, passed in 1928, authorized the Bureau of Reclamation to construct Boulder Dam on the Colorado River, thereby creating Lake Mead above the dam. As the largest artificial lake in the world at that time, Lake Mead would ultimately extend some 115 miles above the dam and have 550 miles of shoreline. The lake, together with adjacent areas, was reserved with the idea of making it a future national monument.

Boulder Dam was constructed during the years 1931-35. On June 22, 1936, Congress appropriated $10,000 for a study to determine the recreational possibilities at Boulder Dam and Lake Mead. The study was to be conducted by the National Park Service in cooperation with the Bureau of Reclamation. While the study was being conducted the Park Service commenced supervision of recreational development at Lake Mead with CCC enrollees. [92]

The study concluded that recreational possibilities were good, and a cooperative agreement was drawn up between the Bureau of Reclamation and the National Park Service on October 13, 1936, providing that the Park Service would assume responsibility for all recreational activities at Lake Mead. Legal authority for such an agreement was contained in the act of June 30, 1932 (later amended on July 20, 1942), entitled "an act to authorize interdepartmental procurement by contract." The agreement was significant in that it established a new policy under which the National Park Service cooperated with the Bureau of Reclamation and the Army Corps Engineers in the administration of recreational areas of national importance resulting from the impoundment of waters by large dams. [93]

Under the provisions of the cooperative agreement, the Bureau of Reclamation retained jurisdiction and authority over Boulder Dam, all engineering works associated with it, the land adjacent to the dam, and the administration of Boulder City and all activities located within its boundaries. The National Park Service had jurisdiction over the remainder of the Boulder Canyon Project Area, including the airport on the outskirts of Boulder City and authority and responsibility for all activities conducted thereon. These activities included the administration, protection, and maintenance of recreational activities and facilities, construction and improvement of roads and trails, and preservation and interpretation of several Indian sites and a variety of natural history points of interest Among the recreational facilities that the Park Service would administer and further develop were campgrounds, picnic areas, boating docks and ramps, horse trails, and bathing beaches. [94]

In June 1937 Director Cammerer observed that the "value and national importance of the Boulder Dam recreational area was proved by the public use of the area during the past year and by the vast scientific interest in it displayed by specialists in many fields." [95] On August 11, 1947, the name was changed from Boulder Dam National Recreation Area to Lake Mead National Recreation Area. [96] By 1952 Davis Dam had been completed downstream, impounding 67-mile-long Lake Mohave whose upper waters lapped the foot of the dam. The Park Service accepted responsibility for recreational activities around Lake Mohave as part of the Lake Mead National Recreation Area, and on October 8, 1964, this area, consisting of nearly 1,500,000 acres, was formally established as a unit of the National Park System. [97]

The Boulder Dam National Recreation Area set a precedent for the Park Service. In 1946 Coulee Dam National Recreation Area was established under an agreement with the Bureau of Reclamation that was patterned after the Boulder Dam cooperative agreement. Between 1952 and 1962 three more such areas were established--Shadow Mountain in Colorado; Glen Canyon in Arizona-Utah; and Whiskeytown-Shasta-Trinity in California. By 196.4 application of the national recreation area concept to major impoundments behind federal dams, whether constructed by the Bureau of Reclamation or the Corps of Engineers, appeared to be well-accepted by Congress. Eight more reservations of this type were authorized as additions to the National Park System between 1964 and 1972. [98]

The last of the new types of recreational areas added to the National Park System in the 1930s was the national seashore. The concept combined the preservation of unspoiled natural and historical areas with provision, at suitable locations, for beachcombing, surf bathing, swimming at protected beaches, surf and sport fishing, bird-watching, nature study, and visits to historic structures. The seashore concept also sought to protect the way of life to which the people of a given shore area had been accustomed for generations. [99]

In 1934 the National Park Service launched a preliminary survey study of some twenty areas along the Atlantic, Gulf, Pacific, and Great Lakes shores in an effort to preserve the remaining unspoiled coastlines for public recreation areas. Although extensive attention was not given to shoreline preservation until the 1950s, the fact that private development was consuming the remaining unspoiled seashore and lakeshore areas at an alarming rate and leaving less of it available for public use was increasingly recognized in the early 1930s. Little had been done to reserve shore areas for public use, and the rush for seashore summer homesites and the land and real estate booms of the prosperous 1920s had taken its toll. The Park Service thus felt that it was appropriate to include seashores and lakeshores in the overall land-use conservation and recreational planning programs made possible through New Deal relief efforts. [100]

Employing the technical expertise of the Coast Guard and other government agencies, the National Park Service continued its seashore and lakeshore studies in 1936 and 1937. The studies had two principal objectives: first, identification of those areas of outstanding importance from the national standpoint that might be considered as additions to the National Park System; and second, those that were outstanding from the state standpoint and that were needed primarily for recreational purposes. The study resulted in the recommendation that twelve major stretches of unspoiled Atlantic and Gulf Coast shoreline, comprising some 437 miles of beach, be preserved as national seashores in the National Park System and thirty areas be preserved as part of state park systems. [101]

One of the shorelines, Cape Hatteras in North Carolina, attracted considerable attention, and local Representative Lindsay Warren succeeded in getting legislation through Congress on August 17, 1937, authorizing the establishment of the cape as the first national seashore in the National Park System. The bill stipulated that the area should cover approximately 100 square miles of barrier islands and beach and that the cape would not be formally established until the state had acquired the lands, except within village boundaries, and turned them over cost-free to the federal government. Residents of the area might make a living fishing under rules to be established by the Secretary of the Interior. Except for certain portions of the area deemed especially adapted for swimming, boating, sailing, fishing, and other recreational facilities, the seashore was to remain a primitive wilderness area to preserve its unique flora and fauna. The act also provided for the retention of the 5,915-acre Pea Island migratory bird refuge under the jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture. [102]

In March 1938 a National Park Service planning team prepared a "Prospectus of Cape Hatteras National Seashore." The prospectus included the presentation of basic information relative to the area and the formulation of policies for its development. Since the cape was the first area of its kind to be authorized by Congress the Park Service adopted a policy to be used in the selection, development, and operation of this and other similar areas that might be acquired in the future. The policy statement read:

Primarily a seashore is a recreation area. Therefore in its selection, the boundaries should be placed in such a manner that the maximum variety of recreation is provided. Thus while provision for bathing may be the first consideration of these areas, it must be kept in mind that a far greater number of people will be more interested in using a seashore area for other recreational purposes. It is desirable therefore to provide ample shoreline for all types of beach recreation. The Cape Hatteras National Seashore provides such an area in that there is extensive shoreline for all forms of recreation both for immediate use and for future development.

Secondarily, the area should include adjacent lands which by reason of historical, geological, forestry, wildlife, or other interests, have sufficient justification to be preserved by the Federal Government. It is important therefore to reach back into the hinterlands and acquire areas which will provide a variety of interest, scenic, scientific and historic. This principle has been followed in determining the boundaries of the Cape Hatteras National Seashore.

Thirdly, it is important to include in the area, lands necessary for proper administration and lands which serve principally as a protection for the recreational and other developments which are the primary purpose of the area. Inasmuch as the Cape Hatteras National Seashore area is composed of islands and peninsulas, the land area in most cases is circumscribed by water, which fact in itself offers considerable protection. Inasmuch as control of much of the water in the Sounds may be desirable for fish and bird life, the boundaries of Cape Hatteras National Seashore area will embrace a substantial portion of these waters.

The development and operation of the Seashore area shall follow the normal national park standards with the understanding that recreational pursuits shall be emphasized to provide activities in as broad a field as is consistent with the preservation of the area. It shall be the policy of the Service to permit fishing, boating and other types of recreation under proper regulations and in designated areas where such activities may not conflict with other factors of greater importance. Where natural landing fields occur, the use of land and sea planes may be permitted where not in conflict with the interests of wildlife or inconsistent with proper development and use of the area. [103]

The years 1939-41 witnessed the initial efforts taken toward the goal of establishing Cape Hatteras as a unit of the National Park System. On March 30, 1939, the State of North Carolina created the State Cape Hatteras National Seashore Commission to direct the acquisition of state and private lands for the national seashore with an appropriation of $20,000. While the state was beginning its land acquisition program Congress passed a bill redesignating the area as a "national seashore recreational area" and permitted limited hunting under carefully prescribed limits. By June 1941 the approved boundaries of the seashore included an aggregate of some 62,500 acres within which were three existing federal areas comprising 405 acres: Kill Devil Hill National Memorial, Cape Hatteras Lighthouse, and Fort Raleigh National Historic Site. [104]

The Cape Hatteras land acquisition program lagged until after World War II . By then private development had made the projected northern boundaries unfeasible, and the revised boundaries were reduced to some 30,000 acres. With the generous aid of the Old Dominion Foundation, established by Paul Mellon, and the Avalon Foundation, created by Ailsa Mellon Bruce, substantial and equal grants were made to the Park Service, which matched by the State of North Carolina, made the establishment of Cape Hatteras possible in 1953. [105]

The seashore and lakeshore studies of the 1930s were not resumed until the Mission 66 program of the mid-1950s. With the support of the Old Dominion and Avalon foundations, the new shoreline surveys resulted in several major reports including Our Vanishing Shoreline (1955), A Report on the Seashore Recreation Survey of the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts (1955), Our Fourth Shore, Great Lakes Shoreline Recreation Survey (1959), and Pacific Coast Recreation Area Survey (1959). Despite the fact that the second national seashore--Cape Cod--was not authorized by Congress until August 7, 1961, some twenty-four years after the initial authorization for Cape Hatteras, the National Park System had fifteen seashores or lakeshores by 1972 encompassing some 718 miles of beach and 711,075 acres. [106]