PIPE SPRING Cultures at a Crossroads: An Administrative History

Monument Administration

The end to all CCC-related activity at the monument in 1940 left Heaton alone responsible for maintaining and protecting Pipe Spring National Monument. Park Service funds were scarce and visitation low in park units nationwide during World War II. Consequently, no major projects were undertaken at the monument. Only minor maintenance or stabilization work was performed on historic or other buildings. [1169] Most of Heaton's time was spent in performing routine maintenance and protection work - repairing fences, cleaning irrigation ditches, reducing fire hazards, tree pruning, and keeping the campgrounds in an orderly condition. Heaton's two oldest sons, Clawson and Dean, often helped with such work during the war years. [1170]

Although development planning for the monument continued during the war years, no building projects were undertaken. Zion and regional office staff made studies for campground development at the monument. A number of NPS officials visited Pipe Spring during the war years, including Director Newton Drury, Regional Director Minor R. Tillotson, Regional Chief of Planning Harvey Cornell, Regional Architect Lyle Bennett, and Chief Landscape Architect Thomas C. Vint. [1171] The visits were made to inspect the monument and to plan post-war work on buildings and a parking area, residence, and utility area. Heaton wrote after their visit, "Promised to get the residence building, but I expect it to be some time." [1172]

For the month of January 1942 Heaton reported, "Not a visitor this month. Looks like the ban on tires and cars will stop visitors to the monument an awful lot for the next few years." [1173] That was not to be the war's only impact on the monument. Southwestern Monuments' Superintendent Hugh Miller was still on his three-month tour of duty in the Washington office. In early January Miller formally notified Chief of Operations Hillory A. Tolson of a change of mind:

You are familiar with my opposition to the transfer of responsibility for the administration of Pipe Spring National Monument from the Superintendent of the Southwestern National Monuments to the Superintendent of Zion National Park. Circumstances related to the war economy appear, however, to have changed the problem to such an extent as to warrant a change in my position with respect to it.

In view particularly of the necessity of restricting automobile travel it would now appear to be in harmony with the policy of the administration to place Pipe Spring National Monument under the Superintendent of Zion National Park and this memorandum expresses my concurrence in the proposal. [1174]

On January 24, 1942, Heaton received word from the regional office that the administration of the monument was to be transferred to Zion National Park. He described this news in his journal entry that day as being "a bomb in the mail." [1175] He wondered what changes would take place and how he would fit into the new organization. As Heaton waited to learn the date the transfer was to take place, he filed his last monthly report to headquarters in Coolidge:

For sixteen years I have been making reports to the Superintendent of Southwest [sic] National Monuments, and it is with no little regret that I think of having to make them to another. Not that I have anything against the other outfit, but I have been so long with the Southwestern Monuments and watched it grow from a traveling office in the old Ford with the Boss to the well-equipped building and staff of a dozen men at Coolidge. After 16 years living with such an outfit there are certain bonds of affection attached with it and friendship that has grown... [1176]

Director Drury issued the memorandum directing the transfer on January 13, 1942. The administration of the monument was formally transferred to Zion on February 16, 1942. [1177] (In addition to administering Zion National Park and now Pipe Spring National Monument during this period, its superintendent oversaw Cedar Breaks National Monument and Bryce Canyon National Park. [1178] ) After the transfer, Heaton's monthly reports to Zion's Superintendent Paul R. Franke took on a more formal and succinct format, rather atypical of Heaton's earlier "chatty" (and more entertaining) reports to Southwestern Monuments. [1179] The custodian described a day spent in the office typing out his monthly report as "my most tiring day's work." [1180]

During the slow winter of early 1942, Heaton painted fort woodwork with linseed oil and worked on remodeling and making repairs to his residence. He received the preliminary plans for the approved new residence in February. [1181] It was to be a handsome, three-bedroom, stone residence located just a short distance east of the meadow pool. (This structure would never be built, but the plans must have given the Heatons a small ray of hope to hang onto.) On March 16, 1942, Heaton made his first official trip to Zion to meet with Franke and the other park staff. The trip via Short Creek was 50 miles; via Kanab it was 61 miles. Either way, the one-way drive - just the first of many he would make - took two hours. [1182] On March 23 he went to Zion to discuss park business and to attend a weekly class. These were being held each Monday night in the rangers' building. [1183] Class that week was on the rating system. Afterward Heaton wrote in his journal, "I can see that I will have to keep on my toes and work up if I hold the rating given me by the Southwestern Monuments." [1184]

86. Custodian C. Leonard Heaton in spring room of the fort, ca. 1942
(Pipe Spring National Monument).

Franke made his first official inspection visit to the monument on March 28, 1942, and spent two hours going over the site discussing problems and reviewing the monument's master plans. Among the proposals that Heaton and Franke talked about that day was planting part of the land back into orchards and gardens; cleaning the ponds and restocking them with fish; furnishing the fort rooms using some of Zion's museum collection; constructing a checking station and comfort station; and changing the location of service roads. Franke told Heaton he would try to visit once a month.

The war years brought a number of servicemen to Pipe Spring National Monument and other park units in the surrounding area. In his first annual report to the Secretary of the Interior since the beginning of the country's involvement in the war, Director Drury emphasized,

In war, no less than in peace, the national parks and allied areas have served as havens of refuge for those fortunate enough to be able to visit them. Proving an environment that tends to give relief from the tension of a warring world, the parks are being looked upon as a factor in a program of rehabilitation, physical and mental, that will be increasingly necessary as the war progresses. [1185]

While he had to report a significant decline in attendance to park units, Drury was obliquely making a strong argument for their "usefulness" to the war-effort. [1186] Perhaps to collect supporting evidence of park units as psychological havens for war-weary soldiers, all parks and monuments were required to keep a record of visits by members of the U.S. Armed Forces during the war years. No such visits were recorded at Pipe Spring until December 1942, when 12 soldiers visited the monument. These men, like many others who either passed by or visited the monument during the war years, were sent on detail to the area from their military base in Kingman, Arizona, to remove the three area CCC camps. [1187] The men temporarily lived at the Fredonia camp while they completed taking down the Antelope Valley camp (G-173) in May and June 1943. The Short Creek camp was also removed about this time. It is presumed that the Fredonia camp was the last to be removed. When servicemen came to Pipe Spring, they nearly always toured the fort and often picnicked in the campground. This helped boost the monument's lean travel figures as well as brought young men into contact with a part of United States history they might never have otherwise been exposed to.

With the German Luftwaffe's aerial bombings of Great Britain in 1940 still fresh in people's minds (not to mention Pearl Harbor), the war had many in the country on edge. Some may have glanced skyward perhaps a little more often than usual for unaccustomed airplane activity. On April 9, 1942, Heaton reported something quite out of the ordinary:

Witnessed one of the most unusual sights in the sky at about 10:30. Heard an airplane flying from west to east, north of the monument. Shortly after it had passed, a white stretch of smoke or clouds started to form, beginning north of the monument and going east, something like the smoke writing from an airplane. But this was white like a cloud and stayed in some shape for 10 to 15 minutes, then small shafts and mists began to drift northward and it did not entirely disappear for at least 1? hours. It appeared to be like a ball being thrown through the air and one could see the clouds forming. At first we thought it might be a plane on fire, but not black enough for that. It is my opinion a cold shaft of air was hurled through the air that formed the cloud, maybe in the trail of the plane. The cloud or smoke turned out to be a flame. [1188]

The cause of the mysterious cloud in the sky is not known. Heaton enjoyed a much more familiar sight in late May, when he wrote in his journal, "Another of those hot dry, windy and dirty days. About like old cattle days at the south side of the monument today. The Indians are branding the calves. With the bellowing of the cattle, shouting of the riders, and smell of burnt hair, makes one think of days gone by." [1189] The old cattle corrals were still in use, only now by Indian stockmen. In December that year, Heaton reported the Indians held a bunch of calves at the old stock corrals. [1190]

The Heatons seemed to have gotten along well with their neighbors, Indian and Mormon alike. When anyone got in trouble or found others in that state, it was customary that whoever was closest helped out as much as possible. For example, when Custodian Heaton's truck became mired in the road one day, two Indians on horseback towed him out. Another time, eight-year-old Bill Tom was injured when the horse he was riding fell and Heaton gave him first aid. He then had one of his sons accompany the Kaibab Paiute boy home. [1191] Heaton's daily journal routinely reported such examples of mutual aid. [1192] The "neighbor" problem most often encountered at the monument was rabbit hunting. In June 1942 Heaton reported, "Stopped Joseph Jolmary, an Indian, from shooting rabbits on the monument this morning. The hunting of rabbits is my biggest trouble with the local people, especially the Indians, who make the rabbit one of their main dishes at the table and there are a lot of rabbits on the monument." [1193] The rabbits, of course, knew a lush playground when they saw one. Besides, hunters hemmed them in on all sides, both Indian and non-Indian. Heaton reported several years later, in May 1944, "The rabbits are not much more than holding their own as the Indians and hunters are after them for their meat. This hunting is being done on the Indian Reservation." [1194] Heaton also reported coyotes were being heavily hunted, considered a menace to the ranchers' lambs and calves.

Rabbits weren't the only furry animals abundant at the monument. Particularly during dry summer weather, a large number of squirrels, chipmunks, rats, and mice could be found at Pipe Spring, being attracted to its water and abundant vegetation. Porcupines, too, lived at the monument; their habits were harmful to certain trees. [1195] In spite of cattle guards, reservation horses and cattle also wandered onto the monument to graze or to water. Other monument residents were gophers. These animals were especially destructive pests in Heaton's eyes, as they damaged tree roots and wreaked havoc on his system of irrigation ditches. (Heaton attributed the monument's loss of several Carolina poplars in 1945 to gophers and disease. [1196] ) While gophers did all of their dirty work underground or at least out of doors, mice and rats munched away on antique furnishings inside the fort. In May 1944 Heaton wrote, "...sure need some rat poison as the mice and rats are so thick around buildings that they cover up all tracks with their running around and are building nests everywhere they can find a dark corner to get into." [1197] There was one other pest that Heaton fought during the summer - ants. His customary extermination method involved pouring about a quart of gasoline into each ant bed then covering it with a sheet of newspaper. If all the ants were in their hole when this ritual was performed, Heaton reported, two applications usually did the job. Even wartime gas rationing didn't stop the monument custodian from using this tried-and-true method of pest control.

One good thing about the war years, now that all the area CCC camps had been abandoned, Heaton was free to refill the meadow pool. In mid-June 1942, Heaton had his sons clean out the pool so that the family and neighbors could cool off by swimming. That Fourth of July, 30 people came to spend the afternoon in the shade of the trees and to swim. Indian children also came from time to time to swim in the meadow pool. [1198] The pool was especially welcome that summer. Heaton reported in his daily journal, "It has been a number of years since we had so much hard west wind and so long. Everyone is on edge. I don't remember when I have been so tired and hate the weather as I have of this continual, hard, west wind. Never a day but what one has to fight the wind to get anything done." [1199] In spite of the unpleasant weather, Heaton managed to get a few things accomplished. During that summer the south wall of the west cabin was stabilized and monument boundary fences were repaired, along with other routine maintenance work. [1200]

In September 1942 Franke paid a surprise visit, bringing with him Landscape Architect John Kell from the regional office, introducing him as Al Kuehl's replacement. The men inspected the work Heaton had done on the west cabin and made recommendations for future mortaring work. Kell later filed a report to Harvey Cornell, suggesting ways the monument's master plan might be modified if a bypass road was ever constructed south of the monument. Kell thought development should be moved away from the fort in order to achieve a more natural setting for the historic buildings. "It was my impression," reported Kell," that there was an abundance of tree growth in the headquarters area." [1201] While he had no objection to the older "historic" trees being retained, Kell recommended removal of some of the smaller ones, especially those that had sprouted up along irrigation ditches.

Franke brought up the landscape issue again two months later in a memorandum to Regional Director Tillotson commenting on monument development plans. The superintendent referred to conversations he had during the summer of 1942 with Randall Jones, tourism booster of southern Utah and northern Arizona for nearly 40 years. Jones had questioned the Park Service's policy of "turning the area into a natural national monument by over-planting with trees and shrubs." [1202] Later Franke started asking questions of the old-timers and reviewing monument correspondence to learn what official policy was on the monument landscape. While there was no question that the Park Service was charged with the preservation of the historic buildings, Franke wrote Tillotson, no commitments had ever been made to preserve or restore the landscape as it was during the historic period. He proposed that part of the landscape be made to look like a typical pioneer ranch - what today would be called a "type" reconstruction, rather than an accurate restoration. Franke wrote,

What has happened to the rail fences, the orchards, gardens, and livestock pasture? Surely they were part of the ranching, dairying, and farming period of 1870 to 1890. In place of maintaining them we permit and encourage the area to develop into a false jungle of alien cottonwoods, willows, box elders, and other specie never part of the pioneer ranch, whose major objective was producing foodstuffs...

We concur in general with the plan giving location of proposed new developments. We suggest there be a general line of demarcation, providing to the east of this line an area for parking of cars, checking station, comfort station, and public campgrounds. To the west of this line we suggest that the landscape be returned to the ranching, farming, dairying, and fruit raising pioneer period of 1870 to 1890. [1203]

Franke stated that in the western part of the monument Heaton should be encouraged to cultivate fruit trees, gardens, and grain fields. "The proposed residences and utility buildings should be architecturally designed to appear as outbuildings of the farmyard but not for public visitation," he added. [1204]

This new plan would have required a complete redesign of the dignified stone custodian's residence (whose final plans had already been approved) into something resembling an agricultural outbuilding, or at least into something no visitor would ever be tempted to set foot in! What is also noteworthy about Franke's proposal - somewhat indicative of his ignorance of past planning decisions made at the monument - is that whereas the decision had been made in the early 1930s to distinguish the historic from non-historic areas by a north-south demarcation (with the monument road being the boundary), now Zion was asking for an east-west bifurcation of the two areas. The general area where Franke wanted to see the new parking area constructed, east of the fort, was the area where earlier planners excluded the campground in order to preserve the fort's historic setting.

In early January 1943, Tillotson wrote a lengthy response to Franke. "The general approach outlined in your memorandum of December 23 is undoubtedly the correct one," he wrote. [1205] Tillotson asked what historical evidence existed for installing orchards, gardens, pastures, etc.? In the absence of historical evidence, he saw Franke's policy as "largely one of type restoration or general period restoration, rather than exact reproduction..." Tillotson also expressed concern about the upkeep of such an agricultural operation and wondered if a "living museum" arrangement with farming and dairying activities carried out by people living at the place might be a solution. "This might or might not be considered desirable and practicable," he added. Tillotson remarked on the absence of a place for interpretive exhibits, supplemental to the period restoration in the fort. He added,

...we hope to be able to give this project the necessary time and historical research to carry out a development program along the general lines you have suggested in such a manner that it will be a credit to the Service and meet with the approval of all concerned, including the Mormon Church and the local old-timers. With this in mind, it will be of immense help if you will gather and assemble all the information and evidence possible as to the original appearance of Pipe Spring and the surrounding gardens, orchards, fences, fields, outbuildings, etc. [1206]

Acting Supervisor of Historic Sites Herbert E. Kahler wrote Tillotson a few weeks later regarding Franke's proposal and Tillotson's response. In order that the interpretive program be historically sound, Kahler recommended that a historical base map, an interpretive statement, and a detailed historical narrative be prepared and included in the next edition of the monument's master plan. [1207] Oddly, no one raised the question of water and how much would be needed to sustain an operation of the kind Franke was proposing.

87. Charles J. Smith, superintendent of Zion National Park from 1943 to 1952, undated (Courtesy Zion National Park, neg. 4287).

At Franke's suggestion, Cornell held certain development plans in abeyance, "pending an investigation which may or may not lead to the inclusion of such features of historical significance as orchard, garden, hitching posts, rail fence and the like." [1208] Franke, on the other hand, set about gathering (with Heaton's assistance) whatever historical information could be found on Pipe Spring's history. This effort included contacting anyone who could be found who had old ties to the site and interviewing them for information, particularly about early agricultural operations and the appearance of the landscape. This information was then forwarded to Park Service temporary headquarters in Chicago where it was passed on to the Branch of Historic Sites and Buildings for its use in the preparation of a historic outline.

Meanwhile, everyday life at the monument in the early war years went on. In the fall of 1942, Heaton took extended sick leave from October 6 until early November to undergo surgery. During this time his wife Edna was in charge of the monument. [1209] On October 24 the monument's trash dump caught on fire. [1210] The fire was started accidentally by his children emptying hot ashes onto the dump. Edna and the children, with the help of Charles and Maggie Heaton (who happened to be passing by), were able to put out the fire before it spread further. The most common fire hazard at the monument was dry foxtail grass. Leonard Heaton tried to reduce the fire risk by routinely cutting or burning the grass and other weeds around the buildings.

The monument received some good publicity with the publication of Jonreed Lauritzen's article, "Pipe Spring, A Monument to Pioneers" in the February 1943 issue of Arizona Highways. Lauritzen was a resident of Short Creek, Arizona, and the son of Short Creek's founder, Jacob Lauritzen. He obtained his dates and other facts used in the article from Leonard Heaton in May 1942. [1211] When they viewed the old fort at Pipe Springs, Lauritzen assured his readers, visitors would "think of men and the struggle they had to bring this wilderness under control." [1212] The monument "in its homely strength and simple dignity typifies the life and character of the early Mormon," the author wrote, a view shared by other descendents of 19th century Mormon settlers. [1213]

On June 13, 1943, Heaton learned that Franke was being transferred from Zion National Park to Grand Teton National Park. (Franke would return to Zion in 1952 to superintend it for the remainder of the decade.) While making a supply run to Zion a few days later, he learned Franke's replacement was to be Charles J. Smith, previously superintendent of Grand Teton National Park. Heaton met Smith and Assistant Superintendent Dorr G. Yeager at the end of the month when he returned to Zion for supplies. He wrote in his diary that night, "Both fine men and believe we will get along just fine." [1214] It would soon be made clear to Heaton that the new superintendent and his assistant intended to run a very tight ship.

During June and July 1943, Heaton hauled rock (probably from Bullrush Wash) and laid a rock floor in "Garage No. 2." The following year, he returned from Zion with an old gasoline-powered Delco light plant, which he set up in the garage. As the old monument truck seemed to be in constant need of repair, Heaton needed this lighted workspace. When he was unable to find and fix the problem, he took the truck to Zion mechanics; if it wasn't driveable, the park mechanic came to the monument. During the summer, the monument's custodian and regional office officials reviewed plans for the monument's public contact and comfort station. [1215] The building was to serve as the public contact station and custodian's office, and to provide public restrooms. Officials had long wanted to end any use of the fort, whether for living or office space, so that it could be converted into a house museum. The need for a modern comfort station was equally important, as old pit toilets were still in use at the monument. While the regional office approved the plans, concerns were expressed that the proposed building lacked room for exhibit space. [1216] The reason this building was never built, however, is the same reason the custodian's residence was not constructed: lack of funding.

In early 1944 Heaton lamented in his journal, "My hardest task on the monument [is] to tell where letters should be filed." [1217] That March Zion's Chief Clerk Carl Walker and an assistant spent a day inspecting Heaton's official files. The filing system must have left something to be desired by Park Service standards, for all of the monument's files were taken back to Zion to be organized. When Heaton picked them up from Zion a month later, he reported that the files were "...all arranged as they ought to be. Now if I can keep them up to date and in order." [1218] Office work was never a job the custodian enjoyed doing.

During the spring of 1944, Heaton laid 180 feet of two-inch irrigation pipeline from a point 200 feet east of the ponds to the north side of the campground. This was done to reduce water loss from the campground's open irrigation ditches. In July 1944 Heaton received a visit from Assistant Superintendent Yeager and Chief Ranger Fred C. Fagergren. The men brought along fire fighting equipment for the monument. Fagergren conducted the first official fire inspection ever made at the monument, Heaton later wrote. Fagergren identified several fire hazards, which Heaton worked to address soon after the men's departure. During the summer of 1944, an attempt was made to develop a combined departmental fire crew to be made up of men from the Grazing Service, Indian Service, and Park Service. [1219] As a precautionary measure, Heaton taught some of his family members how to use the fire fighting equipment on grass fires. "[I] want to hold several more classes 'til all know how to use [the equipment] and what to do in case of fire." [1220]

Heaton always left family members in charge of the monument when he traveled to Zion or during short periods of leave from the monument. He took longer stints to work on the family farm in Alton, Utah. [1221] On those occasions, he was home in the evenings, but during the day his wife and older children tended to the needs of monument visitors. Heaton reported being in Alton from August 15-25, 1945, doing farm work. "During this time some members of the family were here at the monument and they seemed to carry on about as well looking out for the monument interests as if I were here," he reported to headquarters. [1222] Like earlier Southwestern Monuments officials, Zion officials apparently had no problem with this arrangement, partly because visitation was so low during the war years and partly because it saved Zion the trouble and expense of finding a replacement for Heaton. Of course, neither Edna nor the children were ever paid for rendering such services. Edna Heaton had been "filling in" on a regular basis for Leonard since his appointment in 1926. As their children grew up on the monument, they too were recruited for monument work, according to their age and abilities. [1223]

The war in Europe formally ended on May 8, 1945, while Japanese surrender terms were signed on September 9, 1945. Between those two events, in July 1945, Heaton began to write a detailed history of the monument "as I have it in my head.... I thought I should get what I can remember on paper. Should I leave the place, there will be a record for the next fellow." [1224] This work went very slowly, usually only a page or two at a sitting. Heaton was still working on the project over a year later. [1225]