Volume XIV No. 1 - September, 1948
The Extraneous And The Parks
By Dr. G. C. Ruhle, Park Naturalist
Originally our national parks were set aside with an expressed
purpose of protecting the outstanding and peculiar values found within
them. They were essentially in primitive state and the primitive was to
be cherished and preserved. At the same time limited development was to
be undertaken, so that visitors might come in reasonable ease to see,
learn and enjoy. But always the scientific significance, the primitive
character, the ideal of sanctuary for native life, both plant and
animal, and the aesthetic appeal were to fashion park policy and
operation. Any departure from these standards was to be regarded as
unhealthful intrusion in the parks. Cultivation of crowds for the sake
of records or profit was considered as unworthy violation of
principle.
Within the past few years, numbers of visitors to national park
areas have mounted to staggering figures, far surpassing a score of
millions annually, and with these crowds come the many who understand
not, neither do they love. Theirs is not a visit for inspiration,
study, and appreciation of the natural phenomena. Theirs is not respect
for cleanliness and order, for propriety and fitness and decorum, for
consideration of the fellow who follows, let alone for generations
unborn. Their wake is marked by roadsides strewn with bottles, cartons,
and refuse, by vandalism to structures and natural features, by wildfolk
with lives disrupted by unnatural feeding and fraternization, by waste
meadows stripped of flowers and herbage, by charred masts in lifeless
forests swept by fire. With decreasing revenues and man-power, park
efforts have been futile to check and to minimize the devastation. The
cry of alarm is rising from those who look beyond the use of national
parks for picnicking, motoring, and conventional activities.
Drastic possible measures have been proposed to curb impairment of
the parks from overuse and inflated development. One hears of
limitation of numbers admitted, of control of numbers of campers in
campgrounds, of removal of overnight facilities to sites remote from
principal features, of day-use of parks only. Some advocate a screening
of admittees; it were interesting to discover what screening process and
what criteria would be advocated.
It seems that greatest consideration should be given to that which
is charged by law as proper use of the parks. My contention is that if
we restrict attractions to the enjoyment and interpretation of the
features for which the park has been set aside, the overwhelming tide of
visitors will be stemmed and controlled, and the destruction of the
primitive will be checkmated. This, too, is drastic, for by it such
crowd impellents as ski carnivals, conventions, mass picnics, are out,
as are golf links, pinball machines, and dress dinners. This means that
such lures as skiing, fishing, and dancing, all laudable in their proper
sphere, be reduced to an incident in, and not the purpose of a visit to
a park. All "sports" inducements, such as ski lifts and competitive
meets, are incompatible with proper use, as predicated by those who seek
refuge in them for silence, relaxation, aesthetic inspiration and to
marvel over God's handiwork. It means further that artificialities,
such as our Lady-of-the-Woods, yes, even the popular firefall in
Yosemite, deserve the ban which has been put on the Rock-of-Ages
ceremony in Carlsbad Cavern and on the various "bear shows" in other
parks.
Crater Lake National Park has been exceptional in its resistance to
the demands of a public seeking ordinary resort entertainment. Adequate,
suitable divertissement of this type is and should be provided elsewhere
than in a national park. We offer skiing, fishing, and similar
diversions, but only as they may be the means by which one enjoys in
fuller measure the natural wonders of the park. The Park Service
welcomes the man who revels in wetting a fly in the singing streams of
our parks while noting the exuberance of the companion ouzel, the
sparkle of dancing waters, the caress of mountain breezes, the flowers
nodding and dipping in the ripples, the diamond dew-drops on web and
branchlet. Such a fisherman can have successful day fishing and still
not catch a single fish. The Park Service beckons to the skier who
delights in the wintery grandeur while gliding on langlauf through the
somber forests on the mountains.
In the face of all of the serious impairment of the primitive in
every national park, how can there be any question about the
inadvisability of a "Come one, come all" program? Wilderness character
is fragile and easily dissipated, and once lost, seems irrevocable
despite our best efforts. The need for correction is urgent and delay
is costly. Control what is offered to the visitor in a national park,
and there will quickly be natural control of the visitor and visitor use
of the park.
Brief Eruption
By G. P. Walker, Ranger-Naturalist
It was Sunday afternoon in August, and Sinnott Memorial was full
almost to the parapet. The lecturer had finished his discussion of the
cycles of eruption and quiet. Trying to stir the interest of his
audience, he started speculation on the possibilities of renewed
volcanic activity. To ease any fears which they might have about the
mountain exploding under their feet, he mentioned that any major
eruption would undoubtedly be preceded by loud rumblings and at least
some vibration of the earth. At this moment a tremendous roar struck
the intent faces of his listeners. It was a full five seconds before
the taut, fearful expectancy was broken by a nervous laugh. One by one
visitors resumed breathing as they caught sight of the first jet planes
to buzz Crater Lake disappearing over Llao Rock.
|