352 A5 1955 67-06216
reference
collection
book
Kansas city
public library
Kansas city,
missouri
From the collection of the
7 n
z_ m
o Prelinger
i a
AJibrary
San Francisco, California
2006
-.
AMERICAN PLANNING
AND CIVIC ANNUAL
Scenes of mirrored beauty in Louisville s Seneca Park
invite rest and relaxation
AMERICAN
PLANNING AND CIVIC
ANNUAL
A RECORD OF CIVIC ADVANCE IN THE FIELDS OF
PLANNING, PARKS, HOUSING, NEIGHBORHOOD IM-
PROVEMENT AND CONSERVATION OF NATURAL
RESOURCES, INCLUDING ADDRESSES DELIVERED
AT THE NATIONAL CITIZENS CONFERENCE ON
PARKS AND OPEN SPACES, OF THE AMERICAN PLAN-
NING AND CIVIC ASSOCIATION, ACTING WITH THE
AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF PARK EXECUTIVES, COUN-
CIL OF METROPOLITAN REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS,
NATIONAL RECREATION ASSOCIATION, NATIONAL
CONFERENCE ON STATE PARKS, AND OTHER CO-
OPERATING SPONSORS, HELD AT WASHINGTON,
D. C. MAY 22-25, 1955, AND ADDRESSES DELIVERED
AT THE 25TH ANNUAL MEETING OF THE NATIONAL
CONFERENCE ON STATE PARKS, HELD AT STOWE,
VERMONT, SEPTEMBER 25-29, 1955, INCLUDING THE
ROLL CALL OF THE STATES.
EDITED BY
HARLEAN JAMES
AMERICAN PLANNING AND
CIVIC ASSOCIATION
901 UNION TRUST BUILDING, WASHINGTON, D. C.
1955
THE AMERICAN PLANNING AND
CIVIC ANNUAL is sent out to all paid
members and subscribers of the AMERI-
CAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ASSO-
CIATION and the NATIONAL CON-
FERENCE ON STATE PARKS, who
may purchase extra copies for $2 each.
The public may purchase past American
Planning and Civic Annuals and the cur-
rent Annual for $3 each.
A complete set of the American Planning
and Civic Annuals, with the exception of the
1948-49 volume, which is now out of print,
(18 volumes) may be purchased for $32.
Mount Pleasant Press
J. HORACE MCFARLAND Co.
Harrisburg, Pa.
AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ASSOCIATION
PAST PRESIDENTS
J. HORACE MCFARLAND FREDERIC A. DELANO HORACE M. ALBRIGHT
OFFICERS AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES
HORACE M. ALBRIGHT, New York, N. Y., Chairman of the Board
U. S. GRANT SRD, Washington, D. C., President
HARLAND BARTHOLOMEW, St. Louis, Mo., First Vice-President
TOM WALLACE, Louisville, Ky., Second Vice-President
CARL FEISS, Washington, D. C., Third Vice-President
C. F. JACOBSEN, Washington, D. C., Treasurer
HARLEAN JAMES, Washington, D. C., Executive Secretary
FLAVEL SHURTLEFF, Marshfield Hills, Mass., Counsel
MRS. DORA A. PADGETT, Washington, D. C., Librarian
FREDERICK J. ADAMS, Cambridge, Mass. KARL KAMRATH, Houston, Texas
RUSSELL VAN NEST BLACK, New Hope, HAROLD M. LEWIS, New York, N. Y.
Pa. JOHN GAW MEEM, Santa Fe, N. M.
T. LEDYARD BLAKEMAN, Detroit, Mich. HOWARD K. MENHINICK, Atlanta, Ga.
DAVID D. BOHANNON, San Mateo, Calif. DELESSEPS S. MORRISON, New Orleans,
WILLIAM S. BONNER, Fayetteville, Ark. La.
DANIEL H. BURNHAM, Chicago, III. CLYDE NICHOLS, JR., Kansas City, Mo.
PAUL CARRINGTON, Dallas, Tex. C. McKiM NORTON, New York, N. Y.
MRS. LEROY CLARK, Englewood, N. J. CHARLES F. PALMER, Atlanta, Ga.
GRADY CLAY, Louisville, Ky. JOSEPH PRENDERGAST, New York, N. Y.
WILLIAM M. COTTON, Dayton, O. LAURANCE S. ROCKEFELLER, New York,
E. J. CONDON, Chicago, 111. N. Y.
STUART W. CRAMER, JR., Charlotte, N. C. J. WOODALL RODGERS, Dallas, Texas.
JOHN S. DETLIE, Seattle, Wash. ARTHUR RUBLOFF, Chicago, III.
MALCOLM H. Dill, Towson, Md. C. MELVIN SHARPE, Washington, D. C.
MYRON D. DOWNS, Cincinnati, Ohio JAMES F. SULZBY, JR., Birmingham, Ala.
CHARLES W. ELIOT 2o, Cambridge, Mass. FRED W. TUEMMLER, Hyattsville, Md.
HOWARD T. FISHER, Chicago, 111. C. EDGAR VAN CLEEF, Jr., Oklahoma
MRS. PAUL GALLAGHER, Omaha, Neb. City, Okla.
MRS. GEORGE A. GARRETT, Washington, SAMUEL P. WETHERILL, Bryn Mawr, Pa.
D. C. CARL I. WHEAT, Menio Park, Calif.
S. HERBERT HARE, Kansas City, Mo. GORDON WHITNALL, Los Angeles, Calif.
BYRON HARVEY, JR., Chicago, 111. H. O. WHITTEMORE, Ann Arbor, Mich.
MRS. E. NEWLANDS JOHNSTON, Washing- SAM B. ZISMAN, San Antonio, Texas
ton, D. C.
The purpose of the AMERICAN PLANNING AND Civic ASSOCIATION is the education
of the American people to an understanding and appreciation of local, state, regional
and national planning for the best use of urban and rural land, and of water and
other natural resources; the safeguarding and planned use of local and national
parks; the conservation of natural scenery; the improvement of living conditions
and the fostering of wider educational facilities in schools and colleges in the fields
of planning and conservation.
UH tftiu./ ruouu
Ref.
670G21 G
NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON STATE PARKS
OFFICERS AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS
TOM WALLACE, Kentucky, Chairman of the Board
KENNETH R. COUGILL, Indiana, President
ARTHUR C. ELMER, Michigan, V ice-President
BEN H. THOMPSON, D. C., Vice-President
C. F. JACOBSEN, D. C., Treasurer
HARLEAN JAMES, D. C., Executive Secretary
MRS. DORA A. PADGETT, D. C., Editor
HORACE M. ALBRIGHT, New York JOSEPH F. KAYLOR, Maryland
ERNEST E. ALLEN, Kansas HAROLD W. LATHROP, Colorado
C. H. ARMSTRONG, Oregon PERRY H. MERRILL, Vermont
HOWARD W. BAKER, Nebraska RAYMOND R. MITCHELL, Iowa
DR. LAURIE D. Cox, New Hampshire THOMAS W. MORSE, North Carolina
CHARLES A. DETURK, Washington A. NEWTON MOYE, Georgia
HAROLD J. DYER, Maine FRANK D. QUINN, Texas
JAMES F. EVANS, New York LEWIS G. SCOGGIN, Florida
V. W. FLICKINGER, Ohio JAMES L. SEGREST, Alabama
EARL P. HANSON, California JOHN R. VANDERZICHT, Washington
WILLIAM M. HAYS, Georgia HAROLD S. WAGNER, Ohio
U. W. HELLA, Minnesota HENRY WARD, D. C.
CLINTON G. JOHNSON, Kentucky WILLIAM W. WELLS, Louisiana
CONRAD L. WIRTH, D. C.
The purpose of the NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON STATE PARKS is to inform the
public through a central clearing house of information, publications, conferences and
by other educational means, of the value of state parks, monuments, historic sites
and other types of areas suitable for recreation, study of history and cultural resources
through establishment and operation of well balanced state park systems, to the end
that every citizen of the United States shall have easy access to state recreation areas
and appreciate their value; and to encourage adequate state park agencies and
programs, including the establishment of civil service policies and standards of se-
lection, development and administration.
The two organizations join in the publication of the
AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
and the
QUARTERLY, PLANNING AND CIVIC COMMENT
vi
CONTENTS
Frontispiece PAGE
Preface ix
THE NATION
An Adequate National Park System for 300 Million People
Conrad L. Wirth I
Recreational Use of the National Forests . Richard McArdle 8
The Need for Wilderness Areas Howard Zahnizer 14
Wildlife Resources and their Protection . Ira N. Gabrielson 24
Discussion Fred M. Packard 30
Service of the National Parks . . . Hon. Douglas McKay 31
Tribute to National Parks Bradley H. Patterson 32
Importance of National Parks .... Sen. Harry F. Byrd 33
The Record of Congress in Protecting our National Parks
Rep. John P. Saylor 37
IN THE STATES
Presented at National Conference on State Parks, Stowe, Vt.
September 25-29, 1955
Safety Programs for State Parks Polk Hebert 41
National Forests and Recreation in the Northeast ....
Gerald S. Wheeler 46
Design Problems — Artificial Bathing Areas . L. L. Hullleston 51
John I. Rogers 52
Comments on Camping in State Parks . . C. L. Harrington 53
C. P. Bradford 54
Super Highways and Parks Joseph F. Kaylor 57
Roll Call of the States
Alabama James L. Segrest 58
California Earl P. Hanson 59
Connecticut Donald C. Mathews 61
Florida Elmer L. Hill 62
Georgia William H. Hay 63
Indiana K. R. Cougill 63
Iowa Wilbur A. Rush 65
Kentucky Henry Ward 66
Otter Creek Park Clinton G. Johnson 67
Louisiana William W. Wells 67
Maine Harold J. Dyer 68
Maryland Joseph F. Kaylor 69
Massachusetts Raymond J. Kenney 70
Michigan Arthur C. Elmer 71
Minnesota U. W. Hella 72
Missouri Austin Houston 74
Montana Ashley C. Roberts 74
New Hampshire Russell B. Tobey 75
New Jersey Joseph E. McLean 76
New Mexico Carl A. Freeman 76
New York James F. Evans 77
North Carolina Thomas W. Morse 78
vii
viii CONTENTS
Page
Ohio V.W. Flickinger 79
Ohio Historical Society Richard S. Fatig 81
Oklahoma Ernest E. Allen 81
Oregon C. H . Armstrong 82
Pennsylvania W. P. Moll 83
Rhode Island Wm. H. Cotter, Jr. 84
Texas Gordon K. Shearer 85
Vermont Robert G. Simon 86
Washington J. R. Vanderzicht 86
West Virginia H . M. Harr 87
Wisconsin C. L. Harrington 88
Presented at the National Citizens Conference on Parks
and Open Spaces by the American Planning and Civic Assoc-
iation and cooperating groups, Washington, D. C. May 22-
25, 1955. Establishment and Protection of State Parks . . .
V. W. Flickinger 90
State Control of Roadside Vegetation . . . David R. Levin 97
Roadsides and the Federal Highway System
Burton W. Marsh 103
Discussion Thomas W. Morse 112
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS
PARKS AND OPEN SPACES
What Parks and Open Spaces Mean to the American
People Joseph Prendergast 114
The Disappearing Countryside . . . C. Me Kim Norton 120
Our Federal City Parks Gilmore D. Clarke 123
Metropolitan Planning for Parks and Open Spaces
T. Ledyard Blakeman 129
Enrichment of Living Sterling S. Winans 133
Colloquium: What Can People Do About Parks and Open
Spaces Frederick Gutheim 138
Mrs. LeRoy Clark 138
Grady Clay 139
George C. Hayward 144
James McClain 150
Parks Preservation Clinic Harry Alexander 154
Milo F. Christiansen 155
George E. Dickie 157
NEEDS OF OUR GROWING POPULATION
Space for Our Congested Cities Carl Feiss 157
Advance and Retreat of Metropolitan Park Ruilding . .
H. 0. Whittemore 162
Town and County Forests .... Roland F. Eisenbeis 165
Discussion Earl Von Storch 170
Perry L. Norton 172
Central Park, New York Stuart Constable 174
Our Perpetual (?) Temporaries . Rudolph Kauffman II 180
ZONING ROUND TABLE Flavel Shurtleff, Chairman 186
CONFERENCE CONCLUSIONS .... Tom Wallace, Chairman 190
Preface
THE PUBLICATION OF THE 1955 AMERICAN PLANNING AND Civic
ANNUAL has been delayed, but it is our belief that most of the ma-
terial prepared by eminent speakers for the Washington National
Citizens Planning Conference on Parks and Open Spaces and for the
35th Annual Meeting of the National Conference on State Parks, has a
lasting value beyond the day of delivery, and we, therefore, commend
to our readers' attention the factual accounts and philosophy of the
planning and conservation problems with which the United States is
now confronted.
The section on the Nation presents a New Program for National Parks
and National Forests by Directors Wirth and McArdle, recognition of
the value of national parks by the Secretary of the Interior, the Presi-
dent's Cabinet and Congress, through Senator Harry F. Byrd and
Representative John Saylor. Wilderness and Wildlife Resources are
discussed by Dr. Ira Gabrielson and Howard Zahnizer.
State Parks were considered at the Washington Conference on Parks
and Open Spaces in May and at the Vermont National Conference
on State Parks in September 1955. The Roll Call of the States takes
up the story from where the 1954 AMERICAN PLANNING AND Civic
ANNUAL left off, and the story will be continued in the 1956 ANNUAL
to be issued early in 1957. Articles on state parks in relation to safety,
design and facilities are presented. Standards for selection of state parks
are outlined by V. W. Flickinger. State control of roadside vegetation
is outlined by David Levin of the Public Roads Bureau, and the im-
portance of the new Federal Highway Systems is presented by Burton
W. Marsh of the American Automobile Association.
In addition to the papers presented by the distinguished speakers at
the Conference on Parks and Open Spaces, we circularized the urban
planning agencies to ascertain, if we could, how many city planning
commissions had what they considered an adequate comprehensive plan
for parks, either for the city or the metropolitan region. Not all of the
cities to which we wrote gave us the information; but it is significant
that not one city could claim that its park plans were adequate for the
future needs. As we have secured information concerning areas all over
the United States, we are convinced that one of the most important
steps in making urban regions into good living environments is for
planning commissions to study their parks and open spaces and make
plans for securing essential areas before our growing populations have
already caused congestion beyond hope of actual acquisition of areas
acknowledged to be needed.
It is our hope that those who read the articles presented in this
ANNUAL will study their home neighborhoods and give support to their
planning agencies when they make comprehensive plans for parks and
open spaces. There is need for state, regional and city action in this
field.
In addition to the American Institute of Park Executives, Council
of Metropolitan Regional Organizations, National Recreation Associa-
tion and the National Conference on State Parks which joined with the
American Planning and Civic Association in the call of the Conference
on Parks and Open Spaces, the following acted as cooperating sponsors:
American Automobile Association, American Institute of Planners,
American Nature Association, American Recreation Society, American
Society of Landscape Architects, Friends of the Land, Izaak Walton
League of America, Inc., National Association of Travel Organizations,
National Audubon Society, National Parks Association, National Trust
for Historic Preservation, Nature Conservancy, North American Wild-
life Foundation, Wilderness Society, and Wildlife Management In-
stitute.
With all of these organizations on the alert, a well defined public
opinion should be available to planning agencies which wish to adopt
comprehensive plans for parks and open spaces.
HARLEAN JAMES, Editor
December, 1956
THE NATION*
THE AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ASSOCIATION
An Adequate National Park System
for 300 Million People
CONRAD L. WIRTH, Director National Park Service,
Department of the Interior, Washington, D. C.
I AM glad to meet with this group today — to be among the friends
with whom I have been associated for many years in the fields of
planning and conservation of parks and other recreation areas.
When Miss James asked me to talk about "An Adequate National
Park System for 300 Million People", I accepted the opportunity
willingly but not lightly. For that is a formidable subject with which
the National Park Service is generally, and I am personally, very much
concerned.
We started last fall to take stock of ourselves — trying to analyze
our problems and faults, and we have been trying especially to foresee
what lies ahead for the American people in the way of their being able
to continue to enjoy the national parks and monuments and wholesome
outdoor recreation in related types of areas.
First, we might well look at our growing population and park at-
tendance. Last year, out of the 165 million people who live in the
United States, 48 million visits were made to areas administered by the
National Park Service. We had a hard time supplying services to these
millions — housing and camping facilities, roads, and interpretive
services were pressed to the utmost in meeting their needs. And we
did not, as many of you know, despite our best efforts, meet all demands.
But let us take a look into the future. Suppose the parks had to
serve a population of 300 million people instead of 165 million! The
Census Bureau has estimated that in ten years there may be almost
190 million people in the United States, and by 1975 the population
may be over 200 million. If the population continues to grow at the
present rate, we will have more than 300 million people in the year
2000 — only 45 years from now.
How many of the 300 million will be visitors to the areas of the
National Park System? Last year the ratio of park visitors to the
population of the United States was close to 1 to 3. Assuming that
that ratio holds steady the areas would be hosts to more than 88 million
visitors in the year 2000. But we know from experience that the actual
number of visitors is apt to be higher than that, as they have been in-
creasing at a much faster rate than the population. In 1916 the ratio of
*A11 of the papers in this section were delivered at the National Citizens Planning Con-
ference on Parks and Open Spaces for the American People, held in Washington, D. C.
May 22-25, 1955.
2 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
visitors to population was 1-300, in 1920 it was 1-100 and in 1954 it
was down to about I to 3.
Should we be concerned today with the demands that the 300 mil-
lion people in a future generation will make on the National Park
System? I think it is clear that we should. In the midst of our concern
about meeting current problems and providing for the enjoyment of
the parks this year and next year, we cannot forget the basic concept
set forth by the Congress when the National Park Service was estab-
lished— namely, that the parks, monuments, and related reservations
are also to be preserved for the enjoyment of future generations. And
by the same mandate they are to be preserved unimpaired. Therein
lies the problem.
For a number of years, there was a lag in providing the facilities
and services needed to preserve and protect the park areas and to
present them with pride to those fortunate enough to visit them. At
the same time, the parks were overwhelmed with an increasing flood
of visitors. The result was to place our Nation's heritage of irreplace-
able scenic and historic areas in danger of being loved to death. The
facilities of today are only adequate to carry the load of fifteen years
ago when we were planning on 25 million visitors. We have been getting
increased appropriations lately but unfortunately much of this ad-
ditional money has gone to replace facilities that wore out or became
obsolete during the emergency period of the war and the years that
followed, although recently we have been able to make real progress
in new construction and development programs.
The Superintendent of one of our Western parks gave me a good
illustration of one of our problems recently. He pointed out that the
vast majority of visitors to the park are Californians. But he pointed
out further that California's population is increasing at the rate of
8,000 a week. Automobile registrations are rising at the rate of 2500
a week. And at this rate, he reasons, if we were fortunate enough to
obtain funds to carry out all developments and improvements in our
present Master Plan, we would still be farther behind in 10 years than
we are now in meeting the needs of the public.
But of even greater concern, what will be the result of this impact
upon the parks? Must we some day face the fact that parks have a
carrying capacity even as a grazing range, and ration their use?
Or will it some day be necessary to preclude overnight use of most
of the parks, even for camping, which requires more space per person
than other types of overnight accommodations? Or can the problem
be met by the dispersal of use areas? In considering these problems we
bear in mind that it ought to be the privilege of every American to be
able to enjoy the experience of camping in these great outdoor spaces,
if that can possibly be arranged without destruction of the things we
are trying to preserve.
THE NATION 3
Only a few months ago, in connection with the development of the
Everglades National Park, a policy was established that excluded the
construction of overnight accommodations in the new visitor use area
at Flamingo on the theory that all of the available land would be
needed for day use, and that the private lands outside the park, 30
miles away, might best be used for overnight accommodations. Again
in overcrowded park areas, and where additional campgrounds are
needed, I am certain that campgrounds on adjoining public lands can
be found without too much disturbance to other land management
programs.
There are countless other problems with which we are faced, and
sometimes an old problem appears in new form. I am thinking of
the burning issue which arose only a short generation ago over whether
automobiles should be admitted to national parks. For a time road-
blocks were actually set up to keep them out. As the number of auto-
mobiles increased, the old stage coach roads were paved. These roads
led to the most interesting and scenic areas, and while in the stage
coach days the relatively few people who visited these areas did very
little damage, today, with the thousands of cars and millions of people,
great damage is being done. This problem needs careful study.
Now there are the airplane and the helicopter, and each year they
are increasing in popularity.
I have never advocated aircraft landing fields in the parks and
monuments. In fact, I have urged the Civil Aeronautics Administra-
tion to establish minimum altitudes below which aircraft should not
fly over the natural areas within the National Park System. But our
problem in this respect will continue to grow, especially with the grow-
ing popularity and efficiency of the helicopter.
We realize that, to meet the problems of the future, we must adopt
a new approach to many of our problems. These approaches of necessity
must be different. How different I do not yet know.
As a start toward meeting the national park needs of the year 2000,
we are looking toward the year 1966 — the year when the National Park
Service will celebrate its Golden Anniversary. Our first goal is to solve,
by that time, the difficult problem of protecting the scenic and historic
areas of the National Park System from overuse and, at the same time,
of providing optimum opportunity for public enjoyment of the parks.
Our goal for 1966 is a completed and executed plan to handle 75 million
visitors. We cannot handle 75 million visitors with facilities designed
for 25 million.
We are making an intensive study of the problems of protection,
public use, interpretation, development, staffing, legislation, financing,
and all other phases of park operation, in order to produce a compre-
hensive and integrated program of use and protection that is in har-
mony with the obligations of the National Park Service.
4 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
Our immediate objective is the development of a dynamic program
to be presented for consideration by the Department, the Bureau of
the Budget and the Congress beginning with the 1957 fiscal year esti-
mates. The ultimate objective is the execution of the program by the
time the Service celebrates its Golden Anniversary in 1966.
It is our hope that we can announce this Fall that our program is
well under way and can successfully be accomplished — that the parks
can be developed and staffed by 1966, so as to provide adequate facil-
ities of all types for the maximum number of visitors consistent with
guaranteeing the continued protection and preservation which is our
first responsibility. To obtain the approval and support of the Depart-
ment, Congress, and the public, we must have a sound program. This
we fully intend to develop.
A special staff is now at work reviewing the experiences of the past
and studying the expectations of the future. It is reviewing and re-
appraising the guiding policies and principles of the Service. Efforts
are being made through personal interviews and correspondence to
bring out individual thoughts on the many problems and how some of
them might better be solved. Further impetus is being given the project
by the establishment of steering committees in each regional office to
assist with the undertaking.
In our study, we are still guided by the original national park con-
cept. If our planning is carried on within the framework of that con-
cept, it should be possible to achieve a National Park System that will
be adequate to meet the needs of our people ten years from now and to
further develop that concept to meet the needs of a population of 300
million people.
To emphasize this point, I might remind you of these three brief
yet broad principles which were announced by the Secretary of the
Interior 37 years ago. They have never been changed and they are even
more important today.
First, that the national parks must be maintained in absolutely
unimpaired form for the use of future generations as well as those of
our own time ;
Second, that they are set apart for the use, observation, health, and
pleasure of the people ; and
Third, that the national interest must dictate all decisions affecting
public or private enterprise in parks.
Finally, we will not overlook our continued efforts to cooperate with
the States and to encourage them to carry their share of the increasing
load of providing outdoor recreation facilities for our population.
The National Park Service will continue and strengthen its cooperation
with the States in helping them to provide more adequate State park
systems and programs.
Both the States and the Federal Government have responsibilities
THE NATION 5
in the field of park development, and these responsibilities supplement
each other. The preservation of areas with scenic, historic and scientific
features of less than national significance is generally accepted as a
responsibility of the States and their political sub-divisions. Theirs too
is the responsibility for providing adequate outdoor recreation areas
and facilities with easy access of all their citizens. In order to provide
wholesome outdoor recreation for future generations of picnickers,
campers, hikers, and students of nature, a few of the States have been
setting aside unspoiled natural and scenic areas close to where the
people live, even if development must wait until later. This principle of
planning might well have wider application.
An adequate park system to meet the needs of the people now,
10 years from now, or the needs of the 300 million people in the year
2000 does not just grow. It has to be planned, step by step, in accord-
ance with certain guiding principles. We have to decide, among other
things, what kind of park system we want and what that system should
provide — what kind of areas are needed. Should the system be planned
to take care of the recreation needs of the country? Should it provide
amusement places?
We believe that the National Park System should be comprised
of areas of outstanding scenic, natural, and historic significance to the
Nation. Each area should possess certain matchless or unique qualities,
which entitle it to a position of first rank among areas of its kind, to
qualify for preservation by the Federal Government. The System, as
a whole, should embrace the broad outlines of our outdoor heritage and
of man's career on this continent.
The program for the selection and acquisition of the finest natural
and historic areas for inclusion in the National Park System should
not be permitted to give way to the selection of areas of poorer quality
to build a park system that is adequate in quantity but not in quality.
Neither should the areas of the System be selected because of their
accessibility. We believe that areas should be selected because they are
of outstanding interest to the people of the Nation as a whole and only
on that basis are they considered worthy of the Nation.
Careful analysis of the National Park System indicates that there
are types of areas of national significance not adequately represented.
From the standpoint of scenic types, for example, relatively little
that is representative of the Great Plains, the North Woods country
of the Great Lakes region, or the Mississippi River and its major tribu-
taries, has been included in the System. The majority of the large
national parks and monuments are in the West, where they were set
apart from the public domain. Aside from Acadia on the coast of
Maine, there is no national park to preserve a representative segment
of the northeastern part of the Country. The Everglades National
Park at the southern tip of Florida, is one representative segment of
6 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
the Southeast. The Great Smokies and Shenandoah National Park
with their connecting Blue Ridge National Parkway, represent the
eastern mountain range.
Neither Acadia nor Everglades was established primarily for its
seashore qualities. There is as yet only one area of the National Park
System authorized primarily to preserve the seashore, and that is the
Cape Hatteras National Seashore, which has been made possible by
private donations and by matching funds appropriated by the State.
The seashore is a type of area for which, in my opinion, there is an
especially urgent need. That need will be even greater for future genera-
tions, and the opportunities to conserve seashore areas are dwindling
fast.
In this connection, I am glad to say that as a result of a generous
donation to the Service, we are now making, and expect to have complete
this year, a study of the remaining opportunities to preserve outstand-
ing scenic and natural seashore areas along the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts.
A reconnaissance of this vast stretch has been finished and individual
areas are being studied and evaluated. The results are not yet ready for
release, but I understand that the survey staff has found areas of con-
siderably more than local or regional significance and different from any
other areas now represented in the National Park System, which might
well be set aside for future development. Many that do not meet the
national standards, I am sure would be of great value to help meet the
State and local needs. I hope that those that qualify for State and local
recreation use will be so dedicated.
From the standpoint of geology, a major geological category, the
meteor crater, is not represented in the National Park System, and it
may be desirable to give further consideration to the preservation of
other outstanding examples of major geological categories not repre-
sented in the System.
From the standpoint of preserving plant and animal types of bio-
logical interest, attention might be given to certain oceanic areas, such
as a tropical area in the Virgin Islands. As you know, there is now a
bill before the Congress to establish a Virgin Island National Park on
St. John Island. This would add a unique and highly important unit to
the System.
Of the main periods of American history, those that are least well
represented in the National Park System are:
The Development of the English Colonies from 1700 to 1775
The Advance of the Frontier to 1830
Political and Military Affairs from 1830 to 1861
Westward Expansion and the Extension of the National Boundaries
in the period 1830 to 1890
The Arts and Sciences to 1870 and
The Industrial, Agricultural and Business advances that have made
THE NATION 7
this Country strong and raised our standards of living
There is a disproportionately inadequate representation of Western
history in the National Park System.
We are also out of balance in the archeological field. Fifteen of our
19 archeological areas are in the Southwest, largely, perhaps, because
they were on public land at the time of their establishment. Outstand-
ing examples should be considered in other parts of the Country, in-
cluding the Territories.
Additionally, there is need, we believe, for a type of area that is
managed for the primary purpose of active recreation and this is different
from the national park concept. Such areas might be established on
lands and waters of local State, interstate or National significance for
their scenic and recreation qualities, but which, because of the necessity
of permitting other and unrelated uses, might not be eligible for park
status. Population distribution and the need for recreation opportunities
might be given considerable weight in the selection of these areas, and
they might also be established in the vicinity of national parks and
monuments where they could absorb a considerable portion of the im-
pact from camping, horseback riding, boating and other forms of active
outdoor recreation demands. The policies governing their administra-
tion could be considerably more flexible than those in the national parks,
since appropriate recreation use rather than preservation would be the
dominant theme. A national plan for such recreation areas, and for
permanent wilderness areas, the preservation of which is as yet beyond
the scope of most of the State park programs, might be worked out
between the States and the Federal agencies.
I do not wish to leave the impression that there should be large ad-
ditions to the National Park System. The point in question is an ade-
quate National Park System for 300 million people. But the problem
of providing for the outdoor recreation-area needs of the Nation is
closely related and, as we all know, involves other forms of land use
and the cooperation of many agencies. Since the primary responsibility
for meeting the day-to-day recreation-area needs rests with the States
and their political subdivisions, the Federal agencies can be most helpful
not by trying to carry the load themselves, but by facilitating the State
and local park and recreation-area programs.
I realize fully that I have not stated the dimensions of a National
Park System adequate for 300 million people. I have tried, however,
to present some of the dimensions of the problem, to tell some of the
steps we are taking toward meeting it and to suggest some trends in
our thinking and planning that might help us find more satisfying
answers. This, I believe, is in keeping with the sentiment of the Con-
gress when it authorized and directed us to cooperate with the States
and with other Federal agencies in providing adequate park, parkway
and recreation-area facilities for the people of the United States.
8 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
EDITOR'S NOTE.— The MISSION 66 program mentioned by Mr. Wirth has
since received the approval of the Secretary of the Interior, the President's Cabinet
and has been recognized by Congress in initial appropriations. The Seashore and
Recreation Survey on the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts was issued in 1956 under the
title Our Vanishing Shoreline. The bill to create the Virgin Islands National Park was
passed by Congress and signed by the President.
Recreational Use of the National Forests
DR. RICHARD E. McARDLE, Chief, Forest Service,
U. S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C.
AT ABOUT this time last Saturday afternoon I was in the entrance
of the Commerce Department Building. One of the exhibits there
is a "population clock," which shows the estimated present population
of the United States. At the time I saw it, the clock showed a population
of 164,952,766. As I stood watching it for a couple of minutes there
was an increase of 10. Every 12 seconds there is a net gain of 1 in the
number of people our country must feed, clothe, and shelter — around
the clock, hour after hour, day after day, week after week, every 12
seconds, one more addition to our population. If I were to go back
and look at the clock this afternoon, I would find that since I saw it
Saturday afternoon we have 22,000 more people. In 3 days there has
been added to our population the equivalent of a good-sized small town.
Now why do I start with this illustration? Am I trying to frighten
you? No. I see no reason to be afraid of a steady increase in our popula-
tion. Ours is a big country, still rich in many of the natural resources
from which we obtain not only the bare necessities of life but additional
things for a high standard of living and a fuller, more satisfying way of
life.
I have no doubt about our ability to provide for more people. But
to do so I think we must take a hard look and a long look toward the
years ahead. We are going to have to do this anyway, sooner or later.
And planning done too late is a costly way to do the job.
I am convinced also that these plans for the future must include
provision for the ever-wider, ever-longer, ever-swifter stream of Ameri-
cans seeking relaxation and enjoyment in the out-of-doors. This is one
of the significant trends of the times. Right now, today, we are witness-
ing and feeling the impact of a dynamic trend toward outdoor activities
of all kinds. People are moving from cities to the suburbs. Some jump
clear over suburbs to establish homes in the country. For their vaca-
tions, more and more are going to the forests and parks, the seashores
and high mountains to play and rest and escape the pressures of modern
living. Some satisfy the urge to get out of doors by gardening or by
broiling meat on outdoor fireplaces in their backyards. Others seek
relaxation in city parks; still others seek the solitude of remote wilder-
ness areas. There are all shades in between.
THE NATION 9
This movement to the out-of-doors has been explained as a result of
more leisure time, better highways, more automobiles, improved
standards of living. I think it goes deeper than that. Within the souls
of men there is a deep-seated primitive desire to get back to the soil —
close to Nature. This urge seems to express itself as the tension and
competition of modern living grows. Escape to the out-of-doors is a
kind of emotional safety valve that helps to keep things from blowing
up. It is vital to the health and well-being of our country that our
citizens have an opportunity occasionally to get away and enjoy un-
spoiled natural surroundings.
Many of the social and health problems that are plaguing us in-
dividually and collectively could be helped materially if we could get
more people out into the open more often.
I read a statement the other day attributed to a police chief in one of
our large western cities to the effect that a check of police sources in
the United States has revealed that juvenile delinquency almost never
follows a program of outdoor activity. The value of outdoor activity in
developing desirable character traits in young people is well known to
all of us. I am sure that it is of equal value in developing and main-
taining the moral and physical stamina of older people.
I do not mean to preach a sermon. I do mean to say that I believe
the work you are doing is of great importance to your communities and
to the country. So I am glad to have this opportunity to talk with you
about the part the national forests have in meeting the growing demand
for outdoor recreation. To provide opportunities for fishing, hunting,
camping, hiking, skiing, and other outdoor activities is a major part
of our overall national-forest program.
The job has been growing faster than our ability to handle it. In
1924 there were 4 million recreational visits to the national forests.
In 1954 there were 40 million. Recreational use of the national forests
has doubled in the past 7 years. If that rate of increase merely continues
and gets no larger, the recreational use of the national forests will be
80 million visits by 1963. From there on it is anyone's guess. National-
forest recreational use has increased more rapidly than the total increase
in population. People are coming to the national forests in greater and
greater numbers in spite of inadequate facilities, in spite of total lack
of any special improvements in some areas. I suspect that we are only
seeing the beginning.
I am sure you know that in many respects the national forests are
quite different from the recreational areas with which most of you have
been particularly f concerned. The national forests are dedicated to
multiple-purpose management; whereas the national parks and monu-
ments, municipal and State parks, and most other recreational areas
are managed primarily or exclusively for recreation.
The national forests were established 50 years ago for the primary
10 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
purposes of preserving conditions favorable to streamflow and for pro-
viding a continuous supply of timber. But in addition to these two
primary uses they furnish many other services, including recreation.
The national forests are the habitat for many species of fish and wild-
life. Exploration and development of minerals is permitted under the
laws of the United States. Livestock grazing is permitted on lands
suitable for that purpose. We issue special permits for hundreds of dif-
ferent kinds of occupancy and use, ranging all the way from cultivation
of small patches of land suitable for farming, to rights-of-way for power
lines, pipelines, and railroads, to permits for summer homes, resorts,
and many other things. From the very beginning, our guiding principle
has been that the resources of the national forests should be conserved
with wise use. The greatest public good in the long run has been our
measuring stick and our goal.
Multiple-purpose use, of course, does not mean that each and every
major use will be practiced simultaneously on the same piece of ground.
For example, areas designated for intensive recreational use are man-
aged primarily, sometimes exclusively, for that purpose. On some
areas, timber production is the dominant use. On these areas other uses,
such as grazing, wildlife production, and extensive outdoor recreation
must be harmonized with the objectives of protecting watersheds and
producing and harvesting timber. Some national-forest areas are used
to provide winter food for big game animals. On these areas, livestock
grazing may be given second priority.
Multiple use of the national forests is the coordination of various
uses, not on each acre, but on large blocks of land in a way designed to
get the optimum combination of uses for the benefit of the public.
Making multiple use work and fitting public recreation into this scheme
of management is not an easy job, but it can be accomplished and is
being done successfully on many national-forest areas. Almost daily
this job is becoming more complex as the pressures mount for more
public recreation, more timber harvesting, more wildlife, more water,
more minerals, more grazing.
Now let me get down to what 181 million acres of national forests
offer in the way of recreation. We believe that the national forests
should provide an opportunity to enjoy simple forest-type recreation.
We encourage camping, picnicking, swimming, skiing, hiking, riding,
wilderness travel, hunting, fishing, mountain climbing, and the like.
We do not encourage urban types of recreation because we believe these
should be enjoyed in city and county areas. We try to keep our fa-
cilities simple and appropriate to the environment. We do not conduct
tours, give lectures, or sponsor organized sports.
We believe that national-forest recreation should supplement the
recreational facilities of States, cities, and the national parks and
should not compete with or duplicate them. For many years we have
THE NATION 11
cooperated closely with the National Park Service and the States.
People need variety in recreation and outdoor environment. No one
form of outdoor recreation can satisfy all people. School playgrounds,
city parks, state parks and forests, parkways and highways, national
parks and monuments, seashores, lakes and streams, and the national
forests are needed to satisfy the varied tastes and requirements of the
public. All such areas should be developed and used to contribute the
particular type or types of recreation for which they are best suited.
The national forests provide many opportunities to enjoy wilderness.
Wilderness requires relatively large areas of rugged back country. On
the national forests there are 79 wilderness, wild, roadless, and primitive
areas totaling 14 million acres. Here we plan to preserve the primitive
environment. I could talk at length on this aspect of national-forest
recreation, but I see that Howard Zahniser will follow me, and that's
his subject.
Hunting, fishing, riding, and hiking are available on most national
forests. Here are the greatest public hunting and fishing areas in the
country — millions of acres without a "no trespassing" sign. The States
manage the fish and game, and State licenses are required for hunting
and fishing. The Forest Service and the States cooperate closely on
management of the habitat.
Thousands of miles of trails, both outside of and inside of wilderness
areas, offer some wonderful hiking. The national forests include many
miles of the famous Oregon Skyline, Cascade Crest, Sierra, and Ap-
palachian trails.
Highways and roads through the national forests are a recreational
asset which many people usually do not fully appreciate. In addition
to the main highways, which often pass through spectacular scenery
over mountain passes, or along rugged canyons, the national forests
have many special recreational drives and back roads of great charm.
The Angeles Crest Highway, the Mt. Shasta Road, the Pikes Peak
Highway, the Needles Drive, the Catalina Mountain Highway, the
Sandia Crest Highway, the Mt. Evans Road, the Beartooth Highway,
and many others are famous locally and even nationally. Highways
and roads in the national forests have more than a hundred million
visits per year by people driving over them just to enjoy the scenery
and forest environment. The Forest Service does everything possible to
preserve and enhance the attractiveness of highways and other major
roads by preserving the natural environment along the roadside. We
establish roadside zones of 200 feet or more in width, and these are kept
in as natural a condition as possible.
Winter sports have come of age on the national forests in the last
20 years. The national forests have much of the best ski terrain in the
West, and development of ski areas, ski lifts, and ski resorts has been
phenomenal. The development of skiing as a popular sport illustrates
12 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
how land use and values change. Twenty-five or 30 years ago the high
mountain passes in the West were something to get over in the winter —
now they are teeming with skiers, and State highway crews have to
plow out huge parking areas.
The National Park Service and the Forest Service have coordinated
exceptionally well on winter-sports developments. The National Park
Service does not believe that permanent ski-lift installations fit into the
national parks' scheme of things, and I think they are right. To take
care of this mass demand the Forest Service encourages the develop-
ment of ski areas on the national forests. The national parks provide
ski touring and ski areas served by rope tows and temporary lifts.
The organization camp is another link in the chain of recreational
uses on the national forests. Groups of young people have a particular
need for outdoor recreation where they can get guidance programs,
education, and organized sports. Such camps must have simple fa-
cilities for sleeping, eating, and play. The Forest Service has 60 organiza-
tion camps available at low cost to public-spirited groups who sponsor
vacations for young people. We also allow organizations to build their
own camps on the national forests under special-use permits. Many
camps have been built by the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, Y.M.C.A.,
church groups, lodges, cities, and counties. Last year these organization
camps contributed almost 3 million man-days or boy- and girl-days of
recreation for young people.
The Forest Service permits privately owned resorts to operate on
national-forest land if there is public need for these services and accom-
modations. Resorts are expected to maintain structures appropriate
to the environment. They serve many people who prefer to "rough it"
with all the comforts of home.
We also recognize the desire of many people to have summer homes
in the forest by leasing summer-home lots for vacation cabins. This,
being a private use of national-forest land, ranks far below public uses
in priority. Summer homes are carefully laid out on areas which are
not needed for or are not suitable for higher priority uses. Permits
authorizing summer homes require that they be built to reasonable
standards and that sanitation be well taken care of. There are some
17,000 summer homes in the national forests.
Forty million visits now overtax the capacity of national-forest recre-
ation areas and our ability to provide adequate sanitation, clean-up,
and maintenance with the funds available. Sanitation and clean-up are
inadequate at many popular recreation areas, and the facilities are
wearing out. Over-crowding of popular areas is a common occurence
during summer weekends, and the overflow of people who use un-
improved forest areas along the roads creates serious sanitation, fire-
control, and water-pollution problems.
We have attempted to solve part of the problem of inadequate funds
THE NATION 13
by having concessionaires operate some of the larger, more intensively
developed areas on a charge basis. About 50 areas are now being oper-
ated by concessionaires. The highest charge is 24 cents per person per day.
Areas operated by concessionaires help by relieving us of the cost of clean-
up and maintenance at these areas, but it is only a partial solution.
At most, only 200 of our 4,700 improved campground and picnic areas
are large enough to be profitably operated as charge areas.
Some States, counties, and cities have contributed generously toward
the operation and maintenance of national-forest recreation areas which
are used mainly by local people. Last year $1,250,000 was contributed
in money, time, and materials. California, Utah, Colorado, the cities
of Tucson, Salt Lake City, Ogden, Denver, Los Angeles, and others
have helped us keep conditions passable on some heavily used areas.
Our most urgent and immediately pressing problem is to get on top
of the job of adequate clean-up and maintenance of existing recreational
improvements. Although we have had some recent increases in appro-
priations, although we have shifted part of the load to concessionaires,
and although we have been getting more cooperation from local agencies,
we are losing ground. We are not keeping up with the increased use, or
with the need for replacement of improvements, most of which were
built long before World War II.
The next most urgent job is to expand existing facilities and improve
new areas to take care of the expanding mass recreational use. Some of
our present areas are losing their attractiveness. The soil is compacted,
and the cover is wearing out. Trees and other vegetation have no chance
to reproduce under such conditions. Dispersal and rotation of use would
help solve this problem, but would require development of alternate
areas, and that costs more money than we have.
From a recreation-planning standpoint we are in fairly good shape.
Each national forest has a reasonably satisfactory recreation plan. I
feel certain that sufficient areas already are set aside for future public
recreation to accommodate the expected increase for the next 10 years.
Sufficient other areas satisfactory for public recreation can be found to
take care of the use for many years to come, provided funds become
available for construction of the necessary facilities. We shall try to
keep our forest recreation plans up to date and shall continue to reserve
areas suitable for public uses. We are particularly careful to avoid
putting low-priority uses, such as summer homes, on areas which may
be needed for future public use.
It would be logical to end this talk by telling you what we plan to do
about the millions of additional recreational visitors we will have by
1975. I would not be honest if I said that we know exactly what we will
do with them. We don't. I can assure you, however, that we have the
land to take care of them — it is waiting to be developed. We have
trained personnel to take charge of the work, who know where and how
14 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
to develop needed areas. We are a bigger, stronger, more experienced
Forest Service today than we were when this rush to the forests started.
Given the means to do the job, we can plan and build the facilities to
meet future recreational needs on the national forests. So I think I'll
end my comments this way: If anyone doubts the present need for
more adequate recreational facilities, let him go to any national forest
on a pleasant weekend. If anyone doubts the ever-increasing need to
provide for the future, let him go take a look at the population clock over
in the Commerce Building. Somehow, someway, we must provide for
this major use of public forest areas.
The Need for Wilderness Areas
HOWARD ZAHNISER, Executive Secretary of The Wilderness Society and
Editor of The Living Wilderness, Washington, D. C.
IN ADDITION to our needs for urban and suburban parks and
open spaces, in addition to the need for a countryside of rural loveli-
ness, a landscape of beauty for our living, and in addition to the needs
for parkways and parks and well-developed areas for all kinds of outdoor
recreation, there is in our planning a need also to secure the preservation
of some areas that are so managed as to be left unmanaged — areas that
are undeveloped by man's mechanical tools and in every way unmodified
by his civilization. These are the areas of wilderness that still live on in
our national parks, national forests, state parks and forests, and indeed
in various other categories of land likewise.
These are areas with values that are in jeopardy not only from ex-
ploitation for commodity purposes and from appropriation for engineer-
ing uses. Their peculiar values are also in danger from development for
recreation, even from efforts to protect and manage them as wilderness.
It is important to recognize these peculiar values. It is important to
distinguish our need for the areas as wilderness from the needs which they
serve along with our other outdoor areas of parks, parkways, forests,
lakes, and streams. It is fortunate in a program so comprehensive as
this one for the National Citizens Planning Conference on Parks and
Open Spaces for the American People that there is consideration given
to "Need for Wilderness Areas."
I regret that you do not have someone more capable than I to inter-
pret this need, for I feel keenly a rather narrow limitation both in
analyzing the problem we face and in representing the values with which
we are concerned. It would undoubtedly be better also if we could ap-
proach this discussion through testimony rather than discourse, for I
see about me many whose experience in the wilderness is richer than
my own and in whose variety of impressions there doubtless is the
best basis for the conclusions that I must first suggest and only then
THE NATION 15
submit to discussion. And there certainly are others here much more
competent than I am to relate these rich values of wilderness to our
programs for setting aside reservations as a means of protection. I can
only plead a keen interest, a very deep concern, and an eagerness to do
whatever I can to stimulate the more effective contributions of others.
Truly it would be hollow to discuss the wilderness except with a
consciousness of its appeals and inspirations. Yet within the scope of
this symposium there is hardly opportunity to evoke in the words of
one speaker the experiences in the wilderness upon which depends all
that is said. It will also thus be the easier to escape the need to dis-
tinguish the concrete wilderness experience from the experience in other
areas of the great outdoors. How differs the experience that I recall of
the robin singing so marvellously and melodiously in the evening along
the Lake Solitude shores of the Cloud Peak Primitive Area of Wyoming's
Big Horn National Forest from that of the liquid loveliness of the wood
thrush that sang from the precious patch of woodland behind my own
suburban home just as I sought an illustration of this perplexity? Here
I need not answer this question but simply call it up for its answers in
your own minds. For it is not the concrete experience with which I am
concerned in this particular discussion but rather the abstract one that
relates to our concepts of wilderness and our policies of reservations.
Of course, there is a great and practical need that resides in the de-
sires of so many people for wilderness experiences, a need that should
certainly be met. There is likewise a practical need for realizing our ideal
of preserving for everyone the privilege of choosing to enjoy the wilder-
ness if he or she so wishes. These are definite, practical needs for which
we should, of course, provide in our programs.
I recognize these needs, yet I wish here to try to probe deeper into our
fundamentals, to see if there really is a need that if unsatisfied would lead
to deprivations or sacrifices that would be profoundly tragic or even
destructive of our way of living.
SUPERLATIVE VALUES OF THE WILDERNESS
But, first I must point out another practical or immediate need, one
that can be recognized as residing in our compulsion to save from
destruction whatever is best. Some of our strongest determination to
preserve wilderness arises from this motive. Robert Marshall, whose
memory I honor with admiration and deep gratitude, conveys such an
appreciation of the wilderness as a superlative in a short essay found
among his papers by his brother George Marshall a couple of years ago
and published posthumously as the editorial in the Summer 1954 issue
of The Living Wilderness. He was essaying a demonstration of "certain
distinctive values" that come to a person with a return for a time to the
primitive life of the wilderness. I want to quote seven paragraphs,
partly because they place before us so authoritatively the benefits of
wilderness, but mainly to suggest the need for preserving the wilderness
16 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
because it is something superlative. Note the variety of superlatives in
these paragraphs— "best," "ideal," "perfect," "unique," "most per-
fect."
"The wilderness," wrote Bob Marshall, "furnishes the best environment which
remains in the country for physical adventure. It is difficult to overestimate the
importance adventure assumes in the longings of innumerable vigorous people.
Lack of opportunity to satisfy such longings undoubtedly is responsible for much
unhappiness, for a considerable portion of the crime which is so often committed as
a means of self-expression, and, if we are to believe William James and Bertrand
Russell, even for war.
"A wilderness journey provides the ideal conditions for developing physical hardi-
ness. In the wilderness a person cannot buy transportation or services. He must
provide them for himself. He cannot find machinery, to relieve him of the need for
expending his own strength and energy. If he gets into trouble he must get himself
out of it or take the consequences.
"The wilderness also furnishes the perfect environment for peacefulness and
relaxation. Time is of no consequence in an environment which has been developing
through an unbroken chain of natural sequences for millions of years. In the true
wilderness there are no jarring notes, no discordant clashes with one's instinctive
sense of what is fitting and proper.
"From an esthetic standpoint the wilderness is unique because in it alone im-
mensity is a major quality of the beauty which one enjoys. The values which one
gets in a view from some lofty mountain top cannot be comprehended at all if one
tries to reduce them to color or form or pattern.
"All these esthetic values are present, but they are blended with the dominant
value of being a part of an immensity so great that the human being who looks upon
it vanishes into utter insignificance.
"The wilderness is also unique esthetically in that it stimulates not just the
sense of sight, as does art, or the sense of sound, as does music, but all of the senses
which man has. The traveler wandering at evening to the shore of some wilderness
lakelet senses through his sight the pink sunset sky and the delightful pattern which
the deep bay makes among the spruce trees which rise from its shores; senses through
his hearing the lapping of the water against the rocky shore and the evening song of
the thrush; senses through his smell the scent of balsam and the marsh flowers at the
water's edge; senses through his touch the gentle wind which blows on his forehead
and the softness of the sphagnum beneath his feet. The wilderness is all of these
senses harmonized with immensity into a form of beauty which to many human
beings is the most perfect experience of the earth."
BUT Is THE WILDERNESS ESSENTIAL?
Who that can thus see so clearly these superlative values of the
wilderness through the perceptions and interpretations of Robert
Marshall can fail to sense a need for preserving wilderness areas? Who
in a democratic government that seeks to serve the public interest
even for the sake of minorities would wish to lose an opportunity to
realize a policy for wilderness preservation? Who that looks on into the
future with a concern for such values would not wish to insure for
posterity the freedom to choose the privilege of knowing the unspoiled
wilderness?
But are these superlative values essential?
Is the exquisite also a requisite?
I think it is.
I believe that at least in the present phase of our civilization we
have a profound, a fundamental need for areas of wilderness — a need
THE NATION 17
that is not only recreational and spiritual but also educational and
scientific, and withal essential to a true understanding of ourselves, our
culture, our own natures, and our place in all Nature.
This need is for areas of the earth within which we stand without our
mechanisms that make us immediate masters over our environment —
areas of wild Nature in which we sense ourselves to be, what in fact I
believe we are, dependent members of an interdependent community of
living creatures that together derive their existence from the Sun.
By very definition this wilderness is a need. The idea of wilderness
as an area without man's influence is man's own concept. Its values are
human values. Its preservation is a purpose that arises out of man's
own sense of his fundamental needs.
THE WILDERNESS As VACATION COUNTRY
Wilderness to most of us is vacation country, thought about for the
most part in connection with occasional good-time escapes from a
civilized life which itself somehow or other seems to be "reality." It is
usually only after reflection that one perceives the true reality in the
wilderness.
It is, of course, not surprising that recreational values are generally
understood as representing the dominant importance of wilderness in
our modern civilization. Only in a society that produces the erosion of
human beings, the wearing away of soul and body and spirit that is so
familiar in our modern circumstances, does the concept of recreation
appear.
The wilderness represents the antithesis of all that produces these
conditions which recreation remedies. It not only provides the kind of
recreation most needed by the increasingly large number who seek
wilderness, but it also affords the background for the kind of outdoor
recreation for which conveniences and accommodations are provided —
the frontier where those who do not wish to experience the rigors of
wilderness living and travel may stiU know in some degree the tonic
benefits of its wildness.
Recreational values of the wilderness are thus not only intrinsic but
also pervasive throughout the outdoor recreation program of a society
with the tastes and resources of the United States. Wilderness preserva-
tion is a part therefore of a comprehensive recreational program — a
very important part of such a program's provision for outdoor recrea-
tion— and it is the ultimate resource for that phase of outdoor recreation
that ministers to the individual as such.
But wilderness vacations have those overtones that make them more
than narrowly recreational. They are more likely to be joyous than
merry, more refreshing than exciting, more engrossing than diverting.
Their rewards are satisfactions. There is likely to be a seriousness about
wilderness recreation and an earnestness among those who seek it. So
18 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
philosophers of education who describe their goals in such terms as
"life adjustment" and "personality development" may find in the
wilderness a most valuable resource, and recreational values in such a
context become profoundly educational.
THE WILDERNESS AND HUMAN REALITIES
Deeper and broader than the recreational value of wilderness, al-
though indeed encompassing it, is the importance that relates it to our
essential being, indicating that the understandings which come in its
surroundings are those of true reality. Our lives seem so derivative
from the wilderness, we ourselves seem so dependent on a renewal of our
inspiration from these wild sources, that I wonder sometimes if we could
long survive a final destruction of all wilderness. Are we not truly and
in reality human, essentially, as spiritual creatures nurtured and sus-
tained— directly or indirectly — by a wildness that must always be re-
newed from a living wilderness?
Is it not with some such understanding as this that we realize the es-
sential importance of our wilderness areas?
Is it not thus that we can explain the fact that a wilderness vacation
is remembered as more than sport, more than fun, more than simple
recreation?
Are not these the understandings which give such profound significance
to the longer sojourns that a civilized man or woman occasionally spends
in a return to the wilderness?
It is characteristic of wilderness to impress its visitors with their
relationship to other forms of life, and to afford those who linger an
intimation of the interdependence of all life. In the wilderness it is thus
possible to sense most keenly our human membership in the whole com-
munity of life on the Earth. And in this possibility is perhaps one ex-
planation for our modern deep-seated need for wilderness.
Because we are so well able to do things, we forget that we can do
them only because something else is done. We forget that we can con-
tinue only so long as other men, other animals, and other forms of life
also keep on doing things. We forget that the real source of all our life
is not in ourselves, not even in the Earth itself, but more than 90 million
miles away, in the Sun. And not one of us is able alone to live on this
great source. We live only as members of a community.
If for a time some of us might seem to do well at the tragic expense of
other life in this community, we can be sure that it would likewise be
at the expense of our children, our grandchildren, and our great-grand-
children through the generations that might live. For we know that
we can live on in our descendants only if our Earth community lives on
with them. We not only exist but we are immortal on the Earth only as
members of a great community.
These are facts and understandings that have been known to us only
THE NATION 19
a comparatively short time — through the observations and studies
made by our scientists — and not all of us have appreciated them rightly.
It is not long since man thought of himself as the center of the universe,
thought even of the Sun — the very source of all our life — as a light by
day revolving about the Earth. As our new understanding has come-
through science — science also has brought us many other new and
wonderful discoveries, and the new knowledge of what we are has been
overlooked by many of us in our eagerness for the new knowledge of
what we can do. We have become as proud over what we can do as ever
our ancestors could have been over themselves as the center of the
universe.
We deeply need the humility to know ourselves as the dependent
members of a great community of life, and this can indeed be one of the
spiritual benefits of a wilderness experience. Without the gadgets, the
inventions, the contrivances whereby men have seemed to establish
among themselves an independence of nature, without these distractions,
to know the wilderness is to know a profound humility, to recognize
one's littleness, to sense dependence and interdependence, indebtedness,
and responsibility.
Perhaps, indeed, this is the distinctive ministration of wilderness to
modern man, the characteristic effect of an area which we most deeply
need to provide for in our preservation programs.
EDUCATIONAL VALUES
Thus, the most profound of all wilderness values in our modern world
is an educational value.
As the so-called conquest of Nature has progressed, men and women —
separated by civilization from the life community of their origin — have
become less and less aware of their dependence on other forms of life
and more and more misled into a sense of self sufficiency and into a
disregard of their interdependence with the other forms of life with which
they — together — derive their existence from the solar center of the
universe.
In the areas of wilderness that are still relatively unmodified by man
it is, however, possible for a human being, adult or child, to sense and
see his own humble, dependent relationship to all of life.
In these areas, thus, are the opportunities for so important, so
neglected a part of our education — the gaining of the true understanding
of our past, ourselves, and our world which will enable us to enjoy the
conveniences and liberties of our urbanized, industrialized, mechanized
civilization and yet not sacrifice an awareness of our human existence
as spiritual creatures nurtured and sustained by and from the great
community of life that comprises the wildness of the universe, of which
we ourselves are a part.
Paradoxically, the wilderness which thus teaches modern man his
20 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
dependence on the whole community of life can also teach him a needed
personal independence — an ability to care for himself, to carry his own
burdens, to provide his own fuel, prepare his own food, furnish his own
shelter, make his own bed, and — perhaps most remarkable of all —
transport himself by walking.
In these lessons are further the lessons of history — a stimulus to
patriotism of the noblest order — for in the wilderness the land still lives
as it was before the pioneers fashioned in and from it the civilization we
know and enjoy.
With these lessons come also the understanding that physical, psychic,
and spiritual human needs are such that wilderness recreation should
always be available and, in fact, should be enjoyed to a much greater
extent than it now is.
Thus recreational and educational values of the wilderness merge.
In a culture like that which we call modern we can be sure that it
will be increasingly important for students, of the present and of future
generations, to know what the wilderness has to teach — through their
own experiences; through educators who are informed and corrected by
wilderness experiences; through photographs, paintings, writings, and
other educational and informational materials with a validity insured
by a still living wilderness.
So long as wilderness exists in reality, providing actual resorts for
human beings, giving a sense of actuality to pictorial and literary repre-
sentations of the wilderness, and affording the scenes for further re-
search, so long will the safeguards against an urban, industrial, mech-
anized ignorance of the facts of human life be effective.
HISTORICAL VALUES
There are monumental or historical values of the wilderness also,
values which are closely related both to educational and recreational
values. The wilderness has been described as "a piece of the long ago
that we still have with us," and it is highly prized by many people as
such. It perpetuates on our continent not only the scene of the pioneer-
ing activities of the first white men in this hemisphere but also a still
more ancient scene. The areas preserved are monuments to the pioneers'
conquests, but they also are samples of the natural world without the
influence of modern man. They have deep values in the continuing op-
portunity they afford to relive the lives of ancestors and thus, with also
the anticipation of posterity's similar interest, to participate in the im-
mortality of the generations.
SCIENTIFIC VALUES
There are profoundly important scientific values of the wilderness
also. These are similar to those of historical importance in depending on
the preservation of areas as they existed, and exist, without the in-
fluence of modern man. These values too have an educational aspect,
THE NATION 21
but their more precisely scientific importance is in relation to research.
Their research uses are dual: They afford the scenes for fundamental
investigations of the natural world of living creatures unmodified by
man; they afford also "check" areas where none of the factors being
compared in a particular study (land-use research, for example) have
been operative.
The scientific values pertain not only to research and original in-
vestigation but also to the study and observation that are essentially
educational in their purpose. Wilderness areas, including the smaller
natural areas and also the extensive wild regions, should accordingly be
preserved for the sake of the field study that they make possible for
students in each generation. They serve this purpose for the summer
camps of youth organizations, for field stations of college summer-
school classes, and also for the more advanced excursions of graduate
students. And Aldo Leopold exclaimed: "As a matter of fact, there
is no higher or more exciting sport than that of ecological observation."
WILDERNESS NEEDS INTER-RELATED
So we have various needs for wilderness that are all derived from a
need to maintain an awareness of our human relationships to all life, the
need to guard ourselves against a false sense of our own sufficiency. We
need to draw ourselves constantly toward the center of things and not
allow our eccentricities to carry us off on a tangent, toward increasing
unhappiness.
We are a part of the wildness of the universe. That is our nature.
Our noblest, happiest character develops with the influence of wildness.
Away from it we degenerate into the squalor of slums or the frustration
of clinical couches. With the wilderness we are at home.
Some of us think we see this so clearly that for ourselves, for our
children, our continuing posterity, and our fellow men we covet with a
consuming intensity the fullness of the human development that keeps
its contact with wildness. Out of the wilderness, we realize, has come
the substance of our culture, and with a living wilderness — it is our
faith — we shall have also a vibrant vital culture — an enduring civiliza-
tion of healthful happy people who like Antaeus perpetually renew
themselves in contact with the earth.
This is not a disparagement of our civilization — no disparagement at
all — but rather an admiration of it to the point of perpetuating it. We
like the beef from the cattle grazed on the public domain. We relish the
vegetables from the lands irrigated by virtue of the Bureau of Reclama-
tion— OUR Rureau of Reclamation, too, we should recall, now and
then. We carry in our packs aluminum manufactured with the help of
hydroelectric power from great reservoirs. We motor happily on paved
highways to the approaches of our wilderness. We journey in stream-
lined trains and in transcontinental airplanes to conferences on wilder-
22 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
ness preservation. We nourish and refresh our minds from books manu-
factured out of the pulp of our forests. We enjoy the convenience and
comfort of our way of living — urban, village, and rural. And we want
this civilization to endure and to be enjoyed on and on by healthful
happy citizens.
WILDERNESS PRESERVATION
It is this civilization, this culture, this way of living that will be
sacrificed if our wilderness is lost. What sacrificel
Our only hope to avert this loss is in our deliberate effort to pre-
serve the wilderness we have. The ramifications of our developing
mechanical enterprises are such that only those areas which are set
aside for preservation will persist as wilderness.
It behooves us then to do two things: First we must see that an
adequate system of wilderness areas is designated for preservation, and
then we must allow nothing to alter the wilderness character of the
preserves.
We have made an excellent start on such a program. Our obligation
now — to those who have been our pioneers and to those of the future,
as well as to our own generation — is to see that this program is not un-
done but perfected.
In our marvelous national park system; in the wilderness, wild,
primitive, and roadless areas of our national forests; on extensive tracts
of Indian reservations; in certain units of the national wildlife refuge
system; and in state parks, and some others too, we have areas that
have either been set aside as wilderness or that are being protected in
a way that safeguards wilderness.
The process of designation of areas of wilderness for preservation,
however, is not complete as yet. There are still some to be added —
especially grassland, seashore, and desert. There is no doubt, so far as
I know, about the correctness of the designation of any of the areas
now being preserved. There are, I understand, some boundary adjust-
ments that need to be made for certain areas that were established with-
out opportunity for adequate care as to exact boundaries. There are
zoning questions in some of our parks. There are some additions that
can be made to established areas. There are private holdings within
these public areas that should be acquired.
These aspects of the perfection of the designations should be cared
for in a persisting program. And the other potential units in this system
of wilderness should be sought out as soon as possible.
For these areas of wilderness we should obtain the maximum possible
degree of security. We need Congressional action, to provide for their
preservation as wilderness, and we should move forward as steadily as
we can toward this action.
NATIONAL WILDERNESS SYSTEM PROPOSED
A bill to establish a national wilderness preservation system should
THE NATION 23
be drawn up as soon as possible with the joint cooperation of the federal
land-administering agencies and conservation organizations.
It should affirm the national policy to preserve such a wilderness
system.
It should define the proper use of areas within the system and should
provide for the protection of the areas from inconsistent uses.
Areas to be included might well be specified in the bill, and provision
for additions to the list of areas by executive order or formal designation
by the Secretary of Agriculture or the Secretary of the Interior could be
included, with the further provision that the removal of any area from
the system can be effected only by Congress.
The bill should make clear that no changes in jurisdiction would be
involved and that no new land-administration agency would be estab-
lished. The agency administering an area designated as a unit in the
national wilderness preservation system, according to this proposal,
would simply be charged with the responsibility of preserving its wilder-
ness character. National forest areas would continue as at present but
with the guarantee of perpetuity that Congress can give. National park
and monument areas would continue under the administration of the
National Park Service. Such national wildlife refuges as would be in-
cluded would continue to be administered as wildlife refuges, but these
particular refuges would be preserved without developments and in-
stallations that would alter their wilderness character.
In other words, each area in the system would continue to serve the
peculiar purpose that it has, or would have, in the program of its particu-
lar administering agency, but every agency would be charged with the
responsibility of preserving the wilderness character of any area of the
national wilderness preservation system in its custody.
A Wilderness Preservation Commission, modeled possibly after the
Migratory Bird Conservation Commission that has functioned in con-
nection with the establishment of wildlife refuges, might be set up to
assist in the establishment and administration of this wilderness system
—to conduct a survey in cooperation with land-administering agencies,
to recommend to Congress any necessary adjustments in the program,
and to prepare — or coordinate the preparation of — maps and other
material for the information of the public with reference to this system.
CONCLUSION
Conservation is both practical and idealistic, as is well demonstrated
in our concern with wilderness preservation.
It is good and sound to realize that in preserving areas of wilderness
we are recognizing our own true human interest. It seems good, ethical,
to consider ourselves as members of a community of life that embraces
the earth — and to see our own welfare as arising from the prosperity of
the community.
24 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
Yet there may be danger in too conscious, too deliberate, too intent
an effort to see all in terms of our own welfare. Jesus suggested that
self-seeking is not the way to self-realization; not deliberately but
through indirection human beings realize their best welfare, by losing
sight of themselves.
It is a great satisfaction to be able to demonstrate to another that an
unspoiled wilderness is important because it serves man's need for
"escape," but going to the wilderness to escape from something is no
certain way of actually being in the wilderness at all. The only way to
escape from one's self in the wilderness is to lose one's self there. More
realistically, the true wilderness experience is one, not of escaping, but
of finding one's self by seeking the wilderness.
The sum of this moralizing may be in forsaking human arrogance
and courting humility in a respect for the community and with regard
for the environment. The central human importance of such experience,
I believe, constitutes profound evidence of need for wilderness areas.
An understanding of these fundamental needs, as well as the so-called
more practical needs to meet recreational demands of people for wilder-
ness experience — this understanding should inspire us anew to work for
the perfection of a national program for wilderness preservation — a
program to serve not only our own human needs but also those of the
generations to follow.
Wildlife Resources and Their Protection
DR. IRA N. GABRIELSON, Wildlife Management Institute,
Washington, D. C.
IN DISCUSSING the protection of wildlife resources in a short paper,
it seems desirable to define what is meant by the term wildlife. As
here used, it includes not only the game birds, mammals, and fish, which
are commonly thought of when wildlife management is mentioned, but
all wild species in which man may have an interest. In discussing the
management of wildlife, we are really referring to management in
terms of human interest. This may mean protection and attempts to
increase a species or it may be attempts to reduce the numbers of an
animal which adversely affects something in which some man or groups
of men have a more immediate interest.
The knowledge that useful and beautiful wildlife species need pro-
tective legislation goes far back into colonial times. The first colonists
took such animals as they needed with little thought of the future,
but it was not long until the more desirable forms were so reduced in
numbers around the settlements that taking them for food or clothing
became more difficult. It was, therefore, logical that the first protective
laws designed to restrict the human harvest were developed to safeguard
THE NATION 25
those animals that were of most immediate economic importance, such
as deer.
As human population increased, it became more and more necessary
to control the utilization of wild forms. Today, a maze of state and
Federal laws protect or permit the management of these resources. I
prefer the word management rather than protection since it has a far
broader implication, although protection from human overutilization is
the oldest wildlife management device still in use in the country. Over
the years we have learned that protection is a vital and necessary part
of wildlife management, but under many circumstances it cannot, by
itself, provide an abundance of the species in which we are interested.
We have become increasingly conscious of the deficiences of pro-
tection alone coincident with the development of machinery and methods
by which man can substantially alter the character of the vegetation
and the land use over vast areas. The pioneer with his axe and plow was
responsible for many changes in vegetation, but the movements of the
pioneers and their effect upon the landscape were slow and local com-
pared to modern methods that can denude vast areas of land and com-
pletely change the character of the plants that grow on it. These changes,
in themselves, induce tremendous changes in the wildlife populations.
Some species increase; others decrease, according to their ecological
needs.
These tremendous changes, both in the land and waterscape of
America, have led to the development of a new art — the art of wildlife
management. It is the art of applying sound biological information to
the management of the wildlife and human activities affecting it. The
wildlife manager's major job is to retain habitat and a place for wildlife
in the ever-changing pattern of land use and to fit the wildlife needs into
the equally important human needs, as best he can.
It is an art that has grown rapidly. The basic knowledge of the limita-
tions and the potentials of wildlife species have been greatly increased
in the last 25 years. We have more definite knowledge than ever before,
even though there are still extensive gaps in this knowledge, and many
basic principles are poorly if at all understood.
We learned long ago that protection from undue human utilization
or human interference will permit most species to survive and to increase
in numbers to the potential of the living quarters and food that is
available. So long as suitable habitat is present, control of utilization
is sometimes the major and often the only management device needed
to maintain many species. The largely unspoiled habitat in our national
parks and wilderness areas is suitable for maintaining many kinds of
wildlife, and as long as the environment and the vegetation remain suit-
able, wildlife populations will persist.
There are startling exceptions to this general rule — the members of
the deer family, for example, can, with protection and in the absence of
26 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
predators, become so numerous that they destroy the very food plants
upon which they depend. The Yellowstone elk herds are well known
examples of the problems caused by an over-abundance of browsing
animals. Similar situations have developed in many sections of the
country, and the public is slowly learning that management of any
species of deer may involve a limitation of its maximum numbers as
well as protection when the numbers are too low. Another exception
is found in certain species that have been so reduced in numbers that they
rebuild populations slowly or not at all even under the most rigid pro-
tection. The whooping crane, California condor, and ivory-billed wood-
pecker are well known examples of such species.
Utilization of wildlife can take a number of forms. There is a great
and growing number of people who get their pleasure out of the chance
to see wildlife. Many of these are also camera enthusiasts who spend
much time, energy, and money in attempting to get photographs. This
is a recreational use which has a high value and is peculiarly important
because it does not interfere with the wildlife or result in any decrease
in its numbers.
There are many people who turn to wildlife for recreational outlets
by hunting or fishing. There are now wildlife administrative agencies in
every State, as well as wildlife management agencies in the Federal
Government. Most of the emphasis has been placed on those species
that are considered game. In fact, there is a strong tendency in many
state departments, and at times in the Federal Government, to over-
look any except the game species in management plans or programs.
Since all wildlife is considered a public resource, this is an unduly
narrow-minded and short-sighted policy. There are a few outstanding
examples of States that do give consideration, time, and effort to the
welfare of species other than those that provide targets for the guns or
objectives for the anglers. Most states have good laws protecting non-
game species, but too often little or no attention is given to enforcement
of such laws. This is especially true of those protecting hawks and owls,
which despite the widespread prejudice against them are known to be
useful in helping in the control of rodents that are injurious to crops.
While the art of wildlife management is growing rapidly, there still is
much room for improvement in the administration of this resource be-
fore we will be applying intelligently the factual knowledge and under-
standing that is now available. There is, of course, need for extended
and continuous research in this field to fill the broad gaps in our knowl-
edge and to measure the effects of continually changing conditions on
wild populations.
It is, however, possible to measure with some accuracy the ob-
jectives of a wildlife administration. One that gives first consideration
to the welfare of the resource in its management programs and en-
deavors to make its regulations and management policies in such a
THE NATION 27
way as to give wild populations the benefit of any doubt that may
exist is usually doing a sound and sane management job. One that lets
pressure groups or political considerations dictate the policies and pro-
grams is usually not doing a good job of wildlife management.
Measured by these standards, there are many States that are doing
good to excellent jobs ; there are others that are not. In some cases, it is
lack of desire to do anything but a political job; in others, it is the lack
of adequate authority to do a good job. This latter element shows up
most strongly in States where the Legislature still retains the preroga-
tives of making the detailed regulations governing the harvesting of
fish, game, furbearers, and other species. Nearly always such laws are
based on political considerations and seldom, if ever, on the needs of
the species.
In those States that are getting accurate information on the con-
dition of the wildlife populations, it is sometimes possible to relax cer-
tain restrictions and permit a greater enjoyment of the resource with
no harm to it. As examples, I may cite the general relaxing of pro-
tective regulations governing warm-water fish, as knowledge of their
population and reproductive rates have been developed and applied.
The general liberalization of deer hunting regulations in many States
is another example of the application of new and more accurate knowl-
edge of populations and population dynamics. These are only two ex-
amples of a number that could be given.
In this connection, it should be pointed out that with an adequate
staff of trained men it is possible to obtain reasonably accurate informa-
tion on population trends and the effect of hunting regulations. There are
a number of conspicuous examples of successful management of local
populations of game birds, mammals, or fish based upon knowledge of
the resource, its reproductive rate, and its relation to the food and cover
that it requires. A growing number of States are doing a good job in this
respect, and it is not too much to hope that that number will increase.
When it comes to managing migratory birds, it is more difficult to
get accurate information and more difficult to apply it with any cer-
tainty. It is relatively easy, with modern techniques, to get some idea
of the kill taken from the birds that are congregated in any locality.
It is much more difficult to get an accurate measure of the total drain by
hunting on a population of birds that is subject to hunting pressure over
a migratory route of some 2,000 miles or more and over a season that
usually extends from September 1 until after the first of January. It is
theoretically possible to wipe out or to decimate a group of birds from a
particular breeding area even though the total harvest out of the conti-
nental flock may not be excessive.
If the welfare of the resource is the prime consideration, it is necessary
to be somewhat conservative in making regulations. Since the passage
of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, there is no question but what the
28 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
administrative policy of the Biological Survey and by the Fish and
Wildlife Service has generally given primary consideration for the wel-
fare of the resource.
There has, however, been a growing doubt in the minds of many con-
servationists as to whether the welfare of the resource is now being
given sufficient consideration by those responsible for the administration
of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. In the face of a declining population
for two years, there has been a considerable relaxing of the regulations.
This has been particularly noticeable in California where special con-
sideration has been given to that state under the guise of helping in an
admittedly serious depredation problem. Former Under Secretary of
Interior Ralph Tudor, following his resignation, stated in an article in
the Saturday Evening Post that the waterfowl administration had been
set up to please the California duck hunters, and a review of the record
provides some evidence to support this statement.
The California "experimental feeding program," has now been in ef-
fect for two years. Following the first year's operation, there was wide-
spread criticism of the manner in which it had been carried out. A
review of the information furnished by the California Department of
Fish and Game does not indicate that the program has improved ma-
terially in its second year's operation and that it has had little value
in reducing depredations, the chief reason given in justifying it.
In the first year, 141 clubs were licensed to "feed" and this year 140
clubs actually participated. The real depredations on the rice and other
grain crops in California normally come before the hunting season, and
feeding before the hunting season is probably the major contribution
that this feeding program could possibly make. Reports indicate that
in 1953, slightly under 20 percent of the total amount of feed pro-
vided was used prior to the hunting season; while in 1954, it was slightly
over 20 percent. The total amount of food so provided is not great
enough to provide any significant part of this food supply for waterfowl
reported from California at that season, and it appears certain that,
as far as reducing depredations is concerned, this has not been a con-
spicuous success.
The statement has been made many times by club members that it
did not noticeably increase their duck kill to be able to feed, but that it
did enable them to get their birds in a shorter period of time, which,
according to their statements, is the real inducement for their use of
feed under this program.
There are reported to be 1,300 duck clubs in California with a mem-
bership of about 13,000. According to the latest figures there were
193,196 duck stamps sold in California. These figures indicate how
small a part of the California hunters really desire this "feeding pro-
gram." About 10 percent of the clubs, or a little over one-half of one
percent of the hunters, operated under it in each of the two years.
THE NATION 29
This concession to California is, as could be anticipated, leading to
serious complications for the Department of the Interior in its dealings
with other sections of the country. For example, both Ohio senators
and both Maryland senators recently have been getting considerable
publicity for their persistent efforts to get equal favors for a small
minority of the waterfowl hunters in their states.
In Ohio, about 5 percent of the total number of waterfowl hunters
hunt in the Erie marshes, and this is the group that wants the privilege
of baiting. Their kill, according to the figures of the Ohio Conservation
Department, amounts to about 2.6 ducks per hunter per day, as com-
pared to an average of 0.7 of one duck per hunter per day for all those
who shoot outside the Erie marshes. Despite the fact that the Erie
marsh hunters already enjoy a 4.1 advantage over the average gunner,
this group is exerting vigorous political pressure for added privileges for
themselves, in the face of the fact that waterfowl populations have de-
clined for two successive years, and that the winter inventory shows a
decrease for this year. It will take better-than-average hatching and
breeding success to prevent a decline from showing up for the third
successive year when the birds come south in the fall.
In Maryland, the demands are the same that were voiced back in
the mid-30's when the birds reached their lowest ebb. At that time, the
delegations came to my office and demanded about the same things
that are being voiced in behalf of a certain element of Maryland duck
hunters by the senators from that state. As I recall it now, they wanted
baiting and live decoys restored, longer seasons, and bigger bag limits.
I vividly recall one ex-governor of that state pounding my desk and
shouting, interspersed with considerable profanity, that he did not
care whether there were any waterfowl left after he was dead; he wanted
to shoot ducks while he was alive. After that, he did not care. He was
a lot more frank than the average, but his objective was much the same.
The question is often asked, what is wrong with baiting? As a matter
of fact, all States have long since outlawed the practice of baiting or
using salt to attract resident game to the guns, and only in the case of
migratory birds was it legally permitted to continue until it was banned
during the great duck depression in the mid-30's. There are two things
against it, aside from ethical questions, that are raised by many sports-
men. First, it is too efficient. As long as it was used by a limited number
of hunters, it did not adversely affect the waterfowl populations. As
its use became more widespread, it became more efficient and more
deadly. With the growing number of duck hunters, I can see no possi-
bility of a return to baiting without the destruction of the waterfowl
resource. Second, it further stacks the deck in favor of a group of
hunters who already have great advantages over the average fellow who
buys a duck stamp.
These demands, at a time when waterfowl populations are declining,
30 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
and coming from States in which no depredation problem is involved
to confuse the thinking on the subject, are bringing the situation to a
definite showdown. Conservationists should extend a vote of thanks
to the baiting advocates, Bricker, Bender, and Butler and Beall, for
bringing it into focus so sharply.
The original concessions made to California have brought their
inevitable results in increasing demands for similar consideration for
other groups in other places, and the situation will continue to get
worse until it is corrected. Conservationists throughout the country
earnestly hope that the Department of the Interior, in view of the grow-
ing crisis which apparently confronts the waterfowl populations, will
give the birds the breaks in the 1955 regulations; that they will take
another look and another approach to the depredations problem; and
that no consideration will be given to the political pressures so promi-
nently discussed in the press in recent weeks.
Is it too much to hope that the Department of the Interior will
chart a straight course based on sound management principles? If
they do, I believe they can be assured the support of every conserva-
tionist in the country.
Discussion
OPENING the discussion, Fred M. Packard said he believed the
conference had just heard one of the most masterly philosophical
statements of the ethical foundation of the wilderness concept ever
presented. He compared Mr. Zahniser's eloquence and deep insight
to the classic essays of John Muir, Henry Thoreau, and Aldo Leopold,
and expressed the hope it would be long studied as a guiding criterion
for the preservation of wilderness.
Mr. Walter Von Broock asked for the floor to present his proposal
that the Delaware Water Gap be preserved as The Edison National
Park-Interstate as a joint effort of the States of New Jersey and Pennsyl-
vania and the Federal Government. After his explanation of steps taken
by the two States, and interest had been aroused in them, there was
discussion as to whether the area was best suited to national park or
interstate park status.
A number of questions were asked the speakers about points raised
in their addresses, especially about the best ways to secure adequate
funds for the recreational and wildlife activities of the Forest Service,
and to ensure continued preservation of the national wildlife refuges.
Mr. Jack F. Lewis, of Wyoming, asked for the floor to ex-
press the view that the opposition of conservationists to Echo Park
THE NATION 31
dam was not justified. He spoke of the need of the Upper Colorado
States for irrigation and water, and indicated that the people of those
States understand they cannot obtain it without this dam. He con-
sidered the opposition to the dam was based on inadequate knowledge
of the subject. In response, Mr. Packard analyzed the Echo Park dam
controversy, and noted that this dam is a power and storage project,
and it would not contribute any irrigation water. The conservationists
do not oppose the overall Colorado Project, but protested when this un-
necessary invasion to a national park was included. Mr. Gutermuth rose
to comment as one who had attended all the hearings on the subject, and
who had read every published report about it, and has handled cor-
respondence totalling thousands of letters, as well as visiting Dinosaur
National Monument four times, he did not consider himself or his
colleagues misinformed about the project.
Service of National Parks
Presiding: SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR DOUGLAS McKAY,
Washington, D. C.
I WANT to offer you an expression of my sentiments and my con-
victions about the national parks — sentiments and convictions
that guide the Department of the Interior in arriving at decisions that
affect the parks.
First, let me make clear my belief that parks — all kinds of parks —
are a fundamental necessity.
Their importance to our way of life must inevitably grow as we
surround ourselves more and more with the trappings of civilization,
and as more and more of us spend most of our lives where nearly every-
thing in sight is man-made. The open spaces where we can get close to
the works of the Creator are steadily diminishing.
The community or the State or the Nation which makes inadequate
provision — or no provision at all — for parks and playgrounds is today
recognized for what it is — short-sighted, lacking in vision or concern
for those who live in it.
And make no mistake about it; I fully recognize both the pressures
to which the national parks are constantly subjected and the necessity
of resisting them.
In addition, let me assure you of the deep concern of the Administra-
tion with the needs of the National Park System.
That is a concern which I share without any mental reservations at
all.
Speaking for myself, that concern is two-fold. For one thing, we
need to know what the national parks really need. We must find the
answer to that question on the basis of a long view.
32 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
Our fundamental objective is that the parks shall be as beautiful and
as useful to Americans of a hundred years from now as they are today —
or more beautiful because better planned and protected and more useful
because of better techniques of making them so.
For another, once we have determined those needs and have arrived
at an orderly program for meeting them, we must exert ourselves to find
the means of putting that program into effect.
We are looking forward to the 50th anniversary year of the passage
of the Act which established the National Park Service. We hope to
determine what is needed for a 10-year program which, starting in the
fiscal year 1957, would make the National Park System in every respect
what it should be by the time that 50th anniversary year rolls around.
In studying this problem we are guided by the belief that there
should be no restrictions on our thinking. We are simply attempting to
determine what needs to be done, regardless of previous practices or
preconceived notions or whether existing law would permit.
Any institution — and national parks are no exception — tends to be-
come mired in its own past, sometimes to its serious detriment. So it
seems to me that this is a most healthy sort of undertaking.
It starts from these premises — that the national parks exist to
provide enjoyment to human beings; that that enjoyment should be of
kinds that arise from the nature of the areas themselves; and that to
provide it at its fullest requires that the natural scene be safeguarded
as fully as is humanly possible.
Tribute to National Parks
BRADLEY H. PATTERSON, JR., Assistant Cabinet Secretary,
Washington, D. C.
IT IS a great pleasure to be with you tonight and I regret, as you do,
that Governor Howard Pyle of Arizona, for whom I am substituting,
is unable to be here.
I would simply like to leave three comments with you tonight.
Speaking as a camper and one who has travelled to many of the
National Parks with his family, I can testify personally — though such
testimony is hardly needed tonight — to the human and spiritual value
of recreation in the National Parks. Speaking personally in that vein,
I would like to lend my sincere encouragement to your efforts to broaden
and improve the opportunities for outdoor recreation in American life.
Speaking as a parent who with my wife has taken our three children
on several trans-continental trips through the National Parks, I think
that a point which often needs emphasizing is the value of such an
experience for children. The naturalist and interpretive services at the
Parks — the museums, lectures, trips, pictures, and exhibits — are tre-
THE NATION 33
mendously helpful in explaining to children, as young as four, the
meaning of scenery which surrounds them. They long remember those
experiences; such supplemental education becomes a permanent and
immediately noticeable addition to their cultural world.
Finally, speaking as Assistant Cabinet Secretary, I know you will
be happy to hear that Secretary McKay is working with the White
House in preparing for a discussion in Cabinet of the major problems
which the National Parks now face and the courses of action which can
be taken to meet them. We are thus going to have discussed, at the
highest level of Government, the present and future objectives of the
Park System in order that this Administration may do everything pos-
sible to protect and improve these areas for the recreation of all the
American people.
Importance of National Parks
HON. HARRY F. BYRD, U. S. Senator from Virginia
I AM delighted to be here. It is quite a relief to me to make a speech
and not to discuss the budget or the Federal debt. I take an intense
interest in everything outdoors. That is one of the reasons why I se-
lected apple growing as my business occupation. They say that when
you get old and retire you must have a hobby or you will die. I do not
know when I am going to die. Some of the people in Virginia would like
to see me die most any time. But when I do retire, my hobby will be to
visit every national park in the United States, and then in Canada and
then in foreign lands. I am going to walk as long as I can, and when
I can't walk, I am going to ride, and when I can't ride, I am going to
get a helicopter. And I hope that Director Wirth will let me land
somewhere. These helicopters must be good things because you can
sit down most any place.
Now when I was sixteen years old I began to make regular visits to
Stoneyland — that is what "Sky land used to be called 51 years ago. Now
Skyland is part of the Shenandoah National Park. George Pollock,
owner of Skyland, was a very remarkable character. He deserves, I
think, more credit for the establishment of the Shenandoah National
Park than any other one man. There are many people who contributed
to the effort which we made in those days, but he loved the place and
he did his best to leave a heritage of goodwill and wholesome pleasure.
He had his peculiarities, as all of us have. One was that he used to start
out about six o'clock in the morning on a horse and blow a bugle in
front of every one of the twenty or more cottages he owned as a signal
for the guests to get up and go out to see the sunrise. And he liked
rattlesnakes. One of the last things he did before the Government
took over the park was to come into the dining room one night with a
rattlesnake around his neck and the snake would never bite him.
34 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
When I took office as the Governor of Virginia in 1926, I made one
of my main objectives the establishment of the Shenandoah National
Park. A great deal of work had been done by that time. Hubert Work
was then Secretary of the Interior — and a very good man he was. The
Appalachian Park Commission which selected the Shenandoah in the
Blue Ridge and the Great Smoky Mountain National Park further
South, consisted of Representative H. W. Temple, William C. Gregg,
Harlan P. Kelsey, Col. Glenn Smith and Major William A. Welch.
Stephen T. Mather, the first Director, was still serving the national
parks and a very fine man he was. That was in 1928, when things were
fairly prosperous. I recommended an appropriation of one million dol-
lars and the General Assembly of Virginia adopted the measure. We
could not secure the purchase of the properties immediately because
there were 2,200 different parcels of land that had to be bought, so
the money remained in the Treasury. And then the depression came
along in 1930-31, and, when they learned about this million dollars
lying idle there were people who wanted to get this money out of the
Treasury for other purposes. We had a terrible time trying to hold on
to that money. With the help of the Governor who succeeded me we
kept this million dollars lying idle for about five years of the depression.
I think that was quite an achievement. And then I was chairman of the
Citizens that raised nearly a million dollars more. And thus we pur-
chased the Shenandoah National Park, comprising 211,615 acres.
In 1954, Director Wirth says that we had 1,659,564 visitors. Most of
them were on the Skyline Drive, but nevertheless they saw the park.
We really have a great park in the Shenandoah.
I remember when we started to condemn the land, George Pollock
called up the Governor's office and called me in Richmond and reported
that oak timber was being cut in the park. The people who owned the
land, although we had started condemnation proceedings, were cutting
the timber. I got in an automobile at once and got hold of the sheriff
and we went up there and stopped the cutting of timber. There are logs
there today still lying where they fell. But we stopped what would have
been great damage to the park.
I have spent a great deal of time in Shenandoah National Park. I
know every peak and know every trail. I am a member of the Potomac
Appalachian Trail Club. That's an organization that everyone in this
area should join. You will be interested to know that Club members
keep up sections of the trail. My friends and I have about three or
four miles of trail we keep up every year. We cut the weeds and whatever
is necessary to be done.
In 1933, President Franklin Roosevelt, came to the Shenandoah
National Park to dedicate the first CCC camp. I was driving with him
along part of the Skyline Drive and pointed out a road that had been
built by Mr. Hoover to his camp. And I suggested to the President
THE NATION 35
that it would be a very fine idea to connect up the Great Smoky Na-
tional Park with the Shenandoah on top of the Blue Ridge by a Skyline
Drive. Mr. Roosevelt was always responsive to the suggestion to spend
money, so he said: "Harry, that is a fine idea, but we ought to start up
in New England." That was a good idea on his part, too, but I found
out later that when he made overtures to the New England people and
the Governors for the drive to start up there, provided they would
furnish the right-of-way, they did not respond. Rut then he said to me:
"You and Secretary Ickes (who was along that day) get the right-of-way
and I will assign some of this money that has been given to me to spend
(I think it was some two or three billion dollars at that time) to start
construction of the Skyline Drive". So Secretary Ickes appointed me
Chairman of the Committee to secure the right-of-way. It had to be
gotten in three States — Virginia, North Carolina and Tennessee. So
we got the right-of-way — a thousand feet in width, I think, was re-
quired, and the States paid for the land. Now the Rlue Ridge Parkway
is nearly completed — 358 miles, leaving 118 miles still to be built. We
have spent some 42 million dollars on it. In 1954, some 4,344,000
people traveled over the Rlue Ridge Parkway, according to Director
Wirth. And it is one of the finest parkway drives we have. I hope that
all who have not seen it will travel over it.
Now, with the exception of Stephen Mather, I have known all of the
National Park Directors intimately and I have read all that I could
about the great work of Stephen Mather. When I was in Glacier Park
last year, I saw a plaque dedicated to him recognizing that he laid the
foundation of the National Park Service and found and established
the policies under which its areas are being developed and conserved un-
impaired for future generations. There will never come an end to the
good that he has done and no better tribute could be paid to any man
than on that plaque which I understand is placed in other parks.
I knew Horace Albright well and Arno Cammerer and Newton Drury
and I now know intimately and have a great affection and admiration for
our good friend, Conrad Wirth. The best compliment I can say for him
is that he has performed his duties as National Park Director in the
very finest tradition of the Park Service. His efforts have made possible
the great enjoyment of millions of Americans who are now visiting
our national parks. Though I have had occasion at times to make some
criticism of the personnel of the Federal Government, I have been
amazed at the fine type of people who serve in the National Park Ser-
vice. The rangers, wherever you go (to the Glacier National Park, if
you please, or the Shenandoah) represent the finest type of Ameri-
can citizenship. It is a real inspiration to me to come into contact with
them, — always polite, always anxious to render a service, and at the
same time requiring everyone to obey the laws. Director Wirth and I
have a date in Glacier Park this summer and I am going to see what
36 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
kind of a walker he is. We are going up to a place where we shall have to
walk ten miles to get there. I frequently have walked that far in the
Shenandoah. When I was in Glacier Park last year I was told that even
the Canadians admitted that Glacier was equal to any of the Canadian
Parks. I have seen the Canadian Parks and that is a real admission.
Going-to-the-Sun Highway in Glacier is one of the greatest sights in the
whole world. Jack Emmert, the Superintendent of Glacier National
Park, was born within 20 miles of where I live. His brother was a great
friend of mine and he represents to me the very ideal of what a man
should be as a park superintendent. He and Superintendent Guy Edwards
of Shenandoah National Park are the finest type of public servants.
When I was in Glacier Park, I met a very kind lady who took me
around the McDonald Hotel and converted me to the idea that they
ought to have some money for repairs and to put in a power plant. I had
never in my whole 22 years in the Senate written a letter asking the
Director of the Budget to make an appropriation, but this lady made such
an impression on me that when I got back to Washington I wrote the
Budget Director a personal letter and said that this is the first time I
have ever asked for an appropriation and that this request is not for my
State but for the Glacier National Park and I though the McDonald
Hotel needed these improvements. I understand that the appropriation
will be made.
There is a movement on foot now which menaces the most valuable
parts of Glacier National Park by damming up the North Fork of the
Flathead River, flooding nearly 20,000 acres — 10,000 of it virgin timber
where now deer, elk and buffalo are grazing. So far as I know the rule of
reason must prevail in arriving at conclusions, but I think that the
burden of proof must rest very strongly on those who desire to destroy
our great natural resources.
I recently voted to delete Echo Park from the Upper Colorado River
project. I was in the fight years ago about the Jackson Hole project.
These resources threatened by destruction are for the Government to
protect. Other sites can be found for dams, but when you destroy great
naturally beautiful scenery, all the money of Rockefeller and everybody
else combined cannot put it back.
Just the other day I read a book entitled Hunting and Extraordinary
Adventures of Theodore Roosevelt. It has just been published and I
recommend it for good reading. President Roosevelt wrote eloquently
about the charm of the wilderness. Let us never forget, ladies and
gentlemen, that the strength of America is at home. It is in our plains
and our mountains, in our farms and gardens, in our great national
parks and our wealth of natural resources. Americans would be better
citizens and live longer and happier if they spent time in our national
parks. When we strengthen American citizens we strengthen America,
because in the final analysis our strength is in the spirit of our citizens.
THE NATION 37
The Record of Congress in Protecting
Our National Parks
HON. JOHN P. SAYLOR, Member
U. S. House of Representatives from Pennsylvania
Committees on Interior and Insular Affairs are made up so
A predominately of representatives and senators from the West
that I consider it a distinct honor to be invited to take part in this im-
portant Conference. Because most of the vast park areas are located in
the Rocky Mountain region, the general populace has a tendency to
overlook the fact that all of us are responsible for the preservation and
maintenance of these great landmarks. Actually, nowhere in our land
are there more important and more symbolic National Monuments
than the three in the confines of my home State of Pennsylvania —
Gettysburg, Valley Forge and Independence Hall.
Perhaps the distance to our larger park systems is largely responsible
for the inadequate attention given by Congress in this regard. Otherwise
it is quite unlikely that the neglect (and the encroachments on National
Park Service policies which have become so pronounced over the years)
would be tolerated.
Because this audience is so familiar with the problems, I shall forego
examples of the several obvious types of dereliction with which Con-
gress must be charged in its attitude toward our National Parks and
Monuments. In the first place, Congress has been negligent in the
granting of provisions for dams, use permits, mining, and logging
within national monument areas. This instance is all too obvious to
those of us who have followed closely the persistent trend of these
encroachments.
Congress has also been negligent in not providing sufficient funds
for the outright purchase of all property within the boundaries of our
National Parks and Monuments. This illogical frugality has encouraged
practices that acquire needless outlays far in excess of whatever amount
would have been necessary under a planned investment policy.
Finally, Congress has been negligent in not requiring either the Park
Service, a Committee of Congress, or another Government agency to
conduct an overall survey of National Parks and Monuments with an
eye to determining conditions and needs in the light of increased use
over the past fifteen years. When I was home in Johnstown over the
past week-end, a friend looked at me in disbelief as I explained to him
that Yellowstone Park still has the same road system that served the
stagecoach. But it is no exaggeration. Those were the days when visitors
went to the park to stay for a month or so. They were met at the train
by a stagecoach and taken around the Loop, stopping overnight along
the way, and finally returning to the railroad station four weeks later.
In those days perhaps fifty thousand persons visited Yellowstone each
38 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
year. Now there are almost two million visitors per annum, almost all
traveling in their own automobiles, yet there are no new routes and
there has been no resolute effort to learn whether an expanded — or at
least an improved — road system would be more satisfactory. I am sure
that it would be, and so is everyone else who has visited Yellowstone
in recent years, but thus far there has been no provision for such a study.
Perhaps it is not all the fault of Congress. I am reminded of an old
fellow who lived in the Ozarks and had never been outside Missouri.
He always wanted to see Washington, but he was a truck farmer and
just couldn't afford such a trip. Finally several of his wealthier customers
got together some cash and bought their old friend a round-trip ticket
to the Nation's Capital. They put him on the train and, a week later,
were at the station to welcome him back home. "How did you like
Washington?" was the first question put to him. And the old fellow
very honestly replied: "Well, to tell you the truth, there was so much
going on down to the depot that I never did get up to the village."
We have had numerous Commissions, Study Groups, Advisory
Councils, and Special Committees operating in the Federal Government
elsewhere than on Capitol Hill over the past two decades, but no one
ever got around to proposing an appraisal of our park situation. Fortu-
nately, a survey is finally going to come about. MISSION 66 will be con-
ducted without any special funds, and I think that the Director of the
National Park Service is to be commended for this step in the right
direction. Our National Parks and Monuments will become more
accessible to a growing part of our population in the succeeding years.
Gradually the new concept of vacations for everyone in all occupations
and in all industries, is taking hold and the parks are where more and
more of our people will want to go. You would be surprised at the many,
many men, women, and children from back in my home District who
have visited at least one of these recreational sites, and of course thou-
sands more are dreaming of the day when such a trip will be possible. I
consider it the solemn duty of Congress to facilitate park travel and
accommodations wherever possible and practicable. Our people can no
longer spend a month traveling around the Loop in Yellowstone, but
with modern conveyances they will see just as much and more if they
are not handicapped by a nineteenth-century roads system.
I also consider it the solemn duty of Congress to preserve our Parks
and Monuments against the continued attempts to infringe upon this
sacred land, and I use the word 'sacred' advisedly. At the present time
there are at least four bills that not only threaten to mar or destroy vast
portions of our park areas, but would also establish precedents for the
eventual destruction of the whole intent of the National Park Act of
1916. I am opposing these undesirable and expensive measures, and I
hope that members of this audience will make every effort to solicit the
influence of their friends and neighbors in the crusade against all such
THE NATION 39
proposals. Here are the Bills to which I refer:
One — The Colorado River Storage Project, which would invade
Dinosaur National Monument with two dams — Echo Park and Split
Mountain. This is the $1,600,000 Park Destruction Program which has
just passed the Senate.
Two — The Bridge Canyon Dam, which would invade the entire
National Grand Canyon National Monument and would back water into
Grand Canyon National Park.
Three — Tuolumne Water District No. Two, which would invade
Yosemite National Park for a power drop to create electricity. Here
let me say that the people who are behind this project can get all the
electricity they want by buying coal and using it in steam plants.
Just the way that the Potomac Electric Company is doing and just the
way that our Public Utility Companies are doing back in Western
Pennsylvania. The West has enough coal to last more than a thousand
years, and after that we'll be glad to ship it in from Central Pennsyl-
vania, if necessary!
Four — A Bill calling for an annual appropriation of Sixty Million
Dollars for planning and developing airport facilities — twenty-five
percent of which would be available for projects within National Parks,
National Monuments, and National Forests.
Watch these Bills. Be careful of them. Each of them constitutes
a menace to the inheritance of our people.
To those who have never absorbed the beauty and inspiring majesty
of the National Parks and Monuments, taking arms against invaders
might appear to be a thankless task. Members of Congress who take
our position, have been subjected to harsh criticism from many sides.
One of my good friends from the West recently said sarcastically that he
assumes we will next want to put fences around all our parks and re-
quire the public to walk through them. Of a certainty, this method
would be the most effective way of preserving our parks. But we are
reasonable people. We would not object to an encroachment of our
landmarks if the National Defense or the National Welfare were in-
volved. If the time comes that our Military Services require establish-
ment of an uranium mine in the middle of our most scenic Monument,
we will not stand in the way. If the time comes that all our arable lands
are developed to maximum capacity and there is still a shortage of food,
we will lend our services to plowing up the ellipse and the mall.
But there are no such emergencies on the farthest horizon, and we
challenge the usurpers of the properties that have been set aside for us
to become better acquainted with some of the natural wonderlands
that God has created so purposefully. Man does not live by bread alone.
His soul starves for the soft comfort which only Nature's Grandeur can
offer.
My father took me to visit my first National Park when I was a boy
40 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
of twelve. That experience was one which has remained with me through
the years. On each subsequent trip I have received the same inner
satisfaction, and now this inspiration is shared by my children. I hope
to give them an opportunity to visit our National Parks and Monu-
ments just as long as they are willing to spend their vacations with
their Mom and Dad.
I want to protect the National Parks and Monuments so that our
children's children will also have an opportunity to see the handiwork
that God has left for them to enjoy. If these magic landmarks remain
available to the growing numbers of our people who want to indulge the
magnificent testimonials to the Divine Being, I feel confident that
there will be a marked decline in the numbers of disbelievers in the
generations to follow.
EDITOR'S NOTE.— The upper Colorado River bill finally passed Congress
and became Public Law 485 on April 11, 1956. The Act omits Echo Park dam and
provides that " It is the intention of Congress that no dam or reservoir constructed
under the authorization of this Act shall be within any national park or monument."
The three other bills mentioned have not been passed by the 84th Congress.
IN THE STATES
PRESENTED AT THE 35TH ANNUAL MEETING OF THE
NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON STATE PARKS, HELD AT
STOWE, VERMONT, SEPTEMBER 25-29, 1955.
Safety Program for State Parks
POLK HEBERT, Board Member, Louisiana State Parks and Recreation Commission
Member, New Orleans Chapter, American Society of Safety Engineers
WE READ, see and hear the word Safety or Accident Preventions
so frequently that I feel that we have accepted these words to
the extent that they are not meant for us but only for the masses. In
fact, we have gotten so close to the forest that we cannot see the trees;
we see these words so frequently, they have lost some of their meaning,
therefore, we should back off and approach this from a different view.
Last month one of the major parks in the city of New Orleans was
the scene of the death of a fourteen-year-old youngster. This was termed
an accident in newspaper headlines, but — let us analyze this so-called
accident.
"LIFEGUARD SHOCKED, BOY KILLED. . . . Police revealed Saturday
that an Audubon Park lifeguard nearly lost his life trying to save a fourteen-
year-old, electrocuted when he fell on a charged plate at the pool. Killed in-
stantly Friday night was John Stanley. Badly shocked when he tried to pull
Stanley's inert form from the metal plate was lifeguard Almond Smith. Pob'ce
said the plate covered a brick-enclosed electrical junction box next to the walk-
way around the pool. George Douglas, Park Superintendent, said Saturday
that homicide detectives and a city electrical inspector remained at the pool
until 12:40 A.M. Saturday investigating the accident. 'The cause of it was a
wire inside the junction box that touched the metal plate/ Douglas said. 'It
was sending 110 volts through the plate — enough to throw a person's hand
away ordinarily.' He said that the Stanley boy fell across the plate, however,
and that being wet from swimming, he was immediately grounded.
Police were told by eye-witnesses that Stanley had walked over to the area
of the junction box when he suddenly stiffened. He fell across the metal plate
covering the junction box, according to Police Patrolmen Anthony Ragusa and
Frank Cefalu. When lifeguard Smith attempted to pull the body from the plate,
he was thrown back by the electricity and shocked, the policemen reported.
Arthur Arseneaux, 17, of 2136 Cadiz, head lifeguard, succeeded in removing
the body by pulling it off the plate with a towel, police said. Stanley, a seventh
grade Wright High School student, was pronounced dead by a Charity Hospital
ambulance doctor at 8:15 P.M. Police crash truck crewmen and the Charity
doctor worked unsuccessfully for about twenty minutes in efforts to revive
the boy."
Was this really an accident, or was it due to the lack of training on
the part of employees not to leave a hazardous condition which might
cause injury? Let us approach this obligation: from a basis of educa-
tion and training of personnel; from examination of conditions which
cause injury; and from a study of preventative methods for controlling
hazardous conditions which expose the living to injury.
We must set up a Training Program: (a) Procedure and;
41
42 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
(b) Method: Secure services of trained specialist to instruct key per-
sonnel. These can be secured from large industrial manufacturing plants
or utility companies, your local chapter of the American Society of
Safety Engineers or the National Safety Council.
We should survey requirements as to the type program that will
best fit your personnel and problems, and ask these questions:
Do you have maintenance shops with hand and power tools? If
you do, then select an industrial plant which has a trained man in the
safe operation, care and use of this equipment. Borrow this man to
train your key personnel and in turn let them train that part of your
organization that will derive the most benefits from this training.
Do you use heavy equipment, draglines, bulldozers, graders, power
shovels, snowplows, trucks, etc.? If you do, contact your local heavy
equipment dealer for safety information for the proper and safe use of
this equipment. (The gamblers, produced by the Caterpillar Tractor
Company and furnished through the courtesy of Boyce-Harvey Machin-
ery, Inc., Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
Do you have roadway maintenance, nature trails, bridle paths?
For the proper and safe maintenance of your roadways, contact your
State Highways Department and for information on the maintenance
of your nature trails and bridle paths, contact your Municipal Groups
and Recreational Program Directors.
Do you have a building maintenance or new construction program?
If so, get in touch with the various building suppliers who can furnish
you with safety information.
Do you have docks, boats, bathing facilities, pools and other water
sports? For information concerning the solution of any problems
pertaining to these facilities, contact your American Red Cross, U. S.
Coast Guard, Local Power Boat Squadron or U. S. Navy.
Do you have electric, telephone, water, sewer and gas distribution
systems? The odds are that you will have problems in the proper func-
tioning of one or more of these facilities. For an answer to your problem,
contact your local Public Utilities Company, Telephone Company,
Gas Company, Water Works Association, the Sewerage and Sanitation
Board or your local State Health Authorities.
We must set up an Inspection Program with a check system :
This has been successfully accomplished by a classification and inspec-
tion which might be termed "How to Make an Inspection." First it is
advisable to make a check list of the things to be inspected. To accom-
plish this to the best advantage and for the inspector to give a complete
inspection, he should use all five of his senses if possible.
He should Look for signs of poor housekeeping, poor maintenance,
inadequate tools, unsuitable equipment, etc.
He should Listen for sounds of escaping gas or water. Listen for un-
usual sounds like thumps, squeaks or squeals.
IN THE STATES 43
He should Feel for equipment or machinery that is vibrating un-
necessarily. Feel for sharp points or edges that may cut or tear. Feel
for rigidity.
He should Smell for odors of leaking natural gas, acetylene gas,
spilled gasoline or other explosive gases or liquids.
He should Taste the purity of drinking water, soft drink dispensers,
coffee urns, or drinking fountains.
He should review in advance of an inspection a list of possible
mechanical or physical hazards which may be found during the inspec-
tion, then follow the inspection check list whenever it is possible to do
so.
He should follow the inspection process whenever it is possible to
do so. This applies primarily to grounds and buildings.
It is unwise to attempt to correct unsafe working practices which
may be observed while making an inspection. Instead, bring them to
the attention of the proper supervisor, foreman or superintendent after
the inspection has been completed, because you want to avoid disturbing
or distracting those at work. They might injure themselves if startled
or distracted. A good inspector is an unobtrusive person.
The typical inspection list which has been successfully used for
buildings, lodges, cabins and group camps is as follows:
BUILDINGS, LODGES, CABINS AND GROUP CAMPS
1. Check foundations of buildings.
2. Check piers under buildings.
3. Check sills and other foundation for evidence of termites, dampness and
dry rot.
4. Check grades under buildings for moisture accumulation.
5. Check foundation walls for cracks.
6. Check all pipes exposed under building, drains, gas line, sewer and water
lines.
7. Check all concrete walls and drains and clean outs.
8. Check outside paint for peeling, mildew and damaged surface.
9. Check all screen windows and doors.
10. Check all glasses in doors, windows, and outside openings.
11. Check condition of glass and glazing on each window.
12. Check condition of roof, drains and valleys for accumulation of leaves or
other obstructions, flashing around chimneys and windows.
13. Check louvers for accumulation of bird nests and other obstructions.
14. Check condition of outside grounds for cleanliness and hazardous conditions
such as broken bottles or other harmful objects.
15. Check interior floors.
16. Check interior walls.
17. Check interior ceilings.
18. Check all closet spaces.
19. Check locks on all doors and window hooks and latches.
20. Check furniture, chairs, tables, beds, refrigerators and stoves.
21. Check bathroom, toilet, lavatory, shower, shower curtain, towel rack,
linens and general appearances.
22. Check all wiring and light fixtures inside and out.
44 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
GENERAL BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS
1. Check for general condition of building inside and outside same as other
building inspections.
2. Check storage facilities.
3. Check storage of materials.
4. Check all salvage materials.
GROUNDS
1. Check entire area for hazardous conditions, debris, neglect, protection, and
cleanliness.
2. Check all barricades, fences, signs, roads, sewers, water towers, electric and
gas system.
3. Check all docks, piers, boats, paddles and hazards on shore line.
4. Check for dead trees near buildings and picnic areas.
EQUIPMENT
1. Check tractors, trucks and automotive equipment.
2. Check all hand tools, power tools as to condition and use.
3. Check stock of materials on hand.
4. Check mileage on automotive equipment.
5. Report all damaged and obsolete equipment.
This inspection should be made on a monthly basis with the in-
spector furnishing a copy to the foreman or park superintendent who
in turn will initial one copy and mail to his supervisor as indicated on
the organizational chart.
As a further check to determine that this inspection has been com-
pleted, a supplementary inspection sheet should be furnished the Super-
visory Inspector, Engineer or Assistant Park Director who will classify
the general overall conditions of each area.
Sufficient records should be maintained in the Administrative Office
and the inspection sheets should be of such a nature that they can be
perforated and indexed so that each area will be set up as a separate
unit and can be referred to immediately for ready reference or discussion
with the superintendent or individual involved. The success of this
system must not be handed to the operating personnel as a packaged
unit but must be discussed at length in your monthly or quarterly meet-
ings of your supervisors so that they will be given an opportunity to
accept or reject this system in their particular catagories.
Frankly, this is a selling job for the top management of your organ-
ization to your operating group. Its success is dependent upon the
acceptance of the operating personnel. As an incentive plan for securing
outstanding operation, an award to attend sectional, regional or national
safety conferences to further their interest can be offered as an induce-
ment. There are many benefits derived from this type of program which
effect your entire operating personnel. It brings forth a closer spirit of
cooperation among employees, it brings suggestions which heretofore
have not been forthcoming and it brings forth undiscovered talents of
individuals who are interested but unable to express themselves. The
IN THE STATES 45
cost of this whole program is far outweighed by its benefits. As a com-
parison, industry on a national scale has set this up as one of their top
objectives in the successful operation of their business.
Now to complete your records, it would create a competitive spirit
for the successful development of your program to set up some type of
report system on lost time accidents compared to man hours worked.
This should be kept as a yardstick to measure your success. You should
not have more than ten injuries per million man hours worked.
Set up a Hazard Operation Plan: A Hazard Operation Plan is
merely a suggestion system from the operating personnel. It is a system
whereby they may express themselves on shortcuts, hazardous condi-
tions, efficiency of operation, suggested accomplishments, suggested
objectives, suggested future planning or in plain words, a system where-
by you would get suggestions from your entire operating personnel to
make your little world a better place in which to live. This system should
be devised to meet your particular requirements.
What is your liability for protection against negligence on the
part of your park operation? Naturally employees of your
system are protected under Workmen's Compensation Laws; But,
what is the general using public's protection against accidents?
The following, which is an excerpt from a New Orleans newspaper
concerning the accidental electrocution mentioned earlier, shows what
type of damages that can actually result from a serious accident.
"Ask $150,900 in Pool death ... A suit asking damages of $150,900 was
filed today in Federal District Court by the parents of a 15-year-old boy who
was electrocuted Aug. 19 at the Audubon Park Swimming Pool.
"The suit was filed by Mrs. Clara Louise Sanford and her former husband,
Joseph Lawrence Stanley. It is against the Travelers Insurance Company,
insurers of the park.
"It is alleged that on August 19 John Lawrence Stanley was walking on a
concrete walk adjacent to the pool and within the pool enclosure when he came
in contact with a live wire protruding from a junction box.
"It is charged that the wire was not insulated, that there were no warning
signs and that employees of the pool knew of the faulty condition for many
months prior to the accident.
"The child's mother claims she was partially dependent upon him for support
in that he contributed $40 a month to her support. She is asking $125,917.94,
which includes funeral expenses. The child's father is asking $25,000 for loss of
the child's companionship."
On behalf of the state of Louisiana, on behalf of those people who
use the facilities of park areas, on behalf of all of you who devote your
lives to the successful operation of your particular area or function,
this program is dedicated to the years of success that I know lie in store
for you who have given unselfishly of your time, effort and thought in
making the recreational and educational facilities of this nation a
safer place in which we, the general public, can enjoy our leisure hours.
46 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
National Forests and Recreation in the Northeast
GERALD S. WHEELER, Supervisor, White Mountain National Forest,
Laconia, N. H.
SOME of you come from Western States that have had national
forests since before the turn of the century. You know that they
were set aside from the public domain and that many of them are still
remote and rather inaccessible. While there are national forests in 38
States some of you may not know that it was not until 1911 that the
national forest program spread to the East. That year, as the result of
legislation introduced by a Senator from Massachusetts, the Week's
Law was passed providing for the purchase of land for national forests
at the headwaters of navigable rivers primarily for watershed protection.
This same law also recognized that forest fire control was a joint re-
sponsibility of State and Federal Governments. In the East, where
there was no public domain, the national forests had to be purchased
from private land owners and for that reason they are often known as
the purchased or Week's Law national forests. Those in the West are
often called the public domain national forests. Over one-half of the
38 states having national forests are Week's Law States. The majority
of the acreage purchased for these eastern national forests was land
that had been heavily cut over or burned and in many cases consisted
of what might well be called waste land. This is in contrast to the many
millions of acres of virgin timber set aside for the public domain forests.
Since 1905, when the U. S. Forest Service was established in its
present form, the national forests have been managed under the policy
then established by Secretary of Agriculture Wilson. He told Gifford
Pinchot, the first Chief of the Forest Service, that he wanted the na-
tional forests so administered that they would provide the most pro-
ductive use for the permanent good of the whole people and not for
the temporary benefit of individuals or companies. He also stressed
that where conflicting interests concerning the use of the forests had
to be reconciled, that the questions would always be decided from the
standpoint of the greatest good to the greatest number in the long run.
This is still the aim of the Forest Service in the administration of the
national forests and is the basis for the multiple use system of manage-
ment. National forests are not single purpose enterprises but rather
are managed for many purposes; all involving use. Over the years it
has been well demonstrated that large portions of national forests can
be used at the same time for several different purposes; multiple use. But
more about that later.
Now while I was for many years Supervisor of the Green Mountain
National Forest here in Vermont, I am presently in charge of the
White Mountain National Forest in New Hampshire and Maine. These
are both outstanding forests in the greatest public land system in the
IN THE STATES 47
world. I think that it is particularly appropriate that the national
forests are represented on your program as 1955 is the Golden Anni-
versary of the U. S. Forest Service.
Vermont and New Hampshire compete back and forth across
Connecticut for many things including the recreation dollar. While
New Hampshire's National Forest may be a bit older and is some
larger, Vermonters will readily point out that their national forest is
much more productive and far more beautiful. Now this feeling is
entirely a friendly one and I know that our hosts will be reconciled,
even if not happy, if I tell you something about the White Mountain
National Forest as long as I stress their feeling, that anything good
about it is much better in Vermont.
The White Mountain National Forest is located in north-central
New Hampshire and Western Maine and comprises 723,000 acres of
mountainous country. It was one of the first national forests to be
purchased under the Week's Law and many people feel that the need
for a national forest in New Hampshire was the primary reason for its
passage. Perhaps 723,000 acres doesn't mean much to some of you, so
to obtain a sharper picture you might have in mind that it is larger than
the State of Rhode Island and is the largest area of public land in New
England. It comprises the upland tributaries of four great New England
rivers, the Merrimack, Connecticut, Androscoggin and Saco. It in-
cludes all of the peaks of the Presidential Range and 6,288 foot high
Mt. Washington which is the highest peak in the Northeast.
Well, what kind of land is included in this M of a million acre na-
tional forest? Let's look at our land use plans. For one thing, about
220,000 acres have been classified as mountain top or ridge top and
include such land types as barren, sub-alpine and considerable quantities
of upper slope spruce. This zone includes all of the Presidential Range
above timber line.
Then 400,000 acres has been classified as lower slope and it supports
the best timber types, has the deepest soils and probably stores the
most water. It grows the most, the best and the most accessible timber,
produces and carries most of the game and fur bearing animals and
includes most of the productive and usable fishing waters. Because of
its accessibility by roads and trails it carries most of the mass recreation
and by being so important for so many activities, is the area that presents
the greatest potential conflict between uses.
Now between this lower slope area and the mountain tops we have
a third area consisting of about 100,000 acres that we call an intermediate
zone. For the most part it includes the lower portions of the high spruce
slopes which, by a combination of accessibility and productivity, are
considered suitable for commercial forest management. It also is im-
portant for water production and storage as well as for certain types of
recreation.
48 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
The determination of these divisions was a basic step in land use
planning. The results stressed the limitations of resource management
in the mountain top and intermediate zones that comprise about 320,000
acres or 45 percent of the total, and emphasized the opportunities for
such management in the lower slope zone containing the remaining
55 percent or 400,000 acres. I am going to use this lower slope zone to
give you a quick idea as to how we manage more than one resource on
the same area under the multiple use system. For the sake of brevity
I am going to drop all of the many diversified activities we have on the
Eastern national forests, into 3 classes that I will call water, timber and
recreation. Actually they represent far more than three types of use.
If I were asked to list these three resource groups in the order of
their importance, I would place water at the top of the list without
any hesitation. It would not be so easy however for me to designate
the one of second importance. Actually, timber production and rec-
reation are of about equal importance on my forest under the present
scheme of things and it would be very difficult to classify one above the
other. However, for the sake of continuity, I am going to put timber
management second and recreation third. What are the relative im-
portance of these three resources in our New England economy and
what are their potential values?
In the first place the forest is of tremendous importance as an upland
reservoir for 4 of our large New England rivers. In addition, 41 com-
munities, hotels and resorts obtain part or all of their water from the
national forest. In most cases the national forest supplies these com-
munities with water that can be used with only a minimum of chlorina-
tion and which can flow to the faucets by gravity. One of these com-
munities has a population of 17,000. No one knows how much the
national forests are worth as a major source of water for industries and
communities. I have seen various estimates prepared by competent
authorities and the values they placed are very high. Dollars may well
be a poor measuring stick when it comes to water, as it is something
we have to have and is worth whatever it takes to get it. Its value today
is undoubtedly very small compared to what it will be in the years
ahead. And yet while 110,000 acres or about 28 percent of the lower
slope zone, our most accessible and productive type, is contained in
watersheds for these 41 communities, we still find it possible to manage
the other 2 resource groups on this same area at the same time without
serious conflicts. Let me explain:
As I have already pointed out I have temporized a bit by designating
timber production as the second most important resource. While it
will be many years before all of the abused and wrecked stands com-
prising the White Mountain National Forest again become productive,
it is still possible to harvest nominal amounts of mature timber each
year. Our annual cut averages 15 million board feet and has a stumpage
IN THE STATES 49
value in excess of $150,000. These amounts will increase steadily as
the stands recover and become more productive. Possibly, 15 million
board feet does not mean too much to some of you but I think that
it will when I tell you that the costs of processing probably exceeds 3
million dollars each year. Another way of expressing 15 million board
feet is that if this volume of timber were put into building materials
it would represent enough material for about 1500 houses. And yet,
under the multiple use system of management the areas that produce
water for community and industrial use can also produce part of this
timber economy. As a general rule good timber management is good
water management. So here we have two major resources being managed
on the same area and compatible with one another.
Now the third resource I mentioned is recreation and I suppose
you wonder if we are successful in blending it in with timber production
and water production. Yes, we are doing it on most areas and even in
the lower slope zone, with a minimum of conflicts. To be sure we re-
frain from cutting timber along roads, trails, brooks, ponds and heavily
used areas as well as in the upper slope forests so important in watershed
management.
We locate our camping and picnic areas away from watersheds
supplying domestic water to communities but we cut timber on these
watersheds and hunting, fishing and hiking are now pretty much the
accepted thing.
Recreational use is growing by leaps and bounds and it is a year-long
use. The White Mountain National Forest has about every conceivable
type of forest recreation and it is enjoyed by over 4 million people
every year. For instance, we have 40 fishing ponds and lakes having
a combined area of 2500 acres. There are 641 miles of fishing stream
and 373,000 acres of good hunting cover. Most of this is in the lower
slope zone. All that is needed is a state hunting and fishing license to
enjoy this form of recreation. The land is not posted. Then, in addition
to the 74 miles of state highways and 304 miles of town roads through
the national forest, the Forest Service also maintains 140 miles of forest
highways and development roads to make the forest more accessible.
We maintain around 800 miles of foot trails and there are cooperating
trail organizations, such as the Randolph Mountain Club, which main-
tain an additional 550 miles. The Forest Service maintains 11 miles of
ski trails and the spring skiing Mecca of the east, Tuckerman Ravine,
is located in the Presidential Range area. Here skiing continues through
the spring and usually well into June. Many days in the spring up to
2,000 skiers climb the 2^ miles to enjoy this last skiing of the year.
We operate 19 camping and picnic areas the largest being Dolly Copp
Campground at the foot of Mt. Washington where facilities are available
for about 800 campers but where we have had 1,500 at peak periods.
The Forest Service maintains 5 high country cabins and 18 trailside
50 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
shelters in the back country and high in the mountains along the net-
work of hiking trails. Cooperating trail clubs, such as the Appalachian
Mountain Club maintain an additional 23 trailside shelters and this
same organization also maintains, under Forest Service permit, its
chain of 10 mountain huts along the trails in the high peaks where food
and lodging can be obtained for a nominal price during the hiking
season. And then, of course, we have the hundreds and thousands of
people who just come to the White Mountains to view the majestic
peaks and the green timbered hills. These folks take their recreation
in a rather sedentary manner but each year they number between
3 and 4 million.
Recreation is big business in the White Mountains where the gross
income from recreation has been estimated by a state agency as exceed-
ing $50,000,000. Including the national forest, this White Mountain
area provides 40 percent of the State's recreational income. Recreation
is New Hampshire's number two business, but, we should have in mind
that so far as the National Forest is concerned, it is secondary in im-
portance to water production and certainly not more important than
timber production. And let us not lose sight of that fact that under
the multiple use system of management we have these three major
resources living together in a reasonably harmonious family group and
with a minimum of domestic problems. It would not be difficult to
put a price tag on the value of the forest for timber production but
it would be nearly impossible for water production. We might be able
to put a price tag on its value for recreation but I am not sure that
I could defend it. We do know that regardless of present-day values
as our population continues to grow, the importance and value of all
three of these resources will continue to increase. There is little likelihood
of our increasing materially the area of public land in New England.
Somebody told me the other day that the White Mountains are now
within a day's motor trip for some 35 or 40 million people. In evaluating
the recreational potential of New England, the White Mountain and
Green Mountain National Forests should be given places near the head
of the table. And let us not lose sight of the fact that under this multiple-
use system of management they offer the public one of the best means
for providing mass recreation at a nominal cost to the taxpayer.
In closing I would like to pay my respects to Perry Merrill the
Director of Vermont Department of Forests and Parks who has been
a close friend of mine for many years. He is a firm advocate of the
informal type of forest recreation that is so popular here in the North-
east. He has been the same gracious host at this conference that he
is yearlong to the many visitors to Vermont's recreation areas.
IN THE STATES 51
Design Problems — Artificial Bathing Areas
L. L. HUTTLESTON, Assistant Director of State Parks, Albany, New York
A. Bathing, or rather beach recreation, is still the prime attraction
in a park. It is difficult enough to incorporate any water surface or
shore line in a park, at cost that can be afforded. To find one with ade-
quate safe natural water for high capacity bathing use is rare indeed.
In New York State, blessed with a variety of shore lines, new develop-
ment or redevelopment of state parks since World War II has involved
four completely artificial pools, with at least three more in immediate
planning stages. Contrastingly only four new areas involve natural
water surfaces. Three of them are on the Great Lakes, cursed with
short seasons, storms and uncertain bathing conditions.
B. Such artificial developments are costly. We have reached a
rather empiric conclusion that it is hardly worth building a pool develop-
ment in a state park with less than 8,000 sq. feet of water surface. In
round figures such a pool with minimum matching bathhouse, toilets
and utilities, costs $200,000. From this minimum, costs range up to
nearly $2,000,000 for the new Anthony Wayne development in Harri-
man Park.
The sad part of this is not the costs themselves, but the fact that
we can still accommodate only relatively trivial numbers of people.
Pools don't "stretch" for the big days like natural beaches. Space
limits, safety and regulations control capacity right down to the man —
giving us the unpleasant situation of people driving up to fifty miles
for a swim and waiting in line for hours. We have small natural beaches
up-state, where the whole waterfront development did not cost $100,000,
that can take care of a bigger beach crowd on a given instant than you
can run through Anthony Wayne all day.
C. The fact is that the artificial pool, as presently designed and
conceived, is an urban facility. It fits best with public transport and
the bicycle trade. As a tool to cope with the typical state park recreation
problem, diverse, low tension, family group activity; it is at best a
transplanted exotic and at worst a monstrosity.
At the beginning, I distinguished between bathing and beach rec-
reation. It is a real distinction. The lure of the water, as such, is largely
illusion. We have become a nation of sun-worshippers. Several years
ago, we ran a check on some of our up-state beaches. Generally there
was about one person actually in the water to every seven who were
sun-bathing or lolling around in bathing dress. In dealing with this
kind of recreation load, the artificial pool fails dismally.
D. The bathhouse in not vanishing from the scene, but clothing
and living habits are affecting its design and capacity factors. More
and more of our people live in suburban areas where casual clothes
are the rule, days, nights and Sundays. Our most respectable citizens
52 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
gallivant around in clothes that they wouldn't have worn in their own
back yard thirty years ago. Quick drying and self-pressing fabrics
contribute to these habits. As a result, the bathhouse is not only drop-
ping in capacity relative to bathing loads, but it can well use baskets
and parcel size lockers instead of more elaborate equipment.
What is the answer? We still must have the artificial bathing area.
In many locations, a park is literally not a park without it.
I am beginning to think the problem is almost a pure research job,
calling for the co-operative ingenuity of park administrators, designers
and public health regulatory agencies. We need to escape from the ur-
ban swimming pool stereotype. The ideal is artificiality of necessity,
but high capacity as equally essential; some simulation of natural sur-
roundings and a minimum of structural intrusion; recognition that
80% to 90% of your crowd needn't be in the water at all at any given
instant; and simplification of bathhouse and accessory design to meet
modern standards of demand.
JOHN I. ROGERS, Chief, Section of Architecture and Landscape Architecture,
Parks and Recreation Division — Michigan Department of Conservation
/CONSTRUCTION of swimming pools or artificial bathing areas
\^s may be the solution to the lack of swimming facilities in some
areas. A great number of the States, however, need not turn to this
type of facility with its limited capacity. There are two other possibilities
open to every State that has rivers, creeks, and lakes. One is to modify
the shore and lake bottom of existing lakes to make them suitable for
swimming. The other is to create new lakes by impounding waters of
rivers and creeks and developing beaches ahead of impounding the water.
Next to swimming probably the second greatest public demand is
for picnic facilities. Picnickers also want to be near the water. Picnick-
ing and swimming invariably go together in a state park development
and creating new lakes or modifying existing lakes opens up the possi-
bility of providing facilities for both. Construction of a swimming pool
provides for a limited number of swimmers but it does not provide the
water attraction that is desired by the picnicker.
Seldom will it be possible, through creation of new lakes or modifying
existing lake shores, to develop a Jones Beach but it will be possible to
create hundreds of beaches that will handle 1,000 to 10,000 people at
one time. The cost will be greatly under that of swimming pool con-
struction. Swimming pools will cost $200 per person capacity of the
pool. Lake developments now under construction in Michigan, in one
instance which is a Jones Beach type of development, will cost about
$160 per person capacity at one time. Another development, not
nearly as pretentious but none the less planned to accommodate about
10,000 people at one time, will cost about $75 per person capacity at
one time.
IN THE STATES 53
Essential elements for development of beaches on existing or newly
created lakes are: (a) water free from contamination (b) existing gradual
sloping of lake bottom from shore or development of such a lake bottom
possible (c) constant change of water either through stream current
through the lake or sufficient wind action to create movement of water.
Beaches should be located on the opposite side of the lake from the
prevailing winds. Prevailing winds should blow onto the beach. This
gives a washing action on the beach bringing in the cleanest water.
A beach with this wind exposure will also have the warmest water, as
the surface water, which is the warmest water, is being constantly blown
towards the beach.
Comments on Camping in State Parks
STATEMENT OF C. L. HARRINGTON, Superintendent, Forests and Parks
Division, Conservation Department, Madison, Wis.
FROM what I gather so far in this meeting which would coincide
with the experience in Wisconsin during the past several years,
and particularly during the season of 1955, is that camping is taking
on a growing significance in state park affairs. This is true particularly
at those parks which have attractive water frontage on lakes or rivers
and particularly lakes. I don't think it is true for those parks, the
features of which are high points or waterfalls on which are places of
scientific or historic interest. I would also like to point out that, in my
observation, the increase is mainly in the family group category. It has
seemed to me that there are more family groups, including a growing
number of children, using the public camping areas in the state parks.
Several years ago, along with the other States, the daily fees for
camping sites were rather noticeably increased. It was felt that this
might have an adverse effect on camping. Our experience is to the
effect that such has not been the case. Instead of diminishing, the
camping use has increased. On this question of charges no particular
well analyzed common denominator pattern for the country as a whole
has ever been worked out. Every state arrives at its conclusions de-
pending on what the immediate situation is that confronts adminis-
trative agencies. I had thought that I might propose to this group
that such a study be made but probably it is just as well that we all
work out our own destiny in this respect. We do have the statistics
assembled by the National Park Service which are very helpful, and
the National Park Service undoubtedly would be the best agency to
make a study of camping fees for the country as a whole with conclusions
and recommendations, but probably the job is so diverse in nature
that it would not be worth while or that after it was done all States
54 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
would still find it inadvisable to try and proceed other than they
are all now doing. Still the question remains more or less unsolved as
to whether present day charges are realistic or actually needed, State
by state, or in line with charges or no charges in vogue for other services
or facilities furnished the public, all of which cost money the same as
camping does.
I presume in other respects our camping use experiences would
follow more or less those that all of you have been confronted with — the
week-end camper who wants to leave his camp equipment on location
during an extended period, even for the entire season; the growing
demand for better water and sanitary facilities; the criticisms that
arise from freeing water frontage from the rather concentrated use of
campers and moving them to areas back from the water frontage itself;
the problems that arise from that type of camping that looks like getting
a low cost place to live; the decisions that are needed to reconcile the
interests of local merchants or salesmen or local service groups from
soliciting among campers. With the increase of camping of course these
problems and others tend to increase and intensify. During 1955 on several
week-ends we had the feeling at some of the camp sites that we were
really chock-full. On one night at Devil's Lake State Park, over the
Fourth of July week-end, there were over 1,000 camping units registered.
This means that a changing aggregation of people of numbers equal
to a large village or small city had to be dealt with. Under such circum-
stances everything in the park, including the area itself, is taxed to
the limit. As a result, in the middle of August the camping sites are
rather worn out and take on the appearances of a rather beat-up place.
Just how these matters can be fairly disposed of is not altogether clear.
I am sure we all feel that this use of state park property will increase
in the years just ahead and we will all have to do the best we can to
serve this public use. In this respect we will have to have the cooperation
of those who like the experience of outdoor life to the fullest extent.
Statement by C. P. BRADFORD, State Parks Commission, Augusta, Maine
A CCORDING to the Dictionary there are four definitions for
XX "Camp." They are (1) the ground occupied by an army or other
group with tents, or other temporary structures for shelters. (2) a tent
or other temporary hut used by sportsmen or motorists. (3) persons in
an encampment and (4) military life.
Like all words, it has come to mean different things to different
people.
Simplified, to the extreme, John Muir said that all he needed to get
ready for a camping expedition was to "throw some tea and bread in
an old sack and jump over the back fence."
IN THE STATES 55
Today, youngsters, have "day camping" programs where nature
is emphasized. Their older brothers and sisters go "camping" in boys
and girls summer camps. Available to mother and dad are adult camps
for nature study, beauty treatment — and what have you. Also there
are camps for training soldiers, ball players and prize fighters.
By combining the first three definitions found in the dictionary, we
define camping in state parks to mean groups of people using temporary
shelters on a plot of ground designated by the park authorities and
provided with certain essential facilities.
Camping facilities is a very controversial subject, and each agency
will have to establish its own policies. In the Maine State Park we in-
tend to provide each campsite with a picnic table, a fireplace and
reasonably accessable pure drinking water and toilet facilities.
Probably, the fireplace, with the advent of various types of camp
stoves is the least essential; although I feel that our modern civilization
has developed no substitute for the evening campfire — around which,
in the wilds of Wyoming, the National Park idea was conceived.
Our host, Vermont, is to be commended, for providing every State
Park area with untreated mountain spring water from its eternal hills.
Of greatest importance are the sanitary facilities. In Maine we have
attempted to provide water bourne sewerage for the heavy use areas.
In the remote, small use areas pit toilets are used — and as long as park
use coincides with park design, they have proven satisfactory.
Beyond the fundamental essential four — sanitary facilities, pure
drinking water, picnic table and fireplace, there are various interpretive
programs and facilities that can be initiated. Interpretive programs
explain the park. People enjoy and appreciate what they understand.
With understanding comes support.
Director Connie Wirth of the National Park Service has author
Freeman Tilden working on a 2-year assignment to re-examine inter-
pretive programs and methods and to make recommendations for
parks on all levels.
We have found that nature trails receive much appreciative use.
We have been most fortunate in having various garden clubs lay them
out and provide the signs.
As our Sebago Lake State Park we have an Arts and Crafts program,
which is very much worth while and self supporting from a 15 cent
per class fee. Our campground tender has organized it, with the co-
operation of interested adults, so that no extra personnel or state funds
have been involved.
Working with leather, paper, plastics, etc., the classes met twice a
week. (Attendance ran about 40, with children predominating.) The
most popular item this summer was a match scratcher modeled after
Smokey the Bear.
56 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
Also at Sebago Lake we have an amphitheatre where each Wednesday
and Saturday evenings campfire programs are scheduled. The Wed-
nesday evening programs have brought some phase of conservation.
Twice we turned to our good neighbor New Hampshire and were favored
with excellent programs by Dean Stevens of the Forestry School and
Larry Rathbun of the Society for the Protection of New Hampshire
Forests.
The Saturday evening programs include a popular movie. To this
the Central Office agreed reluctantly, but the gains of a quiet night
seem, to the Ranger at least, worth while. For it has been shown that
for a popular movie the entire camp turns out and then turns in.
Maine must continue to give camping careful consideration in its
planning program. In 1954 the national average of tent and trailer
campers as reported by 81 agencies in 46 States was 8%. In Maine it
was 25% or one camper night for every 3 day visitors. I believe this is
the highest ratio in the country, and our camping is limited, in most
areas, only by the facilities available.
Because of overcrowding at Sebago Lake where the ratio of campers
to total park use is 47%, it became necessary to limit parties to the
number of sites — 224, and a two week limit was established. This
resulted in fewer camper nights in 1955, but it more than doubled the
individuals who camped at Sebago.
Overcrowding, while very easy to get into, has several detrimental
effects. Therefore it is advisable to hold park use to park design. There
is, however, the unhappy picture of the travel weary party that arrives
just after the last campsite has been filled.
Apparently all the park operators can do is to publicize and advise
the governing bodies of the needs and the opportunities existing in
the camping field. (In Maine it was believed that this year 525 camping
sites should have been added to the existing 400.)
Today we go camping in air conditioned cars propelled with Hi
Octane gas, on tubeless tires, over super highways listening to the
current ball game or song hit. We take synthetic sleeping bags to lay
on air mattresses. We cook over gas flames and keep our food cold in
portable refrigerators. Science has provided us with insect bombs,
light weight clothing, portable boats and motors, excellent cameras
and binoculars, and other things, for our pleasures and comfort.
The art of camping for John Muir and John Doe presents a striking
contrast, and yet, I feel that the next generation will have camping
equipment that we moderns haven't yet dreamed of.
There are many sociological factors affecting camping.
Living standards have improved 25% in the last 10 years. 70%
of U. S. families now own automobiles, and today, one U. S. worker,
with power tools turns out as much in a 40 hour week as 3 men could
IN THE STATES 57
in 1850 working a 70 hour week. Also in 1850 two-thirds of all U. S.
energy was muscle power. In 1950 it was less than 2%.
By 1960, only 5 years hence, the U. S. will probably have 177 million
people, a 36^2 hour week and an average income of $6,180. The 4 day
week is in the offing. In 1900 13% of living time was working time.
Today it's only 9% and the leisure time market has now reached 30
billion annually.
Maine's own naturalist, Henry Beston, has put his finger on one of
the fundamental human needs and advantages of camping when he
wrote, "people want room to breathe, where one does not have to el-
bow— or gasp — to remain an individual and a human being."
Super Highways and Parks
JOSEPH F. KAYLOR, Director, Department of Forests and Parks,
Annapolis, Maryland
THE PRESENT DAY trend in super highway construction is
creating many new problems in state parks and recreation areas.
The new high speed highways are literally dumping thousands of
people in the very limited space of parks now available for public use.
What are we, as park administrators, to do about this situation?
Many suggestions have arisen how we may go about securing the
cooperation of the highway planners in providing us with preliminary
plans while the work is in the reconnaissance stage, these with the
thought that we might first of all make suggestions how the road en-
trance and exit may be placed in order to create little traffic hazard
difficulties or confusion to the potential state park visitor. We would
likewise have an early opportunity, through knowledge of such informa-
tion, to better plan many of the' now limited facilities, so that we could
take care of the crowds which are bound to arrive once the super high-
way is completed. We all recall Colonel Lieber's planning of thirty
years ago when state parks were placed geographically so that they
would not be more than 25 miles away from each center of population.
It seems like a relatively short few years ago that we stepped up the
distance to 50 miles from large groups of citizens; then 75 miles; and
now today, in amazement, I can report to you that in some areas state
park visitors are driving 90 to 100 miles for a day in the parks. This
means approximately a 200 mile round-trip in order to have a picnic
in one of our state parks or recreation areas. It shows the tremendous
need for such outlets, but in showing this need, we in administrative
positions must get an early grasp of the problem and change our plans
to meet the growing recreation seeking population's thrust upon us.
58 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
Roll Call of the States ;
Alabama. James L. Segrest, Chief, Division of State Parks, Monu-
ments and Historical Sites, Alabama Department of Conservation,
reported:
The outlook is bright for Alabama's state parks in the next two years,
brighter financially than in any two year period in the history of the
State. The State Legislature recently closed a biennial session at Mont-
gomery, approving a State Parks budget of $486,810 annually for the
next two years. This is an increase of approximately $250,000 per year
over the budget of the current year and more than doubles the amount
available to the parks system in any previous year. Although the
Legislature failed to approve a five-million-dollar general obligation
bond issue for development of state parks, administration forces plan
to introduce this proposal again in a special legislative session.
During the past year, the Alabama Parks System has created the
position of State Parks Field Supervisor. This official, assigned to the
Montgomery office, will give closer field supervision and coordination
by the central office. The 1955 State Legislature raised the maximum
salary of top merit system employees to $9,000 annually, an increase
of $1,800 per year; increased the maximum subsistence allowance from
$7 to $9 per day, and private car mileage from 6 cents to 8 cents per
mile. The salary ceiling raise will probably increase the pay brackets
for most state merit system employees.
Two laws enacted by the 1953 State Legislature gave Alabama's
Parks Division royalties from the sale of sand and gravel from public
water bottoms and the revenue from sale of timber from parks lands.
These two sources will produce approximately $150,000 for each of
the next two years. This revenue can be allocated for any purpose and
spent over and above the established budget. However plans are to
use these funds for capital improvement which with $40,000 of the
Legislative appropriation earmarked for additions and betterments,
will give $190,000 annually for additions to parks facilities.
Two new public lakes were opened in Alabama during the past year
and two others were re-opened after complete renovation. The recent
Legislature enacted a general fishing license act which will increase
Game and Fish Division revenues making it possible for the Conserva-
tion Department to build at least five additional lakes per year. When
these lakes are opened to the public they will be operated by the State
Parks Division.
Major repairs to facilities and erection of several new buildings on
some of the reservations were accomplished with timber sale and sand
and gravel funds. Tremendous improvements were made at Gulf State
Park (approximately $150,000) using funds from sale of dead oyster
shells removed from the bottom of Mobile Bay. Alabama's Conserva-
IN THE STATES 59
tion Director, according to a ruling by the Attorney General, has
authority to spend such funds for capital improvements on lands under
jurisdiction of the Conservation Department located in the Mobile
Bay area. These expenditures were over and above the approved state
park budget for the past year.
Plans are to begin development of two major state parks during the
next fiscal year. One of these is located on the Guntersville Reservoir,
a 4,000-acre tract of land given to Alabama by the Tennessee Valley
Authority for State Park use. The other is located in Tuscaloosa County
in central northwest Alabama and comprises approximately 2,000 acres
given to the State by people of that locality for recreational use. Plans
for 1956 also include development of two recreational areas for Negroes,
one in central and one in south Alabama.
California. Earl P. Hanson, California Division of Beaches and
Parks, Department of Natural Resources, reported :
The California State Park System continues to expand under the
able guidance of the State Park Commission and the effective adminis-
tration of Chief Newton B. Drury. At the 1955 General Session of the
California Legislature many top priority projects of the Five- Year
Program, approved by the Commission and the Director of Natural
Resources, were the subject of appropriation bills amounting to approxi-
mately $17,000,000 or one-third of the total suggested Five- Year
Program. In addition to this, the 1955-56 Budget of the Division of
Beaches and Parks appropriated $5,900,000 from the oil royalties for
support and operation of the State Park System. This included approxi-
mately $2,000,000 for development and $800,000 for land additions to
existing areas.
Special appropriation bills included the following:
(1) Redwood Highway By-pass $1,000,000
(2) Establishment of Roadside Rest Program 1,000,000
(3) Shoreline Acquisition and Development 9,000,000
(4) Reservoir Recreational Projects — Acquisition
and Development 1,000,000
(5) Establishment of Interior Park Projects 2,500,000
(6) Establishment and Development of Historical
Monuments and Museums 1,800,000
These appropriation bills carefully excluded the long term matching
requirement, which has been typical of the State Park Commission's
acquisition program.
Governor Goodwin J. Knight pocket vetoed all of the above, reasoning
that since the major appropriation bill was drafted so that he could not
delete specific projects from the bill, high priority projects would be
seriously affected should he reduce the total appropriation. He does
not believe the Legislature has given adequate consideration to the
elimination of the long established matching provision. The Governor
60 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
believes that the development of an outstanding system of state beaches
and parks in California is of utmost importance to the welfare and
economy of the State, but must be in accordance with a sound, prudent
and comprehensive master plan. He proposes to submit to the 1956
Budget Session of the Legislature, a Budget that will contain specific
recommendations for a substantial beginning on such a beach and
park acquisition and development program.
Chief Drury has said: "It is reassuring to know that the future of
the California State Park System will be charted on this sound basis."
As an aid to the development of such a long-range program, the
Division of Beaches and Parks has been granted a deficiency appro-
priation of $50,000 for the purpose of gathering basic data and compiling
a master plan report for the entire State Park System. Based upon
the Commission's Five- Year Program, the report will take into con-
sideration that the first year of this program is being accomplished
through the Division's 1955-56 fiscal year budget.
The State Park Commission has scheduled two public hearings
where agencies and organizations may present written statements
regarding proposed State park projects. As a result of these presenta-
tions, the staff of the Division of Beaches and Parks may review the
proposals and give consideration to them in any priority system that
may be established for purposes of the Division's 1956-57 fiscal year
budget. Thus, approximately $64,000,000 in oil royalties available for
appropriation under existing law will be programmed for expenditure
over the remaining four years of the Commission's Five- Year Program.
This program may well include a determination of such policies as the
elimination of the matching principle, the initial establishment of a
roadside rest program, the development of reservoir and other aquatic
recreation projects and the establishment of critera to determine State-
wide projects as against regional or local projects.
Legislation which would have changed the present law allocating
70 percent of the oil drilling royalties to the State Park and State Beach
Funds failed. With the formula intact, the Commission welcomes a
new opportunity to plan for the use of the $64,000,000 in royalties now
and to be accumulated in those funds.
In bringing you Chief Drury 's greetings, I also would like to bring
you some of his inspirational comments:
What is California's future? Renowned for scenic beauty, rich traditions,
abundant resources and great opportunities, this State, with 300,000 new popu-
lation each year, is undergoing something akin to a revolution. Planners are
speculating as to our problems twenty years from now when our present
12,500,000 will have increased to almost 20,000,000. Thought is being given to
highways, to water, to housing, to many other material things. But I wonder
whether sufficient thought is being given to the one thing that is most char-
acteristic of California's distinction, and is summed up in this question:
"What kind of an environment will be preserved for these millions of people
to live in when we reach the year 1975?"
IN THE STATES 61
We are planning super-highways for the future. Where will these highways
lead our people, accustomed as they are to the beauty of our native landscape
and to the healing effect for body and soul of contact with Nature out-of-doors?
Those who travel from the smog of southern cities to the open spaces and clear
air of the Borrego and Anza Deserts, or leave the heat of interior valleys to
enjoy the cool shadows of the Redwood Highway, or the shimmering beauty of
Emerald Bay on Lake Tahoe (to give but two of many examples), are seeking
an environment that ministers to their needs. We can take pride that our pattern
of land management and philosophy is responsible for preserving some of the
wild places where our harassed population can seek relief from the tensions of
mechanized urban life. It is going to take imagination and daring and great
restraint for us to hold even the six-tenths of one percent of the surface of this
great State which we have set aside in our state parks. What will the State
Park System be in 1975? This gives us something to think about as we carry
on our day-to-day assignments in the Division.
Connecticut. Donald C. Mathews, Director, Connecticut State
Park and Forest Commission, reported:
Connecticut is a small densely populated State. A large percentage
of the population is employed in the great industries of the State.
These people and their families require nearby places for relaxation,
and to provide for this Connecticut has seventy state parks. All are
not developed but during the past year approximately four million
visitors used the facilities.
New parks that were opened during the 1955 season were Kettletown
State Park, Gay City State Park, and Taylor Brook Campground.
Practically no funds are available for capital improvements during
the coming year. This is unfortunate as developed areas are now taxed
beyond their capacity, and Connecticut must soon provide more ade-
quate facilities in the state parks, or it will be impossible to meet the
demand.
Connecticut has the good fortune to be the recipient of many de-
sirable park areas, paid for from the earnings of the George Dudley
Seymour Trust. The most recent acquisition purchased from this trust
fund is Millers Pond State Park in the town of Durham, consisting of
a fifty-acre lake and surrounding land, which, when developed, will
add much to the recreational needs of central Connecticut.
A program of beach erosion control was completed at Hammonasset
Beach State Park during the last year. A similar project is contemplated
for Sherwood Island State Park in 1956.
Prior to July 1, 1955, Connecticut parks were operated from income
plus a general fund appropriation. Now the operation is entirely out
of the general fund. However, the potential income from the parks
has been reflected in the general fund appropriation.
Unique is the operation of one park for the exclusive use of handi-
capped persons. Hundreds of people who normally would be conspicuous
at a public state park enjoy the facilities of this area.
62 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
Florida. Elmer L. Hill, Director, Board of Florida Parks and His-
toric Memorials reported:
The Florida Park Service is glad to report continued and greater
progress for the last fiscal year. All activities in maintenance, operation
and construction have been stepped up. The biennial building program
has been completed and 36 new park structures, ranging from picnic
pavilion to a $60,000 recreation building, are in use, or being equipped
for use. Three undeveloped areas have been improved and are now in
operation. One new area, Kingsley Plantation, a Historic Memorial,
was purchased and added to the system.
Park usage increased, due to three factors: Increased interest, new
facilities in existing areas and the opening of undeveloped areas. Attend-
ance increased from 1,459,000 in 1953-54 to 2,100,000 in 1954-55.
Receipts increased from $136,300 to $160,800. We anticipate propor-
tionate increases this fiscal year. The demands for camping facilities
are increasing steadily. One new group camp, accommodating 100
persons, has been added to the system. Day camp use by schools,
recreation departments, and other organizations, have increased.
Operational expenditures for this fiscal year amounted to $803,118.
Of that amount, $255,700 was spent for Operating Capital Outlay,
which included the purchase of trucks, tractors, all types of equipment,
and improvements to existing structures. These expenditures, with the
$465,000 Biennial Building and Improvement Fund, are very apparent
to the Park patron. Roads in two Park areas have been paved.
Our Historic Memorials, long neglected, are now coming into prom-
inence. We have built two museums and two more are scheduled for
construction. Arrangements have been made with the Florida State
Museum, a division of the University of Florida, to construct and
furnish all interpretative exhibits. Modern techniques have been used
and the results are very satisfactory. All historical data or information
released is authenticated by the History Department of the University
of Florida.
The relationship between the Florida Park Service and the 1955
Legislature was cordial. The progress that had been made was recognized
and the result was an increase in appropriation.
Funds available for the next biennium are, as follows:
General Revenue $1,082,771
Trust Funds or receipts 401,000
Building and Improvements 526,000
$2,009,771
Race Track Funds Volusia County 26,500
$2,036,271
IN THE STATES 63
The Legislators from Volusia County introduced and had passed a
law wherein County race track revenues would be used to match state
appropriation for improvements in Tomoka State Park.
We have a working organization that is dedicated to the job of cour-
teous service to the public. Every effort is being made to raise the
standards of improvement, maintenance, service and safety. Public
acceptance has been good. We are pleased, but not complacent with
our progress.
Georgia. William M. Hay, of Decatur, Georgia, reported:
Georgia has a new Park Director, Mr. Roy Chalker. Mr. Chalker
has discussed very frankly the big problem presented by the Park
Program. He is aware of the need of sound policies in park practices,
personnel planning, operation and administration. It is his desire and
hope to secure help and advise in making needed changes to set up a
sound program. I am very much impressed with his conscientious desire
to do something worthwhile. The opportunity for Georgia Park Program
to move forward I believe is the best it has been in the past twenty
years. I am sure Mr. Chalker will welcome the support and help of the
National Conference on State Parks.
Indiana. K. R. Cougill, Director, Division of State Parks, Lands
and Waters, Indiana Department of Conservation, reported :
Although a great emphasis has been placed recently upon reducing
the costs for operation and maintenance of the Indiana State Parks,
our program of progress and development was not hampered. During
the immediate past fiscal year, the Department encumbered funds
exceeding $1,694,000 for park purposes.
Of this amount, over $825,000 were encumbered for a good construc-
tion program of capital improvements which included $550,000 for a
dam at Versailles, $145,000 for a group camp at Lincoln, $30,000 for
four (4) family cabins at Shakamak, $40,000 for a wildlife exhibit and
modern comfort station at Brown County State Park and $63,000 for
road paving and miscellaneous construction.
The revenue-producing operations earned an income of slightly over
$983,000. Upon a recommendation by our Division, the members of
the Conservation Commission adopted a policy protecting state parks
from exploration by uranium hunters. This policy is considered to be
one of the many decisions which continue to protect the state parks
from encroachments.
During the previous year there were 2,410,383 visitors to our state
properties — making another year in which the total admissions exceeded
2,000,000 people.
The State Park Inns continued to operate with emphasis on serving
the family group. Children, under 14 years of age, when accompanied
64 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
by both parents, are provided free lodging, paying for meals only. An
inspection of the recent publication entitled State Park Statistics, 1954,
produced by the National Park Service, revealed that 42 percent of
all guest nights spent in all state park inns and lodges in the Nation
are spent in Indiana State Park Inns and Lodges.
Indiana entered the current fiscal year with approximately $2,000,000
available for improvements and operations. This amount is equally
divided between improvements and operations.
The dam now under construction at Versailles will provide an im-
pounded water area covering about 270 acres. In addition, the new
lake will provide a water supply for the Town of Versailles and the
town will in turn provide treated water for use at Versailles State Park.
Arrangements are also being made to provide drinking water to nearby
communities, in the vicinity of Versailles, which have suffered from an
acute water shortage during serious droughts of the past few years.
Construction of a modern group camp, to accommodate 120 campers
and 30 leaders, is well underway. This new group camp, being the first
one at Lincoln State Park, will serve the youth groups in southwestern
Indiana. The popularity of family cabins at several of the parks prompted
the construction of four new cabins at Shakamak at a cost of approxi-
mately $30,000.
In a number of the parks, rest room facilities have been expanded by
providing pit toilets with louvered sides and pits arranged so as to pro-
vide easy access for removal of waste.
By action of the 1955 Legislature, Old Goshen Church State Memorial
was returned to the original owners. Buildings at New Harmony were
turned over to this Division as a State Memorial. Plans have been
made to rehabilitate the Fauntleroy House for public visitation. As
time and funds permit, additional buildings of the New Harmony
Memorial will be restored and made accessible to the public.
New pens have already been constructed for the large mammals at
the Brown County Wildlife Exhibit. A modern rest room, near the
wildlife area, is nearly completed. The exhibit includes a reptile pit and
small pens for the smaller mammals and birds now being housed in
the old Wildlife Exhibit building.
Now that certain major developments have been initiated at Ver-
sailles and Lincoln State Parks, according to our master plan of develop-
ment, it is planned to proceed with complete development of these
two areas. With the advent of a new bathhouse at Lincoln, more modern
facilities will be offered to summer visitors. Needed expansion and
development in other state parks will be continued as funds are made
available.
The Tenth Annual Great Lakes Park Training Institute will be held
at Pokagon State Park during the last week of February, 1956. Since
its inception in 1946, this Institute has grown to the point where it is
IN THE STATES 65
considered as the most valuable source of education training and in-
spiration to people in park work. By means of our park superintendents'
meetings and close contacts with operations in the field, our in-service
training program will continue.
The Chain 0' Lakes State Park Project, in northeastern Indiana,
will continue to receive the attention of all those interested in promoting
this area as an addition to the State Park System of Indiana.
Iowa. Wilbur A. Rush, Chief, Division of Lands and Waters, reported :
Unusually fine weather, coupled with an absence of serious storms
or floods, made this past season one of the most favorable in past years.
By mid-season % million more visitors had used Iowa's parks, as com-
pared to the previous season. Total attendance this year will exceed
5,000,000 visitors for the first time in the history of our park system.
A sharp increase in the use of water areas has been noted. Because
of the many points of access to our lakes it is impossible accurately to
check on the increased use, but a good measuring device is the registra-
tion of boats with our office. A year ago an increase of 100 percent
over all previous years was noted. This year registrations have increased
100 percent over last year. Boat dealers report sharp increases in the
sale of boats, motors, and water skis, and all of our bathhouse operators
report increases in the use of our state park beaches.
Overnight cabin use has remained static, principally because no new
units have been added. Most of our cabins are well reserved and people
who are unable to secure cabin reservations are turning to tent camping
for their accommodations. In all areas offering tent camping we have
experienced at least a 50 percent increase in the number of campers
and in many areas the increase is 100 percent or better. As a result
more effort is being expended to improve tent and trailer camping
facilities.
Development of Iowa's two newest artificial lakes has remained at a
standstill during the past year. Work on Prairie Bose Lake in Shelby
County has been held up by litigation in court.
The new lake in Montgomery County has been held up because of
lack of funds, but will now proceed under our new Capital Improvement
appropriation.
This was a legislative year in Iowa and several laws affecting the
department were passed. One important measure was a law permitting
Counties to establish County Conservation Boards empowered to acquire,
develop, and maintain county parks. Such a county park system in
Iowa will be a valuable supplement to our state park system.
A law legalizing the use of prison labor in state parks and another
legalizing the use of county road equipment were also passed. These
laws should give us a little relief in our maintenance problems and
also aid in our development program.
66 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
A new appropriation of $1,173,000 was voted for Capital Improve-
ments in state parks. $550,000 annually was appropriated for main-
tenance and operation of the Division of Lands and Waters, which is
an increase of 75,500 over the previous biennium. However, $75,000
was earmarked for utilization of prison labor, so in reality we will be
operating on the same budget as in previous years. About 75 percent
of the appropriation has been budgeted for state parks.
During the past year a new park film in color showing the develop-
ment of an artificial lake has been released. A year ago I reported to
you on the initiation of our series of television programs. These are
being continued and I am proud to report this year that this series of
programs has been chosen for showing to our armed forces at home and
abroad.
With the initiation of a prison labor program and a larger Capital
Improvement Budget, the coming year promises to be a busy and
active year.
Kentucky. Henry Ward, Commissioner, Department of Conservation,
reported:
A program of expansion of Kentucky State Parks was continued
during the past year, with the objective of developing a major state
park to serve each geographic area of the State.
Three new state park areas were accepted for the park system:
Greenbo Lake with 3,000 acres in Greenup County; 1,000 acres for a
recreational park in Pendleton County; and 25 acres for a historical
shrine in Boone County.
A contract was let for a $600,000 lodge in General Butler State Park,
Carrollton, Ky. Other major construction included: boat dock and
marina at Dewey Lake State Park; central restaurant, gift shop and
headquarters building at Carter Caves State Park; new dining room,
lake and bathhouse and beach at Pine Mountain State Park; restoration
and furnishing of General Butler home at General Butler State Park;
addition of 9 holes to golf course at Kentucky Dam Village State Park;
building of horse riding stables at Natural Bridge, Kentucky Lake,
Pennyrile, General Butler and Kentucky Dam Village parks.
Major emphasis was placed on landscaping in many of the new
parks of the Kentucky system, and on replacement of furnishings. The
national trend toward air-conditioning was recognized, and systems
were provided for all state park dining rooms and lounges. DuPont
Lodge at Cumberland Falls was completely air-conditioned.
State park receipts from operations climbed to approximately
$2,100,000 during the fiscal year of 1954-55. Capital outlay expendi-
tures in addition to that sum totalled approximately $1,500,000.
It was estimated that 4,500,000 persons used Kentucky parks during
the past year.
IN THE STATES 67
Kentucky cooperated with Virginia in the establishment of the
Breaks Interstate Park, in the Cumberland mountains on the border
of the two States. A separate Breaks Interstate Park Commission was
created to develop and operate this park.
The State explored the possibility of issuing revenue bonds to finance
the construction of new facilities, but no definite steps in that direction
were taken.
Otter Creek Park, Clinton G. Johnson, reported:
The year 1955 has been an outstanding year for Otter Creek Park.
I believe that Louisville is one of very few cities with a rural park
such as Otter Creek Park. We have approximately 2600 wooded acres
located on a big bend of the Ohio River forty miles from the city. The
park was started during the 1930 's as a recreational demonstration
project. We have three organization camps, one housing 180 and the
two others 80 each. These are booked solid from April 15th to November
1st, and would be used during the winter if the construction of the
buildings made it possible to keep them warm.
Our day camp area is used by the Parks and Recreation of Louisville
who bring 50 children each day by bus during the summer.
Our picnic areas located on the river where once stood the town of
Rock Haven are the most popular in the park. Our tent camp area
has been used this year by people from as far away as California and
Maine.
We have started the system of charging for large picnic groups
(lOc per person) and for campers (25c per person per night) this year
and there has been no objection to the fee.
Our biggest policy change has been to remove race restrictions for
all park users and we have had no trouble from this step. So far we
have found that in general the negro campers and picnickers leave a
cleaner area than most groups.
Our use has increased far beyond our facilities and we requested
$19,000 additional capital improvement funds, mainly for use in the
picnic areas. I understand that this request was granted just before
I left for this conference. This money is in addition to our 1955-56
budget of $45,000.
A new approach road from U.S. Highway 31W and 60 is supposed to
be started this fall.
Our 1955 use will exceed 125,000 and about 42 percent of this is
campers.
Louisiana. William W. Wells, Director, State Parks and Recreation
Commission, sent the following report:
Successful progress on the current Capital Improvement Program,
most of which was done with force account labor, is one of the most
important things accomplished during the past year. This includes the
68 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
construction of two small group camp swimming pools with a simplified
recirculation system which has worked out very effectively. The cost
of these pools, 25 x 60 feet, averaged a modest $22,000 each.
Construction on Sam Houston State Park near Lake Charles was
initiated after the Department of Highways let a contract to construct
a bridge, which will give access to the area. This project has been hanging
fire for several years.
Additions were made to the technical and clerical staff of the Central
Office in order to keep pace with the expanded operational and con-
struction program. A greatly expanded publicity program was put
into effect which has paid dividends in a number of different ways.
A great improvement was made in operating procedures, service
and accounting in the facilities which produce income. From this
Revolving Fund operation, a considerable amount of repair work and
equipment replacement was paid for and the fund still ended up with
a ten percent net profit.
A total of $295,000 was available for Capital Improvements during
the past year. The planned program for development next year is based
on a total of $470,000 for Capital Improvements. Two new areas, the
Edward Douglass White Memorial Park, and the Mansfield Rattle
Park will be placed in operation. Repair and refurnishing of the birth-
place of the former Chief Justice White of the U. S. Supreme Court is
approximately 75 percent completed. A Confederate Memorial Museum
is on the drawing board for the Mansfield Rattle Park.
An area immediately adjacent to Lake Ristineau State Park has
been acquired on a 99-year lease arrangement for the purpose of pro-
viding negro park and recreational facilities for the northern portion
of the State. A similar development will also be made of the eastern
shore of Chicot Lake to provide facilities for the south-central portion
of the State.
Although the actual deeds have not been signed, a new park of ap-
proximately 1800 acres has been acquired for the purpose of providing
a large regional park to serve the Raton Rouge area. It is the former
Idlewild Plantation which was owned by the State Department of
Institutions and was made available to the State Parks and Recreation
Commission without cost.
Increased usage at all of the State Park Areas was noted, especially
at Lake Ristineau State Park, and also in the museums on three of the
other areas.
Maine. Harold J. Dyer, Director of State Parks, reported:
The Honorable Percival P. Raxter is still adding lands to Raxter
State Park in the Katahdin Region. Recent gifts accepted by the
legislature involve an additional township increasing the area to 193,254
acres. An area of 28,594 acres has been set aside with the provision
IN THE STATES 69
that scientific forest management be practiced. This tract and an ad-
jacent 14,005 acres also have been set aside as lands open to hunting
and trapping.
The original park area involving six additional townships is still
"to be maintained primarily as a wilderness, and recreational purposes
are to be regarded as of secondary importance and shall not encroach
upon the main objective of this area which is to be 'Forever Wild.' '
There are six major tent campgrounds at this park, two of which can
be approached only by trail. "The sole purpose of the donor in creating
this Park is to protect the forests and wildlife therein as a great wilder-
ness area unspoiled by man."
Expansion and improvement of facilities has been in progress on
all areas, but demands far outspace the supply. Work is nearing com-
pletion on the 1J^ mile coastal beach area, Reid State Park, with the
construction of additional roads, parking, bathhouse, concession, water
and sewerage facilities. Two parks, Lake St. George and Aroostook,
have been redesigned and enlarged. Tent camping facilities are being
expanded on all areas, and to meet the demand a two week camping
limit has been applied in an attempt to serve as many visitors as possible.
A $100,000 capital appropriation is available for further improvement
work in the next two years.
Maryland. Joseph F. Kaylor, Director, Department of Forests and
Parks, reported:
The total appropriation for operation and maintenance was $162,498.
Budgeted receipts of $53,928 added to this show a total of $216,426 for
the fiscal year. The total appropriation for capital improvement was
$176,000. This amount was spread between several parks where additions
and improvements were most needed.
The areas administered include 12 parks which have been developed
at a total cost of $2,628,222, and two undeveloped parks that have
cost $36,932. The total cost is $2,665,154. There are no memorials or
other type of areas included.
Attendance estimated for the year was 1,572,155.
Receipts budgeted for expenditures amounted to $47,115, and funds
received and sent to the general revenue fund came to $18,278, together,
making a total of $65,393. For the sake of comparison, total expenditures
for the previous fiscal year were: Operation and maintenance $206,480
and capital outlay $376,515 or a total of $582,995. This Report includes
appropriations for state parks only and does not include outlays for
general administrative expenses.
Recreation facilities to be found in our parks include picnic areas,
play fields, swimming beaches, fishing, boating piers and rental boats,
campsites, hiking and nature trails, rental cabins and bridle trails.
Rates, fees and charges are, for car parking 50 cents, reserved picnic
70 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
table and fireplace one dollar per day, reserved small shelter two
dollars per day, reserved large pavilion $7.50 per day, camp site one
dollar per day, bath house 50 cents.
A package deal at a heavily used area has proved popular where
we charge one dollar for car parking, picnic table, fireplace and a bag
of charcoal.
Of major importance among events of the past year was the transfer
by the Federal Government of 4,500 acres of land of the Catoctin Rec-
reation Development Area to the State. This land was named Cunning-
ham Falls State Park and Recreation Area. It is a valuable and po-
tentially great addition to our State Park System. Also of importance
was the opening of a new unit in Patapsco State Park, designated the
Hollofield Recreation Area, on U. S. Route 40, six miles west of Balti-
more. This unit also provides a roadside rest and information area for
the comfort and convenience of travelers. At Sandy Point State Park,
adjacent to the Chesapeake Bay Bridge, parking facilities were exten-
sively enlarged to accommodate increased attendance. At Elk Neck
State Park the camping area was enlarged in response to the heavy
increase in demand for tent campsites. Gambrill State Park, one of
the oldest in the system, benefited in the construction program with
the addition of improved sanitary and water facilities, plus a loop
road which opens up more picnic and play areas.
Acquisition: Patapsco, Harper's Ferry, for the National Park, and
Dry Creek Lake.
Planned program for 1955-56 includes development of Deep Creek
Lake State Park, a new recreation area at Patapsco State Park, acquisi-
tion of land for Pen-Mar State Park and Wye Mill State Park and
development of a new beach at Elk Neck State Park.
Capital improvement funds for 1955-56 amount to $351,000.
Massachusetts. Raymond J. Kenney, State Forest and Park Director,
reported :
Substantial progress in Park development is under way in Massa-
chusetts.
He pointed out that beginning with 1954 the sum of approximately
$4,000,000 has been appropriated to that Division for park development
and the projects are now under way.
This will involve the construction and opening up of five new Parks
in addition to the thirty-five Parks and recreation areas on State Forests
which have heretofore been operated.
In addition to the foregoing, the Division of Public Beaches in the
Department of Public Works has approximately $4,500,000 for the
development of the present Salisbury Beach Reservation and for the
purchase and development of two additional ocean beaches.
IN THE STATES 71
In the Division of Forests and Parks, the revenue has increased to
the point where approximately $140,000 was collected during the past
year and this amount would have been larger had not hurricanes closed
some of the areas in mid-season both in 1954 and 1955.
Director Kenny also reported that his Division is cooperating with
the State Department of Public Works in the establishment of some
1,000 roadside rest areas which are extensively used by the motoring
public. Tables for these roadside areas are constructed at the Prison
Camp on the Myles Standish State Forest.
The Prison Camp at the Myles Standish State Forest has been of
material benefit in developing the park and recreation program in the
State and in the recent session of the legislature the establishment of
four additional Prison Camps on State Forests has been authorized.
When these are constructed and in operation, it will further augment
the efforts of the Division to develop recreational facilities for the
people of Massachusetts and the increasing number of tourists, to say
nothing of the rehabilitation benefits to the men assigned to these camps.
Director Kenney concluded by pointing out very definitely that
Massachusetts was definitely on the move in the field of park and
recreation development and that a very bright future was on the horizon.
Michigan. Arthur C. Elmer, Chief, Parks and Recreation Division,
Michigan Department of Conservation, reported:
Weather conditions in Michigan were responsible for another major
upswing in state park use. By the end of the year we will have issued
more than 95,000 permits to camp; attendance has also increased pro-
portionately. Park lands, roads and parking areas are literally worn out.
Funds for consolidating ownership in existing parks, extending pre-
sent park boundaries and purchasing new areas to satisfy the demand
for outdoor recreation is a must. In spite of the fact that we now have
175,000 acres of state park lands, we cannot keep up with the demand
for outdoor recreation.
Specific legislation permitting charges for admission or parking or
greatly increased appropriations is necessary to continue to provide
lands, facilities and services for park users. Our attempts to get legisla-
tion for charging for admission or parking failed. Our "sticker" bill
failed. The earmarking of funds from the sale of gas, oil and minerals
from state-owned land, estimated at $1,250,000, for use for park capital
improvements did not get out of committee.
We need some of the National Park Service publicity, national
coverage in magazines of wide circulation of the type recently presented
by Connie Wirth in the Saturday Evening Post. This article was excellent
and should produce results for the National Park Service. We in the
States need the same kind of publicity ; not that we need more people
but we need more money for land and facilities to take care of those
72 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
we now have and those we expect to have in the future.
We cannot keep up with our own population increases or visitors in
providing outdoor recreation — lands and facilities — and we will have to
"get on the bandwagon" with education, mental health and highways
to get the recognition which we in state parks rightfully deserve.
During the past year we completed two units of the Proud Lake
group camp which will ultimately provide year-long recreational op-
portunities for 120 youngsters. We requested $1,000,000 to cover the
acquisition of lands for 1955-56 — we received only $80,000. We are
required by the Legislature to submit a five-year capital improvement
budget which is revised each year to keep it up to date. This provides
a "sounding board" for funds needed to carry out capital improvement
programs for all state agencies throughout the State.
Unless material increases are received for personal service, parks or
parts of parks will have to be closed after the attendance reaches the
designed capacity of the parking, picnicking and/or camping areas.
Sanitation, a public health matter in state parks, will receive major
consideration in planning and construction for 1956-57.
Minnesota. U. W. Hella, Director, division of State Parks, Depart-
ment of Conservation, reported:
The past year has been highlighted by acts of Minnesota's biennial
legislature, as they affect the state park system and its operations. Of
prime concern was the matter of budget. We are happy to report that
funds were authorized to a total of $1,024,000. This exceeds the past
biennium's appropriation by roughly, $154,000. The 1953 appropriations
totaled $870,000 including a $450,000 loan from the Division of Game
and Fish.
The new biennium's appropriation of $1,024,000 is made up as
follows :
From General Revenue $ 428,000.00
From Reappropriated receipts 17,000.00
From Revenue Bonds (Payable over 10 yrs.
beginning 1958) 525,000.00
Sticker Revenues 1955-57 (Balance after full
payment of $450,000 Game and Fish Loan of
past biennium) 54,000.00
$1,024,000.00
It is to be noted that $579,000 of this authorized appropriation is
dependent on sticker revenue. Sticker revenue originates from a re-
quirement that any automobile entering a Minnesota state park must
have affixed to its windshield a sticker which costs $1 and is good
throughout the state park system for the calendar year in which issued.
This law was enacted by the 1953 legislature. The first year of its opera-
IN THE STATES 73
tion, it produced $73,000. Last year gross revenue realized amounted
to $103,000. Based on revenues to date, we anticipate that sales for
the 1955 calendar year will amount to approximately $130,000.
The original sticker act was amended in the past legislative session
as follows:
1. Areas of 50 acres or less were exempted from the sticker require-
ment. This amendment resulted in very little loss of revenue inasmuch
as it was impractical to administer the law in these smaller areas.
2. Amendment makes sticker effective from preceding October 1st
of the calendar year for which issued. This eliminates the objection of
late season park users to the purchase of a sticker effective for a limited
period. This amendment does not affect gross sales for the reason that
the park user still purchases one sticker each year.
3. Provides for a two day (specific dates) use sticker that can be
purchased by organizations in minimum lots of 25 at twenty-five cents
each. This concession helps out sponsors of large organized picnics and
actually increases gross revenue.
These amendments were department sponsored. A number of bills
were introduced which would reduce the effectiveness of the sticker
law, none of these bills progressed beyond the committees to which
they were referred.
In addition to the appropriation from general revenue for the pur-
pose of operation, maintenance and improvement $22,950 was appro-
priated for the purpose of buying strategic land parcels adjacent or
inside boundaries of seven different state parks.
The new biennium's budget permitted an expansion of the Naturalist
program to four areas. This program is sponsored and financed jointly
with the University of Minnesota's Museum of Natural History.
Sticker sales in areas in which Naturalist services are provided greatly
exceeded the normal increase experienced throughout the system —
indicating the acceptance of this program by the public.
System attendance — on the basis of incomplete returns — should
exceed 2J^ million.
Tourist camping has again increased phenomenally. We expect that
final figures for this season will show a 25 percent increase over two
years ago.
Of the $1,024,000 appropriation $388,000 is scheduled for improve-
ments— provided that anticipated revenues are realized and provided
that we are not confronted with unusual emergencies.
The improvement program is directed primarily at replacement of
obsolete and worn out facilities and toward providing the badly needed
basic facilities such as toilets, water and sewer systems.
We, in Minnesota, feel that we are making progress.
74 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
Missouri. Austin Houston, reported:
Use of Missouri's parks has steadily increased in the year 1955.
Endowed with great natural beauty they draw increasing numbers of
visitors each year, many of whom are repeat visitors. The scenic wonders
combined with adequate facilities for visitor comfort and convenience
draw the many visitors for vacations, holidays and week-end visits.
Total attendance in our parks in 1954 was a record 2,368,400.
Providing facilities and protection of the natural beauty of our parks
is the task entrusted to a six-member bipartisan State Park Board.
Missouri parks have been under this administration for the past two
years. Funds for operation of the system are provided by appropriation
from the General Revenues of the State. The law creating the present
administration also provided that State Park revenues be earmarked
as a State Park Fund. An appropriation of $1,150,000 from General
Revenue and $190,000 of Park earnings have been provided by the
Legislature for operation of the system during the present biennium,
which ends June 30, 1957.
Several new facilities have been started during the past year. New
deep wells to provide adequate water supplies, a store and restaurant
building, dining lodge and recreation building for organized group
camp, a new beach area, service building and boat house, and also water
and sewer system in one of the newer park areas. Plans are underway
for additional buildings and enlargement of present facilities in the
near future.
Two areas of over 4000 acres have recently been made available by
gift to the system for use as state parks. With the addition of these two
areas the total acreage of Missouri State Parks now stands at 66,302
acres and the number of state parks increased from twenty-five to
twenty-seven.
Montana. Ashley C. Roberts, State Park Director, State Highway
Commission, reported:
Montana has had a successful year so far as State Park operations
are concerned. Attendance at our Lewis and Clark Caverns State Park
reached an all time high and attendance at other parks was up from a
year ago. The demand for camping facilities is increasing every year.
This increase in attendance and the demand for camping facilities appear
to fall in line with the national trend in this direction.
There has been no change in the Montana State Park administrative
set up. We operate as the Park Division of the State Highway Depart-
ment and are responsible directly to the Highway Commission.
Our budget for the current bi-ennium is $42,000 per year ... up
$7,000 each year from the last bi-ennium. Of this amount $21,000 was
appropriated from the General Fund of the state and the other $21,000
is earned from our operations at Lewis and Clark Caverns, OUT only
IN THE STATES 75
revenue producing operation. Of the total amount $3,000 was earmarked
for capital improvements.
At the National Conference last year we reported ten parks in opera-
tion. Since that time we have placed four more parks in use and now
have fourteen parks that are active. This does not mean that these
parks are complete and all facilities placed. We have a tremendous
amount of work to do in each area but we are making these areas avail-
able while development continues. With a small budget our development
program will proceed at a very slow rate.
Montana has a long way to go in the state park field. In general,
we have much to offer to travelers and to our own folks who are seeking
their recreation out of doors but we are just discovering that recreational
areas must be preserved and must be properly maintained. The casual
picnic just anywhere on a back road by a mountain stream is getting
to be a thing of the past.
In the year ahead we may add one or two more parks. Our big task,
though, will be the further development and enlargement of those areas
already in operation.
New Hampshire. Russell B. Tobey, Director, Recreation Division,
N. H. Forestry and Recreation Department, reported:
While the trend of park patronage has been steadily upward for
several years, the rate of increase dropped during the current year.
This may be attributed to poor summer weather conditions. The trend
in tent camping, however, showed a strong increase of over 20 percent
from the previous year ; and skiing, because of excellent winter weather,
exceeded anything heretofore, with patronage for last winter at Cannon
Mountain estimated at over 90,000.
Capital improvements providing some needed facilities to keep pace
with growing use were carried out to the extent of $64,000. The capacity
of all facilities was hard pressed when weather conditions, winter or
summer, were favorable.
Since it is presently state policy that capital investments in the park
systems will be a charge on their future income, the dilemma of future
debt versus present need is growing acute.
A greater amount of information about parks and their facilities,
through a greater variety of folders, booklets, posters, and some ad-
vertising of ski facilities, has been brought about through a new ad-
ministrative section known as Advertising, Publicity and Information.
Heading this is an experienced newspaperman who has achieved wide
acceptance of stories and pictures on parks and their use in the local
and metropolitan press.
We have a growing concern that our attention to park matters is
being diverted by the many administrative chores required of us by
other state agencies. Such matters as the reclassification of personnel,
76 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
realignment of duties, changes in payroll procedures, and adjustments
in legal interpretations have, in the past year, consumed a great deal
of our time. As a by-product, however, we have achieved a Manual
of Procedure which may be expected to increase our efficiency. While
fiilfilling the many chores required of us, we are convinced that a greater
amount of our time and attention is required for the protection of park
scenery and the refinement of park services.
New Jersey. Fred D. Eckhart reported, for Joseph E. McLean,
Commissioner, Department of Conservation and Economic Develop-
ment.
1955 was the 50th anniversary of the Forests and Parks Section,
Department of Conservation and Economic Development, of the State
of New Jersey.
In 1905 the first law was passed for the establishing of a Forest
Reserve Commission and a Forest Reserve.
It is gratifying to be able to report on this anniversary the first
major progress since termination of recreational area developments
under the C.C.C. program in 1941-1942.
Under direction of Commissioner Joseph E. McLean, a five-stage
program for development of Recreational Facilities in Forest and Park
areas was prepared and submitted to Governor Robert B. Meyner.
This program included provision for the establishment of camps for
housing institutional labor to be utilized for semi- and unskilled jobs.
The year is also marked by gains in area with acquisition of the
Worthington Estate, the eastern shoulder of the Delaware Water Gap,
containing about 6,200 acres and completion of the acquisition of the
Wharton Tract of about 95,000 acres.
Funds for the fiscal year 1955-56 currently available for the first
stage of the capital improvement program total about $1,000,000 of
which $550,000 is available for much needed public recreational facilities
such as water supply, sanitary facilities, added picnicking and bathing
facilities, etc. $100,000 for work camps, and about $350,000 for access-
ways, roads and parkings.
Budget requests recently completed will be submitted for the second
stage of the capital improvement program.
New Mexico. Carl A. Freeman, Los Alamos, reported:
The state of New Mexico saw an increase in state park activity this
year. Approximately 800,000 people visited the parks this season.
The budget for fiscal year 1954 amounted to $31,732.00, while 1955
amounted to $114,080.00. Broken down in the following categories:
IN THE STATES 77
1954 1955
Salaries $19,210.00 $33,030.00
Operation Expense $20,042.00 $15,050.00
Capital Improvement $ 2,500.00 $66,000.00
These changes were in the main, due to Conchas Dam State Park
being returned to the control of the State Park Commission from the
Game and Fish Department.
Improvement this year on the existing state parks is planned to
be about $30,000.00.
New York. James F. Evans, Director of State Parks, Conservation
Department, reported:
A record-breaking hot summer drove New York State park activity
to new highs. Attendance increased about 10 percent and should reach
25,000,000. Revenues are up slightly more and will hit about $3,000,000
for the year.
Few changes developed in administration. A start was made in
three regions about setting up a Competitive Civil Service position of
Assistant General Manager, to improve the career opportunities of the
service and to provide a successor to the top regional executive.
New capital funds available were slightly less than in preceding
years, but a considerable carry-over of active work from previous
appropriations helped to carry on and complete a normal program of
improvements. Parkway appropriations were $15,000,000. Park con-
struction funds including reconstruction and minor improvements,
totaled $1,683,000.
One new area was acquired for state park purposes on the St. Law-
rence River — some 500 acres with about 6,000 feet of shore line. This
will supplement the park area being developed for the Thousand Islands
region by the State Power Authority at Massena of some 2,000 acres
and when both are added to the present holdings in the Thousand Islands
region, the State at last will have a sound and substantial park set-up
in this district.
Under Authority auspices, the six lane improvement of the Southern
State Parkway was completed to Wantagh Avenue, a distance of some
18 miles, at a cost of 40 million dollars. Work was begun on a second
boat basin at Fire Island and a start made on the major reconstruction
of Sunken Meadow State Park, including the last section of the connect-
ing parkway spur.
In the Hudson Valley, the Anthony Wayne $2,000,000 recreational
area was formally opened in June and had a highly successful season.
Good progress was made on both the Taconic and Palisades parkways.
Restoration was begun of the skating at Bear Mountain, destroyed by
fire several years ago, a $300,000 job.
Plans were completed and development continued on newly acquired
78 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
Evangola park in the Niagara region.
High on next year's schedule are : full scale redevelopment of Sunken
Meadow State Park on Long Island; start on the Sprain Parkway in
Westchester County; completion of grading for the Palisades Parkway
from the George Washington bridge to the park, a distance of approxi-
mately 40 miles (this will be completed in the fall of 1958) ; new park
areas in the Allegany and Finger Lakes regions; development of Evan-
gola Park to the point of full public use ; and construction of the Thou-
sand Islands program in co-operation with the Power Authority.
North Carolina. Thomas W. Morse, Superintendent of State Parks,
Department of Conservation, reported :
Highlight events in the North Carolina State Park System during
the past year have included boisterous visits from Hurricanes Hazel,
Connie and Diane; dedication of new park facilities; a reorganization
of responsibilities and an all time high in public use.
Hurricane Hazel caused severe damage to buildings and natural
features at coastal areas and heavy damage to forests as far inland as
Raleigh and Durham. Repair of damage to buildings and facilities at
one state park, Fort Macon, exceeded $30,000. The visits of Hurricanes
Connie and Diane this summer caused only minor damage.
New facilities placed in operation included a restaurant and observa-
tion lounge at Mount Mitchell State Park; beach, swimming area,
bathhouse and refreshment stand at Cliffs of the Neuse State Park;
the re-constructed Overseer's House at Pettigrew State Park; recon-
structed and enlarged parking areas at Mount Mitchell State Park;
and a number of additions and improvements to existing facilities.
As an experiment, a self-service information center has been con-
structed at William B. Umstead State Park. This consists of a small
building with an information map of the park, a nature and hiking trails
map with exhibits, and a proposed development exhibit. Two outdoor
exhibits cover group camping and protection.
The major project now under construction is a completely new road
and parking area system at William B. Umstead State Park. Also,
contracts totalling $662,312 have been let for the restoration of Tryon
Palace. This work is financed by donations made by the late Mrs.
Maude Moore Latham of Greensboro.
The major land acquisition has been the acquisition of 20 tracts for
the Tryon Palace Project at a cost of $111,000— $91,000 from the
private donation and $20,000 from state funds.
Between July 1, 1953 and June 30, 1955, $275,051 was spent on
capital improvements, exclusive of the Tryon Palace Project. These
funds came from previous capital improvements appropriations since
no additional capital improvement funds were made available by either
the 1953 or 1955 sessions of the General Assembly.
IN THE STATES 79
Upon the recommendation of the Commission for the Study of the
Reorganization of the State Government, the 1955 General Assembly
passed an Act transferring responsibility for State Historic Sites from
the Department of Conservation and Development to the Department
of Archives and History effective July 1, 1955. So far, five historic sites
have been so transferred. This has been the only change in administra-
tive procedure.
Over the past two years, public use of the North Carolina State
Parks has averaged more than 1,600,000. Gratifying as is the public
support of the state park program that this attendance reflects, we are
more concerned with what the public gets from its use of state parks
than in merely increasing attendance figures. We have, therefore,
devoted a great deal of time to making each person's use of a state park
a satisfying experience and we have particularly emphasized enjoyment
of natural features through hiking, camping, nature study and similar
activities. Our planned program for next year will include greater
emphasis on this, as well as stepped up maintenance programs, in-
tensified personnel training (made necessary by a rather large turnover
of personnel this year), further improvements in operation, and advance
planning for further development of the state park system.
Ohio. V. W. Flickinger, Chief, Division of Parks, Ohio Department
of Natural Resources, reported :
I. Accomplishments
Acquisition
505 acres by Gift — known locally as Big Creek, Geauga County
by Cleveland citizens headed by S. Livingston Mather, G. G.
Wade, Louise H. Ingalls, Mari Anne M. Hadden
738 acres by purchase — cost $305,592 — largest single purchase
530 acres New Area Portage Lakes, near Akron — appraised at
over $500,000
1,386 acres by transfer from Forestry Division of Department
1,097 acres under option — cost $64,600
Buildings — completed or underway
Cabins, housekeeping utility 69; change booths 18; 6 under
construction; concession buildings (temp) 4; latrines 30, 3
under construction; residences 4, 2 under construction; service
buildings 3, 2 under construction
Contracts Awarded
Findley— 94 acre lake— contract $282,110.70
Hargeu Creek — 150 acre Lake contract $211,732.06
Hueston Woods — 600 acre Lake contract $640,494.87
Rocky Fork Hydraulic Gate $80,100.00
80 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
Dedication
p Crane Creek Beach— Lake Erie 1,000 ft. beach— first section
Iv of proposed 3.5 mile of beach development
Dredging
*426,895 c.y. Clam Shell dredging — channel cleaning
686,369 c.y. Suction Dredging
1,113,264 c.y. Dredging
*49,719 L.F. or 9.5. mi. of channel 50 ft. wide cleaned
Utilities
Gas Line 9,400 L.F. Power (underground) 15,400 L.F.
Sewer 8,200 L.F.; Water 11,600 L.F.; Wells 9
Septic Tank cap. 22,635 gals. Water-storage facilities 70,500
gals.
Other
Campsites — permanent 275, 175 under construction ; campsites
temp. 130; fireplaces 308; parking 2,350 cars, 2,925 car under
construction; picnic tables 1,613; ramps, boat unloading 3;
roads 9,200 L.F., 34,000 L.F. under construction; signs and
markers 545; trees reforestation 59,600.
II. Attendance
10,621,071— an increase of 969,188
61,544 — cabins and lodges
124,025— tent and trailer— increase of 60,050
almost double over last year — in line with national trend
III. Fiscal
Appropriations
Capital Improvements — biennium (2 year) $3,118,900
Maintenance and operation F.Y. 1955-56 659,777
Plus receipts from operated facilities Est 482,000
Total available $4,260,677
Expenditures— F.Y. 1954-55
Capital Improvements $3,342,943
Maintenance and Operation 874,363
Total Expended . .$4,217,306
Expenditures— F.Y. 1955-56— Estimated
Capital Improvements $1,670,000
Maintenance, Operation and Development 1,206,000
$2,876,000
IV.
Completions — lake contracts, 5 mi. of road, parking areas,
residences, group camp building, lodge with 9 sleeping rooms,
campsites.
IN THE STATES 81
Construction — 3 additional lakes for recreation and water supply,
5 bathing beaches, water supply systems, etc.
Continuance of dredging program and cleaning of channels.
V. Legislation
Resolution — Legislative study of dock fee permit charges
Sale of reservoir lands — canal feeders.
40 hour week.
Ohio Historical Society. Richard S. Fatig, Superintendent, Division
of Properties, Ohio Historical Society, reported:
Ohio always has an advantage in this section of the Conference as
we are permitted two reports.
In reporting the activities of the Ohio Historical Society we follow
previous reporters and say "We need more money."
Restoration was continued on previously reported projects but the
capital improvement fund appropriated by the last General Assembly
is certainly not sufficient for an enlarged program during the present
biennium. We will, however, go as far as possible.
In Ohio we have a step system in the job classification with additional
increases in salary range governed by the cost of living index. This is an
excellent system and all employees- deserve the salaries, and even more
if possible. We find ourselves with an ever increasing appropriation but
no provision for additional employees.
During the last General Assembly many position classifications were
increased and a mandatory 40 hour week was instituted but appropria-
tions to care for the increases and extra help were not made.
We had over two and a quarter million visitors in our fifty-seven
historic properties during the past year and anticipate an increase next
year, so I believe you will agree we have a problem.
In Ohio we are experiencing an increased interest in things historical.
We feel that this will be of great assistance to us in future appropriations.
One outstanding step forward was the enactment of legislation making
the study of Ohio history mandatory in the Ohio schools.
Oklahoma. Ernest E. Allen, Director, Division of Recreation and
State Parks, Oklahoma Planning and Resources Bd., sent this report:
Highlight of the past year was the approval and beginning of con-
struction on the 1% million dollar self-liquidating Bond Program for
public recreational facilities in the state parks of Oklahoma. Secondly,
the attendance in state parks doubled in the past year — bringing our
attendance figure for the 13 state parks, 6 recreational areas and 4
Monuments and Memorials to 5}£ million visitors.
The Oklahoma Planning and Resources Board, under which the
Division of State Parks operates, was re-organized, changing from a
seven-member board to eleven-member board. The Governor re-
82 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
appointed four of the original board members, and appointed a new
chairman of the board and six other new members.
We have available approximately $100,000 for capital improvements.
One new state park area was acquired by order of the state legislature,
with money for its improvement.
Accomplishments of the last year included the opening up of several
new undeveloped areas in which were provided facilities for camping,
picnicking, fishing, boating, and other forms of recreation. Our most
outstanding accomplishment was the letting of construction contracts
under the Bond Program whereby we are constructing the following
units: Wister State Park, 1 duplex cabin; Beavers Bend State Park,
1 duplex cabin; Robbers Cave State Park, 2 duplex cabins; Boiling
Springs State Park, 2 duplex cabins; Tenkiller State Park, 4 duplex
cabins; Roman Nose State Park, one lodge with 20 rooms and dining
facilities; Osage Hills State Park, a new swimming pool; Quartz Moun-
tain State Park, a 50-room lodge with dining facilities and a new swim-
ming pool; Lake Murray State Park lodge received a new convention
hall and another wing of 20 rooms with four suites, and a new swimming
pool; Sequoyah State Park received a 104-room lodge and dining fa-
cilities, with 18 cabins and a swimming pool; Lake Texoma State Park
received a 106-room lodge with dining facilities, 50 cabins, a 20-room
fishermen's lodge and a new swimming pool.
In addition to the above all park roads have been paved with a
black-top asphalt type paving.
Our program for the next year will be to open and get into operation
all of the above listed facilities. Opening date is scheduled for March
15, 1956.
Oregon. C. H. Armstrong, State Park Superintendent, reported:
The Oregon State Parks have enjoyed a very successful and busy
year in that more people have visited the parks than ever before, num-
bering in excess of six million. The development of new areas and the
enlargement of others has created greater interest and more opportuni-
ties for enjoyment by the people of the state and its visitors, this being
reflected in the extraordinary amount of use. Overnight camping use
has increased in the past year from 63,000 to slightly over 100,000, and
the records indicate that it will probably number 150,000 campernights
during the current year. The youth camp development and use has
remained somewhat near the same, and amounted to approximately
24,000 for the year. Another type of use which is increasing, but not
large, is the day group camping, which totaled approximately 2,700
for the year 1954. This figure may double for the year 1955.
New areas are being developed and others enlarged as our studies
indicate the necessity. Our planning section has been very busy in the
study of all areas as to their present and future demands. Plans are
IN THE STATES 83
under way to make the necessary enlargements and provide new areas
wherever possible. In this connection, we have enlarged six areas for
overnight camping use, and provided additional facilities in nearly all
of the day use areas. Due to the great increase in use, it is necessary
again to enlarge the overnight camping facilities for the year 1956 at
Cape Lookout, Beverly Beach, Jessie M. Honeyman, and Humbug
Mountain State Parks. These are all along the Oregon Coast, the great
playground for the people of Oregon and their out-of-state guests.
We are in the process of developing facilities at six new areas, at
Ochoco Lake in Central Oregon, Detroit Lake in the Cascades, Bandon
on the Southern Oregon Coast, Fort Stevens on the Northern Oregon
Coast, Susan Creek northeast of Roseburg, and an entirely new area at
Wallowa Lake in Eastern Oregon.
We have added 1,093 acres to the park system during the past year
at such areas as Fogarty Creek, Detroit Lake, Ochoco Lake, Fort
Stevens, Susan Creek, and South Newport State Parks.
Our maintenance and operation forces have remained about the
same as heretofore, with the addition of new forces at the newly ac-
quired and developed areas. During the year 1954, our expenditures
for construction and betterment in park areas, as well as roads, amounted
to approximately $360,000. The total expenditure for capital outlay
was $408,629. The operation of the park areas and roads amounted to
$431,189, while the administration was $104,861, making a total opera-
tion and maintenance expenditures of $536,050, or a total expenditure for
all park activities for the year 1954 amounting to $944,679, before
applying a credit of $91,985 for sales, services, and miscellaneous items.
The future of the Oregon State Parks is very bright in that we an-
ticipate an annual increase in use of 10 to 15 percent. In the main, we
have sufficient areas to accommodate this increase. Arrangements are
being made to purchase additional land wherever a definite shortage is
indicated, and altogether new areas where necessary. In this way the
increase will be amply cared for, and the people of the State and their
guests will enjoy the finest park facilities.
Pennsylvania. W. P. Moll, Chief, Division of Recreation, Department
of Forests and Waters, reported :
Historic parks 11
State Parks 48
State Recreational Parks . 39
Forest park Monuments. . 13
111 areas, 150,000 acres and
2,000,000 acres of forest land
Attendance: 1953 — 5J^ million park visitors
1954 — 9 million park visitors
1955 — 11 million by August
84 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
July 2-3-4 was a big week end with over a million park visitors.
Day users of state parks come in free. We have 20 organized group
camps. From camping and cabins we received $123,000 and from food
concessions $40,000. This all went to the State treasury, and from the
State Treasury we received $746,000 for capital improvements and
$875,000 for operation and maintenance, also $150,000 for acquisition
and development.
The State is investing six million dollars at Independence Hall in
Philadelphia and seven million dollars at Fort Pitt in Pittsburgh.
We are developing 4 new areas, improving all areas and will establish
Shawnee Park of 2700 acres on a flood-control dam.
Rhode Island. William H. Cotter, Jr., Chief, Department of Public
Works, Division of Parks and Recreation, reported:
The goal of the Rhode Island Division of Parks and Recreation is to
provide spotlessly clean, well maintained, safe beach, park, picnic and
other recreational facilities which more nearly meet the healthful
leisure time needs of our people. We believe that definite progress has
been made during the past year toward this goal.
Capital improvements included the construction of hurricane re-
sistant bathhouse facilities at both Block Island and Sand Hill Cove
State Beaches, as well as a hurricane resistant boardwalk of a third
of a mile in length at Scarborough State Beach. Surfaced parking
facilities have been increased from 1000 to 2000 car capacity at Sand
Hill Cove State Beach and from 1200 to 2300 car capacity at Scarbor-
ough State Beach.
Picnic facilities were increased generally throughout the State, in
some cases by a small percentage, in others by as much as fifty percent.
All recreational facilities were well on their way to an all time high in
patronage until our people experienced the "cooling off" effects of
hurricanes, "Connie" and "Diane." As a result we expect bathing
receipts to be down slightly but all others to be above a year ago.
Safety has become a major concern of the Rhode Island Division.
With this in mind we required that all lifeguard captains become water
safety instructors and advanced first-aiders prior to State lifeguard
certification tests. As during the previous year it was required that all
regular lifeguards have an active senior lifesaving card and an active
standard first aid card previous to the State tests. All beach managers,
park managers, and park patrolmen have become either first aid in-
structors or advanced first-aiders.
This year, and for the first time, we provided the general public
with a daily forecast of breaker height and general surf bathing con-
ditions for the following day by using war tested oceanography tech-
niques. The information proved to be of considerable value to water
safety personnel and was well received by the bathing public.
IN THE STATES 85
The Rhode Island program for the coming year includes the develop-
ment of recreational facilities for the physically handicapped, the
opening of new lighted areas for public skating, the development of
fishermen's boat landing areas wherever possible and feasible, and
programs for the continued training of beach, park, and lifeguard per-
sonnel in order to qualify them for additional services to the general
public.
Texas. Prepared by Gordon K. Shearer, Executive Secretary, Texas
State Parks Board, read by Mrs. Ethel W. Harris, Custodian, San Jose
Mission.
Legislative approval was given by Texas this year to the Texas
State Parks Board policy of major improvements through revenue
bonds. The Board has felt that it had this power under the original act
creating the Board. Some legislators thought differently and bills were
offered specifically forbidding such procedure. Not only were these
negative bills defeated, but the Legislature went on to pass an affirmative
act formally approving the $25,000,000 revenue bond resolution of the
Texas State Parks Board.
After serving the customary two terms as Chairman of the Texas
State Parks Board, Frank D. Quinn, who has been re-appointed for
another six-year membership on the Board, said he felt the customary
limit should be observed. New Chairman is Mr. Andrew M. Howsley
of Albany, Texas, a new member of the Board. Member Maurice E.
Turner of Huntsville became vice-chairman succeeding Mr. Lonnie C.
Fuller, who also declined re-election.
In addition to the funds that will become available for capital im-
provements through sale of revenue bonds, $40,000 was appropriated
by the Legislature for needed repairs and maintenance of Goliad State
Park, one of several historical areas, transferred recently to Texas State
Parks Board supervision.
A citizens fund is being raised for another important historic area.
This is Washington-on-the-Brazos, the site of the signing of the Texas
Declaration of Independence from Mexico, and seat of the government
of the Republic of Texas. Col. John C. Diggs of the National Park
Service, in August, assisted in studies of the work to be done at both
these sites.
Principal land acquisition of the year was a 525-acre site at Falcon
Reservoir on the Rio Grande. Cooperatively, the Board helped negotiate
the acquisition by Ward County of an unusual area known as Monahans
Sands, similar to the White Sands National Site in New Mexico.
The program for next year will be studied at a meeting of the Board
to be held next month. At that time, there likely will be definite action
on the revenue bond developments. Not more than five million of the
possible 25 million bonds will be issued as a starter.
86 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
Vermont. Robert G. Simon, Supervisor of Parks, reported:
Vermont is about two hundred miles long, fifty miles wide at the
southern end and eighty-five miles wide at the northern end of the State.
It has 9,124 square miles or 5,839,360 acres with a population of 377,747
people.
With a forest area of 3,504,000 acres, Vermont has only around
83,644 acres in State Parks and Forests.
At the present time, Vermont has twenty-four State Parks with an
area of 6,600 acres and 26 State Forests comprising an area of 81,000
acres. Fourteen of the State Parks and ten of the twenty-four State
Forests have recreational developments.
In comparison to New York State, it is about 1/5 the size in area,
and having 1/38 of the population. Rhode Island, the smallest state
had 644 people per square mile. New York has 264 people to Vermont's
41. Although Vermont is comparatively small, she is near large centers
of population and the people in the nearby States are visiting the Green
Mountain State in larger numbers each year. So Vermont really has to
go beyond her own needs in recreational developments.
Washington. John R. Vanderzicht, Director, State Parks and Recrea-
tion Commission, reported:
During 1955, the Washington State Parks and Recreation Com-
mission has continued negotiation for new park sites and additional
developments at existing sites.
West of the Cascade Mountains the State of Washington has con-
tinued its policy of acquisition of park sites with waterfront. We have
purchased approximately 200 acres in the northwest part of the State
in an area called Rirch Bay, and plan extensive development. Near
Tacoma, on Puget Sound, we have completed negotiations for another
waterfront site on Henderson Ray. Still under negotiation are three
areas, formerly part of the 1898 west coast defenses of the United States
— Fort Casey on Whidby Island; Fort Flagler on Marrowstone Island;
and Fort Canby on Cape Disappointment, near the mouth of the
Columbia River. Plans are also underway for a peninsula tip on the
ocean north of Long Reach, Washington.
On the east side of the mountains a new ski area has been built on
the east side of Mount Spokane. Construction this summer included
road and parking, a ski lodge, and three double rope tows. Private
capital is also spending $200,000 for a chair lift, the longest in the
northwest.
To care for increasing population needs in the Columbia Rasin in
Central Washington where many dams and reservoirs are being built
as part of that great irrigation and power development, we are nego-
tiating with appropriate government agencies for a chain of areas
throughout the basin. These recreational areas will extend from Wallula
IN THE STATES 87
Lake in southeastern Washington north to, and including, the Equal-
izing Reservoir which receives irrigation waters from Grand Coulee
Dam. Agreements on some of these areas have already been reached,
others are in process.
Acquisition of all sites is in keeping with Commission policy to pro-
vide for a growing population 50 years ahead. Another expanded policy
is to provide more maximum use of park areas. More people are camp-
ing in state parks, and more choice of recreational activity provided
where they camp. In this we have the assistance of other state agencies
such as the State Game Department in their fish-stocking program and
the Department of Fisheries in clam conservation.
In providing maximum-use parks, historical site development, boat
moorages, etc., Washington is not only providing variety of choice for
citizens but offering inducements to tourists to come to Washington
and stay longer. Our state parks do much for the State's third largest
industry — the tourist — making us both a public service and a valuable
contributor to the State's economy.
Funds for expenditure in the 1955-57 biennium include $855,600 for
capital outlay; $400,000 for purchase, condemnation and improvement
of land; $490,000 for operations, and $950,000 for salaries, a total of
$2,695,600.
West Virginia. H. M. Harr, Assistant Chief, Division of State Parks,
reported:
In 1953, the West Virginia Legislature authorized the Conservation
Commission to sell Revenue Ronds for the development of single State
parks. In 1955, legislation was passed enabling seven of West Virginia's
twenty-one State parks to be joined in a feasibility report and over-all
anticipated Revenue plan as well as in sale of $3,100,000 in bonds for
an entire State-wide park expansion program designed to make these
seven major parks self-supporting.
In the past, West Virginia State parks were able to accommodate
only 20 percent of the demand made upon them. Now, as a major part
of the vast new development, a total of eighty-five deluxe, modern
cabins are being built. Two lodges, one a forty-eight (48) bedroom unit
at Cacapon State Park and the other a fifty-five room lodge at Rlack-
water Falls State Park are scheduled for completion next year.
Two areas, recently acquired, are being developed as State parks
under the Revenue Rond program. Mont Chateau State Park located
on Cheat Lake will have a forty room lodge and Rluestone State Park
situated on 1,500 acre Rluestone Reservoir will have fifteen (15) cabins
and a forty (40) person overnight fisherman's lodge, as well as a trailer
camp and tenting area.
Refore Revenue bonds allowed the expansion of West Virginia's
twenty-one (21) State Parks, more than one million and a half visitors
88 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
took advantage of the recreational opportunities afforded. Only a few
of these, however, were able to secure overnight and vacation facilities.
Now it is expected that these same people who annually enjoy the scenic
splendor of the State's parks will more than keep up with the rapid
expansion of a vacationland where they can find food, lodging, and
unlimited recreational opportunity close at hand in the Mountain State
of West Virginia.
Wisconsin. C. L. Harrington, Supt. of Forests and Parks, reported:
The state park program in Wisconsin has always been closely asso-
ciated with the state forestry activities. The use of state land originally
intended for the growing of a timber crop is more and more being used
by the public for recreational purposes. The general trend of thinking
now is that, in effect, areas for development in the state forests take on
the aspects of a state park right in the middle of a state forest boundary.
This applies particularly to camping, picnicking, hiking and similar
outdoor needs. In addition, of course, the recreation of hunting applies
to all state forest lands, but in areas of intensive use there is a tendency
to restrict hunting or trapping. Such activities are prohibited on the
state parks.
This overlapping of public-use patterns has an important influence
on all affairs that apply to state park or forest lands. While the financing
of the state forest program is adequate and stable (2 tenths of a mill on
the assessed value of the State), the problem of financing the state
parks is still not satisfactorily solved. The legislature still directs that
a part of the hunting and fishing license moneys be devoted to the state
park work. This is disliked by fishing and hunting organizations, for
the most part, but does receive support from the citizens generally.
It is true that the state general fund is making an increasing contribution
as the years go by to the park program. Legislative committees have
been working on this problem for about six years with an intensity of
effort, and all arrangements that have been tried to raise money for
state parks among the other states have been explored. The legislative
session of 1955 has voted somewhat of an increased operational budget
for the coming biennium, but the state park needs are outrunning the
means provided to supply them. I can report, however, that a special
capital fund of $500,000 has been made available to be used for sanitary
facilities, domestic water supplies, shelters and other similar public
needs. We face the problem of applying this money to three to five
million dollars of work that would be really desirable on the parks
and to set up priorities among the 30 state parks requiring attention
of varying degree. The department is pleased, of course, to have this
substantial help from the legislature during a session marked by many
pressing and important demands for money otherwise. It is the first
time the state parks were treated so well.
IN THE STATES 89
The sentiment for the state park program in the State is a very
healthy one. The Conservation Commission has approved of the estab-
lishment of a new area on the northeastern shore of Lake Winnebago to
serve the needs of the industrial Fox River Valley. This approval was
the result of the interest of the people from that part of the State. It
did not arise from the seat of government itself but entirely from the
rural areas and cities in that part of the State. It is the first time in the
history of the State that the designation of the term Forest-Park will
be used. The frontage and limestone escarpment area that will form
the significant part of this development is the last remaining more or
less intensively undeveloped stretch on Lake Winnebago. While the
area has been subjected to a phase of surface disturbance for many
years, including the operation of a large quarry, still it is the best area
for park purposes in that part of Wisconsin.
In conclusion, may I say that in Wisconsin the spirit of the people
for all park and forest work is vigorously good. The annual attendance
is increasing in practically all such public use areas. The arrangement,
through the State Highway Commission, for all road work which has
been the pattern in Wisconsin for many years still continues. As we
all know, the expense of construction and maintenance of access and
interior roads constitutes about the heaviest over-all expense in any
state park, and when this can be financed with dependability is a long
step forward. Such has been the case in Wisconsin for years. We have
a fine understanding with all other state agencies interested in the
state park program. Not only the State Highway Commission, but the
Historical Society, Archeological Society and Survey, Scientific Area
Board, Department of Public Instruction and similar other concerned
public boards actively cooperate with the Conservation Department
in state park work and development. While we are short of money in
most respects to do what is really needed, still we have every reason
to be encouraged for the future outlook for the state parks of Wisconsin.
90 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
PRESENTED AT THE NATIONAL CITIZENS CONFERENCE
ON PARKS AND OPEN SPACES BY THE AMERICAN PLAN-
NING AND CIVIC ASSOCIATION, ACTING WITH THE AMERI-
CAN INSTITUTE OF PARK EXECUTIVES, COUNCIL OF MET-
ROPOLITAN REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS, NATIONAL REC-
REATION ASSOCIATION AND NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON
STATE PARKS, HELD AT WASHINGTON, D. C. MAY 22-25, 1955.
Establishment and Protection of State Parks
V. W. FLICKINGER, Chief, Division of Parks,
Department of Natural Resources, Columbus, Ohio
UNDER present-day conditions few park administrators have the
opportunity of selecting, and developing, a state recreation system
from its beginning. In most instances a park executive is in charge of
a system conceived and created by others, and with an already estab-
lished pattern of protection, maintenance, and operation. Conse-
quently, he has had little to say about acquisition or development.
Others may have a system which has been created by the transfer of
properties from various agencies to a newly created Division of Parks.
The number of States not having a recreation system is small. In
some of those which lack facilities there are signs which indicate that
the establishment of a system is being considered. In these instances
there may be the opportunity to build a state recreation system, using
the experience of others, and taking into consideration various factors
which are so essential in the establishment of a state park system.
All of us will agree that there are many factors upon which the suc-
cess of any undertaking will depend. The most important single factor
in any field is the human element. Ask any administrator what is his
greatest problem, and personnel is his immediate reply. Experience
has proven conclusively that the quality of personnel retained by those
responsible for the system, will determine the success of that system.
The executive head of the system should be an individual who under-
stands the various technical fields, and how he may best use their
technical skills and knowledge. He must have a knowledge of the over-
all land use program and the basic resource problem. He should have
a specialized knowledge of the unique administrative problems of a
state recreation system, and how they may be solved effectively and
economically. This knowledge will assist and influence his decisions in
the establishment and protection of a state park system.
In the establishment of our state park system of today and for
tomorrow, there are various factors upon which recreation depends;
the following should be taken into consideration:
1. Leisure time.
2. Income available for recreation.
IN THE STATES 91
3. Distance and time required for travel.
4. Facilities available.
5. Surroundings in which facilities are situated.
6. Cost involved for occupancy or use of facilities.
7. Maintenance of area and facilities.
We must recognize that during the past five years there has been a
definite change in recreational habits brought about by a continued
prosperity, full employment and a shorter work week resulting in more
leisure time. There are indications of an even shorter work week to-
gether with a guaranteed annual wage. These factors will have a definite
influence on the establishment and protection of our state park system.
The planning of a state park system and its components is not an
exact science such as mathematics. No two individuals will approach
the problem in the same manner. Study, research, pooling of experience
gained over long periods, and under a great variety of conditions have
provided a basis for guidance in determining area and facility require-
ments. There is no standard pattern, formula or theorem for such
planning. There is also a lack of basic design data, so essential for suc-
cessful planning and development in the field.
Since there are infinite variations in population distribution, and it
is constantly changing, economic status, transportation, climate, char-
acter, quality and quantity of lands available, and other pertinent
factors which vary with each locale, no city, county, state or regional
plan can be superimposed upon any other area. Each is an entity in
itself, and each must be formulated upon conditions and facts found
in the area to be served.
When preparing the systemic plan, the administrator and planner
should take into consideration the following:
1. Population density and its recreation requirements in kind,
quantity and quality.
2. Recreational habits of users in the area served.
3. Amount of land necessary to meet these requirements.
4. Lands available, suitable, and economically feasible for the type
of recreation to be provided and not more valuable for uses other than
recreation.
There are also other integrants, which he should keep in mind.
Careful planning, not only in the economy of development, protection,
maintenance, operation and use, but also, the impression created upon
the visitor.
As systemic requirements are satisfied and the plan takes shape it
becomes apparent that not all areas under consideration are worthy
of inclusion in the system, and neither can or should they be developed
along the same plan or pattern. As the planner views them, he will
find that he is unconsciously classifying them according to a criterion
based upon a development which will make accessible to the visitor
92 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
the important and interesting features of the property, at the same
time providing for proper protection, without impairment of those
values and qualities which make the area desirable.
Unlike business and industry, wherein a standard nomenclature
has been established, there is no uniformly accepted classification of
state park areas. Some States use the term "state parks" universally
and apply it to all areas in the system. Most States have some type of
classification based upon custom, use, character, or statutory provision.
There are currently in use some sixty odd classifications. This variance
from State to State is confusing and misleading to the visitors.
Recognizing the dilemma of this situation, the speaker during his
term as President of the National Conference on State Parks appointed
a committee to study this condition. The result was the preparation of
a report, entitled "Suggested Criteria for Evaluating Areas Proposed
for Inclusion in State Park Systems," which was adopted by the Board
of Directors at the 1954 annual meeting of the Conference.
It is the hope of those who served on this committee "that the
criteria may serve as standards for use by the States." For the purpose
of evaluation, as set forth in this report the state park areas are grouped
into six classifications: Parks, Monuments, Recreation Areas, Beaches,
Parkways and Waysides. (Since this report is published and available
from the National Conference on State Parks, the contexts are not
included in this paper).
In our systemic requirements, we should recognize that each system
as a whole should —
1. "Conserve outstanding examples of the state's natural and cul-
tural resources for the inspiration and benefit of the public."
2. "Provide non-urban recreation opportunities for the State's
citizens and visitors that are normally beyond the responsibility of the
state's political sub-divisions."
It has been our experience that regardless of how we define or classify
a state park, irrespective of its size, character or scenic value, the man
in the street applies the term "state park" to any area, or tract of ground
owned by the State and used for recreational purposes, regardless of
physical characteristics, development or use. Another definition might
be "public lands set aside or dedicated for recreation or pleasure," or
also defined as "public lands, set aside for the preservation of outdoor
values, scenic, scientific or historic features, and made available to the
citizens for recreation and pleasure for years to come."
Under present day conditions the park administrator is rarely con-
fronted with a major acquisition program. In most instances he is
forced to restudy and develop for maximum use, areas which are already
in existence. Limited acquisition may be required for more efficient
utilization and development of the existing area to meet increased
demands.
IN THE STATES 93
There are individuals in the audience who have experienced a sub-
stantial acquisition program for a state park system. From personal
experience, of nearly a quarter of a century, in two different state park
organizations, the speaker has experienced acquisition problems for
effigy Mounds National Monument, seven new state parks, two new
beach parks, as well as the acquisition of numerous small parcels for
additions to existing areas.
In the selection of new areas, or in adding to already existing holdings
the following items should receive study:
1. Topography: Mountains, hills, bluffs, gorges, dunes, moraines,
plains, and caves.
2. Water: Ocean, gulf, lake, river, streams, waterfalls, springs,
underground rivers and beaches.
3. Vegetative Cover: Forests, prairie, meadow, swamp and bogs.
4. History: Historical sites, buildings, other evidences of historical
interest, canals and locks, trails and traces, treaty sites, and villages.
5. Archaeological: Mounds, earthworks, villages, burial grounds.
6. Scientific: Geological interest. Areas in which there is a variety
of plant and animal life, natural scenery, and which show the processes
of the formation of the country.
7. Wildlife: Areas which may involve various combinations of the
above and providing suitable habitat for the continued support of wild-
life in its native state.
Each system and area constitutes an individual problem in planning
and development. Certain facilities will be required in every park re-
gardless of classification, others are common to many, and in some the
development will be of a special nature in order to bring out certain
highlights, or points of interest. The planner must always remember
that area establishment and planning involve:
1. Reconnaissance in advance of acquisition.
2. Determination of the logical and economical relationship among
the several items of development which appear to be required or de-
sirable.
3. Modification of natural environment only when it is certain that
the values resulting will fully balance the losses.
We have of necessity limited our remarks. Many fine articles have
been written on the details of planning state parks, both from the
administrators' and planners' points of view. The 1952 Yearbook on
Park and Recreation Progress, published by the National Conference
on State Parks, has two excellent articles on the above subjects.
So far our remarks have been confined to the establishment phase
of our subject. We should also consider, another one of the components
in our park program ; that of protection. This phase is of equal import-
ance as compared to maintenance, development and operation. Park
people recognize the necessity of an adequate protection program.
94 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
On May 13, 1918, a statement of National Park Policy was outlined
in a letter from Secretary Franklin K. Lane to Director Stephen T.
Mather. The first paragraph is as follows, "The National Park Service
has been established as a bureau of this Department just one year.
During this period our efforts have been chiefly directed toward the
building of an effective organization while engaged in the performance
of duties relating to the administration, protection, and improvements
of the national parks as required by law."
In the legislation creating the Division of Parks in the Ohio Depart-
ment of Natural Resources, effective August 11, 1949, the Legislature
gave the protection phase of the Division's activities equal weight with
its other duties. The act reads as follows: "The Division of Parks shall
have the right, power, and duty to create, supervise, operate, protect
and maintain a system of state parks and to promote the use thereof
by the public."
Again in the "Criteria for the Selection of State Parks" we find the
words, "or which would in the forseeable future possess such qualities
and attractiveness if adequate protection and access were made avail-
able—."
From the above citations, and from other sources there is sufficient
evidence and implication that once areas are established their continued
protection is of paramount importance.
Why do we need to protect our parks, from whom and what? What
do we mean by protection? How do we go about it? All of these ques-
tions may be asked by the visitors who take parks for granted.
The park administrator has some of the answers, and is willing to
discuss with visitors the necessity of protective measures required to
safeguard the inherent, intrinsic and esthetic values which are the soul
of the area, and which make it outstanding.
Webster defines the word "protect" as follows: "To cover or shield,
from injury or destruction; to defend, and to guard." Here we have
the implication that the word protect includes not only the prevention
of vandalism to the natural features and physical facilities, but that it
also includes guarding against other encroachments upon the public
holdings.
A brief visit with a park manager, ranger, naturalist or administrator
on the subject of protection cannot help but impress the visitor with
the necessity of protecting the intangible values, and the physical
features of the public domain.
From whom must we protect? The worst offender: the careless and
thoughtless park visitor. When he visits a park he seems to be motivated
by an impulse to leave a memento of his visit such as : his initials carved
on a picnic table, shelter house, bench, sign or rock face; lipstick on
toilet walls; kleenex and tin cans in reflecting pools; and litter of all
kinds. Ever visit a park on the day after a holiday? Try it some time,
IN THE STATES 95
the results will be enlightening.
There is also the problem of encroachments. For example, the pro-
posal to utilize Rock Creek Parkway in the Capital City for expressway
purposes because there will be low land costs, or the construction of
Echo Dam in Dinosaur National Park. All under the guise of progress,
in each instance destroying an intangible for which the area was orig-
inally set aside.
Daily the state park administrator is beseiged with requests of in-
dividuals seeking to capitalize, or derive personal gain from the visitor
potential in a state park in the form of concession privileges, which are
classed as alien to the state park concept, such as carnival type amuse-
ments in a day-use area, or for the establishment of non-essential food
and drink concessions in apparently strategic locations; the establish-
ment of beer gardens and liquor licenses at, or in close proximity, to
the entrances of parks; through highways in state parks; for permission
to erect private cottages along the lake shores of artificial impoundments,
constructed for public use from public funds, and on public lands; and
many others.
Yes, the features of Nature must be protected for those who come
to enjoy their rightful heritage, from selfish individuals who would
capitalize upon them.
Colonel Lieber said, "State Parks are the show windows of the
State." Certainly, they would not be show windows long, if it were
not for the protective measures which have been taken for the safe-
guarding of their natural values.
How may we go about protecting the public domain? The following
will serve as a guide. There are many others, but time does not permit
their listing:
1. Adequate buffer lands on all sides. Many of our protection prob-
lems could have been very effectively handled by the purchase of ade-
quate take strips or border lands. Where state parks are located within
the confines of the state forest holdings, there are for the most part
adequate buffer lands which preclude undesirable encroachment in the
form of fringe businesses bent on capitalizing on state development and
state park -visitors.
2. Natural or physical barriers. When selecting areas for acquisition
there are ordinarily logical or natural barriers or boundaries, such as
roads, gorges, rivers and lakes. These are easily identified and serve as
natural separation points. Physical barriers or man-made controls will
be in the form of boundary fencing, expensive but mandatory at times,
guard rail or other protective works or devices. We all dislike looking
through a wire mesh, or wrought iron grill at some historical article or
valuable art object, but if such a protective device were not there, the
96 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
object or work would be so mutilated or reduced to such a shamble that
it would no longer be of value. WHY? That is the question the park
people would like to have answered.
3. Zoning. Under the zoning process it is possible through the co-
operation of the citizens in the communities where state parks may be
situated to prescribe the use of lands abutting state park holdings. In
Ohio, county zoning is possible under the provisions of Section 3180-1
of the General Code, which stipulates how the zoning commission is to
be constituted, its duties, how and what lands are to be zoned. There
has been some interest as far as park lands are concerned, but so far
no actual zoning has occurred.
4. Ranger, Park Police, Patrolman. Regardless of title, still a guard
or protector of the parks from vandalism. He should be in a distinctive
and proper uniform at all times. Much of the time he will not be on the
scene when needed, but his presence on the areas will be a deterrent for
overt acts of destruction. An expensive though effective and necessary
method which will vary with every state park system, but extremely
essential for the protection of flora, fauna, and public property as well
as the park visitor.
5. Outdoor Education. Roberts Mann, Forest Preserve District of
Cook County, Illinois said:
Great masses of the American people, now predominately urban do not
know how to behave themselves in a park; they have no respect for or apprecia-
tion of Nature; they have no respect for public property; they have no roots,
no sense of kinship with the land, and what little knowledge they have of Nature
is distorted by misinformation or colored by fear.
The objectives of outdoor education may he simply stated,
(a) Teach people to appreciate Nature and understand Nature's laws.
(b) Enable them to live intelligently and find enjoyment in the out-of-doors.
(c) Give them understanding of the vital need for wise management and
use of pur natural resources, and an ingrained feeling of personal re-
sponsibility for their conservation.
Yes, protection is of equal importance with the creation, operation
and maintenance. It is possible to complete each phase, but if we do
not have protection, that which has been created by the Almighty and
over which we have nominal custodianship, will soon become shabby,
or have its intrinsic and inherent value forever destroyed through
misuse, and once lost it can never be replaced.
We, as park minded citizens, can, through the avenues open to us,
encourage the expansion of existing facilities, and the establishment of
new areas, be they city, metropolitan, county, or state, to accommodate
present day needs, and anticipate future requirements. As we maintain
high scenic values; resist destructive pressures and encroachment;
furnish adequate protection, and supply essential facilities for the
comfort of our visitors, then we shall have achieved the preservation
of our natural heritage, and our sources of inspiration.
IN THE STATES 97
State Control of Roadside Vegetation
DAVID R. LEVIN, Chief, Land Studies Section,
Financial and Administrative Research Branch, Bureau of Public Roads
INTRODUCTION
THIS National Citizens Conference on Parks and Open Spaces for
the American People is to be commended for its current emphasis
upon a problem that is presently tantalizing us. It involves the matter
of how to modernize a highway plant of another era and, at the same
time, blend and integrate the resulting product into a physical environ-
ment, so that a maximum of safety, function, and amenity is achieved
for both the transportation facility and adjacent uses.
I need hardly tell this expert audience that this objective is not
easy to accomplish. It can be achieved, of course, through proper
geometric design of the highway facilities. The objective can also be
facilitated by appropriate legal and administrative tools with which
to foster, protect and provide for roadside vegetation. It is this latter
aspect of the problem to which I would like to address myself this
morning.
OBJECTIVES OF ROADSIDE VEGETATION
We might ask ourselves at the outset what specific ends will be
served by the appropriate provision and public control of roadside
planting. A program of roadside vegetation will
(1) promote safety on the highway;
(2) prevent erosion and its devastating consequences, such as increased cost
of maintenance and traffic hazards;
(3) screen undesirable and sometimes obnoxious structures, objects and
uses along the highway corridors;
(4) reduce noise from the highway facility and its impact on adjacent uses;
(5) insulate roadside areas from fumes and other undesirable by-products
of motorized transportation; and generally
(6) assist in establishing a pleasant and more natural environment for both
the highway traveler and the abutting property owner or occupant.
There may be other objectives that are served by an appropriate pro-
gram of roadside vegetation.
NATURE OF ROADSIDE AREAS
Once we concede that there are compelling reasons why it is very
much in the public interest to provide and regulate roadside planting,
we might well attempt to delineate the character of the area so involved.
The American Association of State Highway Officials defines the "road-
side" as a general term denoting the area adjoining the outer edge of
the roadway, and may include extensive areas between the roadways
of a divided highway. This area, perforce, could extend from the outer
edge of the roadway to the right-of-way boundary, as well as beyond
98 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
the right-of-way boundary and into the adjoining private property.
For physically and functionally, the character and uses of the roadside
affect the character and uses of the roadway itself.
Since State laws concerning the provisions and control of roadside
vegetation distinguish between the highway right-of-way and the areas
in private ownership beyond the right-of-way, it is well to take cog-
nizance of this distinction in discussing the matter today.
LANDSCAPING WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY
I cite an unpublished 1951 survey of State laws made by the Bureau
of Public Roads.
State laws dealing with vegetation sometimes involve (1) the pro-
vision of new planting by public authority, (2) the protection and
maintenance of existing vegetation, and (3) the regulation of the pro-
vision of vegetation by private individuals, groups or organizations.
Each of these groups of laws ought to be considered separately.
Incidentally, no statutory provisions relating to the control of
vegetation by the State highway departments could be found in the
following 17 jurisdictions:
Alabama Montana Tennessee
Arizona Nevada Texas
Arkansas New Mexico Wyoming
Colorado North Dakota District of Columbia
Georgia South Carolina Hawaii
Mississippi South Dakota
A special task force on planning and management of roadside vegetation
of the Committee on Roadside Development of the Highway Research
Board has recently asserted that States should revise their existing
laws or provide new laws wherever necessary to entrust the highway
department with responsibility for the establishment and maintenance
of all vegetation along the highways over which it exercises jurisdiction.
See PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT OF ROADSIDE VEGE-
TATION, Special Task Committee on Planning and Management of
Roadside Vegetation, Nelson M. Wells, Chairman.
PROVISION OF NEW VEGETATION BY PUBLIC AUTHORITY
An analysis of State laws on roadside vegetation reveals that 16
States have legislation authorizing the State highway departments to
carry on planting operations within the highway right-of-way, in ac-
cordance with a planned program of roadside improvement. These
include the following:
Connecticut Michigan Rhode Island
Delaware New Hampshire Utah
Florida New Jersey Virginia
Louisiana New York Washington
Maine Pennsylvania Wisconsin
Maryland
IN THE STATES 99
The Florida statute is illustrative: and other examples included in
this paper are used as illustrations only, and are not suggested as model
pro visio ns necessarily .
The State Roads Department . . . may include as a part of (its) program
of highway construction, repair, maintenance or upkeep, the conservation of the
natural roadside growths and scenery, and the beautification of highways,
roads, or streets by the restoration, planting, replanting, seeding and reseeding
of grasses, plants, shrubs, root stocks, or trees, and the maintenance of same
along the roadsides of all highways. (Florida Stats. Ann., 1944, Title 24, Ch.
342, Sec. 342.01.)
PROTECTION AND MAINTENANCE OF EXISTING VEGETATION
There is already a considerable body of statutory law providing
for the protection and care of existing vegetation by the State highway
department. The laws of at least 13 States permit the State highway
department to trim, cut, or remove vegetation in the highway right-of-
way. These include the following States:
Connecticut Michigan Pennsylvania
Illinois Minnesota Utah
Maine New York Washington
Maryland Ohio Wisconsin
Massachusetts
The New York law is illustrative of this type of legislation:
The Superintendent of Public Works may provide for removal of, or trimming
of any trees within the boundaries of State highways necessary for convenience
or preservation of the highway. (Baldwin's Consolidated Laws, 1938, Highway
Law, Art. 2, Sec. 11 (7).)
In a larger group of States — 25 — the State highway department is
authorized to control the trimming, cutting and removal of vegetation
by others in the highway rights-of-way. Included are these States:
California Massachusetts Oregon
Connecticut Michigan Pennsylvania
Florida Nebraska Rhode Island
Idaho New Hampshire Utah
Indiana New Jersey Vermont
Kansas New York Washington
Kentucky North Carolina West Virginia
Louisiana Ohio Wisconsin
Maryland
The North Carolina law is of this type:
... no tree or shrub in or on any State road or State highway shall be
planted, trimmed, or removed, and no obstruction placed thereon, without a
written permit, as hereinbefore provided for, and then only in accordance with
the regulations of the commission or its duly authorized officers or employees;
and the work shall be done under the supervision and to the satisfaction of the
100 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
commission or its officers or employees, and the expense of replacing the highway
in as good condition as before shall be paid by the persons, firms or corporations
to whom the permit is given, or by whom the work is done. (North Carolina
General Stats. 1943, Ch. 136, Sec. 93.)
An adjunct to this authority of the State highway department is
provision for the eradication of noxious weeds or growths of any kind
within the rights-of-way of State highways. The statutes of at least
six States include this provision, in these instances:
Iowa Oregon
Kansas Rhode Island
New York Virginia
The Rhode Island law may be cited as an example of this type of
legislation:
The Division of Roads and Rridges may remove trees or other plants within
the limits of public highways under its jurisdiction which are injurious plants
or are obnoxious as hosts of insects or fungus pests. (General Laws Rhode
Island, 1938, Ch. 225, Sec. 5.)
REGULATION OF PROVISION OF VEGETATION BY OTHERS
The provision of vegetation within the highway rights-of-way is
frequently undertaken by abutting owners or private groups or indi-
viduals or organizations other than the State highway departments.
The laws of 12 jurisdictions authorize the State highway departments
to control plantings in the highway rights-of-way, sometimes by use
of a permit system and regulations promulgated by the State highway
department. These include:
California North Carolina
Illinois Ohio
Maine Utah
Maryland Washington
Massachusetts West Virginia
New Hampshire Hawaii
The following Maryland enactment is typical:
No State highway shall be dug up for laying or placing pipes . . . and no
trees shall be planted or removed or obstructions placed thereon without the
written permit of the State Roads Commission, or its duly authorized agent,
and then only in accordance with the regulations of said commission; and the
work shall be done under the supervision of and to the satisfaction of said
Commission. (Flacks Ann. Code of Maryland, 1939, Ch. 89B, Sec. 21.)
The more general laws controlling planting by others in the highway
rights-of-way authorize the State highway department to make such
rules and regulations as are considered to be in the best interests of the
State. The New Hampshire law is illustrative:
IN THE STATES 101
On all State maintained highways, the planting, acquisition, maintenance
and removal of all trees and shrubs shall be done under the supervision of the
State highway commissioner who shall make such rules and regulations for the
purpose as shall, in his judgment, seem for the best interests of the State. (Laws
1945, Ch. 188, Sec. 15.)
The type of legal interest which a State acquired in its highway
rights-of-way sometimes influences the State policy with respect to
roadside vegetation that is written into its statutes. Some States
acquire a fee simple title to its highway rights-of-way; the resulting
legal control which this facilitates is quite complete. Other States,
however, traditionally acquire only an easement for highway purposes
in perpetuity, and the underlying fee continues to remain in the abutting
property owner; under such circumstances, and where the prevailing
legal mores of the State or community so dictate, may seek the approval
of the abutting property owner to planting in the highway right-of-way
by others than the State highway department. The laws of at least
two States — Illinois and Maine — so provide.
VEGETATION BEYOND THE RIGHT-OF-WAY
As I have already suggested, the safety of the highway traveler
and his more expeditious journey are frequently affected by the nature
and location of the vegetation in the areas beyond the highway right-of-
way, as well as by vegetation within the right-of-way. The laws of a
few States have taken full cognizance of this important principle by
making provision for planting by the State highway department in areas
adjacent to the highway right-of-way wherever considered necessary
to carry out a planned program of roadside improvement. Six States
have authority of this kind, varying in degree, however:
California Oregon
Connecticut Utah
Massachusetts Vermont
The California statute is an example:
The department may acquire, either in fee or in any lesser estate or interest,
any real property which it considers necessary for State highway purposes.
Real property for such purposes includes, but is not limited to, real property
considered necessary for (the following purposes) : . . . the culture and support
of trees which benefit any State highway by aiding in the maintenance and
preservation of the roadbed, or which aid in the maintenance of the attractive-
ness of the scenic beauties of such highway. (Deerings California Code, 1945,
Streets and Highways, Art. 2, Sec. 104.)
Aside from an active program of planting by the State highway
department in the areas adjacent to the right-of-way, four States
authorize some control by the department of the cutting, trimming
and removal of vegetation in such areas. Safety objectives seem to
102 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
be the determining factor in such instances, and the consent of the
abutting landowner is frequently necessary. The four States are:
Massachusetts Utah
Pennsylvania Virginia
The Massachusetts law is of this type :
The Department, if it can obtain consent of the owner, shall remove the
trees, limbs of trees, shrubbery or any structure or other obstacle from lands
bordering on State highways, which in its opinion obstruct the view of persons
traveling upon the highway or make traveling thereon dangerous. (Ann. Laws
of Massachusetts, Recompiled, 1945, Ch. 81, Sec. 14.)
ACQUISITION OF EASEMENTS TO CONTROL ROADSIDE VEGETATION
Most of the public controls discussed in the foregoing paragraphs
concern the regulation of roadside vegetation under the State's police
power, for which no compensation from government is forthcoming.
A few States, however, have sought to exercise control of roadside
vegetation by the acquisition of special easements, under the power of
eminent domain, involving compensation, theoretically at least.
A prototype of such legislation exists in a Maryland statute:
The State Roads Commission may acquire, by gift, purchase, condemnation,
or otherwise, real property along or near any State highway, parkway or free-
way, or any interest in such property, in order to protect the highway, parkway,
or freeway, or scenery along or near it, or to provide parking areas along the
highway, parkway or freeway and for similar purposes.
Among the interests in land which may be so acquired are agreements or
easements restricting, or subjecting to regulation by the Commission, any right
of the owner or other persons —
(3) to remove or destroy shrubbery or trees;
(4) to place thereon trash or unsightly or offensive material;
(5) to display thereon signs, billboards or advertisements
Where any interest in real property is acquired under this section, the deed,
agreement, judgment, or other instrument shall clearly set forth the specific
restrictions or other interests purchased, condemned, or otherwise acquired and
any such restrictions shall run with the land to which they apply and be binding
on all subsequent holders, except as the deed, agreement, judgment, or decree
or other instrument otherwise expressly provides. (Laws of Maryland, 1941,
Ch. 486.)
It is altogether possible, of course, that other States may possess
the power to acquire easements of this kind, even without the benefit
of specific legislation on the subject. This may follow from the right
such States possess to acquire property or any interests in property,
for highway purposes generally.
CONCLUSION
It is quite obvious, then, that we have really made progress with
respect to the provision and control of vegetation, both within the
IN THE STATES 103
highway rights-of-way, and perhaps to a lesser degree, in the areas
immediately adjacent thereto. But in terms of the needs, much remains
to be done. We must lift the "roadsides" out of the mud, just as we
did the same — literally — many years ago with respect to rural highways.
Only then will we have achieved the ultimate in terms of transportation
facilities that are safe, efficient and pleasant to utilize. And only then
will the man-made accommodation have been blended appropriately
into a natural environment and reconciled functionally with the pattern
of roadside uses.
Roadsides and the Federal Highway System
BURTON W. MARSH, Director, Traffic Engineering and Safety Department,
American Automobile Association
THE ROADSIDE is the most neglected aspect of the highway
program today.
We simply cannot afford to let this situation continue.
Take for example the matter of obtaining adequate right-of-way.
Here is what H. S. Fairbank, one of our topmost highway leaders in
America, recently had to say:
"When shall we ever learn? Time after time, we find that 10 or 15
years after purchasing a right-of-way of inadequate width, we have to
buy, at greatly increased cost, additional right-of-way or go to a new
location.
"Failure to secure adequate rights-of-way is perhaps the most serious
basic fault in highway practice today."
Yes, conditions as to the roadside aspect of the highway problem
are serious today. But, what of the future?
The Future Problem: Let us compare the situation today with the
best available estimates of traffic growth:
1. There are now over 58,000,000 registered vehicles in the United
States — 1 to every 2.8 persons.
2. A short decade from now, by 1965, it is estimated that there will
be almost 3 motor vehicles to every 2 today.
3. By 1975, the estimate is that there will be 4 vehicles for every
2 today.
Now, these estimates are not made by some starry-eyed dreamers.
No indeed, they are the estimates of leading highway transportation
officials — and let me emphasize that heretofore, major estimates of
traffic growth have consistently been on the low side — and very much
on the low side. In other words, highway traffic has grown much faster
than has been anticipated.
104 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
Traffic Growth Outstripping Highway Improvements: Another major
factor in the picture is that traffic growth has been greatly outrunning
highway improvements. Indeed so great has the gap become that
President Eisenhower recently announced a figure of $101 billion as
the amount needed to take care of the present deficiency and to provide
reasonably adequate highway facilities for the next 10 years. (In the
case of the National System of Interstate Highways, to provide facilities
adequate for the next 20 years.) This estimate is based on analysis
prepared by the state highway departments in accordance with pro-
cedures and forms which that Association and the Bureau of Public
Roads developed.
It is a startling deficiency, isn't it?
Will Road Improvements Continue to Lag? It is a fair question of
whether, as the number of motor vehicles increases so rapidly, we shall
find ourselves getting caught up and staying caught up in the provision
of highway facilities. Much as I dislike stating it, it is my judgment
that the road improvement will continue to lag behind growing motor
vehicle registration and traffic demands. This does not mean that we
shall not have some tremendous highway improvement programs in
the years ahead, for I am sure that we shall. But I am equally sure
that even with those improvements, we must look forward to less road
space per car as time goes on.
Implications — Better Disciplined Traffic; Better Roadside Protection:
If this appraisal is correct, then it seems crystal clear that we must
take measures to assure more efficiency and orderliness in the use of
the highway facilities which we have. We shall have to come to a more
effectively disciplined and a more orderly traffic stream. There will be
less opportunities for great variances in driving speeds because of
fewer times when one can overtake and pass in the heavier traffic stream.
Traffic restrictions will certainly become more extensive and rigorous
with more left turns eliminated, more one-way operation, more marking
of lanes and insistence upon adherence to lanes in driving, more and
more elimination of curb parking, increased applications of various
combinations of methods to expedite major traffic flows.
In like manner, there simply must be greatly improved roadside
protection. We shall have to give due recognition to the necessity of
securing adequate rights-of-way. Controlled access must be utilized
much more extensively on the most important arteries — this being the
one and only certain method of assuring that the full capacity and
effectiveness of the artery will be retained for traffic movement. High-
way zoning will have to be very much more extensively utilized so
that its benefits in improving the efficiency of traffic movement and
reducing hazards will be achieved.
These are some of the roadside protection measures set forth in the
booklet "Roadside Protection — A Study of the Problem and Suggested
IN THE STATES 105
Approaches to Betterment," which our Association has published and
the ideas of which the Association is promoting.
Hastening Improvement Measures: Our job — the job of our Asso-
ciation and of you people — seems to me clearly to be that of taking
such constructive steps as we can to hasten these actions — and for
the moment, I am going to limit the discussion to those relating to
roadside protection.
The task won't be easy! Bringing about these improvement meas-
ures which from the long-range viewpoint are, I think, inevitable,
will not be easy. It isn't easy to change the thinking and customs of
people. Our legislative bodies are conservative in acting on various
new ideas. The public must be thoroughly informed on such matters
and that takes time. But most of all, perhaps, we must face the fact
that forces, with lots of ready money in some cases, are ever alert to
prevent such constructive actions.
Let me cite to you a good example from nearby Maryland.
What Happened to Maryland House of Delegates Bill No. 10: On
January 5, 1955, there was introduced in the House of Delegates of
Maryland, a Bill for roadside protection authorizing the State Roads
Commission to designate highways and parts of highways, outside the
corporate limits of any town or city, as "Roadside Protected Highways,"
authorizing the Commission to establish protective areas adjacent to
such highways, to control and regulate uses of land and business and
commercial structures within such protective areas, to issue permits
in accordance with such control and regulation, providing for hearings
by the Commission and appeals therefrom, and relating generally to
the development and protection of roadsides in Maryland.
This Bill authorized the Highway Commission, with the consent of
the County Commissioner of the county concerned, to institute a road-
side zoning program. Would that program have prohibited uses of
commercial developments, including billboards? Not at all. It would
have established some districts in which these uses would have been
prohibited and other districts in which they would have been expressly
permitted.
Would it have provided for going an excessive distance to the sides
and beyond the highway right-of-way? Far from it. As a matter of
fact, while recommended distances for control bordering highways are
up to 1,000 feet on each side, when a roadside protection bill was pre-
sented to the 1953 General Assembly that distance had been squeezed
down to 200 feet. The 1955 Bill, as presented to the Legislative Council,
called for such a 200 foot control. But by the time the Bill was printed,
that figure had shrunk to 75 feet.
Let me refer now to some comments regarding this Bill by Irving C.
Root, City Planner. I quote the following from a strong statement
which Mr. Root prepared, dated February 15, 1955.
106 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
The average citizen, recognizing the solid benefits to accrue from this pro-
posed legislation, would logically expect it to pass promptly and without ques-
tion. But he would not be aware of the small, powerful and wealthy organization
that has been highly successful in stalling desirable public legislation in every
state of our country. . . .
I was disturbed by an article I saw last Friday in a Washington paper which
said the outdoor advertising interests had a lobby in Annapolis for the purpose
of killing this bill. The article went on to say the lobby handed out a printed
statement saying, among other things, that the bill if passed would set up a
"Czar" in the State Roads Commission office who presumably would dictate
unreasonably. Of course, there would be no dictator set up by the State Roads
Commission who would administer unreasonably. However, that is a sample
of the misleading inference that the billboard people spread around hoping to
confuse the gullible.
Mr. Root then points out that no highway zoning regulation would
be applied without concurrence of county elected officials. Hundreds
of miles of state highways are already zoned by counties and so would
not be touched by this bill.
Mr. Root then refers to the cutting down to 75 feet of the distance
to the sides from the highway right-of-way to which the regulations
would apply. He makes this statement:
One is inclined to wonder why the billboard industry is against this bill
after they have practically written it themselves to suit their own purpose. The
reason is that the industry prefers no controls at all. They want the liberty to
put any number of billboards on your favorite highway advertising everything
made from Kalamazoo to Timbucktoo. And right now they can do that very
thing excepting in our growing number of Maryland zoned towns and counties.
The wealthy billboard boys have so consistently had their way with the
Maryland Legislature that the electorate, who are interested in this bill, will
want to know, — is it a sellout or a give-away?
He then refers to some court decisions from other States relating to
billboards.
One of Mr. Root's concluding statements is as follows:
It is interesting to note that the leading outdoor advertising company has
had such a profitable year that its stock increased fifty percent in value. Thus
outdoor advertising could hardly be considered as a depressed industry that
deserved special favors at the expense of Maryland taxpayers.
The measure was defeated as not offering "a satisfactory solution
which was deemed to be in the best interests of the citizens of the State
of Maryland." However, in lieu of this legislation, the House of Dele-
gates has called on the State Planning Commission to prepare and
submit to the General Assembly, in time for its consideration at the
1957 session, proposed plans including regulations to be used as a basis
by the General Assembly in adopting plans and regulations essential
to promote orderly and coordinated development of lands along or
adjacent to state highways and parkways.
IN THE STATES 107
Now, let's look at a much more recent occurrence.
A short time ago, Senator Neuberger according to page 5788 of the
Congressional Record of May 23, 1955, indicated that he had introduced
an amendment in an important highway bill. This bill is a revised
version of £. 1048, popularly known as the Gore Bill, for Federal aid
highway improvements with special emphasis on the National System
of Interstate Highways.
Senator Neuberger's amendment, and I quote him, "had only one
purpose, namely, that in the case of the Interstate System, in which the
American people are going to invest and are investing billions of dollars
to construct, it should not be possible to plaster it with all kinds of
advertising material, which would have no value whatsoever unless the
American people had invested billions of dollars in the road system."
In case some of you are not familiar with the term, the so-called
Inter-state System is the National System of Interstate Highways of
40,000 miles maximum length which, constituting only slightly over
one percent of the road mileage of this country, will carry in its rural
segments one-fifth of the traffic. It is the very backbone of our highway
system and is the system which the Department of Defense has recog-
nized as having top importance from a point of view of defense. It is
likewise our most important system from the point of view of general
economy.
Let me quote what the Bill would have provided. The first part of
Section 4 (a) reads as follows:
In any case in which the Secretary is requested by any State to acquire
any lands or interests in lands (including the control of access to any lands from
adjoining lands and the exclusive right to advertise on lands adjoining and not
exceeding five hundred feet from the right-of-way) required by such State for
right-of-way or other purposes in connection with the prosecution of any project
for the construction, reconstruction, or improvement of any section of the
National System of Interstate Highways, the Secretary is authorized, in the
name of the United States and prior to the approval of title by the Attorney
General, to acquire, enter upon, and take possession of such lands or interests
in lands by purchase, donation, condemnation or otherwise in accordance with
the laws of the United States.
The section goes on to require that it be determined that the State
is unable to acquire these lands, or interests in lands with sufficient
promptness, and that the State has agreed to pay 10 percent of the costs.
It is provided that the costs shall be paid from funds which would other-
wise go to that State for improvement of its part of the Interstate System.
Then the Secretary is authorized and directed to convey such lands
or interests in lands, except the outside five feet of any such right-of-way
in States unable or unwilling to control access, to the state highway
department, under terms to be agreed upon by the Secretary of Com-
merce and the state highway department, or political subdivisions
108 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
involved. "Whenever the State is able and agrees to control access, the
outside five feet may be conveyed to it."
You see, then, that in the first place this proposal becomes effective
only if the State requests it. It involves acquiring lands or interests in
lands to permit control of access and also "the exclusive right to advertise
on lands adjoining and not exceeding five hundred feet from the right-of-
way."
One of the most distinguished members of the United States Senate
took issue with this provision for the Federal Government to acquire
temporarily, on behalf of the state, the exclusive right to advertise on
lands within five hundred feet of the right-of-way. The discussion which
was very animated turned on the question of whether this constituted
a negative easement (whatever that is) and on whether such a negative
easement could be conveyed by the Federal Government back to the
states.
Now, the language would seem to involve purchasing the exclusive
right to advertise, which does not sound like a negative proposal at all.
Nonetheless, the argument seemed to turn on that point and on the
perhaps even more fundamental question of the Federal Government
having any such rights whatsoever instead of leaving it all up to the
states — in which realm the distinguished Senator indicated he had no
objection to exercise of controls.
Now, I do not know what all the various elements were which entered
this picture, but I do know the provision was defeated.
Furthermore, I know what one of our AAA Affiliated Clubs got
from a representative of the General Outdoor Advertising Company
and I should like to read you a quotation from a letter which they
wrote us.
"We have been asked by a local representative of General Outdoor
Advertising Company to use our influence to kill an amendment to
the Gore Bill S. 1048 under which the government may take possession
of land within 500 feet of Federal aid highways.
"Our friend in General Outdoor is of the opinion of course that this
is discriminatory insofar as Outdoor Advertising is concerned."
Now note the inaccuracies in the assertions made :
There was no proposal whatever for the Federal Government to
take possession of land within five hundred feet of Federal aid highways.
Indeed, the very much less broad proposal related only to the Interstate
System, which is a very small segment, albeit a very important segment,
of the total Federal aid mileage.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I have cited these two cases to you because
they show very clearly, it seems to me, at least one kind of opposition
which must be anticipated.
Major Congressional Bills, Including Provision for Control of Access.
But I have gotten a little bit ahead of my main story. You all know,
IN THE STATES 109
I am sure, that President Eisenhower became so impressed with the
seriousness of the highway deficiency that he addressed the Governors
at Bolton Landing, New York, last year about the problem and urged
their cooperation in developing a plan to meet the situation. Out of
this proposal and the work of the Governor's Conference and of a com-
mittee under General Lucius Clay, appointed by the President, there
has been developed a challenging proposal for a multi-billion dollar
program, the major purpose of which is to complete the construction
of the National System of Interstate Highways within the next 10 years
at suitable standards.
This proposal has been formulated in Senate Bill S. 1160, and in
House Bill H. R. 4260 and some other identical bills.
As a result of extensive hearings in the Roads Subcommittee of the
Senate, a modified Bill, popularly known as the Gore Bill, S. 1048, has
been introduced. It would provide for a different method of financing
and for increased emphasis on other Federal aid highways at the same
time as the Interstate Highway is being improved.
The point I wish to make emphatically is that both of these
major bills contain provisions whereby for the interstate system
the control of access can be assured provided, of course, a State
wishes that to be done, even if the State does not now have the
necessary laws for accomplishing that purpose.
In both Bills, the idea involved is for the Federal Government, on
request of the State, to purchase lands and interests in lands, which
would later be conveyed back to the State, except the outside five feet
of the right-of-way which would not be conveyed back until the State
had adopted suitable laws for the control of access, at which time the
remaining five foot strips would also be conveyed back to the States.
Friends, this is an extremely important progressive measure and I
beg of you that you ask your Congressmen to give it their support.
The numbers of the key bills again are S. 1160, S. 1048 and H. R. 4260.
Control of Access to be Acquired Where Needed: The concept in the
Clay Beport and in these major bills is for the acquiring of the control
of access where needed or required by the State. To my way of thinking,
it is most unfortunate that they didn't go all the way and provide for
acquisition of control of access throughout the Interstate System. The
reason is simple. The plan admits the need to obtain it where it is needed.
The Clay Beport reminds us that where it is not now needed, it may be
needed later. And experience has repeatedly shown that where it is
not now needed and even where it does not seem that it will be needed,
it will cost very little to obtain it at this time.
So much for roadside protection in relation to the major Federal road
legislation. Before concluding, may I make quick reference to two other
encouraging developments?
110 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
Advance Acquisition of Right-qf-Way: One of the very encouraging
developments has been that of California in the advance acquisition
of rights-of-way. Impressed with the fact that failure to acquire rights-
of-way in advance often resulted in tremendous increases in right-of-
way costs, California decided to try out the idea of a revolving fund
earmarked for the acquisition of rights-of-way. Originally $10 million
in 1952, the fund was increased in 1953 to a total of $30 million.
California officials assert on the basis of documented investigations
that for every dollar invested today in future highway right-of-way,
savings ranging from ten to thirty dollars will accrue during the next
twelve years. This means that in terms of the entire present authoriza-
tions, savings will be made ranging from $300 million to $900 million.
Perhaps in no other segment of highway development are such fantastic
dividends possible.
Let me illustrate by contrast between two sections of the same
freeway — the Sepulveda Freeway. In 1948, a section of the right-of-way
was purchased for the future Sepulveda Freeway for a little over $100,000.
It was purchased at that time to protect it from the very kind of apart-
ment development that has taken place in the area in the last six years.
Had the California Division of Highways delayed the acquisition of
this right-of-way to the present time and the property been permitted
to develop in a manner similar to the rest of the area (which would
have been inevitable), it is estimated that it would have cost the Division
in excess of $2,200,000 to acquire the right-of-way involved — or ap-
proximately 22 times as much.
In contrast, consider another section of the same Freeway between
Washington and Jefferson Boulevards. Ten years ago this section, only
five percent developed, contained improvements worth approximately
$35,000. Today, the section is 100 percent developed and contains im-
provements valued in excess of $1,750,000, exclusive of land cost. This
greatly increased right-of-way cost currently will face the California
Division of Highways when it proceeds with acquisition of right-of-way
on this project.
Here is a method of dealing with a very important problem directly
related to roadside protection which seems destined to receive favorable
consideration in other states. Already it is understood that something
similar is being used elsewhere. It is an idea worth promoting!
Anti-Litter Campaign: May I also make a quick reference to an
anti-litter campaign? You know what bad litterbugs we Americans
are. It is something we certainly should not be proud of. It is something
that we should certainly seek to bring under control. Here is a method
conceived, as I understand it, by one of you fine folk. It consists of
providing a waxed, water-proof litterbag for use in an automobile.
Here's a sample. In it one would place waste paper, banana peels, tin
IN THE STATES 111
cans, gum wrappings, etc., and then these would be emptied into a
suitable roadside trash container.
It will interest you, I believe, to know that it is expected that this
summer approximately one million of these bags will be distributed.
We are very pleased that a considerable number of affiliated AAA
Clubs are becoming active in this campaign.
What Can You and I Do? May I conclude by dealing for a moment
with what you and I can do? We have a challenging need. I have
already urged and I again urge you to write your Congressmen regarding
retention of the control of access feature regarding pending legislation
(S. 1160, S. 1048, H. R. 4260). We must do an even better job of in-
forming and educating the public on the importance of this matter —
and we must utilize various methods of accomplishing this.
I have already mentioned the AAA booklet, "Roadside Protection."
I might also draw to your attention a reprint of a magazine article by
our Executive Vice-President, Russell E. Singer, "How to Gilt-Edge
Our Highway Investment," which has been put into a folder for wide
distribution, entitled "Protecting the Highway Investment Through
Roadside Zoning." Copies of this are available here for those of you
who are interested.
We are now developing some educational material on this general
subject directed specifically to the layman. We are giving much attention
to use of the picture-cartoon as the main means of putting the story
across.
We are promoting an idea of getting the main road designers of the
highway departments to hold a sort of seminar-observation discussion
in which they would discuss some of these recent developments and
new ideas and we would hope, examine very carefully the superb features
of the relatively short section of U. S. 240, not too far north of Wash-
ington, in the vicinity of Frederick, and also the Garden State Parkway.
Both of these freeways have utilized unique concepts of design which
mean much more pleasant and efficient highways, and I think it is
reasonable to predict much safer ones. They follow the topography
of the land, with easy curves, varying distances between two one-way
separated roads, etc.
May I also urge consideration of the much greater use of roadside
surveys? These have been carried on in Minnesota and Michigan.
Funds are available from Federal aid. The cooperation of the Bureau
of Public Roads is, I believe, available, is it not, Dr. Levin? These
surveys can form an excellent basis for determining what the roadside
conditions really are and for deciding upon a constructive improvement
program. They constitute an idea which deserves far greater promotion
than it has had heretofore.
In closing, may I pay high tribute to you people? Winston Churchill
was the man who used the expression about so many owing so much
112 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
to so few. This seems most appropriate as it applies to you folk. I am
repeatedly astonished at what so few dedicated persons can accomplish
in getting results — even against most serious obstacles and odds — for
constructive measures which are right.
You deserve the hearty commendation of the people of America.
May you continue your good and effective work.
Discussion
THOMAS W. MORSE, Superintendent of State Parks,
Department of Conservation and Development, Raleigh, N. C.
IN DISCUSSING state parks and highways, the speakers on this
panel have pointed out that state parks and highways are both very
important and essential components of the overall pattern of parks
and open spaces.
Highways, properly constructed and maintained with adequate
attention to the roadside, are actually open spaces, although we may
not ordinarily think of them as such. This is particularly true of park-
ways, throughways and similar types of highways.
Statistics show that a very large percentage of highway travel is
recreational travel. This fact should be much more widely accepted
by highway planners and should be reflected in highway planning much
more than it is. Today, of course, highway planners take the recreational
use of highways more into account than they formerly did — the growing
number of roadside parks, roadside rests, overlooks and so forth are
evidence of this — but the conception of highways as true open spaces
and recreational facilities has still to be realized. The readiness, even
eagerness, with which highway planners would route highways through
existing parks of all kinds vividly illustrates that this conception is still
far from realization.
As the two panel members who spoke on state parks, both of whom
are Directors of large state park systems, pointed out, state parks are
highly important units of the overall scheme of parks and open spaces.
The purposes of state park systems are :
(1) to protect and preserve natural areas of unique or exceptional
scenic value for the inspiration, benefit and enjoyment of present and
future generations;
(2) to provide for public use areas that provide recreational use of
natural resources and outdoor recreation in natural surroundings;
(3) to portray and interpret plant and animal life, geology and other
natural features in state parks; and
(4) to preserve, protect and portray historic and scientific sites of
state-wide importance. Not all state park systems however, include
IN THE STATES 113
historic sites since, in some States, these sites are administered by other
agencies.
State park systems supplement and complement both national
parks and local parks and recreational facilities.
State park systems have been subjected to the pressure of heavy
public use arising from increased standards of living, increased use of
the automobile and increased leisure time. This pressure has brought
about many of the problems that confront the national parks and each
state must, therefore, undertake studies and prepare plans similar to
those being made for the national parks and outlined to us last evening
by the Director of the National Park Service.
There needs to be more uniformity in state park standards and
principles. All states should adopt and follow principles and standards
similar to the "Suggested Criteria for Evaluating Areas Proposed for
Inclusion in the State Park Systems" adopted by the National Confer-
ence on State Parks. Some States have such a written set of principles
and standards; other do not.
State Parks are vital to the overall pattern of parks and open spaces
and have done much to enrich the lives of the millions who use and
enjoy them annually. Great as have been the past benefits of state
parks, the benefits they can render in the future are far greater.
EDITOR'S NOTE.— The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956, as enacted by the
84th Congress and approved June 29, 1956, provides that the Secretary of Commerce,
if requested by any State to acquire any lands or interests in lands, including control
of access from adjoining lands, may proceed under certain conditions.
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS
EDITOR'S NOTE: — Papers presented at the National Citizens Planning Con-
ference on Parks and Open Spaces for the American People.
PARKS AND OPEN SPACES
What Parks and Open Spaces
Mean to the American People
JOSEPH PRENDERGAST, Executive Director, National Recreation Association,
New York, N. Y.
S and open spaces mean a great deal to the American people,
perhaps more than to any other people in the world, because parks
in the modern sense of the word and open spaces in both the modern
and the traditional sense have contributed and can continue to con-
tribute much to the very essence of the American way of life.
The physical wealth, the emotional strength, and the great democra-
tic spirit characteristic of America have been shaped and formed under
the pressure of an abundance of open space. First, it was an unknown
and empty continent which faced the restless, adventuresome men
who explored the coast of the New World. As more and more sailing
ships brought colonists fleeing from the crowded areas of Europe, the
wide Appalachian Mountains were crossed and the heart of the cont-
inent penetrated by men and women seeking freedom and opportunity.
Every child in America knows about Davey Crockett and that
amazing group of frontiersmen who until the late 19th century were
continually on the move for new "open space" — virgin land on which
to hunt, search for wealth, and finally to settle and raise families.
B. A. Botkin in his Treasury of American Folklore describes these
people in this way:
"In endless brags and gags, tall talk and tall tales, heroic myths and sagas,
blues and ballads, they express the boundless optimism and the 'individual
competitive aggressiveness' of a restless, ingenious, wisecracking folk with one
foot in the road, who still believe in miracles and in greener fields across the next
river or mountain, in the next county or state."
It is worth noting that the inscription on the California State Capitol
reads, "Bring me men to match my mountains." And of Davey Crock-
ett's description of the frontiersmen of his time: "There are some
first-rate men there, of the real half-horse, half-alligator breed, with
a sprinkling of the steamboat, and such as grow nowhere on the face
of the universal earth, but just about the backbone of North America."
The folklore, the tradition and the fact of the American wilderness,
frontier and open space have had an enormous influence on the Ameri-
can character. Although the frontier had disappeared by the 1890's
114
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 115
the spirit of democracy and individual initiative literally forced upon
the American people by boundless open space continued to flourish.
American business, government, industry, and education received their
greatest stimulation from the concept of America as the land of oppor-
tunity. And the land of opportunity basically meant an endless stretch
of open space where a man could achieve success and happiness.
With the closing of the frontier certain American civic leaders more
sensitive, perhaps, than others to the special American need for open
spaces began to unite and speak of the individual and social evil of
crowding too many people in too small areas in cities, without making
provision for the people to keep in frequent contact with the elements
of a natural environment. They advocated the preservation of large
areas within cities to serve as retreats for the people, for rest in an
environment of peace, quietness and natural beauty, and for such forms
of active recreation as would not destroy the essential quality of the
areas as places of inspiration and enjoyment of the beauties of nature.
The first concrete result of this movement was Central Park in
New York City (1853) followed in rapid succession by the establishment
of similar parks in several other large cities of the United States. From
these beginnings during the last half of the 19th century have evolved
the elaborate systems of recreational areas providing for both active
and passive recreation in our cities of today. In 1885, the first play-
ground was established in Boston and in 1906 with the founding of the
Playground Association of America, now the National Recreation
Association, the national recreation movement was well under way.
In 1892-93, the Boston Metropolitan Park System was established
as a special method of handling on a district basis the acquisition,
development and administration of recreation areas which it was not
practicable for local, town and city governments in the region to handle
alone. The metropolitan district plan has, of course, since spread to
other sections of the country.
In 1895, the first county park system was established in Essex
County, New Jersey. The principal county recreation developments
since then have been in counties in the metropolitan regions of large
cities serving practically the same functions as metropolitan park dis-
tricts, although in a few counties the recreational service provided is
primarily for rural and small rural-urban communities. In some parts
of the country townships and special districts have also been used to
administer recreation systems.
Between 1870 and 1880, a few States such as California, New York,
Michigan and Minnesota began to establish state parks and recreational
areas — a movement which has since spread to every State in the Union
with Colorado the last State to do so establishing a state park agency
in 1955. The establishment of Yellowstone National Park in 1872
marked the entrance of the Federal Government into the field of con-
116 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
servation of natural resources for recreation, from which has grown
the magnificent system of national recreational areas now available
to us all.
I do not know whether or not there was any conscious plan on the
part of the American people or their leaders to substitute local, state
and national parks and other open spaces for the frontiers and bound-
less open spaces of the past so that the best values of frontier and pioneer
life could be perpetuated. Perhaps they were seeking simply to assure
some opportunities for happier and more abundant lives through active
outdoor recreation or passive enjoyment of nature without really know-
ing why the American people had a special need for parks and open
spaces.
It is fortunate, indeed, that the early 20th century pioneers in con-
servation, park and recreation planning were so successful. Thanks to
their farsightedness we have made a good start in the acquisition of an
adequate network of national, state and local parks and recreation
areas. In the transition period between the age of the frontier, the in-
dustrial revolution, and a new age of leisure, they have provided the
American people with a down payment on the kind of land dedicated
to the public use which we are going to need to live successfully in this
new age of leisure.
Perhaps I should add here that I am using the word "recreation"
as it was used in the 1934 report of the National Park Service for the
Land Planning Committee of the National Resources Board to connote
"all that is recreative of the individual, the community or the nation.
In this sense, it is broader than the 'physical activity' concept. It in-
cludes mental and spiritual expression. It allows gratification of the
nearly infinite variety of tastes and predilections so far as that gratifica-
tion is consistent with sustained utilization of the nation's recreational
resources."
I think all of us here today would agree with the views expressed
in that 1934 report that "the public recreation movement in America
represents a conscious cultural ideal of the American people, just as
the great system of public education represented such an ideal. It takes
rank with the system of public education as a necessary addition to the
cultural equipment of the nation. Its supreme objective is the pro-
motion of the general welfare through the creation of opportunities
for a more abundant and happier life for everyone."
The wilderness is gone. The frontier is passed. The age of leisure is
here. The impact of advertising through every possible media proclaims
that this is so. We are constantly being beseiged to buy products which
will help us enjoy our leisure the more. And incidentally, may I note
in passing, that a great many of these products are ones which are
consumed or used en route or at our public parks and recreation areas.
Or they are products which we need special recreation skills to enjoy.
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 117
The 1950 census reports gave the first really substantial statistical
information indicating that leisure is now possible for everyone and not
just for the favored few. Since then, business publications, reports and
magazines have assembled an amazing collection of facts which demon-
strate conclusively that recreation and leisure are now of major im-
portance to American living and that in the years ahead leisure and how
it is used will be a major concern of every business and industry, civic
organization, school, church and unit of government.
POPULATION GROWTH
Consider briefly these facts. During the hundred years of the 19th
century, our population only increased from 5 million to 76 million.
By 1925, however, it was 114 million and by 1954, 163 million and it
is increasing at an even faster rate.
Last year there were over 4 million births, the highest on record
and the eighth straight year over 3^ million. Last year we had the
highest net increase in the population in any one year — over 2,600,000.
No longer are we surprised to hear that the Bureau of the Census
forecasts a population of 177 million in 1960 and 221 million in 1975 —
a rise of some 35 percent in the next twenty years.
LEISURE TIME
This tremendous growth in population is being accompanied by an
even more fabulous growth in the non-working time — the leisure hours,
the recreation time — of the American people. This is true for children
and youth, for working men and women, for women who are not em-
ployed outside their homes, and for older adults.
In 1800, the average workweek in industrial establishments con-
sisted of 84 hours; in 1900, 60 hours; in 1925, 50 hours and in 1950, 40
hours. And within the past two years the four-day workweek with its
30 to 32 hours of work has come to be discussed as if it would be gen-
erally adopted within the next decade or two.
Ten years ago the very word "automation" had not even been in-
vented. Five years, three years ago, electronic devices were just being
played with. Now they are beginning to have a tremendous effect on our
national economy and our individual lives. I wish I had time to tell you
about how automation is already being used by some industries, and
what some of the forecasts are for the future, especially as regards the
increased amount of leisure time for all the people of America. But let
me summarize what this country will face when automation is fully
adopted by asking the question John Diebold, editor of Automatic
Control raises. "Are we capable," he asks "of developing a culture
that does not depend upon work to give meaning to our lives?"
HIGHER STANDARD OF LIVING
An enormous increase in population and a tremendous expansion
in nonworking time are being accompanied by a rapidly rising national
economy and a constantly higher living standard.
118 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
The United States Department of Commerce in July, 1954 reported
that the 1953 national product reached a new peak of one billion dollars
a day or $365 billion in goods and services a year. Today it is running
at the annual rate of $370 billion. Total production in 1950, 1951, 1952
and 1953 set successive new records over the previous high achieved
at the peak of wartime production in 1944 when it reached $268 billion.
The Committee for Economic Development, a private research
organization, has predicted that by 1965, gross national product will
total $535 billion, an increase of 50 percent over present rates. Output
per manhour as estimated by the Federal Reserve has been steadily
increasing at an annual rate of 2 percent or more since 1947. There is
no sign that American industry, especially in the coming age of auto-
mation, cannot, at least, maintain that performance.
What does this mean in terms of the families of America? It means
simply this — in 1944, the average family had an income of $3,610 as
compared to $4,460 in 1950. In 1953, the average family income was
well in excess of $5,000. In 1929, only 31 percent of all American families
had incomes between $3,000 and $10,000 a year while in 1953, 58 percent
of all families had such incomes measured in dollars of like purchasing
power.
One million families, according to a book just issued by the editors
of Fortune magazine under the title "The Changing American Market,"
are crossing the $4,000 income figure a year and in five years a like
number will be crossing the $5,000 income line.
Business Week Magazine more than a year ago said, "spending money
on leisure is no longer considered an economic waste. In fact, the
future economy of America will be built upon leisure-time spending.
There is just so much food and clothing and shelter and other things
needed for bare existence. There is no foreseeable limit to what we need
and can use as our leisure time increases."
There can be no doubt that one of the major trends in living today
is leisure. It is a fact. How we are prepared to use it and what we do
with it will to a great extent determine the kind of people and the kind
of nation we will be in the years ahead.
I wish I could confidently say that the future American character
will be moulded in as desirable a way by the fact of leisure as it was by
the fact of wilderness and the frontier. I wish I could say open spaces
were available now to help the growth of the American character in the
same tradition as in pioneer America. We have time, money, and people
for leisure. But we have not yet developed an ethics of leisure, sufficient
leaders for leisure, and above all, adequate spaces to enjoy leisure
activities.
Open space for leisure living is essential for the continued growth
of the kind of American character we cherish. Without places to play,
a philosophy of recreation, an ethics of leisure, will be of little value.
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 119
The age of leisure will become a stunted and meaningless thing. Unless
an informed public aggressively insists on its right to adequate park
and other recreation areas, the vanishing wilderness and the vanishing
frontier will be joined by a vanishing opportunity for outdoor recreation.
How critical is the need for additional parks and open spaces? Let
me refer to an estimate of the National Resources Planning Board in
1942 that 4 million additional acres of state park land should be ac-
quired to meet the needs of the expanding population. By comparison,
between 1939 and 1952 only 500,000 acres were actually acquired.
Consider, for example, the latest Twentieth Century Fund report on
"America's Needs and Resources." They report that in 1950 an addi-
tional 276,000 acres of park land were needed by urban residents to
bring their cities up to the basic standard. Very few of these needed
acres have been acquired.
At the national level attendance at national parks and recreation
areas has increased enormously. For example, in 1916 when the National
Park Service was created by law, only 358,000 people visited the areas
under its supervision. Last year the attendance was 48 million. Visitors
to the Corps of Engineer projects increased from 10 million in 1949 to
26 million in 1951 and 53,848,000 in 1954. Similar amazing figures
could be cited for all the other recreation areas of various kinds under
the administration of Federal agencies.
According to Conrad Wirth, Director of the National Park Service,
it will require two and a half times the present appropriation over a
ten-year period to correct the present bad campground conditions and
double the present facilities.
The problem of open space, its development and maintenance at
the national level, have received much national publicity in the past
few years. It will need much more before the average American will
insist on better provisions for his leisure in the national parks, forests
and other recreation areas under Federal jurisdiction.
But what is happening at the local level receives only local publicity.
So far, there has been little national publicity given to the critical need
for new park areas and open spaces in cities and towns and suburban
areas. And yet in city after city, and suburb after suburb, the com-
petition for the use of the remaining open space is becoming tremendous.
Existing park land is being sought for fire stations, super-highways,
juvenile detention homes, public housing and other public purposes as
well as for private use. At the same time, new neighborhoods are being
built over night by developers and subdividers. A recent article in the
New York Herald Tribune reports :
"All this points up what community planners in all the suburban areas are
emphasizing as the basic need — land acquisition for future growth. They are
in agreement that the localities themselves — the counties, cities, towns and
villages — must act soon to acquire the land sites for playgrounds which may not
120 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
be needed for years to come. Development is moving so fast that available
recreational sites are vanishing overnight."
Professional park and recreation people, representatives of citizens
boards and committees must help alert the American people to the
very serious need for the protection of existing parks, water resources,
conservation areas, and other recreation sites, and for the expansion of
these areas to meet the new need of a leisure age. Informed professionals
and civic leaders need to be joined by business and industry in a massive
campaign to assure adequate parks and open spaces for the future. The
stake of private enterprise in the new leisure is great.
The Disappearing Countryside
in Metropolitan Areas
C. McKIM NORTON, Vice-President, Regional Plan Association, New York, N. Y.
IN THIS brief address I hope to establish just two points for your
consideration as citizens concerned with parks and open spaces.
First, that our metropolitan urban areas in which more than half of
the Nation's people now live are expanding very rapidly, devouring
natural countryside that we have taken for granted would somehow
always be available "once one got out of town."
Second, that the new kind of automobile age city which we are
building with an almost frenzied rapidity, requires a new concept of
parks and open space reservations as bold and imaginative as the
original city park movement of a hundred years ago.
Let me illustrate my first point from the development facts of our
New York metropolitan region which includes parts of northern New
Jersey, southern New York State, Connecticut's Fairfield County and
Long Island.
In the first 300 years of this metropolitan area's development (from
1626 to 1925) some 420 square miles of land were covered with residential
development of an urban character. In the last 30 years 580 additional
square miles of urban housing were required. If present trends con-
tinue, the next 20 years will see 600 more square miles of today's open
land in our region required to house the 4 million people the Regional
Plan Association estimates will be added to our New York metropolitan
population by 1975.
In terms of population, the first 9 million people were housed in
420 square miles; the next 6 million required 580 square miles; the
predicted 4 million more by 1975 will use up 600 additional square miles.
It takes about 3 times as much land to house people in metropolitan
cities today as it took our ancestors.
If one adds the land which will be required for all the other uses
besides housing — school sites, factory sites, shopping centers, express-
ways and the host of other uses of land — by 1970 we can predict a con-
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 121
tinuous carpet of urban development stretching 70 miles east-west and
40 miles north of New York's City Hall.
Our southern sector may be expected to remain open. It's the
Atlantic Ocean.
The huge central part of our metropolitan area — some 2800 square
miles — was land rich a few years ago. It is becoming land poor with
amazing rapidity. One of our developers alone builds homes at the rate
of two square miles a year.
The nature of this urban growth is known to you all. The tight
packed central city of 1900 has simply exploded into what used to be
called its suburbs. As the flow of asphalt and front lawns erupts into
the countryside, the first sign of things to come is the neo-suburbanite
with his station wagon and his willingness to spend up to an hour twice
daily in his journey to work. He settles on scattered acreage lots with
plenty of spaces between houses. Very soon, however, the empty acre
next door has a house on it. A shopping center and a factory appear
in the vicinity encouraged by a new expressway. With local employment,
some of which may be in the next town, comes the demand for smaller
lots. The short cycle from suburbanization to urbanization is complete.
As city planners, we have seen many improvements in urban design
standards. The garden apartment built to standards of useable open
space is better than its six-story predecessor. Lot sizes are now larger.
There is progress in small parks and playgrounds. Subdivision layouts
are better. Factories are now set in park-like surroundings. Parkways
take us pleasantly through densily built-up areas. These are all gains
but they must not hide our principal loss — the open countryside, the
relatively undeveloped open spaces — the land used for nothing except
enjoyment of jack rabbits and human beings outdoors in natural sur-
roundings— as they say in New England, the land which, thank God,
separates your town from my town.
Farming, of course, yields readily to urban development. Topography
and swampland which once served as barriers to development today
succumb to the bulldozer, the split level house, the municipal dump
and new techniques of land fill for factories.
Once one could walk or bicycle out of town on a Sunday afternoon.
Today one can motor into the country on a Sunday (if you don't mind
the fight to get back Sunday night). Tomorrow one may predict a trip
to the countryside will be an overnight expedition.
In presenting my first point I have not exaggerated the picture.
The figures and your own observations add up to the same story. As
the New York region has grown, it has spread itself all over the land-
scape. And the same thing is happening to cities right across the country.
One feature of the new metropolitan city is that it is so deceptively
open in character. It looks as though it should end any minute and
give way to real country. But it never does.
122 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
The 1951 Edition of the New York Walk Book summarizes the
situation when it states, "A comparison of the walks described in the
first (1923) edition of this Walk Book with those available to the general
public at the time this present edition is being written, indicates only
too clearly how rapidly private land is being built up or closed. It looks
as though it will be only a few years before the tramper will be largely
confined to national, state and county parks, reservations and forests
for his recreation." This is the difference between 1923 and 1951.
I am convinced that this overwhelming blanket of urbanization
cannot be relieved by any other means known to us today short of public
acquisition of land as park and open space reservation.
Zoning and subdivision control, between them, may slow down the
rate of close development, and may improve the quality of ultimate
development, but the police power is simply not a constitutional means
of reserving large areas of open space for public use.
Since 1925 about 35,000 acres of large park lands have been publicly
acquired in our metropolitan area. This sounds like a lot until you
realize that it is not much more land than has been used in the same
period for rights of way for the arterial highway system — for express-
ways, parkways, major highway widening and clover leaf intersections.
Furthermore, 20 percent of this new large park acreage is located within
New York City, thanks to the energy and foresight of Robert Moses.
Much of the balance is concentrated in the mountainous northwest
sector of the region, instead of where we need it most in the rapidly
growing flatlands.
A hundred years ago against almost insuperable odds and at great
cost, our predecessors "brought the country into the city" — New York's
central park, for example. How can our generation rise to the new task
of preventing the city from overrunning the countryside with block
upon block of continuous urban development?
Where we thought of central city parks in hard won acres, must we
not aim for outer area land reservations in terms of square miles? Should
we not make metropolitan plans to acquire many mountain areas, un-
developed water courses, large swamps and, where necessary, ribbons
or squares of flat lands so as to keep some of the metropolitan country-
side out of the clutches of the expanding city?
Our plans must be scaled to the automobile era. Fifteen minutes
travel time equals 10 miles. Within 10 miles of everyone in our great
cities there should be a public land reservation large enough to let
people escape from the automobile, the bulldozer and the no trespassing
sign.
Our plans must be made and executed soon or else the metropolitan
countryside of which I speak will be lost forever. One can redevelop a
slum, but one cannot recreate natural countryside once development
has passed over it.
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 123
To carry out metropolitan land reservation plans will require county,
state and even federal action. Private action such as the Nature Con-
servancy is invaluable. Few municipalities in metropolitan fringe areas,
however, have either the understanding, the will or the financial ability
to act before great opportunities are lost. Until the urban people come,
the country people cannot be expected to anticipate urban needs and
requirements. If nothing is done before the non-farming population
arrives, it is already too late to act. The prime mover in acquiring
metropolitan land reservations must, I believe, be the States themselves
or metropolitan park districts created by the States.
Two recent suggestions have been made for new techniques of
achieving and maintaining land reservations.
One is to combine the principles of land option and installment
buying to the park acquisition problem.
Another suggestion is to reward low intensity uses with a tax dif-
ferential.
Whether new methods are evolved, or time-tested park acquisition
by purchase or condemnation is used, the object in view is simple
and urgent. A new park and land reservation movement to reserve a
reasonable amount of suitably located countryside in our growing sub-
urban areas is one of the most important and urgent problems facing
the nation's metropolitan areas.
Our Federal City Parks
GILMORE D. CLARKE, New York City
WASHINGTON is unique among the important cities of the world;
it has grown, more or less consistently, about a basic pattern
of streets and parks conceived at the beginning of its existence. The
site for the Nation's Capital was selected by President Washington and
he wisely provided for the preparation of a plan for its development.
The plan of 1791, prepared by Charles Pierre L'Enfant, was conceived
with a view toward arranging the important elements in a manner to
provide beauty, dignity, and convenience in a city destined to become
the capital of a new country in "the new world." The fact that the same
broad basic conception persists to this day is testimony to the wisdom
and the foresight of its makers.
The plan of 1791 has been revised from time to time as the population
of the City has increased and as new means of transportation have
been developed. In 1901 the Senate Park Commission made a careful
study of the L'Enfant plan and adjusted it to the demands of the City
of that day and, insofar as possible, to the anticipated growth and
development. This plan, as it was applied to the central area of the
City, was based upon the fundamental precepts laid down by L'Enfant.
124 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
In 1910 President Taft appointed seven men, "well qualified judges
of the Fine Arts," to serve as members of the newly authorized Com-
mission of Fine Arts. This body, without power of veto over the acts
of legislative authority, alone preserved the integrity of the plan of
Washington until 1926, when President Coolidge, by authority of the
Congress, appointed the members of an official planning body, the
National Capital Park and Planning Commission. They have guided
the program for the development of the District of Columbia in co-
operation with other agencies including the Commissioners of the
District of Columbia, the office of National Capital Parks of the Na-
tional Park Service (since 1933), and the Commission of Fine Arts.
These agencies of the Government have cooperated for more than a
quarter of a century in the development of plans for the Capital City.
When authority has overlapped, as has obtained frequently, these
agencies have arranged to have their representatives meet together so
that conflicting views might be presented, discussed and, whenever
possible, resolved. The plans of each agency are subject to review and
comment by the other agencies with the view toward preserving the
best interests of the people of the Nation.
Uppermost in the minds of those charged with the planning of
Washington should be the fact that this, the Capital City of the Nation,
belongs to the people of the whole Nation and that it is visited by people
from all of the States and from every country in the world. Only the
broadest views should be taken with respect to the planning of new
elements in the City Plan; nothing should be done that would tend to
destroy values created over the period of more than 150 years since the
City was born; and nothing should be done unless it is thoroughly re-
viewed and endorsed by every interested agency so as to insure the
preservation of those values that have given distinction to the Capital
of the United States.
We cannot retain a distinguished city if we continue to make errors
of expediency which usually prove to be costly and of which some
probably never can be corrected. We must guard against the immediate
satisfaction of what may seem to be exigencies at the moment because
the results may develop into follies as viewed ten years or more from
now. We must keep uppermost in our minds the fact that we are plan-
ning for the growth of a city. Changes will be inevitable as the social,
economic, and political factors change, but the changes should be
planned and guided by wise men with broad vision to the end that we
may leave for the generations to come a city better than we found it.
It is essential that any changes made in the plan of the City be
made with due regard for the value of the natural beauty that still
exists, as well as of the beauty created by the hand of man. All so-
called improvements, whether they be to facilitate the movement of
automotive traffic, to correct past shortsighted housing developments,
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 125
to improve public utilities, or to provide new space for public buildings,
should be planned in a manner to preserve the irreplaceable values in
the form of natural endowments, parks, great avenues, distinguished
monuments and buildings, all of which, throughout the years have
become important elements in a great and distinguished heritage of
this Nation, its Capital.
"Washington," said ex-President Hoover, "is not only the Nation's
Capital, it is the symbol of America. By its dignity we stimulate pride
in our country." Nothing should be done in the development of Wash-
ington which will in any way lower its dignity, destroy its beauty, or
compromise its importance.
The proposals of the Highway Program of the Commission of the
District of Columbia will not solve the overall problem created by the
motor vehicle. In the National Capital Planning Commission's Mono-
graph Number 5, "Moving People and Goods," there is this observation:
"Parts of the problem are interrelated; it is not a street problem, a transit
problem or a parking problem. Improvements are needed and a number of
plans and proposals have been made. The concentration of so much Federal
activity in and around the central business area has produced a rush-hour
congestion of vehicles at certain intersections that cannot be handled expedi-
tiously by the present street system. This congestion and delay is both annoying
and expensive.
"Solutions can come from four directions:
1. Prevention of further concentration of Federal employment establish-
ments in the congested area together with a better distribution of such employ-
ment centers over an extended central area.
2. Development of a thoroughly efficient transit system.
3. Maintenance or development of good residential areas within walking
distance of the central area and satellite towns at decentralized Government
centers.
4. Development of a plan for improved major highways, expressways,
freeways, and parkways, throughout the metropolitan area for use by mass-
transportation vehicles and private automobiles supplemented by an adequate
and convenient system of parking facilities."
As to the prevention of further concentration of Federal establish-
ments in the central area, we need only cite as an example the near
strangulation of cross-town arteries in mid-town New York to em-
phasize the wisdom of such a preventive program. Although New York
and Washington are not comparable in size or in population, there
should be no mistaking the seriousness of the problem for Washington.
That mid-town New York can function at all is the result of one thing;
millions of sub-surface rapid-transit trips are made daily. Not even
the beginnings of such a transit facility, in the view of those qualified
to judge, would be financially justifiable in Washington in the fore-
seeable future.
There are, in this matter of concentration, corrective as well as pre-
ventive actions that can and should be taken. I refer to the removal
126 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
and replacement of temporary buildings. Over 37,000 Federal employees,
and the automobiles that they drive to and from work, move in and
out of the congested area because of Government activities housed in
temporary buildings. The long and sustained effort to remove these
disfigurements from the parks of the Central Composition came to an
abrupt halt at the start of World War II when a new accumulation of
temporary structures was begun. Their removal is still essential to the
proper development and use of the central-area parks and to the dignity
of the Nation's Capital. The significance of these observations lies in
their relation to the long view of the highway planning program. It
may be assumed that the reasonable economic life span of a major
highway structure is probably not less than forty years. In our judgment,
nothing should be planned now on the basis of an abiding uncertainty
as to the disposition of these temporary buildings. They should be
disposed of early in the economic life of any project worth serious
consideration.
The transit system is, of course, not in the province of the National
Capital Parks but it should be a matter of concern to the park admin-
istrators and to all others concerned with the handling of motor vehicle
traffic. The urban traffic problem cannot be solved without adequate
mass transportation. The need for better transit facilities in the Wash-
ington metropolitan area should be emphasized. Vast expenditures for
highway improvements will be wasted in substantial measure if this
aspect of the problem is not faced squarely.
Obviously something is wrong with the transit system. There is a
high level of Federal employment, great activity in the central area,
a growing population, and a large number of persons living within a
reasonable range for a transit system. Yet it is reliably reported that
the number of transit riders steadily declines and the private automobile,
as a commuter vehicle, is used in increasing numbers. As the Planning
Commission points out, this is expensive to the commuter and an ex-
cessively wasteful use of the public thoroughfares. This cannot be
blamed primarily on a lack of adequate highways over which the transit
vehicles can operate. On any basis of fair comparison, Washington's
highway facilities rank high.
The Planning Commission's reference to the maintenance and de-
velopment of attractive residential areas near the central area is im-
portant. In the context of the Commission's Monograph, the observa-
tion refers to travel afoot. We would expand the implications because
we believe wholesome living situations in central-city areas must be
maintained as one way of saving our great cities. There is much talk
of decentralization that may be a confused reference to normal growth.
The facts are that, nationwide, the trend of population movement
continues to be from the rural areas to the urban areas. There is a pro-
nounced movement to central-city areas, especially by older people.
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 127
It would be urban suicide to write off the centers of the cities. They
hold attractions, services, and concentrated wealth that cannot be re-
placed by any suburb. If these high rateables are allowed to decline,
where is the money coming from to provide the public facilities that
the commuter uses on his daily trips to the city? This is a logical intro-
duction to the Commission's reference to adequate facilities for the
motor vehicle. The motor vehicle is essential to our urban life, but it is
not an unmixed blessing; its use and misuse are making our in-town
areas untenable. Arterial use of local streets is disrupting residential
and commercial value and is an infringement on the rights that normally
would accrue to the owners of abutting property.
The automobile parking situation is of special concern to the National
Capital Parks. The day-long storage of automobiles along both sides
of nearly all drives in the central-area parks is a disgrace. To the people
of other cities some things are sacred. In New York, for example, the
administration does not permit Central Park in Manhattan or Prospect
Park in Brooklyn or other parks to be so defaced. This kind of parking
should be prohibited in Washington, but it cannot be unless all aspects
of the problem are faced; namely, the provision of adequate parking
spaces within the City and as well on the periphery of the City (the
latter where they may be served by transit lines), the expansion of
transit facilities, and the demolition of the Munitions, Navy, and other
temporary buildings which occupy park lands.
Traffic engineers have said that congestion tends to be self limiting.
This is simply another way of saying that the public patience wears
thin and that the public seeks ways of avoiding the congestion. Often
these voluntary actions display a lot of common sense. Such an action
is the growing trend to park private passenger cars at periphery points
served by mass transportation lines. We have been informed that
this is taking place in Washington but in a haphazard manner. The car
owner is finding this convenient, but the growing number of cars parked
throughout the business day where they don't belong, along park drives
and in the quiet residential streets of the periphery neighborhoods, is a
blight. But this problem can be solved. For example, in Philadelphia,
there are in operation now "park-and-ride" services managed by the
Transit company; one fee pays for car parking and transit trips. This
has worked well and the Philadelphia City Planning Commission is
currently planning for the expansion of these services.
As custodians of the Parks in the Central Composition, the ad-
ministrators of the National Capital Parks play the part of hosts to
the millions of tourists who visit Washington each year. The Chamber
of Commerce should be interested in the fact that this automobile
parking congestion seriously mars the tourist's enjoyment of his Wash-
ington visit because these areas constitute the major tourist attractions.
It seems obvious that all agencies concerned in this problem should
128 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
join forces in an effort to secure for the Parking Agency legislative
authority to acquire sites in the central and on periphery areas for park-
ing lots and garages to be built and operated by private enterprise. The
Engineering News Record has reported, "District of Columbia Officials
waived 22 zoning and building-code regulations to permit construction
of the Washington garage." Ruilding-code modifications are essential
to any realistic parking garage program. It would be regrettable not
to follow this forward step by a concerted effort to gain legislative
authority for the power of eminent domain. The Parking Agency has
operated so far without it, but it is illogical to suppose that it can con-
tinue to do so effectively. Easily acquired sites will become more and
more scarce in the central area. Private enterprise is powerless to con-
demn and by its own estimate the Parking Agency, as now equipped,
is in a race that it can't win. Legislative assistance is required.
The attractive little booklet, published by the National Park Service
and entitled "National Capital Parks," tells us that there are 750
reservations totaling approximately 42,000 acres of land in the District
of Columbia and in the immediate environs, including the Chesapeake
and Ohio Canal which extends from the City to Cumberland, Maryland.
In the time left at my disposal I want to tell you a little concerning
recent developments which threaten important parts of Washington's
park system, established by the Congress on July 16, 1790, almost
165 years ago. There have been many earlier threats to the parks; some
of them have materialized and whole parks or parts of parks have been
destroyed or crudely modified to make broader and straighter ways
for the automobile or to provide sites for buildings and other structures,
while other threats have been met by sufficient public resistance so
that certain threatened park areas remain intact, at least for the present.
If we are to maintain the park system of Washington to serve the
purposes for which it was established, then eternal vigilance and a good
deal of patient but vigorous effort, on the part of those who realize the
need for preserving the integrity and the beauty of our parks, is necessary.
There are those in public office hereabouts who believe that easy
movement of the automobile should take precedence over every other
factor in the planning and the use of land. They plan roads along the
lines of least resistance and frequently those lines lead over and across
lands dedicated for park purposes under the jurisdiction of the National
Capital Parks. It is an easy matter for these gentlemen to plan roads
and bridges in unbuilt areas where the land will cost nothing; seldom
do they appraise park lands in terms of their priceless recreational
value, their beauty, their use for those intangible ends which cannot
be measured in a practical way.
One of the most serious of all attacks upon the integrity of the plan
of the great Central Composition of Washington has been made recently
by the Commissioners of the District of Columbia. As most of you
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 129
know, they have planned a bridge across the Potomac just north of
and within the shadow of the Arlington Memorial Bridge. They first
planned this crossing at a point further north, opposite "E" Street,
where it would have cut Theodore Roosevelt Island in half and com-
pletely destroyed this park area for the purposes for which it was dedi-
cated by the Congress in May, 1932. When the Commissioners were
defeated in their attempt to destroy Theodore Roosevelt Island they
"compromised" by selecting a site for the Potomac River crossing
extending westerly from Constitution Avenue. The controversy is still
on and, in spite of a reasonable and thoroughly practicable alternative,
the substitution of a tunnel for a bridge on this same site, the District
Commissioners remain adamant and insist upon a bridge crossing.
If the parks of the Nation's Capital are to be preserved against the
continuing attacks which threaten them, including a proposed inner-
loop expressway, an extension of an expressway through Rock Creek
Park, as well as the destruction of the park lands along the Potomac,
including the waters of the River and Theodore Roosevelt Island, it
would seem prudent if the authority vested in the District Commission-
ers to carry out such plans be voided by the Congress and the authority
to plan and to replan the parks of this City placed in the office of the
National Capital Parks of the National Park Service, where it belongs.
Mr. Elihu Root, in a letter written in 1910 to the late Theodore
W. Noyes of this City, wrote :
Untold injury is done by the mistakes that are so frequently made by
people of perfectly good intentions, who, without having studied the subject
comprehensively, think this, that, or the other thing would be a good thing
to do. Things done that way are usually wrong. The beauty of Washington, its
superiority over other American cities, comes from the fact that it was started
with a plan.
Let us adhere as closely as possible to a plan which a few men are
bent on destroying.
Metropolitan Planning for Parks
and Open Spaces
T. LED YARD BLAKEMAN, Area Planning Commission, Detroit, Mich.
AMONG the wide range of problems faced by the people concerned
with state and regional planning and development, there is none
which is more important nor more difficult to solve than that of obtain-
ing and retaining open spaces in our great metropolitan areas. In
addition to providing active and passive recreation for the mass of
urban dwellers, these open spaces serve numerous other functions. One
of the most important is the delimitation of communities within the
sprawling mass of metropolitan development, so that the plan has some
form and is composed of recognizable entities wherein people can enjoy
at least some of the benefits of small town life.
130 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
In many areas of the country the metropolitan mass or sprawl is
broken up by large streams or by steep hillsides in such manner that
the planner can with relatively little difficulty produce a livable com-
munity pattern. In the Great Lakes Basin, however, and in many
other areas of the country we are faced by a complete absence of such
natural dividers. There is nothing to prevent anyone building anything
within a twenty mile radius of the Detroit City Hall. Furthermore,
it is exceedingly difficult to explain to the subdividers and the local
governments why they should not do just that.
With the help of Ladislas Segoe of Cincinnati, we have prepared a
land use plan for the two thousand square miles in the Detroit Met-
ropolitan Area. In addition to major industrial and residential areas,
we show a network of parks, public lands and also reservations for
agriculture. The parks and public lands proposals have not been studied
in detail. For the most part they are a rounding out of existing public
lands and plans already proposed by operating park agencies. The
additions made by the Regional Planning Commission are of two types:
First, flood plains which we want to hold open to take care of natural
drainage; and second, green belts connecting these stream beds in such
manner as to delimit communities. It is only recently that we have
begun to attempt what might be called a regional parks and open
spaces plan.
Our approach to the land planning job was first to tie down the needed
major industrial areas because manufacturing has the most rigid site
requirements. Then we related the necessary residential communities
to the work areas attempting, where possible, to retain interstices of
agricultural open space and the stream beds and green belts mentioned
above. Having thus determined on the basis of trends and design the
number and location of the people to be served we are proceeding to plan
for sewer, water, highways, retail stores, parks and other services.
In addition to being a valuable service the parks and other open
spaces are vital to the development and preservation of a livable and
efficient community pattern. We, therefore, made the study of open
space needs one of our first service studies. The Planner, Bob Carpenter,
and Jim Miller, Associate Planner, have been working with a large
advisory committee of recreation people for some time now. The results
are very discouraging. We figured that in order to arrive at the demand
for Metropolitan Parks, we would first determine the needs for all types
of recreation area; then we would find out how well these needs were
being met; subtract the supply from the demand; design a system that
made up the metropolitan deficit; and put QED on the plan.
Sounds simple enough. Time consuming, yes, but basically simple
in general outline. We knew how many people were to be served and
we had an inventory of the land theoretically available for open de-
velopment. It was not too hard to find out what lands were now in
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 131
public ownership at all levels of government. Very quickly, however,
we discovered that on any reasonable basis the municipalities and
townships were terribly deficient in the type of recreation area they
should provide. Two of the three counties have no parks. The third
county is not only deficient in park area but because of the local deficit
the county parks are being developed to serve the intensive recreation
purposes which should be met locally. This has shoved the county park
demand onto the shoulders of the Huron-Clinton Metropolitan Park
Authority. They find themselves under pressure not only to come in a
little closer to the center but also to develop active recreation facilities
in areas thirty to fifty miles out. State parks fifty to seventy-five miles
out are also feeling these pressures.
This means that we have a fight on our hands because parks are in
shortest supply in the areas where pressure for residential development
is greatest. We have plenty of public land fifty or sixty miles from
Detroit. It is like trying to establish a major airport. You can always
get plenty of land where you don't need it. The problem is to get the
right amount in the right location. When you start telling people they
must sacrifice their development rights for the good of the public you
have to have some very convincing reasons.
In the area of active local recreation we have some fairly demon-
strable facts and figures, but in metropolitan requirements there seems
to be a dearth of criteria. How much picnic, swimming, strolling or sitting
area is needed at various distances from the population concentrations?
Can and should we get these areas close enough so that they can be
used after work? If so, how do we do it without bankrupting the metrop-
olis^
It seems to us that the basic need is for some well substantiated
standards. We have checked with national recreation and park or-
ganizations; we have checked with other metropolitan agencies; and
we have come up with only one definite fact, and that is that nobody
has substantiated standards for the amount and location of metropolitan
parks. One further conclusion we have come to is that everybody would
like to have them. As a result we are trying to get funds with which to
retain a parks consultant to set up a study.
The objective of such a research study would be to investigate
existing recreational principles and standards that are commonly being
used in metropolitan areas — including urban, rural and regional stand-
ards.
There are three major items to be considered in this study. They are:
(1) the trend in leisure time — present and future, (2) the place that
recreational activity fills in this leisure time and (3) the resulting space
and location requirements for recreation.
The trend of leisure time could best be investigated by delving into
the reduction of working hours. This would require some study of or
132 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
expert opinion on new methods of production, the rising standard of
living, movement of the population (centralization and dispersion),
and the increasing use of the automobile which has extended the range
of recreation possibilities for the average family. It is not enough to
investigate just the past trends in the amount of leisure time the Ameri-
can people have, this leisure time has to be projected into the future
to get a realistic picture on which to base recreational standards.
The second phase of the problem is concerned with determining
what part of the existing and projected leisure time will be taken care
of by the recreational function. To find this out the desires and recrea-
tional patterns that are growing and changing should be investigated.
These patterns result from such factors as the changing composition of
the population which include an increasing proportion of older people,
a higher level of formal education, and the decreasing size of the average
American family, more individual transportation, and many others.
Only after this leisure time and the changing recreational function
are investigated in detail can they be expressed in land needs quanti-
tatively and qualitatively. It might be possible to show substantial
economies and improved recreational results, (better use of the rec-
reational dollar) and a more satisfied public by a more realistic pattern
of recreational land in metropolitan areas. Also, a closer relationship of
programs to land economics would be possible. To do all this, the study
would have to find out what people do with their leisure time and in
what recreational activities people want to participate. Desire sampling
might be required to achieve the goals of the study.
The needs for recreation should be determined by age groups, eco-
nomic groups and by type of recreation areas such as intensive, extensive
and water using. These needs should be further defined as to categories
of frequency of use (a) daily use — with varying walking distance of
those expected to use them, (b) special purpose areas — large general
parks, etc., (c) one day outing use, (d) week-end use, and (e) longer va-
cation. It should then be possible to determine what types of recrea-
tion should logically be handled by a metropolitan park system.
Assuming that we know what we want in the way of open spaces
how can we get them? This is the $64 question. I am a great believer
in knowing what you want and trying to get it regardless of the ob-
stacles. If you don't have a plan, you don't stand a chance, so I quess
preparing a parks and open space plan is the first step. In fact the mere
existence of the plan will get some private donations and public appro-
priations. These, however, will usually account for only a small per-
centage of the total open space needed.
Keeping private property in agriculture may some day be possible
through zoning or something like the British system where the govern-
ment acquires development rights. This is pretty far off, however, in
this country. In the interim we may be able to accomplish something
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 133
by withholding the public services prerequisite to urbanization.
All large metropolitan areas either have or are working toward park
water, sewer and transportation authorities. If these county or met-
ropolitan agencies could be convinced of the importance of following a
land use plan they could carry out much of it by the way they placed
their services.
Another great ally whose potential assistance has hardly been tapped
is the Public Health administrator. Strict enforcement of septic tank
restrictions for instance to prevent development in areas of non-perme-
able soils would help greatly to hold certain areas open.
Finally, we have a pretty good tool in much of our state enabling
legislation for local planning and zoning. The legal power to hold land
open without buying it is not too strong. On the other hand many
communities have been able to develop quite a nice park system by
merely showing it on a plan and buying only when it was threatened
by development. It might be possible to apply this official map tech-
nique to county, state and even metropolitan plans.
But, we must have some substantiated criteria before we can use
any of these means of acquisition.
Enrichment of Living
STERLING S. WINANS, President, American Recreation Society. Read by
MILO CHRISTIANSEN, Superintendent of Recreation, District of Columbia
PARKS and open spaces are the physical interpretation of man's
seeking after enrichment of his every day living.
The American Recreation Society and its 2400 members salutes
the American Planning and Civic Association in the calling of a National
Citizens Planning Conference on Parks and Open Spaces. The Society
has had the privilege of joining in cooperative projects with almost all
of the sponsors of this conference. These organizations have demon-
strated time and again their sincere desire to help provide for the en-
richment of living in this nation.
This conference has the opportunity to make big plans for parks
and open spaces which will affect the recreation of millions of people.
It has been said that:
Recreation is an individual or a group experience motivated primarily by
the pleasure derived therefrom. It takes many forms and may be a planned or
a spontaneous activity. It is one of man's principal opportunities for enrichment
of living and is the natural expression of certain human interests and needs.
(Adopted by the State of California Recreation Commission September 11,
1953.)
It is our purpose to report to the National Citizens Planning Con-
ference on a significant project now under way in California. This under-
taking will be of especial interest to you since California representatives
134 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
of several of your sponsoring organizations are directly involved in the
success of this venture: American Institute of Park Executives, Cali-
fornia Society; National Recreation Association; American Institute of
Planners; and the California Recreation Society which is affiliated with
the American Recreation Society.
Need for a Guide for Planning. The tremendous population increases
in California, the fast-growing fringe areas of urban communities, the
development of residential subdivisions in areas heretofore considered
rural, the need for redevelopment in older portions of metropolitan
centers — all are urgent reasons why state and local jurisdictions are
seeking land and water areas for public recreation.
Guiding principles and graded standards are necessary and should
be formulated. The best experience of some communities should be
made available to all communities. People need and are demanding
land and water areas for purposes of recreation in older metropolitan
centers, in the fast-growing fringe areas and in urban areas heretofore
considered rural. That planning and recreation agencies can make
sound recommendations for the type and number of land and water
areas to be acquired, a planning guide is necessary. Principles, criteria
and standards are urgently needed which reflect the (1) topographic and
climatic variations, (2) variety in natural resources, and (3) differences
in density of population; age distribution and family income of com-
munities. The guide must be applicable to communities in mountain,
valley and desert regions and to populated centers along ocean beaches
and inland waterways. Such a guide is not available. The California
Committee on Planning for Recreation and Park Areas and Facilities
proposes to help meet this need.
A year ago, President Eisenhower, in his housing message to Congress,
brought into sharp focus the planning of our cities and towns. Pointing
to slum conditions and all that they mean in human misery, crime and
expenditure of public funds, he highlighted the futility of merely ap-
propriating funds to clear slums after they happen. He suggested that
every means should be used to prevent slums and that the principal
tool available for such a task is competent city planning, both in the
laying out of new urban areas and in preserving existing areas against
becoming slums.
Sponsors. The survey of existing standards and formulation of a
guide for planning is directed by a committee of sponsors. Members of
the sponsoring committee represent statewide voluntary organizations
and agencies, and agencies of state government; as well as national
organizations:
Voluntary Organizations:
American Institute of Architects
American Institute of Park Executives, California Society
American Institute of Planners
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 135
California Association for Health Education, Physical Education
and Recreation
California Association of Landscape Architects
California Recreation Society
County Supervisors Association of California
League of California Cities
National Recreation Association
State of California :
Recreation Commission
Department of Education
Department of Natural Resources, Division of Reaches and Parks
University of California, Department of City and Regional Plan-
ning, and Department of Architecture, Berkeley
The sponsoring committee formulated and submitted a request to
the Rosenberg Foundation of San Francisco and procured funds to
finance the project, including a survey and formulation of a guide for
planning. A grant of $25,000 was made to the Committee to help
finance a one-year study. Sponsoring organizations are supplementing
the grant with services in kind amounting to $9,000, making an invest-
ment of $34,000 in the planning of open spaces for the leisure of people.
Dr. Josephine Randall, formerly superintendent of recreation in
San Francisco has been employed as project director. Planning tech-
nicians and a research writer will assist. George Hjelte, General Man-
ager, Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks, and Paul
Oppermann, San Francisco Planning Director, have been employed as
consultants. Upon completion of the staff work, the sponsoring com-
mittee must assume the responsibility for the approval of the guide
and will then recommend the guide to state organizations for adoption.
The committee of sponsors has three primary objectives well in mind:
1. To conduct a comprehensive survey and study of the needs,
experience and best practice in California communities, as related to
planning for the acquisition and development of recreation and park
areas and facilities under public ownership in urban and populated
centers.
2. To formulate a guide containing principles, criteria and graded
standards for the planning of public recreation areas and facilities.
3. To present these principles, criteria and standards in a guide
appropriate for adoption by the Committee and by a Statewide Ad-
visory Council on Planning for Recreation and Park Areas and Facilities,
and by
Organizations representing agencies of local government;
Recreation, park and planning boards;
Statewide, regional and local voluntary planning bodies;
Professional societies in the recreation and planning fields;
Private consulting firms in the planning field; and
136 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
Interested agencies and organizations.
Project Method. The method of conducting the project, under direct-
ion of the sponsoring committee, consists of the following:
1. To determine the essential types and number of recreation areas
and facilities needed in urban communities and neighborhoods.
Assemble and analyze previous studies on the recreation interest,
habits and needs of people, which studies have been conductd by uni-
versities, colleges, state agencies and voluntary organizations.
Survey and analyze the number and types of recreation and park
areas and facilities existent in communities of various population ranges.
2. To define and describe recreational land and water areas and
facilities suited to neighborhoods, districts (portion of a larger city),
communities, regions (portion of one or more counties) and counties.
Types and number of land and water areas and facilities needed will
be related to factors such as:
Authority granted in state enabling legislation, including re-
development and urban renewal procedures;
Availability of raw land areas;
Cost of development and recurring maintenance;
Intensity of social need;
Natural or artificial barriers;
Population density and age of population in a given center;
Proximity of natural recreation resources;
Topography and climatic conditions;
Traffic load and pattern.
3. To collect information on best experience and practice of Cali-
fornia Communities in planning for the acquisition and development of
recreation and park areas and facilities:
Make an analysis of principles, criteria and standards referred to in
recreation studies and master plans of California communities;
Analyze standards referred to in publications of state and national
recreation and planning agencies.
4. To formulate and submit a preliminary guide for planning to the
sponsoring committee for analysis, and for analysis and recommendation
by the advisory committee.
5. To revise the guide, taking cognizance of the revisions recom-
mended by the sponsoring committee, and resubmit the guide for ap-
proval of the sponsoring committee.
6. To collect sample layouts of recreation and park areas and facili-
ties, including sketches, photographs and plans of areas and facilities
which illustrate guiding principles, criteria and standards.
7. To prepare a final report to be submitted to the sponsoring com-
mittee for publication.
Advisory Council
The Advisory Council on Planning for Recreation and Park Areas
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 137
and Facilities has been appointed by the sponsoring committee and is
composed of at least 60 members representing :
Lay recreation and planning boards in state and local government;
Professional societies in the recreation and planning fields;
Departments of planning, public administration, and architecture
of universities and colleges;
Professional recreation and park administrators and planning
directors;
Statewide, regional and local voluntary planning bodies;
Private consulting firms in the planning field;
Interested agencies and organizations.
The advisory council will meet at least twice during the continuance
of the project, to advise the sponsoring committee, by:
1. Reviewing the method employed in the project;
2. Reviewing principles, criteria and standards proposed by the
sponsoring committee;
3. Recommending approval or revision of principles, criteria and
standards;
4. Encouraging the adoption and use of the guide.
Final Report
The completed guide will be published by the State of California
Recreation Commission. It may include sample layouts of recreation
and park areas and facilities illustrating guiding principles and standards
approved by the sponsoring committee.
Complimentary copies of the final report will be made available to
the members of the sponsoring committee and advisory council, and to
interested agencies and organizations.
Agencies and organizations having representation on the sponsoring
committee and the advisory council are not bound to adopt the guiding
principles and graded standards as approved by the sponsoring com-
mittee. It is the obligation of the sponsoring committee to present the
principles and standards to interested statewide and local agencies and
organizations and to encourage the adoption and use of the report.
Counsel Welcomed. The sponsoring committee, under the chairman-
ship of Richard Rathfon, City Planner of Sacramento, continues to
seek the comment and counsel of organizations and leaders represented
in this National Citizens Planning Conference on Parks and Open
Spaces. Leaders in professional recreation and planning organizations
have assured the sponsoring committee that a guide to planning will
be of value to communities all over the nation. The support of this
project by the American Planning and Civic Association and this
National Citizens Conference is a source of great encouragement to
all of us.
138 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
Colloquium: What Can the People Do About
Parks and Open Spaces?
FREDERICK GUTHEIM, Washington, D. C., Moderator
WHETHER we call them "the people" or "the public" or by some
other name, we are talking about ourselves. We are talking about
the people who pay for parks and open spaces, who want them because
they will use them, and whose votes at elections and bond referenda
will be required to get them. We take counsel with each other in asso-
ciations of various kinds, and much of our action in behalf of parks
and open spaces is taken through the same organizations. Three of the
speakers on this panel represent such associations — each widely different
from the other and the three of them, perhaps, to be taken as represent-
ing the range of such groups. The fourth speaker represents that most
important institution, the press.
I take it we have two important questions to examine today. The
first is to preserve and protect the limited amounts of open space we
have from encroachment, neglect and other compromises with their
essential use as natural and recreation areas. Buildings, parking lots
and other uses threaten park lands in many cities; and only a vigilant,
well-informed and well-organized public can be counted on to protect
them against the multitude of special interests, each intent upon their
own concerns, who menace them. The second is to give some attention
to the need for new parks and additional open spaces, particularly in
the fringe areas where development is building by the square mile.
Here we have a need not only for neighborhood parks and recreation
areas, but for larger regional parks. And we have new requirements
for preserving conservation areas, stream valley flood plains, water-
sheds, wild life reservations, forest areas and agricultural districts, both
for their own sake as valuable elements in the metropolitan area, as
well as for the contribution they can make to the shaping of a well-
planned city, a city of well-formed communities rather than of un-
differentiated sprawling development. Public ownership may be nec-
essary to implement such planning, but we are obliged to consider
whether zoning or other forms of land-use control can be effective in
accomplishing the same purpose.
Both of these questions require the same techniques of local citizens
action. If we can get something started here, perhaps it will spread
throughout the country.
MRS. LEROY CLARK, Englewood, New Jersey
THROUGH the membership of The Garden Club of America there
is an ever increasing feeling of responsibility for the preservation
of parks and the open spaces which are being taken over by a rapidly
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 139
multiplying population and additional highways. Through the Con-
servation and National Parks Committees information is disseminated
through the Clubs of the country and through their members to students
and adults on important issues. They are urged to be particularly alert
in their own States and never to forget their national responsibility.
Those in my own State of New Jersey joined in the successful effort
to preserve Island Beach in spite of the desire of a real estate company
to purchase it, thereby saving the only untouched stretch of seashore
on the Atlantic coast with its rare flora.
It is noteworthy that in these days of shorter working hours the
Carpenters and Joiners of America were prevailed upon to contribute
$75,000 to complete the purchase of Mettlers Woods, a stand of virgin
forest.
The Wharton tract and Worthington property have been acquired
by the State, each of value in its own way.
The County Park systems are being developed as well as other
State Parks and roadside parks are increasing in number, inspired by
an active Roadside Council which contributed funds for teaching road-
side beautification to students of highway engineering at Stevens
Institute.
It was the people who persuaded the States of New York and New
Jersey to end the quarrying of the great cliffs of the Hudson. The
Palisades Interstate Park Commission was formed by an act of Congress.
Land was acquired by purchase and gift of all available property over-
looking the river.
The Borough of Ft. Lee for the past three years has failed to accept
an offer for the historic land south of the George Washington Bridge
where our first President was in Camp when Cornwallis crossed the
Hudson hoping to capture his army. There is still hope.
The Palisades Interstate Park Commission has allowed the Palisades
Nature Association an area of 148 acres for the development of a wild-
life sanctuary, known as Greenbrook. Over five miles of trails have
been brushed for the study and enjoyment of those who wish to learn
of the flora and fauna of the region. It is being restored to what it
would have been without past destruction by fire and storm.
This is not adequate but it is a demonstration of what interested
people can accomplish if there is the will and a realization of the need.
GRADY CLAY, The Courier-Journal, Louisville, Ky.
WE ARE come together to comment on the crisis abroad in our
land, the crisis caused by a growing population, by increased
pressure for land, by the competitive battle for open spaces in our
metropolitan areas.
140 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
May I qualify myself as a non-expert in these matters by saying
that I am a fairly consistent non-member of board commissions, or
committees, official or otherwise, having to do with such matters.
As a newspaperman, I'm much more at home describing the world as I
see it, rather than prescribing for the world as I should like it to be.
At any rate, we should examine the issue before us. Is it really a
fundamental issue? Or is it merely another in the series of problems
caused by an expanding economy — and a debate over whose open space
must be preserved, protected and created?
I would say there is strong evidence that the American public is
sold on open space. It wants all it can get. It is paying staggering sums
of open space, more or less willingly. It is especially sold on that par-
ticular kind of open space usually identified as Lot 110 in Broad Acres,
said lot containing 9000 square feet, more or less, and one free-standing
house obtainable by paying $11,800 (and up), with $550 down plus
closing costs, the rest in easy monthly payments.
This is open space — private, fenceable, negotiable — and when the
grass grows too fast, almost unmanageable. Since World War I some
7% million families have paid what was considered good money (before
inflation) for this kind of open space.
I am sure these people are not to be condemned as low, base, ma-
terialistic and lacking in all public spirit if they display far more en-
thusiasm for such private open space than they have shown for public
open spaces paid for by such unmentionable or conversely damnable
methods as bond issues and taxes.
Now this great urge towards open spaces is, I believe a tribute to
the success of such organizations as the American Planning and Civic
Association. I suspect the work of yours, and allied groups, has fostered,
if not created, a great and unfulfilled desire in millions of Americans
to enjoy open spaces — even if it means paying through the nose for
the dubious pleasure of fighting crabgrass, shopping centers, traffic and
other benefits of suburban life.
Of course, this flight toward the new amenities of the suburbs has
left behind a horrible nest of troubles, which I expect is one of the most
important reasons why we're here.
If we're Democrats, we resent all those good city Democrats who
moved to the suburbs and started voting Republican. If we're city-
lovers who are fighting to preserve some measure of charm and amenity
in an old residential neighborhood near the center of town, we resent
all those people who move out to Long Brook Acres, and spend all their
civic energies on the suburban PTA, rather than on efforts to pass a
bond issue for a downtown park.
At this point, I hope you won't mind my telling you of my friend
and his new Coffeemaster.
He and his wife had their first cups of coffee from that bright, shiny
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 141
new Coffeemaster last Christmas morning. They had read the ads about
the brave new mechanized world that the modern appliances, the Coffee-
masters and all the rest, would automatically provide. But after they
drank their coffee, my friend says, "We looked at each other and realized
we were disappointed. We finally figured it out — all the damn thing did
was make coffee."
Somehow, as a result of being oversold, my friend expected something
more than coffee.
And I fear that if we expect too much of parks, playgrounds and
open space, we too shall be disappointed.
So let me stick in a word of caution, as a victim of expecting too
much. . . Let us not fall into the trap of thinking that if only we have
enough parks, playground and open space, our jangled nerves will
relax, our juvenile delinquents will become bird watchers, our densities
automatically drop 50 percent, our incomes double, our tax bills come
down, and the suburban boom will be deflated, land values in our city
stabilized, and all the "best people" will move back into town so they
can pay lower taxes, run for the City Council and serve on the Park
Board. . . .
Such an attitude forces the parks into substituting for Church,
State, Home and Mother — and of course this is too big a burden.
May I spend just a few moments describing some of the things which
I think the public can do — not in every city, and not in the same way.
We are all in debt to Dennis 0 'Harrow of the American Society of
Planning Officials for his superb editorial in the current ASPO NEWS-
LETTER reminding us that one of the great things about this country
is that "there is greater strength in diversity than there is in uniformity,
that out of about 3,000 separate zoning ordinances in the United States,
there is bound to come a variety of approaches from which we can
choose, in contrast to a Federal formula requiring uniformity, unanimity,
and — monotony. ' '
The public can do many things, because the public itself is a many-
sided thing. There are many publics, and each can contribute in its
own distinct way to the promotion — or the destruction — of good cities.
First. There is the do-it-yourself public — which is currently support-
ing a billion-dollars worth of sales of seeds, plows that throw the dirt
this way, plows that churn the dirt that way — a billion dollars worth of
business done last year among amateur gardeners. Not to mention
the do-it-yourself workshop fans, boat-builders, house-builders and
all the rest.
This part of the public, I am confident, will respond with enthusiasm,
vigor, and high spirits to an imaginative and well-organized effort to
create a park in a day. The soil-conservation movement has worked
wonders with its farm in a day extravaganza — turning a farm-improve-
142 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
ment project into a community affair with bulldozers, hoopla, lunch on
the grounds, and all the rest.
Second. There is the small but tremendously effective part of the
public working on urban renewal. In Louisville, this consists of little
more than a mere handful of FHA officials, city officials, and a team of
builders and real estate men.
The new center of power in park-promotion, certainly in most old
cities, is beginning to shift into this urban renewal field — while the
garden clubs and the traditional park-lovers remain completely on the
outside, certainly in my own community. Urban renewal — especially
the provisions of Title I for urban redevelopment as it was called by
the Democratic administration — offers perhaps the greatest oppor-
tunity in a generation to create new playgrounds, parks and open spaces
in old congested districts. As an observer, let me voice the hope that
more people, more public groups can get into this urban renewal struggle,
and combine forces.
Third. Another segment of the public loves music, picnicking — or
just bread and circuses. In Louisville, the parks program received a
wonderful boost from two happy circumstances — a $50,000 gift for
purchase of land along the Ohio River; and a civic orchestra with a
director of the "I'11-try-anything-once" variety. Not once but twice
last summer they produced a waterfront concert, with the orchestra
on a barge in the River. Some 20,000 people came to picnic, and listen.
A Circuit Judge had the time of his life shooting off the cannon for
the 1812 overture and at intermission we all enjoyed the carefully
scheduled fireworks of a private country club on a nearby hill. . . .
Fourth. The auto driving public can and will flock with pleasure to
suburban parks if they are provided. (And, lacking parks, they will,
cause and already are causing, serious destruction to farmers' crops for
30 miles around most big cities, parking off the roads, stealing corn
and other portable crops.)
I believe the expansion of parks is almost a generation behind the
expansion of automobile ownership. Cities fight desperately to raise
money for expensive parks, downtown or in the highly competitive
suburban areas.
I would hate to see these efforts sidetracked, but I would suggest
that the public will use and support wilderness-type parks up to 40
miles from City Hall. This will take some of the week-end pressure off
the already overcrowded city parks. . .
In Louisville, we are fortunate in having Otter Creek Park, a former
CCC project, given by the Federal government to Louisville, and now
run by the city — a 2,000 acre semi-wilderness of rough scenic land
overlooking the Ohio, near Fort Knox. On busy week-ends thousands
of families enjoy it. Fortunately, a major new road into the park will
soon be built.
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 143
Fifth. There is a segment of the public which, I believe, will support your
efforts to create parks and playgrounds by the sanitary landfill method.
In my opinion, the use of incinerators to burn up city garbage and
trash is one of the most shortsighted aspects of modern city planning.
This material should be used to fill up useless old quarries, sandpits,
claypits, sloughs, gulleys, and unusable valleys, converting them into
playgrounds, often in the midst of heavily populated areas. We in
Louisville already have filled one great slough, creating Lannan Park
in our crowded Portland area. And another former slough of a diverted
creek is now filled. Unfortunately, our City administration never en-
forced good sanitary practises at the landfill, and public outcry against
the stink has resulted in a bond issue for a new incinerator . . . thus
losing a chance to create possibly 500 to 1,000 acres of usable parkland
in what are now sloughs, flooded areas, and wastelands within or border-
ing on the city limits.
Sixth. I believe the public can and will support the kind of big
thinking that produced the multiple-use developments of natural re-
sources in the Tennessee Valley, and in the Great West, if that big
thinking is applied to such big projects as turnpikes.
As it is now being built, the Kentucky Turnpike is a 30-mile-long
limited-access road from Louisville south to Elizabethtown, a wonderful
traffic artery, built single-mindedly with only one-purpose — moving
traffic. It has one stretch eight miles long absolutely straight — evidence
of the slide-rule mind at work, regardless of contours, property lines,
the necessity for visual variety, or the resulting uneconomic division
of land.
I believe the public will support a program that can convert these
giant and expensive jobs into multiple-benefit projects, so that the
rights-of-way can be wide enough to provide parklands, accessible
from the countryside ; so that the drainage ditches can be expanded into
great retention ponds where necessary to control flash floods in the
neighborhood (all too often caused by the expressway construction), —
so that these retention ponds can be stabilized at a water level sufficient
to provide fishing, boating and other benefits, even if this means getting
into that knotty field of excess condemnation, I believe there will be
public support for it.
Seventh. There is a real need for opportunists in this, the public's
business, just as they are needed in the pursuit of private business in a
fast-changing society. It took a real opportunist in the Mayor's office
in Louisville to hire a skilled tax-and-title lawyer to pick up 75 parcels
of land with confused or bad titles — convert them into totlots in crowded
neighborhoods — a great piece of opportunism.
But beyond this kind of opportunism, the public wants and I believe
will support really big plans if they are made clear, repeated and de-
scribed by words, simple maps, clear pictures, and repeated, repeated,
144 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
repeated, until every schoolchild can be familiar with the big ideas. . .
In my own community, such a plan is lacking. Parks and playgrounds
in the new suburban subdivisions are acquired by the Robin Hood
technique.
Our local Planning and Zoning Commission, motivated by the high-
est public motives, plays Robin Hood by forcing a few big subdividers
to cough up playground space without being paid for it, letting those
who are close to county schools, or those with small projects, go scot
free, and doing it all without any overall plan whatever.
If this helter-skelter operation is typical of what happens in most
communities, then it is no wonder that some of the public is lukewarm
about lending its support for parks and playgrounds. . . »
In conclusion — despite the self-centered suburbanites, the self-
seeking land-slaughterers who cut up the countryside with no regard
for scenic values — despite the continued fight to chip and slice at our
great public parklands — I believe we can all be guided by the statement
of J. B. Jackson, editor of Human Geography, who said man's
motives are, and should remain "the re-creation of Heaven on earth. . ."
GEORGE G. HAYWARD, Executive Secretary, Citizen Development Committee,
Cincinnati, Ohio
THIS assignment was accepted with some reluctance through the
realization that I might not be in complete agreement with some
of the attitudes of the audience. Please let me observe that; (1) in
great share it is the many in this audience together with the American
Planning and Civic Association to whom we are indebted in this country
for the parks and open spaces we enjoy, (2) in having selected this panel
from activities somewhat outside the subject field it must be that im-
partial advice is needed or is at least sought, and (3) because of (1) and
in spite of (2) it may be difficult to make points to the fullest intent and
possibility.
Actually, there is a very simple way but I maintain it is a superficial
way, to describe what would be a most productive method of creating
and preserving open areas. It would be to establish an official agency
such as a Park Board with as completely autonomous powers as could
be made available. Influential and wealthy people would be appointed
to operate the agency and they would be enticed by the eminence of the
agency and their control of it to donate money or properties as needed
for a development plan. Arrangements could conceivably be made for
bequeathing of the positions to family members to encourage endow-
ments and other permanence of the scheme. It would be further in-
surance to create a strong citizens' group to bolster and protect this
group.
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 145
This method has been highly successful in a number of cities and it
is easily imagined that it can be completely justified in the minds of
many enthusiasts for the cause.
As a professional city planner and a respecter of the over-all and
coordinating principles of this profession as it must prevail in all sound
and equitable government, I cannot hold conscientiously with this
approach. Briefly it is in conflict with (1) governmental organization
by allowing a phase to become prominent and strong for the most part
according to the degree of promotion, and possibly emotion, that can
be developed; (2) the approach of over-all planning which should con-
sider all phases of community development and activity in their proper
places and retain the balance of priority and expenditure of monies;
(3) the hierarchy likely to be established is certain to make the com-
munity planning and development rigid, which is without question a
most harmful effect that can be envisioned by a sincere and able planner.
If it is any consolation to the good people who adhere to the park
and open space principle as one of paramount importance, I have con-
firmed beliefs that all of their warranted dreams will be just as realizable
and longer lasting through cooperating with other elements of com-
munity operations. Those who have felt remorse that the City Beautiful
moment lost prominence should certainly accept the fact that planning
for people basically and achieving those basics is certain to produce
eventually the aesthetic attributes. It is my very frank attitude that
unless there is a strong element of economic or economically social
justification, a priority position should not be accorded to any publicly
financed project.
We on this panel have been asked to speak from personal experience
to illustrate our points. I hope I can cite some convincing points from
my experience during the last 20 years in planning administration for
three of several cities. In Flint, Michigan the automobile industry
dominates the economic base as it does in several Michigan cities. It
was my good fortune to inherit some outstanding studies and proposals
ranging from urban redevelopment through traffic plans to civic center
ideas. The need, plans and potential financing have been available in
Flint for many years. The situation has changed very little, not through
lack of appreciation, but through the preponderance of the basic prob-
lem. It is my fond hope that in developing interest in their community
and seeing the wonderful opportunities, they will overcome this over-
powering obstacle. Again, Flint needs to broaden its economic base.
Cincinnati enjoys a long history of early, as well as up-to-date
planning provided by as impressive a list of staff, consultants and citizen
agency members as could be found in any community in the United
States. Until recent years there has been no motivating coordinated
spirit or conviction as to community improvement being essential.
Although there is positive evidence of some of this need being met there
146 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
still must be increased momentum and certainly continuing inspiration
to result in really worthwhile accomplishment.
As a Hoosier, I read with great distress a recent detailed account
in the National Municipal Review that the Indiana State Legislature
had again defeated a bill which could have made possible the installation
of the city manager form of government. For all of the admitted im-
perfections of the city manager form of government, it is regarded as
the best available. It certainly would be an improvement on existing
municipal government in Indiana. It is almost the only remaining
State in the entire Union whose laws stand in the way of making use
of this modern businesslike manner and still democratic form of govern-
mental administration. I witnessed in Fort Wayne the accepted pattern
of changeover of city hall administration at election time which reverses
the position of a department head from a lowest position to the top
position at every change of political party domination at City Council.
Almost the only municipal positions which have seemed to be immune
to this ridiculous manipulation are those of the Planning Commission's
staff, but even here a partisan aspect has crept in. Indiana planning
statutes have been amended to provide that the citizen members shall
not all be from the same political party. As might be expected, this
has drawn political attention to the situation to the extent that political
considerations have been encouraged to become a factor in Planning
Commission activities.
I maintain that complete and permanent good living can be enjoyed
in no city until basic wrongs are corrected. These cities may not be
facing eventual bankruptcy through disintegration or the many other
threats to preservation, but Flint would do well to correct completely
its dependency on a single-type industry, one-corporation industry;
Fort Wayne should fully realize its precarious position due to its an-
tiquated government; and Cincinnati must maintain and even exceed
its start on a drive to rebuild and revitalize its area. The tools of plan-
ning, administration, financing, laws, etc., are available to at least
workable degrees and certainly the more alert communities threaten
to outdistance those which are reluctant to make changes standing in
the way of progress. Inevitably the distraction of incidental objectives,
important as they may seem to their proponents, can be the defeating
cause even to the extent of reacting terrifically against the special
cause involved.
There is some irony in the fact that all three of the cities discussed
here have outstanding parks and open areas which are bound to be
involved in any aggressive program to improve on other community
facilities. These problems must be anticipated with a broad under-
standing of what is best for the community. In Cincinnati two essential
playfields will be destroyed by parts of the drastically needed express-
ways. The Cincinnati Metropolitan Master Plan was prepared very
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 147
carefully and with high regard for playfields and all other elements of
the community plant. Provisions has been made in the Plan for these
two playfields and other dislocated facilities, which is as it should be.
It is realized that there may be even more irony in the situation in
which Cincinnati is being used as an example of how parks and open
spaces are being given their fair treatment. The facts that the city
enjoys about 20 miles of Ohio River frontage for an average width of
about a quarter of a mile, and a comparatively low population density
make the picture probably less severe. Also, the very hilly topography
of Cincinnati contributes to the fact that the city contains a population
of a half million in about 75 square miles while the Cleveland population
of twice Cincinnati's size occupies about exactly the same sized area.
From those who are acquainted with the objectives and accomplish-
ments of the Citizens Development Committee for which I work in
Cincinnati, there might be the contention that we are currently address-
ing ourselves to certain elements which do not include some of these
developments such as parks and open spaces. It is a hard fact that we
have pursued the programs for expressways, off-street parking, master
airport and urban redevelopment almost without any deviation during
most of our 12 years of existence. We maintain:
1. That the very fact that it has taken the coordinating effort of all
elements to get these phases finally under way is adequate justification
for concentration.
2. That these basic improvements are so sadly needed that the economic
and entire well being of the community is at stake.
3. That with proper planning and follow through, all of the improve-
ments included in the Master Plan will result as rapidly as financing and
construction can proceed.
4. That urban redevelopment which is now expanding into urban re-
newal provides in itself for the realization of all elements of community
development from railroads to neighborhood playgrounds. Cincinnati
is scheduled for about 25 percent of the entire incorporated area to be
renewed, more than 5 percent of which will be completely cleared and
rebuilt or redeveloped. So that assuming good planning, completely
adequate provision will be made for parks and open spaces throughout
a large part of the city by this process.
Up to this point it is my sincere hope that at least some of you listen-
ers are willing to accept some of my contentions that, in order to realize
the creation and retention of facilities such as parks, playgrounds, etc.,
the greatest assurance is the provision of a fundamental approach which
will automatically insure a warranted program and in probably the
most orderly and natural manner. Some suggestions of almost ele-
mentary but important aspect from my own experience and opinion are :
1. Be sure that your community has an organized group which is fully
capable of discussion, presenting and proposing a solution to the basic
148 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
needs of the community. This could be a promotional, fact finding or
administrative agency such as a private development group, a bureau
of governmental research, an official planning agency or, ideally, all of
these groups working together. Needless to say, the appointees should
be the most respected and busiest citizens.
2. A common understanding must be arrived at on as many as possible
of basic considerations, after which there must be a minimum of de-
viations.
3. Under no circumstances can the organization be permitted to exist
for the sake of general principles alone.
4. The most expert assistance in preparing programs or plans should be
obtained. In the instance of participation from several government
agencies, conflicts with plans or other developments can be avoided or
adjusted through preparation of such plans as far in advance as possible
of the other agencies.
5. Be prepared to make concessions as long as the overall good of the
community is realized. For instance, in any community which has a
park system of respectable dimensions, it is almost impossible to avoid
crossing or using part of the system for some other units of the plan.
6. In another direction, the degree of sacredness attributed by some to
open areas will never be appreciated when unrealistic attitudes such as
prohibiting automobile traffic from large acreages persist. Many times
this automatically eliminates the facilities from probably the most
needful elements of the populations such as older citizens, families with
young children, physically handicapped and those who lose interest
when inconveniences are apparent. The modern concept of public
library location and design based on the premise that value is generally
measured by the extent of use is a good principle to follow for almost all
publicly financed projects.
7. Above all, there must be a support, in so far as reasonable, of the
programs of others. In almost all things there are and should be con-
siderations of available financing, etc., so that a turn must be waited for,
which in the simple process of bargaining, should react to the advantage
of the cooperator.
8. There is no room in the operations for civic achievement for any
individuals or groups looking for self-aggrandizement in any way.
9. There is little room for sentiment despite the fact that some significant
accomplishments have been won through emotional promotion. There
is always a question as to how long such gains can be assured.
I can realize how difficult it would be for some to obtain a complete
plan of action from these remarks. In the first place, it is impossible
for anyone to devise an approach that will fit every problem. Secondly,
there is bound to be some degree of prejudice which even the giver of
advice should be willing to admit. Also, it is sometimes necessary to
impress advice on some with exaggerations which is of course liable to
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 149
be misunderstood by others. A final observation is that no goal must
be approached with an attitude of all importance or seriousness to the
extent that all opposition is expected to melt away and concede to the
complete wishes of any group regardless of how fine a goal they may
believe they have.
These advisory points that have been set forth have worked to an
extent in one situation, and it is believed that they will at least provoke
some serious thought which will evenuate in some advantage to your
causes. It would be well to remember, just as any planner must, that
times change and sometimes quite rapidly. We have heard of the rapid
changeover of our ways of life to present day life resulting from the
greatly increased amount of leisure time. You people have been using
that as a point of impressing the importance of your program. I think
you would do well to consider at the same time the other changes such
as attitudes that have come about through present day methods of
communication, transportation and other fundamental considerations.
Question: Professor H. 0. Whittemore of the University of Michi-
gan, asked if Ohio River cities were directing their planning for park and
recreation facilities in river frontage.
Answer: There has been and continues to be tremendous pressure
from all types of selfish interest groups to protect Ohio River frontage at
Cincinnati from floods with levees or walls. The Cincinnati Master
plan has not held with this point of view except for the protection by a
barrier dam of the huge Mill Creek industrial valley against Ohio River
floods and Mill Creek flash floods. In a way this answers a point of the
preceding talk by emphasizing that the Master Plan arrived at its
stand on the basis of economics for the most part which viewpoint is
shared by the U. S. Corps of Army Engineers. Many acres of accessible
property are involved, but no sections are justified for protection by
the Army Engineers' formula.
The Master Plan pursues this simple realistic treatment by suggest-
ing uses which would either not be harmed by floods or could be pro-
vided with self-protection. For instance recreation and parking areas
do not warrant protection and buildings can be so designed or arranged
that lower floors can withstand occasional inundation.
The decision therefore was based solely on economics or function,
although had it been necessary, some additional points would have
been raised in support of the type of proposed uses and against the
construction of floodwall, etc. The unattractiveness and obstacle to
river view which would result from flood protection structures would
have had considerable opposition also from those in favor of locating
recreation areas along the river front from the point of need, accessibility,
etc., beyond the argument for views and generally attractive appearance.
Another point to illustrate the thesis of the earlier remarks is in
regard to the priority of developments. The downtown connecting link
150 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
of the Cincinnati expressways system called the Third Street Distributor
has been recognized as a first priority and is now proceeding rapidly in
construction plans, property acquisition, and site clearance. This
facility will require such a large portion of the central riverfront area
and its design will have such a determining influence on the balance
of the area that the redevelopment of the central river front is almost
certain to follow. Had it not been for the fortunate situation that dic-
tated the location, design, etc., of this expressway facility, it is quite
likely that there would never have been a chance for the riverfront
project. This illustrates that not only is it necessary in the logical
course of events to give priority to basics but that there are tremendous
supporting advantages which accrue in this process to bring about
the other elements.
JAMES McCLAIN, Planning Director,
Allegheny Conference on Community Development, Pittsburgh, Pa.
TODAY, the provision of parks and playgrounds is commonly ac-
cepted as a public function. It is increasingly recognized, moreover,
that public agencies should not only provide the facilities but should
also furnish instruction and supervision in their use. Nevertheless,
private citizens, working both as dedicated individuals and as civic
groups, have made an incalculable contribution to the park and play-
ground movement nationally; and it is the thesis of this colloquium
that citizen participation is still essential.
The modern park movement in this country is actually not very old.
Central Park, purchased by New York City in 1853, was among the
first of the municipal acquisitions. The early concept of parks, however,
was one of passive recreation. The active recreation movement is said to
have started with the establishment of sand gardens in Boston by the
Massachusetts Emergency and Hygiene Association in 1887. About the
turn of the century, the park and playground movements joined forces
to the mutual benefit of both. In the years since then, not only have the
facilities multiplied, but the scope of the recreation concept has been
greatly broadened and diversified, so that it now embraces all segments
of the population, all age groups of both sexes, all year round, and all
sizes of service area from local to national.
At different times and places throughout this movement, the citizen
role has taken a great variety of forms. Many recreational projects and
functions have started out as civic undertakings and later have been
transferred to official agencies. Civic crusades have helped to preserve
historic sites and places of exceptional natural beauty or interest. Pri-
vate philanthropy has played an important part in nearly every locality.
What can the people do about it? The people can do a great deal, and
they are doing it.
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 151
In the Pittsburgh area, the Allegheny Conference on Community
Development has been quite active in the recreation field. A word or
two as to its set-up will be helpful to a better understanding of its
activities and methods. A group of leading citizens organized the Con-
ference in 1943, originally for the purpose of seeking solutions to Pitts-
burgh's post-war and post-depression problems, but it was recognized
from the outset that the responsibility would be a continuing one. At
present, the Conference is composed of 87 sponsors (in effect, its board
of directors) who meet quarterly; an executive committee of 21 of the
sponsors which meets monthly, and a relatively small paid staff. It is
financed through the Civic-Business Council, which is the fund raising
agency for the Chamber of Commerce and several other civic bodies.
The Conference's success is due in no small measure to the soundness
of its policies. Top business executives serve on its working committees
personally, instead of sending substitutes. It strives for the broadest
co-ordination of effort across all civic and political lines, working with,
rather than trying to supplant, existing agencies. An effective public
relations procedure is guided by the assistant director, who is a trained
public relations expert. The Conference works very closely with the
Pittsburgh Regional Planning Association, which is sometimes called
the technical arm of the Conference ; in fact, the two organizations have
the same president and the same executive director, and their offices are
almost adjoining.
In order to illustrate citizen participation relating to parks and
playgrounds in the Pittsburgh area, I have chosen three fairly recent
examples which are quite different, not only in character but also in
service area: the first concerns a small community, the second is of
city-wide significance, while the third is regional in character.
West View is a residential suburban borough located just five airline
miles northwest of Pittsburgh's Golden Triangle. Its 1950 population
was 7,581. Its 1.02 square mile area comprises mostly hills and valleys.
The one large level tract of 30 acres, right in the heart of the borough, is
occupied by a commercial amusement park.
Some time ago, West View parents became concerned about their
children spending too much time, and perhaps money, in the amusement
park. The children, however, could hardly be blamed, as they had
virtually no place else to play. Nearly all of the buildable area had
long since been developed, with little thought being given to recreational
needs. Even the schools had very inadequate play yards.
A group of civic-minded citizens organized to remedy this deficiency.
They succeeded in arousing local pride and also needled the Town
Council into creating an official Recreation Board, which Pennsylvania
law permits boroughs to do. The Council created the Board in Sep-
tember, 1953, and also allocated funds for its initial operations.
152 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
The newly formed Recreation Board came to us for technical assist-
ance in the preparation of a long-range plan for the development of
recreational facilities in West View. We made a careful study of the
recreational needs of the various age groups, including population fore-
casts, inventory of present facilities and programs, topography and land
use, neighborhood patterns, schools, available sites, etc., and presented
our report in August, 1954. It was adopted unanimously by the Rec-
reation Board and the Town Council. The Board has acquired its first
playground site and is proceeding to develop it.
The West View example clearly demonstrates how other small
communities might effectively face their recreational problems. The
steps are: (1) form a vigorous citizens' group, (2) arouse local pride, (3)
obtain official support and, if legislation permits, official status, (4)
secure qualified technical assistance, and (5) carry out the plan.
The second example is the new Point State Park, comprising 36 acres
at the tip of the Golden Triangle, where the Allegheny and Monongahela
Rivers join to form the Ohio. This strategic spot was the site of four
successive pioneer forts, the last and by far the largest of which was the
second Fort Pitt completed in 1761. It has been said that the question
of whether the civilization of inland America was to be French or
British was largely determined at this location. The Point also served
in the early days as a "Gateway to the West" for countless westward
moving pioneers. George Washington, visiting the site as a young man,
was among the first to appreciate its strategic value and recommended
its fortification.
Generations of Pittsburghers had discussed the establishment of a
park at the Point to commemorate its historic significance, but nothing
was actually done about it until the Allegheny Conference undertook
the project in 1946. The entire 36-acre site has now been acquired by
the State at a cost of $7J^ million and cleared of buildings. Much of the
grading has been completed and construction of the park is well under
way. In the early stages of the project, the governor of Pennsylvania
officially designated the Point Park Committee of the Allegheny Con-
ference as the policy making body in matters concerning the develop-
ment of the Park.
To deal with the many problems and complications arising during
the course of this development, we created an interesting device which
we call a "co-ordinating committee." It has been very useful here and
might also prove useful in other localities. The Point Co-ordinating
Committee is composed of representatives of all the public and private
interests concerned in this development: the State Highway Department
and Department of Forests and Waters, the city and county govern-
ments, the Allegheny Conference, the utilities, the engineers, architects,
and contractors, etc. Nearly every problem involves two or more of
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 153
these interests and can be disposed of expeditiously at the committee
meetings where all interests are represented.
However, there is another arm of the Allegheny Conference which
is especially concerned with our present subject, namely, the Recreation
Conservation and Park Council. Organized in 1949, the Park Council
has an executive committee of 18, which meets quarterly or oftener if
necessary, and a membership of approximately 200, which assembles
at an annual dinner meeting, usually to hear a prominent speaker on
park, recreation, or conservation subjects. The Park Council has no
paid staff of its own, but occasionally enlists the staff services of the
Allegheny Conference and the Pittsburgh Regional Planning Asso-
ciation.
The Park Council works closely with the City Department of Parks
and Recreation in a number of ways, but particularly in sponsoring the
popular Spring and Fall flower shows at Phipps Conservatory. The
Park Council acts as the receiving and disbursing agent for the moneys
involved. The shows are free in the daytime, but a fee is charged for
the illuminated evening shows. With the funds realized from fees and
concessions, the Park Council assists the Conservatory in acquiring
rare plants and other unusual expenditures for which there are no
regular city appropriations. The funds and income of the former Horti-
cultural Society have also been turned over to the Park Council.
One of the major interests of the Park Council is known as the Slip-
pery Rock-Muddy Creek Area, located 43 miles north of Pittsburgh,
and this is my third and final example. It was chosen for its regional
significance and because of the growing importance of such outlying
parks due to the enormous increase in the use of the private automobile.
The nucleus of the Slippery Rock-Muddy Creek Area is a 132-acre
property known as McConnell's Mill. The old mill is located in a pic-
turesque gorge of Slippery Rock Creek, right beside an old covered
bridge. The property was acquired in 1944 by the Greater Pittsburgh
Parks Association, a private non-profit organization. The Park Council
did not wish to become involved in land ownership, so the idea was
conceived of revitalizing and enlarging the Greater Pittsburgh Parks
Association for this purpose. In March, 1951, the name of the Asso-
ciation was changed to the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy, a name
which would not connote the paternalism of Pittsburgh and would
therefore be more likely to enlist support from the surrounding counties.
In this process the Park Council and the Conservancy have become
closely affiliated, the latter being the land owning agency.
Shortly after the birth of the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy,
strip-mining, lumbering, and commercialization threatened to destroy
the wonderfully scenic Slippery Rock Area adjacent to the McConnell's
Mill property, and also the beautiful adjoining valley of Muddy Creek,
a tributary of Slippery Rock Creek. To avert this tragedy, it was de-
154 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
cided to conduct a fund raising campaign that would enable the Con-
servancy to purchase several thousand acres in the Slippery Rock-
Muddy Creek drainage area. A Pittsburgh foundation made a grant
of $150,000 and the campaign raised over $100,000 in addition. With
these funds the Conservancy has acquired about 1,800 acres in the
Slippery Rock valley and has purchased or is in the process of purchasing
about 1,500 acres in the Muddy Creek valley. An agreement has been
executed whereby the State will purchase the 1,800 acres in the Slippery
Rock valley, and the actual transfer of the property is awaiting com-
pletion of the title searches. Thus, for $30,000 the State will acquire an
outstanding park site for which the Conservancy paid about $100,000.
However, we are now assured that the site will be permanently pre-
served, developed, and maintained as a state park. The site possesses
numerous recreational and scientific attractions, among which is a
potential lake in the Muddy Creek valley. This lake will provide an
excellent waterfowl refuge since it is directly in the migration lane from
Chesapeake Ray to the Pymatuning swamps. Meanwhile, the Con-
servancy is proceeding with the purchase of more properties needed to
round out the Slippery Rock-Muddy Creek area.
It might also be mentioned that in its brief life to date, the Con-
servancy has purchased two other important sites in Western Penn-
sylvania : the Jennings Rlazing Star Prairie and Ferncliff Park at historic
Ohiopyle — both eminently worthwhile conserving, although for different
reasons. The Conservancy's charter limits its membership to 50 persons,
from among whom its Roard of Directors is elected. At present, there
are 45 members and 18 directors. It has no paid officers or staff other
than a land purchasing agent and a caretaker at Ohiopyle.
These few examples present only a fragmentary picture of the role
of Pittsburgh citizens in the recreation field, but time limitations nec-
cessitate selectivity. I can only hope that our experiences may shed
some light on the similar problems of others.
Parks Preservation Clinic
HARRY W. ALEXANDER, Harland Bartholomew and Associates,
St. Louis, Mo.
ONE OF THE basic difficulties in preserving parks and public
open spaces for their intended uses in any city is the frequent
lack of a comprehensive plan which allocates land uses in their appro-
priate locations. If there is a comprehensive plan which balances and
coordinates the various physical features of the community, the chances
for conflicts between traffic and other needs and park uses would be
minimized. Once having such a plan, it should be made official and its
integrity maintained. If adjustments become necessary to meet chang-
ing and unforeseen conditions, these adjustments should be made by
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 155
the planning commissions as they are in a better position to evaluate
the over-all needs of the community than any other public official or
agency. Acting in its capacity as a coordinating agency between various
officials and departments of the community it should be possible to
avoid independent action by various agencies which so often create
the difficulties which this panel has been concerned with. The com-
prehensive plan might reveal that some parks, because of location or
other reasons, might be better suited for some other use. The determina-
tion of that use, however, should be made by the Planning Commission
and shown on the comprehensive plan. It would appear preferable that
the agency having jurisdiction over parks should be an independent
agency — preferably with metropolitan status. Where conflicts arise
between such an independent agency and another public department,
the planning commission should be the power making the final decision.
MILO F. CHRISTIANSEN, Superintendent of Recreation, Washington, D. C.
IF I MIGHT be facetious, at least one out of three treatments or
cures is possible hi the preservation of our parks and open spaces.
The first one, of course, is to have someone like Bob Moses as head of
the park system. But more seriously, it seems that most of the panel
discussants provided solutions to their own problems so there is not
much left for the panel consultants to discuss. However, it becomes
increasingly obvious that two very important factors are predominant:
(1) Have protective legislation and (2) an alerted and aggressive public
opinion. The last mentioned item is extremely important as, after all,
the consumer public is the one who benefits and the one who is harmed
by the withdrawal of open spaces.
In Washington, D. C. we have made a forthright statement on
encroachment on parks, playgrounds and recreation areas. We have
also contacted every parent-teacher association, citizen and civic asso-
ciations and many other civic groups putting them on notice in regards
to this problem. In many cases, the organizations have taken action
supporting the policy statement. Thus it becomes important that every
rumor or condition that develops which in any way may infringe upon
or eliminate public use of park and recreation space must be guarded
against. This is and will continue to be a daily task of vigilance as
governmental and population needs expand.
SOME BASIC PRINCIPLES
1. A responsible public authority should prepare a master plan of
land use for all public purposes including parks. Such a plan should be
projected to the anticipated future growth of the community and re-
vised at frequent intervals to insure adequacy and conformity to chang-
156 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
ing standards or developments. (This principle may apply to a metropo-
lis, county, state or nation.)
2. Builders and creators of new subdivisions should be required to
reserve a portion of their developments for park and recreation use.
Such reservations should be in ratio of size and number to the proposed
population of the subdivision and in accordance with accepted standards.
3. Park property should be protected by regulation and law which
states that land acquired for park use must be held in perpetuity for
that purpose. A park and recreation agency should not be required to
release land to other public agencies which did not have the foresight
to acquire property for their future needs.
4. Development plans should provide for the various activities in-
tended in park areas; active recreation, the appreciation of nature, and
areas forj passive recreation.
5. A good public park is an attractive and well-maintained outdoor
public area in which people of all ages can enjoy themselves, can be
inspired, and can learn. Every effort should be made to improve the
quality and diversity of park and recreation activities through a broad
educational program to every man, woman, and child in the area.
6. The intangible values of Nature fire our emotions, influence our
happiness and contentment, and make life worth living. The naturalistic
setting is vital to the development of sound cultural, sociological, and
spiritual values. As our Nation progresses to even larger urban areas,
it is necessary that man have available a place of natural beauty where
the quiet inspiration of a secluded grove creates anew the vigor of mind,
spirit, and body. The conservation of natural areas, especially in the
midst of metropolitan districts, and their use for recreation is an im-
portant factor in the conservation of human ability and the develop-
ment of the true American way of life.
7. Forecasts have been made that the population of the United
States will approximate 300 million. Most communities today are un-
able to provide adequate parks, playgrounds and open spaces because
land has been pre-empted for other purposes.
Park and recreation officials must utilize interested agencies and
organizations, and if necessary foster new groups which will: (a) pur-
posely and directly mobilize community effort to be allerted to encroach-
ments for non-park and recreational uses; (b) make or renew effort to
interpret and utilize existing park and recreation resources for immediate
and future needs; (c) be consciously aware of ever-increasing reduction
of work-hour week (labor leaders and economists predict a 30-35 hour
work week in the next 10 to 20 years).
8. The National Citizens Planning Conference should urge imme-
diate plans for a workshop, including national leaders from business,
industry, government, and the professions, for the purpose of developing
national standards or guides to enable the Federal, state, community,
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 157
metropolitan, local park and recreation authorities to plan for the im-
mediate and long range needs of the people of the United States.
GEORGE E. DICKIE, Executive Secretary,
Federal Inter-Agency Committee on Recreation, Washington, D. C.
THE reports from the various cities emphasize the growing pressure
for the use of park areas for highways, housing, armories, universi-
ties, civic centers, schools, hospitals, public parking areas and other
purposes. The majority of communities are far below the acreage and
proper distribution of that acreage which they should have.
To overcome the pressure for encroachment, a publicity campaign is
needed to arouse the community against adverse action and to interpret
to the community effectively the true values of parks as against the
values for other uses put forth by those who would alienate park land.
Park and recreation areas and other open spaces should be acquired
on a basis of a long-range master plan, and when acquired they should
be retained because very few cities, if any, have more park acreage than
they should have.
To take park land for other purposes to make an immediate budget
saving for another department is false economy as it means the re-
purchase of new park land later at a much greater cost.
If the present pressures for alienation are substantially successful,
we will soon face the disappearance of open space from our urban land
patterns. This is certainly dangerous and shortsighted.
NEEDS OF OUR GROWING POPULATION
Space for Our Congested Cities
CARL FEISS, AIA, AIP, Planning and Urban Renewal Consultant,
Parks and Open Spaces, Washington, D. C.
THE following hypotheses are postulated without introduction. They
will be briefly elaborated, but from the outset it should be made
clear that neither peroration or statistics are necessary to support
these axiomatic arguments. Unpalatable as some of these hypotheses
may be, still, they must form the hard core of the complex plans yet
to be designed and a century of programs that are yet to be started.
However, I know that responsible and courageous citizens will under-
take the arduous and tedious task of rebuilding our worn-out, inefficient,
inhuman, and ugly American cities and that they will prevent these
cities from backsliding, once we have accomplished even a small portion
of our long-range objective.
Here then are the hypotheses:
1. That the central portions of American cities are obsolete, that
their continued decay hastens the flight from the city to the suburbs,
158 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
and that the rapid and confused expansion of metropolitan areas in no
way assists the renewal of the central city.
2. That the loss of value in the central city area is more than a loss
in real estate equities or in the value of capital improvements, it is the
loss of the heart and brain of urban living.
3. That all evidence points to the curious fact that the more intense
the use and the higher the residential and working densities, the more
rapid the rate of obsolescence of the central city. This is stated with
full acknowledgment of the gigantic construction program now under-
way in the Grand Central District in New York City. However, I am
unaware of any plans for or by the same city to cope with extant con-
gestion or congestion to be created by the pending incredible work
densities. Irresponsible self-interest, freewheeling in our unplanned
cities has never resulted in guaranteed value nor has it constituted a
preventive of obsolescence. Major and ex-post-facto surgery such as the
new Congress Street Expressway blasted through the huge obsolescence
of the south side of the Chicago Loop, is no answer to an historic prob-
lem of laissez-faire. Under present superficial concepts of regulatory
control, such development can easily lead to further exploitation of
land and further congestion.
4. That we have neglected the study and development of criteria
for adequate planning standards for our urban workers, including our
huge daytime white collar population and the employees of industrial
and business establishments. We have neglected the development of
sound plans for land uses for retail merchandising in central city areas.
Further, we have failed to recognize that the customer is human, a
pedestrian, and is impacted physically and emotionally by the dangers,
appearances, and annoyances of our central business areas. These omis-
sions in our plans assist in the downgrading of the heart of our cities.
5. That the flight to the suburbs is due to a natural human desire to
escape to light and air, to individual rather than group choices, to
flexibility of movement, and to the amenities of Nature. Further, that
the development of planned suburban and regional shopping centers
which incorporate these features is satisfying such of these amenities
as are now lacking in the central city.
6. That what unplanned decongestion of central cities is now taking
place, both in living and working population, creates further in-town
blight and obsolescence, expedient land uses, and areas of no-man's-land
in which civic anarchy takes place.
7. That since 60 percent of our Nation's population lives in urban
places and that conservatively estimating, some 30 million people live
in substandard dwelling units and low-grade or depressed areas and
since these figures do not include workers' congestion or substandard
travel conditions, therefore, the condition of our cities and the degrees
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 159
of the condition of land uses are fundamental planning problems and are
neglected concepts in the philosophy of general planning.
8. That congestion takes many forms, all of them bad. That con-
gestion is the converse of adequate space and that adequate space for
infinite purposes is a fundamental requirement in our cities. Space is
seldom, if ever, available to meet the dynamics of urban development.
Therefore, the retention, protection, acquisition and expansion of open
spaces for the requirements of flexibility, air, light, quiet, freedom of
movement, natural amenity and for space itself, which has its own
value, should be as important in our plans as any other land use. At
present it is only a minor element in rebuilding plans and renewal
concepts.
9. That the requirements of human beings should take precedence
over the demands of urban real estate. Space for the general welfare
should be a public concept.
10. That the human being is more important than the automobile
despite opinions and plans to the contrary.
Now let us make some further and perhaps pleasanter assumptions:
1. That the great experiments in new town planning on open land
in Europe and the United States and in particular the Radburn-Green-
belt concepts have set standards and criteria for residential development
compatible to the objectives of sound family and group living and in
harmony with the technology of our times. The wisdom of these stand-
ards has been demonstrated and they are applicable to any location,
whether in town or in the suburbs or in new towns. In other words, we
have sufficient knowledge to apply such standards to the rebuilding of
the central city if we have the imagination and the guts to do so.
2. That if we are to translate our successful experiments with newer
planning concepts in peripheral areas to the rebuilding of the central
city (which was unfortunately neglected by Ebenezer Howard in his
Garden City ideas, just as if a solar system could exist without the sun)
it means more parks, recreation space and greenbelts in the central
city and even an occasional new Central Park, Washington Mall, or
Boston Common. It also means more local recreation spaces for the
working population — or at least garden type rest areas at the ground
level, below the ground level and on the roofs of buildings.
3. That city planning and the public interest which it is intended to
promote, in the foreseeable future, can overcome the pressures of un-
enlightened self-interest and demonstrate the skills and leadership
essential to the renewal of cities.
SPACE CITIES
My children and their peers, the jet propulsion physicists, are deeply
concerned with space ships. I am interested in more terrestrial matters
— space cities. Both are in incubation but more thought seems to be
concentrated on the space ships than the cities. The reason is clearly
160 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
that it seems more feasible to get away from the congested city by using
space ships than it is to create space in those cities.
The space city is nothing we have been talking about in our con-
ferences. It is not to be found in our Federal or state or municipal laws.
In fact, as a concept it is not even born. I am merely suggesting its
conception here. I am suggesting that we use our courage and imagina-
tion and dig holes into the piles of masonry we have been building — not
for throughways, or parking, but for amenity. Let me illustrate.
During the last five years I have been working in Washington in a
six-block area, bounded on the south by Lafayette Square, on the east
by McPherson Square, on the west by Farragut Square, with K Street
on the north. These three squares, part of the original L'Enfant Plan,
are surrounded by office buildings with only two residences, including
the White House, facing on them. The presence of these squares is a
constant source of benefit to the properties adjoining them — not because
they enhance property values but because they provide green space and
leisure for the workers in the huge office buildings in the area. My office
today faces on Lafayette Square and as I prepared this paper I could
look down through the trees on the many people who stop for a moment
on a park bench, watch the squirrels and pigeons, eat their lunches,
read the papers, or converse. It is a very civilized scene and a charming
one, with Andrew Jackson astride his prancing horse, gayly doffing his
hat to his successors across the street.
I would be happy to be accused of being romantic and sentimental
about these green spaces, because I am. There is romance and sentiment
needed in the heart of our cities and all the human qualities that go
with the moment of leisure and the break in miles and miles of grey
stone walls punctured with black holes. That is why the gardens at
Rockefeller center are so successful. They are romantic. And so is the
garden at the center of the new Lever House on Park Avenue and so
is Grant Park in Chicago and the formal Mall in front of the Civic
Center at St. Louis, Cleveland, San Francisco, and other places. Rut
what I particularly like about the smaller squares in Washington is that
so often they have no importance other than charming space which for
my money is more important than anything else, including the formal
settings for public buildings.
Of course, I am talking here about downtown business area spaces.
I would hope that in time, when non-residential land re-uses are being
considered in areas to be cleared of slums and blight, that local plans
will require the retention of open spaces for amenity and that Federal
write-downs will be predicated on such a sensible land use.
PARKS vs. PARKING
It is a sad thing indeed that the words park and parking should be
spelled in the same way and be so dissimilar. When I see all the space
being created these days for parking and so little for parks, I wonder
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 161
whether or not we shouldn't reverse the use of the words, just for fun,
and then see what would happen. Not long ago I had the responsibility
to review and comment on a large high-rise apartment development.
The FHA was requiring for it 80 percent off-street parking. The coverage
was 35 percent and the density was somewhere in the vicinity of 110
families per net acre. The buildings were around fourteen stories high.
The way the thing worked out in plan, the whole acreage could have
been paved in concrete with holes cut in it for the buildings and about a
ten foot border of green at the base of the buildings for some scraggly
bushes and "Keep Off the Grass" signs. There were no play spaces
possible other than the parking areas and the streets, for the several
hundred children who are going to live in the project. Yet this is con-
sidered a modern residential development and the privies are indoors.
In the heated debates I had with other government officials, (debates,
incidentally, that I lost), it was clear that neither recreation or amenity
could be considered as important as off-street parking. The rent return
would be affected. I wonder how important that really is.
AMERICA'S MOST CIVILIZED SQUARE MILE
There is a converse to the above situation which I call America's most
civilized square mile. It is within ten minutes of the White House at the
northern side of Georgetown. It consists of a series of open spaces joined
in a remarkable series of common interests but with different and care-
fully distinguished uses. At the top of a hill sits Dumbarton Oaks, the
handsome mansion in which fine concerts occur. Attached to it is a
wonderful little Byzantine Museum, and below and surrounding are
some of the most beautiful formal gardens in the country. The Museum
and the gardens are open to the public a large part of the year. How
many neighborhoods do you know that have their own personal Byzan-
tine Museum in them? Below the formal gardens in a hollow, is Dum-
barton Oaks Park, our smallest, most beautiful and least known wilder-
ness National Park. It is open on weekends and holidays only. It has a
little stream winding through it and trails into a bird sanctuary. It is a
complete escapist paradise — particularly when the daffodils carpet the
little valley and the dogwood is in bloom. People stroll about quietly
and relax. On the hill east of and adjoining these two open spaces is a
good sized public park and playground. This is Montrose Park. It has
magnificent trees and rolling lawns down which tumble the children
from the Jackson School across the street. No urban public school any-
where has a more beautiful play space. There are picnic tables under the
great trees, tennis courts, and a playground and play school for very
little children — a kind of children's dream spot. Beyond all this and
below is Rock Creek Park and an old cemetery which add to the spacious
feeling of the entire area.
The Dumbarton Oaks Square Mile then encompasses the whole
range of culture from a wonderful little museum to a wilderness area,
162 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
all in one neighborhood in the heart of a great city. This is a very un-
usual oasis of civilization in our savage, modern city.
I cannot possibly cover here what needs to be said about the require-
ments of open space for urban living, for schools, for recreation for all
age groups and of all types. The sole purpose of this statement is to
try and inject in the thinking of the planners and recreation people the
idea that space for our congested cities is a fundamental land use as
space. With permanent space on hand to be used for the purpose of
amenity as well as just air between buildings or storage of cars or other
mechanical utilitarian purposes, we may be able to build fine, permanent
and beautiful cities out of the rags of our old and worn-out ones. We
may, in time, prove that we are able to judge between human and non-
human values and make the correct choices. This should be a funda-
mental objective behind all of our programs of urban renewal.
Advance and Retreat of Metropolitan
Park Building
PROFESSOR H. O. WHITTEMORE, Chairman,
Department of Landscape Architecture, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich.
OUR previous speaker, Mr. Carl Feiss, has outlined the complex
problems of space for our congested cities. He has made an able
presentation of the increasing and often fierce competition for space,
between the primary categories of human activities for which physical
provision must be made, and between the individual exponents of enter-
prise within these primary categories. Among these 9 categories, which
are (1) Industry (2) Trade (3) Transportation (4) Residence (5) Gen-
eral Govt. (6) Public Safety, Health and Welfare (7) Education (8) Rec-
reation or Beneficial Use of Leisure Time (9) Religion, the subject of
this conference, No. 8 is only one; but it is by no means of lesser im-
portance. In fact, it has a most stimulating and beneficial effect upon
all of the other 8.
Now, the primary factor, the one thing we cannot do without in
outdoor recreation facilities, sometimes omitted in listing the qualifica-
tions, is space, lateral space, vertical space, open space. But this one is
also what the exponents of other enterprises have suddenly discovered
they need in increasing quantities. A manufacturing corporation, once
content with two acres of lot space for one of factory floor space now
needs an optimum of 8 acres of lot space for one of factory space. Sub-
urban residences, once on yi acre lots now require &i to % acre or
even 1 acre lots. Highways are now widened from 66 feet to 200 feet
or more. The new suburban shopping centers have a ratio of up to 235
acres of land to 12)^ acres of building space. What seemed like a ple-
thora of space available for recreation is contested for by all of these
other facilities, even to demanding that some of the space already
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 163
designated for parks be used for other purposes.
So great is this demand and so potent the threat that at the annual
meeting of the American Institute of Planners in Kansas City in March,
a workshop was set up, with the subject "The Preservation of Public
Open Spaces." The panel consisted of Miss Harlean James, of the Ameri-
can Planning & Civic Association; Mr. Donald Bush of Hare & Hare
consulting landscape architects for the Kansas City Parks; John Bar-
stow Morrill, Landscape Architect for the Cook County Forest Preserve
District; Mr. Charles Jeffers, landscape architect with the Omaha office
of the National Park Service, and myself. There were 40 or 50 in attend-
ance representing an important cross section of the planning profession.
Many serious cases of the assault upon public parks and open spaces
were cited. Eleven questions relative thereto were posed and discussed.
I have tried to assemble what seemed to be the consensus of opinion of
the assembly and would like to read it to you:
PREFACE. Although it is difficult to document, we are all aware of the
contribution of parkways and park systems to promoting a higher level of
health, both physical and mental. We know also that they contribute to civic
amenity and that, where the people have confidence that parks and reservations
are for the most part held in inviolable trust, they have a real impact on the
stabilization of property values. Several decades ago we had, in our metro-
politan areas, a concept of public open spaces which has all but disappeared
from the urban scene. As a result, today open space has virtually no integrity
whatsoever. It is to explore the possibilities of revitalizing this critical need
that these questions are posed:
1. Should public open spaces be considered as vacant lanids subject to a "higher
use" if one appears?
A. Public open spaces when being used for a beneficent purpose or held
for such use in the near future, for uses which require open out-of-door space,
must not be considered as vacant land, for there can be no higher use than
beneficial out-of-door activities.
2. Under what circumstances should open reservations be subject to military
(and restricted) uses?
A. Public land reservations for beneficial out-of-door activities should not
be appropriated for military purposes except in a grave national emergency,
and should be returned in its original condition within one year or less
after the emergency is past.
3. Should public buildings be placed in public parks?
A. Only such public buildings as are necessary for the fulfillment of the
primary purposes of parks, playgrounds and reservations should be per-
mitted. All others should be strictly excluded and should be on their own
sites, properly located for ease of public access and use.
4. Should existing public open spaces be appropriated for school buildings?
A. See answer to Question 3. In the new design called park-schools, pro-
viding for a close cooperation between park board and school board, the
school building and its accessory areas should be added to and not sub-
tracted from any existing play park to which it will be adjacent.
5. Should fee charging golf courses be parts of public park land?
A. Public fee charging golf courses are in harmony with the major purpose
of out-of-door recreation area and not to be discouraged, but the area
164 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
should be added to and not subtracted from existing landscape parks where
people can wander freely and preferably built on independent areas carefully
selected for the most effective golf course layout.
6. Should expressways for multiple type traffic be located in existing parkways
or through park lands in order to save land and construction costs or to
simplify engineering?
A. This is a most serious issue facing our urban people. Admitting the
grave necessity of expressways into and through urban areas, they must be
located where they will be most convenient and effective. Cost is definitely
a secondary consideration. And shifting location to save a few thousand
dollars by using public park land is short sighted and stupid. However, if
parks are definitely in the line of the best location, and no other location is
possible, the park board must be liberally compensated for the loss of
valuable park recreation land to enable replacement to be made where
most needed. Taking such land without such compensation is reprehensible
public management.
7. Should reservoirs for irrigation flood control or power where a heavy draw
down occurs in summer be placed in existing city, state and national park
lands?
A. Irrigation, flood control or power reservoirs where a heavy draw down
occurs should not be located in existing or planned park lands, unless a
grave danger exists from floods, or if crop failure is imminent without this
storage reservoir, and if no other feasible site can be found. Power reservoirs
can be permitted only if a power shortage is present in the community
with no other source available, and this only if a draw down of not more
than two feet is allowed. In primitive or natural scenic parks, of state or
national governments, none of the above can be permitted. Only artificial
lakes for recreation use maintained at constant level are permissible in state,
county and city landscape parks. In the National Parks, "Any improvement
which would in any material way affect the natural scene which the Congress
has said 'we are to leave unimpaired for the enjoyment of future genera-
tions,' " must be avoided.
8. Should so-called port or navigation districts take over lake or harbor fronts
in public park lands where private frontage is available without replacing
for public use an equal amount of lake frontage within the metropolitan
area?
A. No.
9. Should military or veteran's hospitals be considered a higher use than open
rce parks?
No. — Both are important for safety, health and welfare, but a hospital
should be in its own specially adapted site, which may overlook, but not
be in, public use parkland.
10. Could it be that adequate provision of public open spaces might make
expensive public slum clearance unnecessary?
A. No. Because public slum clearance is necessitated primarily by obso-
lescence of buildings. However, presence of adequate amenity in open
playgrounds and green spaces encourages community pride and better
maintenance and upkeep, thus retarding obsolescence, and maintaining
property values many years beyond the normal period.
11. Should public agencies acquire open spaces in advance of needs in ostensibly
growing areas?
A. Yes — definitely. But only in conformity with a definite, well considered
plan for recreation areas and among all levels of government, so that the
citizens and the courts, if necessary, understand fully the necessity of this
advance acquisition. Requiring all new subdivisions to allocate 5 — 8% of
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 165
land for park purposes is not workable unless the urban authorities can
accept cash or lands to increase ownership where planned and needed.
Conclusion:
The greatest concern of the common people of the municipality with refer-
ence to the above questions is timidity on the part of the park board and
its supporters. They must be armed with facts and principles, and sound
reasoning and be ready to use these weapons. The people are also concerned
that the planning commission or department and officials shall assume
responsibility for using sound judgment in evaluating claims of projects and
activities competing for the use of land and not be dazzled by the size of
projects or the power of their supporting groups or agencies.
The questions and answers suggest that we admit we are on the
defensive. Another question might be: Are there instances where it
might be desirable or necessary to make a strategic retreat. When
should we stand our ground on matters of principle and risk total defeat?
How can we make a compensating advance while we retreat or face
defeat? The answer seems to be to plan large and plan well and advance
with boldness and power; refuse to be dazzled by large competing
projects or intimidated by financial power of those who profit by these
projects or by public officials looking for the easy way out of their space
and money difficulties.
Examples of boldness and power in the past are (1) The Boston
Metropolitan Parks; The defense of Central Park; The Minneapolis
Park System; The Cook County Forest Preserves, Illinois; The East
Bay Parks in the San Francisco Bay Region. Recently we have the
Huron-Clinton Metropolitan Authority parks and parkways and the
40,000 acres of state recreation areas in the 5 county Detroit metropolitan
region ; The Maryland National Capital park and parkway developments,
the bold developments in and around New York City; the park-school
programme at Grand Rapids, Mich., the recreation area developments
on the Tennessee River and its tributaries sponsored by the T.V.A.;
the Blue Ridge Parkway sponsored by the National Park Service, and
others. You will note, however, that most of these are in the outlying
areas and have not fully compensated for the losses or the overcrowding
within the cities.
Mr. President, I want to thank you for the opportunity to present
these issues.
Town and County Forests
ROLAND F. EISENBEIS, Superintendent of Conservation,
Forest Preserve District of Cook County, Illinois
I COULDN'T help but smile on the day that I was asked to talk on
town and county forests. For the assignment was given to one who
was born on the plains of North Dakota. A land where a tree became a
landmark and where the stealing of a branch, which included a crotch
big enough from which to make a sling shot, was cause enough for court
166 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
action at the time that the Judge made his next circuit. It wasn't until
we left our native State that we realized that many of the existing
timber stands were not shelter belts planted back in CCC days, but
were part of the natural landscape. However, most of us short grass
people have become used to the big plants with the leafy canopy and
have great reverence for them.
As a passing thought — have you ever noticed, generally speaking,
that communities with large numbers of old trees usually have many
churches? The answer must lie with the four freedoms upon which our
very early settlements were founded.
Trees, as such, had a great influence on the American way of life.
The White Oak provided one of the very earliest forms of revenue for
the Americans. The wood was valuable for the shipping industry and
the making of whiskey barrels. White and longleaf pine were in great
demand as export material. They provided the masts and spars, tur-
pentine and pitch, or naval stores as they were called, for those nations
with large and powerful fleets.
As our towns and villages grew, the local timber stands vanished.
It is the absence or the limited acreage of forested areas near to our
communities that has brought a different kind of value to them. This
recent set of values is one of lasting quality and will be invaluable in
helping to preserve naturalistic lands for the future if set aside at present.
The speakers that preceded me on the program here today presented
excellent pictures of present and future recreational forest needs. The
problems of not only a growing but a shifting population, were well
covered. It is well established that we can no longer depend on land
gifts, from those who pass on, as being sufficient acreage where our
people and those of coming generations can find relief or surcease from
their toil and their own kind.
It is not important, nor is it profitable, to concern ourselves with
the fact that man has established a certain rate of reproduction, suc-
ceeded in lowering his death rate, and managed to lengthen his life
span, thus increasing greatly the rate of population growth in countries
such as ours. However, it is important — it is imperative — that we plan
for our total population now and the greater, more urbanized population
of the future. This calls for fast bold planning.
The late editor of Harper 's Magazine, Frederick Lewis Allen, once said:
"If we are to prevent formerly pretty residential areas from succumbing to
blight, and the few remaining bits of woodland and pasture from being cluttered
with houses for people — who thought they were moving to woodland and
pasture — somebody must plan ahead, think big, and plan big. And the first
requirement is to set aside, now, large tracts of land where nobody at all may
build."
There are a few fine examples in our country where regional or county
forests have been established, such as Huron-Clinton Metropolitan
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 167
Authority, the Cleveland and Akron metropolitan park systems, and
others. These are living examples of what has been done and what
should be done in many of our heavily populated areas. However, most
of these lack the necessary land acquisition program to care for future
needs. Their existence and success has indicated that they are filling,
at present, a definite need. I am fairly well acquainted with the pro-
grams of each. However, I should like to point out what is being done
to fulfill the recreational needs of the second largest city in our country.
What has happened to Los Angeles County, since this speech was writ-
ten, I do not know.
Our own Cook County Forest Preserve has attempted to keep abreast
of the population growth that has taken place in the last thirty or more
years. In 1929, the total legal allowance of our forest preserves was
35,000 acres. At this same time the population of Cook County, Illinois,
was 3,982,000. Since that time the maximum has been increased to
44,000 acres and the population has grown to over 4J^ million people.
This foresighted, bold acquisition plan has been under the guidance of
our General Superintendent, Charles G. Sauers, who has just recently
requested that the acreage of the forest preserves be increased to 50,000
acres. The bill is to be considered during the current session of the
state legislature.
Fortunately, natural forests, if protected and large enough, maintain
their natural beauties and are able to preserve their ecological founda-
tions. Our fundamental consideration is based on the biological adage
that says, "Nature left to herself is always orderly." The four and one-
half million people of Cook County, which includes Chicago and its
104 suburbs, have over 40,000 acres of such naturalistic lands which
bear out this proclamation in spite of the fact that it is the largest and
most heavily used reservation of its kind in this country. 80 percent of
the land is wild or semi-wild and, of this, 60 percent is forested.
Fundamentally, the Forest Preserve District is not a park, as that
term is commonly employed in urban areas, nor is it a group of outer
parks. It is a naturalistic reservation and a forested sanctuary through-
out, with recreational facilities for appropriate forms of intensive use
on the fringes. The interiors have been made and are kept inaccessible
except by walking, bicycling, or by horseback riding on the established
trails, in order that the bulk of the holdings, as nearly as possible, are
maintained in a primitive state.
People are becoming more outdoor-minded. There is a growing inter-
est in natural history and in conservation of our natural resources.
There is increasing need and demand for accessible facilities which will
enable them to enjoy unregimented voluntary outdoor activities, and
the freedom and peacefulness of native landscape. The first need is for
space, for elbow room, for freedom from man-made and man-handled
environment; where freedom of will and movement meets no interfer-
168 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
ence, and where there is a feeling of closeness to the soil — a sense of
return to the ancestral state.
The Cook County Forest Preserve lies, roughly, in a great outer
belt around the City of Chicago. Many of its holdings are strung out in
narrow strips along five major water courses. There is a huge block of
10,000 acres in the Palos Hills — less than an hour's ride from the heart
of the city where our greatest wilderness bird, the wild turkey, has
found suitable habitation in which to survive.
There are numerous isolated holdings, some large, some small, in-
cluding several very fine tracts from 1300 to 1700 acres of each. A con-
siderable acreage lies within the corporate limits of the City of Chicago
and many of the 104 suburbs that hug each other along the radiating
railroads and highways. No matter where you live in Cook County,
you can reach some part of the forest preserve in a half-hour drive or
less. And at some time, nearly everybody does. For many it is within
walking distance. Within several weeks from now, with favorable
weather on any weekend, as many as four hundred thousand may
come picnicking or to relax in the shade or wander along the trails — and
there is ample room for all of them.
The additional six thousand acres that have been requested and are
at present under legislative consideration, are to be used for land pur-
chase in the northwestern section of the county. This area will be com-
parable to the 10,000-acre Palos region we now own in the south. This
area includes what might be considered the headwaters to a small
waterway that runs through our county. Water is a priceless possession
in naturalistic areas. Our boss states that "There is something about
water that irons the wrinkles out of a tired mind."
It not only serves as a source of recreation to the countless numbers
of fishermen, but the very presence and scenic beauties of such areas
are essential to a varying and pleasurable landscape. Then, too, water
areas serve as refuges for many kinds of wildlife including the teeming
thousands of migratory waterfowl that funnel through Chicagoland.
The distribution of our holdings throughout the county is fairly
even and exceptionally close to the city. However, it appears as though
city people actually enjoy driving a reasonable distance to the spot
selected for their outing. It has been found that they are very willing
to drive even fifty miles — one way — as an average distance, for family
recreational purposes. This exceeds the distance that Cook County
people need to travel to our preserves, but in many States such distances
would not be considered excessive.
It is also interesting to note that in two studies recently made by
the National Recreation Association on the "Recreation Activities
Enjoyed and Desired by Families," that: "Picnicking was found to be
the most popular form of recreation outside towns and cities."
Each year our preserves serve over 13 million people who enjoy the
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 169
passive forms of recreation. People are left to seek their own enjoyment
without any form of organized or regimented recreation being offered.
There is a degree of sacredness to be found within naturalistic regions
that frowns on using such lands for attractions that are not in harmony
with the land. Last year the national forests had more than forty million
visitors. The greatest use, by twenty and one-half millions, was for
general enjoyment and picnicking.
If we are to follow the evidence of what the majority of people do,
throughout the country, it would seem that woodlands and forests are
their first preference for recreational purposes.
The facilities wanted by the average family when visiting woodlands
are few. Of course, the car, like the telephone, is here to stay, so ample
parking must be provided. However, we use parking as a control
measure. Our lands are fertile and will absorb considerable pressure.
So that a given piece of land is not over used, parking facilities are
made available in accordance to the capacity of the area. Much of our
Forest Preserve policy is to be found in the principle as stated by Dr.
Laurie Cox, which emphasizes that the greatest value of a naturalistic,
recreational area is its character of freedom, spaciousness and wild
beauty. That there is for every scenic unit, depending upon its character,
size and ecology, a very definite point of human saturation beyond
which this value and charm are lost, both temporarily when the crowd
is present, and permanently because maintenance is unable to make
good the scenic damage.
The fact that we are a "green belt" around Chicago means that we
find ourselves with 200 miles of highway frontage and about 80 miles
of rivers and creeks. Added to this, we have become backdoor neighbors
to countless numbers of private property owners. This creates an extra-
ordinary physical situation and many problems of protection and
control. However, these are the inevitable considerations when making
town or county forests easily accessible to large populations. Then, too,
we must provide for tremendous use and at the same time preserve the
unspoiled natural features of the environment for enjoyment by the
future generations. About 7000 picnic permits are issued each year to
groups ranging in number from 25 to 10,000. Groups that are smaller
than 25 in number need no permit.
Our solution has been to develop a sufficient number of rather small
areas, well placed along the highway borders, for intensive use; and
then to maintain exceptionally good protection of the interiors against
fire, automobiles and over-use by people. We now have 165 major picnic
centers, and countless numbers of smaller ones. Added to these we
have 378 of what we call fixed tables. These are permanent tables located
singly along the roads, for the non-gregarious or family groups. Mass
production necessitates massed living and so man, when away from
the city, seeks out a place where he and his family can enjoy the spa-
170 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
ciousness, freedom and peacefulness of a native landscape. Our policy
has been to develop our holdings with first consideration for the family,
for this is the greatest common denominator among people.
Winding through our forest areas are the 175 miles of improved
trails used by hikers, bicyclists and 30,000 registered equestrians. There
are three large outdoor swimming pools which have an annual attend-
ance of 165,000. Our six golf courses handle usually more than 200,000
players.
The heavy use that I have emphasized is largely on weekends and
especially on the 17 Sundays and holidays from Memorial Day to
Labor Day. Prior to 1947, the picnic centers used to lie virtually idle
during the week days. Since that time, through encouragement, the
youth group organizations have established the largest Day Camp
program in the country, using our facilities. Last year, well over 20,000
children from the city and its suburbs enjoyed Day Camp programs
held in the picnic centers of our preserves.
The schools, in the most recent years, are putting the woods to great
use as outdoor laboratories, for it is here that many things can be better
taught than in the classroom. The varied uses to which town or county
forests can be put are unlimited. This, too, must be considered as an
intangible value to be had from such holdings, for a forest, in order to
be enjoyed, and to gain and hold respect, must represent something
that cannot be had or enjoyed in the city.
To hundreds of thousands lacking transportation, money or oppor-
tunity to visit even the nearby state parks, these forest areas are a
Godsend. City or county forests, as naturalistic areas, have a definite
function and a specific place between the small city park on one hand
and the large wilderness areas on the other. Their intrinsic values lie
in the cultural factors that they bring to the neighboring communities
and people. It is important that man :
"Makes rules for the preservation of natural beauty. Unless he protects it
even at the partial expense of some of his other greedy activities, he will cut
off his descendants, a helpless prey forever, to the base materialism of mean
and vulgar sights. Destruction walks by noonday. Unless we reverse the
engines and, instead of speeding up destruction, plan the development of the
country so that the minimum of harm can he done to nature and to beauty,
the future of our race, whatever its social, economic and political structure
may be, will be brutish and shorn of real value."
Discussion
EARL VON STORCH, Deputy Director, Planning and Engineering Branch,
Urban Renewal Administration, Housing and Home Finance Agency
THE three speakers we have just heard have raised many chal-
lenging points. In fact, the substance of their papers will require
some digestion and considerable thought before their full implication
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 171
can be grasped. The time we have left for discussion can hardly produce
an adequate response, so therefore I hope that the papers will be given
their proper attention when published in the proceedings of this con-
ference and that the ideas and problems presented can be taken up
again at future conferences.
"While I am sure that the papers were prepared without advance
collaboration, no one can question the fact that we have here a close
interrelationship of ideas. Mr. Feiss, in his proposal for a space city,
has advanced some revolutionary ideas on the amount and type of open
space we should have in our central areas and has raised sights with
respect to open spaces in the areas beyond. His concepts and our
reactions to them are of particular and immediate significance in con-
nection with planning for urban renewal and rebuilding, which will
largely focus on the rebuilding of central areas and the restoration and
preservation of built-up residential areas wherever they might lie.
Professor Whittemore has not only indicated ways in which our sights
might be raised but has also emphasized the problem of protecting and
retaining such open space as our cities have been able to establish.
Mr. Eisenbeis has carried the discussion to the outer parts of our ur-
banized areas, thus setting the wide panorama which must be kept
in view as we think of open space for a growing urban population.
"It seems to me that the rich fare we have just been given calls for
treatment in three ways. First, it indicates the need for a new and fresh
look at the type of city we think we should have and the function of
open space in it. It indicates that there is still plenty of room for new
thinking in setting our planning objectives and goals. Second, as we
re-think our planning objectives and goals, we will need to take a hard
look at the plans themselves, at their adequacy and at what needs to
be done to carry them out. Third, and this is really the tough one, is
action to get the open spaces we need and then, once gotten, to keep
them. As Professor Whittemore has pointed out, this 'keeping' is a real
and not an imaginary problem.
"Now, with only a few minutes left, I know that we can hardly get
into questions of the type I have indicated or others which you in the
audience have in mind, so once again I suggest that these papers be
the subject of your very serious consideration after this conference is
over."
I have said nothing about points raised during discussion because
the prepared statement Perry Norton made during the discussion period
took up so much time and, according to my notes and my memory,
there was nothing else of significance to report. If, as you had previously
planned, Perry's paper is published in full, it might be prefaced by a
statement that, while it was presented at this meeting because it fitted
in with the topic at hand, it was intended to reply to matters that had
been raised at several other sessions of the conference.
172 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
PERRY L. NORTON, Executive Director,
American Institute of Planners, Cambridge, Massachusetts
IF I HAD tried to say the things six years ago that I am about to
say now, I might not be here today because Professor Whittemore
might have flunked me and I could have ended up being a surveyor.
Most of the talk thus far has been in terms of quantities. There has
been more or less unchallenged assumption that parks are necessary —
and I am using the word parks here to mean open spaces in the broad
senses which you use here.
It seems to be a fairly safe bet to conclude from what has been said
that, if in 1940 we had X number of people and in 1955 we have 10X
number of people, we now need ipso facto 10 times the amount of public
open space as was available to our urban populations in 1910. Oh yes,
there are modifications to this too simple formula, but they are only
modifications. No one is giving much attention to the why of the needs
for open spaces. Specifically what are we trying to accomplish for society
in the preservation and development of these open spaces? We have
only the quantitative approach (with apologies to Carl Feiss's senti-
mental attachment to Washington's squares and Dumbarton Oaks)
and this is the worst kind. In other societal problems we have begun
to learn something of critical needs. In terms of job-status and occu-
pational characteristics we begin to see what motivates people to behave
as they do. In terms of the power structure in the community we begin
to see patterns which we have heretofore only suspected. But in terms
of leisure-time activities, we have been doing a lot of loose thinking.
We know there is a distinct relationship between the do-it-yourself
activities of the father of the family and the cultural need for an identi-
fication of the father role. But we have not yet translated this relation-
ship into a re-examination of the artifacts of leisure-time activities.
We say that we need parks and playgrounds and picnics grounds and
camping grounds, and a whole host of areas and then if someone asks
us why we need these activities we become righteously angry and we
sputter out such comments as :
Relaxation from the crushing concrete canyons of the city
Education, to become more humble through life processes and
Lewis Mumford might add, to participate in these life processes.
I submit to you that these are not adequate expressions of the needs
for open space. Is it for relaxation, for specific kinds of physical exercise,
for identification with the soil in a world torn asunder through tech-
nological advances, for personal communication with Nature — is it for
any of these things that we seek to provide the artifacts? How can we
be so sure that the facilities we have been providing thus far are the
facilities that we now need to meet these objectives? Professor Whitte-
more asked this same question.
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 173
Yesterday, Mr. Grady Clay made a very important observation,
which should have started some wheels turning. He said that buyers
of one-family homes bought a piece of open space. Think about that a
moment. In recent years there have been literally millions of persons
who have heretofore lived in congested urban apartments who are now
owners of one-family houses with plots of green which are their own
pride and responsibility. Carl Feiss refers to the flight to the suburbs.
You may say that subdivisions have been devouring the countryside . . .
I say that millions of people have achieved something of a goal through
acquiring a piece of land. This movement has real significance to us in
terms of the quantity and quality of our public open spaces. Who will
picnic in a public park when he has a private park in his own back yard?
Who will spend much time admiring public gardens when he has a
horticultural project of his own going on in his garden? What man will
feel the need for camping when he has a fistful of work to accomplish
in his own backyard?
We have talked here of increasing leisure time. True, work-hours per
job have been reduced during the years from 60 to 50 to 40 hours. True
also that the 30-hour week is on the horizon. But the number of jobs
have increased. More people have two jobs and the number of women
who are taking on jobs outside of the family may be increasing. All
this looms as a factor not part of our cultural patterns of 40 years ago.
Someone here has said that we must think in terms of the automobile
(certainly not an original statement) ; but how incredibly slow we have
been in recognizing the automobile in terms of park systems. Michigan
has quite a thorough system of tourist roadside parks, a device which
makes sense to a lot of Michigan motorists.
The Sunday ride is a recreation activity and maybe we need no more
reason than this to preserve vast areas of forests and lakes and country-
side. The psychological impact of being able to say with feeling: "These
hills, forests, this green magnificence, this is my own, my native land."
But I think that you must keep evaluating the why of things. If
you can tell city planners what social, cultural and psychological needs
are served through the preservation and development of open spaces,
then you will furnish these planners with the same sort of information
and pressure that have been provided for other needs.
I beg of you not to accept purely quantitative evaluations of the
need for open spaces. Give us the why and we will try to give you the
wherewithal. You have heard from enough planners here to be quite
certain that the planner will look upon public open spaces as one of
several kinds of land uses. If you are self-critical of your demands you
will be most sure of your grounds for justifying public open spaces.
174 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
Central Park, New York
STUART CONSTABLE, Executive Officer,
Department of Parks, New York City
THE Central Park is not now in any danger of invasion by improper
uses or of reduction in area; in fact, it is in no danger of any sort.
It enjoys the protection of public opinion — the Press, the Park
Association and Commissioner Moses.
The entire park system in New York is safe from invasion and from
reduction in area. It is being increased at every opportunity. Since
1934 the number of playgrounds in New York has increased from 114
to 640, and the park acreage from 14,827 to 27,057 acres.
All park areas are inalienable. In order to use park land for any
other purpose, the Commissioner must surrender the land to the Board
of Estimate ; thereafter a demapping proceeding and a local law removing
the park trust must be passed by the Council.
All this takes so long that any diversion or any proposed diversion
of park land is well advertised long before the event and public opinion
led by the Park Association can easily save the park land if the proposed
diversion is improper.
Central Park has withstood a long series of attempts to use it for
something other than a park.
From the records it is evident that since Central Park was first
founded the proposed invasions of the park could be numbered in the
hundreds. But the city fathers who conceived the park, Frederick
Olmstead and Calvert Vaux who designed and built it, Samuel Parsons,
Superintendent for many years, and Robert Moses have all effectively
preserved this great park for the people of New York.
An early threat was that of a proposed World's Fair in 1893. Several
foreign world's fairs had been resounding successes and the United
States hoped to emulate them. New York wanted the fair and naturally
everyone looked at good old Central Park, with plans for ripping up
tremendous areas, roofing over the reservoir, etc. etc., but it was saved,
partly by chance and partly by the strong opposition of Andrew H.
Green, Boss Thomas Platt and Charles A. Dana. The Mayor and all
the Park Commissioners were for using the park but the struggle for-
tunately ended when Chicago outbid New York at Washington and got
the necessary votes in Congress. It was a close call.
The average attack on Central Park, is easily repulsed through sheer
non-action. Since the proponent of any invasion must have the approval
of the Park Department and the City, it is only through some special
pressure that any of the radical schemes near accomplishment, such as
cited in the World's Fair case. In the administrations since reorganiza-
tion in 1934, such a situation rarely arises, and although there have
been schemes presented, they don't get very far. Throughout its history
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 175
the defense of Central Park has been ably handled by strong men, the
press and public opinion.
Following are some of the more important cases:
In 1886 at the death of General Grant, New York practically gave
the family a free choice of any site in the City. Samuel Parsons was
able to keep the tomb out of Central Park only by way of subtle sug-
gestion.
At one time a map was actually published by Theodore Roosevelt's
uncle and others proposing selling the lower half of the park for building
lots and acquiring more land farther north. This scheme got nowhere.
In the late nineteenth century, another idea, complete with drawings
and pictures was presented for a grand boulevard, or Rotten Row, along
Fifth Avenue, slicing a nice chunk out of the park, but public opinion
overcame it.
One specially interesting incident which almost won out was a pro-
posed race track on the west side of the park. Fast horses were fash-
ionable at that time and the social leaders actually got a bill through
Albany authorizing the City to build a track in the park. In this case
opposition came from the press, the public and associations of various
kinds. Even the Park Commissioners were for the track. Then public
storm warnings appeared and physical violence was threatened on the
laborers at the track. The acquiescent city government abruptly changed
its mind and the same senator who had helped pass the original bill
was sent to Albany to secure its repeal. This was a clear case of public
opinion winning the fight. It is interesting to note that the Harlem
River Speedway was developed after this and there also a battle took
place. The horse people did not want a pedestrian promenade along the
water, the public did. The promenade was eventually added. As late
as 1918 some people were proposing a race track around the reservoir
in the center of Central Park.
Several other situations can be cited, such as the proposed Heine
Statue, which fortunately ended up in the South Rronx; the creation
of a Zoological Park north of the reservoir, which also was defeated.
It is interesting to note that the Zoological Park and Botanical Garden
eventually occupied most of Bronx Park, the Central Park of the Bronx.
Reverse procedure seems to have obtained in the Menagerie at 64th
Street. Public opinion would not let it be removed from the park.
The Sherman Statue now at 59th Street was originally proposed
for the end of the Mall with complete reconstruction of about three
acres of the area to be dominated by a great equestrian statue. In this
case Mr. Parsons seems to have kept it out of the park and placed it
where it now is by argument.
On one occasion the power of the press was boldly used to effectively
stop an invasion. A plan had been prepared to make a plaza at 59th
Street and 8th Avenue, which would require reconstruction of a large
176 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
section of the park and cutting of many trees. The Commissioners
agreed to the work, against Mr. Parsons' viewpoint. He was directed
to proceed, which he did, but behind their backs approached the New
York Sun, whose editor wrote a sarcastic article ridiculing the whole
plan. Work was quietly stopped and the whole thing forgotten.
In 1941 a plan was proposed to create an eight acre plaza of South
America within the park at 81st to 86th Streets. The proponent tried
to forward his case by a long detailed letter to Nelson Rockefeller,
Director of South American affairs. It was effectively squashed by a
typical Moses letter with his unqualified disapproval and opposition.
A perennial later day attack on Central Park stems from our present
traffic problem which can be solved by carving an underground garage
in the park. This is a comparatively easy suggestion to knock down,
both from the viewpoint of damage to Central Park and that under-
ground Manhattan is solid rock.
I should like to read the correspondence referred to concerning the
Plaza of South American Heroes.
Law Offices
JOHN T. HETTRICK
N. Y. C.
Residence
60 West 70th Street February 6, 1941
Hon. Robert Moses,
Park Commissioner
New York City
Dear Sir:
After an interview with Mr. Constable of the engineering force of the De-
partment of Parks, I take the liberty of attaching a copy of a letter sent to
Nelson Rockefeller as "Director of Cultural Relations between the Americas."
This letter was also submitted by me to Hon. A. A. Berle, Jr., Asst. Secre-
tary of State in Washington. Information was returned to me that before the
State Department would give the plan official consideration it would have to be
approved by you as Park Commissioner. I was told that the plan had received
favorable unofficial consideration.
I propose to mail several small artistic pamphlets by the thousands without
any names being used. This work to be done under the supervision of a small
"Temporary and Unofficial Committee" at our own expense. The pamphlet
will be entitled "PROPOSED LATIN-AMERICAN 'HALL OF FAME' IN
CENTRAL PARK." If enough interest is shown by the officials of the 22 South
American countries and in this country the way would be open to form official
committees to carry on the work. If you approve I will see that your letter is
broadcast to the countries interested and printed in fac-simile for general
distribution.
(signed) JO
Very truly yours,
JOHN T. HETTRICK
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 177
JOHN T. HETTRICK
60 West 70th Street
New York City
February 11, 1941
Nelson Rockefeller, Esq.,
Director of Cultural and Commercial
Relations between the Americas,
Rockefeller Center, N. Y. City.
Dear Sir:
Your work in this field may mark the path of peace between all the nations
of the two continents of the Western Hemisphere lasting for a century.
May I offer a suggestion which may be helpful to you in this vast under-
taking?
In the section of Central Park from 81st to 86th Street on the West side,
there is a plot of about eight acres, dominated by the impressive equestrian
statue of Simon Bolivar, Liberator of several South American countries. It
would be feasible to establish a Sud American "Hall of Fame" — "Hill of Fame"-
"Colinade de Fama" or "Sala de Fama." All the republics of Central and
South America to be asked to participate with the people of the United States
in placing memorials, statues, or busts of the great personages who, from the
days of Balboa and Magellan, have struggled for the liberty of their peoples.
About thirty years after the close of our Revolutionary War there was begun
the struggle of the peoples in the Southern Continent for independence. There
arose great patriots, statesmen and war generals about whom very little is
known by the general public of this country. To bring the history of the heroes
of South America before our people in a graphic manner would stimulate the
youth and all of our citizens to the value of liberty and democracy for which
other people besides ourselves have struggled.
The cost of the memorials and statues would be small when divided between
the 22 countries to the South. I am convinced that many citizens of the United
States would subscribe the comparatively small sums needed for our part in
this work. Any needed landscaping would not be expensive, as the rocky height
and surroundings form a natural and impressive site for this purpose. Improve-
ments to the grounds and foundations might be made a W.P.A. project. In
many of the capitals of South America are noble monuments to national heroes,
and replicas of some of these might be used.
An advantage of this site is that the imposing New York State Memorial
Building to President Theodore Roosevelt is just south and also the Museum
of Natural History, the largest institution of its kind in the world, to which
hundreds of thousands are attracted every year. Visitors would naturally be
attracted to this South American Memorial on the rocky hill just north. It
might please our "Good Neighbors" to know that thousands of our school child-
ren from the public schools would visit the place and become acquainted with
the history of their countries.
ORGANIZATION AND PRELIMINARY WORK
The cooperation of the President of the United States and the Secretary of
State would be necessary at the outset. Communications to the rulers of the
South and Central American countries would follow. Committees of citizens
of the U.S.A. and countries which may become interested, could be organized
to work with the ambassadors, ministers, counsels and other officials of our
neighbors. Architects, sculptors, and artists would become interested and many
178 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
would volunteer their services for the preliminary work. Similar professional
men and citizens of South America would be attracted to the project.
After the preliminary work it would be fitting to have a combined celebration
of all interested at a DEDICATION OF THE SITE, to be held, say on July 4,
1941. The display could be made a most colorful pageant of international im-
portance. Speeches would show the solidarity of the countries of the Western
Hemisphere to keep their freedom and democracy without interference by the
totalitarian powers of Europe. President Roosevelt might decide that it was
a fitting time to broadcast to the peoples of the U.S.A. and South America and
by short wave all over the world the importance of the event.
A showing of the naval, army, air and other arms of the international defense
of the Western Hemisphere might be approved by the U.S.A. and other govern-
ments. The parade of even small detachments from all of the 22 countries to
the South would be a demonstration of our unity and strength and would hearten
the peoples of every country in the world except the Axis powers of Germany,
Japan and Italy — and before July 4, 1941, the Axis powers may be reduced
to two.
"LIBERATORS AND HEROES OF SOUTH AMERICA"
That there is no shortage of famous personages is shown by a book just
published with the above title.
The following is from a critique of this volume published in the Book Review
of the New York TIMES on February 9, 1941:—
"There is the forerunner of independence, Miranda of Venezuela; San
Martin, who saved Chile; Moreno, champion of free speech in Argentina;
Artigas, "protector of free people" in Uruguay; Gen. Relgrano, the pa-
triotic soldier; Bernardo O'Higgins, the "supreme director" of Chile;
Paez, "the man on horseback" and at some length the career of the great
Simon Bolivar. There are Sucre and Santander, the young patriot martyr
Tirandentes; Bonifacio, the father of Brazilian independence; Dom Pedro,
the first and the second; Unanue of Peru and Sarmiento, the school-master
President of Argentina."
The above and with Balboa, the first European to sight the Pacific Ocean
from a height in Central America, and Magellan, the first human to organize
an expedition which circumnavigated the world, may be added to the list of
heroes of South and Central America. The great sculptors and artists of our
modern times could make this "Hall of Fame" as famous in the centuries to
come as the immortal works of Athens and Rome. The effect on the "cultural
relations between the Americas" can hardly be conceived.
As an after-thought it occurred to me that our more than competent Park
Commissioner, Robert Moses, who would have control over such a project,
might object to the erection of buildings; but surely he could not object to
colonnades, pergolas and memorials of artistic merit which would enhance the
beauty of one of the rare spots in Central Park.
If this plan meets with your approval I would be pleased to do the necessary
work in the publicity and secretarial field, in my leisure time, without com-
pensation.
Wishing you every success in your great international undertaking, I remain,
Respectfully yours,
(signed) J. T. H.
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 179
City of New York
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS
Arsenal, Central Park
March 7, 1941
John Hettrick, Esq.,
60 West 70th Street,
New York City, New York.
Dear Sir:
Your grandiose scheme to fill up part of Central Park with assorted memor-
ials, has my unqualified disapproval and opposition, and I hope you will drop
the matter without creating unnecessary trouble. This letter is written you
under the provisions of the City Charter which places upon the Park Com-
missioner initial responsibility for approving or disapproving memorials in parks.
Central Park, as its name implies, is a comparatively small recreation space
in the very center of Manhattan, serving a vast number of people of all kinds
and ages. It already has too many buildings and structures in it, not appro-
priate or desirable in a park of this kind.
We have fortunately a fine memorial to Bolivar which symbolizes all the
things you refer to in your letter. If you had proposed to improve the sur-
roundings of the Bolivar Monument so as to give it a better setting, and to
afford better access and public accommodations, I would have no quarrel with
you, but even such a thing would have to be done with the greatest restraint.
I therefore urge that you drop this promotion scheme.
Copies of this letter are being sent to Adolf Berle and Nelson Rockefeller,
and of course, to the Mayor.
Very truly yours,
(signed) ROBERT MOSES
Commissioner.
So long as there are dedicated public servants like Robert Moses
the parks in New York are in no danger. However, through the years
it has been intelligently guided public sentiment which has kept the
Central Park for the people.
There will be many future suggestions that park lands be diverted
to other uses. Selfish interests will always try to find a way to divert
public property to private use, and misguided proponents of public
economy will always see in park lands ideal school, hospital, library,
incinerator and sewerage disposal plant sites.
Our fervent hope in New York is that our parks will be as well pro-
tected in the future as they have been for the past twenty-one years.
180 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
Our Perpetual (?) Temporaries
RUDOLPH KAUFFMAN II, Assistant to the Managing Editor, The Evening Star.
TWO weeks ago yesterday the Capital of the United States and the
rest of the world celebrated the 10th anniversary of VE Day.
If it sounds like vain provincialism to put Washington and all other
places in that order, it stems from an understandable pride in this
beautiful city where I was born and where I've worked for a newspaper
that has grown with the city for more than a century.
In the 10 years that have passed since Germany laid down her arms
in World War II there have been many changes in Washington. There
are more people. There are more and better schools, there are more and
better roads, bridges, stores, trees and playgrounds. The average home
is a better one. The average individual lives a fuller life. Almost anyone
would have to admit that we have progressed.
There is one thing, however, that hasn't changed — the unsightly,
cheap, expensive to maintain, sweltering, inefficient temporary buildings
that the necessities of two world wars have left with us, that prevent
the fulfillment of a half century of painstaking effort and expenditure
to provide a fitting setting for the principal buildings of our Government
and the fine memorials that have been erected to commemorate its
great men and achievments.
Of the 75 "tempos" built in World Wars I and II, 54 remain. Fifty
of those remaining were built in the second war. Only 4 remain of the
24 that cluttered the Mall, Union Station Plaza and other areas when
the November 11, 1918 Armistice was signed.
Of the 54 "tempos" still here, 30 may be said to be in key park areas —
the areas designed to provide the setting for the heart of our Government.
I speak of those on Constitution and Pennsylvania avenues, on the Mall
and in West Potomac Park. The other 24 are scattered in areas where
they are perhaps somewhat less objectionable.
I won't dwell at length on why they are objectionable. I think we're
pretty well aware of the reasons.
1. They wall in the Reflecting Pool on both sides and interpose
themselves between the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Mem-
orial, occupying what is intended to be one great park setting for these
two beautiful and inspiring structures that all America travels here
to see.
2. To all intents and purposes they completely preempt West Po-
tomac Park.
3. They scar marginal areas of the Mall between the Capitol and
the Monument.
4. They are more expensive to maintain than permanent structures.
Being flimsy and temporary, they require excessive cleaning and paint-
ing. Some of the older ones have had to have new foundations.
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 181
5. They provide an extremely inefficient place in which to work.
For example, 21,513 man hours of Government work were sacrified in
the summer of 1954 because the heat became insufferable and employes
were let off, not to mention the work loss on days not quite hot enough
for employes to be let off.
I doubt if you could find anyone who thinks this is right, or anyone
who wouldn't immediately say he thought they ought to come down.
No successful private industry would think of trying to get good
work out of its office employes in such surroundings.
When plans were laid for building tempos during World War II,
President Franklin Roosevelt said that he hoped they would be so
designed that they would fall down in five years.
They haven't fallen down, of course, and only one of those Mr.
Roosevelt was talking about has been torn down.
Fair questions to ask are: "Why hasn't something been done?
What can be done to rid our Capital City of these eyesores?"
I said a moment ago that 20 of the 24 World War I "tempos" have
disappeared. They disappeared, as many of you no doubt know, in
the period between the wars. Before I attempt to answer the questions
I've just asked, I'd like to go back to the 20 's and 30 's and take a look
at how we were able to accomplish their demolition then; because
what we want to accomplish now was accomplished, broadly speaking,
then.
There were four major factors which helped set things to right after
World War I:
1. A 48% decrease in Federal employment in Washington in the 10
years following the 1918 Armistice. Employment in the 10 years since
VE Day has dropped only 15 percent.
2. The Federal Triangle Project, conceived originally by the Mac-
Millan Commission of 1901, revived in the early 1920's and authorized
by Act of Congress on May 25, 1926, which set the stage for new per-
manent buildings to house Federal employes.
3. The Depression of the 1930's which spawned the public works
programs that carried the Triangle to completion plus additional build-
ings to meet the needs of new and expanding Government agencies.
4. Aggressive leadership on the part of successive Presidents and
Congressional leaders.
Many of you are familiar with what took place; the moves that gave
us modern Washington.
In the first place demolition of "tempos" was provided for in the re-
gular appropriations bills.
Men like Frederic A. Delano, Charles Moore, U. S. Grant III,
Senator Smoot of Utah, Andrew Mellon, David Lynn, David E. Finley,
Louis A. Simon, George A. Von Nerta and James A. Wetmore and many
others, having revived the idea of a permanent building program,
182 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
wrapped the idea up in red ribbon as a program with a clearly recogniz-
able master plan and theme and put it across.
In his message to Congress dated December 9, 1925, President
Coolidge explained that no building designed primarily for the Executive
Branch had been constructed for 40 years and asked for an annual
appropriation of $10,000,000 for a building program later described by
the National Commission of Fine Arts as "more ambitious than any
ever undertaken by the Government since Congress provided for the
location of the National Capital on the banks of the Potomac."
Secretary of the Treasury Mellon is credited with playing the major
role in selling the idea of the Federal Triangle to President Coolidge.
He brought together a Board of Architectural Consultants to work out
the broad aspects of the Triangle plan. He paid for a motion picture
which was used to demonstrate to members of Congress how the Tri-
angle would look. Mr. Finley wrote the scenario. It was called "The
City of Washington."
Shortly after the election of President Hoover, Mr. Mellon was host
to an audience of notables at the United States Chamber of Commerce.
The President, Congressional leaders and members of the Cabinet
were there.
So great was the demand for tickets to this function that it was
repeated the following evening.
The plan was sold.
As support for properly housing the Government and providing it
with a proper setting grew, Congress passed on March 4, 1929, an act
to enlarge the Capitol grounds as far as Union Station Plaza. This
program, carried out by David Lynn, architect of the Capitol, rang
down the curtain on the "tempos" that littered the Union Station Plaza
area following the first World War.
On top of these steps, which got the program fairly underway, came
depression-born Public Works. More buildings — South Interior, the
present State Department, the Federal Reserve Building, the Social
Security Building and others were added.
These projects, taken together, remade the face of Washington's
Federal Area. The long sought goal of seeing the Mall and Potomac
Park cleared for park development was in sight when the Nation found
it must gird for war again. Then a whole new crop of "tempos" sprouted
in which future Federal employes would be doomed to swelter in-
efficiently where grass, trees and inspiring vistas and reflections are
supposed to be.
Now, let's take a look at the record in the ten years following VE Day.
We started off fine. We started off in high gear. Even while the fight-
ing was still in progress finishing touches were being put to an omnibus
public buildings bill aimed at carrying forward the work of the years
between the wars, at eliminating the "tempos" and excessive rental of
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 183
private office space and at providing (if needed) a shelf load of public
works in case post-war depression materialized.
H.R. 4276, 79th Congress, the bill in question, called for the author-
ization of a long-range building program estimated at nearly a billion
dollars for the entire Nation, nearly $200,000,000 of it in the Capital.
Here are some of the buildings it would have authorized: a New
Navy Department, completion of the new War Department (now the
State Department), a new building for the FBI, a new service building
to house the housekeeping functions of Government, new buildings for
the Smithsonian Institution and a new Federal Courthouse.
If this bill had been passed and followed by regular appropriations,
as happened in the case of the building bills of the 20 's and 30 's, there
would be fewer "tempos" to plague us today.
It didn't pass, however. It never got out of committee.
The primary reason for this was political. Members of Congress
reasoned, and probably rightly, that even to authorize nearly a billion
dollars worth of buildings at a time when there was a shortage of build-
ing material, labor, homes for veterans, and offices and plants for
business and industry would be an action that would be used against
them in the 1946 Congressional elections.
So, the "tempos" stayed on.
In the fall of 1945, when hearings were held on this bill, the Govern-
ment was renting 7,000,000 square feet of privately owned office space
in Washington. There actually was a shortage of private office space
as a result.
A hue and cry went up. The government was under pressure. As
soon as any slack appeared in Federal employment here, it released the
rented space. It did it by shifting employes into "tempos," making
it doubly certain that they could not be demolished.
As of April 30 last, the Government was renting 1,206,723 square
feet of privately owned office space in Washington. So, you can see
that its policy of giving up rental space has been highly successful. It
is now renting less private office space in Washington than it has at
any time in the last 28 years.
The 1945 omnibus buildings bill that I mentioned a few moments
ago was geared to an estimated permanent Federal payroll in Wash-
ington of 180,000 employes by 1950. It was a very conservative bill.
Actually, of course, the figure never got that low. As of June 30,
1945, there were 264,770 Federal employes in Washington. The figure
now, as the fiscal year 1955 draws to a close, is 228,194, a reduction of
only 15 percent compared with a 48 percent reduction in the ten years
following World War I.
So that even if all the buildings that might have been built under
the authority of the 1945 bill had since been built, there would still be
"tempos" in use.
184 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
When the omnibus bill of 1945 failed, the problem was attacked
piecemeal. As a matter of fact, it still is being attacked piecemeal. We
finally got a desperately needed new Government Accounting Office
building and a new Federal Courthouse under separate "one-shot" bills.
The "Tempos" meanwhile became more and more permanent.
Then, just as it appeared the conditions for approval of a master
building plan were slightly more favorable, came the Cold War, bigger
and better A and H bombs and the Korean conflict.
The result has been tremendous defense appropriations which, by
the way, include millions spent for permanent buildings overseas both
for this country and others that have forced otherwise legitimate re-
quests out of the budget, and foot dragging occasioned by repeated
suggestions that the Government disperse to a safe distance from
Washington.
Until quite recently new permanent Federal buildings for Washington
have had very low priority and the "tempos" have gone on, and on and on.
I think that answers my first question: "Why hasn't something
been done?" On second thought, it really isn't an answer. It's an alibi.
To the second question: "What can be done to rid our Capital City
of these Eyesores?" — there are some partial answers in the making.
Leading the list is lease-purchase legislation, which, adapted to
meet the special needs of Washington by Representatives Auchincloss
and Ruckley and Senator Chavez, would clear the way for new public
buildings to be lease-purchased in Washington's Southwest Redevelop-
ment area, and makes it mandatory that approximately equivalent
"tempo" building space be demolished. This legislation has received
Senate sub-committee approval.
Then there are three separate bills (piecemeal legislation again)
before Congress — one to build a headquarters for the Atomic Energy
Commission, another to build a new building for the Smithsonian
Institution and a third to build a headquarters for the Central Intelli-
gence Agency, the last being a leading user of "tempos."
There's a bill, sponsored by Representative Broyhill of Virginia that
would establish a "Commission for the Removal of Temporary Govern-
ment Buildings in the District of Columbia."
There's still another bill, sponsored by Senator Butler and Repre-
sentative Miller, both of Maryland, that would (1) demolish "tempos"
and (2) replace the space with permanent buildings in Maryland.
Taken in its entirety this buildings legislation is pretty palid com-
pared with that which was in the works ten years after World War I.
Of the lot the so-called Auchincloss Bill seems to have the best
chance of alleviating the "tempo" situation.
The real answer to my second question, it seems to me, lies in trying
somehow to follow the pattern of the 20's, the pattern of the 1945
proposal which died a-borning, and to follow it despite the Cold War.
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 185
We're being told, and I'm sure it's so, that we have to face a future
in which we must stand permanently armed by means of continuing
large defense budgets. Let's face it. There just isn't going to come a
time when we can slump back into small budgets that can conveniently
take care of such things as permanent buildings for Government.
It seems to me that we must turn to this pattern of buildings pro-
gramming despite the need for budget balancing — after all short term
economy on buildings now will simply result in an expensive accounting
at some future date. We must do it despite rumors of dispersal, which
when pinned down with official sources amount to little more than plans
to locate small nuclei of key war agencies outside Washington ; despite
wishful thinking that by some magical process the Federal Govern-
ment will shrink back into its present permanent buildings at some un-
specified time in the future.
As I see it there should be a single overall Executive Branch building
program to include both lease-purchase and outright building and
provide for the mandatory demolition of "tempos." It should be agreed
upon at the highest level after everyone concerned has ironed out the
details. It should be drafted into legislative form to serve as a con-
tinuing blueprint for housing the Government and should be put in
the form of an authorization, to be followed by a program of appropria-
tions based on agreed upon priorities.
It seems to me this would be something the President could present
as the considered policy on buildings of the Executive Branch, something
everyone could get behind and push.
I used to cover the National Capital Park and Planning Commission,
now the National Capital Planning Commission, for The Star. In one
of the back rooms of the Commission's offices there used to hang on
the wall some words to live by — words spoken once by Daniel Burham,
who needs no introduction to this group. With your permission I'd like
to read the text of it. It's not long, but it's very much to the point in
any discussion of "tempos."
"Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood, and
probably themselves will not be realized. Make big plans; aim high in
hope and work, remembering that a noble, logical diagram once recorded
will never die, but long after we are gone will be a living thing, asserting
itself with ever growing insistency. Remember that our sons and grand-
sons are going to do things that would stagger us. Let your watchword
be order and your beacon beauty."
Nearby, some wit had posted a fake Latin inscription: "Soc et tuum."
Our leaders are preoccupied with matters that are literally of earth
shaking importance. But, I think that they would take time out, just
as did the leaders of the somewhat less hectic 20's, to put across a really
well-considered long range program that replaced a piecemeal approach.
186 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
With such a program to rally around I sincerely believe we could
take Washington's "tempos" and "Soc et tuum."
A year or so ago the Perpetual Building and Loan Association here
built a new building outside their old building, while construction
of the new one was going on, they put a sign which said, I'm sure in-
advertently,— "Temporary Perpetual Building and Loan Association."
They got kidded about it, of course.
But I'm wondering if they weren't saying the right thing after all.
They were making something temporary out of something perpetual.
I hope and trust, and I know you do too, that our Government isn't
doing the reverse.
Zoning Round Table
Tuesday, May 25, 1955
PANEL: Chairman: Flavel Shurtleff, Counsel, American Planning and Civic Asso-
ciation.
MEMBERS: Malcolm H. Dill, Director Baltimore County Planning Commission,
Towson, Md.
John Nolen, Jr., Director, National Capital Planning Commission,
Washingon, D. C.
Mrs. Brysis N. Whitnall, Planning Consultant, Los Angeles, Calif.
Garland A. Wood, City Planner, City Planning Commission, Richmond,
Va.
REPORTER: Dr. Dorothy A. Muncy, Consulting Industrial Planner, Washington,
D. C.
PARK REQUIREMENTS IN SUBDIVISIONS
SEVERAL methods available to planners in providing open space
within new residential subdivisions were discussed by the panel:
reservation, dedication and lot fee charged to the subdivider.
Mrs. Whitnall described the fee method now being employed by
Southern California communities. The city receives a fee per lot from
the subdivider. Sites for future parks and recreation purchased with
the funds are selected in localities designated on the master plan of parks
and recreation. A major advantage of this method, Mrs. Whitnall
pointed out, is the opportunity to acquire land in large tracts at acreage
prices, to be held by the city until park development is needed.
In response to Mr. Edward Heiselberg's questions, Mrs. Whitnall
indicated that these lot fees are put into a special fund, administered by
the Park and Recreation Commission. Title to the land is obtained by
actual deed transfer to the city. Mr. Wesson Cook inquired whether
the fee method had been tested in court. Mrs. Whitnall replied that no
court case had arisen.
Mr. Wood discussed the dedication technique of acquiring open space
from developers. He cautioned planners that the percentage indiscrim-
inate use basis could result in recreation areas too small for efficient use
and costly to maintain. He recommended that dedicated areas from
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 187
contiguous subdivisions be taken at the corners and merged to form a
park or playground of sufficient size. A minimum standard for dedication
should be 1J^ acres per subdivision.
Mr. Dill said that Baltimore County makes joint use of small neigh-
borhood parks by combining them with school sites: 20 acres for elemen-
tary school centers, and 30 to 50 acres for junior and senior high school
sites. He recommended storm drainage reservations as an effective tool
for the preservation of open spaces in subdivisions because the taking
of such land is based upon a demonstrable principle.
Mr. Shurtleff emphasized two major planning principles involved in
open space preservation: First, that an integrated master plan is needed
before standards can be set. Second, that the right to subdivide is a
privilege. In requesting this privilege, the developer is producing a
burden on the government to provide additional services. The best
police power is reasonability. Thus, if the reservations, dedications or
fees which the community might demand as the price of the privilege of
subdivision are reasonable, then such restrictions should hold in court.
However, the city must have specific statutory authority for whichever
method is employed.
OPEN SPACES AROUND DECENTRALIZED INDUSTRY
Mr. Nolen pointed out that new modes of transport have created
a new mobility of labor, thereby changing the location pattern of in-
dustry in metropolitan areas. With the resulting suburbanization of
industry, it is most important to relate these plants to the overall master
plan, and to establish requirements to protect the neighborhood. He
cited the ASPO bulletin on performance standards as an invaluable
guide to planners. He urged caution in admitting industry into resi-
dential zone. Even though light industry might have no nuisance char-
acteristics in terms of noise, dust, smoke, odor or traffic, the psycho-
logical aspect might have a deteriorating effect on the neighborhood.
Mr. Dill described an M-R zone (restricted manufacturing) in the
Baltimore County ordinance, which provided for open space around in-
dustrial plants by permitting only 25 percent occupancy of the site.
Mrs, Muncy pointed out that modern industrial plants are pro-
viding open space on their sites. Most new laboratories and factories
are handsomely landscaped with generous front and side setbacks. Their
interest in aesthetics is an aid to community and employee relations.
Landscaping, however, also serves to absorb sound, and is further evi-
dence of industry's continuing efforts to be a "good neighbor." Recrea-
tion areas are provided by many companies. Baseball diamonds, soft
ball fields, and picnic areas are often located on the plant site. Parks are
being developed on the grounds of larger plants. The outstanding ex-
ample is the arboretum which General Electric has planted at Appliance
188 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
Park, Louisville, Kentucky. Company engineers are proud of the fact
that the park is not fenced but completely open to public use.
Mr. Shurtleff reminded planners that while zoning can require cer-
tain distances to be maintained between industrial structures and resi-
dential areas, it is the enlightened attitude of industry which will pro-
vide most of the open spaces around new industrial plants.
RURAL ZONING AND DENSITY DEVELOPMENTS
Mr. Dill cited the example of conservancy zoning in Waukesha
County, Wisconsin, as a means of preserving land in rural areas for
agricultural and recreational use only. Residential, commercial and
industrial uses are prohibited. The effort to restrict density in Balti-
more County by an R-120 zone, with a minimum of approximately 2%
acres was not successful, primarily because citizens considered the re-
striction a serious deterrent in disposing of their property. The County,
however, had an ample instrument to discourage premature develop-
ment in the requirement for a paved street.
Professor Charles Eliot said that the highest use in rural zoning may
not be residential, but agricultural or recreational. He recommended
that planners combine efforts with agricultural economists to determine
the size of economic unit suitable for several types of rural land uses.
He warned that acreage zoning may be considered class zoning by the
courts, with the danger of segregation by income.
Mr. McClain said that the Pittsburgh area is considering a minimum
of 60,000 square feet when public water and sewage services are not
available, to be automatically reduced to 30,000 square feet when these
services are provided.
Mr. Albert Walker, campus planner for the University of California,
reported that Santa Clara County has developed a zone for exclusive
agricultural use.
Professor Eliot pointed out that a key to the retetion of land
in agricultural use is the policy of the tax assessor. Mr. Shurtleff claimed
that, although he has been emphasizing for more than 20 years, after
the land has been rezoned, it should be reassessed; few have heeded.
Mrs. Whitnall also stressed the importance of keeping the assessment
low on agricultural land. She further cautioned planners against too
stringent controls to retain land in agricultural land use. In one Cali-
fornia area, if 15 percent of the owners petition for agricultural zoning,
the Planning Commission is required to so zone it, and keep it in that use
for 15 years. Unless 80 percent of the owners agree to change the agri-
cultural zoning, this land use is reimposed for another 15 years. Thirty
years is too long a time to require a land owner to hold his land in agri-
cultural use if subdivisions are being built adjacent to his property.
A suggestion was offered that land capability studies be made prior
to rural zoning.
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 189
HIGHWAY ZONING
A highlight of the zoning round table sessions was Mrs. Whitnall's
explanation of a new technique in zoning, which can also be applied to
controlling land uses along highways. On the zoning map, the potential
classification of an area should be indicated, in addition to the present
use classification. The potential use should be arrived at by planners
after careful research and field study. Thus four corners of a future
highway intersection might now be zoned residential, but a potential for
future commercial use would also be noted on the zoning map, based
upon recognition of the suitability of the location for that future use. The
land owners would be guided and forewarned by this planning forecast
future use. To translate this potential use classification to a permitted
use, a precise detailed plan must be adopted, constituting an amendment
to the zoning map. Such precise plan must indicate exact boundaries,
design and dimensions of streets, parking areas, building sites and
similar features.
Land use in a reclassified precise plan is limited exclusively to such
uses as are permitted in the zone to which it is classified. "Uses shown
on the precise plan including automobile parking shall conform to such
precise plan even though such uses are not otherwise specifically classi-
fied by the ordinance as permissible in any given zone."
Mrs. Whitnall said that this zoning by design has eliminated com-
mercial string development in the areas where it is in effect. In response
to a query about its usefulness when the ownership is split, Mrs. Whit-
nail replied that all owners must work together and approach the Plan-
ning Commission for a unified plan in order actually to obtain the zoning
classification now indicated as potential.
Mr. Shurtleff asked why a specific potential should be noted on the
map. Would it not be sufficient just to indicate that another use might
develop later? Mrs. Whitnall replied that some property owners might
early pressure for a revision to an incorrect use. The potential use recom-
mended by the planner is based upon careful research. She indicated
that the assessors are not yet reassessing the property in terms of the
potential use.
Professor Eliot asked if all four corners of a highway intersection
should be reclassified as commercial. Mrs. Whitnall said that the plan-
ners were unable to determine which side of the highway might first
develop commercially, so felt it best to indicate the potential of the area.
In reply to a query of Mr. Robinson, of the Northern Virginia Re-
gional Planning Council, Mrs. Whitnall said that the potential classifi-
cation method of zoning had not been tested in the courts.
Mr. Shurtleff concluded the sessions with a suggestion that a separate
highway zone, possibly in control of the State, might be set aside — say
approximately 1,000 feet from the center line on each side. By using
this device of designating potential uses, we could control all the uses
190 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
along the highway — and with one fell swoop, get rid of the clutter, bill-
boards plus, along the highway. Sadly he destroyed this dream by re-
minding planners that the State had delegated its authority for land use
control, and that every community along the right of way of the new
highways would protest.
Conference Conclusions
TOM WALLACE, Louisville, Kentucky, Chairman
IN 1955 the American Planning and Civic Association, acting with
the American Institute of Park Executives, the Council of Metro-
politan Regional Organizations, the National Recreation Association
and the National Conference on State Parks called a Citizens Confer-
ence to consider current pressing problems presented by the unprece-
dented growth of population which gave the United States an estimated
168,000,000 people January 1, 1955, with predictions of 290,000,000 at
the'century's end.
People crowding into national parks from growing urban areas at the
rate of 50,000,000 a year find facilities designed a generation ago for less
than one tenth of that number. There is a clear responsibility on the part
of the Federal Government to see that the American people, who own
the national parks, are provided with adequate facilities when they visit
the national parks.
We are beginning to create effective machinery for planning and ad-
ministering metropolitan districts which often stretch into two or more
States, comprise all or parts of numerous counties and include many
closely settled communities operating under separate governments.
One of the most important elements in a metropolitan plan is ade-
quate provision for parks, playgrounds and open spaces.
In the nineties the Boston Metropolitan Park Commission began to
build the Metropolitan Park System. And yet today historic Boston
Common, reserved in 1634, is threatened by a proposed vast underground
parking garage. In other cities parks are menaced by expressways and
unrelated buildings because they are unwisely considered free land.
There are in the 48 States historic sites and state parks numbering nearly
2,000 and totaling nearly 5,000,000 acres, visited annually by 166,000,000
people.
The challenge of the second half of the Twentieth Century is to
evaluate our park and wilderness heritage and to provide and protect at
each level of government the spaces our growing population needs to
maintain gracious living and for the physical and mental welfare of our
people.
Parks of every classification, including conspicuously national parks
and municipal parks in major cities because of the public's waxing
demands upon their services are threatened with loss or impairment of
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 191
natural characteristics for which they were preserved. For example,
there is a grave erosion problem in New York's famous Central Park,
because that park is not now nearly large enough to serve its area.
Yet opportunists, holding office hi various units of government, and
shortsighted, influential individuals and organizations outside govern-
ment, obstinately consider reservations as free land when they plan
roads or other needed improvements not more vitally important than
the reservations they would damage or destroy.
Recognizing these facts numerous well versed citizens, nationally
known as being interested in preserving suitable spaces for the present
and future generations assembled in Washington, aware of unceasing
efforts of unsleeping forces to diminish and to denature reserves which
have great intangible values. In most cases we find greater dollar
values than the land would have in any other use than that to which it
was dedicated.
That a more or less permanent record of conclusions of the conference
might be made a Committee on Conference Conclusions was formed.
It was divided into three parts, a Metropolitan Sub-Committee, a State-
Action Sub-Committee and a National Parks and National Reservations
Sub-Committee.
Members of each Sub-Committee were invited to submit to the chair-
man of the Committee on Conference Conclusions suggestions upon
which a report might be based. Not all of them responded, but numerous
suggestions were made. It was decided to form from those suggestions
and from utterances by participants in the program a text which would
summarize the conclusions of the conference.
The Conference's conclusions were and the considered opinion of the
participants is that:
(1) There are not too many parks and open spaces. In number and
in total area they are inadequate rather than more than adequate for the
services which the foreseeable population of the United States will
inevitably and quite reasonably demand.
(2) There are examples of reservations not wisely chosen, but they
are exceptions to the rule that wisdom and foresight characterized action
of those who figured as creators or promoters of open spaces.
(3) The history of parks which have been preserved, despite many
efforts to curtail them — notably the history of Central Park in New
York, continued existence of which as a park is creditable to the culture
of our greatest city — shows the wisdom and the public service of those
who created them and of those who have effectively opposed their cur-
tailment.
(4) In a democracy such as ours, eternal vigilance is the price of
everything that is desirable. No law that protects public reservations
is sufficient in itself to serve as perpetual protection. Unless those—
always, and naturally, a minority — who understand their value, are
192 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
continuously militant in their behalf, laws protecting them will be over-
ridden or changed by legislative action.
It is necessary that courts of last resort be aware of the dangers to
public welfare, that lie in leniency toward those who would take for other
uses, well chosen reserves and thoughtfully preserved open spaces.
(5) There is, ineluctably, a clash of purposes in the development of
any vigorous Nation. Those who would build a highway, or a high dam,
which would damage a public reservation are not necessarily inferior
mentally or morally to those who would preserve a reservation that
reflects the wisdom and foresight of other citizens. But the temptation
into which exponents of industrial development, highway development,
even development of education, may be led are great. Reservations
that were wisely made never will have too many defenders.
Among suggestions made by members of the committee which, it
seemed to the chairman, should be incorporated in the text of the con-
clusions of the conference, because they agreed with statements made
and approved during the conference are these:
All parks and comparable reservations should be effectively pro-
tected from curtailment, transformation or destruction by units of
government seeking to use them as "free land".
Courts of last resort should recognize the fact that to dispossess the
public of spaces dedicated to the public in perpetuity, because a highway
commission, an educational institution or an industrial enterprise may
desire to use the areas, is unethical and destructive.
Builders and creators of subdivisions should be required to reserve
a suitable portion of their developments for parks and recreation or
contribute to a fund to provide adequate and suitably located open space
in accordance with accepted standards.
A good public park is an attractive and well maintained outdoor
public area in which people of all ages can enjoy themselves, can be
inspired, and can learn. Every effort should be made to improve the
quality and diversity of park and recreation activities through a broad
educational program to every man, woman, and child in the area.
The intangible values of Nature fire our emotions, influence our
happiness and contentment, and make life worth living. The naturalistic
setting is vital to the development of sound cultural, sociological, and
spiritual values. As our Nation progresses to larger urban areas, it is
necessary that man have available a place of natural beauty where the
quiet inspiration of a secluded grove creates a new vigor of mind, spirit,
and body. The conservation of natural areas, especially in the midst of
metropolitan districts, and their use for recreation is an important
factor in the conservation of human ability and the development of the
true American way of life.
Every national and local conservation organization should be
militant, as a defender of existing reserves. In view of a foreseeable
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 193
population of 300,000,000 in the United States, every citizen should be
a zealous advocate of more and greater reservations.
More expansion, bigger budgets, bigger staffs, should be the battle
cry of park administrators. Add to the words of Robert Moses; "mean
parks make mean people" the equally true assertion "good parks make
good citizens".
As a major objective, making reservations self supporting is not ad-
visable. This practice leads to a catchpenny outlook on the part of park
supervisors and a tendency toward commercialization which may defeat
the purposes for which parks are established.
Developments within parks that are designed to attract tourists
and conventions for purposes not primarily connected with proper
enjoyment of parks, constitutes commercialization and may lead to
impairment of the park's values as well as to unwarranted competition
with private enterprise.
Where fragile (destroyable) assets are concerned, the limiting and
regulating the public's visiting is warrantable and even commendable,
and should appeal to well versed students of conservation problems.
Sound policies governing administration and use of parks, are based
upon the concept that superb natural scenes shall remain unimpaired
through the coming centuries of our culture. Our national parks and
state wilderness parks are not resorts for superficial recreation and
entertainment. No developments or activities that impair natural
scenes should be encouraged in wild reservations. Intrusion of the arti-
ficial is undesirable and may become ultimately, destructive.
For the usefulness and success of reserves it is essential that we have
adequate laws, qualified administrative personnel, programs of educa-
tion or interpretation, including year-round services of park naturalists,
proper maintenance, proper planning to eliminate temptations to misuse
park areas.
Fifty years ago park management was widely looked upon as mainly
care-taking. Along with growing recognition of needs of open spaces of
several classifications has come recognized need of adequately trained
administrators employing adequately trained staff members, in parks
for perpetuation of opportunity for recreation, as well as in forests
which are planned for production of timber, protection of watersheds,
conservation of ground water and for other purposes, including recrea-
tion.
That parks are essential in a rightly ordered civilization is increas-
ingly understood. They are much more than mere playgrounds. They
affect health and culture. As community property, state property or
national property they should be owned as definitely as factory sites or
home sites are owned by individuals. Unlike residence sites and factory
sites, they create and preserve desirable neighborhoods; which are pro-
tected, by their existence, from blight.
194 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
It is the responsibility of city, metropolitan-area, state and national
planning agencies, in cooperation with recreation officials, to recommend
acquisition programs that will guard the population against lack of
suitably chosen and rightly administered open spaces in the future. It
is important to insure an adequate and balanced park system in ad-
vance of land settlement, to preserve natural stream valleys and pro-
vide for the welfare and happiness of future generations, as well as to
preserve property values.
Growing pressure for use of park areas for highways, housing,
armories, universities, civic centers, libraries, auditoriums, schools,
hospitals, parking spaces and other purposes should awaken the public
to the fact that virtually all communities, all States and the Nation,
need more spaces than they now have, and that sound planning for the
future takes into consideration growth of population.
Existing parks were, as a rule, chosen because of especial suitability
of the scene as the site of a park. Using part of a park, or all of a park
as "free land" and providing equal acreage for park use is therefore
usually unsound regardless of the fact that surrounding values are af-
fected adversely when park land is yielded to industrial uses or to high-
way development.
A vigorous publicity campaign, in the press, if press support be
available, and in opposition to the press if newspapers will not co-
operate, will in many cases avert destructive encroachment.
For preservation of wilderness state parks which, without the safe-
guard, may be abused by "developers" each State might well establish a
non-political advisory board similar to the Wisconsin Board for Preser-
vation of Scientific Areas.
It should be always in the minds of advocates of preservation of
spaces that no law and no code of ethics binds a court of last resort,
but that public opinion may be effective. For protection of spaces but
through the instrumentality of courts it is essential to develop public
opinion in their behalf to the point at which it is recognized in courts,
including last resort courts.
Hotels, lodges, cabins, restaurants and facilities for suitable types of
recreation are widely considered essential to the greatest usefulness of
wilderness state and national parks, but development of such facilities
as ends in themselves, designed to attract tourists and conventions for
purposes not primarily concerned with proper enjoyment of parks
constitutes commercialization that may readily lead to impairment of
the park's resources as well as to unwarranted competition with private
enterprise.
Administrators of two nationally known and nationally important
reservations, the Cook County Forest Preserve (Illinois) and Ever-
glades National Park (Florida) do not permit hotels or lodges within
their boundaries.
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 195
Horses used for riding within the Cook County Forest Preserve
number about 1,700. They are owned and stabled outside the reserva-
tion.
What, in the future, may be prevailing policy with regard to over-
night accommodations in parks remains to be seen, but a safe policy
nowadays is to avoid permitting developments in and uses of parks
that will or may destroy or impair qualities which occasioned their
creation.
CITY AND METROPOLITAN DISTRICTS
It is the responsibility of city and metropolitan planning agencies
(in cooperation with park and recreation officials) to recommend at in-
tervals acquisition programs for parks, parkways and public open spaces
which will extend 20 or 25 years into the future. Planning agencies
should specify for guidance of administrative officials a schedule of capi-
tal expenditures which will ensure an adequate and balanced park system
in advance of land settlement, in order to preserve natural stream valleys
and provide for the population which is reasonably certain to be living
in the area.
The coordination of neighborhood parks, play grounds and school
sites is recommended to serve planned residential districts.
Service roads in urban parkways should be planned to give access to
the parks and add to the enjoyment of park users.
While arterial highways and belt routes may very well be provided
with divided lanes and pleasantly planted roadsides and some may be
limited to passenger cars, there is no justification for incorporating park
roads into regular routes for handling fast traffic into and out of urban
centers.
It is held that the use of areas dedicated for park purposes should be
limited to recognized park uses. The taking of park land, with or without
compensation, for unrelated uses, is an evidence of poor planning to be
avoided at all costs.
Express highways, parking of automobiles and other facilities for
passenger and freight traffic should be financed from national, state and
local gasoline taxes and special appropriations designated for such
facilities, without the appropriation or diversion of existing park lands,
already shown in most cities to be inadequate for present needs.
The use of parks as sites for unrelated public buildings, including
fire houses, libraries and other municipal structures, should be forbidden
in law and practice. Each type of public building should be financed
with specific appropriations, without the free use of land acquired by
the public for other purposes.
STATES
State parks, state historic sites, and related types of reservations
have been established primarily to conserve and make available for
196 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
public enjoyment a variety of areas of scenic, scientific, and historic
interest. They should be maintained to retain their intrinsic values to
the greatest extent practicable. Only those recreation facilities and
activities that are suitable to the character of the areas and do not con-
flict with their primary purpose should be permitted. Adverse uses such
as hunting, logging, mining, grazing, highway rights-of-way, and sites
for buildings not associated with park use, should be avoided. State
recreation areas are in a different category and may permit a greater
variety of recreation activites.
The States should be encouraged to develop adequate state park
systems, state forests and wildlife areas, served with parkway con-
nections for pleasure travel.
State legislatures are asked to provide effective controls of access and
roadside use along the 41,000-mile Federal Aid Interstate Highway
System which is being authorized by Congress, in order to protect the
usefulness of the highways for moving traffic and prevent premature
deterioration of these highways in which the public is investing huge
sums of money.
NATIONAL
The Federal Government now owns outright a system of National
Parks and Monuments which by Congressional mandate is directed to be
preserved as nearly as possible in their natural condition, and specifically
exempted from the jurisdiction of the Federal Power Commission for
the development of power by private companies. The enabling act
creating the National Park Service and amendments, may be taken as
Congressional protection of the entire system, but it may well be that
Congress will some day enact overall legislation to protect national parks
and monuments from public power projects. On the positive side, wilder-
ness values in our national parks offer unmatched cultural assets to our
people, and, before it is too late, a concerted effort should be made to
bring into the system those remaining untouched areas which qualify
as national parks.
The Federal Government, through the U. S. Forest Service, has set
up in the National Forests, many wildlife areas. It may be that careful
study will dictate revised boundary lines but when these are once deter-
mined it is to the public interest that they be recognized and maintained
against all unrelated encroachments.
The U. S. Forest Service is also seeking the recognition of recreation
as one of the major uses of national forests. With adequate appropriations
these recreational facilities should add greatly to the enjoyment of the
American people.
The Wildlife Refuges which have been established by the Federal
Government or designated within existing Federal areas have provided
for the protection of wildlife which is absolutely essential in a country
IN THE CITIES AND TOWNS 197
with a rapidly growing population which otherwise would extinguish or
reduce many species now extant. These areas should be protected from
all encroachments which limit their usefulness.
PARKWAYS
A study of various types of highways bearing the name of parkways
or resembling parkways is recommended so that there may be differ-
entiated :
1. Well laid-out contour highways, with landscaped roadsides, re-
stricted to passenger cars, but serving to carry heavy streams of sub-
urban traffic into and out of central business districts.
2. Pleasant highways, bordered by improved roadsides, provided for
carrying heavy arterial traffic, even if restricted to passenger cars.
3. Highways and boulevards, well designed and flanked with planted
roadside strips and supplied with divided lanes for truck as well as
passenger traffic.
4. True parkways, with contour roads, wide protected roadsides,
limited access, restricted speeds, planned only for pleasure travel.
5. Roads in established parks, designed to fit into the scene, to be
used for access to and enjoyment of the park. The design and use of
roads to carry traffic across a national, state or local park, should be
discouraged as not in the public interest. In closely-built city areas, it
may be necessary to provide traffic ways across large park areas, but
these can be designed and planted so that they are little noticed and
they can be provided with separate grade crossings in order to keep the
park roads intact.
COMMITTEE ON CONFERENCE CONCLUSIONS
Tom Wallace, Louisville, Kentucky, Chairman
Metropolitan Sub-Committee
George E. Dickie, National Recreation Association, Washington, D.C.
Garrett G. Eppley, Pres. Am. Institute of Park Executives, Bloom-
ington, Ind.
Miss Barbara Terrett, Council of Met. Regional Organizations,
Washington, D. C.
Perry L. Norton, Exec. Dir., Am. Institute of Planners, Cambridge,
Mass.
Milo F. Christiansen, Supt. of Recreation, Washington, D. C.
State Action Sub-Committee
Sidney S. Kennedy, Chief Branch of State Cooperation, National
Park Service, Washington, D. C.
Burton W. Marsh, Dir. Traffic, Engineering and Safety Dept., Am.
Automobile Assn., Washington, D. C.
198 AMERICAN PLANNING AND CIVIC ANNUAL
Ollie E. Fink, Exec. Secy., Friends of the Land, Zanesville, Ohio
George B. Fell, Exec. Dir. Nature Conservancy, Washington, D. C.
V. W. Flickinger, Chief, Div. of Parks, Dept. of Natural Resources,
Columbus, 0.
H. S. Wagner, Director-Secretary, Akron Metropolitan Park District,
Akron, 0.
National Parks and Reservations Sub-Committee
Fred M. Packard, Exec. Secy, National Parks Assn., Washington,
D.C.
Frederick L. Rath, Director, National Trust for Historic Preserva-
tion, Washington, D. C.
William Voigt, Jr., Exec. Dir,, Izaak Walton League of Am., Chicago,
111.
Howard Zahnizer, Executive Secretary, The Wilderness Society,
Washington, D. C.
C. R. Gutermuth, Secy., North American Wildlife Foundation,
Washington, D. C.
John H. Baker, President, National Audubon Society
INDEX
Albright, Horace M., 35.
Allen, Ernest E., 81-82.
Allen, Frederick Lewis, 166.
American Automobile Assn., x, 103, 108,
American Inst. of Architects, 134.
American Inst. of Park Executives, x, 134,
190.
American Inst. of Planners, x, 134, 172.
American Nature Assn., x.
Am. Planning & Civic Assn., v, ix, 133, 137.
163, 190.
Am. Recreation Society, x, 133, 135.
Am. Society of Landscape Architects, x,
135.
Angeles Crest Highway, 11.
Appalachian Park Comm., 34.
Appalachian Trail, 11, 34.
Armstrong, C. H., 82-83.
Baker, John H., 198.
Beartooth Highway, 11.
Beston, Henry, 57.
Blakeman, T. Ledyard, 129-132.
Blue Ridge National Parkway, 6, 35.
Bluestone State Park, W. Va., 87.
Boston Met. Parks, 165, 191.
Bradford, C. P., 54-57.
Broyhill, Rep. Joel T., Va., 184.
Budget, Bureau of, 4.
Bush, Donald, of Hare & Hare, 163.
Business Week Magazine, 118.
Byrd, Sen. Harry F., Va., ix, 33-36.
Calif. Assn. for Health Ed., etc., 135.
Calif. Dept. Natural Resources, 135.
Cammerer, Arno, 35.
Cape Hatteras National Seashore, 6.
Carter Caves State Park, Ky., 66.
Cascade Crest, 11.
Catalina Mountain Highway, 11.
Central Park, New York, 174-179.
Christiansen, Milo F., 133-137, 155-156,
197.
Churchill, Winston, 111.
Cincinnati Development Committee, 144,
148.
Cincinnati Met. Master Plan, 146.
Civil Aeronautics Admn., 3.
Clark, Mjrs. LeRoy, 138.
Clarke, Gilmore D., 123-129.
Clay, Grady, 139-144, 173.
Colorado River Storage Project, 39, 40.
Commerce, Dept. of., 8, 14, 118.
Committee for Economic Development, 118.
Constable, Stuart, 174-179.
Cook, Wesson, 186.
Cook Co. Forest Preserves, 165, 194, 195.
Coolidge, President Calvin, 182.
Cotter, William H. Jr., 84-85.
Cougill, K. R., 63-65.
Deep Creek Lake State Park, Md., 70.
Delano. Frederic A., 181.
Devil's Lake State Park, Wis., 54
Dickie, George, 167, 197.
Diggs, Col. John C., Nat. Park Serv., 85
Dill, Malcolm, 186-190.
Dinosaur National Monument, 39.
Drury, Newton B., 35, 60.
Dyer, Harold J., 68-69.
Eckhart, Fred D., 76.
Edward Douglass White Mem. Park, La.,
68.
Edwards, Guy, Supt. Shenandoah Nat.
Park, 36.
Eisenbeis, Roland F., 165-170.
Eliot, Prof. Charles, 188, 189.
Elk Neck State Park, Md., 70.
Emmert, J., Supt. Glacier Nat. Park, 36.
Eppley, Garrett G., 197.
Evans, James F., 77-78.
Everglades National Park, 5, 195.
Falls State Park and Rec. Area, Md., 70.
Fatig, Dr. Richard S., 81.
Federal Reserve, 118.
Feiss, Carl, 157-162, 172.
Fell, George B., 198.
Fink, Ollie, 198.
Finley, Dr. David E., 181, 182.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 28.
Flickinger, V. W., ix, 79-81, 90-96, 198.
Forest Preserve Dist., Cook Co., 111., 165-
170, 194, 195.
Fortune Magazine, 118.
Freeman, Carl A., 76-77.
Friends of the Land, x, 198.
Fuller, Lonnie C., Texas, 85.
Gabrielson, Dr. Ira, ix, 24.
General Butler State Park, Ky., 66.
General Electric Co., 187.
Glacier National Park, 35.
Grant, U. S. 3d, v, 181.
Great Lakes Park Training Inst., 64.
Great Smoky Mts. National Park, 6, 35.
Green Mt. National Forest, 46, 50.
Gregg, William C., 34.
Gutermuth, C. R., 31, 198.
Gutheim, Frederick, 138.
Hanson, Earl P., 59-61.
Harper's Ferry National Monument, 70.
Harper's Magazine, 166.
Harr, H. M., W. Va., 87.
Harrington, C. L., 53-54, 88-89.
Harris, Mrs. Ethel, 85.
Hay, William M., 63.
Hayward, George C., 144-150.
Hebert, Herbert, 41-45.
Heiselberg, Edward, 186.
Hella, U. V., 72-73.
Hettrick, John T., 176-179.
Hill, Elmer C., 62.
Hjelte, George, 135.
Honeyman, Jessie M. State Park, Ore., 83.
Hoover, President Herbert, 34, 125, 182.
Housing and Home Finance Agency, 170.
Houston, Austin, 74.
Howard, Ebenezer, 159.
Howsley, Andrew M., Texas, 85.
Humbug State Park, Ore., 83.
Huron-Clinton Met. Auth., 131, 165, 166.
Huttleston, L. L., 51-52.
Ickes, Harold, Secy, of Interior, 35.
Independence Hall, Pa., 84.
Izaak Walton League, x.
Jackson, J. B., 144.
James, Harlean, x, 1, 163.
Jeffers, Charles, 163.
Johnson, Flinton G., 67.
Kauffman, Rudolph, II, 180-186.
Kaylor, Joseph F., 57, 69-70.
Kelsey, Harlan, 34.
Kennedy, Sidney S., 197.
Kenney, Raymond J., 70-71.
Kentucky, Dam Village State Park, 6.
Knight, Gov. Goodwin J., 59.
Lake Ristineau State Park, La., 68.
Latham, Mrs. Maude Morse, N. C., 78.
L'Enfant Plan, 123, 160.
Leopold, Aldo, 30.
Levin, David R., ix, 97-102, 111.
Lewis, Jack L., 30.
Lieber, Col. Richard, 95.
Lynn, David, 181, 182.
McArdle, Richard, Chief Forester, ix, 8.
McClain, James, 150-154.
McKay, Douglas, Secy, of Interior, 31-32.
Mann, Roberts, 96.
Mansfield Rattle Park, La., 68.
Marsh, Rurton W., ix, 103-109, 197.
Mather, Stephen T., 34.
Matthews, Donald C., 61.
Mellon, Andrew, 181, 182.
Migratory Rird Treaty Act, 28.
Mission 66, National Park Service, 4, 38.
Moll, W. P., 83-84.
Mont Chateau State Park, W. Va., 87.
Moore, Charles, 181.
Morrill, John Rarstow, 163.
Morse, Thos. W., 78-79, 112.
Moses, Robert, 174-179.
Mt. Shasta Road, 11.
Mt. Mitchell State Park, N. C., 78.
Muir, John, 30, 51, 56.
Muncy, Dr. Dorothy A., 186-190.
Myles Standish State Forest, Mass., 71.
Nat. Assn. of Travel Organizations, x.
National Audubon Society, x.
National Capital Planning Comm., 124,
126.
National Capital Parks, 124, 126, 127, 128.
National Conference on State Parks, vi, ix,
x, 41-89, 190.
National Forests, 8-14, 46-50, 196.
National Municipal Review, 146.
National Parks, 31, 32, 33-36, 37-40, 196.
National Park Service, 1-8, 12, 64, 71, 119,
124, 128.
National Parks Assn., x, 30, 198.
National Recreation Assn., x, 114, 135, 190.
National Trust for Historic Preservation, x.
Nature Conservancy, x.
Neuse State Park, N. C., 78.
Neuberger, Sen. Richard, 107.
New York Herald Tribune, 119.
New York Walk Rook, 122.
Nolen, John, Jr., 186-190.
North American Wildlife Foundation, x.
Norton, C. McKim, 120.
Norton, Perry L., 172-173, 197.
Noyes, Theodore W., 129.
Olmsted, Frederick Law, 174.
Oregon Skyline Trail, 11.
Oppermann, Paul, 135.
Otter Creek Park, Ky., 67.
Packard, Fred M., 30, 198.
Palisades Interstate Park Comm., 139.
Parsons, Samuel, 174.
Patapsco State Park, Md., 70.
Patterson, Rradley H. Jr., 32.
Pen-Mar State Park, Md., 70.
Pikes Peak Highway, 11.
Pinchot, Gifford, 46.
Pittsburgh's Golden Triangle, 151.
Point State Park, Pa., 152.
Pollock, George, 33, 34.
Prendergast, Joseph, 114-119.
Public Roads, Rureau of, 97.
Quinn, Frank D., 85.
Randall, Dr. Josephine, 135.
Rath, Frederick L., 198.
Rathfon, Richard, 137.
Robinson, Charles, 189.
Roberts, Ashley C., 74-75.
Rock Creek Park, Washington, 161.
Rockefeller, Nelson, 176.
Rogers, John L, 52-53.
Roosevelt, President Franklin D., 34, 35
Roosevelt, President Theodore, 36.
Root, Elihu, 129.
Root, Irving C., 105, 106.
Rush, Wilbur A., 65.
Sam Houston State Park, La., 68.
Saturday Evening Post, 28, 71.
Saylor, Rep. John F., ix, 37-40.
Sebago Lake State Park, Me., 55.
Segoe, Ladislas, 130.
Segrest, James L., 58.
Shearer, Gordon K., 85.
Shenandoah National Park, 6, 33, 34.
Shoreline, Our Vanishing, 7.
Shurtleff, Flavel, 186-190.
Sierra Trail, 11.
Simon, Robert G., Vt., 86.
Simon, Louis A., 181.
Skyline Drive, 11.
Skyland, Va., 33.
Smith, Col. Glenn, 34.
Smoot, Senator Reed, 181.
Taft, President William Howard, 124.
Temple, H. W., Rep., 34.
Terrett, Rarbara, 197.
Thoreau, Henry, 30.
Tilden, Freeman, 55.
Tobey, Russell R., 75-76.
Tryon Palace, N. C., 78.
Tudor, Ralph, Under Secy, of Interior, 28.
Turner, Maurice E., Texas, 85.
Twentieth Century Fund, 119.
University of Calif. Dept. City and Re-
gional Planning, 135.
University of Minn. Museum of Natural
History, 73.
Vanderzicht, John R., 86-87.
Vaux, Calvert, 174.
Virgin Island National Park, 6, 7.
Voight, Wm. J., 198.
Von Brook, Walter, 30.
Von Nerta, George A., 181.
Von Storch, Earl, 170-171.
Wagner, H. S., 198.
Walker, Albert, 188.
Wallace, Tom, 190-198.
Ward, Henry, 66.
Welch, Major William A., 34.
Wells, William W., 67-68.
Wetmore, James A., 181.
Wheeler, Gerald S., 46-50.
White Mountain National Forest, 46-50.
Whitnall, Mrs. Brysis, 186-190.
Whittemore, Prof. H. O., 149, 162-165.
Wilderness, 1^23.
Wilderness Society, x, 14.
Wild Life Management Institute, x.
Wildlife Resources, 24-31, 196.
Winans, Sterling, 133-137.
Wirth, Conrad L., ix, 1, 33, 35, 55, 71, 119.
Wood, Garland, 186-190.
Work, Hubert, Secy, of Int., 34.
Wye Mill State Park, Md., 70.
Yellowstone National Park, 38.
Zahnizer, Howard, ix, 11, 14-23, 30, 198.
• £
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11