Legacy for Living Blog

ASLA and the National Park Service: 1916

March 4, 2025

Vernal Falls, Yosemite National Park. Henry V. Hubbard, 1916.

ASLA was instrumental in the formation of the U.S. National Park Service in 1916. Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr., together with J. Horace McFarland of the American Civic Association, helped to build interest in a uniform approach to managing the national parks and pressured federal leaders to create a bureau for park management. This pressure campaigned culminated with President Taft speaking at the ACA meeting in 1911 and then requesting a national parks bureau from Congress in 1912. In 1913 the new Wilson administration appointed Franklin Lane, with keen interest in the parks, as Secretary of the Interior. Lane then hired assistants to directly oversee the parks. Olmsted contributed wording to the parks service act that the American Civic Association repeatedly tried to shepherd through Congress. Originally the act called for an advisory board of landscape architects to be on retainer to render advice to the Park Service, but this clause was dropped in the final version of the act.

On February 14, 1916, ASLA members met in Boston to hear lectures and letters about the proposed Park Service. Representatives of ASLA and the federal government made clear that, despite the lack of a formal advisory board to the Park Service, both parties remained interested in establishing a relationship. On the one hand, the speakers at this 1916 conference championed outdated views about preserving the supposed "primeval" state of the land. However, even at this early date these leaders recognized the importance of developing the parks in such a way that the built environment would blend in seamlessly with the landscape as a whole; and they recognized that the people to do that work were landscape architects.

The Proposed National Park Serviceby Richard B. Watrous, Secretary, American Civic Association

Address to the American Society of Landscape Architects, Hotel Bellevue, Boston, February 14, 1916. Reprinted in Landscape Architecture Magazine 6, no. 3 (April 1916): 101-105.

The particular movement in regard to the National Parks in which we are interested is that it is proposed to create in the Federal Government and in the Department of the Interior a new Bureau, to be known as a National Park Service. There are now existing fourteen National Parks, all of them under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior. They embrace a total area of nearly six million acres of land, and are as follows: Yellowstone, Yosemite, Sequoia, General Grant, Mount Rainier, Crater Lake, Wind Cave, Platt, Mesa Verde, Hot Springs Reservation, Glacier, Rocky Mountain, Sully’s Hill, and Casa Grande Ruins. Created at different periods, the first being the Yellowstone, just about one hundred years after our Government had been established, there has been no uniformity in the Acts establishing the parks, and there has been no uniformity in their administration. Each park has had to be conducted as a separate undertaking, and the appropriations have been separate appropriations. There has been much “hit or miss” effort in the establishment and in the administration of the National Parks. For many years, what has been done on behalf of the parks has been done by enthusiastic clerks and heads of Bureaus in the Department of the Interior, who have been willing to give time after working hours and time on Sunday for the needs of the parks. It was during the administration of Secretary Ballinger that the first Bill, as proposed by the American Civic Association for the creation of a Park Bureau, was introduced. But, being quite a new subject, no very definite progress was made. Under Secretary Fisher, emphasis was given to the need of such a Bureau, and, in 1912, President Taft addressed a special message to Congress, earnestly recommending the establishment of a bureau of National Parks. When our Bill was first introduced, it proposed the creation of a National Park Bureau. When it was considered by the Senate Committee on Public Lands, on our recommendation, suggested by an influential New York weekly paper, the word “Bureau” was changed to “Service,” and since that time we have been working toward a National Park Service. There has always been a disposition by Congress to proceed slowly in establishing new Bureaus, and the word “Service” has, for a number of reasons, seemed the better word. It was been well used in connection with Forestry. The Forestry Service, which made a small start, has become now one of the great Bureaus of the country.

Under the administration of Secretary Lane, there has been a still greater interest in the parks by the Department of the Interior, and this increased interest has simply emphasized the need of an administrative body, which can have in charge all of the parks, secure in time the necessary appropriation for the Service, and have the directing hand in apportioning the appropriations for each of the separate parks. Mr. Lane, as soon as he entered office, manifested an interest in the parks, and before many months had gone by he called to his assistance an old friend, a Californian and a member of the Sierra Club, and one who loved the parks, Mr. Stephen Mather, of Chicago, who bears the title of Assistant to the Secretary of the Interior. Recently the Secretary transferred Mr. Robert B. Marshall from the position of Chief Geographer, the Geological Survey, to a position, which he created by executive order, of General Superintendent of the National Parks. Mr. Marshall had been in the Geological Survey for nearly twenty-five years, making maps of the western country. He knows the parks and the mountains well, has lived in them with John Muir. It is Mr. Marshall who will have charge of the selection and direction of the men who will be Superintendents of the parks. I mentioned these developments to show that there is progress, and to emphasize the need of a Service which may provide for the harmonious progressive and systematic development.

There is a very large work to be done in such a Service. For one thing, the parks must be properly equipped to handle the great amount of tourist travel that is sure to go to them. During the past two years, because travel abroad has been prohibited by the war, the drift of travel has been turning to the West, and during these two years this has been demonstrated: that the slogan in respect to the National Parks is not “See America First,” but “Get America Ready to be Seen,”—a slogan which we thank Mr. Enos Mills for. It will be safe to say that only two of the parks are now at all adequately prepared to receive and comfortably care for large numbers of tourists.

The Service also should have a large work to do in the proper exploitation of its parks. Canada has set us a splendid example in having its parks ready to be seen and enjoyed, and in letting the world at large know they were ready. From a purely commercial standpoint, Canada has profited well in the moneys that have accrued to that country from tourist travel, and this is saying nothing of the more important benefits that come to people from living the outdoor life that is afforded by a visit to the parks.

Another important function of the Service will be in the consideration and wise recommendation for a natural and steady increase in our National Park areas. There are, at the present time, probably a dozen proposals in Congress for the creation of new National Parks. Some of them undoubtedly are fully up to the dignity of National Parks. Others probably are worthy to be considered, if at all, only as State Parks.

I might tell you a long story of the preparation of the present Bill for the National Park Service, and how, when our committee first prepared it, it was lengthy and adorned with all kinds of trimmings. But, one by one, those adornments, some less important, some, we think, very desirable, have been stripped from the Bill, and now it is a very plain and practical proposal. For one thing, we had hoped to have incorporated in the Bill a provision for an advisory board which might be composed of landscape architects and an engineer, whose services could be called for at all times when questions of landscape treatment of existing parks or when new proposals for parks were to be considered, but it seemed best to eliminate that important clause. It is gratifying to report to you, however, that the gentlemen in the Department of the Interior, all of whom are hopeful for the creation of the Service, are appreciative of the advice that can be given to them by the men of your organization; and I know that I speak for them when I say that they will appreciate always your voluntary suggestions concerning the development of the present parks, and I can also say that I have no doubt they will call on you frequently for such advice. Planning for the proper treatment of the parks is no small undertaking. In respect to its scenic beauty, each park is an entity of itself, and for such treatment as may be necessary each park presents its own special problems. This, of course, is not saying that any large attempt shall ever be made to effect changes in the parks, or introduce anything that would tend to divert attention from their natural beauty.

I have confined my talk almost exclusively to a consideration of the National Parks. There are, however, in addition to them, thirty-five National Monuments set aside by executive order under an enabling Act of Congress, each of which is noted for some distinctive feature of scenery or archaeology. Twenty of these monuments are under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior, (1) twelve of the Department of Agriculture, (2) and three of the War Department (3). There has been no arrangement for their uniform and harmonious administration, and our National Park Service Bill proposes that all of them should be included under the administration of the Department of the Interior. It is possible that when a Bill is finally reported for consideration those monuments now in the Department of Agriculture and in the War Department will stay where they are, but a great step forward will have been taken when all of the parks and a great majority of the monuments are embraced under one general administration.

It is very gratifying to me to be able to report to you tonight that there are very encouraging evidences that this Bill, as drawn by the Committee of the American Civic Association, with the cooperation of members of your Society, and introduced in Congress by Mr. Kent, of California, will be passed by Congress. A Bill proposing the creation of a Service was introduced early in the session by Senator Smoot, being similar in form to the one he introduced at our request some three sessions ago. We are advised that, while his Bill differs materially from the Kent Bill, when the Department of the Interior makes its report on it the report will be similar to the report it is to make, and I think has already made, to the Committee of the House of Representatives. That, we are sure, will be very satisfactory to Mr. Smoot, and will hasten action by both Houses on one and the same Bill, namely, what is known as the American Civic Association Bill, as introduced by Mr. Kent.

Your cordial endorsement, as a body, of this proposal for a National Park Service is urged, and it is very important that it be given. Surely every American may take great pride in the joint possession of such wonderful recreational areas as have been given to us under the various Acts creating our National Parks and Monuments, and therefore a very great responsibility rests upon all of us, particularly those who, by their professions and interest, are giving much of their time to the extension of the idea of outdoor living and the preservation of scenic areas.

Return to top of page

National Parks, Monuments and Forestsby Warren H. Manning, FASLA

Landscape Architecture Magazine 6, no. 3 (April 1916): 106-109.

Compiled from Government Documents and Allen Chamberlain’s Maps and Table in John Muir’s “Our National Parks.” (Plan No. 1076-2) >

* Administered by Department of Agriculture
† Administered by Interior Department
‡ Administered by War Department

Return to top of page

H.R. 8668: A Bill to Establish a National Park ServiceIntroduced by Mr. Kent, of California, in the House of Representatives January 11, 1916.
As printed in Landscape Architecture Magazine 6, no. 3 (April 1916): 109-111.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That there is hereby established in the Department of the Interior a service to be called the National Park Service, which shall be under the charge of a director who shall be appointed by the Secretary, and there shall also be in said service such assistants and other employees as the Secretary of the Interior shall deem necessary.

Section 2. That the director shall, under the direction of the Secretary of the Interior, have the supervision, management, and control of the several national parks, national monuments, the Hot Springs Reservation in the State of Arkansas, and such other national parks, national monuments, and reservations of like character as may hereafter be created or authorized by Congress.

Section 3. That the Secretary of the Interior shall make and publish such rules and regulations as he may deem necessary or proper for the use and management of such parks, monuments, and reservations as are hereby or may hereafter be placed under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service, and any violation of any of the rules and regulations authorized by this Act shall be punished as provided for in section fifty of the Act entitled “An Act to codify and amend the penal laws of the United States,” approved March fourth, nineteen hundred and nine, as amended by section six of the Act of June twenty-fight, nineteen hundred and ten (Thirty-sixth United States Statues at Large, page eight hundred and fifty-seven). He may also, upon terms and conditions to be fixed by him, sell or dispose of timber in those cases where the cutting of such timber is requisite for properly controlling the attacks of insects or disease or of otherwise conserving the scenery or the natural or historic objects in any park, monument, or other reservation; grant privileges, leases, and permits for the use of land, but only for the accommodation of visitors in the various parks, monuments, or other reservations herein provided for, but for periods not exceeding twenty years, and that no natural curiosities, wonders, or objects of interest shall be leased, rented, or granted to anyone on such terms as to interfere with free access to them by the public. It is further provided that in the granting of leases and concessions and in the general management and development of said parks, monuments, and reservations no action unless specifically provided for by future enactments of Congress shall be detrimental to the fundamental object of these aforesaid parks, monuments, and reservations, which object is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects therein and to provide for the enjoyment of said scenery and objects by the public in any manner and by any means that will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations. The fund derived from such sales, leases, permits, and privileges shall be deposited in the Treasury as a general fund, to be expended by the director, under the supervision of the Secretary of the Interior, in the administration, maintenance, and improvements of the parks, monuments, and reservations herein provided for.

Section 4. That the expenses incident to the establishment of such National Park Service shall be met out of funds allotted to the Interior Department for similar purposes and shall be submitted in the Book of Estimates furnished to the House of Representatives by the Department of the Interior.

Section 5. That all Acts or parts of Acts inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed.

Return to top of page

Resolutions of the American Society of Landscape ArchitectsConcerning the National Park Service
February 14, 1916

Whereas, The need has long been felt, not only for more adequate protection of the surpassing beauty of those primeval landscapes which the National Parks have been created to perpetuate, but also for rendering this landscape beauty more readily enjoyable through construction in these parks of certain necessary roads and buildings for the accommodation of visitors in a way to bring the minimum of injury to these primeval landscapes;

Whereas, The meeting of this two-fold need can only be expected to come, on the one hand, from the creation of a special Government Service charged with the sole responsibility for the care and maintenance and, so far as need be, the development of these areas for their primary recreative purpose, and, on the other hand, from the securing, by such Government Service, when created, of the most expert professional counsel, to advise as to the actual treatment of these areas, including their planning and the design of all necessary constructions with them;

Whereas, The Secretary of the Interior has now appointed in responsible charge of these National Parks, Stephen Tyng Mather, and as General Superintendent of the National Parks, under him and in direct responsible relation to those Park areas, Robert Bradford Marshall, both public servants of the highest character and standing and, in the judgment of this Society particularly well qualified to be in administrative charge of these areas, and it is understood that they do not intend to accept or adopt any comprehensive plans for these areas, or designs for constructions which such plans may provide for, without first securing the approval of qualified expert advisors, and an earnest desire for the cooperation of this Society has been expressed; and

Whereas, A bill (H.R.8668) has been introduced in Congress by Mr. Kent of California and has been referred to the Committee on Public Lands, being a Bill to Establish a National Park Service, and drawn by members of the American Civic Association in Conference with representatives of the American Society of Landscape Architects; be it, and it hereby is,

Resolved: First, That the American Society of Landscape Architects declares its confidence in the present provisional administration of the National Parks;

Second, That the American Society of Landscape Architects endorses the Bill (H.R.8668), entitled a Bill to Establish a National Park Service, and pledges its utmost efforts, in cooperation with the American Civic Association, to secure its passage;

Third, That the American Society of Landscape Architects pledges itself, and invites its individual members, to cooperate in any way possible, and consistent with the recognized ethics of the profession, with the present provisional National Park Service and with the National Park Service sought to be established under the aforesaid Bill.

Return to top of page

Danger of Over-exploitation of Our National Parksby James Sturgis Pray, FASLA, President, American Society of Landscape Architects

Address to the American Society of Landscape Architects, Hotel Bellevue, Boston, February 14, 1916. Reprinted in Landscape Architecture Magazine 6, no. 3 (April 1916): 113-114.

The importance and value of preserving unimpaired for future generations certain examples of primeval landscape have been ably and eloquently set forth by such inspired prophets as John Muir, and by many other writers and speakers. The general public is doubtless more sensible of this value than it was a generation ago, but there seems danger that the present popular awakening to the scenic interest of these areas, and greatly increased travel to them, bringing about a demand for better traveling facilities and more comfortable accommodations, will lead to over-exploitation of these areas, by too many and too conspicuous and sometimes inappropriate constructions, and consequent serious injury to the primeval character of the scenery. It is said that, in 1915 alone, several hundred million dollars was divided among the railroads, hotels, etc., because of travel to the Parks—travel increased, of course, by the war in Europe and the Expositions in California. There are increasingly immense moneyed interests behind the exploitation of the scenery of our National Parks. The Administration—any administration—will be under the greatest pressure to provide more and more elaborately—perhaps less and less restrainedly and fitly—for this ever-increasing number of visitors, of whom a large, if not a preponderating proportion will be of the comfort-demanding rather that the reverential type. We shall ever need an endless line of noble champions like Muir, whose scathing rebuke of indifferent administrations, and of selfish, short-sighted exploitation—easily becoming desecration—will keep the willful or merely ignorant destroyer in leash. But there is even more call for wider education of our people with respect to the sacredness of these areas, and in this work the American Society of Landscape Architects should find a special opportunity for service. It is for us, moreover, to hold our ideals clearly before this and every administration and, if the ideals are sound, and we are sufficiently able and devoted, even if we do not succeed in securing realization of all these ideals, we shall at least have helped to guide the hands, and it may be strengthen the will of the administration toward their attainment or the attainment of other worthy ideals.

In this matter of holding up our ideals for the National Parks, and apropos of the present move to establish a separate National Park Service, the now classic statement of Professor F. L. Olmsted of the distinction between National Parks and National Forests, and the importance of their separate administration cannot be too strongly impressed on the public mind.

Return to top of page

The Distinction between National Parks and National Forestsby Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr., FASLA, Charter member of the American Society of Landscape Architects

Letter to the American Society of Landscape Architects, Hotel Bellevue, Boston, February 14, 1916. Reprinted in Landscape Architecture Magazine 6, no. 3 (April 1916): 114-115.

Why should there be a distinction between National Forests and National Parks? If the public is at liberty to use both as recreation grounds, why should they not all be under one management, in the interest of a more economical administration?

The National Forests are set apart for economic ends, and their use for recreation is a by-product properly to be secured only in so far as it does not interfere with the economic efficiency of the forest management. The National Parks are set apart primarily in order to preserve to the people for all time the opportunity of a peculiar kind of enjoyment and recreation, not measurable in economic terms and to be obtained only from the remarkable scenery which they contain,—scenery of those primeval types which are in most parts of the world rapidly vanishing for all eternity before the increased thoroughness of the economic use of land. In the National Parks direct economic returns, if any, are properly the by-products; and even rapidity and efficiency in making them accessible to the people, although of great importance, are wholly secondary to the one dominant purpose of preserving essential esthetic qualities of their scenery unimpaired as a heritage to the infinite numbers of generations to come.

Because of the very fact that in the Parks, as well as in the Forests, considerations of economics and of direct human enjoyment must both be carefully weighed in reaching decisions, and because the physical problems are much the same in both, the fundamental difference in the points of view which should control the management of the National Parks and that of the National Forests can be safely maintained only by keeping them under separate administration.

Return to top of page

The Forest Service and the Preservation of Natural Beautyby E. A. Sherman, Assistant Chief, U.S. Forest Service

Vernal Falls, Yosemite National Park. Henry V. Hubbard, 1916.

Landscape Architecture Magazine 6, no. 3 (April 1916): 115-119.

The administration of the National Forests is under the charge of the Department of Agriculture, of which the Forest Service is a part, while the administration of the National Parks is in the Department of the Interior. More than then years ago, jurisdiction over the National Forests was transferred from the Department of the Interior to the Department of Agriculture, in order to make possible the application of specialized and technical knowledge to the problems of timber and forage production and utilization and to those of water conservation. Experience had proved that the Department of the Interior, whose functions in connection with public land matters are principally those related to the disposal of the lands, rather than to their control and development as permanent public resources, was not well equipped for the constructive work necessary in order to open the forests to wide use while safeguarding them against abuse. Consequently the transfer was made by Congress, on the repeated recommendation of the Secretary of the Interior and the Commissioner of the General Land Office. These officials pointed out that the Department of Agriculture was best fitted to grapple with the underlying administrative problems, since these related to the use of the soil in the production of what are essentially crops—timber and forage—and in the adaption of the methods employed to the needs of those who use the water derived from the forests.

Primarily, therefore, the National Forests are administered with a view to obtaining from them certain essential material products. From the outset, however, it has been recognized that public ownership differs from private ownership in that it permits and demands recognition of every form of public usefulness of which the forests are capable. The private owner of a piece of timberland handles it in whatever way he believes will enable him to get most out of the timber. What the effect of his action may be on the purity and regularity of streams, on wild life, on natural scenery, or on any other kind of matter which does not personally affect him, is no concern of his. But the Government is a trustee for all the people, and must seek to secure the largest possible net total of public benefits of all kinds. Therefore, in administering the National Forests the interest of the public in the recreation resource involved—already of large importance, and destined to be of steadily increasing importance—must be taken account of and intelligently provided for.

In providing for recreation use of the National Forests and the protection of notable scenic features, the Forest Service approaches the field of work of the Department of the Interior, in its National Park administration. To a large extent the National Parks have been created by setting aside for this purpose portions of the National Forests. Such portions have been selected because they possessed scenic attractions of so extraordinary a kind as to make them worthy of the care of the nation, on the ground of their national importance, and to justify closing the door to material development of the resources involved, in order to protect the paramount interests of the public in the scenic features. Thus the distinction between National Park administration and National Forest administration is a definite one, although National Forest includes for one of its purposes that which forms the sole purpose of National Park Administration. National Parks are areas where economic considerations can be practically excluded. Without this distinction the two forms of administration would cover precisely the same field.*

*See the distinction between National Parks and National Forests, page 114.

Since public use of the National Parks involves expenditures by the Government to make them accessible and to provide for their care and protection, only areas which are a matter of interest to the country as a whole should be made National Parks. Our National Parks include such wonderful and unique things as are found in the Yosemite, the Yellowstone, Glacier Park, and Crater Lake. The National Forests, covering as they do the principal mountain regions of the West, contain not hundreds but thousands of places of great natural beauty and local importance from the recreation standpoint. In some cases, already it has been found that the local importance of recreation use of limited areas was so great that it should be recognized as paramount, and that economic use of the land for timber production, grazing, or even agriculture, should be excluded or subordinated. Wherever it appears that productive use for the supply of strictly economic needs will conflict with recreation use, and that recreation use is the highest use for the particular area involved, the Forest Service plans accordingly.

One example of the application of this principle is furnished by the action of the Secretary of Agriculture in classifying as chiefly valuable for purposes of public recreation 13,873 acres of land on the northern edge of the Oregon National Forest, near the Columbia River Scenic Highway. This Highway has recently been built at a large cost, by the City of Portland and by the counties concerned, through the gorge cut by the Columbia River across the main divide of the Cascades. It is one of the chief attractions of the Northwest, and it eminently deserves that the Forest Service cooperate in providing for its enjoyment by the largest possible number, and in largest measure. Therefore, no timber within the area classified by the Secretary of Agriculture as chiefly valuable for recreation purposes will be cut; no exclusive occupancy of any portion of the land by any one permittee will be authorized, but all portions will be alike open to the general public; and in all respects the administration of the land by the Federal Government will have in view the most intelligent provisions for this recognizedly dominant form of the interest.

Another example is in a portion of the Cleveland National Forest in southern California, which affords an opportunity for summer homes accessible to the people of the Imperial Valley. The need of these people for a convenient place of resort from the summer heat of the valley is such that an area on the Cleveland Forest has been closed, for their benefit, against any timber cutting or agricultural settlement. Road development to enable them to reach this area will be made by the Government in cooperation with the settlers in the valley, and land will be leased to them for the building of summer homes.

Already there are thousands of individuals who have sought and obtained authorization from the Forest Service for the use of National Forest lands as a place of summer residence. Some of these applicants are provided for through issuing permits allowing the use of a plot of ground, at a nominal charge. In other cases term leases are given. But, in any case, a careful provision is made for the most wide-spread use of the resource. Where a limited amount of desirable land is in demand, or is likely to be soon in demand, by an considerable number of people, the land is subdivided so as take care of as many people as possible, in the best way possible.

Throughout the National Forests the development of means of transportation and communication, through the construction of trails, roads, and other facilities for the use of the forests by the public, is being pressed as fast as the available funds permit. The National Forest force is expected to render all the help that it can to those who go on the forest for recreation. More than one and a half million people are now visiting the National Forests each year for recreation purposes, and this form of use is rapidly increasing. Great as is the economic importance of the National Forests as sources of timber supply, water-supply, and forage production, it is not improbable that their value as playgrounds for the public will in time come to rank as one of the major resources. The Forest Service is giving due consideration to this fact. It has definitely aimed to foresee what the public needs in this respect will require, and to plan accordingly, as well as to provide for the public needs of the present.

Return to top of page

The American Society of Landscape Architects and Our National Parksby James Sturgis Pray, FASLA, President, American Society of Landscape Architects

Address to the American Society of Landscape Architects, Hotel Bellevue, Boston, February 14, 1916. Including public letters by Stephen T. Mather, Assistant to the Secretary of the Interior, and Robert B. Marshall, Superintendent of National Parks. Reprinted in Landscape Architecture Magazine 6, no. 3 (April 1916): 119-123.

In considering the question of our National Parks the American Society of Landscape Architects has principally before it these two problems: First, the conservation of the primeval landscape beauty of the National Park areas unimpaired for the generations to come, and second, the increasing of the public’s facilities for the enjoyment of this beauty. The value of the first to man is greatly increased by the second. The value of the second without the first is nil. Without the utmost skill and care,—yes, without the utmost reverence for the natural beauty of the areas—coupled with experience in the adaptation of artificial structures to natural topography so that they shall seem as near as may be to be a part of the whole,—the accomplishment of the second purpose will almost surely defeat the first. For both these purposes we need, first, a safe and sane administration backed by the popular will. But for the second, and for the first also, we need to have that safe and sane administration make fullest possible use of wise expert professional counsel.

Let me now go on record as believing that the surpassing beauty of our National Parks is neither safe, nor will be made enjoyable, for the maximum number of people with the minimum of injury to that landscape beauty, unless the administration of the National Park areas employs the best expert counsel it can secure in the profession of Landscape Architecture, and that this is needed for four principal purposes: First, a careful determination of proper boundaries of the National Parks, not arbitrary, as those at present, but in consonance with the topography and with landscape unity; second, the development of comprehensive general plans for every National Park and Monument, showing roads, bridges, trails, buildings, etc., so far as these may be needed, and at the same time can be built without injury to the landscape, and the adoption of a definite policy of development; third, the approval of designs for buildings or other special structures; fourth, prescribing a system of intelligent and scrupulous maintenance having particular regard to the protection of the beauty of the landscape.

But, to accomplish this two-fold purpose of conservation and conservative development, a safe and sane administration is first of all necessary. At the moment we have cause for congratulation and confidence, first, in that Secretary Lane, of the Department of the Interior, has appointed Honorable Stephen T. Mather Assistant to the Secretary of the Interior and in responsible charge of all the National Parks, and Robert B. Marshall under him and in direct responsible relation to the National Park areas themselves; both men of the highest character and standing and enthusiastic interest in the National Parks; and, second, that a Bill is now pending in Congress and has been referred to the Committee on Public Land, being entitled a Bill to Establish a National Park Service, and drawn by officers of the American Civic Association in conference with representatives of the American Society of Landscape Architects, which Bill provides for an independent service in charge of the National Parks, the idea being that it will make the present Provisional Service permanent.

We expected to have with us tonight the Honorable Stephen T. Mather. He had definitely accepted our invitation, but finally was prevented from coming by important duties in Washington. He writes us as follows:

I trust that the suggestion which I made to Mr. Manning can be carried out, that your committee arrange to take a trip through the leading parks during the coming summer, and learn for themselves the characteristics of each park, the present facilities, and their possibilities in the way of future development.

The department would be very glad to have any specific recommendations after such a visit had been made. There is much room for further development, but this development must be done in such a way as not to interfere with the natural beauty of the parks.

I was much impressed by my visit to the parks, last summer, with the importance of studying problems directly on the ground, and I know men of your profession will realize the importance of this. I hope, therefore, some plan can be worked out by which such a trip can be made this coming season. The department would be glad to give you every facility and put you in touch personally with the superintendent of each park, so that you can obtain as comprehensive an idea as will be possible in a limited time.

Mr. R. B. Marshall, our recently appointed Superintendent of National Parks, is addressing himself closely to the problems in which you are particularly interested, while my own endeavors are largely focused in working out the business problems involved in the park management. The department is particularly interested in securing proper revenues from the business done by the concessioners in the park, without, at the same time, making these charges a burden on the tourist.

The revenues obtained from the automobile tourists are already adding materially to the receipts; over $40,000 having been received last year, as against $13,000 for 1914. My proposed plan for a park-to-park highway, which is being taken up enthusiastically by several of the states, should help materially in increasing automobile travel to the park, and the revenues from this should serve, within a year or so, to double our receipts.

All this will help to make the parks more nearly self-supporting, and the time should not be far distant when the administration of the parks, at least, and possibly the upkeep of the roads, can be paid out of the revenues, requiring appropriations only for road construction and other general improvements.

Stephen T. Mather

For the same reason of official duty—of obligation to the great interests at stake—Mr. Marshall is also unable to be with us tonight. Mr. Marshall is the man in direct contact with the Park areas. He is the man whose touch upon those areas is going to do good or ill, and it is particularly from Mr. Marshall that you will see we have grounds for hope of a splendid opportunity to cooperate. As perhaps we do not all know, he was the Chief Geographer of the United States Geological Survey, and, as such, intimately acquainted with the areas of all the Parks. He writes as follows:

I want, and must have, all the assistance possible from the American Society of Landscape Architects, and the best way to get such assistance is to get in close personal touch with the membership. Unfortunately for me, your meeting happens to come at a time that official duties prevent my being with you on the fourteenth. Therefore, will you please express to your Society, in any language you choose, my sincerest regrets for my inability to be present, as I want each member personally to know that my heart and mind will be with you even though the flesh is absent because of official duties over which I have no control.

Now as to the information you request about the general subject of National Parks. I am sending you copies of Secretary Lane’s annual report, the last report of this conference of the park superintendents, and report to Congress regarding some emergency legislation to allow some form of organization until there is created a National Park Service, and finally, a copy of a few words I gave before the American Civic Association during the Christmastime. These data will give you a line on what we are trying to do.

We are now reporting upon a bill of the American Civic Association, which was introduced by Hon. William Kent, of California, to create a National Park Service, and have prepared a bill soon to be introduced to create the Grand Canyon National Park in Arizona, and to enlarge the Sequoia National Park in California. We are doing everything possible to reorganize the concessioners in the several national parks, all with the one thought to make it better for the people, that they may better receive the benefit and enjoyment of the national playgrounds.

We are working on a plan with the several railroads interested in the business of national park transportation, for coupon tickets to go in and out at the pleasure of the visitor, and to issue bulletins of high-class literature and photographs that it is hoped will hold to the attention of the public that, even though the exposition has closed at San Francisco, the National parks are always open, and that we hope they will get the National-park habit, and keep it.

The improvement of roads, trails, hotels, tents, etc., in the parks is one of first importance, and as fast as we can receive funds from Congress they will go forward. How much money we can get is the vital question, as you know we cannot do much without money. In the Yosemite, for instance, we are asking for $313,000. We should have a million, such as has been given to the Yellowstone, for roads; not all to be spent during one season, but to go on as a business plan would be undertaken. And so with all of the parks there will be a comprehensive plan worked out, and by next winter we can lay it before Congress, and it is in such a plan that we would want cooperation with your Society.

The talked-of Village plan for the Yosemite, for instance, has only gone so far as to select the new hotel site, and the other parts of the Village will be carefully considered and before adopted we will want cooperation with those who have made a life study of the subject. I might go on enough to make a book of our thoughts, desires, and hopes, and as soon as we can get them into even tentative shape we shall be glad indeed if your Association will give us its good advice.

R. B. Marshall

Return to top of page

References

Linda Flint McClelland, Presenting Nature: The Historic Landscape Design of the National Park Service, 1916 to 1942 (U.S. National Park Service, 1993), https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/mcclelland/mcclelland.htm.

"Our National Parks: A Conference: The Proposed National Park Service," Landscape Architecture Magazine 6, no. 3 (April 1916): 101-123, https://www.jstor.org/stable/44658300.

Transactions of the American Society of Landscape Architects, 1909–1921 (The Recorder Press, 1921).