Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi.htm[8/6/2013 5:32:15 PM]

Mojave

Administrative History

From Neglected Space

To Protected Place:

An Administrative History of

Mojave National Preserve

by

Eric Charles Nystrom

March 2003

Prepared for:

United States Department of the Interior

National Park Service

Mojave National Preserve

Great Basin CESU

Cooperative Agreement

H8R0701001

TABLE OF CONTENTS

moja/adhi/adhi.htm

Last Updated: 05-Apr-2005
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Table of Contents)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhit.htm[8/6/2013 5:32:17 PM]

Mojave

Administrative History

TABLE OF CONTENTS

COVER

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER TWO: PRELUDE TO SYSTEMATIC FEDERAL MANAGEMENT

Native Americans and Anglo Contact

Grazing

Mining

Railroads

Homesteading

Modern Roads and Rights of Way

Modern Military Training

Recreation

CHAPTER THREE: BLM MANAGEMENT IN THE EAST MOJAVE

FLPMA and the Desert Plan

The East Mojave National Scenic Area and the Genesis of the CDPA

The Political Battle Over the CDPA

CHAPTER FOUR: AN AWKWARD START AND THREATS OF AN EARLY END

The Dollar Budget

CHAPTER FIVE: PLANNING FOR MOJAVE'S FUTURE

CHAPTER SIX: PARK MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER SEVEN: VISITOR SERVICES

Resource and Visitor Protection

Interpretation

CHAPTER EIGHT: RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Natural Resources
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Table of Contents)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhit.htm[8/6/2013 5:32:17 PM]

Cultural Resources

CHAPTER NINE: FUTURES

BIBLIOGRAPHY

FOOTNOTES

INDEX (omitted from the online edition)

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Illustration 1 - Joshua tree and buckhorn cholla

Illustration 2 - Prehistoric petroglyphs at Indian Well

Illustration 3 - The 7IL Ranch

Illustration 4 - Stone walls of 1880s-era Providence

Illustration 5 - U.S. Highway 66, Essex, California

Illustration 6 - High-tension power wires and associated infrastructure

Illustration 7 - Visitor's center for Providence Mountains State Recreation Area

Illustration 8 - Zzyzx

Illustration 9 - Four-wheel drive vehicles traveling the Mojave Road

Illustration 10 - Painted sign opposing S.21

Illustration 11 - Cross on Sunrise Rock

Illustration 12 - Solar panels at Hole-in-the-Wall

Illustration 13 - Mojave National Preserve entrance monument

Illustration 14 - Official logo of Mojave National Preserve

Illustration 15 - Buildings at the New Trail Mine

Illustration 16 - Graffiti on Kelbaker Road

Illustration 17 - The Union Pacific Railroad

Illustration 18 - Kelso Depot

Illustration 19 - NPS visitors' center at Hole-in-the-Wall

Illustration 20 - Lake Tuendae at Zzyzx

Illustration 21 - Desert cattle

Illustration 22 - Rock walls of the military outpost at Piute Creek

Illustration 23 - The Rock Springs Land & Cattle Company water trough and corral

Illustration 24 - Headframe of the Evening Star Mine

Illustration 25 - Morning Star Mine

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ACLU — American Civil Liberties Union

AML — Abandoned Mine Land

ATV — All-Terrain Vehicle

AUM — Animal Unit Month

BLM — Bureau of Land Management

CalTrans — California Department of Transportation

CDF&G — California Department of Fish & Game

CDPA — California Desert Protection Act

DOI — Department of the Interior

DTRP — Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Table of Contents)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhit.htm[8/6/2013 5:32:17 PM]

EIS — Environmental Impact Statement

EMNSA — East Mojave National Scenic Area

FLPMA — Federal Land Policy and Management Act

FMO — Fire Management Officer

FWS — U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

GMP — General Management Plan

HAZMAT — Hazardous Material

LRIP — Long-Range Interpretive Plan

MOU — Memorandum of Understanding

NEMO — Northern / Eastern Mojave Planning Effort

NPS — National Park Service

NRA — National Recreation Area

OHV — Off-Highway Vehicle

SET — Special Event Team

UP — Union Pacific Railroad

USGS — United States Geological Survey

WSA — Wilderness Study Area

<<< Previous <<< Contents >>> Next >>>

moja/adhi/adhit.htm

Last Updated: 05-Apr-2004
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Table of Contents)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhit.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:38 PM]

Mojave

Administrative History

TABLE OF CONTENTS

COVER

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER TWO: PRELUDE TO SYSTEMATIC FEDERAL MANAGEMENT

Native Americans and Anglo Contact

Grazing

Mining

Railroads

Homesteading

Modern Roads and Rights of Way

Modern Military Training

Recreation

CHAPTER THREE: BLM MANAGEMENT IN THE EAST MOJAVE

FLPMA and the Desert Plan

The East Mojave National Scenic Area and the Genesis of the CDPA

The Political Battle Over the CDPA

CHAPTER FOUR: AN AWKWARD START AND THREATS OF AN EARLY END

The Dollar Budget

CHAPTER FIVE: PLANNING FOR MOJAVE'S FUTURE

CHAPTER SIX: PARK MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER SEVEN: VISITOR SERVICES

Resource and Visitor Protection

Interpretation

CHAPTER EIGHT: RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Natural Resources
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Table of Contents)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhit.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:38 PM]

Cultural Resources

CHAPTER NINE: FUTURES

BIBLIOGRAPHY

FOOTNOTES

INDEX (omitted from the online edition)

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Illustration 1 - Joshua tree and buckhorn cholla

Illustration 2 - Prehistoric petroglyphs at Indian Well

Illustration 3 - The 7IL Ranch

Illustration 4 - Stone walls of 1880s-era Providence

Illustration 5 - U.S. Highway 66, Essex, California

Illustration 6 - High-tension power wires and associated infrastructure

Illustration 7 - Visitor's center for Providence Mountains State Recreation Area

Illustration 8 - Zzyzx

Illustration 9 - Four-wheel drive vehicles traveling the Mojave Road

Illustration 10 - Painted sign opposing S.21

Illustration 11 - Cross on Sunrise Rock

Illustration 12 - Solar panels at Hole-in-the-Wall

Illustration 13 - Mojave National Preserve entrance monument

Illustration 14 - Official logo of Mojave National Preserve

Illustration 15 - Buildings at the New Trail Mine

Illustration 16 - Graffiti on Kelbaker Road

Illustration 17 - The Union Pacific Railroad

Illustration 18 - Kelso Depot

Illustration 19 - NPS visitors' center at Hole-in-the-Wall

Illustration 20 - Lake Tuendae at Zzyzx

Illustration 21 - Desert cattle

Illustration 22 - Rock walls of the military outpost at Piute Creek

Illustration 23 - The Rock Springs Land & Cattle Company water trough and corral

Illustration 24 - Headframe of the Evening Star Mine

Illustration 25 - Morning Star Mine

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ACLU — American Civil Liberties Union

AML — Abandoned Mine Land

ATV — All-Terrain Vehicle

AUM — Animal Unit Month

BLM — Bureau of Land Management

CalTrans — California Department of Transportation

CDF&G — California Department of Fish & Game

CDPA — California Desert Protection Act

DOI — Department of the Interior

DTRP — Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Table of Contents)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhit.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:38 PM]

EIS — Environmental Impact Statement

EMNSA — East Mojave National Scenic Area

FLPMA — Federal Land Policy and Management Act

FMO — Fire Management Officer

FWS — U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

GMP — General Management Plan

HAZMAT — Hazardous Material

LRIP — Long-Range Interpretive Plan

MOU — Memorandum of Understanding

NEMO — Northern / Eastern Mojave Planning Effort

NPS — National Park Service

NRA — National Recreation Area

OHV — Off-Highway Vehicle

SET — Special Event Team

UP — Union Pacific Railroad

USGS — United States Geological Survey

WSA — Wilderness Study Area

<<< Previous <<< Contents >>> Next >>>

moja/adhi/adhit.htm

Last Updated: 05-Apr-2004
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:39 PM]

Mojave

Administrative History

From Neglected Space

To Protected Place:

An Administrative History of

Mojave National Preserve

by

Eric Charles Nystrom

March 2003

Prepared for:

United States Department of the Interior

National Park Service

Mojave National Preserve

Great Basin CESU

Cooperative Agreement

H8R0701001

TABLE OF CONTENTS

moja/adhi/adhi.htm

Last Updated: 05-Apr-2005
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Acknowledgments)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi0.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:40 PM]

Mojave

Administrative History

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I still vividly remember the way I met this thesis. My advisor, Dr. Hal Rothman, casually

pitched it to me: "I have a project that would be cool, but it would take a year and probably

rearrange your schedule." Yes, every bit as promised. I really need to thank Dr. Rothman for

everything he has done for me. I couldn't possibly list even a fraction of the debts I owe him,

big and small. It will have to suffice to say that he's taught me a lot, and I'm a much better

historian than I ever thought I could be at this stage because of his guidance. I'll never forget

his lessons, the explicit ones and the silent ones alike. I'd also like to convey my deep

gratitude to Dr. David Wrobel, Dr. Andrew Kirk, and Francisco Menendez, who served on

my M.A. Committee at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, and to Dr. Bill Leslie, my

Ph.D. advisor in the Department of the History of Science, Medicine, and Technology at

Johns Hopkins University, for his patience as I finish the revisions to this project.

The employees of the National Park Service, especially the current and former staff of

Mojave National Preserve, have been wonderful throughout the project. They put up with my

questions and tolerated my miscues, and I can only hope that this history does them justice.

I'd like to specifically thank Dave Anderson, Gordon Chappell, Bob Conway, Jean de los

Reyes, Tim Duncan, Kelly Hawk-Mee, Marv Jensen, Mary "Jeff" Karraker, Andy

Lesczykowski, Gretchen Luxenberg, Mary Martin, Janet McDonnell, Sean McGuinness,

Kristy McMillan, David Moore, Tom Mulhern, Ruby Newton, Dave Paulissen, Gordon Pine,

Barbara Schneider, Dennis Schramm, Doug Scovill, Linda Slater, Ted Weasma, and Danette

Woo for sharing their experiences, comments, assistance, and time with me.

I'd like to acknowledge a professional debt to Elisabeth M. Infield and the late Frank Wheat

for their important accounts of the California Desert Protection Act. Like any other historian

who might attempt to write about the eastern Mojave, my indebtedness to Dennis Casebier is

substantial. His well-researched series of books form the backbone of any historical study,

and his incredible archive collections are a priceless resource for any future account of the

history of the park's lands. My own account of the pre-park history of the area which is now

Mojave National Preserve relies heavily on his research, though any mistakes in

interpretation are, of course, mine alone.

Bill Fullerton, my desert chauffeur, was a tremendous help and an honest friend - how they

squeezed such a big heart into such a rough exterior, I'll never know. My families, the one

I've had for decades now and the one I formally acquired only months ago, cheered me on

through the entire ordeal. I hope Bruce Nystrom and Herbert Nystrom would have approved

of my efforts.

Rachel Diane Land Nystrom is my best friend in the world. She's smart, caring, hilarious and

tender, beautiful and considerate, helpful, warm and utterly unique. She married me, and I'm

the luckiest guy on the planet. I dedicate this text to her.

Eric Charles Nystrom
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Acknowledgments)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi0.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:40 PM]

Baltimore, Maryland

Map of Mojave National Preserve. (click on image for an enlargement in a new

window)

<<< Previous <<< Contents >>> Next >>>

moja/adhi/adhi0.htm

Last Updated: 05-Apr-2004
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi1.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:43 PM]

Mojave

Administrative History

CHAPTER ONE:

INTRODUCTION

The eastern portion of the Mojave desert is a beautiful place. Successive mountain ranges,

trending from southwest to northeast, tower above broad valleys with sweeping vistas.

Shimmering bright playas, sun-baked remnants of Pleistocene lakes, occupy the lowest areas.

Several diverse plant communities successively populate the gently sloping alluvial plains,

known locally as bajadas, as elevation increases. The Mojave-signature Joshua tree is found

throughout the area, and two forests, on Cima Dome and in Lanfair Valley, have the densest

concentrations of the plant in the world. In the mountains, the pinyon-juniper community of

the Great Basin predominates. At the top of some of the highest Mojave peaks, relic stands of

white pine and Douglas fir were left stranded after the last glaciers retreated ten thousand

years ago. Extinct volcanoes and lava flows, some estimated to be only hundreds of years

old, sit less than thirty miles from huge sand dunes that make booming noises when fine

grains of sand rub against one another. Much of the land in question is home to the

endangered desert tortoise, and bighorn sheep live in the steep mountains. A cornucopia of

wildflowers erupts after every desert rain, temporarily masking the dominant environmental

fact that the area is dry.

The eastern Mojave is today largely encompassed by the Mojave National Preserve, a

National Park Service unit in southern California created in 1994. The history of the area of

the Mojave National Preserve since European contact can be explained as the function of two

factors: arid desert lands, and urban proximity. Urban proximity itself gave rise to two

ideologies that conflicted over the best uses for desert spaces, and in so doing, shaped the

Mojave National Preserve as a Park Service unit.

The history of the eastern Mojave

desert shares many characteristics

with the history of other places in

the rural desert west. Most of

Nevada, much of Utah, and large

portions of southern California,

Arizona, and New Mexico have

had similar development patterns.

The military made the land safe for

whites at the cost of the Native

Americans who called the area their

homeland. Geological forces

deposited large varieties of metals

and minerals, and Euro-American

prospectors were aided in their

searches for wealth by a lack of

vegetation to obscure their views.

Small scale mining and

prospecting, with occasional rich
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi1.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:43 PM]

Illustration 1 - The Joshua tree and buckhorn cholla are distinctive

Mojave desert vegetation. (Photo by Eric Nystrom, 2001.)

finds, was the norm. Arid-lands

ranching flourished, involving vast

tracts of public land controlled by

cattle entrepreneurs who owned the

only sources of water. As in other

deserts, cattle ranching was

successful in a way that much other

economic activity was not, but

margins were slim and the

consequences for the environment were largely permanent, as native biota gave way to exotic

grasses and woody shrubs proliferated to replace native forbs. Transcontinental railroads

pushed through the Mojave, like other deserts, on their way to distant markets. After 1910,

homesteaders acting with the Progressive-era faith in the potential of mankind to solve any

problem attempted to farm the east Mojave. Unlike the deserts of central Nevada, Utah,

Arizona, and New Mexico, where the Newlands Reclamation Act of 1902 took hold and

made at least parts of the desert bloom, no nearby rivers could be tapped for irrigation in the

eastern Mojave. Optimistic farmers utilized dryfarming techniques, and a series of wet years

prolonged the experiment, but the average rainfall - less than eight inches per year in most

places - proved too little for even the most virtuous farmer.

As southern California and the city of Los Angeles grew throughout the twentieth century,

the eastern Mojave remained a relatively unpopulated desert, but the patterns of development

and use of the area took on new forms as a result of its proximity to a major urban area.

Certainly, the destination of southern California explains the presence of railroads in the

Mojave - the Union Pacific, which runs through the middle of today's Mojave National

Preserve, was originally called the San Pedro, Los Angeles, and Salt Lake Railroad. Roads

through the desert terminated in southern California, and author John Steinbeck's Okies

traveled Route 66, the "mother road," through the Mojave to the prosperity of areas closer to

the coast. Later interstate highways followed 66 and Highway 91, the highway to Las Vegas,

and moved travelers through, but not to, the eastern portion of the Mojave desert.

Los Angeles and the rest of the Sunbelt grew enormously during World War II, and the

demographic changes sparked by the war changed the nature of use of the desert. After

millions of G.I.s got to know the desert through General George Patton's desert training

camps, riding around the Mojave in jeeps and tanks, many post-war recreationists decided to
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi1.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:43 PM]

do the same thing without the artillery. Off-road motorcycles were a postwar innovation, and

the California deserts seemed like an excellent place to use them - the deserts were close to

the population centers, only a few hours away from San Fernando Valley. Residents of the

suburbs found the desert a nice place for solitude, but close enough to be convenient.

Seemingly, no one cared about the land and people could use it as they wished, and no one

seemed to live there either.

Eventually, the pressure of urban recreation on the desert became too much for the land to

absorb without obvious long-term impacts. Spurred to action by the inaugural run of a

massive cross-desert motorcycle race - the Barstow to Vegas - in 1967, the U.S. Bureau of

Land Management (BLM) focused its attention on regulating users of off-road vehicles and

other recreation in the desert. BLM had no enforcement powers, but the Federal Land Policy

and Management Act, known as FLPMA, gave BLM authority to regulate beginning in 1976.

FLPMA also contained a special provision which required BLM to develop a comprehensive

management plan for all of the southern California desert under its control. The result,

published in 1980, was known formally as the California Desert Conservation Area Plan but

universally as simply the Desert Plan. The Desert Plan prohibited certain activities and

encouraged others, provided four land classifications to regulate use of federal desert, and

created areas of protection, but the underlying premise of the whole document was that too

many people, most of them from the greater Los Angeles area, were trying to use the desert

and were harming it in the process.

By the time restrictive desert planning began in the mid-1970s, expansion of the suburbs

already began to consume open areas closest to the city, and recreationists were pushed

farther east in their desire for new places. In the context of the 1970s, where suburban sprawl

was being systematically challenged by environmentalists as ugly and evil and the declining

economy inspired pessimism in blue collar workers, the relatively empty deserts to the east of

L.A. were seen as a buffer to urban society. Some people, who may broadly be described as

"conservatives," saw the desert as a repository of American values, a vaguely Turnerian

"empty" frontier where ruggedness reinvigorated the self, where guns could be fired without

danger, where the individualist, perhaps embodied by a man on a high-speed motorcycle,

could exercise his personal freedom to recreate however he saw fit. Residents of the desert,

mostly ranchers and miners, were lauded by conservatives for their adherence to a system of

hard work extracting wealth from the land, a way of life that seemed a throwback to a better

America at a time of widespread manufacturing layoffs, the OPEC oil crisis, and rampant

inflation. Another group, who may be broadly called "environmentalists," also praised the

desert. For them it was a repository of open space, which seemed to be in dramatically short

supply as they watched closer places become manufactured suburbs. It was a vessel of

biodiversity - as more became known about the extraordinary species native to the desert, a

post-Earth Day concern with the environment elevated the "unspoiled" desert to high status.

And it was beautiful, in part because it was so empty.

These two constituencies, conservatives and environmentalists, both loved the desert, but had

clearly differing ideas for its future. Conservatives saw mining, ranching, and off-road

recreation as activities that enhanced the value of the desert, while environmentalists viewed

those same activities as destroying the landscape, ruining the ecosystem, and damaging

fragile desert lands. The Desert Plan, finalized in December 1980, attempted to split the

difference between these groups. In the eastern Mojave, it created the East Mojave National

Scenic Area, the first designation of its kind, which was intended to placate those

environmentalists who wished to turn the area into a national park, while also permitting

conservative uses of the land like ranching and mining to continue. During the early 1980s,

James Watt, Ronald Reagan's Secretary of the Interior, attacked environmental programs

across the board, and decimated BLM's institutional culture by laying off some employees

with pro-environment views and involuntarily transferring others in order to create a culture
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi1.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:43 PM]

of fear dominated by a Sagebrush Rebellion-inspired, use-based approach to managing the

bureau's lands. Desert Plan amendment cycles in the early 1980s reflected this change of

managerial attitude. Beginning in 1982, the BLM proposed amendments that seemed, at least

to environmentalists, to threaten to turn the desert over completely to consumptive and

destructive uses.

The environmentalists responded by working to achieve more permanent legislative

protection for the desert. By 1984, a group of conservation organizations, led by the Sierra

Club and working together as the California Desert Protection League, were creating maps

and legislation that would expand Death Valley and Joshua Tree National Monuments into

national parks, create a third so-called Mojave National Park out of the East Mojave National

Scenic Area, and designate dozens of BLM-managed wilderness areas in the desert. Senator

Alan Cranston introduced this legislation for the first time in 1986, but the California Desert

Protection Act or CDPA, as the bill was known, did not meet with immediate success.

Conservatives and environmentalists battled over the bill and their conflicting interpretations

of the best use for the desert for almost a decade. Over time, environmentalists made a series

of compromises to placate individual foes - leaving a group of mining claims outside park

boundaries, for instance. Occasionally, conservatives forced their issues on the bill, most

significantly when they added hunting to Mojave National Park and made it a National

Preserve instead. Differences of opinion between Democratic Senator Cranston and his

Republican California colleagues, first Pete Wilson then John Seymour, prevented the Senate

from acting on Cranston's proposal, even though the House passed the bill in 1991. In her

1992 campaign to fill out the remaining 2 years of Wilson's old Senate seat, Democrat

Dianne Feinstein's support of the desert bill was a factor in the race. After she was elected,

Feinstein made passage of the CDPA her top priority, as she wanted to have a large

legislative success to show to voters in her 1994 reelection drive. The 1992 elections brought

a Democratic administration into power, which along with Feinstein's Democratic senatorial

counterpart from California, Barbara Boxer, removed partisan roadblocks that had prevented

the bill's passage in earlier sessions. Still, passage was not assured - Republican opposition

was fierce, and nearly scuttled the bill on several occasions. Senate Majority Leader George

Mitchell eventually held the Senate in session after it was scheduled to adjourn in order to

break a Republican filibuster and pass the CDPA into law.

When Bill Clinton signed the California Desert Protection Act on October 31, 1994, he

created with the stroke of a pen a new unit of the National Park Service in the eastern

Mojave desert. A team of law enforcement rangers secured the area and posted signs to alert

users of the new wilderness closures, while a group of administrators attempted to start a

park from scratch. Many of these first park staffers had little administrative experience, and

the park's startup was stunted because of a lack of office space and equipment. Within a few

months, the new park staff grew rapidly and began to set programs into place, but local

residents, almost all of them of conservative views, felt like they were not being taken into

consideration.

After the so-called "Republican Revolution" of November 1994 swept the GOP into power in

both houses of Congress, talk of scaling back environmental regulations in the name of

increasing the efficiency of government was common in Washington. Reacting to constituent

concerns and operating in the context of the Republican rollback of environmental measures,

longtime U.S. Representative Jerry Lewis, whose district included the Preserve, maneuvered

to pass an appropriations bill that gave the National Park Service exactly one dollar to

administer Mojave National Preserve, and gave the rest of its appropriation to the BLM to

manage the area in a multiple-use fashion. Over several months, as President Clinton and

Republican leaders Newt Gingrich, Trent Lott, and Bob Dole fought over the budget, the park

was stuck in limbo. Some of the staff transferred to other parks, and the skeleton crew that
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi1.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:43 PM]

remained lived in fear of their jobs evaporating. Clinton twice vetoed budgets he believed

were too environmentally destructive. His vetoes resulted in two shutdowns of governmental

services, but Republicans were blamed by the media and much of the public for the

problems. In April 1996, Republican leaders sacrificed Lewis' Dollar Budget provision in

order to pass the budget, and Mojave National Preserve's future looked less in doubt. At its

core, the Dollar Budget fight reflected the differing visions of conservatives and

environmentalists for the eastern Mojave desert, a split that was not changed by the passage

of the CDPA.

Even before the dollar budget crisis had been resolved, the Preserve undertook an innovative

planning effort. The Department of the Interior viewed the CDPA parks, plus BLM lands, as

an excellent opportunity to experiment with bioregional, interagency planning efforts. The

planning team was led by the NPS, and was located at Mojave National Preserve

headquarters in Barstow. Ultimately, multiagency planning did not come to fruition because

of interagency tensions, so the planning team developed a General Management Plan for the

Preserve on its own. This park-based planning team was unusual, as most planning for the

park service is conducted out of a central office. In its successful completion of a park-based

plan, Mojave National Preserve could provide a model for future park planning.

The Preserve has also had to deal with a series of issues that stem from the negotiations

between conservatives and environmentalists that resulted in the formation of the park and

that are related to the area's history as a worked landscape. When the park was established,

more than 15,000 mining claims were active for various sites in the park, and more than 400

abandoned mine sites exist inside park boundaries. Grazing was permitted to continue by the

CDPA. A railroad runs through the park, as do a petroleum pipeline and hi-tension power

wires, providing scenic intrusions and headaches for park managers. Hunting is also

expressly permitted in the park by its enabling act, which puts the Park Service in the delicate

position of attempting to maintain natural wildlife so they can be shot by trophy hunters.

Mojave's urban proximity brought big-city problems - speeding, graffiti, hazardous materials,

and drug trafficking - to the park, forcing cash-strapped management to adjust priorities.

These issues were the fruit of the compromises between conservatives and environmentalists

that were made in the process of establishing the park. The landscape and management of

Mojave National Preserve both reflect a heritage of conflict over the best use of particular

spaces, and a legacy of impacts from urban proximity. Study of the park is therefore

instructive both as an example of the price of accommodation, as interest groups' concerns

are addressed and neutralized through the democratic process, and as a vivid lesson of the

extent to which urban growth in the Southwest affects everything and everyone around it.

<<< Previous <<< Contents >>> Next >>>

moja/adhi/adhi1.htm

Last Updated: 05-Apr-2004
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi2.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:44 PM]

Mojave

Administrative History

CHAPTER TWO:

PRELUDE TO SYSTEMATIC FEDERAL

MANAGEMENT

The history of the eastern Mojave prior to systematic federal management is long and varied.

Most of the challenges and opportunities faced by Mojave National Preserve have their roots

in the history of human habitation of the area. Likewise, many of the outstanding resources

and attractions, as well as the less attractive features of the park, are the result of human

efforts. As such, understanding the history of the eastern Mojave before systematic federal

management is crucial to understanding the area afterward.

Individual perceptions of the eastern Mojave varied by cultural affiliation and the individual's

potential for economic gain from the area. Native Americans such as the Chemehuevi and the

Mohave understood the area as a homeland and a transportation corridor. Early Europeans

and Euro-Americans viewed the desert as an unremittingly hostile place. Ranchers and

miners envisioned economic opportunity through resource extraction, while homesteaders

imagined land ownership and yeoman freedom. Beginning in the nineteenth century and

continuing throughout the following century, railroads, power and pipeline companies, and

migrants on Route 66 alike saw, in John Steinbeck's words, a place that one must "get

acrost." The U.S. Army looked at the Mojave as a facsimile of North Africa, suitable for

training, and Americans after World War II understood it as recreational space. The first

threads of systematic management could be found in the post-Taylor Grazing Act (1934)

ranching operations, but comprehensive federal control did not happen until widespread,

destructive recreation forced the government to take action in the 1960s.

Native Americans and Anglo Contact
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi2.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:44 PM]

Illustration 2 - Prehistoric petroglyphs, like these at Indian Well, are found at sites

scattered throughout Mojave National Preserve. (Photo by Eric Nystrom, 2001.)

About 11,000 years ago, the region's ecological zones were one thousand feet lower in

elevation than today due to the cooler and wetter weather patterns of the waning Ice Age.

Streams flowed and lakes existed where dry playas are today. The relative abundance of plant

communities supported wildlife and indigenous peoples who depended upon the natural

resources. While clear archaeological evidence of human presence in this early time are

sparse, over 1,300 later prehistoric and historic period archaeological resources have been

recorded for the large Preserve area, including 65 rock image sites. Museums and

professional researchers have made significant collections of artifacts since 1925.

In general, these tribal peoples occupied the lands as small, mobile social units of related

families who traveled in regular patterns and established summer or winter camps in

customary places where water and food resources were available. Archaeologists named a

series of five manifestations of Native American occupation, which were believed to describe

changes in climate, chipped stone technology, and subsistence practices of these early

peoples. These periods covered time intervals from about 5000 BC to AD 700-900. At that

point, the Mojave desert area, unlike other portions of California's desert region, was

influenced by native peoples now called 'Ancestral Pueblo' who established farming villages

along the Muddy, Virgin, and upper Colorado rivers. Their culture reached into today's

Preserve lands at turquoise sources and via trade trails as far as the Pacific coasts. Later,

however, Ancestral Pueblo peoples abandoned their territory and were replaced by

Shoshonean and Paiute peoples after about AD 1000. In addition, native peoples of the lower

Colorado River basin speaking Yuman languages expanded their river zone territory and

utilized some desert lands as well.

Modern Native American "tribes" were products of interactions with the American military

and legal system as much as modern reflections of pre-contact Native American land use

patterns, and the land allocated to these groups frequently did not reflect the actual extent of

their pre-Anglo homelands. No tribes directly control any lands in the Preserve, but

historical, archaeological, and ethnographic information indicates that ancestors of the

modern Chemehuevi and Mohave Tribes traveled, camped, hunted, and resided at various

places now in the Preserve. Oral traditions and historical information compiled into maps for

the 1950-1960s Federal Indian Lands Claims cases showed Chemehuevi land knowledge and

uses. Some Mohave Tribal members have family histories of being on lands now within the

eastern areas of the Preserve. Certainly, the very detailed and lengthy "song cycles" of the

Chemehuevi identify many places within the Preserve with names and events of supernaturals

who performed various activities there. The "song cycles" were a type of oral map of the

territory which had great value to travelers moving through the area or following seasonal

foraging patterns. However, both tribal groups sustained hostilities between themselves,

which was noted by Spanish Friar Francisco Garcés in 1776. Euro-American contact with

peoples now called Chemehuevi or Mohave increased in the nineteenth century. [1]

The Desert Chemehuevi were Native Americans who actually lived most of the year in the

area of the Preserve. Limited food and water resources sustained a low Desert Chemehuevi

population density. When food was abundant, it would be dried and cached for later use. The

area of the Preserve probably never supported more than about 150 people at any one time.

[2]

While the Chemehuevi were the primary inhabitants of the area now encompassed by the

Preserve, the desert and the park itself are named for a different group of Native Americans -

the Mohave. [3] The Mohave were agriculturalists who planted in the flooded plain of the

Colorado River. This agricultural lifestyle generated food surpluses, which enabled them to
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi2.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:44 PM]

support a sizable population in the river basin area, numbering in the thousands. The Mohave

frequently traded with other Native American groups to the west and east, and had a

particular fondness for seashells traded by Indians on the California coast. The Mohave had a

network of trails across the desert from waterhole to waterhole. The Mohave bragged to early

European visitors that a powerful Mohave runner could make the trip to the Pacific coast,

more than 150 miles long, in three days. The Mohave guided some of the first non-Indian

travelers over this network of trails, including friar Garcés in 1776 and American trapper

Jedediah Smith in 1826. Their network of trails, now known as the Mojave Road, became one

of the main routes used by the government and other travelers to cross the desert before the

advent of the railroad.

The Mohave were friendly to Garcés and Smith at first, but when Smith returned to recross

the river in 1827, the Mohaves attacked as his party was crossing. Historians later determined

that other trappers, arriving between Smith's two visits, killed several Mohaves and

antagonized the rest, prompting the tribe to exact revenge on the next Euro-Americans they

saw. Half of Smith's party was killed, and the explorer led the survivors back across the

desert trails to relative safety in California. This incident created the reputation of the

Mohaves as a fierce band that should be avoided. [4] Further encounters with trappers in the

late 1820s and early 1830s led to more bloodshed by Indian and Anglo alike. Historians

hypothesize that the Old Spanish Trail, which runs to the north of the Preserve, was created

in the 1830s specifically to bypass the Mohave. [5]

In 1848, the United States signed the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo to end the Mexican War

and received almost all of the territory that is now the American Southwest, including all of

California and all of the area of the Mojave National Preserve. Interest in building a

transcontinental railroad was high, but the choice of route was difficult due to sectional

controversies. In 1853-54, the United States sent several survey teams into the field to report

on the feasibility of the various routes. One of these was the so-called 35th Parallel Route,

which cut through the eastern Mojave. Two survey parties took the field: one, under Lt.

Robert S. Williamson, explored from the western side and proceeded as far as Soda Lake; the

other, under Lt. A.W. Whipple, proceeded from Arkansas to Los Angeles, crossing the

Preserve along the route of the Mojave Road. [6]

Later attempts proved more successful at opening the cross-desert route now known as the

Mojave Road. Between 1855 and 1857, the General Land Office surveyed township lines

throughout the area. This effort was largely wasted when the location monuments could not

be rediscovered by others, but the small number of people on the surveying teams became

very familiar with the desert and later served as guides for other expeditions. In 1857,

Edward F. Beale surveyed a wagon road across the Arizona desert, and crossed the Mojave

along the route of the future Mojave Road. Combined with his eastbound crossing in 1858,

Beale's success proved the viability of the wagon road.

Conflict between Native Americans and Euro-Americans was the catalyst for the

establishment of a lasting federal legacy in the Mojave desert. The Mohave attacked emigrant

wagon trains in 1858, prompting a substantial military response. [7] Major William Hoffman

led a unit of over 600 men to the Colorado River, homeland of the Mohave, and demanded

surrender. Prudently, the Mohave complied, and Hoffman set up a military post on the

eastern bank of the Colorado River that soon became known as Fort Mojave. The effort to

supply the fort caused wagon teams from Los Angeles to cross the eastern Mojave regularly

until the start of the Civil War in 1861, and turned Beale's path into a true wagon road, easily

followed. Some improvements were made to the route at this time, such as the construction

of a water stop known as Government Holes.

The U.S. military spent several months in the eastern Mojave in an ill-conceived attempt to
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi2.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:44 PM]

punish Native Americans for a crime they may not have committed. In 1860, two whites

were murdered at Bitter Springs, on the Salt Lake Trail, and the attacks were blamed on the

"Pah-Utes," though contemporaries and later historians suggested that the attacks were quite

possibly carried out by Mormons, rather than Native Americans. Newspapers in southern

California whipped the citizenry into a fury, and prompted the army to send a unit led by

James H. Carleton, an Army dragoon from Fort Tejon, California, into the desert to exact

revenge on the Native Americans supposedly responsible for the attacks. Carleton's troops

built a small fort at Camp Cady, and roamed all over the western portion of the present-day

Preserve - through Devil's Playground, around the Granite Mountains, and across Soda Lake.

The soldiers constructed a small earthen fortification, called Hancock's Redoubt, at Soda

Springs. Carleton chased his quarry all over the desert, and executed several in an attempt to

impress the remainder with the power of the United States military. At the end of his threemonth stay in the desert, the Native American leaders arrived at Camp Cady and asked for

peace. Carleton negotiated a cease-fire, but it was ultimately ineffectual as the army did not

return later (due to the Civil War) to distribute aid as promised and uphold their end of the

bargain. [8]

The Civil War prompted the military to abandon Fort Mojave in 1861. In mid-1863, it was

re-activated with a garrison composed of California Volunteers, to provide security for

travelers to Arizona. Gold was discovered in Arizona that year and by 1864, the Mojave Road

was a crucial supply line to the territorial capital at Prescott. From 1866 to 1868, the mail was

carried over the Mojave Road from California to Arizona. Native Americans in the Mojave

and in Arizona commenced hostilities, and a group attacked the garrison at Camp Cady. This

emphasized the importance of having a military escort for the mail as it crossed the desert. To

support this escort effort, the military constructed small outposts at Soda Springs, Marl

Springs, Rock Spring, and "Piute" Creek. The army successfully negotiated an end to the

conflict in late 1867. Shortly thereafter, a series of heavy rainstorms left the road impassible.

This factor, combined with the cumulative losses to Native Americans along the Mojave

route, caused the transfer of mail service to a different, more southerly trail. The outposts at

Piute Creek, Rock Spring, Marl Springs, and Soda Springs were abandoned. [9]

Military use of the Mojave Road diminished, but civilian use increased as more people were

attracted to the desert area. By the 1870s, Fort Mojave was largely supplied by steamboat

service up the Colorado River, but miners, prospectors, and ranchers used the Mojave Road

to cross the desert until the Southern Pacific / Atlantic & Pacific Railroad was completed in

1883. [10]

Grazing

Grazing of non-native livestock has occurred on most of the land that is now the Mojave

National Preserve at one time or another over the past 150 years. Livestock was present in

the east Mojave in association with the earliest Euro-American uses of the desert. Travelers

over the Mojave Road almost always had some stock with them, and grazed them as they

crossed the desert. Several times, herds of hundreds of cattle or sheep were driven over the

route across the Mojave either to resupply Fort Mojave on the Colorado River or to move

livestock to fresh range in New Mexico and Arizona. Military outposts constructed along the

Mojave Road conducted small-scale grazing activity, to supplement the soldiers' food supply.

[11]

Entrepreneurs took advantage of the open range and ready market in the form of miners and

later railroad workers by setting up several ranches in the years from about 1875 to the end of

the nineteenth century. George Briggs and LeRoy Blackburn, two of the future partners of the

Rock Springs Land & Cattle Company, set up their individual ranches around 1875, with

headquarters at Marl Springs and Government Holes, respectively. John Domingo raised
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi2.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:44 PM]

work horses on a ranch near the Bonanza King mine starting in the early 1880s, and Daniel

Kistler raised beef for sale near what is now known as Kessler Spring at about the same time.

[12]

In 1894 Blackburn and Briggs, along with other investors, merged their holdings to form the

Rock Springs Land & Cattle Company, with headquarters at Barnwell, the northern terminus

of the newly constructed Nevada Southern Railway. This move highlighted the fact that while

local consumption by miners in the area was important to the firm, so too was the capability

to transport cattle to other markets via the railroad. The Rock Springs outfit, like other

ranchers in the area, grazed their cattle on public land without fences. They moved

aggressively to purchase or trade for ownership of water rights, the possession of which

enabled de facto control of the surrounding range. At various times, the company had more

than 10,000 cattle on their fifty square mile range. [13] The company came into conflict with

homesteaders who staked claims in prime grazing territory after 1910. Cattle trampled

homesteaders' crops (sometimes at the deliberate urging of the cowboys) and the company

denied homesteaders access to water; homesteaders retaliated by helping themselves to free

beef. A shootout at Government Holes in 1925 was the final straw for many of the

homesteaders who had not yet left. [14]

Sidney E. "Boots" Yates arrived in the Valley Wells area in 1894, alone with 27 head of

cattle, and set up a ranch of his own. With hard work, good forage years, and a job as

foreman of the Rock Springs Company that provided a steady income, Yates worked steadily

and built up his ranch. After World War I, Yates started his nephew, L. E. "Boy" Williams, in

the cattle business as well. Yates passed away in 1923 and his widow Bessie continued to run

the Valley Wells ranch. [15]

John Domingo raised horses on his ranch near Providence until 1918, when he sold his

holdings. The ranch soon came under control of the partnership of J. N. Sanders and W. W.

"Wash" Gibson, who stocked the ranch with cattle and called it the 7IL. Sanders and Gibson

hired Frank Murphy, a homesteader from the Lanfair area, to direct the day-to-day

operations in the early 1920s.

Illustration 3 - The 7IL Ranch, in the Colton Hills area, has been operated by

members of the same family since 1938. (Photo by Eric Nystrom, 2001.)

A massive drought in the late 1920s, culminating in 1928, contributed to changes on the

Mojave range. The Rock Springs Land & Cattle Company dissolved under the pressure. Most

of the cattle had perished on the range, but the remainder were rounded up and sold in urban
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi2.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:44 PM]

markets. In September 1928, the northern part of the Rock Springs range was sold to Bessie

Yates and "Boy" Williams. The Rock Springs lands in Nevada were given to long-time ranch

superintendent John Woolf, who promptly sold the property to Hollywood western movie star

Rex Bell, who together with his wife Clara Bow, lived and worked on the ranch they called

the Walking Box. In September 1931, the remainder of the Rock Springs Land & Cattle

Company's holdings were sold to a group headed by Claud Halsell, Sr., who took complete

control within a year of the ranch they called the OX. [16] Additionally, Gibson and Sanders

sold the 7IL Ranch to Mark and Mary Pettit in 1929.

The late 1920s and 1930s were years of flux in the cattle business in the east Mojave, not

only because of the substantial drought, but also due to the passage of the Taylor Grazing Act

in 1934. The Taylor Grazing Act compelled individual ranchers to clearly delineate and fence

their ranges, and required grazers to pay fees to the government for forage consumed by each

animal on public lands. Mark and Mary Pettit sold the 7IL that year, just prior to the signing

of the act, in part because of concerns over impending government regulations. The ranch

was sold again in 1938 to Herbert and Anson Murphy, sons of Frank Murphy who had

operated the ranch in the early 1920s. [17] The Yates/Williams partnership that purchased

part of the Rock Springs range dissolved in 1937 as a result of the need for smaller holdings

that could be fenced, resulting in the creation of the Kessler Springs Ranch for Williams and

the Valley View Ranch for Yates. The Valley View was sold to Fred Twisselman in 1940,

while the Valley Wells ranch remained in the hands of Sarah Yates Miles, daughter of

"Boots" Yates, and her husband, Wade Miles. Fleetwood "Fleet" Southcott Sr. came to the

Gold Valley area in 1931, after losing his fortune in the Great Depression, and staked a

homestead in Gold Valley with an eye toward developing a ranch. [18]

The Taylor Grazing Act caused changes in the ranching landscape in the Mojave, by

requiring ranchers to fence their ranges and develop multiple water sources, so that the

burden on any one part of the range was lessened. "Boy" Williams and Claud Halsell both

constructed large numbers of corrals, improved water sources, and built many miles of fence

to bring their Kessler Springs and OX Ranches into compliance. "Fleet" Southcott saw the act

as an opportunity to develop a ranch of his own, and leased an allotment in the Gold Valley

area before Halsell was able to do so. [19]

During the years from the 1940s to the passage of the California Desert Protection Act in

1994, ranching in the area evolved, but remained rooted in old-fashioned methods that

worked better on the tough range than modern agribusiness techniques. "Slim" Skinner and

his father-in-law, Fred Twisselman, bought the Valley View from Bessie Yates in 1940.

Unlike many of the "cow and calf" operations in the desert, such as the OX and Kessler

Springs ranches, the Valley View was worked as a steer operation, involving greater risk, but

potentially greater profit. Skinner retired in the early 1980s and sold the ranch to Andy

Anderson of Montana. [20] In 1960 the Murphy brothers sold the 7IL ranch to their nephews,

Howard and Jerry Blair, the descendants of whom still own and operate the ranch. [21]

"Boy" Williams sold the Kessler Springs Ranch in 1942, and it passed through the hands of

several often-absentee owners until it fell under control of part-owner Gary Overson in 1969.

Overson was raised in the east Mojave, first working for the OX Ranch at eleven years of

age. Through hard work and a shrewd sense for expansion, he bought out his partners at

Kessler Springs within a decade.

Claud Halsell retained ownership of the OX Ranch until 1946, during which time he added a

tremendous number of improvements, fenced most of the range, added private lands to the

ranch holdings, and moved the ranch headquarters from Barnwell to Ledge, along Lanfair

Road. Halsell's successors, the partnership of Waldo Bozarth and Oscar Rudnick, owned the

ranch until 1955 and built a herd from 1,000 to 5,000 animals during that time. Ed Eldridge

purchased the ranch from Bozarth and Rudnick, and constructed a large number of fences,
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi2.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:44 PM]

corrals, and pipelines to facilitate expansion of his ranching operation. When Eldridge was

ready to retire, he sold the OX to Gary and Linda Overson in 1986, giving the Oversons

direct control over most of the Mojave range. Later, the Oversons also managed the Valley

View and Valley Wells ranches for Richard Blincoe, an Idaho-based agricultural

businessman. [22]

The lands of the east Mojave have been subject to ranching for profit for more than 125

years, and in that time have indelibly changed. The key to ranching in the Mojave is water,

and commercial ranches have developed extensive water systems which are also used by

wildlife. Though no definitive data exists, the numbers of both native and non-native species

may have been enhanced by the long-term availability of these water sources, making it

difficult to discover what pre-ranching levels of wildlife were like. In the same way, longterm ranching has quite possibly been responsible for the creation of some of the Preserve's

most magnificent landscapes, the Joshua tree forests of Cima Dome and Lanfair Valley.

Biologist Harold Avery noted that cattle grazing in the Mojave had the effect of increasing

the number of shrubs, and biologist Steve Brittingham noted that shrubs provide

microclimates that nurture the development of Joshua trees. [23] Jim Cornett, a biologist with

the San Bernardino County Museum, also explained the connection between cattle grazing

and increased Joshua tree density as a product of the shelter that unpalatable shrubs give to

the infant trees. [24] An analogy, focused on the role of subtle human effects in producing

landscapes that are seemingly "natural," can be drawn between Mojave's Joshua tree forests

and the forests of giant sequoias in Sequoia National Park, where researchers in the 1970s

realized that the huge trees were largely the product of the Native American practice of

setting deliberate fires. Both the sequoias and Mojave's Joshua tree forests are beautiful

attractions, seemingly natural, that were in reality partially formed by human actions over a

long period of time. [25] In the cultural history of the eastern Mojave and in the landscape

itself, the continuous presence of cattle grazing in Mojave National Preserve has left an

important legacy.

Mining

Mining activity played an important role in the history of the area that is now Mojave

National Preserve. Geologists agree that mineralization is often associated with faults, joints

in rock that allow mineralized water from inside the earth to flow toward the surface, where

the water evaporates and leaves the dissolved minerals behind. The Mojave has been

categorized as extremely geologically active, a consequence of its position at the junction of

two of earth's crustal plates. This faulting and other geologic activity left the desert a highly

mineralized area, with large varieties of precious metals and industrial minerals scattered in

small deposits of rich ore. A truly remarkable amount and variety of minerals have been

removed from the area of the Preserve, including gold, silver, lead, zinc, copper, tungsten,

vanadium, iron, clay, and cinders. Discovery, exploration, and development of the area's rich

mineral potential was facilitated by the lack of vegetation, which tended to obscure mineral

deposits in more temperate locations. Most mines in the Mojave, particularly precious metal

mines, offered small veins of rich ore, which led to occasional bonanza strikes but little longterm profitability. Nevertheless, mining activity was a consistent theme throughout the

history of human use of the eastern Mojave desert.

Mining by Americans began in the 1860s, although many discoveries did not develop for

several decades until the costs of production and transportation were reduced by the railroad.

Before the arrival of Euro-Americans in the area, Puebloan people mined for turquoise at

several sites near the boundaries of the Preserve, and persistent traditions of Spanish and/or

Mexican mining activity tantalized early American miners. [26] Some of the soldiers

stationed at the remote outposts along the Mojave Road, especially in the vicinity of Marl

Springs, are thought to have conducted small-scale exploration in 1860. [27] The following
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi2.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:44 PM]

year, gold was discovered in the Vanderbilt area, but thirty years passed before this deposit

was developed. In 1863, prospectors discovered silver and subsequently formed the Rock

Springs Mining District, also known as the Macedonian Mining District. The intense isolation

of the area made profitable excavation almost impossible, and troubles with Native

Americans caused its abandonment by 1866. [28]

The first significant mining activity in the present-day Preserve began in the mid-1860s, and

profitably produced silver for more than a decade despite difficulties caused by geographic

isolation. In 1865, prospectors discovered silver on the north side of Clark Mountain, and

organized the Clarke Mining District that July. [29] The mountain was named after the

district, itself labeled in honor of William H. Clarke of Visalia, California, owner of a

popular saloon. [30] Ivanpah (later called Old Ivanpah) was the main town, located in the

heart of the Clark District on the north side of Clark Mountain. The area, described by one

modern author as "the most important [mineral area] ... of all of San Bernardino County,"

produced a considerable amount of silver between 1869 and 1880, when profits began to

decline and people moved away. The district hung on until the late 1890s, when a crash in

the price of silver ended mining there. The extraordinary remoteness of the area caused

profitability problems as well. [31]

The other major mine before the turn of the twentieth century was the Bonanza King Mine,

located near the present 7IL Ranch. Discovered in 1880 by Ivanpah prospectors, the Bonanza

King produced rich silver ore until 1885, and sporadically thereafter. The mill, believed to

have been near the current 7IL Ranch headquarters, burned in 1885 and was not immediately

rebuilt. Later owners revived the mine several times, most significantly between 1905-07 and

1915-1920. Bonanza King workers lived near the mine in the town of Providence, where

stone ruins still stand. The profitability of the mine was helped by the construction of the

Atlantic & Pacific Railroad to the south; Bonanza King stock was listed on the New York

Stock Exchange, and output eventually totaled more than one and a half million dollars. [32]

Illustration 4 - Stone walls mark the location of 1880s-era Providence, near the

Bonanza King Mine. (Photo by Eric Nystrom, 2001.)

Railroads helped stimulate mining in the Mojave. The Atlantic & Pacific was completed in
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi2.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:44 PM]

1883, but had little effect on the Ivanpah mines, which were already in decline. Beginning in

1893, the Nevada Southern Railway, built north from Goffs to Barnwell, tapped the

Vanderbilt area, the Sagamore Mine, and other potentially profitable ventures, and helped

stimulate prospecting and small-scale mining in the area. Just after the turn of the century,

that railroad extended branches from Barnwell through the New York Mountains to the

Ivanpah Valley, as well as to Searchlight, both of which coincided with additional mining

activity. [33]

The "Great Years" of mining in the eastern Mojave, so named because adequate capital

financed substantial production of both precious metals and industrial metals, came between

1900 and the end of World War I. In 1900, a boom at Tonopah, Nevada, sent prospectors

throughout the desert region, and a large number of claims were staked in the Mojave.

Several Mojave mines were big producers. The Copper World, in the Clark Mountain section

of the Preserve, produced 100 tons each day, making it one of the larger copper mines in

California at the time. The Von Trigger Mine, later known as the California Mine, produced

30,000 tons of copper between 1907 and 1909. The Paymaster Mine, discovered in 1900 on

the slope of Old Dad Mountain, produced some $75,000 worth of gold between 1910 and

1914. These small bonanzas were short-lived. The depression that followed World War I

caused substantial contraction of mining nationwide; smaller producers like those in the

Mojave simply found it impossible to operate economically. [34]

The Great Depression sparked an increase in gold mining in what later became the Mojave

National Preserve. The Depression caused an increase in the price of gold, and labor

expenses were low. These factors, combined with another key ingredient, described by one

author as "men not having much else to do," caused a surge of gold mining activity in the

area. The Colosseum Mine, discovered as early as 1880 but never mined comprehensively,

began substantial production in 1929, and the Telegraph Mine, first located in 1930, produced

$100,000 in gold between 1932 and 1938. [35]

The entrance of the United States into World War II in late 1941 prompted a change in

mining activity in the eastern Mojave, accelerating a shift from production of precious metals

to excavation of industrial minerals. During World War II, mining of almost all precious

metals was halted by executive order to free resources for America's war effort. Some

resources made more valuable by the war were found in the eastern Mojave, including copper

from several small mines, and tin and tungsten from the Evening Star Mine. The most

important wartime production came from the Vulcan Mine in the Providence Mountains,

which supplied iron ore for the blast furnaces of Henry Kaiser's Fontana steel mill and turned

Kelso into a boom town of 1,500 people. [36]

After the shutdown of the Vulcan Mine in 1948, much of the remaining mining activity in the

eastern Mojave focused on salable materials such as cinders. [37] The Aiken Cinder Mine

and the Cima Cinder Mine both began operation around 1948, and profitably worked their

deposits through the 1990s. The primary exception to the focus on salable minerals was the

Mountain Pass Mine, located just outside Preserve boundaries, which was purchased by

Molybdenum Corporation of America (Molycorp) in 1951 and remains one of the largest

producers of rare earth elements in the world. [38]

The period between the late 1970s and mid-1990s saw a worldwide revolution in gold

mining methods. The development of cyanide heap leaching, first proposed to the mining

community by the Bureau of Mines in 1969, enabled miners to recover microscopic amounts

of gold. [39] This was merely an interesting tool until the price of gold, which had been

regulated until the 1970s, was allowed to follow the market. The value of gold skyrocketed,

which prompted demand for new sources of the metal. Cyanide heap leach technology

permitted companies to extract gold from the tailings left behind at older mines. The new
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi2.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:44 PM]

technique also permitted companies to profitably extract gold from mines that had not

previously had concentrations of ore rich enough to mine. Three major mines in and around

Mojave National Preserve were opened or re-opened using cyanide heap-leaching: the

Colosseum Mine and the Morning Star Mine were both located inside the boundaries of the

Preserve, and Viceroy Gold's Castle Mountain Mine was specifically excluded from the park

in the passage of the California Desert Protection Act. Neither of the open pits inside the park

were actively mined after the establishment of the Preserve, but these mines have left behind

enormous piles of tailings with residual cyanide, as well as the open pits themselves.

<<< Previous <<< Contents >>> Next >>>

moja/adhi/adhi2.htm

Last Updated: 05-Apr-2004
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi3.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:46 PM]

Mojave

Administrative History

CHAPTER THREE:

BLM MANAGEMENT IN THE EAST MOJAVE

After World War II, control of federal lands in the desert fell to the Bureau of Land

Management (BLM), a newly-created agency in the Department of the Interior whose

difficult mission of being almost everything to almost everyone was later codified as

"multiple use." The BLM was created in 1946 when the Grazing Service and the General

Land Office were combined. This action placed much of southern California and the east

Mojave under the ostensible control of the new agency, but in reality the BLM's presence was

light, both because of the nature of the management responsibilities of the new agency and a

lack of staff. The BLM's greatest presence in the area was felt by miners and ranchers, both

of whose activities the agency monitored; the former under the auspices of the 1872 General

Mining Law, and the latter under the 1934 Taylor Grazing Act. The Bureau was dominated

by ranchers and miners, and provided little oversight of their activities. The massive

popularity of recreational use of the California desert forced the BLM to expand its

management portfolio. After World War II, recreation rose to economic importance in the

area. Millions of American soldiers got to know the area during the war because of Patton's

Desert Training Center and California Arizona Maneuver Area, and the growth of population

in the Los Angeles area after the conflict created additional pressure to explore the desert.

Motorcycle technology, fueled by the disposable income of thrill-seeking baby boomers,

advanced rapidly after the war, and the desert became the location of choice for increasing

numbers of off-road riders to recreate. At the same time, the American public began to

develop an environmental ethic that suggested that consumptive uses of the desert were

perhaps not the best ones.

BLM stepped up its management of recreation when Russ Penny, appointed California state

BLM director in 1966, instructed his office in Riverside to document the impacts of a

motorcycle race that was to be held in the desert on Thanksgiving weekend, 1967. Known as

"Barstow to Vegas" or simply "B to V," this motorcycle race quickly became one of the

major spectacles in American off-road racing. The most unusual feature was the mass start of

the race, where hundreds and, in later years, thousands of dirt bikes roared to life at once and

sped off toward a distant target in a cloud of choking dust. The Barstow to Vegas race caused

considerable damage to desert resources, and Penny's documentation of the event provided

the BLM with ammunition to get a $25,000 grant to study the desert. The resulting 1968

report suggested the development of a comprehensive plan and the formulation of future

studies of the area, as well as designation of off-road courses and protected recreation areas.

As an agency, BLM was only beginning to become comfortable with recreation management

in the late 1960s, and perceived off-road recreation as a use for which the desert was

suitable. The BLM formed the Off-Road Vehicle Advisory Council, or ORVAC, to advise

the agency on recreation and desert issues. The council developed a report which

recommended classifying lands as "open," "restricted use," and "non-use," and suggested that

BLM needed law enforcement powers to stop lawbreakers. [69]

BLM's call for expanded regulation was answered in 1972 because a radical change in

attitudes toward government intervention in environmental issues prompted the politically-
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi3.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:46 PM]

sensitive president to act. A massive oil spill off the coast of Santa Barbara, California in

1969 and other events focused the nation's attention on environmental regulation, and

legislation such as the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 received strong bipartisan

support. At a time when a pro-environment stance was a good political move for any

politician, Republican or Democrat, President Richard M. Nixon issued Executive Order

11644 in February 1972, which required all federal agencies with land under their control to

designate areas as acceptable or unacceptable for off-road vehicle use, so as to protect the

natural environment. The BLM set up an Interim Critical Management Program, under the

leadership of Wes Chambers and Neil Pfulb, to find and close particularly sensitive areas, and

to allow open play in others. After receiving 18,000 comments on the draft, a final version

was approved in November 1973, which provided guidance for the next seven years. [70]

The Barstow to Vegas motorcycle race grew considerably after its inception in 1967, and

BLM employees and other desert users were increasingly concerned that the race was

substantially damaging the desert. After the 1973 race, BLM conducted an Environmental

Impact Study (EIS) that showed that significant damage had occurred and would continue to

occur with future races. The report was published less than a month before the 1974 race, so

a federal judge ruled that the event could continue as planned. The BLM monitored the race

very closely, and the data that they collected plus the EIS was enough justification to deny a

permit for the event in 1975 and thereafter.

FLPMA and the Desert Plan

The Barstow to Vegas motorcycle race and subsequent concern over OHV damage focused

the attention of environmentalists and lawmakers on the California desert. Conservation

measures in the California desert were hamstrung because BLM had no enforcement powers

and no legislative mandate to protect the environment, unlike its specifically mandated

grazing and mining responsibilities. In 1970, Bob Jennings, a member of Penny's desert

planning staff who cared for the desert and saw first hand the resource damage that BLM was

unable to prevent, left the Bureau to work as an aide for U.S. Representative Bob Mathias, a

California Republican whose district included some areas that would eventually be added to

Death Valley National Park. Jennings emphasized the desert conservation issue to his boss,

and working together with BLM, wrote a bill to give the BLM enforcement and planning

powers in the desert. Mathias introduced the bill in Congress that year, and soon other

members of the California delegation, including Senator Alan Cranston, were also pushing

similar bills. The desert bills were reintroduced in 1971, and again in 1973. Senator Cranston

got a hearing for his bill in 1974, where the subcommittee suggested that it be integrated into

an omnibus BLM bill, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), making its

way through the Senate. FLPMA did not pass that year, but Cranston's desert-specific

portions remained in subsequent reintroductions, and were enacted into law when FLPMA

was passed in October 1976. This act, one of the most important pieces of land management

legislation ever passed, provided the BLM with an organic act and placed it on equal footing

with the NPS and the Department of Agriculture's Forest Service. On paper, the act

prioritized recreation and preservation as of equal importance as BLM's traditional mining

and grazing functions, even though this equality was not always reflected in the field. [71]

FLPMA had several important impacts in the eastern Mojave. It required the BLM to

"manage, use, develop, and protect" its lands, a contradictory mission that suggested a

tenuous balance of interests but prevented BLM from adequately satisfying any user group

completely. It enabled the BLM to designate Areas of Critical Environmental Concern, of

which six were eventually created in the eastern Mojave, and required that the agency check

its holdings for lands suitable for potential inclusion in the wilderness system. FLPMA

section 601 specifically created the California Desert Conservation Area, consisting of some

twenty-five million acres of private and public land including all BLM lands in southern
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi3.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:46 PM]

California, and required that a management plan be developed by 1980. This document

became known as the "Desert Plan." [72]

Developing the Desert Plan took several years and a tremendous amount of public input. The

scope of the project alone, developing a management plan for tens of millions of acres, was

daunting. Little information existed about many of the resources in question, so the BLM

created a tremendous program of natural and cultural research on desert resources. Many

large public meetings were held by the agency to ensure public input; fifteen hearings were

held between 1977 and 1979, before publication of the first draft of the plan. BLM received

more than 40,000 individual comments at that time. Some of the loudest voices at these

meetings came from organized groups that wanted to utilize the desert for OHVs and mining,

but others urged conservation. In a series of opinion polls, the public substantially supported

increased conservation in the desert. FLPMA required BLM to inventory its lands and set

aside those that seemed to have wilderness values as Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs). The

Wilderness Act of 1964 already initiated WSA evaluation for lands controlled by the U.S.

Forest Service and the National Park Service, but the BLM had been left out of the original

act. FLPMA required the WSA evaluation process to be completed by 1991, but since the

status of WSAs would affect their management, this task also needed to be completed before

the final Desert Plan was issued. [73]

The main mechanism for planning in the Desert Plan was land classifications, a technique

commonly used by federal agencies by the time of the development of the management plan

for the deserts of Southern California. For federal land in the California Desert Conservation

Area, one of four classifications could be used. Class C, "Controlled Use," was reserved for

Wilderness Study Areas and prohibited most vehicle use and all new mineral claims.

"Limited Use" or Class L lands were designated as such to "protect sensitive, natural, scenic,

ecological, and cultural resources." On such lands, mining operations were required to have a

Plan of Operations with reclamation, power and phone lines were to be routed underground

where possible, and land would not be turned over to private ownership. Class M, "Moderate

Use," permitted more kinds of operation, including airstrips, nuclear and fossil fuel

powerplants, off-road racing, and small mines without reclamation. "Intensive Use" or Class

I lands included large mining operations and OHV play areas. The Desert Plan provided an

"Unclassified" category for lands usually located inside towns or surrounded by private lands.

The Desert Plan also allowed BLM to establish special reservations to acknowledge special

features or uses. Examples of these special categories included the "Area of Critical

Environmental Concern," the "Research Natural Area," and the "National Natural Landmark."

[74]

The Desert Plan included an interesting amendment mechanism that gives solid proof to the

adage about no good deed going unpunished. "Eminent planner" Harvey Perloff was one of

many experts hired by BLM to help the agency put together the Desert Plan. Perloff

suggested that an amendment process be included, so that instead of a static, unwieldy

document, the Desert Plan could mutate and grow as conditions themselves changed. BLM

officials thought this an excellent idea, and the amendment mechanism became an integral

part of the Desert Plan. Ultimately, many of the Desert Plan amendments passed by BLM in

the Reagan/Watt years served to weaken environmental protections. Environmentalists didn't

trust the BLM to maintain adequate levels of protection in the face of administrative hostility,

especially after Ronald Reagan's Interior Secretary James Watt decimated the conservation

aspects of the bureau, and a more "permanent" legislative (rather than administrative)

protection of desert lands became the goal of the conservation lobby. [75]

The East Mojave National Scenic Area and the Genesis of the CDPA

During the creation of the Desert Plan, members of various conservation organizations urged
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi3.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:46 PM]

BLM to provide special protection to lands in the eastern Mojave. One group, Citizens for

Mojave National Park, was formed by Joyce and Peter Burk as a bicentennial project on July

4, 1976. In fits and starts, the organization pursued its solitary goal of a Mojave National

Park. The Citizens for Mojave National Park alone were never numerous nor wealthy enough

to make a national impact, but Peter Burk and other members were also actively involved in

the Sierra Club and other organizations with enough resources to achieve major change. As a

result, the Citizens for Mojave National Park helped to focus some debate on the desirability

of increased protection for the eastern Mojave, even though most politicians and conservation

leaders believed any park effort should wait until after the Desert Plan was complete. As

early as 1976, Burk circulated a rough sketch of a Mojave National Park that closely mirrored

the later East Mojave National Scenic Area and the Mojave National Preserve, although the

resemblance probably had as much to do with the realities of development in the eastern

Mojave as it did with prophetic vision. [76]

Burk's idea of a Mojave National Park may have been deemed premature, but the idea was

clearly on the minds of the agency's planners at the time. In 1978 and 1979, BLM Desert

Plan staff studied their holdings for potential park lands in the desert, and concluded that "the

cultural and natural resource values of the East Mojave Study Area are so diverse and

outstanding that the area readily qualifies for national park or national monument status."

BLM management sidestepped the insinuation of the report that the agency should relinquish

some of its most beautiful California lands to its rival Interior agency. [77] The Desert Plan,

as finalized, was significantly weaker than environmentalists originally hoped, but the

election of Ronald Reagan convinced conservationists that the plan was certainly better than

nothing. [78] One of the highlights of the Desert Plan was the recommendation that Interior

create a "national scenic area" in the east Mojave, the first designation of its kind. The East

Mojave National Scenic Area (EMNSA) was formed by an order of Secretary of the Interior

Cecil Andrus in December 1980, just before Reagan took office, and reauthorized by James

Watt in early 1981. When Guy R. Martin, Andrus' Assistant Secretary of Interior for Land

and Water Resources, signed the proposal, he noted the amorphous nature of the new

designation, and added the important proviso that the "concept should be fully and accurately

described." [79]

The decision to create a "national scenic area" instead of a national park in the eastern

Mojave desert in 1980 was due to a series of factors. The eastern Mojave landscape was

clearly among the most park-like of the BLM lands in the California desert, and widespread

calls for increased protection could not be ignored. Without a doubt, BLM management

desired to retain jurisdiction over the prime lands in the eastern Mojave, and not give up any

control to other agencies. Frank Wheat said that BLM "tossed a bone to the conservation

community" by forming the EMNSA. Judy Anderson, one of the principal leaders in the later

push for increased desert protection, later described the designation as a deal between the

BLM and pro-park forces, brokered by the National Parks Conservation Association, which

was deeply concerned about putting additional strain on NPS resources. These fears were

based on the belief that the California desert was already adequately represented in the

national park system by Death Valley and Joshua Tree National Monuments; when combined

with concerns that scenic intrusions such as power lines and abandoned mines made the area

less than desirable, the EMNSA designation seemed like an appropriate compromise. [80]

Working mostly with traditional users, BLM management created a statement of management

philosophy in August 1981 to guide decision-making until a management plan could be

developed and implemented. The statement reaffirmed BLM's commitment to the multiple

use of the area, and emphasized that designation of the EMNSA did not add additional levels

of regulation; the region would be managed according to the public land laws and the Desert

Plan. To ensure "adequate" protection, nearly all of the land within the EMNSA would be

classified for limited use under Desert Plan guidelines. Administrative priority would be
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi3.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:46 PM]

placed on EMNSA issues within the larger BLM management area. Additionally, the BLM

would review all development plans within its jurisdiction for "scenic quality management."

Several concepts would be echoed by later NPS management. For example, the BLM

emphasized that "recreationists" should have a "sense of discovery" when exploring the area.

This phrase still describes management philosophy in the Preserve. The philosophy statement

also noted that the designation and its consequent management applied only to public lands,

not private or state lands located inside the boundaries of the EMNSA. The California Desert

Protection Act of 1994 harkened to this concept, though not directly, when it specifically

excluded all private land (other than the former railroad lands then owned by the Catellus

Corporation) from the Mojave National Preserve until acquisition by the park.

Other provisions of the philosophy statement emphasized BLM's multiple use mission. Of six

management goals listed in the document, the first was to make the EMNSA a

"demonstration showcase for multiple-use management." Another goal expressed the desire

to limit development of paved roads, but simultaneously increase the value of the resource by

adding "improvements" such as additional water. Recreational use, such as sightseeing and

camping, were recognized as important activities. Even with the increased protection of the

"scenic area" designation, the eastern Mojave was managed from a perspective that use of the

land was the highest value, unlike NPS policies that emphasize resource protection and

functioning ecosystems above all else. [81]

Illustration 9 - A caravan of four-wheel drive vehicles traveling the Mojave Road

pauses for lunch. (Photo by Eric Nystrom, 2001.)

One recreational resource enhancement was provided by a group of volunteers who worked

to reopen the "Old Government Road" to modern traffic. In 1962, Dennis Casebier, a

physicist by trade and a historian by inclination, first arrived in the eastern Mojave,

"fascinated from the beginning" by the old trail and determined to find out more about it.

While working in Washington DC, Casebier haunted the National Archives, copying

tremendous amounts of historic material about the Mojave. In the early 1970s, Casebier wrote

several short histories of aspects of the military presence in the desert, including its role in

the development of the Mojave Road. Armed with an engaging slide show, Casebier gave
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi3.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:46 PM]

lectures on the history of the trail. BLM officials, including Desert Plan Director Neil Pfulb

and Assistant Director Wes Chambers, were very interested in the Mojave Road and its

potential for recreational use by hikers, equestrians, and perhaps motorized vehicles. Not yet

convinced of the road's suitability for four wheel drive use, Casebier hiked its 130-mile

length in eight days during October 1975. Assisted by BLM, Casebier sought publicity in the

late 1970s and early 1980s to open the road to greater recreational use. The trace itself was

disappearing in some places, and needed traffic to retain a road-like condition. In March

1980, Casebier was asked to lead a caravan of four-wheel drive enthusiasts over the Mojave

Road. Using CB radio, he lectured along the way, describing the history of the landscape. In

Casebier's words, "it was just like magic!," and the experience demonstrated that cautious

drivers would pose little threat to the resource. Over the next several years, Casebier led more

outings and coordinated development of the trail, with BLM's eager consent. In May 1981,

Casebier and his associates officially created the Friends of the Mojave Road, to work with

BLM as volunteers to promote environmentally friendly recreation along the old wagon road

with an emphasis on education. The group agreed that signs would be out of place along the

road and resolved to create rock cairns and a mileage-based guidebook as an alternative. As

finalized, the trail produced by volunteers ran directly over the wagon road in most places but

occasionally utilized detours along parallel trails when the original road was blocked or

unusable. The California Association of Four-Wheel Drive Clubs agreed to take

responsibility for the small amount of maintenance the road would need, repairing cairns as

necessary and conducting semiregular trash patrols. The Guide to the Mojave Road was

published in October 1983, after advance orders of over 600 copies ensured it would be a

worthwhile venture. [82]

The first edition of 1,700 copies sold out, and by the time an updated edition of the guide was

issued in 1986, Casebier estimated that over 2,000 people had traveled the trail. Once the

success of the experiment was clear, the Friends of the Mojave Road, with the approval of

BLM managers, developed a more ambitious project, a 660-mile closed loop utilizing

existing roads through lands in the eastern Mojave, in part to relieve traffic pressures on the

Mojave Road. Initial planning work for the East Mojave Heritage Trail was under way by

1985. As a result of the effort and cost associated with devel [83]oping the trail and

publishing the guidebooks, the Heritage Trail was opened in successive segments. The first of

four guidebooks was published in 1987, and the final installment appeared in 1990. Under

BLM, four-wheel drive recreation was a use of the East Mojave National Scenic Area that

was encouraged. [84]

Despite rhetoric in favor of protection espoused by the EMNSA management statement, it

seemed to conservationists that resource protection was a secondary concern. In 1982, BLM

promulgated the first cycle of major amendments of the Desert Plan. Several affected the East

Mojave National Scenic Area, including proposals to reinstate the Barstow to Vegas

motorcycle race, to remove some 300,000 acres from WSA status, to reduce levels of

protection on class L lands, and to delete some 140,000 acres in the northern portion of the

EMNSA from the unit entirely at the request of Molycorp. The Molycorp land deletion was

reduced to 47,520 acres after conservationists protested the move, but many of the other

amendments perceived by conservationists as detrimental to the EMNSA were passed. This

incident highlighted the fact that the malleability of the Desert Plan would not necessarily

work only to increase environmental values. Disillusioned conservationists doubted that the

Desert Plan could be counted on to prevent ecological damage, since any protections could be

taken away with administrative amendments, so environmentalists began to push in earnest

for a legislative solution to resource protection. [85]

BLM actions in the EMNSA gave environmentalists reasons to worry. In 1984, MCI

Communications proposed to put a 350-foot tall microwave tower on private land atop Marl

Mountain. BLM claimed that they had no voice in the matter, because it was private land, but
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi3.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:46 PM]

conservation groups pushed the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors to require an

Environmental Impact Report for the project. Stalled by wrangling over environmental issues,

MCI decided to locate its tower outside the Scenic Area. The following year, BLM supported

selling EMNSA land south of I-15 to facilitate development in Baker. Both developments

eventually ended without action, but environmentalists remained concerned that BLM had no

interest in maintaining the integrity of EMNSA lands. Later events reinforced this

observation, including BLM's permission for LA Cellular and Pacific Bell to build towers in

the Scenic Area without public review, and the bureau's decision to reinstate the Barstow to

Vegas motorcycle ride. Mining in the area expanded in the 1980s, driven by a steady rise in

the price of gold and the development of cyanide heap-leach methods capable of working

low-level ore at a profit. The Colosseum Mine, an open pit gold operation located in the

Clark Mountain Area of Critical Environmental Concern, began modern production in 1985.

Environmentalists charged that permission of massive open pit mines in the Scenic Area

itself was wrong, but to do so for a mine in an ACEC, argued conservationists, showed

beyond doubt that the BLM's designation was meaningless. [86]

BLM's apparent disregard for environmental protection gradually eroded their support among

environmentalists, and activists pushed for legislative reform. Southern California Sierra Club

activists took the lead on pushing for legislative protections in the desert. Judy Anderson, a

high school mathematics teacher in greater Los Angeles, gradually became the de facto leader

and was assisted by an extensive roster of conservationists. Anderson began producing maps

of proposed wilderness areas and expanded park units in 1981; these maps, with

modifications, were the basis of the maps included with the final CDPA. Pro-CDPA forces

agreed that patience was crucial, and hypothesized that a Desert Protection Act had the best

chance of passage if a broad coalition of pro-environmental groups were aligned behind a

single proposal. At first, the national leadership of conservation organizations doubted the

wisdom of including a Mojave National Park in the proposal, but effective advocacy by Peter

Burk and others ensured that it would be included in the final plan. In late 1984 and early

1985, a number of conservation groups led by the Sierra Club, the Wilderness Society, and

the California Wilderness Coalition, formed the California Desert Protection League as an

umbrella organization, and elected Judy Anderson as chair. They kept in close contact with

Kathy Files (later known as Kathy Lacey), Senator Alan Cranston's environmental aide, and

met with the lawmaker himself in January 1985. The league prepared maps of all of the

proposed additions and wilderness areas, along with descriptions and photographs of the

areas. With a solid foundation of material for support, Senator Cranston introduced S.2061,

the California Desert Protection Act, at a press conference on February 7, 1986. Cranston

emphasized that the bill would be "no-cost" because all of the areas were already under

federal control. [87]

The first California Desert Protection Act was the direct antecedent of the final bill that

passed in 1994. It included a new Mojave National Park, without hunting, in the area

designated as the East Mojave National Scenic Area, national park status for Death Valley

and Joshua Tree National Monuments, and creation of an extensive amount of BLMmanaged wilderness in the desert. The introduction of CDPA legislation also prompted desert

users to take sides for or against the bill. The Los Angeles Times, in an editorial reflective of

the attitudes of its urban constituency, endorsed the proposal. The California Desert Coalition

was formed in 1986 as the biggest anti-CDPA group, comprised of mining, ranching, OHV,

hunting, and property rights activists. Prompted by the anti-expansion attitudes of the Reagan

administration, the Department of the Interior and the BLM also opposed Cranston's bill. Roy

Rogers, an advocate for traditional uses of the desert which reified the individualistic

American anti-regulation myth, starred in an anti-CDPA video, "Desert Lockout," produced

by conservative California state senator H.L. Richardson and distributed to major news

outlets. The California Desert Protection League countered with a video of their own, "Desert

Under Siege," a pro-park production starring two pro-conservation scientists. [88]
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi3.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:46 PM]

Despite their opposing positions, it was clear that both sides cared about the desert. In late

1985 and early 1986, the Union Pacific decided to cease operations at Kelso, and raze the

1924 vintage railroad depot because of mounting maintenance costs. People from both sides

of the CDPA debate joined to save the Kelso Depot from destruction. Peter Burk, who was

widely known as being stridently anti-BLM, gave an indication of the bipartisan nature of the

effort when he labeled BLM leaders Ev Hayes and Gerry Hillier, as well as Congressman

Jerry Lewis "the heroes who saved Kelso Depot from destruction." With the assistance of the

Kelso Depot Fund, the BLM took control of the building in 1992. [89]

For six years, the East Mojave National Scenic Area was administered by BLM under the

statement of philosophy and the Desert Plan. During this time, several specific planning

efforts targeted Areas of Environmental Concern, grazing, wildlife habitat, and burro

management. The introduction of the Cranston bill in 1986 showed BLM that

conservationists were genuinely unhappy with the bureau's management of the area. BLM

attempted to remake its efforts in a newly sensitive light, to prove its capabilities to

conservationists, and to avoid the transfer of BLM lands to other agencies. In January 1987,

the Park Service reported on the suitability of the lands in the east Mojave for inclusion in the

park system. The report itself was essentially noncommittal, but NPS Western Regional

Director Howard Chapman's cover letter enthusiastically supported a park in the east Mojave.

Despite a limited reception in Washington, this report increased the pressure on BLM to

release a management plan for EMNSA that reflected the desire of much of the public for

additional resource protection. BLM prepared a draft management plan for the EMNSA in

1987, and submitted it for public review. The plan outlined steps that would increase

protection in EMNSA, including decreasing use of ATVs, closure of some roads and washes,

withdrawal of some 60,000 acres from mineral use, and reclassification of 120,000 acres from

class M to class L status. The agency received 327 written comments and more than 100 oral

suggestions at ten public meetings. A final management plan was released to the public in

mid-May 1988, but was characterized as a "significant retreat" from the draft plan, with

environmental protections weakened in many cases. The plan was designed to last for ten

years, until 1997, and to provide levels of support services sufficient for 200,000 visitors by

that time. The EMNSA plans placed extensive emphasis on scenic quality management but

only referred to historic preservation and continuation of existing uses in a parenthetical

manner. [90]

The EMNSA plan was perceived as "too little, too late" by many conservationists. It seemed

to be a political response to the threat posed to the agency by the California Desert Protection

Act, rather than a genuine expression of a change of heart toward conservation issues. More

importantly, the multiple-use outlook of the agency itself suggested that BLM would never

protect the land to a level satisfactory to the conservationists. As the California Desert

Protection League ramped up efforts to extend permanent legislative protection over desert

lands, conservationists became less interested in a BLM-based solution.

<<< Previous <<< Contents >>> Next >>>

moja/adhi/adhi3.htm

Last Updated: 05-Apr-2004
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi4.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:47 PM]

Mojave

Administrative History

CHAPTER FOUR:

AN AWKWARD START AND THREATS OF AN

EARLY END

On October 31, 1994, the Mojave National Preserve became the newest unit of the national

park system. Creating a new administrative structure to manage 1.6 million acres of land was

a formidable task. The initial park staff borrowed resources, relied heavily on other agencies,

and had to "make do" as best as they could. Politics made their task infinitely more difficult.

After the CDPA became law, a congressional opponent attempted to cripple the park by

providing an appropriation of one dollar to administer the Preserve. The future of Mojave

National Preserve became embroiled in a drawn-out political fight, while park staff faced

relocation, emotional trauma, and uncertainty about the future. They actively sought to create

better relations with anti-park forces, laying the foundation for the survival of the Preserve.

The crisis came to an end in April 1996, and it was clear that Mojave National Preserve

would survive as a unit of the National Park Service.

After the CDPA conference report passed Congress, Alan O'Neill, Superintendent of Lake

Mead National Recreation Area, was appointed Acting Superintendent of the Mojave

National Preserve. Frank Buono, who had worked extensively on the transition, was named

as his assistant. O'Neill spent as much time as possible on the Preserve, but his Lake Mead

duties consumed his time as well. Buono likewise worked to resolve the mountain of tasks

facing the brand-new institution. O'Neill contacted locals and inholders in the new Preserve,

including the Oversons, the Blairs, and Dennis Casebier, and informed them about what to

expect with the new park, with the hope of mollifying some of their worst fears. He also

worked with BLM to transfer the budget and resolve administrative issues. O'Neill also

represented the interests of the new Preserve at the meetings of the Desert Managers' Group,

of which he was already an active member. [113]

The transition report prepared in 1993 emphasized the need for the Park Service to establish a

management presence in Mojave immediately after passage of the CDPA. The two measures

advocated by the report were the immediate dispatch of law enforcement to the area and

posting of signs to indicate the changed status. [114] O'Neill brought a Special Events Team

(SET) of rangers from other parks to secure the area; they operated from BLM's fire station

at Hole-In-the-Wall and stayed during November 1994. [115] The SET team posted nodriving signs in the washes and patrolled the park for illegal activity. The appearance of these

rangers caused tremendous friction and misunderstanding with the local residents. Mary

Martin, an early park employee who became Superintendent in 1995, described the effect of

the SET team:

"[T]hey expected to find drug labs and people that didn't like them, so they wore

their 'second-chance' vests on the outside of their uniform and apparently had

their shotguns and rifles very present. So locals, who for ten years had gone

through this debate about the Park Service coming out and taking [their] land...

They see rangers out there with guns putting up signs. So they think 'a-ha! Just

what we expected from the Park Service.' " [116]
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi4.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:47 PM]

The SET team's mission to secure the resources of the new Preserve was deemed complete,

and the team left at the end of November 1994. Thane Weigand, a ranger from Lake Mead,

and Joe Gerken, a seasonal ranger, were stationed at Hole-In-the-Wall to patrol the Preserve.

On November 13, 1994, O'Neill hired two visitor use assistants. Ruby Newton worked out of

the California Desert Information Center in Barstow, and seasonal Michael Marion staffed

Hole-In-the-Wall. [117]

As soon as passage of the California Desert Protection Act seemed probable, the Park Service

began organization of the first staff of Mojave National Preserve. Marvin O. Jensen served

for more than six years as Superintendent of Glacier Bay National Park in Alaska when he

decided that he would like one more assignment before retirement. His preference was for a

desert park, hopefully Death Valley National Monument. When the California Desert

Protection Act seemed assured of passage, Jensen accepted the superintendency of Mojave

National Preserve offered by John Reynolds, Deputy Director of the Park Service. [118]

Mary Martin, assistant chief personnel officer in Washington D.C., was approached in May

1994 by Reynolds to see if she was interested in becoming deputy superintendent of Mojave

if the CDPA became law. After the passage of the California Desert Protection Act in

October, Martin was assigned the task of working with Reynolds and Department of the

Interior officials to choose the initial employees for the infant park. After negotiations

between the Park Service and Department of the Interior (DOI) staff, Secretary of the Interior

Bruce Babbitt named the first three members of Mojave's staff: Superintendent Marv Jensen,

Deputy Superintendent Mary Martin, and Assistant Superintendent for Ecosystem

Management Frank Buono, formerly of the Albright Training Center at Grand Canyon

National Park who was then serving as Alan O'Neill's assistant for the Preserve. [119] On

January 13, 1995, Jensen was formally appointed superintendent of Mojave National

Preserve, marking the transition from interim management under Lake Mead National

Recreation Area staff to the permanent team of Jensen, Martin, and Buono. [120] The new

staff worked out of Lake Mead NRA headquarters in Boulder City, Nevada. Jensen described

the interim arrangements:

"Alan O'Neill, superintendent out there, was extremely supportive. [O'Neill]

offered to provide administrative help, so that our payroll got done, our travel

got done, the hiring of people got done, some actual staff assistance, some

biologists and rangers in the Preserve, we had his airplane when we needed it.

He moved people aside, squeezed them up, so that we could have part of his

offices there, which he didn't have too much of either. He just did a tremendous

job of providing that place to work out of and the staff assistance that we needed

to make things work." [121]

The initial staff was top-heavy, relative to the budget of the park. The plan suggested by the

Transition Action Report called for key leadership posts to be filled first, then other

employees as expanding budgets permitted. Still, the budgetary implications of such a

structure caused Jensen some concern:

"So they said you've got two assistant superintendents and I said ... this doesn't

make any sense to me. Here we are in a fledgling park, brand new, we don't even

have field staff, we don't have field rangers, we don't have field anything, and

we have a very limited budget, $600,000 and some odd loose change, coming

from BLM's operations accounts, and that's all we've got. And you're going to

put more than half of that into the superintendency, the superintendent's office?

That doesn't make any sense at all." [122]

Jensen and Martin arrived before their permanent appointments took effect and began the
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi4.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:47 PM]

groundwork for the new park. They attended their first meeting of the Desert Managers'

Group in Riverside, California, in late November 1994, and started to map Mojave's role in

the impending planning efforts. This group was formed to promote ecosystem-wide

management of the desert, by all of the various agencies involved with land management in

Southern California. As part of Vice President Al Gore's "reinventing government" initiative

and enthusiastically championed by Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt, ecosystem planning

directed some facets of the early history of the park. [123]

The newly arrived staff also served as liaisons to pro-park locals. Many local residents were

against the CDPA and disliked the Preserve at first, but some groups of local residents

displayed their support of the new park. Peter Burk and the Citizens for Mojave National

Park organized a reception for Mojave staff in Barstow on January 21, 1995. Six

organizations, representing pro-growth coalitions from several area towns excited about the

prospect of park-based tourism, presented resolutions in favor of the Preserve. Those from

Barstow "invited" the Preserve to locate its headquarters there; the resolutions from Baker

encouraged the National Park Service to create facilities in their hamlet as well. These parkfriendly locals clearly appreciated the potential for economic activity that could come with a

new federal organization. [124]

Other local residents vented their unhappiness with NPS control, especially after signs

prohibiting commercial traffic through the park were constructed along roads leading into the

Preserve. This action, though perfectly correct according to 36 CFR 5.6, was another public

relations disaster. [125] Observers accused the Park Service of "marking its territory" and

engaging in a land grab. Other residents were clearly worried about the implications of the

ban on commercial vehicles that the signs' wording suggested. The regulations were designed

to prohibit long-haul truckers from using park roads for a shortcut, but the signs were not

carefully worded and appeared to prohibit all commercial traffic. This seemed to exclude

dump trucks hauling away cinders from local mines, diesels with trailers that took cattle to

market, supply trucks carrying groceries to stock the shelves of the Cima store, and even the

tankers that delivered propane to heat and power homes in remote places in the Preserve.

This perception only fed the flames of anti-Park Service rhetoric. Under intense pressure, the

signs were removed. Reworded, they were posted again later, after a public education

campaign clarified the spirit of the regulations.

One of the first tasks for the new park managers was to set up headquarters. By the 1990s, the

NPS no longer constructed extensive headquarters facilities inside new parks, for fiscal and

environmental reasons. Instead, headquarters would typically be established in the nearest

town with sufficient services for park employees. Several places vied for the location of the

headquarters of the new Preserve. The East Mojave National Scenic Area was administered

from a BLM office in Needles, and that city was eager to receive the headquarters of the new

Preserve as well. The 1993 transition report identified Baker as the nearest suitable location

for offices. Barstow, though farther away, had a greater availability of housing and services.

Jensen had worked in parks, such as Glacier Bay, where the availability of housing was a

significant issue in attracting and retaining quality employees. He chose to site the Preserve's

future headquarters in Barstow based on the availability of services, housing, and freeway

access there. [126]

Mojave continued to expand its complement of personnel. George W. "Bill" Blake was

transferred from New River Gorge NRA to become the park's first Chief Ranger, and

formally assumed his duties in early March 1995. His wife, Bettie Blake, was hired as

secretary for the park. Two more seasonal rangers were added the same month. [127] The

growing staff moved out of Lake Mead National Recreation Area's headquarters and into

shared space at the BLM office in Barstow on March 13, 1995. It was easier to plan for a

Barstow headquarters from a temporary location in the same city, but the NPS staff did not
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi4.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:47 PM]

have space to call their own. Park files were stored in the back of Martin's Volvo, and the

entire staff shared a cubicle with a BLM wildlife biologist. "We'd take turns at the desk, on

the phone," recalled Martin. [128]

The work of setting up a new park was difficult, often in unexpected ways. Lake Mead NRA

provided administrative services to Mojave, but was located some 170 miles from the

Barstow offices. Procuring essential supplies was difficult, making it a challenge to find a

pen or photocopy a document. This difficult working environment slowed down the work of

headquarters staff until Dave Paulissen, the park's first Administrative Officer, was hired in

June 1995. [129] Mary Martin suggested that community relations may not have received

enough attention because of the struggle to create the park's structure. To her, the lesson was

clear:

"[T]he best thing the Park Service could have done was just send out an

administrative SET team, have someone deal with the administrative stuff, and

have us just get out and meet people and say 'hi, we're here,' and have a cup of

coffee with them... You know, listen to them." [130]

Despite the hardships, staff made important decisions. Frank Buono led the effort to convert

BLM rights-of-way to NPS standards, a time-consuming administrative task. In some cases,

companies tried to take advantage of the change of leadership. Molycorp, a rare earth

minerals mine on the boundary of the Preserve, wanted to replace a portion of its freshwater

pipeline, which ran within a right-of-way on NPS land. The company asserted that the NPS

had no authority over its activities in the right-of-way, and refused to submit an

Environmental Assessment for the replacement project. The Preserve made it clear to the

mining company that no work could be performed without an environmental assessment.

Under heavy pressure, Molycorp admitted the right of the park to regulate rights-of-way on

NPS land, and submitted an EA for the project in late 1994, which was approved the

following month. [131]

This period in the BLM offices in Barstow also saw the groundwork laid for a number of

important projects that later came to fruition. In April 1995, Martin spoke at the Death Valley

Natural History Association meeting and successfully persuaded the group to become the

cooperating association of Mojave National Preserve, in addition to Death Valley National

Park. The association formally voted in early June to finalize the agreement. [132]

Mojave staff worked to find and equip a more permanent headquarters site in Barstow. Colocation with BLM staff was a positive initial step recommended by the Transition Action

Plan developed before the passage of the CDPA, but the reality of the situation was that the

BLM simply did not have enough space to share. [133] The Mercado Mall, along Barstow's

Main Street, stood more than half empty and could meet the anticipated space needs of

Mojave headquarters. The Park Service leased six suites for a total of $120,000 per year. An

open house and reception were held on May 22, 1995 to mark the formal opening of the

facility. [134] The small first year budget for the park allocated no funds to furnish the space,

so several employees, including David Moore and Gordon Reetz, the newly-hired members

of the planning team who arrived May 15, 1995, scrounged furniture, computers, vehicles,

law enforcement gear, and other supplies from government surplus warehouses in the area.

Moore recalled one furniture hunting trip, where he felt "very self-conscious" arriving in

front of Lake Mead NRA headquarters in a yellow Ryder truck only two months after the

Oklahoma City bombing. Marv Jensen and Martin resurfaced and finished a wooden

conference table, found in a surplus yard, for the new Mojave headquarters. [135]

As the headquarters took shape, additional staff fleshed out the Preserve's administrative

structure. Marcia Schramm arrived to take charge of Mojave's human resources needs in July
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi4.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:47 PM]

1995, as her husband Dennis Schramm took the helm of the planning program. Doug Scovill,

Chief Archaeologist in the Washington D.C. office, wanted to finish his career in the field. In

March 1995 he planned to transfer to Mojave as the head of cultural resources, but work in

Washington delayed his arrival until August 6. [136] Dave Paulissen, the park's first

Administrative Officer, transferred to the Preserve in June 1995, but some administration

functions were handled by Lake Mead staff through the end of the year. The park's staff grew

rapidly, in line with growth expectations voiced as early as 1993 in preliminary planning

documents. Many members of the expanding staff were higher-level employees, hired with

the expectation that rapid staff growth would soon fill in lower-level positions. [137] The

limited budget and rapid staff growth exacerbated office administration. Paulissen

remembered that even basic equipment was difficult to procure:

"One of the biggest things that we were all proud of is that we were able to get a

stapler for [Doug Scovill]. He didn't have a stapler, and he was always asking for

a stapler. Finally somebody found a stapler somewhere and we made a big

production - we presented him with the stapler." [138]

A flurry of permit applications for various mining operations proved to be an early headache.

James Wood of the Park Service's Geologic Resources Division spent almost three months

with the Preserve helping with the workload, but Buono and Martin also shouldered much of

the burden. Temporary permits to continue operations until the end of calendar 1995 were

issued to nine active operations. Mojave received four plans for new mining operations in the

park, but only one, a gravel pit for the 7IL Ranch, received approval. The most controversial

rejected proposal came from Pluess-Stauffer, a Swiss company that sought a huge open pit

calcium carbonate mine in the New York Mountains. Pluess-Stauffer claimed that the low

economic value of the deposit made open-pit mining the only economical method of

extraction, but Superintendent Jensen rejected the plan because of the impacts that an open pit

would have on the park. [139]

Early cultural resources efforts were assigned to staff of the Pacific Great Basin Support

Services Office and the Denver Service Center or handled by Lake Mead National Recreation

Area staff. Much of this early effort was directed at the Kelso Depot, including the

preparation of a Historic Structures Report of the railroad building by NPS historian Gordon

Chappell, Bob Carper, and others. Lake Mead staff conducted some early mapping around

Kelso and also coordinated archaeological compliance for two ranching waterline projects.

[140] When Doug Scovill arrived in August 1995, the park benefited enormously. Scovill

monitored cultural resource and desert tortoise compliance procedures, set up the first

database of archaeological information for the park, and participated in several interagency

cultural resources efforts, including setting up a common database standard so that cultural

resource data from across the California desert could be entered in the state's database as it

was collected. [141]

Mojave National Preserve soon acquired its first interpretive employee. Kirsten Talken was

reassigned from the Washington office as Mojave's first permanent interpretive ranger in May

1995. Talken helped develop and direct early interpretive programs, which included school

presentations, community outreach, and visitor contact centers at Hole-in-the-Wall and

Baker. Interpretive resources developed by other nearby NPS units proved easily adaptable,

and helped the Preserve get high-quality interpretive programs underway quickly.

In August 1995, the park unofficially opened the Mojave Desert Information Center, at the

base of the World's Tallest Thermometer in Baker, California. A formal opening ceremony

took place the following month. Talken can be credited with much of the work necessary to

bring the center to fruition. At the Baker facility, Talken and a cadre of seasonal employees

sold materials provided by the Death Valley Natural History Association, and handed out
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi4.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:47 PM]

information to passing tourists. Low initial visitor numbers were attributed to lack of

highway signage. [142] Baker, a town of less than one thousand residents astride I-15 and

Kelbaker Road, the most important road into the Preserve, coveted the center. Some early

planning for the Preserve considered Baker the best location for park headquarters, but the

hamlet lacked sufficient infrastructure to serve the Park Service's needs. [143] Once it

became clear that Baker would not be chosen for headquarters, members of the local growth

coalition, including Willis Herron, owner of the Bun Boy restaurant and the driving force

behind the construction of the Tallest Thermometer, actively sought location of a park

facility in the town. In addition to the visitor facility, the Park Service acquired the former

California Department of Transportation (CalTrans) housing compound in Baker in August

1995. This facility, consisting of five mobile homes and several other structures, allowed the

park to house interpretive and ranger staff closer to the Preserve itself and centralize its

maintenance and supply operations. CalTrans donated the buildings to the NPS, and BLM

developed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which allowed the Preserve to keep the

structures in their current location on BLM land. Talken and Ranger Brian Willbond set up

the first Baker park office in one of the CalTrans trailers. The park also leased a mobile home

in Kelso from the Union Pacific Railroad to house a law enforcement ranger at that location.

[144]

Protection of the Preserve from fire was a top priority of the Park Service. Because the

Preserve's size and isolation, the Park Service could not rely on mutual-aid response by other

agencies to reach emergencies in time. The park received $68,000 in special funding, directed

through the fire management program at Joshua Tree National Park, to set up basic fire

protection. NPS negotiated an agreement with the BLM to jointly staff and operate the

BLM's existing fire station at Hole-in-the-Wall. Ken Smihula and James Argon, BLM fire

employees at Hole-in-the-Wall, worked very closely with NPS personnel to set up the joint

fire program. Mary Martin led the effort to "figure out how to buy a fire truck," and the new

heavy wildland apparatus was in service before 1995 ended. [145]

The Preserve received an additional $10,000 in special funds to set up a fee collection system

at the park's two developed campgrounds. The park installed drop boxes for fee envelopes,

and purchased cash registers and safes for the money. The initial fees were reasonable - ten

dollars per night at Hole-in-the-Wall, and half that amount at Mid Hills - and the park

collected $440.50 during September 1995, the first full month of operation. [146]

At the end of the first fiscal year of operation, Mojave National Preserve consisted of eleven

full time employees, three members of the planning team, and seasonal workers. The park

could not afford maintenance staff; salaried staff had to perform basic maintenance, such as

collecting trash in campgrounds, and more complex tasks were contracted to other entities. A

glance at the organizational chart revealed a top-heavy administrative structure that was

primed for expansion. The following year staff expected to double the final operations budget

for FY95, which was only $660,000 transferred from other accounts and special

authorizations. [147] Rather than the rapid expansion and easy growth envisioned by some

Park Service personnel, the following year saw Mojave at the center of an ugly political

brawl, fighting for its continued existence as a National Park Service unit.

<<< Previous <<< Contents >>> Next >>>

moja/adhi/adhi4.htm

Last Updated: 05-Apr-2004
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi5.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:48 PM]

Mojave

Administrative History

CHAPTER FIVE:

PLANNING FOR MOJAVE'S FUTURE

One of the most substantial accomplishments in the short history of the Mojave National

Preserve was the autumn 2001 completion of the first General Management Plan for the park.

That document was the culmination of a planning process that began even before the area

officially belonged to the National Park Service. The plan was produced by park-based

planning staff, a rare circumstance that offered a new vision of the future of planning in the

national parks. Most modern park planning, especially for General Management Plans, has

been conducted by planning staff based in centralized NPS offices. Few modern parks

constructed General Management Plans with park staff, largely because of the historical

failure of such initiatives. Typically the funding and personnel intended for planning often

ended up serving other interests, park staff often lacked the specialized expertise necessary

for a plan, and in-house projects of this scale did not often reach completion in a timely

fashion.

Mojave National Preserve became a significant exception to that formula. Its GMP was

conceived in the crucible of bioregional ecosystem planning, carried through local opposition,

the lean time of the Dollar Budget, and the growth that followed. Based in the precepts of

national park management, the plan also reflected the particular and even peculiar situation of

Mojave National Preserve. The advantage of an in-house GMP quickly became clear. Mojave

NP faced different constraints than many of the more traditional units of the park system

because of the compromises built into the mission of the park, and on-the-ground knowledge

was crucial to negotiating the complicated circumstances of the eastern Mojave. In the end,

Mojave planners successfully produced a workable General Management Plan, a document

of tremendous importance to the future of the park. The planning process can also be read as

a successful instance of park-based planning, and the experience of Mojave's planning team

may be used to inform future NPS planning efforts.

After the passage of the California Desert Protection Act seemed inevitable, officials in the

Bureau of Land Management and the National Park Service considered some of the potential

opportunities for bioregional planning that would exist with such a land transfer. The

California Desert was seen by many as an ideal candidate for ecosystem planning. Most of

the area was already under the jurisdiction of the California Desert Plan, the earlier desertwide management plan produced by BLM in 1980. More importantly, some bioregional

planning was already underway in the Mojave. The desert and the rest of California were

subjected to a 1991 federal and state interagency Memorandum of Understanding on

Biodiversity, which "gave impetus to this idea of planning on a multi-ownership, multispecies level." [168] This MOU was informed by multijurisdictional planning work in the

western Mojave, which was part of the response by DOI and private landowners to the

August 1989 emergency listing of the desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) as a threatened

species under the Endangered Species Act. Some of the earliest studies of a potential

transition of BLM land to NPS control assimilated the language and spirit of bioregional

planning, which made sense in the context of the 1991 MOU. The area under consideration

for transfer to the Park Service as a Mojave National Park was recognized in the enabling
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi5.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:48 PM]

legislation as a juncture of different desert ecosystems found in Death Valley and Joshua

Tree, a perfect opportunity for ecosystem planning on a large scale in conjunction with other

Park Service units and the BLM. [169]

A large-scale management plan to assist the recovery of the endangered desert tortoise further

emphasized the need for regional planning on an ecological basis. In 1992, the Fish and

Wildlife Service officially listed the desert tortoise as threatened, and in June 1994 completed

the Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan (DTRP), which gave BLM and NPS additional impetus to

work together on ecosystem planning. The Recovery Plan called for sweeping management

changes on a large amount of public land, both inside and outside future Mojave National

Preserve boundaries. [170] The need of BLM and NPS to both closely follow the strictures

of the Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan gave added justification to a joint planning process, as

both agencies would require the same kinds of expensive experts and both would be facing

similar problems.

Department of the Interior planners saw the transition of BLM-controlled lands in the Mojave

to Park Service control as an ideal opportunity to plan broadly to increase efficiency and save

money. In 1993, the Secretary of the Interior created the California Desert Transition Work

Group to plan for the eventual transfer of portions of the desert to the National Park Service

if the California Desert Protection Act was passed. The group had a two-part mission, to

create a "seamless" transfer, and also to identify ways to save money in the process. The

group also looked to take advantage of the National Performance Review, Vice President Al

Gore's "reinventing government" initiative, as an additional source of funds for the transition.

[171] The work group produced a document in October 1993 titled "The California Desert in

Transition," colloquially known as the "Yellow Book." It created a framework for proceeding

with a "bioregional management" strategy in planning for the area, and included cost

estimates and potential savings for the transition and for the new parks, as well as

recommendations for joint and individual agency action. [172] The report was hailed by

Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt in his testimony before Congress on the California

Desert Protection Act as an example of interagency cooperation and ecosystem planning.

[173]

In retrospect, the report was fatally flawed, because the unusual resources and challenges of

the future park were not adequately acknowledged. "[T]hey really missed the mark [because]

[t]hey looked at it from a traditional Park Service organization," noted Superintendent Mary

Martin. [174] The report did not adequately address the issues that made the Preserve unique,

such as mining, rights of way, OHV use, and grazing. [175] In one glaring omission, the

projected composition of park staff in the first full fiscal year included fifteen full time and

eight temporary maintenance personnel, but not a single position dedicated to mining issues.

[176] The "Yellow Book" also included just two Department of the Interior agencies, the

Bureau of Land Management and the National Park Service. Later efforts in the bioregional

planning process integrated the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service into the discussion, as well as

the Department of Defense, responsible for considerable acreage in the California desert set

aside as training grounds.

The NPS portion of the joint team that produced the 1993 report was led by Dave Mihalic,

and included among its members Frank Buono, then assigned to the Albright Training Center

at Grand Canyon National Park. [177] After Babbitt's approval of the "Yellow Book" report,

Frank Buono was temporarily assigned to work with Alan O'Neill, Superintendent of Lake

Mead National Recreation Area, on further plans for the transition. In July 1994, BLM and

NPS jointly produced a task directive, called the "Transition Action Plan," that listed the

issues and tasks necessary to implement the CDPA. A total of twenty seven issues were

identified in the report, many with multiple recommended actions. For each action, personnel

from BLM and NPS were identified to lead the initiative. The innovative Alan O'Neill, who
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi5.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:48 PM]

had already significantly improved Lake Mead National Recreation Area, shouldered much

of this responsibility; Frank Buono also played a large role in implementation of the task

directive. The directive was more detailed and issue-oriented than the Transition Action Plan,

and was intended as a supplement, rather than a replacement. [178]

The Transition Action Plan contained the seeds of several initiatives that would become

important in the GMP process for Mojave. It set up the Desert Managers' Group, the multiagency management work group that supported Mojave personnel with planning and other

expertise. [179] It also required Death Valley and Mojave to divide the Northern and Eastern

Mojave Ecosystem Planning Units into areas of influence for planning purposes. These units,

a product of the Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan, gave geographical definition and a name to

the planning effort that would include Mojave National Preserve. The plan was for the

Northern and Eastern Mojave, or NEMO - a nine-million-acre planning area.

Unlike the other areas created by the Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan, in which the vast

majority of land was under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management, the National

Park Service controlled more than half of the NEMO area in Death Valley National Park and

Mojave National Preserve. As a result, Ed Hastey, the California State BLM Director, asked

the Park Service to lead the NEMO effort. The NPS agreed, and promised to fill three of the

positions for the planning team, including the team leader. The BLM provided three more,

and FWS one. Marvin Jensen and Ray Murray, Regional Chief of Planning and Partnership,

lobbied aggressively to have the planning staff attached to Mojave National Preserve, instead

of using planners contracted through a central office, and succeeded in having the planners

assigned to the park. [180]

The Park Service advertised for the position of planning team leader in March 1995,

identifying Dennis Schramm, who was working in the Alaska Support Office, as an ideal

candidate. Schramm was one half of a dual-career couple and turned down the transfer offer

unless both he and Marcia, his wife, could be employed. The Park Service could not find

positions for both Schramms until July 1995, but meanwhile hired the two other NPS

members of the planning team. David Moore, a landscape architect at Sequoia / Kings

Canyon National Park, filled the community planner position, and Gordon Reetz, from

Chickasaw National Recreation Area, took on responsibility for natural resources planning.

Both Reetz and Moore arrived at Mojave headquarters in mid-May 1995, and were instructed

by Superintendent Jensen to become familiar with the land. Several field trips soon followed.

[181] The newly arrived members of the planning team also helped set up the new

headquarters office at Mercado Mall. The structure of the building made it feasible to locate

the planning team in a suite a few doors down from the rest of the park staff. Schramm later

identified the semi-isolation as very helpful in keeping the planners on track and preventing

them from becoming bogged down in day-to-day park business. [182]

The new NEMO planning team met with the Desert Managers' Group, the Desert Tortoise

planning management team, and NPS planners from the Denver office in early June 1995, in

Barstow. The various parties discussed broadly how to approach the task of creating the

NEMO plan, with the intent of formalizing the recommendations in a project agreement.

Since none of the Mojave planning staff had worked on a general management plan before,

they relied heavily on NPS experts to point them in the right direction. The team discussed

"issue-driven" planning versus "goal-driven" planning, and decided that "goal-driven"

planning might be a useful tool to defuse some of the intense issue-driven controversy

surrounding the Preserve. Intense emotions about certain issues could hold back an issuedriven planning process, but a goal-driven approach would circumvent those issues to an

extent and also provide more vision for future park planning. [183]

The planning team decided to use the best available methods to collect public comments
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi5.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:48 PM]

about the proposed plan. Everyone on the team was acutely sensitive to the hostility with

which some members of the public regarded Mojave National Preserve and wilderness

elements of the California Desert Protection Act. "When I came to Mojave, people back at

Sequoia were joking about needing to buy flak jackets and making sure I took the target off

my back," remembered David Moore. [184] The Forest Service and BLM in Las Vegas,

Nevada had recently completed controversial management plans, and the NEMO team sought

their expertise in handling public comment. On July 11-13, 1995, the planning team met to

work out public comment options and discuss coordination with the Northern/Eastern

Colorado and Western Mojave planning efforts. Forest Service and BLM Nevada personnel

presented their experiences with different approaches to gathering public comment. Their

technique, utilizing several roundtables where comments were collected rather than a singlepublic-microphone approach, increased numbers of comments and commentators and also

defused some negativity. This method was employed by the planning team at all of the public

scoping meetings for the NEMO plans, and worked very well. [185]

The planners embarked on an ambitious set of scoping meetings, in an effort to receive

suggestions to help shape the course of the management plans. In late July, the team held the

first scoping meeting with BLM and NPS personnel from the desert, in order to understand

management expectations for the plan. [186] One month later, in late August 1995, the

planning team held the first of its public scoping meetings. Local, state, and federal officials

and agencies were invited to the Mercado headquarters to talk to the planning team. David

Moore remembers this meeting as having a "pretty good turnout" and being "very positive" in

tone. The influential members of local communities present at the meeting were members of

a traditional pro-tourism "growth coalition," in favor of the park for the economic

opportunity it created for their communities and for themselves. [187] It was important for

the planning team to receive input from these local elites, as they had a keen understanding

of the issues the park was likely to face in the coming public meetings. It was also important

to the park that the local leaders had an understanding of the planning process and their role

in the future of the park.

The planning team prepared workshops to receive input from the general public, but the

Dollar Budget crisis nearly brought a halt to the process. The NPS prepared a pamphlet that

described the planning process and the public scoping meeting schedule, which the BLM

mailed to everyone on its California Desert mailing list, some 6,000 people, on August 31,

1995. The team published the official notice of intent and EIS for the planning process in the

Federal Register on September 5, 1995. [188] The initial public scoping meetings were

scheduled for the week of September 21-27, but when the "Dollar Budget" appropriations bill

passed out of the Conference Committee on September 19, Mojave National Preserve was in

disarray. The management team discussed the possibility of canceling the meetings, because

of the more than $15,000 it would cost to hold the workshops. Superintendent Jensen,

Superintendent Dick Martin of Death Valley, and Ray Murray, of the Pacific West Regional

Office, decided that the meetings should be held as scheduled. [189]

The NEMO team conducted the first wave of public scoping meetings in late September

1995. Two teams of employees headed the meetings. Alan Hagood of the Denver Service

Center led those in the northern portion, while Dennis Schramm headed the southern

meetings. The BLM Riverside district office helped with administrative support, such as

communication with the media and sending letters to interested members of the public.

Meetings were held in ten locations throughout the planning area. [190] Registration sheets

recorded a total of 252 participants, but many more people attended who did not sign in.

[191]

Peter Burk, President of the Citizens for Mojave National Park, wrote that all of the meetings

saw a "majority of the people" supportive both of the Preserve and the planning process, but
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi5.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:48 PM]

NPS officials remembered a more hostile reception; David Moore identified the Pasadena

meeting as the only one where a majority of visitors were pro-NPS. [192] Mary Martin

described the situation at the meeting in Needles:

"The audience was just packed, there must have been eighty people there ... Plus

there was this one woman, ... she was just screaming through the meeting. And

people were really emotionally upset. They didn't like the Park Service and they

let us know. They let us know everything that they thought we did wrong, and

we were listening." [193]

People opposed to the Mojave National Preserve often displayed cynicism. One local

opponent weighed in on the planning process: "It is nice to know we are now a 'bioregion' -

we used to be part of the United States," the meetings: "a total waste of time and a waste of

taxpayers money," and multiagency planning: "Like tieing [sic] the tails of three alley cats

together and throwing them over a clothesline." [194] The planning team structured its

approach accordingly, placing an emphasis on listening and educating members of the public.

Moore noted that the initial scoping meetings were about more than simply receiving public

input. "In a sense," he recalled, "we were like ambassadors." [195]

A typical planning meeting began with Dennis Schramm giving a brief overview of the

planning process. The planners then broke into groups of one or two individuals, and staffed

the "breakout" tables, each dedicated to a specific issue or theme. Each table had an easel

with a large blank paper pad, upon which the planners or individual members of the public

wrote or summarized their comments. Occasionally, the planners would also take notes as

well. Most comments were summarized for brevity, but since they were recorded in the open,

the person who commented enjoyed a reasonable degree of confidence that the remarks were

not being misinterpreted. After the meeting, comments were entered into a computer

database, printed according to topic, and circulated among members of the planning team.

[196]

The usefulness of the initial public input to the planning process was limited. "When we

started holding public meetings, the first round people really just wanted to complain about

the Act, ... so the actual scoping value of those meetings was minimal, in terms of new ideas

or what issues should we address," noted Dennis Schramm. To the public, the process may

have looked premeditated, though, because most of the negative public reaction had to do

with topics that were not under the park's control, such as wilderness boundary modifications

and the complete elimination of grazing and hunting [197]. Dennis Schramm observed

another function of the first wave of planning meetings:

"We went out into those communities, we took the congressional wilderness

maps, and when people would say 'they closed off every road in the Preserve,'

we'd drag out the wilderness maps and say 'which one are you concerned about?'

and they'd point it out and we'd go 'that one's still open.' ... The rumor was that

all the roads were closed. And the reality was that less than 15% were closed by

wilderness. As people began to learn more and more about what the act did, 'oh

yeah, we can still use this, oh yeah, I can still hunt out here, oh yeah, there's still

mining out here,' that started alleviating some of the concerns that people had

had with it." [198]

Despite the public negativity, the first phase of public scoping meetings was considered a

success. The planning team received public input, and the public had a good chance to air

their concerns about the Preserve and the planning process. A larger threat to the park and the

planning process loomed even as the first meetings were being conducted. Salaries of

planning staff, unlike those for regular Mojave employees, theoretically were not in
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi5.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:48 PM]

immediate danger from the Dollar Budget, because the planners were funded by special

planning dollars unaffected by the cut. Nonetheless, the planning staff was definitely affected.

Reetz, Moore, and Schramm had all been promised potential staff positions after the GMP

was complete. Schramm explained how his salary was safe but his job was not: "my future

was at Mojave, once the plan was done, because I was attached to the Mojave staff." [199]

In early 1996, the NEMO team created a fourteen-page newsletter to inform the public of the

progress of the planning process. This "Periodic Update on the Interagency Management Plan

#1," issued in February 1996, gave summaries of public comments received at the initial

public scoping meetings. It also explained the missions of the three land management units,

Mojave National Preserve, Death Valley National Park, and BLM lands involved in the

NEMO effort, and assured readers that despite the flap over the Dollar Budget, the Preserve

and the planning team would continue to function until instructed otherwise by Congress.

[200] This newsletter was mailed to only approximately 500 people, as the NEMO team

switched to a mailing list developed from agency lists and participants in the scoping process.

[201] Some locals read specific details as proof of the illogic of Park Service control; one

complained that "there is nothing sensible" about "banning" local recreationists while trying

to simultaneously encourage foreign tourists to visit the Preserve. [202]

The planning team made efforts to contact agencies with less substantial stakes in the process

that had not participated in the initial scoping meetings. In April 1996, the NEMO team

officially notified California's State Historic Preservation Office that the planning process was

underway. By law, the Park Service must evaluate all structures more than fifty years old on

its property for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. Each State Historic

Preservation Office is in charge of the National Register nominations for that state, so

coordination between Mojave National Preserve and the California office was essential. A

month later, the State Historic Preservation Office replied, and a meeting between the NPS

and the agency was held in June 1996. The State Historic Preservation Office was interested

in the planning process, but had no need to play an aggressive role. Thereafter, the agency

kept in touch with the planning team through the formal comment process. [203]

In order to meet the CDPA requirement of consultation with local Native Americans, Dennis

Schramm and BLM Archaeologist Rolla Queen met with leaders of the Chemehuevi, Native

Americans who historically lived in the area of the Preserve, at their Colorado River

reservation on April 23, 1996. More than one year later, on May 19, 1997, NEMO planners

met again with the Chemehuevi at their tribal offices. Later that day, planners met with the

chair of the Fort Mojave Tribe at tribal offices in Needles. The planning team put together an

intertribal meeting, scheduled for July 11, 1997 at the Avi Casino. William "Bill" Mungary, a

Native American involved with the American Indian Council of Central California and other

groups, conducted the meeting. The planners extended invitations to thirteen tribal groups, as

well as selected NPS and BLM officials. Seven tribal leaders attended, representing the Fort

Mojave Tribe, Timbisha Shoshone, Chemehuevi, and San Manuel band. In addition, nine

BLM and NPS employees were present. [204]

The NEMO team utilized electronic media throughout the planning process to keep the public

informed of their progress and to make documents available without the cost of printing. In

February 1997, the first NEMO web site came online, hosted by the BLM along with sites for

the Western Mojave and Northern / Eastern Colorado planning efforts. In April 1998, after

the decision to complete three plans instead of a single joint plan, the NEMO site moved to

the Mojave National Preserve website. Both drafts of the EISs and GMPs being prepared by

the NEMO team were posted on the Internet site and were also made available on CD-ROM,

enabling the government to avoid the $60 per copy printing and mailing costs of the paper

version. Approximately 100 copies of the 1998 draft were sent out on CD-ROM, and some

200 copies of the second draft were requested in the CD-ROM format. [205]
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi5.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:48 PM]

In mid-April 1997, the NEMO team mailed its second newsletter and press release, timed to

announce a second round of public scoping meetings. These meetings were intended to give

members of the public a chance to discuss various plan alternatives. With better media

publicity, the second round of workshops attracted at least 330 participants. The ten meetings

were held in the same locations as the earlier meetings, except the Independence, California,

meeting which was moved to the town of Bishop. [206] After the public meetings were held,

the planning team hosted a two-day interagency scoping meeting in Barstow in late April

1997. Twenty-eight participants, representing a variety of federal and state agencies,

discussed the public comments and the alternatives. [207]

The planning staff made good use out of data developed by other agencies, discounting the

charge of CDPA opponents that the new parks would invalidate the time and money spent on

previous planning efforts. Team members consulted existing BLM documents, many

developed in preparation for and after implementation of the 1980 Desert Plan. In most cases,

the BLM texts provided the planning team with a valuable resource. [208] In a few instances,

planners such as David Moore recognized the value of previous planning efforts in a more

literal way:

"[E]specially for the Mojave Road — I mean, there had been so much that had been covered,

and I'm sure just fought over and argued over earlier with BLM and these use groups, and so

[I] felt it was still applicable and just carried it over into our plan. ... I just realized that there

was a lot of work and a lot of words that had been shared back and forth over the whole

thing." [209]

While planners were writing the first draft of the combined EIS and GMP, the relationship

between the NPS and BLM in the NEMO team became a problem. BLM was the lead agency

on two other planning initiatives in the California desert, the West Mojave Plan and the

Northern and Eastern Colorado Plan, and had little money or staff to devote to the Northern

and Eastern Mojave Plan. "It was their lowest priority — in fact, they told us more than once

that it wasn't a priority for them," recalled Schramm. At the same time, the NPS portions of

the NEMO plan were being funded with Park Service dollars reserved for general

management plans. This imposed a sense of urgency on the NPS that did not fit well with the

BLM's less intense attitude toward the process. [210] As the combined internal-use draft

NEMO plan, more than 800 pages in length, circulated among members of both agencies,

BLM withdrew its support for the project. Pressure from the highest echelons of the

Department of the Interior forced the bureau to come back to the table, but by then it was

clear that a combined document — and combined planning process — was not feasible.

Some of the spirit of ecosystem planning remained, and the NPS planning team cooperated

with BLM on issues of joint concern such as burro management. [211] The joint planning

process ultimately proved too complex, given the different time frames, budgets,

commitments, and missions of the agencies involved, for the innovative attempt at ecosystem

planning to succeed in the Mojave desert.

The NPS planners utilized contracted assistance to fill in the gaps in the planning team left by

BLM's departure. BLM personnel had been an important part of the NEMO team. According

to the project agreement, the Park Service provided a team leader, a community planner, and

a natural resources expert. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service contributed a biologist, and the

BLM added cultural resource expertise, Geographical Information Service (GIS) expertise,

and clerical staff. The planning team could not adequately proceed until it found

replacements for the lost staff. The University of Nevada, Las Vegas Cooperative Park

Studies Unit provided GIS services on a contract basis. The NEMO team contracted with the

historian Harlan Unrau, of the NPS's Denver Service Center, to manage cultural resource

planning. Dean Runyan Associates was hired to produce an Economic Impact Analysis. Jean

De Los Reyes was hired as a temporary editor to help compile and revise the draft plans
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi5.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:48 PM]

before their 1998 release. [212]

The third planning team newsletter in April 1998 announced that the NEMO effort would

generate three environmental impact statements, one each for Death Valley, Mojave, and

BLM lands, instead of a single unified document. The newsletter reported that this was

intended as a ease-of-use measure, noting that the initial combined draft was 800 pages and

growing. In reality, the arrangement reflected the reconciliation of the agencies after BLM

pulled out of the planning effort several months previously. The newsletter noted that

interested members of the public could choose to receive the plans in electronic format if

they wished. [213]

In September 1998, the planning team released the first draft environmental impact

statements and general management plans for Mojave National Preserve and Death Valley

National Park. Approximately 450 of the printed documents were mailed to various parties,

and more than 100 CD-ROMs were produced. The documents were also available on the

National Park Service website. The official notice of availability for the plan was published

on September 11, 1998 in the Federal Register. [214] In late November 1998, the original

ninety day comment period was extended until mid-January 1999, which gave the public a

total of 127 days to comment on the draft. [215]

Unlike the first round of scoping meetings, the park encountered criticisms of the draft GMP

from both traditional park opponents and those who ordinarily supported NPS efforts. Ten

public meetings were conducted October 19-30, 1998, more than a month after the draft

documents were issued. Some criticism of the plans was encountered from anti-park critics

who had also been critical of the CDPA. Others were upset because the plans did not go far

enough to protect the resources of the Preserve. Peter Burk, President of the Citizens for

Mojave National Park, called the draft 'multiple-use double-talk,' and pitched his own

'modified proposed action alternative' to better protect park lands and the desert tortoise. In

their attempts to recognize the legitimacy of activities expressly permitted by Congress to

continue in the Preserve, the planning team came under fire from environmentalists who

wanted more strict controls. [216] The planning team received just under 400 individual

letters commenting on aspects of the plan. Some 1,800 pre-printed postcards from members

of the Sierra Club, the National Parks Conservation Association, and the Wilderness Society

were also mailed to the team. [217]

The planning team, working closely with the superintendents of both Mojave National

Preserve and Death Valley National Park, realized that the tremendous public interest in the

plan called for unusual measures. They decided to create a revised draft and hold another

public comment period with public meetings. Some changes took place in the planning team,

because after the publication of the first draft, Reetz and Moore moved to staff positions in

the park, and when the GMP planning money ran out, Schramm's position had to be funded

through the park as well. As a spatial reminder of their new status, most members of the

planning team moved into the regular park office, yielding their separate suite to the

incoming chief ranger and his staff. [218]

Schramm tackled the job of creating the official Park Service responses to public comments.

He rewrote sections of the plans based on public comments. Schramm also reworked the

structure of Mojave's plan, rearranging the contents under four umbrella headings designed to

clarify the elements of the GMP. Superintendent Martin gave Schramm the flexibility to

evade distractions; he only stopped in at headquarters a couple times a week:

"When we went from the first draft to the revised draft, most of the staff had

moved into other jobs. So I basically wrote that second revised draft - that's when

I spent the three months at home. My kids were in high school, and I was telling
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi5.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:48 PM]

them, 'you talk about a term paper, I've got a term paper!' And I was doing two

of them - Death Valley's and Mojave's." [219]

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) coordinated the Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan,

and therefore needed to approve of any long-term development plans in critical tortoise

habitat. Rather than spend time and money on a formal Biological Opinion, the planning

team received FWS reviews of the plans prior to their formal publication, for both the initial

draft in 1998 and the revised draft in early 2000. Any FWS changes to the plan were

promptly incorporated into the draft GMPs. As a result, the service agreed that it would issue

a Biological Opinion on the final EIS when it was published, if all of FWS's concerns were

addressed. [220]

In September 2000, Mojave National Preserve and Death Valley National Park released

revised draft environmental impact statements and general management plans, and notified

some 3,500 people and organizations on the NEMO mailing list. Agency responses to public

comments were bound as a separate volume. [221] The revised draft had 92 days of public

review, beginning with a notice in the Federal Register on September 6, 2000. [222] Nearly

two months later, the planning team held eleven more public meetings about the proposed

changes. Including this final round, a total of forty three public meetings were held during

the development of the General Management Plan. [223] Planners and park staff received

202 written comments about the revised draft.

After the public comment period expired, the NPS reviewed the comments and decided that

respondents raised no new major issues. Since there were essentially only minor corrections

to make to the revised draft EIS — the revisions filled only thirty pages, minuscule by EIS

standards - planners decided to issue an abbreviated final environmental impact statement,

instead of a full version. This abbreviated final EIS/GMP would be read in conjunction with

the revised draft for a complete final EIS and GMP. This document, issued June 21, 2001,

also contained the public comments received by Mojave National Preserve about the revised

draft. As had the revised draft before it, the final EIS/GMP identified Alternative 1, which

called for rehabilitation of the Kelso Depot, limited development within park boundaries, and

acquisition of non-federal land within the Preserve, as the proposed plan. The NEMO team

mailed their fifth newsletter announcing the publication of the abbreviated final EIS and the

thirty day noaction period, which was received by some 3,600 people on the planning team

mailing list. On July 6, 2001, FWS issued Biological Opinion 1-8-00-F-36, which approved

the NPS-preferred alternative in the abbreviated final EIS and GMP as acceptable from the

standpoint of the Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan. [224]

One NPS change in the abbreviated final EIS/GMP seemed like a minor correction, but

caused a large headache for park staff. The California Department of Fish & Game pointed

out in their official response to the 2000 revised draft EIS that the preferred alternative

allowed continued hunting of small game, where the Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan specified

that only big game or upland game bird hunting should be allowed. The NPS responded by

modifying the revised draft to conform to the wording of the Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan,

'prohibit[ing] the discharge of firearms, except for hunting of big game or upland game birds

from September through February." [225] Mary Martin described the result:

"[in] the final draft of the GMP, the Cal Fish & Game wrote back to us and not

only did they support our hunting issue ... but they pointed out that the Desert

Tortoise Recovery Plan called for the elimination of ... rabbit ... hunting. And we

had left it in our plan. So we said 'hey great, Fish & Game wants to reduce

hunting, we'd support that,' and we took their recommendation. Well then the

hunting community heard about it — they were mad at Fish & Game, they were

mad at the Park Service, and the last round of public meetings, there were lots of
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi5.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:48 PM]

hunters that showed up, lots of hunters that showed up. The hunters were very

effective at getting political support." [226]

The hunting issue pitted traditional Park Service constituents, who tended to be antihunting,

against hunters whom the Preserve was obliged to accommodate. During the 'No Action

Period' that followed the publication of the abbreviated final EIS, Mojave received more than

twenty five letters, approximately 200 more form letters, and several petitions opposed to the

hunting reduction proposal. The park also received a few letters and almost a thousand emails

in favor of the hunting reductions, but the pro-hunting groups had political muscle and the

legislative intent of the CDPA on their side. Superintendent Martin received several letters

from congressional representatives requesting that she meet with California Fish & Game

before a Record of Decision could be issued. The superintendent met with the director and

deputy director of CDF&G on August 1, 2001, and NPS staff met with Fish & Game and

FWS staff the following day. In both meetings, the Park Service made it clear that the intent

of the GMP was to allow upland game bird hunting and prohibit hunting of predators and socalled 'furbearing' species such as rabbits and squirrels. [227]

The issuance of a Record of Decision for the General Management Plan hinged on the

successful resolution of the hunting issue. On September 7, 2001, the Park Service asked the

Fish & Wildlife Service to amend the Biological Opinion, and restore rabbit hunting, to

which FWS agreed almost two weeks later. The Park Service also sought to amend the

hunting seasons in the Preserve to make them consistent with the Desert Tortoise Recovery

Plan by making their case to the California Fish and Game Commission. As an act of

conciliation, the Preserve removed the provision that a one mile no-shooting zone exist

around all developed areas in the park, except around the Kelso Depot and Kelso Dunes

areas, because CDF&G indicated to the Park Service that the existing 150-yard limit was

sufficiently effective. The Preserve received almost 1,400 emails claiming that the new

provisions did not comply with the Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan, but the Park Service

responded that the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, the agency in charge of implementation of

the DTRP, signed off on the change as adequate. [228]

Two days after FWS agreed to the changes, on September 21, 2001 NPS Regional Director

John Reynolds signed the Record of Decision for the abbreviated final environmental impact

statement and general management plan, identifying the preferred alternative as the official

future of Mojave National Preserve. Included with the document was a signed copy of the

"Floodplain Statement of Findings for the Kelso Depot," required by executive order as a

result of the building's location in a major drainage area. [229] Aside from the reversal on

hunting, the Record of Decision made only a handful of minor changes, most simply

corrections of errors that appeared in the revised draft EIS/GMP. Months later, the various

documents, compiled into a bound General Management Plan, were received at headquarters

for the everyday use of park employees. [230] After six years of work, Mojave National

Preserve had a clear plan for its future.

The implications of the General Management Plan for Mojave National Preserve are obvious

— the goals of the park for the next decade or more are spelled out on its pages — but the

Mojave plan might also serve as a successful 'proof of concept' for future park-based general

management plans in the NPS. Dennis Schramm, leader of the planning team that produced

Mojave's GMP, emphasized the rarity of park-based planning in today's NPS. However, he

also saw that the Denver Service Center, traditional home of NPS planning teams, receives

more political scrutiny and less funding than it needs, opening the possibility that future

planning may need to be park-based. Those involved in the Mojave effort hope that their

experiences developing the GMP might help future park-level plans succeed.

The Mojave planners identified two key factors in their success: isolation, and contracting.
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi5.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:48 PM]

Mojave's plan benefited from having staff completely dedicated to the planning process.

Ensconced in semi-isolation in a separate strip-mall office, the planning team was able to

work effectively without getting too caught up in day-to-day park affairs. Schramm suggests

that park-based collateral duty planners often face an uphill struggle to remain focused on

planning, "they just really can't put the time in on it, unless they're given the latitude to work

elsewhere." [231] After the planning team was moved back into the main office, Schramm

worked from home for three months to complete the revised draft, and his self-imposed exile

proved important to his timely success. Mojave's experience with the composition of the

planning team may also offer insight to future park-based planning efforts. The Park Service

cannot afford to concentrate several planners, an entire planning team, at a single park. One

of the key ideas behind the bioregional planning effort was the sharing of resources — in

theory, the Park Service only had to pay for three positions on a seven-member team of

experts. Once the BLM embarked on its own plan, the Park Service had to find a way to

complete the plans on its own, and discovered that contracting could provide much of the

needed expertise. Asked about the ability of other parks to replicate Mojave's success,

Schramm suggested that:

"if you did it where the superintendent and a key person were park base-funded

and involved, and you got a chunk of planning money to contract some support

services, you know, I think you could pull it off."

<<< Previous <<< Contents >>> Next >>>

moja/adhi/adhi5.htm

Last Updated: 05-Apr-2004
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi6.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:50 PM]

Mojave

Administrative History

CHAPTER SIX:

PARK MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

While the planning team created a document from which the ideal future of the park would

emerge, the rest of park staff went about the daily business of running one of the largest

parks in the continental United States. The Preserve's several administrative teams all faced a

remarkable diversity of issues. The history of pre-Park Service low-key management of the

eastern Mojave was the indirect catalyst for episodes where user expectations clashed with

the Park Service's mission of preservation and protection of the resources of the desert. The

Preserve's proximity to two interstate freeways and the greater Los Angeles urban area

changed the shape and focus of the park's visitor and resource protection measures, giving

Mojave National Preserve management issues more common in urban parks like Golden Gate

NRA. Mojave's management also tackled other concerns, like personnel issues and

maintenance, that have been addressed by nearly all parks but that were nonetheless crucial to

the proper functioning of the Preserve.

Top-level managers organized the administrative structure of the Preserve into several teams,

each with separate areas of responsibility. Dave Paulissen, one of the park's original

employees, has led the administration and maintenance division since its inception. Chief

Ranger Sean McGuinness leads the resource and visitor protection division and also bore

responsibility for interpretation programming until the Preserve hired Mary "Jeff" Karraker in

2001 to head up a separate interpretation unit. Larry Whalon supervises the intricate

complexities of the resource management division. This chapter addresses management and

administrative issues; chapter seven explores the history of resource protection and

interpretation at the Preserve; and chapter eight examines resource management themes.

The management of Mojave National Preserve, perhaps more than other aspects of the park,

reflects the Preserve's early days. The management team is close-knit, innovative, and

flexible. One of the most remarkable features of the management process is that the division

leaders have mutually agreed that salaries will not exceed 75 percent of the total base budget.

Typical parks have upward of 90 percent of their total base budget tied up in salary expenses.

The result is a greater degree of flexibility for Mojave - the agreement makes it possible to

fund projects that are unforeseen but necessary. One example of such a program was the

funding of the first two years of the burro removal program. Eventually, the park received

money from a national fund dedicated to resource protection to continue the work begun by

the park, but if some burro mitigation measures had not been taken when they did, the

problem would have quickly spiraled out of control because of the burro's prolific

reproduction. This 75 percent cap agreement, though unwritten, is very clear to all of the

managers, and trust between them makes it possible to continue the practice to the benefit of

the park. [232]

Another unusual practice, predicated on trust between the division leaders, is the management

team's negotiation over all new hires. If an existing position goes vacant, it is not

automatically filled with an identical replacement - the position is discussed by the

management team, and the salary dollars may be put to use in a different capacity or
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi6.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:50 PM]

division, to better reflect the park's adjusted priorities. When viewed in contrast to the image

of a stereotypical park, where division chiefs are loathe to give up control over any dollars or

positions because they might not get them back, the practice seems remarkable indeed, and

helps Mojave make the most of its limited fiscal resources amid shifting priorities.

The top management team long administered the park in a hands-on kind of way, which

stems from times when the park staff was much smaller. Weekly all-staff meetings were the

norm for many years, where top leaders not only developed management philosophy for the

park, but also made many day-to-day decisions. Explains David Moore:

"Now, the team, the squad managers, get together and talk about more of the

big-picture stuff, but back then, it was everything. You dealt with everything,

you know, from 'do we need to order some more water for the water coolers' to

dealing with public relations — just everything." [233]

The staff retains a vestigial flexibility as well. The management team emphasized solving

problems, not necessarily working within any given employee's particular job description.

Veteran employees joke of times when no one really wanted to answer the outside telephone

line, since whomever picked up the receiver would undoubtedly be saddled with a new

project or investigation if the caller needed something specific. As the park staff has grown in

size and the backlog of unaddressed issues has been reduced, the need for such staff

flexibility has been reduced, but not eliminated. Staff members still routinely take on

assignments outside their traditional areas of expertise when asked to do so.

Something is clearly working well, for the Preserve has garnered several major awards in its

short history. In 1995, the park received the Secretary's Award for the law enforcement

investigation that led to the arrest and incarceration of two men who were dumping highly

hazardous compounds on NPS lands. In 2001, Mojave received the NPS Director's "Park

Wilderness Stewardship Award" in recognition of several accomplishments, including the

Catellus land swap agreement, the acquisition of the Overson grazing allotments, the work

with the California Integrated Waste Management Board to clean up hazardous waste and

trash in the Preserve at low cost, and the marking and patrol of wilderness boundaries. [234]

One common criticism of the eastern Mojave during the debate over the California Desert

Protection Act was that the area did not have the scenic qualities of a park. The inaccuracy of

that assertion was again demonstrated in a small but significant way in March 2001. Kodak

and the National Park Foundation sponsored the "Experience Your America Photo Contest,"

for the best photo taken in a national park. David Aikenhead, a California resident, won

"honorable mention" with his photo of a person amid a sea of wildflowers in the Mojave

National Preserve. [235]

Every national park has had to face problems that arise from visitors' expectations that differ

from the course of action required by the Park Service's mission, but Mojave National

Preserve has seemingly faced more than its share of these issues, chiefly because of the area's

governance under BLM's much more lenient rules less than a decade ago. One of the most

unusual incidents began as a minor movement of performance art enthusiasts and their

followers rose to international prominence as they worshiped the object of their affection - a

lonely telephone booth, at the end of a long string of poles. Park Service employees were

amused at first, but chuckles turned to concerns as visitor traffic increased and booth

enthusiasts left behind offerings of art and junk, like pilgrims at a pop culture shrine.

Concerned about impacts to desert resources, aware of the expiration of the expiration of

Pacific Bell's right-of-way, and unmoved by the apparently frivolous arguments of the phone

booth users, the NPS ensured the booth's removal. Booth enthusiasts flooded Mojave

headquarters with angry emails and phone calls, and charged the Park Service with only
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi6.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:50 PM]

welcoming certain kinds of visitors with open arms, the counterculture's retread of the

argument used by almost any group that finds the NPS mission in the way of their personal

use of a public place.

A telephone was placed in the California desert around 1948 along a telephone line that

stretched from Highway 91 through the east Mojave to Route 66. The idea was to provide

local cinder miners with a means of communication with the outside world. The phone itself,

known as "Cinder Peak 2," had to be cranked by hand. Emerson Ray, owner and operator of

the nearby Cima Cinder Mine, requested the installation of the booth. Sometime in the mid1960's the phone was replaced with a regular payphone, which was upgraded again sometime

in the late 1980s as touch-tone payphones became the norm. [236]

The phone had long been listed on American Automobile Association maps of the area - the

word "Telephone" at the junction of a couple of dirt roads. Early visitors to the booth were

lured to the area by the apparent incongruity of a telephone seemingly in the middle of

nowhere, 15 miles from a paved road. In May 1997, one traveler wrote a letter to a fan

"'zine" for the Washington band "Girl Trouble," describing the remote phone. This fired the

imagination of Godfrey Daniels, a Tempe, Arizona-based computer programmer and

sometime artist, who resolved to call the booth's number every day until he received a

response. His breakthrough occurred in late June 1997, less than a month after he started

calling, when he reached Lorene Caffee, operator of the local cinder mine, as she made calls

from the booth. [237] Daniels, in a transcript of the phone call posted on his website, was

clearly thunderstruck by the fact that the booth actually existed, and vowed to visit some day.

Daniels made his first trip to the site in late August 1997, after receiving a Xeroxed map of

the area from Dennis Casebier. He got lost, presaging the experience of hundreds who would

follow in his tire tracks, and arrived after dark. Still, the booth inspired him:

"It was just as I had imagined it--a lonely communications outpost at the end of

a long, long chain of telephone poles. All its glass had been shot out, but I

thought it was beautiful. At that moment I felt I might never leave it." [238]

The story of the booth spread rapidly, posted by Daniels on his website and popularized

through contacts in the counterculture art world. When he first made a trip to the booth, no

one called - Daniels paged a friend so he could hear what an incoming ring sounded like.

Most of the commentors on his website were friends from the art world or people who

happened across the site accidentally. A series of radio appearances and small news articles,

starting as early as 1998 and increased in frequency by April 1999, drew more visitors to

Daniels' webpage. The overall tone was still friendly. One writer detailed her plans for an

Easter weekend campout, and Daniels replied that he would try to show up. [239] Phone

traffic could be heavy if a trip to the booth was publicized in advance. Camping overnight at

the booth on his way to the 1998 Burning Man festival, the phone rang almost constantly,

enough so that Daniels had to take the receiver off the hook to get some sleep. [240]

Media attention began to spread the word about the funky telephone booth in the middle of

nowhere. A visitor in early July 1999 logged three calls in an hour and a half, more than

typical but hardly a portent of things to come. [241] As news of the booth spread, the number

of visitors to the area also increased. The new enthusiasts came from all walks of life, but

they all had the phone booth in common. Andria Fiegel Wolfe, an interior designer from

New York, flew cross-country with her sister to answer calls at the booth in their birthday

suits. Two southern California men, who had only met online, took a roadtrip to the booth to

hang up the receiver when they received constant busy signals. An Arizona man, Rick Karr,

acting on orders from the Holy Spirit, spent more than a month camped beside the booth in

the middle of summer in 1999. Karr read scripture to astonished callers and documented
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi6.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:50 PM]

every one in a logbook, recording over 500 calls. Mike Sims and Ron Kling set up a party at

the booth, complete with food and a punk band, to promote their website. [242]

The story of the "loneliest phone booth in the world" was picked up by major news outlets

after mid-1999, and the added publicity proved fatal to the booth. Flash News Service first

told of the new phenomenon, and the story was subsequently investigated by the Los Angeles

Times, the New York Times, the San Bernardino Sun, and the Las Vegas Review-Journal,

among others. When news of the booth, along with maps and directions, appeared in major

papers serving populations within driving distance of the location, the increase in visitors to

the site was enormous. The Los Angeles Times reported Daniels' plans for a Y2K celebration

at the booth, and the deluge of self-invitations from people who wanted to be part of the

action convinced Daniels to stay away. Dozens of TV crews, including major nationwide

networks, made the trip to the Mojave. The phone would hardly be placed in the cradle

before it would ring again. Even David Letterman did a spoof, documenting "the mic stand in

the middle of nowhere." [243] Those people who had learned of the booth's existence before

the media blitz lamented its newfound popularity. One wistful post noted that "Something

kinda dies after Brokaw gets ahold of it...know what I mean?" [244]

Many of the residents of the area did not mind the popularity. Charlie Wilcox, a local with a

tow truck, made money from ill-prepared booth visitors who ignored warnings not to take

two-wheel drive cars on the sandy roads. However, one nearby rancher, Tim Overson, was

not happy with the booth or the unusual people who gravitated to it. His frustration was due

in part to the fact that the best road to the phone ran literally right through his front yard, and

when people got stuck, they often knocked on his door. Mary Martin noted Overson's method

of occasional revenge: "although he won't admit it - he'd go on out and cut the wire." [245]

Nothing prepared Mojave management for the popularity of a lonely phone booth. Pacific

Bell's right-of-way for the phone booth expired in 1992, and the company hadn't bothered to

renew it. The line wasn't very profitable, and much of the need for the cross-desert telephone

link had been eliminated when a microwave tower was installed further south, leaving the

Mojave Phone Booth at the end of a long line of poles.

With the increased notoriety of the booth and the extensive activity at the site, the NPS grew

ill at ease. In early May, park staff happened upon a campfire at the booth, blazing away

unattended. This was the final straw: Park Service officials "had a chat" with Pac-Bell and

encouraged the phone company to remove the booth. Without notice, Pacific Bell hauled the

booth away on May 17, 2000, leaving the counterculture in mourning and the press writing

requiems for the "loneliest phone booth on Earth." [246]

The Park Service was deluged with emails, phone calls, and letters from outraged supporters

of the telephone booth. Daniels posted Superintendent Martin's park phone number and email

address on his website, and exhorted booth supporters to call: "Do it. Do it. Do it till you're

satisfied." [247] Many pro-booth correspondents pointed out the appearance of hypocrisy:

"[I]sn't this a form of recreation? I thought our system of National Parks was for recreational

use?" [248] Almost all protested NPS claims of environmental damage in the area. Some

took issue with other parts of the boilerplate NPS reply, which charged booth visitors with

bringing decorative white quartz rock to the site and interpreted a note that one user left at

the booth reminding visitors to the keep the area clean as evidence of the volume of trash left

behind by visitors. [249] Others were threats, including one bomb threat that sounded serious

enough to prompt the Park Service to call the Federal Bureau of Investigation. [250] Many

supporters attempted to verbalize their affections for the booth: "It had

SOMETHING...something about it was almost mysterious." [251] "Folks...had a possibility

to get out for a while from their every day life..." [252] "I'll probably be mourning its death

on and off for the rest of my life." [253] The rhetoric of loss, while exaggerated, seemingly
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi6.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:50 PM]

reflects a real depth of feeling about the phone booth. The NPS did receive a small number

of letters in support of its action, from the National Parks Conservation Association and other

individuals who resented the booth as a man-made intrusion inconsistent with the features

that were supposed to exist in national parks. [254]

The furor took a considerable time to die down. Almost two years after the booth's removal,

the superintendent continued to receive several booth-related emails a week. The incident

and the subsequent reaction after the booth was removed illustrate the difficulties posed to

the Park Service by the history of the eastern Mojave as a working landscape. When applied

to a place that had long been managed for multiple uses, the NPS mission of preservation and

protection can seem unduly restrictive to users wishing little resistance to their exercise of

unlimited freedom in the form of worshiping a quirky phone booth on public lands.

Illustration 11 - The first cross at this location was constructed in 1934. This cross

was the focus of a lawsuit between the NPS and the ACLU. (Photo by Eric Nystrom,

2001.)

The Park Service encountered a similarly furious reaction when it announced plans to remove

another odd cultural item in the Mojave National Preserve. This time, the outcome was

different, and the item in question was saved. In 1934, the Death Valley chapter of the

Veterans of Foreign Wars constructed a wooden cross atop a pile of rocks along Cima Road.

As an adjacent sign explained, the memorial was intended to honor "the dead of all wars."

[256] The site was the location of occasional resident get-togethers as well as regular Easter

sunrise services, and became known as "Sunrise Rock." The sign and the cross both fell

victim to vandalism, but area residents reconstructed the cross each time it was damaged. The

current version, some eight feet of iron pipe welded to bolts sunk in holes drilled into the

granite rock, was constructed by Henry Sandoz, who takes care of the area in memory of his

late friend, J. Riley Bembry, who helped construct the original cross. BLM apparently paid

little attention to the cross, which was only one of several on BLM desert lands, and the Park

Service took a similarly laissez-faire attitude toward the memorial after the park was

established. In May 1999, a Buddhist monk attempted to receive permission to construct a

stupa on the site. Citing their eventual intention to remove the cross, the park denied the

monk's request. [257]
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi6.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:50 PM]

In 1999, after he left the Park Service, former Mojave employee Frank Buono contacted the

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Southern California and informed them about the

existence of the cross. On October 6, 1999, the ACLU formally requested removal of the

cross, and threatened to sue if their demand was not met. In compliance with Section 106 of

the National Historic Preservation Act, NPS Historian Mark Luellen from the Pacific Great

Basin Support Office spent several days in early November 1999 researching the history of

the cross. The item's dual purpose, both religious and as a memorial, plus the fact that it had

been reconstructed several times, made its eligibility for the National Register of Historic

Places extremely doubtful. It looked like the cross might have to go, but Preserve

management dragged their feet on the actual removal. The action would certainly be

extremely unpopular with local residents, so there seemed to be no advantage in hurrying the

situation. [258]

While the Park Service delayed action, word of the pressure to remove the cross spread.

Kathy Davis, San Bernardino County Supervisor for the area, sent Martin a letter urging

retention of the memorial. In January 2000, Assistant DOI Solicitor Larry Bradfish sent the

ACLU more information about the cross in response to the latter's request. When the ACLU

again contacted Bradfish in July 2000 to see if action had taken place, the group was

informed that Preserve officials decided not to do anything about the cross. The ACLU

repeated its threat to sue in a letter to the director of the National Park Service in early

August, noting that the area could be made a forum for free expression or the cross could be

temporarily built each year under permit for specific religious ceremonies, as at Easter sunrise

services at Grand Canyon National Park. Noting both that case law was overwhelmingly clear

that the cross would have to go and that any court would probably assess damages against

government employees who knew about the cross but did nothing about it, the ACLU

declared its intent to sue if action was not taken by early October 2000. [259]

The threat to pursue damages against individual employees caught the attention of Mojave

National Preserve's management team, and Martin decided reluctantly in October that the

cross would have to come down. The Park Service informed the ACLU of its decision, and

stated that the cross would be removed by the end of the year. In the meantime, newspapers

picked up the story, and angry locals prompted Rep. Jerry Lewis to address the issue. In

December 2000, Lewis added a rider to a fiscal year 2001 appropriations bill that prohibited

the Park Service from using any federal money to remove the cross; in other words, the NPS

could not take action on government time. This granted the cross a year-long reprieve, but in

March 2001 the ACLU filed suit to have the matter resolved in court. [260]

The Preserve was caught between the ACLU lawsuit and federal action taken by Jerry Lewis.

Park employees, including Martin, gave depositions in the case, and the Department of the

Interior's Solicitor's office represented the park and DOI employees named in the suit. In

August 2001, the cross was a topic on national television show "CBS Sunday Morning,"

which helped gain nationwide publicity, then in December 2001, Lewis added a rider to the

FY 2002 Defense appropriations bill, which made the cross a national memorial in honor of

veterans of World War I and allocated $10,000 to create a plaque for the site. Cross

supporters believed that the area's designation as a national memorial, equivalent to national

battlefields with their rows of crosses, would have an effect on the ACLU lawsuit, but the

organization contended that the suit would continue as planned. In summer 2002, the

Preserve awaited word from NPS offices in Washington, D.C., to begin action on the new

memorial, when U.S. District Court Judge Robert Timlin ruled in favor of the ACLU,

declaring that the cross constitutes "a message of endorsement of religion" by the federal

government. Judge Timlin ordered the cross removed, though he did not set a deadline. The

Justice Department, backed by Lewis, asked for a delay and guidance in order to comply with

both the ruling and the Congressional directive declaring the cross a national memorial.
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi6.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:50 PM]

Lewis began negotiations to transfer the cross and the land around it to Henry and Wanda

Sandoz, nearby residents who take care of the cross, in exchange for land elsewhere in the

Preserve owned by the couple. In February 2003, the Department of Justice declared its

intention to appeal the ruling of the District Court, but advised the NPS to cover the cross

with a tarp until the situation is resolved. [261]

The controversy over the cross on Sunrise Rock illustrates the difficulties for the Park Service

that happen when the agency finds itself at the middle of a struggle over contested meanings

of a public symbol. To local residents, the cross was a religious symbol, and a patriotic

tribute to America's veterans. It also served as a source of local identity, giving residents a

focal point around which to gather and to rally. While the phone booth attracted a

constituency made up mostly of outsiders, local residents argued to keep the cross intact.

Lewis took his constituents's concerns seriously, and the cross, preserved as a national

memorial inside Mojave National Preserve, would certainly have been removed without his

actions. Both the Mojave Phone Booth and the cross on Sunrise Rock highlight how different

groups find meaning in curious artifacts in Mojave National Preserve, and how the Park

Service frequently ends up in the middle of conflicts over which interpretation triumphs in

the end.

While only a handful of parks have ever become embroiled in disputes over publicly

displayed religious symbols, every park must concern itself with personnel issues and

maintenance of park facilities. The basic administration of a park is not glamorous, but

human resources and maintenance are both essential parts of the foundation of the park.

Personnel management at Mojave National Preserve was guided by Marcia Schramm from

the establishment of the park until her departure in September 2002. Schramm brought up-todate human resources solutions to the problem of hiring and retaining a diverse and

productive park staff. In 1997, all employees attended a week-long training session on

Stephen Covey's "Seven Habits of Highly Effective People," and all members of the

management team received diversity training. [262] Marcia Schramm represented Mojave

National Preserve on the Pacific-West Region's Equal Opportunity Diversity Advisory

Committee throughout her tenure. Schramm and other managers formulated a diversity plan

in 1997-1998, utilizing the regional committee's plan as a model. The plan's focus was for the

Preserve workforce to "reflect the diversity of the American population." The document

outlined a series of objectives and strategies to achieve those objectives, including conducting

more recruiting among underrepresented groups and creating a plan to enhance the quality of

work life. [263] The park was very successful in hiring more diverse candidates in both its

seasonal hires and in additions to the permanent park staff. For example, in fiscal year 1999,

seven out of eight temporary hires and four out of six permanent employees were either

women or minorities, and the following year the statistic was four out of six temporary and

six of six permanent hires. [264]

The employee geography of Mojave National Preserve, which sees more than half of all

personnel clustered in Barstow, and the rest distributed in or near the park at Baker, Needles,

Hole-in-the-Wall, and Kelso, is not conducive to maintaining good headquarters/field

relationships. In recognition, the Preserve administration took many concrete steps to forge

all employees into a team, and to increase headquarters/field employee communication. The

tradition of having an all-employee campout in the park every year, started in the wake of the

Dollar Budget, became an excellent way for park staff to come together in a team spirit.

Other steps, such as ensuring field employee participation on the Work-Life Issues

Committee and development of an internal park website, also helped bring all of the

employees closer together. Mojave National Preserve established the Work-Life Issues

Committee in FY1998 to address issues of concern to park employees and to help make the

Mojave workplace a better place, in keeping with the diversity plan's goal to retain a more
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi6.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:50 PM]

diverse workforce. The committee tackled issues such as improving park housing for field

employees and creating a park-wide safety plan. [265] Schramm's use of modern humanresources practices, such as addressing the issue of diversity in the workplace, ensuring total

employee participation in team building exercises, and formation and ongoing use of an

employee-led work-life committee, contributed positively to the employee culture at the

Preserve.

Mojave National Preserve's maintenance operations can also be described as applying current

best practice to the situations faced by the new park. Mojave explicitly learned the lessons

from the experiences of other parks. The Preserve consciously attempted to avoid creating

any more facilities that require maintenance in the park itself, and instead contracted its

vehicle maintenance and other work to reputable outside vendors. Likewise, the maintenance

yards themselves were located in a former CalTrans yard in Baker, where suitable facilities

already existed and the Preserve therefore avoided the cost of new construction. Nonetheless,

when park facilities were in need of work, the maintenance was done with the goal of fixing

the problem completely, as evidenced by the comprehensive overhauls received by the two

main campgrounds. The maintenance team of the Preserve is also noted for innovative

solutions to enhance park facilities.

Illustration 12 - Solar panels power the ranger station at Hole-in-the-Wall. (Photo by

Eric Nystrom, 2001.)

The park campgrounds at Mid Hills and Hole-in-the-Wall were inherited from the Bureau of

Land Management, who constructed them in the 1960s. [266] When the Park Service took

over the campgrounds, the Hole-in-the-Wall site had been recently overhauled and was in

good shape, but the Mid Hills facility was in desperate need of repair. In a multi-year project,

the table tops and benches, fire rings, vault toilets, campsite markers, interpretive displays,

and gravel roads were replaced or refinished at Mid Hills, and new trash cans and an

informative bulletin board were installed at Hole-in-the-Wall. The water systems at both

campgrounds were also subjected to major overhauls. BLM did not regularly check the water

quality at Mid Hills, and when the park first checked the water, it tested positive for e.coli

bacteria, because of a contaminated water storage tank. This got the attention of the Regional

Director, who made it a priority to get the water system completely overhauled and replaced,

a task completed by 1999. At Hole-in-the-Wall, water lines running to the campground and

the fire center were replaced, and the process of upgrading the water lines in the campground

itself is underway as of 2002. [267]
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi6.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:50 PM]

Illustration 14 - The park's official logo depicts

stylized representations of the Mojave

landscape. (Logo courtesy Mojave National

Preserve.)

Illustration 13 - A three-dimensional iron Joshua tree casts shadows upon one of

Mojave National Preserve's six entrance monuments. (Photo by Eric Nystrom, 2001.)

Maintenance needs often dovetailed with measures to better protect park resources. A series

of measures upgrading the visitors' parking lot and shade shelter at Zzyzx included

installation of raven-proof trash cans, to avoid adding to the numbers of exotic predators

feeding on baby desert tortoises. At Kelso Dunes, an upgrade program resulted in similar

armored trash cans, new vault toilets to eliminate issues with human waste, a fence to reduce

the number of trails across the sensitive dunes, and an oiled road, to keep dust levels down

and increase the Preserve's air quality. These and other maintenance tasks were largely

accomplished by Mojave's small regular maintenance staff when possible, assisted by the park

fire crew if needed. [268]

In 1997 and 1998, Administrative Officer Dave

Paulissen coordinated a partnership with Sandia

National Laboratory and Southern California

Edison to get a solar-photovoltaic generation

system to replace a noisy propane-powered

generator at the visitors' center at Hole-in-theWall. The new Hole-in-the-Wall fire center was

also powered by sunlight. These systems promote

the use of green energy, and may provide an

example to park inholders, most of whom have to

rely on generators for power. [249]

The Preserve's administration approached even

seemingly minor tasks with a participatory spirit.

As a new park, Mojave had no insignia for

letterhead and official patches. The park sponsored

a design contest for the logo. Jim Vanderford and

Jeff Garrett, both employees of Lake Mead NRA,

each earned $200 for their collaboration on the

winning symbol. Administration also had to create
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi6.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:50 PM]

entrance monuments for the six major entrances to the Preserve. In a creative attempt to

increase community identification with the park and transcend typical wooden signs, Mojave

held a design competition for the new monuments. The winning entry, announced in 1997,

garnered a $1,000 prize for the artist, Jodie Peterson of the Denver Service Center. The

monuments were installed in 1999, and each feature a three dimensional iron Joshua Tree

that casts shadows on the classic desert-colored backgrounds. [270]

Though management teams, personnel issues, and maintenance operations are not the

flashiest aspects of Mojave National Preserve (or any other park), they play integral roles in

the ongoing functioning of the park. A close study of all three at Mojave reveals similar

themes: cutting edge theory applied to everyday practice, close-knit groups to emphasize

teamwork, creative and innovative partnerships to reduce costs and protect resources, and

important flexibility to deal with the myriad of unique and common issues facing the park on

a regular basis.

<<< Previous <<< Contents >>> Next >>>

moja/adhi/adhi6.htm

Last Updated: 05-Apr-2004
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi7.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:52 PM]

Mojave

Administrative History

CHAPTER SEVEN:

VISITOR SERVICES

Much of the management of Mojave National Preserve takes place out of the direct public

eye. Park visitors see only the tip of the employee iceberg. Those rangers who do directly

interact with park patrons generally come from two of the Preserve's administrative divisions.

Some are law enforcement rangers, in charge of protecting park visitors and the resources of

the Preserve. Others are interpretive rangers, responsible for educating the public about

Mojave National Preserve. Both law enforcement rangers and interpretive personnel are

common to nearly all NPS units, but both job types at Mojave National Preserve have

unusual features because of the size of the park and its proximity to urban areas.

After the Dollar Budget threat passed, one of the first priorities for the park was

establishment of a ranger program. The departure of Bill Blake and the seasonal rangers left

the Preserve virtually unprotected. Sean McGuinness was stationed at Wrangell-St. Elias

National Park and Preserve before being chosen as Mojave's Chief Ranger. Upon his arrival,

he was placed in charge of all visitor services. The management team allocated money for

three law enforcement rangers and two more interpretive rangers to assist Kirsten Talken. As

Mojave National Preserve tried to reinvigorate a dormant ranger program, the law

enforcement and interpretive challenges seemed daunting. [271]

Resource and Visitor Protection

At Mojave National Preserve, the challenges posed both by urban growth in the Southwest

and by the compromises inherent in the park's formation fall squarely on the shoulders of the

law enforcement ranger corps. Mojave is a "nowhere between two somewheres," and it is

these "somewheres" — specifically the greater Los Angeles and Las Vegas metropolitan

areas — that contribute to most of the workload for Mojave's law enforcement rangers.

Speeding motorists, clandestine drug labs, graffiti, and theft and damage of natural resources

result from Mojave's urban proximity. Other incidents have resulted from the railroads and

freeways that run through and adjacent to park lands, connecting the sprawling urban areas.

Citizen attitudes toward the desert ecosystem of Mojave National Preserve complicate

management even further. Many Americans viewed the desert as a wasteland, a mindset that

did little to discourage illegal OHV use and illegal dumping. The history of low-key BLM

management left its own legacy, further complicating the job of Mojave's rangers. Perhaps

the biggest challenge of all was posed by the park's vast size - precisely how does one

effectively patrol a 1.6 million acre park with only a handful of rangers?

Situated between two interstate freeways and between two major metropolitan areas, Mojave

National Preserve endures a tremendous amount of road traffic that uses paved park roads as

shortcuts. Much of this traffic travels between the Palm Springs and Twentynine Palms areas

and Las Vegas. These visitors usually speed through the park, typically along Kelbaker and

Kelso-Cima roads. Half of Mojave's ranger vehicles are outfitted with radar, and rangers

watch carefully for violators as they patrol the park. Despite the fact that Mojave's posted

speed limit of 55 miles per hour permits travel through Mojave faster than in most national
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi7.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:52 PM]

parks, some visitors have been clocked at speeds half again as fast. In a typical example,

Ranger Tim Duncan issued three tickets to motorists traveling 87mph, 70mph, and 80mph

within a period of two hours on a single day in November 2001. Speeds in excess of 90mph

are periodically detected. [272] Rangers also issue tickets for other typical traffic violations,

such as accidents and disregarded stop signs, as well as more park-related violations such as

"travel off a designated route." [273] The heavy emphasis that rangers at Mojave National

Preserve must place on traffic stops and other sorts of work more typical of police forces in

order to ensure public safety highlights the challenge posed to the ranger corps by Mojave's

urban proximity. [274]

One of the most dangerous consequences of Mojave's nearness to urban areas is the use of

the park by illegal narcotics manufacturers and drug dealers. Manufacture of illegal

methamphetamine, often referred to as "crystal meth," has posed a considerable problem to

the park. Meth is a synthetic drug, and the manufacturing process emits strong odors, which

make labs easily detectable in urban areas. Abandoned sites in rural areas with little

supervision but easy access to urban markets pose ideal conditions for methamphetamine

manufacturers. Mojave's abandoned mine sites contain buildings and debris, which help meth

manufacturers hide evidence of their activities. People associated with illegal drugs are

usually heavily armed, and pose a substantial threat to the personal safety of law enforcement

rangers or park visitors who come into contact with them.

On three separate occasions in October and November 1999, Ranger Sean Isham discovered

large cardboard boxes with empty pseudoephedrine bottles. Twice these were found near the

junction of Nipton Road and I-15, and once along a primitive road on the south side of Clark

Mountain. Some human hairs were taken from the boxes as evidence. The presence of empty

bulk pseudoephedrine containers suggests the presence of meth labs in the area, as over-thecounter pseudoephedrine can be cooked into crystal meth. [275]

Even more problematic than the use of abandoned mine sites by drug producers is the

potential for mobile meth labs in the Preserve. In April 2001, an NPS ranger contacted a

confidential informant who had observed on several occasions a suspected mobile

methamphetamine lab, contained in an old Ryder truck. The informant also made note of the

unsavory types that were associated with the truck, and pointed out that they had motorcycles

and were heavily armed, with shotguns, rifles, and perhaps handguns as well. The same

informant had seen what might have been a nighttime landing at the Lanfair airstrip, and

overheard discussions about "tak[ing] a load to Las Vegas." The NPS ranger investigated the

airstrip and found tire tracks, several weeks old, including some that might have come from a

light plane. Clearly, the possibility of drug trafficking and methamphetamine manufacturing

provides an edge of danger to park employees and visitors. [276]

Park rangers routinely patrol abandoned sites that might be attractive for drug producers, and

have discovered several methamphetamine labs as a result. In February 1998, rangers on

patrol found activity at Rainbow Wells that looked like a drug lab. Mojave received help

from Death Valley NP and the Drug Enforcement Agency in setting up surveillance of the

site. Some two weeks later, authorities raided the site early in the morning and caught Eric

Wilson and Timothy Matthews in the act of producing crystal meth. The agents seized an

arsenal of weapons as well as methamphetamine worth $75,000. Convicted in federal court,

Wilson received a nine-and-one- half-year sentence, while Matthews waits out a twenty year

sentence, neither with the possibility of parole. [277]
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi7.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:52 PM]

Illustration 15 - NPS Rangers caught two suspects manufacturing methamphetamine

in these buildings at the New Trail Mine. (Photo by Eric Nystrom, 2001.)

In February 2001, Rangers Kirk Gebicke and Chris Jefferson noticed new locks on buildings

at the New Trail Mine during a routine patrol of the area. The next day, as snow began to

fall, Gebicke and Tim Duncan went to saw off the locks, and met four men in a pickup truck

leaving the New Trail Mine. The rangers searched their vehicle, but found only camping

equipment. The suspects also yielded a key that fit the padlocks the quartet had installed on

mine buildings. The rangers proceeded to the mine, where they found considerable evidence

suggesting the presence of an illegal drug lab at the site. NPS rangers guarded the area until

the arrival of county drug task force members the following day. A subsequent search of the

area revealed a considerable amount of drug-making equipment and ten gallons of pure

methamphetamine oil, valued at more than $50,000, ready to be converted into the drug's

final crystalline form. The area cost $20,000 to clean up, and in 2002, the case remained

under adjudication. [278]

Vandalism and damage of park resources occurs with alarming frequency in the desert.

Vandals deface or steal prehistoric rock art, shoot wildlife, buildings and signs, and

sometimes burn historic structures to the ground. Unintentional damage due to negligence

also causes problems. The Park Service can use a recent statute, known correctly as the "Park

System Resources Protection Act" and informally as "19jj" after its U.S. Code section

number, to recover money to repair park resources damaged by individual or collective

action. The 19jj statute has been used at Mojave National Preserve to exact damages for

wilderness road violations, resource damage due to airplane crashes, and all other incidents

of deliberate or unintentional damage to park resources. [279]

Petty vandalism, conducted by parties unknown for no apparent reason, makes up the bulk of

deliberate damage to park resources, but the park has to handle deliberate destruction of the

environment for economic gain as well. In 1999, a company constructed a microwave tower

just south of I-40, but required access to the site over park roads. After appropriate

compliance documents were completed, the Park Service issued a special use permit, but

stipulated that "no heavy commercial trucks, conveyances, or related construction equipment"

was allowed, and that no improvements, such as blading, were permitted on the access road.
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi7.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:52 PM]

In September 2000, park rangers noticed that the road had been bladed and widened several

feet, which prompted the park to revoke the special use permit. The company did not admit

wrongdoing at first and battled NPS and BLM attempts to exact restitution and cancel the

project, but the DOI agencies prevailed in mid-2002. [280] In late July and early August

2001, a telephone company widened and graded more than three miles of road along a right

of way to a microwave tower in the park, and built a new building at the site without NPS

clearance. More than one mile of this road was a cherry stem into a designated wilderness

area, and located in critical desert tortoise habitat. The Park Service is seeking compensation

for the damages under 19jj. [281]

Mojave National Preserve has had to battle what is traditionally an urban problem - graffiti.

Some visitors are amused by the spray-painted graffiti in the middle of Kelbaker Road south

of Baker. In 2002, Ranger Bob Conway apprehended four suspects shortly after they

allegedly used blue spray paint to cover some boulders with graffiti inside the Preserve. In

cases such as these, the Park Service again can use the 19jj statute to get restitution for the

full cost of the damages.

Illustration 16 - Mojave National Preserve has to face typically urban problems such

as this graffiti on Kelbaker Road. (Photo by Eric Nystrom, 2001.)

Like many large parks, the Preserve has faced environmental damage resulting from the crash

of a small airplane and the subsequent search and salvage operation. On March 8, 2000, a

Piper Supercub flying from Las Vegas to Chino, California, was reported missing. The pilot,

Robert Bogle, was the only occupant, and was last seen by a companion aircraft near Primm,

Nevada. San Bernardino County Sheriffs, the Civil Air Patrol, and the California Highway

Patrol searched for the missing plane and found it in the Ivanpah Valley, about 3 miles inside

park boundaries. The next day, the plane wreckage was investigated by the sheriff's office,

the county coroner, and the National Transportation Safety Board in helicopters and ground

vehicles. The pilot's body was recovered, and on March 13 a salvage company hauled away

what was left of the plane. During the recovery efforts, three helicopters landed at the site,

and at least two vehicles drove straight to the site from Morning Star Mine Road, a distance

of more than a quarter of a mile.
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi7.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:52 PM]

At the crash site, on a gently sloping bajada near the Morning Star Mine, there was a small

burn and debris field, measuring only 75 feet by 39 feet. The crash burned 4 yuccas, 3 small

barrel cacti, and two large creosote bushes. Some hydrocarbons and traces of heavy metals

contaminated the soil, but did not extend down farther than about one foot. During the

recovery/salvage process, vehicles drove over many plants, although reports indicate that the

drivers may have tried to miss the biggest ones. There was no apparent wildlife damage,

although the area is designated critical habitat for the desert tortoise. Total cost of

replacement of the plants damaged was $4,760, and the projected total costs of the operation

to restore the area, including minor landscape recontouring and administrative time, was

$24,691.45. The NPS decided to pursue a claim under 19jj for the amount from the insurer of

the airplane, but as of this time the claim is still under adjudication. The Ivanpah airplane

crash highlights the appropriate use of the 19jj statute by the Preserve to receive

compensation for all damages to park resources, no matter how noble the cause may have

been. [228]

Illustration 17 - The Union Pacific Railroad bisects Mojave National Preserve and

creates unusual challenges for park rangers. (Photo by Eric Nystrom, 2002.)

The Union Pacific Railroad (UP) bisects the Preserve, and brings special challenges to law

enforcement rangers. The railroad is a target for vandals, and after the terrorist attacks of

September 11, 2001, rangers paid even closer attention to any unusual activity near the

railroad. Park rangers assist railroad police with any problems they might have along the

Preserve portion of the UP line, and railroad personnel reciprocate by informing the rangers

about any suspicious activity they might see. This positive, though informal, working

relationship caused NPS rangers to assist railroad police apprehend thieves in the park.

Burglars frequently boarded freight trains in the UP yards at Yermo, and broke into shipping

containers while the train was moving. When the heavy freights slowed as they ascended the

Cima grade, the bandits threw merchandise from the train. Accomplices collected it, loaded

the contraband into waiting trucks, and hauled it away. The railroad lost more than one

million dollars a month at one point from this kind of theft, but heavy enforcement by UP

police and park rangers put a stop to the practice.

Rangers also have to worry about the railroad as a catalyst for other problems. On March 4,
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi7.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:52 PM]

2001 park personnel responded to a fire blazing in a pile of debris near the tracks. Footprints

at the site suggested that the fire was deliberately set, and that the perpetrator escaped by

jumping on a train climbing the hill. [283] This incident stands as an illustration of how the

presence of the railroad can encourage undesirable activity in the park.

The trains themselves pose a hazard to the Preserve. Shortly before noon on January 12,

1997, Union Pacific westbound freight train #6205 lost control coming down the Cima grade

and overturned at the Hayden siding. Trains ordinarily utilize engine braking to keep speeds

below 20 miles per hour coming down the hill, but this time the engineer accidentally shut

off the diesels. Air brakes, ordinarily sufficient to stop such a train on a normal grade, did

little to slow the three locomotives and seventy five hopper cars full of bulk corn on the steep

hill. The train reached 72 miles per hour just before sixty eight of the train's cars derailed and

spilled their contents along the tracks. Ranger Brian Willbond described the scene as "a

fantastic pile of rubble fifty feet high, with metal and corn everywhere." The railroad hired a

salvage company to clean up the mess, but some loose corn was left behind, leading park

personnel to worry about the effect of the increased food supply on the raven population. The

wreck also suggested how much worse things could have been. "Tank cars are designed to

survive a crash, unlike those boxcars," Ranger Tim Duncan observed, "but that doesn't mean

they would." In the wake of the crash, the National Transportation Safety Board highlighted

the danger that the super-steep downhill grade at Cima posed to heavy modern trains. In the

event of a failure of the engine braking system on a train, the engineer has very little time to

apply the air brakes before the train picks up so much speed that it cannot be stopped. The

incidents prompted the railroad to make procedural changes to hopefully give train engineers

more time to stop if an engine failure occurs, but the potential for future problems remains

along Cima Hill because of the steep track slope. [284]

Mojave National Preserve sits between Interstate 40 and Interstate 15, a circumstance of

geography that has direct and indirect implications for the park. The NPS has mutual-aid

agreements with the San Bernardino County Sheriff, the BLM, and local fire and emergency

medical service agencies. Park personnel response to highway incidents pose a substantial

drain on NPS resources, although the relationship also benefits the park when emergencies

occur inside its boundaries. Cargo traffic on the freeways poses a potential threat to the park's

landscape. If a vehicle drove off of the right shoulder of northbound I-15 or westbound I-40,

the damage would be within park territory. So far, however, no incidents of damage to park

lands have taken place in this fashion.

Easy freeway access was an indirect catalyst for one of the most significant crimes Mojave

law enforcement rangers have faced to date. From April to August 1995, Gene LeFave and

his son, Louis LeFave, dumped ninety-seven drums of hazardous waste in the desert on NPS,

BLM, and privately-owned land, rather than pay the $1,000 per barrel cost for legal disposal.

Under cover of darkness, the LeFaves brought 55 gallon drums of waste products, including

solvents, rubber, and adhesive glues, from their Las Vegas-based epoxy manufacturing

business to a series of sites off Nipton Road, and pushed the barrels out of trucks onto the

ground, where some split open. Most of the six sites used by the LeFaves in Mojave National

Preserve were in washes, where the waste could have contaminated water supplies. Some

small wildlife was found dead, stuck in the residue, by CDF&G officials. An interagency

team, including federal and state law enforcement officials, apprehended Louis LeFave and a

seventeen year old boy in the process of dumping more waste. In federal court, Louis LeFave

was fined $40,000 and sentenced to two and one-half years in prison, while his father, Gene

LeFave, was fined the same amount and sentenced to almost four years in jail. The Park

Service and BLM spent more than $170,000 cleaning up the dump sites. Chief Ranger Bill

Blake, Martin, and Ranger Eric Inman later accepted the DOI Secretary's Award on behalf of

Mojave National Preserve for the park's role in the investigation and prosecution of the

dumping case. [285]
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi7.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:52 PM]

"Operation Sweet Success" may prove to be just as momentous. Since at least the mid-1980s,

an organized group of Hispanic workers have illegally collected barrel cacti from federal

lands in the desert, including Mojave National Preserve lands near Nipton. These cacti were

cut into pieces and sold to two competing companies in the Los Angeles area, where they

were made into biznaga, a form of cactus candy popular in Mexico. A Department of the

Interior special investigator was in charge of the case against the cactus poachers, and was

assisted by personnel from several agencies, including Mojave National Preserve. Ranger

Tim Duncan participated in raids on the candy facilities in December 1999, and had earlier

helped detain suspects found harvesting cacti on BLM land near Clark Mountain. Agents in

charge of the case estimate that some 15,000 mature barrel cacti were removed from federal

lands in the desert at the behest of the cactus poachers, who knew their activity was illegal

but bragged that they could not be touched because of powerful and influential friends. At a

replacement cost of $50-$200 per cactus, depending on size, the final cost in environmental

damage alone will be substantial. The case is still in adjudication, but the Park Service

intends to seek restitution under the 19jj statute for damage to park resources. [286]

A history of less restrictive management of the desert the BLM posed special challenges to

park rangers once the lands transferred to Park Service control. A substantial problem has

been posed by off-road vehicle and all-terrain vehicle users in the park. Some off-road users,

such as careful four-wheel drive groups, impact the desert only lightly and take pains to

minimize ecological damage. Other all-terrain vehicle users, especially some motorcycle

riders, have caused great damage in parts of the California desert by riding aggressively

across undisturbed land. The BLM acknowledged this fact in the 1980 Desert Plan by setting

aside small portions of the desert as "open play" areas for OHVs, and setting other areas aside

as off limits to off-roaders. Most of the area that became Mojave National Preserve was open

to use by off-highway vehicles, as long as the machines had a "green sticker" and stayed on

established trails or in washes. NPS policy permitted only street-legal vehicles to operate in

the park, thus excluding a large number of motorcycles, ATVs, and dune buggies.

Nonetheless, ATV use in the park continues, albeit at far lower levels than before. In

November 1999, Ranger Sean Isham issued four citations for ATV use in the park in less

than one week. The OHV problem is compounded by the CDPA's decision to establish the

park's western boundary, a wilderness area, adjacent to BLM's Rasor open play area. As a

result, vehicles often stray, accidentally or otherwise, from the open area into the Preserve's

Soda Lake wilderness. Thanksgiving weekend traditionally saw heavy use of the play area by

OHV users. Mojave responded by bringing in SET teams of rangers from other parks to

patrol the boundary. The first SET team secured the area in 1994, and others did so in

succeeding years, although the problem diminished in severity as users were educated about

the regulations. In a typical example, five rangers from Lake Mead NRA patrolled the area

during the 1999 holiday weekend, while Mojave's full ranger force monitored the rest of the

park. The SET team issued five citations and many warnings to errant OHV users. [287]

Sometimes ATV use causes other problems. In November 2000, two boys, 11 and 14 years of

age, were riding ATVs on private land near Fourth of July Canyon. They collided and were

both seriously injured, suffering broken bones, a dislocated hip, and possible spinal injuries

as well. NPS rangers were the first to arrive on scene, and stabilized the victims for over 20

minutes until medical personnel could arrive. The two were both flown by air ambulance to

Las Vegas hospitals. The large distance from the Preserve to the nearest medical care in Las

Vegas means that NPS first responders bear substantial responsibility for initial medical care

in case of emergencies in the park. [288]

Desert users acting according to local custom and less restrictive BLM rules occasionally

found themselves in violation of NPS regulations against firearms. Under BLM, firearms

were allowed in the desert, and casual possession and use of guns was common in the area.
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi7.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:52 PM]

After the shift to NPS management, firearms were only allowed in the park during hunting

season, and only if the carrier was also in possession of a valid hunting license. While overall

firearm use has been reduced significantly from pre-park levels, not all visitors received the

message. In 1999, Ranger Duncan stopped several boys riding ATVs inside the park. When

he followed them back to their campsite, he spoke with the adult in charge, and asked if he

had any guns with him. The man told Duncan that he had a 9mm Glock pistol with him,

which the ranger requested, and kept for the remainder of the interview. Before leaving,

Duncan informed the gentleman of the regulations prohibiting firearms in the park, then

returned the gun and wished him a nice day. This incident illustrates both the commonality of

firearms among park users, and the use of a tolerant and understanding attitude by park

rangers to educate patrons who may not be familiar with the differences between NPS and

BLM regulations. [289]

This system of balanced response is not merely the personal attitude of one humanistic ranger

but is instead a conscious, though informal, policy emanating from Superintendent Martin

and Chief Ranger McGuinness. Realistically, Martin and McGuinness understood that the

move from low-key BLM control to NPS management, which appears intensive in

comparison, would be quite a shock for desert users. Accordingly, the rangers were instructed

to be long on warnings and short on citations at first. This "long leash" would then grow

progressively shorter over the years as users adjusted to the Park Service's rules and

regulations. The policy, though informal, seems to be working well, and long-time rangers

suggest that they have far fewer problems now with firearms and other violations of NPS

policies. [290]

Rangers also help the public in ways more in line with the traditional image of the helpful

and friendly Park Service. In March 1998, a twelve-woman group of Sierra Club campers

were stranded at Mid Hills campground by an unusual rain and snowstorm that buried their

street vehicles. Ranger Tim Terrill, on patrol through the area, found the campers. "All were

well, but most sincerely wished to be elsewhere, particularly somewhere warmer," noted a

local newspaperman. Terrill and other NPS personnel, some using their personal vehicles,

helped ferry the stranded visitors to Baker, where Interpretive Ranger Kirsten Talken helped

them find rooms and food. In all, suggested a local reporter, "a disaster had been averted by

quick action by the Park Service." [291]

Hunting, an unusual practice in national parks outside Alaska, was authorized in Mojave

National Preserve by the CDPA, and is managed jointly by the park and the California

Department of Fish and Game. In the United States, historic precedent has established that

the state has control over wildlife on public land, even federal land, but the Park Service's

Organic Act reserves control of wildlife to the agency inside national parks. The California

Desert Protection Act explicitly reaffirmed that the California Department of Fish and Game

would regulate hunting in Mojave National Preserve. As a result, both California State game

wardens and NPS rangers enforce the hunting rules set by the state. Rangers also enforce

regular park regulations, such as camping restrictions, on hunters in the Preserve when

necessary, since game wardens do not have the authority to address violations of NPS rules.

[292]

An administrative adaptation helps Mojave National Preserve's resource and visitor protection

rangers work most effectively, despite their small numbers and the size of the park. Rather

than divide the rangers into rigidly defined districts, each of the three full time field rangers is

responsible for a "patrol area," consisting of approximately one third of the park. Each ranger

is responsible for knowing the backcountry and problem sites of his designated area

intimately, and must be able to notice any changes that occur and note use patterns. [293] If

rangers working outside their designated patrol area spot something unusual, they share the

information with the appropriate colleague. This "patrol area" structure works well. Because
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi7.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:52 PM]

of low staff levels, it is common to have at least one patrol area without a ranger on duty at

any given time. Rather than leave that area of the part without a ranger presence, the on-duty

rangers scout the heavily used features of the park, no matter what patrol area includes them.

In their own designated areas or elsewhere as necessary, rangers patrol wilderness on foot or,

beginning in April 2002, on horseback. Given the visitation patterns of the Preserve, with

high use of paved roads and very low use of the backcountry, coupled with low ranger

staffing levels, the "patrol area" system is a flexible and intelligent response to a thorny

problem. [294]

Fire is a major threat in Mojave National Preserve. Skeptics unfamiliar with the desert might

wonder if anything exists that can burn, but a quick tour of the park would dispel such

notions. The Mojave ecosystem is not very well adapted to fire, and would take a long time

to recover from even a small conflagration. The presence of exotic grasses, which came to

the desert during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century grazing operations, contribute

to fire concerns. These exotic grasses burn rapidly and ignite very easily, and their perennial

growth pattern allows fuel loads to build up rapidly, especially if the grasses are not being

grazed by cattle or other foragers. Historically, range fires were uncommon, because grazing

prevented fuel loads from becoming dense enough to spread fire rapidly.

BLM established a fire center at Hole-in-the-Wall sometime after systematic development of

the area began in the 1960s. Equipped with rugged heavy wildland fire trucks, the Hole-inthe-Wall center, staffed only during the summer fire season, defended a huge swath of BLM

desert. After passage of the CDPA in 1994, the Hole-in-the-Wall facility was located on NPS

land, but BLM had neither the desire nor the funding to build a new separate facility for its

fire forces. The two agencies agreed to jointly manage the Hole-in-the-Wall center. NPS and

BLM each provided one fire engine and half of the firefighters, shared fiscal responsibility,

and had a single joint manager for both programs. In the first years after the passage of the

CDPA, two BLM fire employees played important roles in the Preserve's fire program. Ken

Smihula, who worked for BLM, served as Mojave's acting Fire Management Officer (FMO),

with support and guidance from Joshua Tree National Park's FMO. James Argon, engine

captain for the BLM crew, assisted the Preserve with the details of getting a new fire

program in place. Between 1995 and 1999, the fire crews averaged 100 wildland calls per

year, on both BLM and NPS land, and an additional 150 calls per year for traffic accidents,

mutual aid responses, medical incidents, and non-wildland fires. After the park received

additional funding in 2001 to increase the level of emergency protection, the park was able to

retain a reduced crew, subject to furlough, throughout the whole year, rather than only during

the peak summer season. The importance of the Hole-in-the-Wall fire center was highlighted

by NPS plans to replace the old facility with a larger one in the same location. Mojave's

fiscal year 2002 budget included more than $1.5 million for the project. [295]

The fire crew at Hole-in-the-Wall is the main source of emergency protection for Preserve

resources, but by no means the only one. All law enforcement rangers in the Preserve are also

trained as emergency medical technicians. [296] Additionally, Mojave NP has created

mutual-aid agreements with all of the emergency response agencies located near the park,

and San Bernardino County Fire Department routinely responded from Baker to incidents in

and near the Preserve, especially for fires larger than the BLM and NPS wildland trucks can

handle. The future of mutual aid in the area of the Preserve, however, may rest

disproportionately on the shoulders of the Park Service. In July 2002, San Bernardino County

Fire Department removed their engine that was stationed at Baker, because inmate crews that

had been manning the rig were no longer available. As a result, the Mojave National Preserve

crew was forced to respond more frequently to emergencies from Baker to the Nevada state

line, adding an additional drain on park resources. Months later, a series of stopgap measures

reopened the station temporarily, but the long-term situation remained tenuous. [297] One of

the single most important structures in the park, the Kelso Depot, received two fire hydrants
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi7.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:52 PM]

and hose boxes during fiscal 1998 as a measure of fire protection, and regular park staff were

trained on how to use the new equipment if a fire broke out at the building. The fire crew has

also served as a source of labor for park projects. For example, the Mojave fire crew, with

supervisors from Lake Mead NRA, tackled exotic tamarisk removal at springs in Mojave,

Death Valley NP, and Lake Mead in 1997. [298]

Initially, Mojave National Preserve's fire programs were managed by Smihula, in cooperation

with Joshua Tree NP's Fire Management Officer. Without a fire management plan in place,

the Preserve conducted a policy of total suppression of wildfires in the park, as required by

Park Service policy. Progress was slow on a fire management plan for the Preserve until

Kristy McMillan was hired as Mojave's FMO in November 1999. [299] Other smaller safety

plans, such as the park's aviation safety plan, were created in the meantime. In terms of fire

preparedness, the Preserve has been lucky — as of 2002, no major wildland fires had swept

the land and threatened park resources.

<<< Previous <<< Contents >>> Next >>>

moja/adhi/adhi7.htm

Last Updated: 05-Apr-2004
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi8.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:54 PM]

Mojave

Administrative History

CHAPTER EIGHT:

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Resource management is an important issue in any park, as the resources, natural or cultural,

are the very justification for any park's existence. At Mojave National Preserve, the unusual

features of the park gave the Resource Management team several major challenges. The park

addressed natural resource management issues, including wilderness, water, animals (both

native and exotic), grazing, land acquisition, and soundscape threats in efforts to maintain the

integrity of the natural features of the land. The Preserve also contains a wealth of cultural

resources, from rock art and an old wagon road to ranching and mining remains. Legacies of

former uses of the eastern Mojave created problems in the form of abandoned mine sites and

hazardous materials, all of which had to be addressed by Mojave's management. The

responses of the park to these situations vividly illustrate both the challenges posed by the

history of human uses of the eastern Mojave and the flexibility and innovation required of

park managers at Mojave National Preserve.

Natural Resources

Almost half of Mojave National Preserve's land base is designated as wilderness, a level of

protection that requires the least intrusive management possible. Wilderness areas in the

Preserve encompass a wide range of terrain, from dry lake playas to sand dunes to more

traditional forested mountains. Wilderness inside the park is unusual for the number of former

roads and routes it contains. San Bernardino County has attempted to claim some of these

routes as traditional roads under RS-2477, which would turn their management over to the

county. The park is resisting the county's claims. RS-2477 was a law passed in 1866 that

granted rights-of-way across unreserved public lands for construction of highways; it was

repealed in 1976. In 1988, Secretary of the Interior Donald Hodel opined that RS-2477 gave

states jurisdiction over even the faintest trails, as long as the trails in question existed before

the act's 1976 repeal. Anti-wilderness activists inspired by the Wise Use movement have

attempted to use RS-2477 as a means of disqualifying lands from wilderness status. In 1996,

three Utah counties bulldozed roads into BLM and NPS wilderness areas, asserting that RS2477 gave them the right to do so, but a federal judge ruled that they were in violation of the

law. The federal judiciary's ruling is a preliminary sign that RS-2477 claims will not stand up

in court, but the status of Mojave National Preserve's wilderness routes has not been formally

determined. [319]

Management of wilderness by the park has been guided by the document "Principles for

Wilderness Management in the California Desert," which was developed by Interior agencies

to articulate a directive of the 1994 Transition Action Plan. The September 1995 report, along

with subsequent additions, articulated basic tenets of wilderness management, including the

"minimum tool" standard. The managers of federal land in the desert recognized key

differences between BLM-managed wilderness and NPS-managed wilderness created by the

CDPA, but pledged that they would work together to create consistent management practices.

[320]
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi8.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:54 PM]

One of the most important tasks of the park's wilderness management program was

determining final wilderness boundaries and posting signs to let users know of the

boundaries' existence. The maps of wilderness included with the CDPA had wilderness

boundaries drawn with heavy marker on copies of fifteen minute topographic maps. This

caused some confusion (as well as flexibility) in determining the exact placement of

wilderness boundaries. However, thin signs identifying areas as wilderness were posted along

road corridors were placed by park rangers very early to provide users with necessary

guidance. Patrolling the vast wilderness areas was no easy task. In 2002, the Preserve

received a temporary detachment of horses from Sequoia/Kings Canyon National Park for

use in the park. The horses were kept at Kessler Springs Ranch after its acquisition by the

Park Service. With proper training, rangers and other park employees could use park horses

to access and patrol wilderness. This represented a tremendous improvement over the former

system, which required rangers to patrol park wilderness on foot, a task complicated by the

large number of wilderness areas in the Preserve and the highly arid environment.

Lack of water is the defining characteristic of deserts, including the Mojave, and

concomitantly, it is one of the Preserve's most precious resources. For a desert, the eastern

Mojave has a large number of water sources, which support a large variety of wildlife.

During the ongoing operations of cattle ranching in the Mojave, grazers "improved" natural

springs and drilled many wells, all with the goal of increasing the amount of water available

for cattle. Wildlife utilized these water sources as well, and it might be surmised that

populations of some species increased due to the larger amount of available water. As the

Park Service received ownership of ranching lands and range improvements, control of these

water sources became a park issue. Many have since been turned off or removed, with the

goal of returning water levels (and dependent wildlife populations) to a "natural" level, but

with nonnative species such as burros, deer, and chukar, as well as native species utilizing

the scarce water, a return to pre-grazing conditions with fewer water sources may be

impossible to attain. Nonetheless, ongoing removal of burros and range improvements

certainly do increase riparian flora and fauna, as some early successes on former grazing

lands near the Kelso Dunes can attest. [321]

Water is also at the core of one of the largest threats to the integrity of the park. Outside the

southern boundary of the Preserve, Cadiz Inc. owns land under which sits an aquifer

estimated to hold more than 600 billion gallons of water. The company proposes to sell the

water to the Metropolitan Water District, the agency that slakes the thirst of greater Los

Angeles. The district would also pump water from the Colorado River into the aquifer at

Cadiz for later use, turning the ground into an enormous subterranean storage reservoir. Little

is known about the aquifer or its connections to water sources inside the Preserve, but

scientists fear a lowering of the water table would dry up springs and seeps throughout the

desert. In 1999, Cadiz Inc. prepared an environmental assessment that was roundly criticized

by the park and other agencies. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) noted that Cadiz Inc.

overestimated the aquifer's recharge rate by "five to twenty five times." The Park Service and

USGS agreed the following year to a revised report that included a system of monitoring

devices to make sure the pumping did no damage to park resources. An additional delay was

introduced to the project when hexavalent chromium, also known as chromium 6, was

discovered in the aquifer's water. Hexavalent chromium is linked to cancer risk, but there is

little agreement on standards for permissible levels of the element in drinking water. It is also

hugely expensive to remove from drinking water, which put a major dent in the economics of

the project. On August 29, 2002, the Department of the Interior approved Cadiz Inc.'s

environmental review. Opponents of the project, including Dianne Feinstein, focused their

attention on the board of the Metropolitan Water District, the last agency whose approval was

necessary for the project to go forward. On October 8, 2002, the water district voted, by the

narrowist of margins, to halt the project. For all its problems, the project was a tremendous

threat to the integrity of the park. If the Cadiz project dried up Mojave springs, all manner of
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi8.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:54 PM]

plants and animals in the Preserve would have suffered the consequences. [322]

Mojave National Preserve harbors a tremendous array of native and exotic fauna, small and

large, common and rare. In sheer numbers, the tiniest park residents, including microbes and

fungi that help make up cryptogramic desert soils, are extensive but poorly understood. The

same could be said for most of the park's smallest fauna, including common insects like the

black widow spider and insects found nowhere else, such as a small cricket that lives only on

the Kelso Dunes. The Preserve was named one of America's top Globally Important Bird

Areas by the American Bird Conservancy in 2001, in recognition of the important habitat it

provides. [323]

Of the diverse fauna found in Mojave National Preserve, no creature receives as much

attention as Gopherus agassizii, the desert tortoise. In the late 1980s, scientists witnessed an

alarming drop in desert tortoise populations throughout the Mojave, including in the East

Mojave National Scenic Area, and obtained listing of the tortoise as a threatened species. The

tortoise is extremely sensitive to changes in habitat, a fact noted in the 1994 Desert Tortoise

Recovery Plan, and bioregional planning and early Mojave National Preserve planning efforts

were tied in part to the need to manage the desert tortoise's habitat as a functioning

ecosystem. Since the creation of Mojave National Preserve, nearly all decisions relating to the

land have taken the desert tortoise into account to some extent. Superintendent Martin noted

that it was not park policy to manage resources for the benefit of a single species, but the vast

array of management decisions called for by the Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan create a de

facto situation where the needs of the tortoise seem to dominate management decisions. [324]

Even unconventional projects required park staff time for desert tortoise monitoring and

compliance. For example, when Jonathan Mostow, director of the movie "Breakdown,"

wanted to film portions of his suspense movie in the park, Doug Scovill was detailed to

ensure that the movie cast did not harm a single desert tortoise. "They were very cooperative,

but any time they went off the road I would go and inspect the area," remembered Scovill.

The crew spent three twelve-hour days filming in the Preserve, and Scovill was with them

the entire time to protect the endangered tortoise. [325]

While the desert tortoise received complete management attention to attempt to save the

species, the history of another native park species, the bighorn sheep, was more complex.

Bighorn population levels were historically very low, and in the late 1800s the state of

California made it illegal to hunt them. Enhanced water supplies in the desert, probably

including water intended for cattle grazing but also specially-designed guzzlers intended for

bighorn sheep, allowed the population to grow, especially in the area near the Old Dad

Mountains. By the mid-1980s, there were enough bighorn in that area that BLM captured

some of them and introduced them to other parts of the Mojave where bighorn had vanished.

In 1987, California Department of Fish & Game went one step further and began to issue a

very limited number of hunting permits every year for bighorn sheep. In a break with

tradition, all of the bighorn tags save one are awarded by computer-generated random lottery,

the reserved tag is auctioned off to the highest bidder, often for more than $100,000. [326]

Bighorn embody the kind of awkward management dilemmas found in the Mojave National

Preserve: removing guzzlers would create more natural conditions in the park but would

probably lead to the decline of the bighorn population, which the park is obliged to protect at

natural and healthy levels. However, the loss of the surplus bighorn would likely emphasize

hunting impacts on those left and might create a situation where the sheep need to be

protected from hunting again. This analysis seems ironic in light of the fact that in the

opinion of some CDPA activists, bighorn hunting, rather than deer or game bird hunting, was

the real reason behind Mojave's "preserve" designation. [327]
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi8.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:54 PM]

Bighorn have been at the center of several management complications for Mojave staff. The

most serious incident took place in 1995, when thirty eight bighorn drowned in a freak

accident at a guzzler. [328] Jerry Lewis and anti-park forces called the tragedy a result of

Park Service mismanagement, and used the incident as justification for the Dollar Budget.

Lambing protections for bighorn in the Clark Mountain area may put the park at odds with a

vocal group of rock climbers, who consider Clark Mountain extremely good climbing terrain.

"Discovered" in 1992 by rock climber Randy Leavitt, who later published a guidebook to

climbing the area, Clark Mountain was described by a national rock climbing magazine as

"one of the most awe-inspiring and intimidating sport cliffs in America." Prior to the CDPA's

designation of the area as wilderness, some climbing bolts were installed in the rock, but no

new installations have been allowed since then. [329]

Most of Mojave National Preserve faces a four-hoofed problem that has its roots in the

human history of the area and will remain a headache for the park because of legislated

sentiment for the Old West. Burros, a descendant of the Sumerian ass, are hearty, easy to

train creatures, features which made them attractive to desert prospectors. Modern wild

burros are the descendants of animals who broke free or were turned loose in the desert by

miners unable to pay for feed. Burros pose a considerable challenge to other desert dwellers:

they will take control of water sources and prevent other animals, such as cattle and bighorn

sheep, from using them, and consume a tremendous amount of forage that other animals,

including the desert tortoise, depend upon. As recently as the late 1960s, ranchers kept the

burro population under control by shooting animals that threatened their cattle's water or

forage supply. [330]

Animal humane societies, worried about a decline of sightings of wild horses, pushed for

Congress to protect the invasive animals on public lands as a reminder of the Old Western

past. In 1971, Congress passed the Wild and Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act, which

formally mandated the continuing existence of such animals on BLM land where they

already were present. BLM took over management of the issue from ranchers, but was

reluctant to kill the burros because of pressure from animal rights groups. Burros are as

concupiscent as rabbits - herd growth rates approach 20% annually - and the population

exploded under BLM management.

The Park Service was under no obligation to allow burros to remain in the park, as the agency

is exempt from the Wild Horse and Burro Act. NPS regulations require the park to act as a

functioning ecosystem, and the impacts of burros were both negative and substantial.

Accordingly, the Preserve made the burro control program one of its top priorities. One

statistic illustrates the size of the burro problem: BLM estimated that 130 burros constituted

the maximum-sized herd that could exist in the eastern Mojave without ecosystem damage,

but a NPS burro census conducted in October 1996 found over 1,500 animals in the park.

Managers were so alarmed by the burro problem that the park used $100,000 of base budget

money in 1997 and again in 1998 to initiate the burro removal program. Doug Scovill,

promoted to chief of resources after the Dollar Budget crisis had passed, hired Chris Stubbs

to tackle the burro problem. The park applied for Natural Resources Preservation Program

money, and received $900,000 over three years to continue the program through FY01.

Beginning in 1997, the Preserve utilized a combination of water trapping and helicopter

roundups to capture burros, snaring 3,000 animals over five years. BLM budgets $1,000 per

burro to remove the animals from lands it controls, but Mojave National Preserve

accomplished the task for about $300 per burro, largely because of the success of relatively

inexpensive water trapping facilitated by Mojave's extensive ranching infrastructure.

Wholesale slaughter of the animals was not a politically feasible option. BLM agreed to take

a limited number into its adoption program, and the park was able to place 1998's group of

captured burros with a private agency which agreed to sell them to the public. Beginning in

1998, Mojave National Preserve entered into an agreement with the Fund for Animals, which
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi8.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:54 PM]

operated the Black Beauty Ranch, a haven for unwanted animals. Cleveland Amory,

president and founder of the Fund, agreed that the ranch would take up to 300 burros per year

from the Preserve at no charge - the Park Service was only obligated to pay for transportation

to Texas and a one-time veterinary check. The agreement to adopt Mojave burros was

remarkable, as Amory generally took an adversarial stance toward the National Park Service.

[331]

Despite extensive Park Service efforts, the burro problem has not been entirely eliminated. In

the Clark Mountain area, burros from a BLM-managed herd stray into park lands. After

grazing in the area is retired, the Park Service will likely fence the boundary to prevent burros

from entering. Such a fence would be constructed with special gates that would permit

jumping animals, such as deer and bighorn sheep, to pass through, but prevent non-jumping

animals like burros from gaining access. Other parts of the Preserve, including the "keyholes"

in the Mescal Range and near Castle Mountain Mine as well as the southwest part of the park

near the Bristol Mountains, are adjacent to BLM lands that support burro populations not

considered part of a managed herd. The boundary in these areas will likely have to be fenced

to allow total removal of burros from the Preserve. [332]

Illustration 20 - Lake Tuendae at Zzyzx is an artificially-supported habitat that

harbors the only population of endangered Mojave tui chub. (Photo by Eric Nystrom,

2001.)

While most attention has focused on removal of non-native ungulates such as burros and

cattle to promote the health of the desert, the park also began investigating the possible return

of a once-native species to the area. Anecdotal evidence strongly suggests that pronghorn

antelope once lived in the Preserve. More research would be necessary to determine if a

reintroduction program can be justified, but park managers are cautiously supportive of the

idea. At least one wolf has been found in the eastern Mojave in the twentieth century, but

more research would be necessary to determine if the creatures were ever present in the area

in numbers that would justify reintroduction. [333]

In most of the park, managers are making efforts to move ecosystems to a more sustainable

state, with less human intervention necessary in the survival of any and all park flora and

fauna. This is not the case at Zzyzx, where a population of endangered Mojave tui chub are

maintained in the artificial ponds at the site. The Mojave tui chub is the only fish native to

the Mojave River. Sometime before the 1930s, a population of the fish came to live in holes
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi8.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:54 PM]

at Soda Springs, likely during one of the Mojave River's periodic inundations of Soda Lake.

In the 1930s, a related non-native chub was introduced to the Mojave River, and over time,

hybridized with the native fish, merging so completely that by 1970 no genetically original

tui chub were thought to exist. In 1970, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service listed the tui chub

as an endangered species, when the fish in ponds at Zzyzx were discovered to be genetically

distinct, native Mojave tui chub. Since that time, the fish population has been maintained by

BLM and the Park Service. To provide appropriate habitat, the ponds they inhabit must be

cleaned of cattails and dredged once a decade. In 2001, the Park Service issued a finding of

no significant impact on an environmental assessment that described the dredging process. A

cofferdam would be constructed to divide Lake Tuendae, then all of the fish in the western

half would be captured and moved to the other side before most of the cattails were cut away

and the pond dredged to a depth of six feet, a significant improvement of habitat for the tui

chub population. [334]

The long-term benefits of ecosystem restoration motivated NPS participation in the AT&T's

removal of an underground telecommunications cable from park lands. The cable, known as

the "P140 system," was constructed in the mid-1960s to be impervious to nuclear assault. The

system consisted of the cable itself as well as repeater huts, manholes, and an access road

with signage. By 1996, AT&T decided that the burdens of maintenance on the outdated

equipment and patrols to prevent vandalism were not justified by the obsolete system. The

NPS welcomed the opportunity to remove the manmade structures and receive the right-ofway back from AT&T, and agreed to lead the federal side of the development of an EIS for

the project. Public scoping meetings were held in June 1997, and the Draft EIS was available

for public comment from late December 1997 until March 1998. A final EIS was issued in

May 1998, and the Record of Decision, confirming the preferred alternative of the EIS, was

issued August 17, 1998. After some delays related to the Special Use Permit process, AT&T

removed the cable then restored the right-of-way, and finished by mid-November 1999.

[335] The land associated with the right-of-way occupied by the AT&T cable was valuable,

but the removal of structures and restoration of the right-of-way was of greatest importance

for the future of park resources.

For Mojave National Preserve, grazing is a controversial and important issue that cannot be

ignored. Widespread political and cultural overtones help make grazing a sensitive issue for

everyone involved. As such, park management tread carefully but deliberately in the arena of

grazing management. The Park Service has long viewed grazing as antithetical to its mission,

permitting the activity in certain parks only when political circumstances absolutely required

it. Park Service culture and policy have historically limited grazing in national parks, initially

to differentiate itself from the Forest Service, and in later years to help maintain ecosystems.

The long history of grazing in Mojave National Preserve and permission for its continuation

in perpetuity by legislative action complicates natural resource decisions, making the goal of

a functioning pre-grazing ecosystem frustratingly difficult to achieve.

At the time Mojave National Preserve was established, all or part of eleven BLM grazing

allotments, established under the 1934 Taylor Grazing Act, were included within the park.

Superintendent Marvin Jensen brought a background in range conservation with him and

established a friendly management tone toward grazers. All existing operations were issued

NPS permits to continue with their ranching activity, and management of the range did not

differ substantially from BLM activity.
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi8.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:54 PM]

Illustration 21 - Desert cattle, such as these belonging to the 7IL herd, graze portions

of Mojave National Preserve's landscape. (Photo by Eric Nystrom, 2001.)

The Park Service also took concrete steps toward limiting grazing when possible, providing

that the situation was politically feasible. The portion of the Piute allotment within the park

was for ephemeral forage only and was in desert tortoise habitat. Management decided that

any ephemeral forage must, at behest of the Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan, be used by the

desert tortoise, so a permit to graze ephemeral forage would never be issued. A second

allotment, Crescent Peak, was owned by a conservation group, who had purchased it as part

of a move to eliminate grazing in southern Nevada. Since no active grazing was taking place,

the permit was retired. Not long after the creation of the Preserve, the rancher who held the

Clark Mountain grazing allotment passed away, and Park Service regulations forbid the issue

of a permit for renewed operations there. Irene Ausmus held the Round Valley allotment, just

large enough for her to keep her two pet cows in feed, but not so big as to cause significant

resource issues for the park.

Major cattle operations in Mojave National Preserve were essentially controlled by three

groups. The Overson family was responsible for the largest share of the acreage, with the OX

and Kessler Springs ranches owned by Gary and Linda Overson, and the Granite Mountains

ranch owned by their son, Clay Overson. Next in size were the Valley View and Valley

Wells allotments, both owned by Richard Blincoe, an Idaho agriculturalist, and managed by

Tim Overson. The Blair family operated the 7IL Ranch on the Colton Hills and Gold Valley

allotments. During the CDPA debate, the Blairs worked to preserve their ranching way of

life, and an original clause that specified a twenty five year sunset on Mojave ranching was

removed from the bill largely as a result of their efforts. In 2001, the park concluded an

arrangement begun in 1998 where the 40 acres of park land that included the 7IL Ranch

headquarters were swapped to the Blairs for 40 acres of undisturbed land in critical desert

tortoise habitat owned by the ranching family. Touted as a "win-win" situation for the Blairs

and the Park Service, the deal also showed locals that the government was not out to destroy

family ranchers in the Preserve. [336]

Ranch lands are identified in the California Desert Protection Act as top priorities for

acquisitions. In contrast to the Blairs' opposition to the CDPA, Gary Overson specifically
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi8.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:54 PM]

requested that his ranchlands be included in the park, to guarantee an acceptable purchase

price should he decide to sell his property. Beginning in 1995, Deputy Superintendent Mary

Martin worked to coordinate the sale of Overson's ranch to the National Parks Conservation

Fund, but after years of contract negotiations, the deal fell through at least in part as a result

of strict timelines and reluctance on the part of BLM. Undaunted, Martin sought another

donor, but Overson doubted the ability of the Park Service to complete a buyout, as a result

of the earlier failed experiment. Overson looked for another private buyer for his ranch, but

the park made it clear to the buyer that issuance of a new grazing permit "is not certain" and

that "the application process ... is subject to lengthy and potentially costly delays and

complex administrative and legal procedures and challenges." [337] As a trial run, Mojave

National Preserve and the National Park Foundation worked to move the Granite Mountains

Ranch, owned by Overson's son, to NPS control. The deal was completed in April 2000, and

set the stage for the park's successful acquisition of Gary Overson's holdings in January 2001.

In 2002, Blincoe also agreed to sell his ranches to the park. [338]

The effect of the Overson and Blincoe allotment acquisitions cannot be overstated. Total

grazing in the Mojave National Preserve was reduced from some 37,000 Animal Unit Months

(AUMs) to approximately 4,000 AUMs, leaving the 7IL as the only major cattle ranch in the

Preserve. [339] The elimination of grazing will move the formerly grazed lands closer toward

a goal of a more naturally functioning ecosystem. The Park Service also gained control of a

tremendous number and variety of structures associated with cattle ranching in the eastern

Mojave desert. In 2002, a consultant produced a National Register district nomination for the

Overson properties, signifying their historic importance to the east Mojave; future plans may

include interpretive programs and utilizing some structures for NPS employee housing. The

ranches acquired by Mojave National Preserve included some private lands among the

holdings, but the most valuable assets to the park were the grazing permits and the ranchers'

water rights. [340]

Other parties owned most of the private land in the Preserve. About half of that land was

owned by individuals, a legacy of homesteading days, but the other half - some 87,000 acres

— was under control of the Catellus Corporation. The Catellus holdings, made up of

checkerboard sections across much of the park, were originally granted to the Southern

Pacific Railroad in 1864 by the federal government, as incentive to build the line that is

today's Burlington Northern Santa Fe. Catellus wanted to gain maximum value for

stockholders, and was interested in disposing of its desert lands if possible. In 1996, a $36

million deal partially fell through, because the federal government's decision to spend $380

million on 7,000 acres of old-growth forest in northern California left the Catellus deal short

of funds. The company put pressure on the government by sending teams to survey their

desert lands for mineral and development opportunities, and put up large "For Sale" signs

along roads near the Preserve. The Wildlands Conservancy, a non-profit group, stepped in to

help negotiate a deal. In 1998 and 1999, the non-profit group and Catellus came to an

agreement that would transfer 487,000 acres of land to the federal government for $54.6

million, of which $18.6 million would come from the private group and the rest from the

federal government. Rep. Jerry Lewis and other Republicans blocked part of the money - that

which would purchase Catellus lands inside the Preserve - until a deal to allow expansion of

Ft. Irwin was consummated. On July 27, 2000, the government took control of Catellus lands

within Mojave National Preserve. Of the $20 million received by Catellus for the 184,000

acres of lands in and near the park, $15 million was raised by the Wildlands Conservancy,

and the federal government paid the rest. [341]

Development, land use, and urban sprawl are some of the biggest threats to the Mojave

National Preserve. Citing statistics that indicate that McCarran Airport will reach capacity by

2014, airport planners have long cast their eye on the northern part of the Ivanpah Valley,

between Jean and Primm, as ideal for an additional airport to serve the Las Vegas area. The
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi8.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:54 PM]

valley already had easy transportation access to the metropolis because both the Union

Pacific Railroad and a recently-widened Interstate 15 run through it. In 1998, Nevada

representatives introduced legislation in Congress to allow Clark County to purchase more

than 6,000 acres from BLM to build the airport. Opposition focused largely on impacts that

the airport would have on the Preserve, the boundary of which is less than 15 miles from the

proposed site. The airport would destroy the park's sense of natural quiet, adversely impact

air quality and nighttime darkness, and bring urban sprawl to the Mojave's doorstep. In the

House, the measure was defeated along with a large number of other measures in an omnibus

anti-environment bill; the Senate version languished in committee. In April 1999, the

National Parks Conservation Association listed Mojave as one of the ten most endangered

parks because of the airport threat. In May, Nevada's Congressional delegates again

introduced legislation to transfer land for the airport, but added some weak protections

against environmental damage as well. Again, the legislation was delayed in committee in the

Senate, where Dianne Feinstein and others expressed their concerns over the impacts to

Mojave National Preserve. After consultation with environmental groups added language

stipulating that a full EIS would be completed prior to construction and that the land would

revert back to BLM if the airport was not built in 20 years, the House overwhelmingly passed

the airport legislation in early March 2000. In July, Senator Harry Reid added several

amendments in order to get the stalled bill out of committee. Most crucially, one amendment

required that "any actions ... shall specifically address any impacts on the purposes for which

the Mojave National Preserve was created." The full Senate approved Reid's bill in early

October, and President Clinton inked his approval on October 28, 2000. [342]

After passage of the airport land legislation, Mojave National Preserve instituted a program

to document the natural soundscape to better demonstrate that the airport would harm park

resources. In a series of remote locations throughout the Preserve, park staff have set up

monitoring stations with sensitive microphones that constantly record the decibel level of

ambient sound to a computer log file. If a noise above a certain threshold is experienced for

more than a certain length of time, the computer saves the sound itself as an electronic file.

The park is also encouraging research on the effect airplane sounds would have on bighorn

sheep lambing and on the desert tortoise. Dennis Schramm summarized the park's airport

strategy:

"We just want a realistic evaluation of alternative sites, and that's what we're

going to try to get. We also want a realistic evaluation of the noise impacts over

Mojave. And whether or not that piece of legislation is able to stand up and they

will actually turn the airport down - only time will tell." [343]

<<< Previous <<< Contents >>> Next >>>

moja/adhi/adhi8.htm

Last Updated: 05-Apr-2004
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi9.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:55 PM]

Mojave

Administrative History

CHAPTER NINE:

FUTURES

Does the rocky path taken by Mojave National Preserve from a neglected space to a

protected place have implications for the future of the park? In an era of tightening federal

budgets and widespread uncertainty, even the most storied national parks cannot see a future

entirely free of difficulty. Fortunately for Preserve staff, some challenges that plagued Mojave

in the early days of the park are unlikely to be problems in the future. The difficult tasks of

creating a park where none existed before have largely been completed. The focus of park

managers and employees on community relations has paid off; animosity of locals and

inholders has been greatly reduced, and as a result the likelihood of another politically

executed local revolt such as the Dollar Budget incident is now remote. Instead, other

elements of the park's past promise to cloud the picture.

The future of Mojave National Preserve is inextricably bound to the two factors that created

the park and have motivated management decisions from the beginning: increased population

growth in the desert Southwest, especially in the Los Angeles and Las Vegas areas, and the

eternal negotiation and compromise over the meaning of the Preserve and the purpose of the

actual place that bears that designation. The pressures of population growth will likely lead to

ever-larger visitor numbers, with concomitant demand for increased visitor services such as

campgrounds, interpretive programs, trails, and exhibits. Naturally, the park will also need to

extend its maintenance and visitor protection activities to cope with the larger visitor load.

Gateway communities at Baker, Goffs, Nipton, Essex, Needles, Primm, and Barstow may

develop private services and companies to cater to a wide spectrum of visitor expectations,

from day-use sightseeing to backcountry wilderness expeditions. Rapid growth of the urban

places outside the boundaries of the Preserve will have greater consequences beyond

providing ever-larger numbers of visitors. The Cadiz water project was conceived as a

response to the perceived water needs of Los Angeles, and while the plan itself is on hold, the

desires of Angelenos for green lawns continues unabated. The Ivanpah Airport project with

its potential impacts on the natural quiet of the park is a response to the expanding

transportation requirements of greater Las Vegas, and expansion of Interstate 15 or increased

railroad traffic through the Preserve are also conceivable in the future. The bright lights of

Las Vegas, Laughlin, and of Primm at the state line will increasingly degrade the quality of

Mojave's nighttime darkness, and air pollution blown from the metropoles will haze the

Preserve's vistas.

While urban growth poses challenges to the integrity of the park's resources, other questions

will be prompted by the continuing struggle to understand what precisely constitutes a

"preserve." Mojave National Preserve is an unusual park, to be sure. The place is certainly

parklike. It features craggy mountain peaks, huge sweeping valleys, alien cinder cones, and

Joshua tree forests, the whole populated with exotic plants and animals as small as bacteria

and as large as bighorn, all supremely adapted to their ecosystem. There are notes of jarring

discord, however: among those parklike features are views that seem to spoil the tableau -

gigantic open pit mines mar the mountains, bright steel electric-line towers leapfrog the

valleys, huge notches and mining roads spoil the hulking cinder cones, and cattle with horns
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhi9.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:55 PM]

dumbly graze around the spiky Joshua trees.

The landscape of Mojave National Preserve reflects human work in a naked, obvious manner,

and therein lies its value. Practically from the beginning of the appreciation of American

spaces as worthy of preservation, those most treasured - America's national parks - have been

artificially empty, seemingly devoid of the works of humanity. The existence of sacred,

beautiful, untouched, empty spaces also implies the reverse - that places with people or their

modifications are profane and ugly, not worthy of care. This idea formed the core of the 1964

Wilderness Act, which "for the permanent good of the whole people" declared that

wilderness was "an area where earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man,

where man himself is a visitor who does not remain." [379] The explicit choice provided by

the law - "earth and its community of life" versus "man" - reinforces the idea that man and

nature are mutually exclusive. We know that this myth is false, at the very least because it

excludes the Native Americans that called the wilderness home well before the United States

ever existed, but places like Mojave National Preserve force the point in a vivid way.

Considered broadly, the Preserve's designation was a result of a compromise between those

who saw only parklike resources and those who believed that the land had been used by

humans long enough and intensely enough to disqualify it as a park. Today, the Preserve

lands show their heritage as places where prehistoric and modern humans lived and worked

yet are still beautiful and worthy of our consideration and protection. If Mojave National

Preserve and other places like it can help humans recognize that all places are precious,

regardless of the changes perpetuated on them by earlier generations, then perhaps we might

treat all of our spaces, urban and rural, with greater respect. [380]

<<< Previous <<< Contents >>> Next >>>

moja/adhi/adhi9.htm

Last Updated: 05-Apr-2004
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhib.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:56 PM]

Mojave

Administrative History

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ausmus, Bob. East Mojave Diary. Tales of the Mojave Road #16. Norco, CA: Tales of the

Mojave Road Publishing Co., 1989.

Avery, Harold W. Nutritional Ecology of the Desert Tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) in

Relation to Cattle Grazing in the Mojave Desert. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI, 1998.

Baley, Charles W. Disaster at the Colorado: Beale's Wagon Road and the First Emigrant

Party. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press, 2002.

Bard, Robert Charles. Settlement Pattern of the Eastern Mojave Desert. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI,

1972.

Brittingham, Steve. Facilitation of Yucca Brevifolia Recruitment By Mojave Desert Shrubs.

Ann Arbor, MI: UMI, 1998.

Burk, Peter. The East Mojave: A Critical History, 1776-1980. Barstow, CA: Peter Burk:

1988.

________. East Mojave National Scenic Area: 1981-1994. Barstow, CA: Peter Burk, 1994.

________. The Making of Mojave National Preserve. Barstow, CA: Citizens for Mojave

National Park, 1994.

________. Mojave National Preserve: 1994-1995. Barstow, CA: Citizens for Mojave

National Park, December 1995.

Casebier, Dennis. The Battle at Camp Cady. Tales of the Mojave Road #2. Norco, CA:

Dennis G. Casebier, 1972.

________. Carleton's Pah-Ute Campaign. Tales of the Mojave Road #1. Norco, CA: Dennis

G. Casebier, 1972.

________. "Lanfair Valley: A Black Homesteading Experience," Online article.

http://www.nps.gov/moja/mojahtdu.htm. Accessed February 20, 2002.

________. The Mojave Road. Tales of the Mojave Road #5. Norco, CA: Tales of the Mojave

Road Publishing Co, 1975.

________. Reopening the Mojave Road: A Personal Narrative. Tales of the Mojave Road #8.

Norco, CA: Tales of the Mojave Road Publishing Co., 1983.

Dennis Casebier and the Friends of the Mojave Road. Guide to the East Mojave Heritage

Trail: Needles to Ivanpah. Tales of the Mojave Road #12. Norco, CA: Tales of the Mojave

Road Publishing Co., 1987.
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhib.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:56 PM]

________. Guide to the East Mojave Heritage Trail: Ivanpah to Rocky Ridge. Tales of the

Mojave Road #14. Norco, CA: Tales of the Mojave Road Publishing Co., 1988.

________. Guide to the East Mojave Heritage Trail: Rocky Ridge to Fenner. Tales of the

Mojave Road #15. Norco, CA: Tales of the Mojave Road Publishing Co., 1989.

________. Guide to the East Mojave Heritage Trail: Fenner to Needles. Tales of the Mojave

Road #16. Essex, CA: Tales of the Mojave Road Publishing Co., 1990.

________. Guide to the Mojave Road. Tales of the Mojave Road #9. Norco, CA: Tales of the

Mojave Road Publishing Co., 1983.

________. Mojave Road Guide. Tales of the Mojave Road #11. Norco, CA: Tales of the

Mojave Road Publishing Co., 1986.

Cawley, R. McGreggor. Federal Land, Western Anger: The Sagebrush Rebellion and

Environmental Politics. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 1993.

Chappell, Gordon, et al., An Oasis for Railroaders in the Mojave: The History and

Architecture of the Los Angeles and Salt Lake Railroad Depot, Restaurant and Employees'

Hotel at Kelso, California on the Union Pacific System. California: U.S. Department of the

Interior, National Park Service: 1998.

Clawson, Marion. The Bureau of Land Management. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1971.

Cronon, William. "The Trouble With Wilderness, or, Getting Back to the Wrong Nature." In

Cronon, William, ed. Uncommon Ground: Toward Reinventing Nature. New York: W. W.

Norton & Co., 1995.

Darlington, David. The Mojave: A Portrait of the Definitive American Desert. New York:

Henry Holt & Company, 1996.

Duffield-Stoll, Anne Q. Zzyzx: History of an Oasis. California Desert Studies Consortium,

Desert Studies Contributed Series #65. Northridge, CA: Santa Susana Press / University

Library, California State University Northridge, 1994.

Durant, Robert F. The Administrative Presidency Revisited: Public Lands, the BLM, and the

Reagan Revolution. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1992.

Hemphill, Mark W. Union Pacific Salt Lake Route. Erin, ONT: Boston Mills Press, 1995.

Hunt, Aurora. James H. Carleton: Frontier Dragoon. Glendale, CA: Arthur H. Clark Co.,

1958.

Infield, Elisabeth M. Stories of the Land: Rhetoric and Reconciliation in the Mojave National

Preserve. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI, 1997.

Johnson, Darryl R. "National Parks and Rural Development in Alaska." In Machlis, Gary E.

and Donald R. Field, eds. National Parks and Rural Development: Practice and Policy in the

United States. Washington, DC: Island Press, 2000.

Johnson, Richard F. "Human Uses and Impacts." Technical Reports: Proceedings of the East

Mojave Desert Symposium. Nov. 1992.

King, Chester and Dennis G. Casebier, with Matthew C. Hall and Carol Rector. Background

to Historic and Prehistoric Resources of the East Mojave Desert Region. Riverside, CA:
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhib.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:56 PM]

Bureau of Land Management, California Desert District, 1981.

Laird, Carobeth. The Chemehuevi. Banning, CA: Malki Museum Press, 1976.

Livingston, D.S. (Dewey). "Rock Springs Land & Cattle Company Historic District National

Register Nomination." Draft. March 7, 2002. Copy in possession of author.

Miller, Ron and Peggy Miller. Mines of the Mojave. California: La Siesta Press, 1976, 1992.

"Mission: Hang It Up." http://www.deadpan.net/mpb/ and linked pages. Accessed March 2,

2002.

Mitchell, Jack. Jack Mitchell, Caveman. Torrance, CA: Lewellen Press, 1964.

Moehring, Eugene. Resort City in the Sunbelt: Las Vegas, 1930-1970. Reno: University of

Nevada Press, 1989.

"The Mojave Desert Phone Booth." http://www.illuminatrix.com/mojave/ and linked pages.

Accessed March 2, 2002.

"The Mojave Phone Booth Project." http://www.deuceofclubs.com/moj/index.html and linked

pages. Accessed March 1, 2002.

Myrick, David F. Railroads of Nevada and Eastern California: Volume II, the Southern

Roads. Reno: University of Nevada Press, 1992.

National Geographic Maps/Trails Illustrated. Mojave National Preserve, California.

Evergreen, CO: Trails Illustrated, 1999.

National Park Service, Mojave National Preserve. Abbreviated Final Environmental Impact

Statement & General Management Plan: Mojave National Preserve, California. June 2001.

________. "Final GMP Record of Decision." http://www.nps.gov/moja/rod&fp.htm.

Accessed May 2, 2002.

________. Mojave National Preserve Park Files. Mojave National Preserve Headquarters,

Barstow, CA.

________. Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement and General Management Plan.

Washington, DC: GPO, July 2000.

National Transportation Safety Board. Derailment of Union Pacific Railroad Unit Freight

Train 6205 West Near Kelso, California, January 12, 1997. Railroad Accident Report, PB98-

916301. Washington, DC: National Transportation Safety Administration, February 6, 1998.

Paher, Stanley W. Las Vegas: As It Began-As It Grew. Las Vegas: Nevada Publications,

1971.

Papierski, Betty Pettit. Flat Tires and Coffee Fires: Being Tales From the 7IL Ranch. Tales of

the Mojave Road #20. Essex, CA: Tales of the Mojave Road Publishing Co., 1993.

Pegg, Dave. "Sin City Limestone." Climbing June 15, 1998: 95-100, 163-165.

Petersen, Shannon C. Acting For Endangered Species: The Statutory Ark. Lawrence, KS:

University Press of Kansas, 2002.
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhib.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:56 PM]

Prose, D.V., Susan K. Metzger, and H.G. Wilshire. "Effects of Substrate Disturbance on

Secondary Plant Succession; Mojave Desert, California." Journal of Applied Ecology 24

(April 1987): 305-315.

Prose, Douglas V. and Howard G. Wilshire. "The Lasting Effects of Tank Maneuvers on

Desert Soils and Intershrub Flora." U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report OF00-512.

2000.

Rothman, Hal K. Devil's Bargains: Tourism in the Twentieth Century American West.

Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 1998.

________. Neon Metropolis: How Las Vegas Started the Twenty-First Century. New York:

Routledge, 2002.

________. Saving the Planet: The American Response to the Environment in the Twentieth

Century. Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 2000.

Sellars, Richard West. Preserving Nature in the National Parks: A History. New Haven, CT:

Yale University Press, 1997.

Sherer, Lorraine M., and Frances Stillman. Bitterness Road: The Mojave, 1604-1860.

Needles, CA: Mohave Tribe / Ballena Press, 1994.

Signor, John R. The Los Angeles & Salt Lake Railroad: Union Pacific's Historic Salt Lake

Route. San Marino, CA: Golden West Books, 1988.

Spence, Mark David. Dispossessing the Wilderness: Indian Removal and the Making of the

National Parks. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.

Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York, Viking, 1939; reprint, Bantam Books,

1972.

U.S. Bureau of Land Management. East Mojave National Scenic Area Final Management

Plan. Needles, CA: Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Needles Resource

Area, May 1988.

________. The California Desert Conservation Area Plan. Riverside, CA: U.S. Department of

the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Desert District, 1980.

________. Draft East Mojave National Scenic Area Management Plan and Environmental

Assessment. Needles, CA: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management,

California Desert District, Needles Resource Area, April 1987.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Desert Tortoise (Mojave Population) Recovery Plan.

Portland, OR: Fish & Wildlife Service, 1994.

Ver Planck, William E. "History of Mining in Northeastern San Bernardino County." State of

California Mineral Information Service vol. 14 no. 9, September 1961.

Wheat, Frank. California Desert Miracle: The Fight For Desert Parks and Wilderness. San

Diego: Sunbelt Publications, 1999.

Wilkinson, Todd. "A Troubled Time for Tortoises." National Parks July/August 1996: 32-39.

Zaslowsky, Dyan and T.H. Watkins. These American Lands: Parks, Wilderness, and the

Public Lands. Washington DC: Island Press, 1994.
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhib.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:56 PM]

Newspapers/Periodicals

Baker Valley News

Barstow Desert Dispatch

Environmental News Network / CNN.com

High Country News

Las Vegas Review-Journal

Las Vegas Sun

Los Angeles Times

Mohave Valley Daily News

Mojave National Preserve Monitor

National Park Service Morning Report

Needles Desert Star

Pahrump Valley Gazette

PR Newswire

Sacramento Bee

San Bernardino County Sun

San Diego Union-Tribune

San Francisco Chronicle

USA Today

Victorville Daily Press

Interviews Conducted by Author

Anderson, Dave. Barstow, CA., February 7, 2002.

Bryson, Robert. Barstow, CA., March 28, 2002.

Jensen, Marvin O. Via telephone, November 26, 2002.

Karraker, Mary "Jeff." Barstow, CA., March 28, 2002.

Lesczykowski, Andrew. Barstow, CA., February 8, 2002. 2 discs.

Martin, Mary. Barstow, CA., March 29, 2002. 2 discs.

McGuinness, Sean. Via telephone, December 4, 2002.

Moore, David. Barstow, CA., March 26, 2002. 2 discs.

Paulissen, David. Barstow, CA., March 27, 2002.

Pine, Gordon. Barstow, CA., March 27, 2002.

Schramm, Dennis. Barstow, CA., March 26, 2002. 2 discs.

Scovill, Douglas. Via telephone, December 3, 2002.

Slater, Linda. Barstow, CA., March 27, 2002.

Weasma, Ted. Barstow, CA., March 27, 2002. 2 discs.

<<< Previous <<< Contents >>> Next >>>

moja/adhi/adhib.htm

Last Updated: 05-Apr-2004
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

Mojave

Administrative History

FOOTNOTES

1 Lorraine M. Sherer and Frances Stillman, Bitterness Road: The Mojave, 1604-1860

(Needles, CA: Mohave Tribe / Ballena Press, 1994). I am indebted to Roger Kelly, Senior

Archeologist, NPS Oakland, for much of the information and wording in the preceding

paragraphs. Comments by Roger Kelly on first draft, June 25, 2002. For information about

Chemehuevi songs, consult Carobeth Laird, The Chemehuevi (Banning, CA: Malki Museum

Press, 1976), 9-19.

2 Chester King and Dennis G. Casebier, with Matthew C. Hall and Carol Rector, Background

to Historic and Prehistoric Resources of the East Mojave Desert Region (Riverside, CA:

Bureau of Land Management, California Desert District, 1981), 20.

3 Generally, the tribe and places named after the tribe in Arizona are spelled "Mohave," the

fort in Arizona, the desert, and other places in California are spelled "Mojave." See Dennis

Casebier, The Mojave Road, Tales of the Mojave Road #5 (Norco, CA: Tales of the Mojave

Road Publishing Co, 1975), 182n1.

4 This incident was likely precipitated by violence toward the Mojave by an earlier trapping

party, under the command of Ewing Young. Later trappers, such as Peter Skene Ogden, also

massacred Mohaves without warning, contributing to the tension. Casebier, Mojave Road, 24-

28.

5 Casebier, Mojave Road, 30-31.

6 Casebier, Mojave Road, 57-66.

7 The emigrant party got no further west than the banks of the Colorado; after being attacked

by the Mohave, the emigrants staged a disastrous retreat back to Albuquerque, New Mexico.

See Charles W. Baley, Disaster at the Colorado: Beale's Wagon Road and the First

Emigrant Party (Logan, UT: Utah State University Press, 2002).

8 Dennis Casebier, Carleton's Pah-Ute Campaign, Tales of the Mojave Road #1 (Norco, CA:

Dennis G. Casebier, 1972), 1-49; for a biography of Carleton, who had an interesting career

in the Civil War-era military apart from his service in the eastern Mojave, see Aurora Hunt,

James H. Carleton: Frontier Dragoon (Glendale, CA: Arthur H. Clark Co., 1958).

9 Casebier, Mojave Road, 131-158; also see Dennis Casebier, The Battle at Camp Cady,

Tales of the Mojave Road #2 (Norco, CA: Dennis G. Casebier, 1972) for more information

about the Camp Cady skirmish and its subsequent effect on military escorts for the mail

service.

10 Casebier, Mojave Road, 159-161.
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

11 Casebier, Mojave Road, 161; King & Casebier, Part 2, 317-318.

12 D.S. (Dewey) Livingston, "Rock Springs Land & Cattle Company Historic District

National Register Nomination," Draft, March 7, 2002, section 8 page 4; Introduction by

Dennis Casebier, in Betty Pettit Papierski, Flat Tires and Coffee Fires: Being Tales From the

7IL Ranch, Tales of the Mojave Road #20 (Essex, CA: Tales of the Mojave Road Publishing

Co., 1993), 13-14.

13 Barnwell was also known as Manvel, after an executive of the Santa Fe Railway. Dennis

Casebier and the Friends of the Mojave Road, Guide to the East Mojave Heritage Trail:

Needles to Ivanpah, Tales of the Mojave Road #12 (Norco, CA: Tales of the Mojave Road

Publishing Co., 1987), 129; Livingston, section 8 page 4-5. The number of cattle run by the

RSL&CC are almost four times the number allowed in recent times of full ranch operation.

14 Casebier, et al., East Mojave Heritage Trail: Needles to Ivanpah, 138-139.

15 Sarah Yates Miles, "Yates Ranch 1894-1952," in Dennis Casebier and the Friends of the

Mojave Road, Guide to the East Mojave Heritage Trail: Ivanpah to Rocky Ridge, Tales of

the Mojave Road #14 (Norco, CA: Tales of the Mojave Road Publishing Co., 1988), 205-214.

16 Livingston, section 8, page 4-7.

17 Papierski, 130-131, 154-155.

18 Miles, 214-215; Bob Ausmus, East Mojave Diary, Tales of the Mojave Road #16 (Norco,

CA: Tales of the Mojave Road Publishing Co., 1989), 133.

19 Ausmus, 137.

20 Ausmus, 92; "Valley View Ranch," in Casebier, et al., East Mojave Heritage Trail:

Ivanpah to Rocky Ridge, 269-274.

21 Casebier in Papierski, 14.

22 Livingston, section 8, pages 6-9; David Darlington, The Mojave: A Portrait of the

Definitive American Desert (New York: Henry Holt & Company, 1996), 111.

23 Harold W. Avery, Nutritional Ecology of the Desert Tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) in

Relation to Cattle Grazing in the Mojave Desert (Ann Arbor, MI: UMI, 1998), 67; Steve

Brittingham, Facilitation of Yucca Brevifolia Recruitment By Mojave Desert Shrubs (Ann

Arbor, MI: UMI, 1998), 13-28.

24 Darlington, 23.

25 Richard West Sellars, Preserving Nature in the National Parks: A History (New Haven,

CT: Yale University Press, 1997), 256-257; see Anthony C. Caprio and Pat Lineback, "PreTwentieth Century Fire History of Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks: A Review and

Evaluation of Our Knowledge" Proceedings of the Conference on Fire in California

Ecosystems: Integrating Ecology, Prevention, and Management Nov. 17-20, 1997, San

Diego, CA, available online at http://www.nps.gov/ seki/fire/pdf/sd_knwf.pdf for a thorough

review of the state of research on pre-1900 fire regimes in Sequoia / Kings Canyon National

Park.
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

26 These were slightly north of I-15, near Halloran Spring, and near Crescent, just over the

Nevada border. William E. Ver Planck, "History of Mining in Northeastern San Bernardino

County," State of California Mineral Information Service vol. 14 no. 9, September 1961, 4;

Casebier, et al., East Mojave Heritage Trail: Needles to Ivanpah, 276-278. For descriptions

and historic accounts of rumors of Spanish mines, see King & Casebier, Part 2, 300-303.

27 Ver Planck, 5.

28 King & Casebier, Part 2, 303-304.

29 Ver Planck dates the discoveries to 1865, Casebier suggests that the area began to prosper

in 1869. Both authors may be right, though Casebier's carefully worded explanation enables a

more accurate chronological contextualization of the development of the Ivanpah area. Ron

and Peggy Miller split the difference and wrote that the discoveries occurred in 1867. Ver

Planck, 5; Casebier et al., East Mojave Heritage Trail: Needles to Ivanpah, 311; Ron and

Peggy Miller, Mines of the Mojave (California: La Siesta Press, 1976, 1992), 61.

30 Both the district and the mountain eventually lost the trailing "e." S.L. Snell, "Clark

Mountain Mining District," in Casebier et al., East Mojave Heritage Trail: Ivanpah to Rocky

Ridge, 45.

31 Ver Planck, 5; Casebier et al., East Mojave Heritage Trail: Needles to Ivanpah, 311-313;

Casebier et al., East Mojave Heritage Trail: Ivanpah to Rocky Ridge, 31-43.

32 Alan Hensher, "Providence," in Dennis Casebier and the Friends of the Mojave Road,

Guide to the East Mojave Heritage Trail: Rocky Ridge to Fenner, Tales of the Mojave Road

#15 (Norco, CA: Tales of the Mojave Road Publishing Co., 1989), 275-283.

33 Ver Planck, 5-6.

34 King & Casebier, Part 2, 305-306; Ver Planck, 6-7

35 Ver Planck, 7.

36 Marion F. Ely II, "The Vulcan Mine," in Casebier et al., East Mojave Heritage Trail:

Rocky Ridge to Fenner, 264-268.

37 Salable minerals are also known as non-metallic minerals, and are used in a wide variety

of applications, such as building materials, decorative landscaping, and concrete aggregate,

among others. Salable minerals should be contrasted with metallic ores, which are milled to

produce valuable metals. The two categories are governed by different laws.

38 Ver Planck, 8. See also the section about Molycorp in chapter eight.

39 Certain solutions of cyanide will draw gold from its host rock. The ore (rock containing

gold) is ground very finely and piled in layers to form a heap, which ordinarily sits atop a

thin layer of plastic sheeting. A dilute cyanide solution is sprayed over the heap, and the

runoff, rich with gold, is collected and refined. Cyanide heap leaching technology makes

possible the recovery of microscopic amounts of gold from tons of waste rock. See the

discussion of the Morning Star Mine in chapter 8 for more information.

40
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

 NPS Historian Gordon Chappell provided excellent clarification of this issue: "Actually,

the U.P.Ry.E.D. had nothing to do with the Union Pacific Railroad, then being built from

Omaha to Promontory Summit. The U.P.Ry.E.D. had been so-named by promoters

deliberately to confuse investors into thinking it was somehow connected with the wellpublicized Union Pacific Railroad, when in fact there was no connection at all except a

misleading name. The U.P.Ry.E.D. did actually build track across Kansas and Colorado to

Denver, but never continued on to New Mexico, Arizona, and southern California. ... Before

it reached Denver, it had changed its name to the Kansas Pacific Railroad." Gordon Chappell

memorandum to David Moore, July 31, 2002, 1, copy in possession of author.

41 David F. Myrick, Railroads of Nevada and Eastern California: Volume II, the Southern

Roads (reprint, Reno: University of Nevada Press, 1992), 762-793; Chappell memorandum to

Moore, July 31, 2002, 1-2.

42 King & Casebier, Part 2, 307-310, Myrick, 841-848.

43 Mark W. Hemphill, Union Pacific Salt Lake Route (Erin, Ont.: Boston Mills Press, 1995);

John R. Signor, The Los Angeles & Salt Lake Railroad: Union Pacific's Historic Salt Lake

Route (San Marino, CA: Golden West Books, 1988); Stanley W. Paher, Las Vegas: As It

Began-As It Grew (Las Vegas: Nevada Publications, 1971), 65-80.

44 It should be noted that the Tonopah & Tidewater Railroad connected with the Bullfrog

Goldfield Railroad just south of Beatty, Nevada, and the latter line itself connected with the

Tonopah & Goldfield Railroad in Goldfield, Nevada. Thus it was possible for T&T traffic to

reach Tonopah, though not over T&T rails. Chappell memo to Moore, July 31, 2002, 2.

45 Delmer G. Ross, "Borax Smith and the Tonopah & Tidewater Railroad," in Casebier et al.,

East Mojave Heritage Trail: Ivanpah to Rocky Ridge, 133-149; Dennis Casebier and the

Friends of the Mojave Road, Mojave Road Guide, Tales of the Mojave Road #11 (Norco, CA:

Tales of the Mojave Road Publishing Co., 1986), 182-183; National Geographic Maps/Trails

Illustrated, Mojave National Preserve, California (Evergreen, CO: Trails Illustrated, 1999),

South Side.

46 California Desert Protection Act of 1994, section 2 b.1.C.

47 National Park Service, Mojave National Preserve, Revised Draft Environmental Impact

Statement and General Management Plan (Washington, DC: GPO, July 2000), 92.

48 Casebier et al., East Mojave Heritage Trail: Needles to Ivanpah, 153; Ausmus, 121-132.

49 Dennis G. Casebier, "Lanfair Valley: A Black Homesteading Experience," [article online]

accessed February 20, 2002, http://www.nps.gov/moja/ mojahtdu.htm.

50 Casebier et al., East Mojave Heritage Trail: Needles to Ivanpah, 149-159; Livingston,

section 8, pages 7-8.

51 John Steinbeck, The Grapes of Wrath (New York, Viking, 1939; reprint, Bantam Books,

1972), 128.

52 Robert Charles Bard, Settlement Pattern of the Eastern Mojave Desert (Ann Arbor, MI:

UMI, 1972), 88-91; Casebier et al., East Mojave Heritage Trail: Rocky Ridge to Fenner,

147-153, 157-160.
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

53 Casebier et al., East Mojave Heritage Trail: Rocky Ridge to Fenner, 156; Bard, 117-118.

At one time, engineers planned to use 22 nuclear bombs to blast a corridor for the highway

and the railroad through the Bristol Mountains, but a tight time schedule and the passage of

the Limited Test Ban Treaty scuttled the idea. Jim Drago, "Amazing But True: Department

Engineers Considered the 'Nuclear Option' to Clear the Way for Route 66's Successor," in

Casebier et al., East Mojave Heritage Trail: Rocky Ridge to Fenner, 229-232.

54 Eugene Moehring, Resort City in the Sunbelt: Las Vegas, 1930-1970 (Reno: University of

Nevada Press, 1989), 10-12, 246-247; Bard, 86, 88, 126-132.

55 Mojave National Preserve, Revised Draft General Management Plan, 238-239; Casebier et

al., East Mojave Heritage Trail: Needles to Ivanpah, 127.

56 Casebier et al., East Mojave Heritage Trail: Needles to Ivanpah, 307, 109; Casebier et al.,

East Mojave Heritage Trail: Ivanpah to Rocky Ridge, 155-160; Casebier et al., East Mojave

Heritage Trail: Rocky Ridge to Fenner, 39-41.

57 Casebier et al., East Mojave Heritage Trail: Needles to Ivanpah, 76; Casebier et al., East

Mojave Heritage Trail: Ivanpah to Rocky Ridge, 226-228; "Figure 9: Major Rights-of-Way,"

Mojave National Preserve, Revised Draft General Management Plan. The shutoff times are

frightening: Given that the pipelines move 2,940,000 gallons of petroleum a day, this means

that 6,125 gallons would, in theory, be pumped out of the line before the gate valves were

closed, even if a break in the line were discovered immediately. Casebier reports that the line

has only been broken twice, both by bulldozers.

58Ev Hayes, "Camp Clipper and the Desert Training Center," in Dennis Casebier and the

Friends of the Mojave Road, Guide to the East Mojave Heritage Trail: Fenner to Needles

(Essex, CA: Tales of the Mojave Road Publishing Co., 1990), 201-223; Darlington, 152-155;

Casebier et al., East Mojave Heritage Trail: Needles to Ivanpah, 91-100.

59 Ausmus, 89-91.

60 Darlington, 152.

61 Darlington, 76-77; D.V. Prose, Susan K. Metzger, and H.G. Wilshire, "Effects of

Substrate Disturbance on Secondary Plant Succession; Mojave Desert, California," Journal of

Applied Ecology 24 (April 1987): 305-315; Douglas V. Prose and Howard G. Wilshire, "The

Lasting Effects of Tank Maneuvers on Desert Soils and Intershrub Flora," U.S. Geological

Survey Open File Report OF00-512, 2000, 1-4.

62 See the Map Collection of the Mojave Desert Heritage & Cultural Association, Goffs,

California for examples. The author assisted cataloging and processing this collection.

63 Darlington, 234-235.

64 Hayes in Casebier et al., East Mojave Heritage Trail: Fenner to Needles, 214.

65 Papierski, 92-93, 147-148; Bob Ausmus, "Jack Mitchell of Mitchell's Caverns," in

Casebier et al., East Mojave Heritage Trail: Rocky Ridge to Fenner, 283-291. Also see

Mitchell's frequently-embellished first-hand account, Jack Mitchell, Caveman (Torrance, CA:

Lewellen Press, 1964); Peter Burk, The East Mojave: A Critical History, 1776-1980

(Barstow, CA: Peter Burk: 1988), 20.
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

66 Ausmus, 140.

67 U.S. Bureau of Land Management, East Mojave National Scenic Area Final Management

Plan (Needles, CA: Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Needles Resource

Area, 1988), 111, 122.

68 Anne Q. Duffield-Stoll, Zzyzx: History of an Oasis, California Desert Studies Consortium,

Desert Studies Contributed Series #65 (Northridge, CA: Santa Susana Press / University

Library, California State University Northridge, 1994), 49-55; Casebier et al., Mojave Road

Guide, 167-176; Darlington, 100-103.

69 Marion Clawson, The Bureau of Land Management (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1971),

113-120; Frank Wheat, California Desert Miracle: The Fight For Desert Parks and

Wilderness (San Diego: Sunbelt Publications, 1999), 2-3, 8-10.

70 Hal K. Rothman, Saving the Planet: The American Response to the Environment in the

Twentieth Century (Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 2000), 138-139; Wheat, 17-21.

71 Dyan Zaslowsky and T.H. Watkins, These American Lands: Parks, Wilderness, and the

Public Lands (Washington DC: Island Press, 1994), 125-126, 130-132; Wheat, 11-15.

72 Bureau of Land Management, The California Desert Conservation Area Plan (Riverside,

CA: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Desert District, 1980).

73 Elisabeth M. Infield, Stories of the Land: Rhetoric and Reconciliation in the Mojave

National Preserve (Ann Arbor, MI: UMI, 1997), 94-95; Wheat, 43-46, 67-69.

74 Bureau of Land Management, Draft East Mojave National Scenic Area Management Plan

and Environmental Assessment (Needles, CA: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of

Land Management, California Desert District, Needles Resource Area, April 1987), 28-29.

75 Robert F. Durant, The Administrative Presidency Revisited: Public Lands, the BLM, and

the Reagan Revolution (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1992), 51-63;

Infield, 94.

76 Peter Burk, The Making of Mojave National Preserve (Barstow: Citizens for Mojave

National Park, 1994), 3-16; Wheat, 50.

77 Wheat, 53.

78Wheat, 77-78. As Peter Burk colorfully put it, "In November the Reagan landslide came

and environmentalists became depressed." Burk, The Making of Mojave National Preserve,

16.

79East Mojave National Scenic Area Final Management Plan, Appendix A, "Secretarial

Order Establishing the East Mojave National Scenic Area," 143-144.

80Wheat, 54; Infield, 96.

81East Mojave National Scenic Area Final Management Plan, Appendix B, "Management

Philosophy Statement," 145-147.
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

82 Dennis Casebier, Reopening the Mojave Road: A Personal Narrative, Tales of the Mojave

Road #8 (Norco, CA: Tales of the Mojave Road Publishing Co., 1983), 7-112; also see

Dennis Casebier and the Friends of the Mojave Road, Guide to the Mojave Road, Tales of the

Mojave Road #9 (Norco, CA: Tales of the Mojave Road Publishing Co., 1983.)

83 Dennis Casebier et al., Mojave Road Guide, 9.

84 Charles Hillinger, "New Recreation Trail to Make Loop in the Desert," Los Angeles Times

October 7, 1985; Casebier et al., East Mojave Heritage Trail: Needles to Ivanpah, 9-11;

Casebier et al., East Mojave Heritage Trail: Fenner to Needles, 15-19.

85 Burk, Making Mojave National Preserve, 17, 19; Peter Burk, East Mojave National Scenic

Area: 1981-1994 (Barstow: Peter Burk, 1994), 7; Wheat, 90-100.

86 Burk, Making of Mojave National Preserve, 21, 23-24; Burk, East Mojave National Scenic

Area, 8, 12.

87 Wheat, 105-113; "The Region — LA Files Response to Redistricting Suit," Los Angeles

Times February 10, 1986.

88 Editorial, "Go Gentle Into the Desert," Los Angeles Times February 17, 1986; Maura

Dolan, "Pressures on National Parks Mount," Los Angeles Times May 25, 1986; Wheat, 113-

115, 125-127, 131-132, Douglas Shuit, "Video Will Dramatize Foes' Attack on Bill to

Preserve Desert Areas," Los Angeles Times December 16, 1987.

89 Charles Hillinger, "Desert Hamlet Hopes to Derail Plan to Raze Depot," Los Angeles

Times August 19, 1985; Peter Burk, quoted in Wheat, 127-131.

90 Wheat, 165-166, 180-183; Infield, 88-90.

91 Rothman, Saving the Planet, 21, 170-171.

92 Wheat, 105-110.

93 Ronald B. Taylor, "Cranston Desert Bill Poses Classic Conservation Fight," Los Angeles

Times April 19, 1987; Wheat, 216-220; Frank Clifford, "Sierra Club Officials Cool to

Wilson, But Warm to Foe," Los Angeles Times March 13, 1988.

94 Wheat, 214-215; Burk, Making of the Mojave National Preserve, 28-31; Frank Clifford,

"Wilson Hasn't Cooperated on Desert Bill — Cranston," Los Angeles Times June 30, 1988;

Frank Clifford, "Desert Bill Dies, Cranston and Wilson Blame Each Other," Los Angeles

Times July 8, 1988.

95 Josh Getlin, "Round 2 of Desert Preservation Battle to Begin," Los Angeles Times January

26, 1989.

96 Rothman, Saving the Planet, 158-170; also see R. McGreggor Cawley, Federal Land,

Western Anger: The Sagebrush Rebellion and Environmental Politics (Lawrence, KS.:

University Press of Kansas, 1993).

97 Burk, Making of Mojave National Preserve, 33-34; Wheat, 221-228; Sue Ellen Christian,
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

"Desert Preservation Bill Stalled in Senate Panel," Los Angeles Times September 27, 1990;

Christian, "Cranston Shelves Ambitious Desert Parkland Measure," Los Angeles Times

October 10, 1990.

98 Bill Stall, "Wilderness Status Urged For Only Part of State Desert," Los Angeles Times

July 27, 1991; Glenn F. Bunting, "House Panel Oks California Desert Preservation Bill," Los

Angeles Times October 2, 1991; Bunting, "House Oks Landmark Desert Protection Bill," Los

Angeles Times November 27, 1991; Wheat, 229-234.

99 Robert W. Stewart, "Seymour Caught in Whirlwind of Change," Los Angeles Times

January 27, 1991; Bill Stall, "Seymour Seeks End to Battle in Desert," Los Angeles Times

May 26, 1991; Glenn F. Bunting, "Cranston, Seymour Clash Over Desert Bill," Los Angeles

Times January 14, 1992; Wheat, 230-232, 235-238; Glenn F. Bunting, "Seymour Maneuver

Bottles Up Desert Bill in Committee," Los Angeles Times August 6, 1992; Glenn F. Bunting,

"Cranston's Desert Protection Measure Fails For Sixth Year," Los Angeles Times September

23, 1992.

100 Dean E. Murphy, "Feinstein Off to Job, Boxer Takes Break," Los Angeles Times

November 5, 1992; Glenn F. Bunting, "Senators Reverse Styles to Match New Roles," Los

Angeles Times March 8, 1993.

101 Glenn F. Bunting, "Feinstein To Lead Off With Desert Bill," Los Angeles Times January

21, 1993; Wheat, 235-244; Burk, Making Mojave National Preserve, 37; Burk, East Mojave

National Scenic Area, 15.

102 Infield, 306-307.

103 Wheat, 252-257, Glenn F. Bunting, "Desert Bill Easily Passes Key Senate Committee

Vote," Los Angeles Times October 6, 1993.

104 Wheat, 257-261; Glenn F. Bunting, "Desert Protection Act Clears Senate," Los Angeles

Times April 14, 1994.

105 "House Committee Approves Desert Protection Act," Los Angeles Times May 5, 1994;

Wheat, 262-263.

106 Wheat, 264-270.

107 James Bornemeier, "House Vote Downgrades Desert Land Status," Los Angeles Times

July 13, 1994.

108 For example, 1998's auction tag fetched $150,000; see Steve Torres, "Apply For Your

'Hunt of a Lifetime'" Tracks: News About California Deer and Other Big Game 16 (1999):

15; Wheat, 271-273; Infield, 286-295.

190 James Bornemeier, "House Oks Bill Protecting Vast Desert Acreage," Los Angeles Times

July 28, 1994.

110 In the ANILCA parks, Alaska natives are allowed to hunt in the national parks

themselves as well as in the national preserves. The preservation of "customary and

traditional" subsistence hunting was designed to minimize the disruption that designation of

the areas as national parks would have on local lifestyles, and was an unstated
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

acknowledgment of the role of human predation in the sustainable functioning of the Alaskan

ecosystem. The situation in the eastern Mojave was different, as human predation had not

been a longstanding, sustainable part of the ecosystem since the arrival of the American

settlement in the 1860s, and hunting was of chief importance to a small group of elite trophy

hunters who wished to harvest bighorn sheep. For a good overview of the role of hunting in

the Alaska parks, see Darryl R. Johnson, "National Parks and Rural Development in Alaska,"

in Gary E. Machlis and Donald R. Field, eds., National Parks and Rural Development:

Practice and Policy in the United States (Washington, DC: Island Press, 2000), 132-163;

Wheat, 273-278.

111 Wheat, 279-284; James Bornemeier, "Desert Protection Act Imperiled," Los Angeles

Times September 20, 1994; "Desert Bill — A Messy Anticlimax," Los Angeles Times

September 22, 1994; James Bornemeier, "Desert Bill, Threatened By GOP, Inches Ahead,"

Los Angeles Times September 24, 1994; James Bornemeier, "Desert Bill Deadlock Broken,"

Los Angeles Times September 30, 1994. Feinstein showed a willingness to compromise on

the status of the park in the east Mojave as early as April 1993, see Howard Libit,

"Compromise By Feinstein On Desert Measure Possible," Los Angeles Times April 28, 1993.

112 Faye Fiore, "Feinstein Desert Bill Hangs In Balance in Senate," Los Angeles Times

October 7, 1994; Edwin Chen, "Senate Vote Expected Today on Desert Bill," Los Angeles

Times October 8, 1994; Edwin Chen, "Filibuster Broken, Senate Oks Calif. Desert Protection

Legislation," Los Angeles Times October 9, 1994; Wheat, 288-298. The California Desert

Protection Act is Public Law 103-433.

113Author interview with Marvin Jensen, November 26, 2002.

114 California Desert Transition Work Group, "The California Desert in Transition: The

Opportunity for Bioregional Management," October 1993, in CDPA Activation binder,

Superintendent's Office, Mojave National Preserve (MOJA) Headquarters, Barstow CA, 10.

115 The rangers were from Golden Gate, Lake Mead, Grand Canyon, and Sequoia-Kings

Canyon; their supervisor, from Organ Pipe Cactus, never came to the Preserve. Peter Burk,

Mojave National Preserve: 1994-1995 (Barstow: Citizens for Mojave National Park,

December 1995), 9; "Draft Superintendent's Annual Narrative Report for Fiscal Year 1995,"

in Binder "Mojave National Preserve," MOJA Headquarters, Barstow CA, 1.

116 Author interview with Mary Martin, March 29, 2002, Barstow CA, Disc 1.

117 Burk, Mojave National Preserve, 10; "Draft Superintendent's Annual Narrative Report for

Fiscal Year 1995," 12.

118 Author interview with Marvin Jensen, via telephone, November 26, 2002.

119 Author interview with Mary Martin, March 29, 2002, Disc 1.

120 In interview, Martin recalls January 10, 1995 (Tuesday) as the official start date; Burk

printed January 13, 1995 (Friday). Burk, Mojave National Preserve, 12.

121 Author interview with Marvin Jensen, November 26, 2002.

122 Author interview with Marvin Jensen, November 26, 2002.

123
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

 See chapter five for more information about ecosystem planning.

124 Resolutions from the City of Barstow, the Barstow Chamber of Commerce, the Newberry

Springs Chamber of Commerce, the Provident Corporation (owners of Nipton), the Baker

Chamber of Commerce, and the Baker Community Service District were presented to Marv

Jensen at the gathering. "Resolutions Supporting Mojave National Preserve," Mojave

National Preserve Monitor 2 (Feb. 1995): 5.

125 "Draft Superintendent's Annual Narrative Report for Fiscal Year 1995," 2.

126 Author interview with Marvin Jensen, November 26, 2002.

127 Author interview with Mary Martin, March 29, 2002, Disc 1. The rangers, both seasonal,

were Nate Card and Brian Willbond. Burk, Mojave National Preserve Appendix B: Mojave

National Preserve Employees, 23.

128 Author interview with Mary Martin, March 29, 2002, Disc 1.

129 Author interview with Mary Martin, March 29, 2002, Disc 1; Author interview with Dave

Paulissen, Barstow, CA, March 27, 2002.

130 Author interview with Mary Martin, March 29, 2002, Disc 1.

131 Author interview with Marvin Jensen, November 26, 2002; "Draft Superintendent's

Annual Narrative Report for Fiscal Year 1995," 3; Burk, Mojave National Preserve, 13.

132 "Draft Superintendent's Annual Narrative Report for Fiscal Year 1995," 15-16.

133 "Task Directive, California Desert Protection Act, BLM/NPS Transition Action Plan, July

1994," tab "NPS/BLM Transition Report" in CDPA Activation Binder, Superintendent's

Office, Mojave National Preserve Headquarters, Barstow CA, 13.

134 Burk, Mojave National Preserve, 15.

135 Author interview with David Moore, Barstow, CA, March 26, 2002, Disc 2. This table is

currently in the library room at park headquarters.

136Author interview with Doug Scovill, via telephone, December 3, 2002.

137 "Draft Superintendent's Annual Narrative Report for Fiscal Year 1995," 2-3.

138 Author interview with Dave Paulissen, March 27, 2002.

139 "Draft Superintendent's Annual Narrative Report for Fiscal Year 1995," 3; Author

interview with Mary Martin, March 29, 2002, Disc 1; Author interview with Marvin Jensen,

November 26, 2002; Burk, Mojave National Preserve, 14.

140 "Draft Superintendent's Annual Narrative Report for Fiscal Year 1995," 3-4.

141 Author interview with Doug Scovill, December 3, 2002.

142 "Draft Superintendent's Annual Narrative Report for Fiscal Year 1995," 14-16.
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

143 California Desert Transition Work Group, "The California Desert in Transition: The

Opportunity for Bioregional Management," October 1993, in CDPA Activation binder,

Superintendent's Office, MOJA HQ; Author interview with Mary Martin, March 29, 2002,

Disc 1.

144 Willis Herron, "National Parks and Preserve and Visitor's Center," May 31, 1995, in

Mojave National Preserve Clip File 1995; "Draft Superintendent's Annual Narrative Report

for Fiscal Year 1995," 11; Mary Martin, comments on first draft, July 2002, copy in

possession of author; David Moore, comments on first draft, July 2002, copy in possession of

author.

145 "Draft Superintendent's Annual Narrative Report for Fiscal Year 1995," 10; Author

interview with Sean McGuinness, December 4, 2002; Author interview with Mary Martin,

March 29, 2002, Disc 1.

146 "Draft Superintendent's Annual Narrative Report for Fiscal Year 1995," 13; for context

on the fee collection issue on public lands, see Hal Clifford, "Land of the Fee," High Country

News February 14, 2000.

147 "Draft Superintendent's Annual Narrative Report for Fiscal Year 1995," 10

148 "Office Bombed in Nevada," High Country News November 15, 1993; Jon Christensen,

"Forest Service Bombed in Nevada," High Country News April 17, 1995; Scott Sonner,

"Memo: Forestry Workers Fear For Their Safety," Las Vegas Sun November 17, 1999;

Sandra Chereb, "Bombing Inquiry Frustrates Ranger," Las Vegas Review Journal May 11,

2000.

149 Author interview with Marvin Jensen, November 26, 2002.

150 "Draft Superintendent's Annual Narrative Report for Fiscal Year 1995," 10; Frank

Clifford, "Desert Funding Stalled," Las Vegas Review-Journal May 29, 1995; "Desert Funds

May Be A Mirage," Los Angeles Times May 28, 1995.

151 "Speech By Congressman Jerry Lewis, Goffs California, 17 February 1996," Baker Valley

News March 15, 1996; Author interview with Marvin Jensen, November 26, 2002; Author

interview with Mary Martin, March 29, 2002, Disc 1; David Drudge, "Lewis Uses Sheep

Incident to Blast Desert Management," Desert Dispatch April 3, 1997; Robert S. Campbell,

"Bighorn Sheep," Baker Valley News July 19, 1996. "Guzzlers" are water collection devices

that have been constructed in the desert to provide water for wildlife, usually game species. A

guzzler consists of an asphalt or concrete slab that catches rainwater, which drains to a

storage tank and is piped from there to a drinking trough for the animals' use.

152 Author interview with Dennis Schramm, Barstow, CA, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

153 Author interview with Mary Martin, March 29, 2002, Disc 1; Author interview with Dave

Paulissen, March 27, 2002; Author interview with Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

154 "Veto the Environmental[sic] Wrecking Legislation," San Francisco Chronicle Sept. 21,

1995; Carolyn Lochhead, "Panel Strips Mojave Preserve of Funds," San Francisco Chronicle

Sept. 22, 1995; "Desert Mischief," San Diego Union-Tribune Sept. 22, 1995; "Clinton Should

Reject Sabotage of Desert Act," Los Angeles Times Sept. 22, 1995; Press Release, "Statement
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

of the Vice President," Office of the Press Secretary, The White House, Sept. 22, 1995;

"Resignation Settles In As Clock Winds Down," USA Today, November 13, 1995.

155Author interview with Marvin Jensen, November 26, 2002.

156Author interview with Marvin Jensen, November 26, 2002.

157 Clyde Weiss, "Budget Crisis Squeezes Staff From New Park," Las Vegas Review-Journal

November 30, 1995; Burk, Mojave National Preserve, 23; Author interview with Mary

Martin, March 29, 2002, Disc 1; Author interview with Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002,

Disc 1.

158 Author interview with Doug Scovill, December 3, 2002.

159 Author interview with David Moore, March 26, 2002, Disc 2.

160 "'Kind of Like Chaos' as Backlogs Hit," USA Today November 20, 1995; Deborah

Brown, "Mojave Bill Faces Veto," Hi-Desert Star December 17, 1995; "Starved for Funds,"

San Diego Union-Tribune December 3, 1995; "Second Shutdown Will Have Limited Effect,"

USA Today December 15, 1995; "Clinton Vetoes 2 Spending Bills, Ready to Reject 3rd1,"

USA Today December 18, 1995; Mary Martin, comment on first draft, July 2002, copy in

possession of author.

161 Wheat, 300; David Moore, comment on first draft, July 2002, copy in possession of

author.

162 Author interview with Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

163 "Public Sighs Relief as Washington Museums Reopen," USA Today January 6, 1996;

"Clinton signs bill to avert shutdown," USA Today March 15, 1996; "House Passes Another

Stopgap Spending Bill," USA Today March 20, 1996; Clyde Weiss, "New Plan Aimed at

Desert Park," Las Vegas Review-Journal, January 17, 1996.

164 Letter from John Brown, East Mojave Property Owner's Association, to Property Owners,

February 5, 1996; Memo from Dennis G. Casebier to Friends of the Mojave Road, February

8, 1996; National Parks and Conservation Association Press Release, "Mojave National

Preserve Suffers Latest Assault," February 17, 1996; Lois Clark, "Jerry Lewis, Guest of

Honor at Desert B-B-Q," Baker Valley News March 15, 1996.

165 "White House, Congress near Deal on Huge Spending Bill," USA Today April 23, 1996;

Jim Specht, "Mojave at Center of Democrat-GOP Fight," San Bernardino County Sun April

24, 1996.

166 "Budget Highlights," USA Today April 25, 1996; "Education, Environment Cuts Gentler

than GOP's First Plan," USA Today April 25, 1996; Chuck Mueller, "Mojave Balancing Act:

Increased Tourism, Conservation," San Bernardino County Sun April 28, 1996.

167 "Congressman Won't Battle Over Preserve," Las Vegas Sun June 7, 1996.

168 "Memorandum of Understanding: California's Coordinated Regional Strategy to Conserve

Biological Diversity," September 19, 1991; Richard F. Johnson, "Human Uses and Impacts,"

Technical Reports: Proceedings of the East Mojave Desert Symposium 10 (Nov. 1992): 110.
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

169 See "California Desert Protection Act of 1994" PL 103-433 Sec. 501(1) for the wording

as enacted in the final version.

170 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Desert Tortoise (Mojave Population) Recovery Plan

Portland, OR.: Fish & Wildlife Service, 1994. For a discussion of the effect of the listing of

the desert tortoise in the greater Mojave desert area, see Darlington, 222-234, 284-297; Hal

K. Rothman, Neon Metropolis: How Las Vegas Started the Twenty-First Century (New

York: Routledge, 2002), 226-231; for an insightful discussion of the Endangered Species

Act, see Shannon C. Petersen, Acting For Endangered Species: The Statutory Ark (Lawrence,

KS: University Press of Kansas, 2002).

171 California Desert Transition Work Group, "The California Desert in Transition: The

Opportunity for Bioregional Management," October 1993, in CDPA Activation binder,

Superintendent's Office, MOJA Headquarters, Barstow CA, 5-6.

172 "The California Desert in Transition," 5-8.

173 "Task Directive: California Desert Protection Act: Bureau of Land Management/National

Park Service Transition Action Plan," July 1994, 2.

174 Author interview with Mary Martin, March 29, 2002, Disc 2.

175 Hunting as an issue is omitted here because the report assumed the creation of Mojave

National Park, with hunting prohibited, was the likely outcome of the CDPA.

176 "The California Desert in Transition," 43-44.

177 Author interview with Mary Martin, March 29, 2002, Disc 1; "Kennedy Names Buono to

Assistant Superintendent Post," Mohave Valley Daily News, Dec 7, 1994.

178 "Transition Action Plan," 2.

179 "Transition Action Plan," Issue 3, Action D.

180 Author interview with Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002, Disc 1; Author interview with

Mary Martin, March 29, 2002, Disc 1.

181 Author interview with David Moore, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

182 Author interview with David Moore, March 26, 2002, Disc 1; Author interview with

Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

183 Author interview with David Moore, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

184 Author interview with David Moore, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

185 "Draft Superintendent's Annual Narrative Report for Fiscal Year 1995," 7; Author

interview with David Moore, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

186 "Draft Superintendent's Annual Narrative Report for Fiscal Year 1995," 8.
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

187 Author interview with David Moore, March 26, 2002, Disc 1; Hal Rothman, Devil's

Bargains: Tourism in the Twentieth Century American West (Lawrence, KS: University Press

of Kansas, 1998).

188 Federal Register September 5, 1995, 46132.

189 Author interview with Mary Martin, March 29, 2002, Disc 1; Author interview with

Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

190 Meetings were held in Pasadena, San Bernardino, Barstow, Baker, Needles, Ridgecrest,

Independence, Lone Pine, Furnace Creek, and Las Vegas. "Periodic Update on the

Interagency Management Plan," Issue 1, Winter 1995/96, 2.

191 "Draft Superintendent's Annual Narrative Report for Fiscal Year 1995," 8.

192 Burk, Mojave National Preserve, 18; David Moore, comment on first draft, July 2002,

copy in possession of author.

193 Author interview with Mary Martin, March 29, 2002, Disc 1.

194 Dennis Casebier, "Development of Yet Another Plan for Parts of the California Desert

Begins," Baker Valley News, October 20, 1995.

195 Author interview with David Moore, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

196 Author interview with David Moore, March 26, 2002, Disc 1; Author conversation with

David Moore, March 25-26, 2002, Mojave National Preserve headquarters, Barstow CA.

197 Author interview with David Moore, March 26, 2002, Disc 1; Author interview with

Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

198 Author interview with Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

199 Author interview with Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

200 Northern and Eastern Mojave Team, "Periodic Update on the Interagency Management

Plan #1," Winter 1995/96.

201 National Park Service, "Final GMP Record of Decision," accessed May 2, 2002,

http://www.nps.gov/moja/ rod&fp.htm.

202 Hildamae Voght, "Changes in the California Desert," Baker Valley News, April 19, 1996.

203 National Park Service, "Final GMP Record of Decision," accessed May 2, 2002,

http://www.nps.gov/moja/ rod&fp.htm.

204 National Park Service, "Final GMP Record of Decision," accessed May 2, 2002,

http://www.nps.gov/moja/ rod&fp.htm.

205 National Park Service, "Final GMP Record of Decision," accessed May 2, 2002,

http://www.nps.gov/moja/ rod&fp.htm; National Park Service, Mojave National Preserve,
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

Abbreviated Final Environmental Impact Statement & General Management Plan: Mojave

National Preserve, California June 2001, 1.

206 National Park Service, "Final GMP Record of Decision," accessed May 2, 2002,

http://www.nps.gov/moja/ rod&fp.htm; David Drudge, "Desert Planning Workshops Offered

to Public," Desert Dispatch, April 12, 1997.

207 National Park Service, "Final GMP Record of Decision," accessed May 2, 2002,

http://www.nps.gov/moja/ rod&fp.htm.

208 Author interview with Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

209 Author interview with David Moore, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

210 Author interview with Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

211 Author interview with Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

212 Author interview with Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

213 National Park Service, "Final GMP Record of Decision," accessed May 2, 2002,

http://www.nps.gov/moja/ rod&fp.htm.

214 Federal Register, September 11, 1998, 48727.

215 National Park Service, "Final GMP Record of Decision," accessed May 2, 2002,

http://www.nps.gov/moja/ rod&fp.htm.

216 David Drudge, "Report: Maintain Preserve's Protection," Victorville Daily Press, October

13, 1998; Chuck Mueller, "Public Comments Sought on Mojave National Preserve," San

Bernardino County Sun, October 19, 1998; Juliet V. Casey, "Desert Park Plan Sparks

Dissent," San Bernardino County Sun, October 22, 1998; "Mojave Preserve Draft

Management Plan Available For Review," Mohave Valley Daily News, October 29, 1998.

217 National Park Service, "Final GMP Record of Decision," accessed May 2, 2002,

http://www.nps.gov/moja/ rod&fp.htm.

218 Gordon Reetz remained in the old planning office until he left for a position in the

Regional Office. David Moore, comment on first draft, July 2002, copy in possession of

author.

219 Author interview with Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

220 National Park Service, "Final GMP Record of Decision," accessed May 2, 2002,

http://www.nps.gov/moja/ rod&fp.htm.

221 National Park Service, "Final GMP Record of Decision," accessed May 2, 2002,

http://www.nps.gov/moja/ rod&fp.htm.

222 Federal Register, September 6, 2000, 54064-54065.

223 Author interview with Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

224 National Park Service, "Final GMP Record of Decision," accessed May 2, 2002,

http://www.nps.gov/moja/ rod&fp.htm.

225 Desert Tortoise Recovery Act, 57; Abbreviated Final EIS & GMP, 44.

226 Author interview with Mary Martin, March 29, 2002, Disc 2.

227 National Park Service, "Final GMP Record of Decision," accessed May 2, 2002,

http://www.nps.gov/moja/ rod&fp.htm.

228 National Park Service, "Final GMP Record of Decision," accessed May 2, 2002,

http://www.nps.gov/moja/ rod&fp.htm.

229 See the section in this document about the Kelso depot for more information.

230 National Park Service, "Final GMP Record of Decision," accessed May 2, 2002,

http://www.nps.gov/moja/ rod&fp.htm.

231 Author interview with Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

232 Author interview with Mary Martin, March 28, 2002, Disc 2.

233 Author interview with David Moore, March 26, 2002, Disc 2.

234 Mojave National Preserve Press Release, "Mojave National Preserve Receives Honor,"

August 16, 2001.

235 Mojave National Preserve Press Release, "Mojave National Preserve Photo Wins

Honorable Mention in National Parks Pass Experience Your America Photo Contest," March

15, 2001.

236 Quoting Charlie Wilcox in Warren Bates, "If A Phone Rings In the Desert," Las Vegas

Review-Journal, August 1, 1999.

237 http://www.deuceofclubs.com/moj/mojave1.htm, accessed March 1, 2002. Note that

Daniels misreports Caffee's name as Crawford, an error repeated by several news stories.

238 http://www.deuceofclubs.com/moj/mojave3.htm, accessed March 1, 2002.

239 "Joules," comment on 4-26-1999, in http://www.deuceofclubs.com/moj/mojmail2.htm,

accessed March 1, 2002.

240 http://www.deuceofclubs.com/moj/mojave3.htm, accessed March 1, 2002;

http://www.deuceofclubs.com/moj/bm98/index.html, accessed March 1, 2002.

241 "Charles," comment on 7-4-1999, in http://www.deuceofclubs.com/moj/mojmail2.htm,

accessed March 1, 2002.

242 http://www .illuminatrix.com/mojave/, accessed March 2, 2002; http://www.deadpan

.net/mpb/, accessed March 2, 2002; Steve Smith, "Telephone Booth a Mojave Mecca for the

Faithful," San Bernardino County Sun, August 21, 1999; John M. Glionna, "Reaching Way
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

Out," Los Angeles Times, September 18, 1999.

243 "The Late Show With David Letterman," November 9, 1999.

244 "Jessica P," comment on 10-4-1999, in http://www.deuceofclubs.com/moj/mojmail3.htm,

accessed March 1, 2002.

245 Author interview with Mary Martin, March 28, 2002, Disc 2.

246 Author interview with Mary Martin, March 28, 2002, Disc 2; Renee Tawa, "Requiem for

a Telephone Booth," Los Angeles Times, May 30, 2000.

247 Deuce of Clubs, in http://www.deuceofclubs.com/moj/index.html, accessed March 8,

2002.

248 Brett Taylor letter to U.S. Representative Lynn Woolsey, May 23, 2000, in NPS file

A3615 "Complaints," Mojave National Preserve Headquarters, Barstow CA.

249 See Mary Martin letter to Robert Goodale, June 12, 2000, in NPS file A3615

"Complaints," Mojave National Preserve Headquarters, Barstow CA.

250 Author interview with Mary Martin, March 28, 2002, Disc 2.

251 Comment from "romeo" May 20, 2000, in

http://www.deuceofclubs.com/moj/mojmail5.htm, accessed March 1, 2002

252 Comment from "Borys from Poland" Sept 2, 2000, in

http://www.deuceofclubs.com/moj/mojmail5.htm, accessed March 1, 2002.

253 Comment from "James B." March 21, 2001, in

http://www.deuceofclubs.com/moj/mojmail5.htm, accessed March 1, 2002.

254 Helen Wagenvoord letter to Mary Martin, May 31, 2000, Claire Perricelli letter to Mary

Martin, June 10, 2000, Thomas J. Suk letter to Mary Martin, June 11, 2000, Marilyn Dinger

letter to Mary Martin, June 12, 2000, Sherryl Taylor letter to Mary Martin, June 13, 2000, in

NPS file A3615 "Complaints," Mojave National Preserve Headquarters, Barstow CA.

255 Author interview with Mary Martin, March 28, 2002, Disc 2.

256Ausmus, 117.

257 Mary G. Martin letter to Sherpa San Harold Horpa, May 27, 1999, in "Read File FY99"

tab "Management Team," MOJA HQ.

258 Michael Small, Chief Counsel, ACLU of Southern California, letter to Mary Martin and

John Reynolds, October 6, 1999; Mark Luellen memorandum to Mojave National Preserve

Superintendent, November 11, 1999, in folder "The Cross at Sunrise Rock" in folder L-58

"Proposed Areas," Park files, Mojave National Preserve Headquarters, Barstow CA.

259 Kathy Davis letter to Mary Martin, December 1, 1999; Larry Bradfish letter to Michael

Small, January 21, 2000; Michael Small letter to Robert Stanton, August 3, 2000; in folder

"The Cross at Sunrise Rock," MOJA park files.
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

260 Mary Martin, memorandum to Mojave National Preserve Employees, October 6, 2000, in

folder "The Cross at Sunrise Rock," MOJA park files; Chelsea J. Carter, "Parks to Remove

Cross From Federal Land," San Bernardino County Sun October 27, 2000; A.J. Gardner,

"Long-standing Wooden Cross Removed By Parks Officials," Desert Dispatch November 1,

2000; Che Tabisola, "Cross Targeted for Removal is War Memorial, Baker Woman Says,"

Victorville Daily Press November 4, 2000; A.J. Gardner, "Congress Says Cross Remains,"

Victorville Daily Press December 19, 2000; A.J. Gardner, "ACLU Promises Fight Over

Cross," Victorville Daily Press December 20, 2000; A.J. Gardner, "ACLU Files Suit,"

Victorville Daily Press March 22, 2001.

261 David Mondoza, "CBS Show Takes on Cross Battle," Victorville Daily Press August 4,

2001; Ryan Daugherty, "Mojave Preserve's Cross Declared National Memorial," Victorville

Daily Press December 21, 2001; Author interview with Mary Martin, March 29, 2002, Disc

2; U.S. House of Representatives, "Conference Report on H.R. 3338, Department of Defense

Appropriations Act, 2002," Section 8137, December 19, 2001, H10516, H10799; Gary

George, "Judge Orders Removal of Historic Mojave Cross," Victorville Daily Press July 26,

2002; Tiffany Starkey, "Feds Ask Judge to Delay Cross Removal," Victorville Daily Press

August 16, 2002; Kelly Donovan, "Land Swap Puts Couple in Spotlight," Victorville Daily

Press December 6, 2002; Richard Lake, "That Old Rugged Cross," Las Vegas ReviewJournal December 15, 2002; Kelly Donovan, "Justice to Appeal Order to Remove Mojave

Cross," Victorville Daily Press February 14, 2003; Kelly Donovan, "Feds Order Cover-up

For Mojave Cross," Victorville Daily Press March 13, 2003.

262 Mojave National Preserve, "Report of Accomplishments, October 1, 1996 to September

30, 1997," 3.

263 Mojave National Preserve Diversity Plan, 1998, 2-7.

264 Mojave National Preserve, "FY99 Accomplishments for Superintendent's Performance

Review,"5; Mojave National Preserve, "Accomplishments for Superintendent's FY2000

Performance Review," 4.

265 Mojave National Preserve, "Superintendent's Annual Report for FY98," 1; Mojave

National Preserve, "FY99 Accomplishments for Superintendent's Performance Review,"4.

266 Burk, Critical History, 21.

267 Mojave National Preserve, "Report of Accomplishments October 1, 1996 to September

30, 1997," 3; Mojave National Preserve, "Superintendent's Annual Report for FY98," 3;

Mojave National Preserve, "FY99 Accomplishments," 17; David Moore, comments on first

draft, July 2002, copy in possession of author.

268 Mojave National Preserve, "Major Accomplishments for the First Five Years (1994-

1999)," 4; Mojave National Preserve, "FY 2000 GPRA Accomplishments," 9; David Moore,

comments on first draft, July 2002, copy in possession of author.

269 Mojave National Preserve, "Report of Accomplishments October 1, 1996 to September

30, 1997," 1.

270 Mojave National Preserve Press Release 97-005, "Sign Contest Winner," [May 1997].

271
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

 Author interview with Sean McGuinness, via telephone, December 4, 2002.

272 Incidents MOJA0100000155, MOJA0100000156, MOJA0100000158,

MOJA0100000047, in file "Case Incident Reports 2001;" Incident MOJA9900000149 in file

"Recent - Review Case Incidents," Chief Ranger's office, MOJA HQ, Barstow CA.

273 Incident MOJA9900000155 in file "Recent - Review Case Incidents;" Incidents

MOJA0100000015, MOJA0100000029, in file "Case Incident Reports 2001," Chief Ranger's

office, MOJA HQ, Barstow CA.

274 Author interview with Sean McGuinness, via telephone, December 4, 2002; anecdotal

information from Tim Duncan, in conversation with author, February 9, 2002, Kelso

California.

275 Case report MOJA9900000146, Folder "Recent - Review Case Incidents," Chief Ranger's

Office Files, Mojave National Preserve HQ.

276 Case report MOJA0100000038, Folder "Recent - Review Case Incidents," Chief Ranger's

Office Files, Mojave National Preserve HQ.

277 "Mojave NP (CA) - Drug Lab Arrests," National Park Service Morning Report March 6,

1998; Press Release, "Clandestine Drug Lab Found in Mojave National Preserve," March 16,

2001.

278 Press Release, "Clandestine Drug Lab Found in Mojave National Preserve," March 16,

2001; Incident MOJA0100000025, file "Case Incident Reports 2001," Chief Ranger's office,

MOJA HQ, Barstow CA.

279 See 16 U.S.C. 19jj.

280 Folder "[Name Withheld] Road Grade 19jj Case - ICT," Chief Ranger's office, MOJA

HQ, Barstow CA.

281 Folder "[Company Name Withheld] Road Grade Building Case," Chief Ranger's office,

MOJA HQ, Barstow CA.

282 File (Binder) "Morning Star Airplane Crash, Case MOJA00038," Chief Ranger's Office,

MOJA HQ, Barstow CA.

283 MOJA case #01-26, File "Case incident reports 2001," Chief Ranger's office, MOJA HQ.

284 National Transportation Safety Board, Derailment of Union Pacific Railroad Unit Freight

Train 6205 West Near Kelso, California, January 12, 1997, Railroad Accident Report, PB98-

916301 (Washington, DC: National Transportation Safety Administration, February 6, 1998);

Chuck Mueller, "Freeway Closures Turn Baker into Boomtown," San Bernardino County Sun

January 15, 1997; Tim Duncan, conversation with author, February 9, 2002, Kelso California.

285 Don Holland, "Father, Son Get Prison Time For Illegal Dumping," Desert Dispatch

October 29, 1996; "Man Gets Prison Term For Illegal Dumping," Las Vegas Review-Journal

October 27, 1996; Mary Manning, "Las Vegas Draw Prison Time For Illegal Dumping," Las

Vegas Sun October 30, 1996; Gene Shlotto, "Man Gets Probation for Dumping Waste,"

Press-Enterprise March 3, 1997; "A Federal Grand Jury Returns a 21-Count Indictment in
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

Illegal Transporting and Dumping of Hazardous Waste Case," Baker Valley News October

20, 1995; "Man Gets 46 Months Over Toxic Waste," Los Angeles Times October 27, 1996;

Mary Manning, "Family Business Faces More Dumping Problems," Las Vegas Sun August

28, 1997; Joe Schoenmann, "Las Vegas Father, Son Face Federal Charges in Waste Dumping

Case," Las Vegas Review-Journal August 28, 1997.

286 Binder "Operation Sweet Success - Barrel Cactus Theft - USDI - NPS - DEVA98-

00594," binder 1 of 2, Chief Ranger files, MOJA HQ, Barstow CA.

287 Incidents MOJA9900000146, MOJA9900000155, MOJA9900000152, in folder "Recent -

Review Case Incidents," Chief Ranger files, MOJA HQ; Mary Martin letter to Don and Mary

Enlow, N1623, February 4, 2000, in binder "Read File FY00" tab "Resource Management,"

MOJA HQ.

288 Kirk Gebicke and Chris Burns, Incident Reports, faxed copy in possession of author.

289 Incident MOJA9900000150, in folder "Recent - Review Case Incidents," Chief Ranger

files, MOJA HQ, Barstow CA.

290 Author interview with Sean McGuinness, December 4, 2002; author's notes of

conversation with Bob Conway, February 8, 2002, MOJA HQ, Barstow CA; corroborated by

Tim Duncan, conversation with author, February 9, 2002, Kelso CA.

291 Mike Dougherty, "The Snowbound Ladies of the Sierra Club," Pahrump Valley Gazette

April 9, 1998.

292 Author interview with Sean McGuinness, December 4, 2002.

293 In this case, I use the male pronoun because as of 2002, all Mojave National Preserve

rangers in charge of a patrol area are male.

294 Author's notes of conversation with Bob Conway, February 8, 2002, MOJA HQ, Barstow

CA; Author's notes of conversation with Tim Duncan, February 9, 2002, Kelso CA; Author

interview with Sean McGuinness, December 4, 2002.

295 Author interview with Sean McGuinness, December 4, 2002; Mojave National Preserve,

"Major Accomplishments for the First Five Years (1994-1999)," 3; "Mojave National

Preserve, "FY 2000 GPRA Accomplishments," 2; Mojave National Preserve Press Release,

"Fiscal Year 2002 Budget and Annual Performance Plans for Mojave National Preserve are

Available for Public Review," December 31, 2001.

296 Author interview with Sean McGuinness, December 4, 2002.

297 Gary George, "Deadly Highway Becomes Deadlier," Victorville Daily Press, July 10,

2002; Scott Van Horne, "Postmus, Fire Officials Butting Heads," Desert Dispatch September

13, 2002; David Schwartz, "Training for Firefighters From Baker's Prison to Resume," Desert

Dispatch November 20, 2002; Christina L. Esparza, "Baker Fire Takes Hit in Budget," Desert

Dispatch March 12, 2003.

298 Mojave National Preserve, "Superintendent's Annual Report for FY98," 8; Mojave

National Preserve, "Report of Accomplishments, October 1, 1996 to September 30, 1997," 3.
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

299Mary G. Martin letter to Kristy MacMillan [sic], October 15, 1999, in binder "Read file

FY00" tab "Administration/Personnel," MOJA HQ.

300 Author interview with Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002, Disc 2; Mojave National

Preserve, Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement and General Management Plan, 72.

301 Author interview with Mary "Jeff" Karraker, Barstow, CA, March 28, 2002; Author

interview with David Moore, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

302 In summary, the themes are concerned with the variety and transitional habitat found in

the park; the geology of Mojave; diverse and specially adapted flora and fauna; the fragility

of the desert; Mojave's extensive historical and cultural resources; and Mojave's vastness,

remoteness, and solitude. Mojave National Preserve, "Long Range Interpretive Plan - Draft,"

July 8, 2001, 16-17.

303 "Long Range Interpretive Plan," 13-15.

304 Gordon Chappell, et al., An Oasis for Railroaders in the Mojave: The History and

Architecture of the Los Angeles and Salt Lake Railroad Depot, Restaurant and Employees'

Hotel at Kelso, California on the Union Pacific System (California: U.S. Department of the

Interior, National Park Service: 1998), 187-188.

305 Mojave National Preserve Press Release, "Restoration of Kelso Depot to Begin," June 7,

2002.

306 National Park Service, "Final GMP Record of Decision," accessed May 2, 2002,

http://www.nps.gov/moja/ rod&fp.htm.

307 National Park Service, "Final GMP Record of Decision," accessed May 2, 2002,

http://www.nps.gov/moja/ rod&fp.htm.

308 Mojave National Preserve, Comments and Responses on the 1998 Draft Environmental

Impact Statement and General Management Plan, July 2000, 58-59; Mojave National

Preserve, Abbreviated Final Environmental Impact Statement & General Management Plan,

73; Author interview with Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002, Disc 2.

309 "Long Range Interpretive Plan," 62.

310 The map was revised in 1999 and is still handed out by park staff, though the printing

costs have been assumed by the NPS. David Moore, electronic message, January 31, 2003,

copy in possession of author.

311 Comment by Mary Martin on draft, December 2002, copy in possession of author.

312 Robin Richards, "NPS Considers Visitors Center in Needles," Mohave Valley Daily News

July 4, 1996; Robin Richards, "National Park Service to Locate Information Center in

Needles," Mohave Valley Daily News June 26, 1997; Robin Richards, "Park Service to Open

Soon," Needles Desert Star November 5, 1997; David Drudge, "Park Service Opening Info

Center in Needles," Desert Dispatch December 4, 1997; "Mojave National Preserve Opens

Center in Needles," Mohave Valley Daily News December 4, 1997; Maggie McShan, "Spring

Means Special Events Around Needles," Needles Desert Star March 11, 1998; James

Woolsey, "Parks Provide Benefits," Needles Desert Star March 3, 1999; Comment by Mary
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

Martin on draft, December 2002.

313 Author interview with Mary "Jeff" Karraker, March 28, 2002.

314 See chapter three for more information.

315 Author interview with Mary "Jeff" Karraker, March 28, 2002; Mojave National Preserve,

"FY2000 GPRA Accomplishments," 11 (IIb1O1).

316 Sean McGuinness to Eric Nystrom, electronic message, December 13, 2002, copy in

possession of author; Author interview with Sean McGuinness, December 4, 2002; Author

interview with Linda Slater, Barstow, CA, March 27, 2002.

317 Author interview with Linda Slater, March 27, 2002; Author interview with Mary "Jeff"

Karraker, March 28, 2002.

318 For an example, see Ted R. Weasma letter to Teresa Cervantes, May 5, 2000, in binder

"Read File FY00" tab "Resource Management — Mining," MOJA HQ; Author interview

with Linda Slater, March 27, 2002.

319 Terri Martin, "RS-2477: A Loophole For Vandals," High Country News March 21, 1994;

Elizabeth Manning, "Utah's Burr Trail Still Leads to Court," High Country News April 15,

1996; Larry Warren, "Utah Counties Bulldoze the BLM, Park Service," High Country News

October 28, 1996; Christopher Smith, "Feds Sue a Utah County For Building a Road in a

National Park," High Country News June 8, 1998; Rachel Jackson, "Counties Cross the

Yellow Line," High Country News July 30, 2001.

320 Mojave National Preserve, Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement and General

Management Plan, Appendix F, "Principles for Wilderness Management in the California

Desert," 442-458.

321 Author interview with Mary Martin, March 29, 2002, Disc 2.

322 "Thirsty Mojave Knee-Deep in Water Controversy," Environmental News Network /

CNN.com October 30, 2000; Chuck Mueller, "Council Will Review Desert Water Plan," San

Bernardino County Sun October 20, 2000; Tony Perry, "Key Agencies Reach Accord on

Wells in Mojave Desert," Los Angeles Times October 4, 2000; "State Must Deal With the

Bugs to Build Water Supply," San Bernardino County Sun November 26, 2000; Tony Perry,

"High Chromium 6 Levels Found in Mojave Aquifer," Los Angeles Times November 14,

2000; Tom Philp, "Brockovich's Mermaid Cameo in a Water Plot," Sacramento Bee

November 14, 2000; "Mojave Water Grab: Severely Flawed Environmental Report Puts

Desert At Risk," PR Newswire October 20, 2000; Laura Wides, "Plan To Store Water Under

Desert OK'd," Las Vegas Review-Journal August 30, 2002; "State Panel Kills Water Plan,"

Las Vegas Review-Journal October 9, 2002.

323 Mojave National Preserve Press Release, "Mojave National Preserve Named One of

America's Top Globally Important Bird Areas," August 16, 2001.

324 Darlington, 222-234; "Tortoise Population Falling, Government Biologist Says,"

Victorville Press-Dispatch December 29, 1996; Todd Wilkinson, "A Troubled Time for

Tortoises," National Parks July/August 1996, 32-39; Chuck Mueller, "Tortoises Face Threat

From Kissing Disease," San Bernardino County Sun January 12, 1997; James Woolsey,
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

"Survival Challenges," Needles Desert Star, November 5, 1997; Teri Figueroa, "Creeping

Closer to Extinction," Victorville Press-Dispatch June 11, 2000; Author interview with Mary

Martin, March 29, 2002, Disc 2.

325 Author interview with Doug Scovill, December 3, 2002; "Breakdown" was released in

theaters in May 1997 by 20th Century Fox/Paramount Pictures, and starred Kurt Russell.

326 Infield, 286-295. As an example, 1998's auction tag fetched $150,000; see Steve Torres,

"Apply For Your 'Hunt of a Lifetime'" Tracks: News About California Deer and Other Big

Game 16 (1999): 15.

327 See chapter three for analysis of hunting in the creation of the park; comment on draft by

Mary Martin, December 2002.

328 See chapter four for more information about the bighorn sheep incident.

329 See chapter four for the Dollar Budget and its effects; Mojave National Preserve, Revised

Draft Environmental Impact Statement and General Management Plan, 125; Dave Pegg, "Sin

City Limestone," Climbing June 15, 1998, 95-100, 163-165.

330Lara Hartley, "Ropin' and Wranglin' Wild Burros," Press-Dispatch May 28, 2000.

331Author interview with Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002, Disc 1; Author interview with

Doug Scovill, December 3, 2002; Mojave National Preserve, Revised Draft General

Management Plan, 127-131; Lara Hartley, "Ropin' and Wranglin' Wild Burros," PressDispatch May 28, 2000; Chuck Mueller, "Burros To Be Marked For Aerial Surveys," San

Bernardino County Sun, August 14, 1996; "Burros To Move From Mojave Preserve,"

Mohave Valley Daily News September 4, 1997; Greg Harris, "Adoption Program Moves

Burros Out of Mojave National Preserve," Victorville Daily Press September 5, 1997; Mojave

National Preserve Press Release, "Burro Roundup in Mojave National Preserve," April 10,

2001; comment by Mary Martin on draft, December 2002. Cleveland Amory died a very

short time after the conclusion of the burro agreement with the Preserve.

332 Author interview with Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

333 Author interview with Mary Martin, March 26, 2002, Disc 2.

334 Mojave National Preserve, Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement and General

Management Plan, 124; Mojave National Preserve Press Release, "Mojave National Preserve

Environmental Assessment Released," September 21, 2001; Mojave National Preserve,

"Finding of No Significant Impact, Dredging of Lake Tuendae, Habitat for the Endangered

Mojave Tui Chub."

335 Draft Environmental Impact Statement: P140 Coaxial Cable Removal Project, Socorro,

New Mexico to Mojave, California December 1997, i, xi-xiii, 1-31; Federal Register, May 29,

1998, 29429-29430; Federal Register, September 22, 1998, 50580-50581; Mary G. Martin

letter to Preston M. Canzius, L3031, June 15, 1999, binder "Read File FY99" tab "Resource

Management," MOJA HQ; Mary G. Martin letter to Dennis Casebier, November 18, 1999,

folder "Read File FY00" tab "Resource Management," MOJA HQ.

336 Mary G. Martin memorandum to Realty Officer, Land Resources, PGBSSO, July 2, 1998,

in binder "Read File FY99" tab "Management Team," MOJA HQ; Mary G. Martin letter to
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

Dianne Feinstein, December 1, 1998 Mojave National Preserve Press Release, "Blair Land

Exchange Finalized," March 15, 2001; Author interview with Mary Martin, March 29, 2002,

Disc 2.

337Mary G. Martin letter to Randel Aleman, L3019, December 19, 1999, in binder "Read File

FY00" tab "Resource Management — Grazing," 2, 4, MOJA HQ.

338 Author interview with Mary Martin, March 29, 2002, Disc 2; Author interview with

Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002, Disc 2; Clay Overson and Sandra Overson letter to Mary

Martin, January 25, 2000, Mary Martin memorandum to Regional Director, Pacific West

Region, February 16, 2000, in binder "Read File FY00" tab "Resource Management —

Grazing," MOJA HQ; Mojave National Preserve Press Release, "Granite Mountain Grazing

Allotment Donated to Mojave National Preserve," April 18, 2000; Mojave National Preserve

Press Release, "Kessler Springs and Lanfair Valley Allotments Donated to Mojave National

Preserve," January 16, 2001.

339 An Animal Unit Month (AUM) is the amount of forage necessary to feed a cow and her

calf for one month. Grazing on federal land is measured in AUMs.

340 The National Park Service owned a majority of the Preserve's water rights only after the

Overson and Blincoe acquisitions. Mary Martin, comment on draft, December 2002.

341 Frank Clifford, "Firm Threatens to Mine, Build in Mojave Preserve," Los Angeles Times

October 31, 1996; Carl Nolte, "Mojave Preserve Land-Swap Deal Stalls Over Price," San

Francisco Chronicle November 4, 1996; Frank Clifford, "US Pursues Major Land Swap in

Mojave," Los Angeles Times May 21, 1997; Andrew Silva, "Wildlands Expansion Discussion

Under Way," San Bernardino County Sun December 1, 1998; Frank Clifford, "$52-Million

Deal Seeks to Save Desert Land," Los Angeles Times December 2, 1998; Alex Barnum,

"Clinton's Big Plans For Protecting Land," San Francisco Chronicle January 12, 1999;

Andrew Silva, "Huge Conservation Deal Advances," San Bernardino County Sun January 12,

1999; Andrew Silva, "Babbitt Predicts Congressional Support of Deal," San Bernardino

County Sun January 21, 1999; Bettina Boxall, "US Takes Control of Desert Land," Los

Angeles Times January 30, 2000; Teri Figueroa, "$20M Deal Adds Land to BLM, Preserve,"

Victorville Daily Press July 28, 2000; Scott Gold, "US Acquires Desert Land for

Preservation," Los Angeles Times July 28, 2000.

342 Keith Rogers, "Environmentalists Oppose Airport Plans for Ivanpah Valley," Las Vegas

Review-Journal June 24, 1998; Mark D. Preston, "Plans For Cargo Airport Advance," Las

Vegas Sun August 7, 1998; Tony Batt, "Ivanpah Valley Airport Proposal for Clark County

Defeated in the House," Las Vegas Review-Journal October 8, 1998; Clyde Weiss,

"Conservation Group Lists Mojave Preserve as Endangered," Las Vegas Review-Journal

April 21, 1999; Clyde Weiss, "Push Renewed For Ivanpah Airport," Las Vegas ReviewJournal June 1, 1999; Keith Rogers, "Group: Airport Plan a Threat," Las Vegas ReviewJournal June 21, 1999; Tony Batt, "Congressional Panel Oks Sale of Land for Airport South

of LV," Las Vegas Review-Journal September 24, 1999; Christine Dorsey, "Airport Land

Bill Delayed By Senators," Las Vegas Review-Journal October 21, 1999; Launce Rake,

"Plans for Second Airport Take Flight," Las Vegas Sun November 7, 1999; Launce Rake,

"Environmentalists Air Complaints," Las Vegas Sun November 8, 1999; Benjamin Grove,

"House Launches New Airport," Las Vegas Sun March 9, 2000; Christine Dorsey,

"Compromise Pushes Ivanpah Airport Measure Forward," Las Vegas Review-Journal March

9, 2000; Christine Dorsey, "Ivanpah Airport Bill Advances," Las Vegas Review-Journal July

14, 2000; Benjamin Grove, "Ivanpah Airport Gets Go-Ahead From Senate," Las Vegas Sun

October 6, 2000; Christine Dorsey, "House Oks Sale of Ivanpah Valley Land for Airport,"
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

Las Vegas Review-Journal October 18, 2000; Christine Dorsey, "Clinton Signs Ivanpah

Airport Legislation," Las Vegas Review-Journal October 29, 2000.

343 Author interview with Dennis Schramm, March 26, 2002, Disc 1.

344 Author interview with Robert Bryson, Barstow CA., March 28, 2002.

345 Mojave National Preserve, Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement and General

Management Plan, 105, 149.

346 Also see the section on interpretation in chapter seven for more information about the

Kelso depot.

347 Mojave National Preserve, Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement and General

Management Plan, 247.

348 Gordon Chappell, et al., An Oasis for Railroaders in the Mojave: The History and

Architecture of the Los Angeles and Salt Lake Railroad Depot, Restaurant and Employees'

Hotel at Kelso, California on the Union Pacific System (California: U.S. Department of the

Interior, National Park Service: 1998); Mojave National Preserve, Revised Draft

Environmental Impact Statement and General Management Plan, Appendix B, "Kelso Depot

Development Concept Plan," 349-368; Mojave National Preserve Press Release, "Kelso

Depot Added to National Register of Historic Places," August 16, 2001.

349 Chuck Mueller, "Park Hopes Old Vulcan Mine Will Be Prosperous," San Bernardino

County Sun March 9, 1998.

350 Author interview with Robert Bryson, March 28, 2002.

351 See chapter two for more information on the history of mining in the area of the Preserve.

Author interview with Andrew Lesczykowski, Barstow, CA, February 8, 2002, Disc 2.

352 Author interview with Andrew Lesczykowski, February 8, 2002, Disc 1-2.

353 "California Desert Protection Act of 1994," Public Law 103-433, Section 509; Author

interview with Ted Weasma, Barstow, CA, March 27, 2002, Disc 1. For a map of active

mining claims in the Preserve, see Mojave National Preserve, General Management Plan,

101.

354 Author interview with Ted Weasma, March 27, 2002, Disc 1; Author interview with

Gordon Pine, Barstow, CA, March 27, 2002.

355 Author interview with Andrew Lesczykowski, February 8, 2002, Disc 2.

356 Author interview with Andrew Lesczykowski, February 8, 2002, Disc 2.

357 Mary G. Martin letter to Lorene Caffee [no date], in binder "Read File FY99" tab "Special

Uses Team," MOJA HQ.

358 Mary G. Martin, memorandum to Regional Director, August 10, 1999, Mary G. Martin,

letter to Terry Caffee and Lorene Caffee, August 10, 1999, in binder "Read File FY99" tab

"Management Team," MOJA HQ.
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

359 Author interview with Mary Martin, March 29, 2002, Disc 1.

360 Robin Sorti (daughter of Lorene Caffee),

http://www.deuceofclubs.com/moj/cimamine/mine1.htm, accessed March 18, 2002; J. Lorene

Caffee letter to Senator Dianne Feinstein, August 23, 1999; Mary G. Martin letter to Monte

E. Ray, January 12, 2000, in "Read File FY00" tab "Resource Management — Mining,"

MOJA HQ; Author interview with Andrew Lesczykowski, February 8, 2002, Disc 2.

361 Author interview with Andrew Lesczykowski, February 8, 2002, Disc 2; "Molycorp

Through the Years," San Bernardino County Sun May 25, 1997; Dave Anderson, "Molycorp

Issue Paper," Jan 21, 2000.

362 Steven Church, "Water Watchdogs Ignored Spills," San Bernardino County Sun June 9,

1998.

363 Author interview with Dave Anderson, Barstow, CA, February 7, 2002.

364 "Radioactive Waste Remains in Desert Months After Spill," Desert Dispatch April 25,

1997.

365 Christine Vetter, "Information on the Molycorp Waste Discharge Pipeline Releases," May

4, 1999; Author interview with Dave Anderson, February 7, 2002.

366 Vetter, "Information..."; Author interview with Dave Anderson, February 7, 2002; Steven

Church, "An Accident Waiting to Happen?" San Bernardino County Sun March 4, 1998;

Greg Harris, "Water Quality Officer to Issue Cleanup Orders to Molycorp," Victorville Daily

Press March 21, 1998; Warren Bates, "Company Nearly Finished With Cleanup of

Radioactive Spills," Las Vegas Review-Journal February 23, 1998.

367 Greg Harris, "Molycorp Faces Cleanup Orders," Desert Dispatch March 21, 1998; Greg

Harris, "Molycorp Temporarily Suspends Wastewater Pipeline Usage," Desert Dispatch

March 25, 1998; Steven Church, "Molycorp To Close Waste-Water Pipeline Near I-15," San

Bernardino County Sun March 24, 1998; Greg Harris, "Molycorp to Pay $410,000," Desert

Dispatch July 11, 1998; "Molycorp Fined $410,000 in Wastewater Pollution Case," Las

Vegas Review-Journal July 11, 1998.

368 "Can Molycorp Get A Handle On Spills?" San Bernardino County Sun October 6, 1998;

Dave Anderson, "Molycorp Issue Paper," Jan. 21, 2000

369 Steven Church, "Molycorp Faces Water Cleanup Order," San Bernardino County Sun

March 7, 1998; Marry Manning, "Mining Company Target of Environmental Lawsuit," Las

Vegas Sun May 14, 1998; Greg Harris, "District Attorney Files Suit Against Molycorp Inc.,"

Desert Dispatch May 21, 1998; Steven Church, "DA Suing Molycorp Over Leaks," San

Bernardino County Sun May 20, 1998.

370 Mimi Ko Cruz, "Molycorp Suspends Operations At Mountain Pass Site," San Bernardino

County Sun September 12, 1998; Craig Johnson, "Supervisors OK Firms for Mine

Environmental Study," Desert Dispatch October 28, 1998; Cerise A. Valenzuela, "Payment

Plan OK'd For Mine's Environmental Study on Expansion," San Bernardino County Sun

October 28, 1998; Dave Anderson, "Molycorp Issue Paper," Jan 21, 2000.

371
Mojave National Preserve: Administrative History (Footnotes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/adhin.htm[8/6/2013 5:33:57 PM]

 Dave Anderson, "Environmental Cleanup Liability Assessment, Molycorp Mine Site

Summary," Sept 25, 2001; Author interview with Dave Anderson, February 7, 2002.

372 Mary Martin letter to Marge Rouch, L3031, April 11, 2000, in binder "Read File FY00"

tab "Resource Management," MOJA HQ; Mojave National Preserve Press Release 01-005

(no title), March 13, 2001; Mojave National Preserve Press Release, "Nearly 1000 Tons of

Debris Removed," August 16, 2001.

373 Dave Anderson, "Environmental Cleanup Liability Assessment, Kelso Dunes Mine Site

Summary," September 21, 2001.

374 Central HAZMAT Fund is the Department of the Interior version of Superfund. Author

interview with Dave Anderson, February 7, 2002, Disc 1; Mary G. Martin letter to Kathy

Davis, L3019, [no date], in binder "Read File FY00" tab "Management," MOJA HQ; Mary G.

Martin letter to Keith Fegert, N3617, August 10, 1999, in binder "Read File FY99"

tab"Resource Management," MOJA HQ; Dave Anderson, "Environmental Cleanup Liability

Assessment, Morning Star Mine Site Summary," September 21, 2001.

375 Mojave National Preserve, "Report of Accomplishments October 1, 1996 to September

30, 1997," 2.

376 See the section on resource and visitor protection in chapter seven for an account of the

incident.

377 Mojave National Preserve, "Major Accomplishments for the First Five Years (1994-

1999)," 8.

378 Mojave National Preserve, "Major Accomplishments for the First Five Years (1994-

1999)," 8.

379 "Wilderness Act," Public Law 88-577, September 3, 1964, Section 2(c).

380 See Mark David Spence, Dispossessing the Wilderness: Indian Removal and the Making

of the National Parks (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999) and William Cronon, "The

Trouble With Wilderness, or, Getting Back to the Wrong Nature," in William Cronon, ed.,

Uncommon Ground: Toward Reinventing Nature (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1995),

69-90.

<<< Previous <<< Contents >>>

moja/adhi/adhin.htm

Last Updated: 05-Apr-2004
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig1.jpg[8/6/2013 5:33:59 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig2.jpg[8/6/2013 5:33:59 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig3.jpg[8/6/2013 5:33:59 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig4.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:00 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig5.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:00 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig6.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:01 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig7.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:02 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig8.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:02 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig9.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:03 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig10.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:03 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig11.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:03 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig12.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:04 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig13.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:04 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig14.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:05 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig15.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:05 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig16.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:05 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig17.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:06 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig18.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:06 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig19.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:07 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig20.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:07 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig21.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:08 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig22.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:08 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig23.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:09 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig24.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:10 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/moja/adhi/images/fig25.jpg[8/6/2013 5:34:10 PM]