Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/index.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:08 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

ISOLATED

PARADISE:

An Administrative History of

the Katmai and Aniakchak

NPS Units, Alaska

By

Frank B. Norris

1996

National Park Service

Alaska System Support Office

Anchorage, Alaska

TABLE OF CONTENTS

adhi/index.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Table of Contents)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/contents.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:09 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Cover

Cover photograph: Three Forks in the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes. Here Knife and Windy

Creeks join the River Lethe, which is part of the Ukak River basin. (Bruce Kaye, NPS)

List of Maps

List of Tables

List of Photographs

Author's Note

Abbreviations

Part I: Katmai National Park and Preserve

1. An Overview of the Katmai Country

A Land of Topographic and Biotic Diversity

A Prehistoric Cultural Crossroads

Native and European Interaction, 1741-1867

A Perspective on the Early American Period, 1867-1912

2. Creation of Katmai National Monument, 1912-1918

The Eruption of Mount Katmai

Alaskans React to the Eruption

The National Geographic Society Shows an Interest

Griggs Discovers the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes

Toward the Protection of the Volcanic Area

The National Park Service Gets Involved

President Wilson Proclaims Katmai National Monument

3. An Era of Neglect: Monument Administration Before 1950

Reactions to the New Monument

Early Monument Visitors

Initial National Park Service Management

The 1931 Boundary Expansion

Users of the Monument, 1931-1936

The NPS Expresses an Interest
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Table of Contents)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/contents.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:09 PM]

Trappers and the Kinsley Investigation

Carson and Been Visit the Monument

The 1942 Boundary Expansion

Attempts to Establish a Management Presence

Wartime Usage of the Monument

Pearson and Kuehl Visit the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes

Katmai Management Issues, 1945-1948

Alaskan Attempts to Dismantle the Monument

Management Activities, 1948-1950

Ray Petersen Establishes the Katmai Concession

4. Katmai Management, 1950-1969

NPS On-Site Operations Begin

Early Staffing

The Alaska Recreation Survey

Proposed Boundary Changes, 1951-1955

Questions About Access: Brooks Camp Airstrip Issues, 1954-1956

The Mission 66 Program

Master Plan Efforts, 1957-1960

Access Issues Related to Mission 66, 1956-1958

The Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes Road

The Proposed Trans-Peninsula Highway

King Salmon Facility Establishment

Master Plan Activity, 1963-1967

Access Issues During the 1960s

Staff and Budget Growth

Creation of McNeil River State Game Sanctuary

Should Katmai Be Designated a National Park?

5. Katmai and The Alaska Lands Controversy, 1969-1980

Early Attempts to Resolve Statewide Lands Issues

The 1969 Boundary Expansion

Katmai Gets a Superintendent

Problems Administering the Monument, 1969-1974

Preparing a Master Plan and Wilderness Study

ANCSA and the d-2 Process

Katmai Issues a Master Plan

The 1974 Final Wilderness Statement

The Department of the Interior Considers an Expanded Park

Planners Weigh the Future of Katmai

Issues in Monument Administration, 1975-1980

The Proclamation of an Expanded Monument

Establishment of Katmai National Park and Preserve

6. Management of Katmai National Park and Preserve

Issues Relating to Brooks Camp Growth

Park Enforcement Activities

The King Salmon Headquarters Plan

Katmai Begins the Management Planning Process

Alagnak River Planning Efforts

Creation of a General Management Plan
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Table of Contents)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/contents.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:09 PM]

Native Land Claims Become a Major Issue 

The Melgenak Claim at Brooks Camp

The Peters Claim at Lake Camp

Backcountry Ranger Activities

The Katmai Wilderness Plan

Katmai Land Exchange Proposals

Park Activities, 1983-1992

The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill

The Brooks River Area Development Concept Plan

7. The Katmai Interpretive Program

Early Interpretation

Effects of Valley Road Construction

Evolution of Interpretive Themes

Growth in Backcountry Use

A Cooperative Association is Established

Interpretive Activities Since 1970

Interpretive Improvements

Conclusions

8. Fish and Aquatic Resource Management

Early Users and Investigations

Construction of the Brooks River Fish Ladder

Sport Fishing Before 1950

Sport Fishery Management, 1950-1976

Fisheries Research and Management Activities, 1950-1976

Fisheries Research and Management Activities Since 1976

Changes in Sport Fishing Regulations Since 1980

Use of Katmai's Fishery By Local Residents

Clamming Operations

9. Bear Management

Bears Become a Significant Management Element

Early Bear Management Policies

Problems with Brooks Camp Garbage

Katmai Bear Research, 1967-1969

Bear Management Activities, 1970-1974

Planning and Policy Development, 1975-1985

Bear Research in the 1980s and 1990s

10. Cultural Resource Management

Early Cultural Resource Concerns

The Katmai Project

University of Oregon Investigations

Archeological Work During the 1970s

Inventory and Nomination Activities

Recent Archeological Investigations

Development of Museum Collection

11. Minerals Management
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Table of Contents)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/contents.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:09 PM]

Early Mineral Exploration

Mining in the Katmai Area, 1918-1945

Attempts to Extract Volcanic Ash

Mining Policies and Surveying Activities, 1945-1970

Proposed Offshore Oil Activities, 1960-1980

Mining and the Alaska Lands Act

Mining in Katmai After 1978

12. Other Resource Management Issues

Early Research Efforts

The Katmai Project

Astronauts in the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes

The Geophysical Institute's Work at Baked Mountain

Alaska Lands Act Biological Studies

Resource Management Since 1980

Novarupta Drilling Project

Exxon Valdez Resource Assessment Work

Subsistence Issues

Part II: Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve

13. Aniakchak's Natural and Cultural History

Natural History

Native Use

Russian Exploration and Settlement

Fisheries Interests Invade the Area

Trapping and Oil Prospecting

USGS Surveyors Investigate Aniakchak Caldera

Father Hubbard Visits the Area

The Aniakchak National Monument Proposal (1931)

Land Use Development, 1931-1970

14. Aniakchak and the Alaska Lands Question

NPS Planning Efforts, 1964-1971

Interior Department Boundary Proposals

Interior Department Land Use Proposals

NPS Keyman Activities

Congress Establishes the Monument and Preserve

15. Management of Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve

Initial Planning Efforts

General Management, Land Protection, and Wilderness Plans

Wilderness Recommendations

Subsistence Management

Visitor Use

NPS Personnel Establish a Presence

Resource Management Activities

Notes
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Table of Contents)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/contents.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:09 PM]

Appendices

A. Growth in Katmai's Boundaries, 1918 to Present

B. Officials in Charge of the Katmai and Aniakchak NPS Units

C. Katmai/Aniakchak Budgets

D. Katmai Visitation Figures, 1966-1992

Selected Bibliography

Index (omitted from online edition)

LIST OF MAPS

Map 1. Location of the Katmai and Aniakchak NPS Units

Map 2. Katmai National Park and Preserve

Map 3. Evolution of Original Monument Boundaries, 1918

Map 4. Evolution of Expanded Monument Boundaries, 1930-1931

Map 5. Boundary Modification Proposals by Alaska Recreation Survey, 1952-1953

Map 6. Master Plan Development Proposals, 1971

Map 7. Proposed Katmai National Park Boundary, December 1973

Map 8. Proposed Katmai National Park Development Proposals, January 1975

Map 9. Brooks River Area, March 1983

Map 10. Aniakchak Bay Cultural Complex

Map 11. Location of Aniakchak Bay Fish Traps

Map 12. Sketch Map Showing Location of Aniakchak

Map 13. Proposed Aniakchak National Monument, 1931

Map 14. Aniakchak Administrative Proposals, 1973

Map 15. Aniakchak Sport Hunting Exclusion, September 2, 1972

Map 16. Koniag, Inc. Subsurface Rights, Granted January 2, 1976

Map 17. Aniakchak Proposals, 1977

Map 18. Aniakchak Boundaries, 1978-80

Map 19. Aniakchak Wilderness Recommendations, 1985-1988

Map 20. Hunting Guide Areas in Aniakchak National Preserve, 1988

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Commercial Use License Activity in Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve

Table 2. Visitation to Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve, 1989-1992

LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS

Photo 1. John "Frenchy" Fournier, a Katmai-area trapper

Photo 2. Harry Featherstone and Roy Fure, trappers

Photo 3. Enforcement agent Carlos M. Carson and his wife

Photo 4. Old poacher's cabin at the mouth of Headwaters Creek

Photo 5. "Fox ranch" on Kiukpalik Island

Photo 6. Poacher's cabins on Takli Island

Photo 7. Louis Corbley, first NPS employee to visit Katmai

Photo 8. Mount McKinley Superintendent Frank Been

Photo 9. Grant Pearson in the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Table of Contents)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/contents.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:09 PM]

Photo 10. Superintendent Pearson at Mount McKinley National Park

Photo 11. Willie Nancarrow, the first Katmai ranger

Photo 12. Katmai's first ranger station

Photo 13. The first interpretive brochure (1952)

Photo 14. The cache near the ranger station

Photo 15. Katmai Project scientists and support personnel at Kukak Bay

Photo 16. Katmai Project personnel in the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes

Photo 17. Robert Luntey, NPS coordinator for the Katmai Project

Photo 18. Northern Consolidated plane arriving at Brooks Camp, 1959

Photo 19. Aerial photo of Kaguyak during the Katmai boundary survey, 1952

Photo 20. Advisory Board visit to the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes, 1965

Photo 21. George Hartzog and Mel Grosvenor during the Advisory Board trip

Photo 22. Mount McKinley Superintendent George Hall

Photo 23. Alaska's NPS planners, 1967

Photo 24. Katmai Superintendent Gil Blinn

Photo 25. Interior Secretary Rogers Morton

Photo 26. Alaska leaders meeting with President Ford

Photo 27. Research Bay, site of proposed visitor-development node

Photo 28. Katmai Superintendent David Morris

Photo 29. Salmon drying at the mouth of Brooks River

Photo 30. The weir at the head of Brooks River

Photo 31. Sport fishing at Brooks Falls

Photo 32. Brooks Falls fish ladder

Photo 33. Cannery at Kukak Bay

Photo 34. Swikshak Bay clam-canning operation

Photo 35. Roy Fure's cabin, storehouse, and cache, American Creek

Photo 36. Fure's Bay of Islands (Naknek Lake) cabin

Photo 37. Savonoski Village remains

Photo 38. Novarupta Volcano, July 1953

Photo 39. Astronauts visit the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes

Photo 40. An astronaut in training peers into the eroded ash deposits

Photo 41. A USGS scientist lectures to a large group of astronauts

Photo 42. A USGS geologist discusses Katmai's geological formations

Photo 43. Two astronauts gather geology specimens

Photo 44. The Bernard Hubbard party visits the north end of Aniakchak Bay

Photo 45. Inside Aniakchak Caldera, 1930, before Vent Mountain erupted

Photo 46. Father Hubbard flying in southwestern Alaska, 1931

Photo 47. Hubbard and Santa Clara University students in the caldera, 1932

Photo 48. Local resident drying salmon at the mouth of Aniakchak River

Photo 49. Columbia River Packers Association bunkhouse, Aniakchak Bay, 1973

Photo 50. Aniakchak Bay bunkhouse, 1990

Cover design by Wyndeth Davis, NPS.

Printed on contract from the Government Printing Office, Seattle, Washington.

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

adhi/contents.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Table of Contents)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/contents.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:09 PM]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Author's Note)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/preface.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:11 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

AUTHOR'S NOTE

This study has been evolving for a long time. William S. Hanable, a historian in the Alaska

Regional Office, began work on it in the spring of 1988. It was originally intended to be a

history of Katmai's bear policies; shortly afterwards, the study's scope was broadened into a

general administrative history. Because of the nature of ongoing management problems, it

was intended that the main themes of that management history would be Brooks Camp, bears,

and fishing. An additional chapter or two would to be devoted to remaining aspects of park

management.

Mr. Hanable completed three chapters--on Brooks Camp, Bear Management, and Fish and

Aquatic Resource Management--during the winter of 1988-89. He was steering them through

the in-house peer review process when the oil tanker Exxon Valdez hit Bligh Reef in the

early morning hours of March 24, 1989. In response to the accident, regional office

management immediately dispatched Mr. Hanable to the field in order to document the

agency's role in fighting the ensuing oil spill. Despite the frenzied pace of activity of the next

few months, he was able to revise the three chapters he had completed but was unable to

complete the remainder of the study. Mr. Hanable left the agency in November 1989.

The author was assigned to complete the task which Mr. Hanable began. It was decided to

retain the chapters which pertained to fish and bear management (chapter 8 and 9); although

the material in those chapters has been somewhat revised, he should be considered the

primary author of both. The material which was originally presented in the Brooks Camp

chapter has been disseminated into several chapters of the present work. The present author is

indebted to Mr. Hanable for gathering a large amount of research material. His thorough,

exacting research made the compilation of this work far easier than it would otherwise have

been.

As defined by Release No. 4 of the agency's Cultural Resource Management Guidelines

(NPS-28), an administrative history "describes how a park was conceived and established

and how it has been managed to the present day." As such, an administrative history

normally provides an extensive discussion of the public pressure, and legislative and

administrative activity, that take place prior to the designation of a new park unit. Such a

history also includes a broad investigation into the successes and failures of park

management. That investigation usually includes the relationship between NPS managers and

concessioners.

In the case of Katmai, two previous volumes make a full discussion of park administration

unnecessary. In August 1971 the NPS published a historic resource study entitled Embattled

Katmai: A History of Katmai National Monument. It was written by John A. Hussey, a

historian working at the agency's Western Service Center in San Francisco. In his study, Mr.

Hussey provided an extensive history of the Katmai country prior to the June 1912 volcanic

eruption. He also did an excellent job of describing the eruption and its aftermath, and gave

an excellent accounting of the scientific expeditions, pressure-group tactics and legislative

maneuvering which resulted in President Wilson's proclamation of September 1918 which
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Author's Note)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/preface.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:11 PM]

established Katmai National Monument. Because Mr. Hussey provided such a thorough

account of the pre-1918 period, the present volume will not try to tread the same ground;

instead, it merely summarizes it. The reader who wishes more details on the early history of

Katmai would be well advised to read Mr. Hussey's fine work.

In addition, there is little need in the present study to concentrate on relations between the

National Park Service and the various commercial entities which have utilized the Katmai

area. In 1992, the author completed Tourism in Katmai Country: A History of Concessions

Activity in Katmai National Park and Preserve. This study discusses the agency's relations

with its primary concessioner, with various park inholders, and with those who have utilized

limited commercial permits and commercial use licenses. A brief history of early tourism to

the area is also included.

The author is indebted to all of those who assisted him in compiling this volume. This

volume, indeed, is a collective effort; he asked for help from scores of people, and virtually

everyone he contacted was helpful and generous. As has been described above, this study

was begun by William Hanable. He, first and foremost, deserves thanks for gathering much

of the primary and secondary material used in this study.

Because this history documents the actions of a government agency, the author based much

of his research on files available at federal government archives: National Archives and

Records Administration repositories, the NPS office in Anchorage, and the park office in

King Salmon. Those particularly helpful in providing access to those files included Tom

Wiltsey and Bruce Parham of the NARA branch in Anchorage; Richard Fusick, with NARA

in Washington, D.C.; Barry Mackintosh, the NPS bureau historian in Washington; David

Nathanson, the NPS Librarian at the agency's Harpers Ferry Center in West Virginia; Janis

Meldrum, a former Katmai/Aniakchak employee now employed at the NPS office in

Anchorage; Melanie Heacox, at Denali National Park and Preserve.

Much data, however, was gathered outside of federal channels. Particularly helpful in

providing that data included Dean Dawson and Larry Hibsphmann of the Alaska State

Archives, in Juneau, Bruce Merrell and Dan Fleming at Loussac Library in Anchorage,

Dennis Walle at the University of Alaska-Anchorage Archives, Barbara Walton at the

Denver Public Library; Barbara Minard at the Columbia River Maritime Museum; Julia

O'Keefe, at the Santa Clara University archives; and Jill Schneider, at the U.S. Geological

Survey's Branch of Alaskan Geology in Anchorage. Special thanks go to Theodor (Ted)

Swem, a retired NPS official living in the Denver area, who shared his meticulous

recollections and provided appropriate files on Katmai history. The staff at Katmai National

Park and Preserve was very helpful in providing information on specific problem areas.

In order to provide help during the editorial and proofreading process, several individuals in

the agency stepped forward to offer their assistance. They included Ross Kavanagh in the

Anchorage office; former superintendents Gil Blinn, Alan Eliason, and Ray Bane; former

park employees Janis Meldrum, David Manski, and Kathy Jope; and current park employee

Mark Wagner. Jack Hession, who has long served as the Sierra Club's Alaska Representative,

was similarly helpful in clearing up the intricacies of the legislative fight that led to the

Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act.

The author briefly interviewed several superintendents and other park employees regarding

specific administrative issues related to park management. Unfortunately, time constraints

prevented a greater oral history element in this study. It is suggested that park or regional

staff organize such a program in the not-too-distant future. The logical subjects for

interviews would be permanent and seasonal park staff, Anchorage-based officials with

responsibilities over the park, local concessioners, and longtime residents of the various
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Author's Note)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/preface.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:11 PM]

towns and villages which surround the park.

It will be noted that scores if not hundreds of place-name locations are scattered through the

volume, and many may be unfamiliar to readers. The more commonly-used place names can

be located in the agency's standard interpretive brochures which are freely available to park

visitors. All names used are the official names used by the U.S. Board of Geographic Names;

if specific locations for less familiar names are needed, it is suggested that the reader consult

either an appropriate USGS quadrangle or a copy of Donald Orth's fine volume, Dictionary

of Alaska Place Names.

In closing, it needs to be noted that the draft of this document was completed during the

summer of 1993. Money for printing, however, was not available until this year. Because of

that delay, and because much of the author's work was based on Mr. Hanable's original

research, this document is not up-to-date. Park staff have noted, quite correctly, that several

resource issues that emerged in the early 1990s have not been covered, and only scattered

notes on park activities since mid-1993 have been included. Therefore, the reader should be

forewarned that any issues covered during the 1990s may be less than complete.

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

adhi/preface.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Abbreviations)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/abbreviations.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:12 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

ABBREVIATIONS

AAO - Alaska Area Office

ABF - Budget and Finance Division (of NPS)

ACC - Alaska Commercial Company

ACV - Alaska Consolidated Vacations (part of NCA)

ADB - Alaska Development Board

ADF&G - Alaska Department of Fish and Game

AEC - Area of Ecological Concern

AEIDC - Alaska Environmental Information and Data Center

AFO - Alaska Field Office

AGC - Alaska Game Commission

AHL - Alaska Historical Library

AKSO - Alaska System Support Office (of NPS)

ALSC - Alaska Legal Services Corporation

AMRAP - Alaska Mineral Resource Assessment Program

AMHA - Anchorage Museum of History and Art

ANC - Anchorage, Alaska

ANCSA - Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act

ANHA - Alaska Natural History Association

ANIA - Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve

ANILCA - Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act

APA - Alaska Power Administration; Alaska Packers Association

APG - Alaska Planning Group

APHA - Alaska Professional Hunters Association

ARC - Alaska Road Commission

ARD - Associate Regional Director

ARO - Alaska Regional Office (NPS)

ARS - Alaska Recreation Survey

ASA - Alaska State Archives

ATF - Alaska Task Force

AVO - Alaska Volcano Observatory

BBNA - Bristol Bay Native Association

BBNC - Bristol Bay Native Corporation

BCF - Bureau of Commercial Fisheries

BIA - Bureau of Indian Affairs

BLM - Bureau of Land Management

BOR - Bureau of Outdoor Recreation

BP - before present

CCC - Civilian Conservation Corps

CDCC - Cape Douglas Canning Corporation

CEQ - Council on Environmental Quality

CERCLA - Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act

CPSU - Cooperative Park Studies Unit

CRPA - Columbia River Packers Association
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Abbreviations)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/abbreviations.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:12 PM]

CUL - Commercial Use License

DCP - Development Concept Plan

DEIS - Draft Environmental Impact Statement

DENA - Denali National Park and Preserve

DES - Draft Environmental Statement

DNR - (Alaska) Department of Natural Resources

DOSECC - Deep Observation and Sampling of the Earth's Continental Crust

DSC - Denver Service Center

EC - Concessions Team; prior to 1995, Environmental Compliance

EEI - Education and Interpretation Team (NPS)

EL - Lands Team (NPS)

EPD - Planning, Design, and Maintenance Team (NPS)

EIS - Environmental Impact Statement

F&WS - Fish and Wildlife Service

FAA - Federal Aviation Agency (1962)

FES - Final Environmental Statement

FOSC - Federal On-Scene Coordinator

FRC - Federal Records Center

FWQA - Federal Water Quality Administration

FY - fiscal year

GLBA - Glacier Bay National Monument

GLO - General Land Office

GMP - General Management Plan

GPO - Government Printing Office

HB - House Bill (Alaska Legislature)

HCRS - Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service

HFC - Harpers Ferry Center (NPS)

HJR - House Joint Resolution

H.R. - (U.S.) House of Representatives (bill number)

HSAR - Historic Structure Assessment Report

IBLA - Interior Board of Land Appeals

ICG - Interagency Coordinating Group

ICT - Incident Command Team

ILI - Iliamna (USGS map acronym)

JFSLUPC - Joint Federal-State Land Use Planning Commission

JSC - Johnson Space Center

KATM - Katmai National Monument, or Katmai National Park and Preserve

KNM - Katmai National Monument

M&P - Management and Protection

MOA - Memorandum of Agreement

MOMC - Mount McKinley National Park

MSC - Manned Spacecraft Center

NARA - National Archives and Records Administration

NAS - National Academy of Sciences

NASA - National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NCA - Northern Consolidated Airlines

NGS - National Geographic Society

NHL - National Historic Landmark

NMFS - National Marine Fisheries Service

NNL - National Natural Landmark

NPS - National Park Service

NR - Natural Resources

NRA - National Recreation Area

NRDA - Natural Resource Damage Assessment
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Abbreviations)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/abbreviations.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:12 PM]

NRFR - Natural Resources Final Report

NRHP - National Register of Historic Places

NRPR - Natural Resources Progress Report

NRSIR - Natural Resource Survey and Inventory Report

NRTR - Natural Resources Technical Report

NSF - National Science Foundation

NWRO - Northwest Regional Office

OAS - Office of Aircraft Services (USDI)

ONR - Office of Naval Research

PCP - Project Construction Program

PNRO - Pacific Northwest Regional Office

R4 - Region Four (NPS office in San Francisco)

RCP - Coastal Programs Division (NPS)

RCR - Cultural Resources Division/Team (NPS)

RD - Regional Director

REDW - Redwood National Park

REQ - Environmental Quality Division (NPS)

RG - Record Group

RMM - Minerals Management Division/Team (NPS)

RMP - Resource Management Plan

RMS - Resource Management Specialist

RNR - Natural Resources Division/Team (NPS)

RPO - Resource Protection Officer

RS - Subsistence Division (NPS)

RuralCAP - Rural Alaska Community Action Project

SAR - Superintendent's Annual Report

SB - San Bruno, California

SEKI - Sequoia-Kings Canyon National Parks

S.J. - Society of Jesuits

SMR - Superintendent's Monthly Report

SSC - San Francisco Service Center (NPS)

SUNY - State University of New York

TAG - Technical Advisory Group

TIC - Technical Information Center (NPS, Denver)

UAA - University of Alaska-Anchorage

UAF - University of Alaska-Fairbanks

USAF - U.S. Air Force

USBF - U.S. Bureau of Fisheries

USC&GS - U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey

USGS - U.S. Geological Survey

USDI - U.S. Department of the Interior

UWSC - University of Washington Special Collections

VISTA - Volunteers in Service to America

WAA - Wien Air Alaska

WASO - Washington (DC) Service Office (NPS)

WCA - Wien Consolidated Airlines

WIMP - Winter Interagency Monitoring Program

WODC - Western Office of Design and Construction

WRO - Western Regional Office

WSC - Western Service Center

<<< Previous <<< Contents>>> Next >>>
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Abbreviations)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/abbreviations.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:12 PM]

adhi/abbreviations.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap1.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:14 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

PART I: KATMAI NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE

Chapter 1:

An Overview of the Katmai Country

Katmai National Park and Preserve is located between Shelikof Strait and Bristol Bay in

southwestern Alaska. Within this reservation is found some of the most spectacular scenery

in the state. The thrusting peaks of the Aleutian Range dominate the eastern half of the unit.

To the west, the land broadens out into countryside dominated by low mountains and rolling

hills punctuated by long, narrow lakes.

Map 2. Katmai National Park and Preserve. Source: NPS, Environmental

Assessment, Draft Development Concept Plan, Brooks Camp and Grosvenor

Camp for Katmai, January 1982, 2. (click image for an enlargement in a new

window)
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap1.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:14 PM]

As might be expected, such a large area as Katmai sports a wide variety of plant and animal

life. Tundra carpets much of the area, while the valleys and lake shores are dominated by

various forms of forest and brush. Caribou, moose and brown bear are all found in Katmai,

along with a wide variety of birds, insects and other fauna. The lakes, particularly those at the

lower elevations, teem with salmon, trout and other fish species.

Both the topography and biotic diversity of the Katmai country are undeniably beautiful.

Neither, however, are singlehandedly responsible for creating the present NPS unit. Katmai

was thrust into prominence because of one catastrophic event: the eruption of Novarupta,

near Mount Katmai, in June 1912. Based on the publicity and scientific curiosity surrounding

that event, Katmai National Monument was created to protect the geological wonderland

which encircled Mount Katmai. [1] In the years since the monument was established, Katmai

has been expanded four times, but the rationale behind all four expansions has borne no

resemblance to that which created the original monument. As the Katmai country became

better known and the number of visitors began to increase, the area became increasingly

valuable as a storehouse of biological diversity. In recent years it has become well known for

its wilderness values as well as a world-class destination for fishing and for game

observation.

Those who would hope to appreciate Katmai need to recognize that the park has developed

into its present form because of a variety of pressures. Katmai has represented different

values to different people. Some, among which are included a number of Alaskans, have seen

Katmai as a place of little worth; as a result, several people have sought to reduce its

boundaries or eliminate the unit entirely. Others, in the name of biological or topographical

consistency, have sought to change the existing straight-line boundaries into borders which

followed river courses, ridge tops, or other natural demarcations. And still others have sought

to expand the park.

This study is an attempt to document how National Park Service officials have managed the

area within the boundaries of present-day Katmai National Park and Preserve. In order to

manage it effectively, the NPS has had to be sensitive to the changing expectations which

people have had for that area, and has attempted to reconcile those expectations with broad

mandates, issued from Washington, regarding how all national park units should be

maintained. The job, to be sure, has not been easy; and there were certainly times,

particularly in the first several decades after the monument was established, in which park

resources were entirely ignored. The upcoming chapters will outline what the agency did to

protect and manage the resources with which it was entrusted, and some of the reasons why

Katmai was managed the way it was.

A Land of Topographic and Biotic Diversity

The combined park and preserve is located at the base of the Alaska Peninsula, a volcanostudded protrusion which stretches over 400 miles to the southwest before it terminates at

False Pass. A huge area (see Map 2) is enclosed within the park. [2] The lands and waters

within its boundaries--3,674,541 acres in Katmai National Park and another 418,699 acres in

Katmai National Preserve--span almost the width of the peninsula, and its boundaries extend

along the base of the peninsula for more than 100 miles. The present park and preserve is

only the fifth largest National Park Service unit in Alaska. Even so, their combined area is

larger than Connecticut and Rhode Island put together, and is almost twice as large as the

largest national park in the Lower 48 states. [3] Katmai, large as it is, is only one small part

of an enormous federal land block which stretches, in an almost unbroken line, some 400

miles from Kamishak Bay to the tip of the Alaska Peninsula.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap1.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:14 PM]

Two physiographic provinces lie within the park: the Aleutian Range and the NushagakBristol Bay Lowlands. [4] The broadly-defined Aleutian Range province constitutes over 90

percent of the park, and is composed of three zones. The Shelikof Strait seacoast zone, which

is a band roughly 10 miles wide along the eastern coast, is a rugged, diversified area of bays,

beaches, cliffs, canyons, and waterfalls. The Aleutian Mountain zone, which ranges in width

from ten to 40 miles, is located inland from the coastal zone. It is an area of volcanic peaks

and glaciers; summits within the zone range from the 3000 foot level to Mount Denison

which, at 7606 feet (2318 meters) is the highest point in the park. The last zone in the

Aleutian province is the lake region--the so-called Hudsonian zone--which is dominated by

lakes, ponds and other hydrographic features. In the eastern portion of the zone, these

features are separated by low mountains and hills, while in the western part the terrain opens

up and the hills diminish. [5]

The Nushagak-Bristol Bay Lowlands, which are separated from the Aleutian Range

physiographic province by the Bruin Bay earthquake fault, is located in the southwestern

corner of the park and constitutes only a small part of it. The terrain in this province is

relatively flat, with many poorly drained lakes. A number of low ridges, sand dunes and

meandering streams break the uniformity of this area. [6]

Nature is effusive and diverse in much of the Katmai country. Tundra carpets much of the

area; a barren and sparse dry tundra is found in many of the higher elevations, while moist

tundra dominates the lowland areas in the western third of the park. The boreal forest

vegetation complex predominates in more climatically advantageous, lower elevation areas,

primarily in river valleys and along lake shores. Dominant species within the complex

include white spruce, birch and balsam poplar. In places where trees cannot survive, high

brush predominates; primary species include alder and willow. Temperate, spruce-dominated

coastal forests cover a few drainages in the northeastern part of the park, while snow fields

and bare rock, are found at the highest elevations in the Aleutian Range. The Valley of Ten

Thousand Smokes, along with some adjacent areas, is also largely unvegetated, it being

overlain with volcanic ash and rock. [7]

Because of the diversity of habitats found in Katmai, the park supports an abundance of

animal life. Biologists have recorded at least six species of marine mammals, 29 species of

land mammals, 137 bird species, 24 species of freshwater fishes and four anadromous fish

species. Of chief interest to the visitor and park manager are the large mammals and game

fishes. Caribou, for instance, inhabit portions of the western end of the park, and moose and

brown bear have been found in many sections of the park. Bear roam even onto the mountain

slopes. The lakes, particularly those at the lower elevations, teem with sockeye salmon,

rainbow and lake trout, Dolly Varden trout, grayling, steelhead, northern pike and other

fishes. Chum salmon are found in streams draining into Shelikof Strait. [8]

The weather, not surprisingly, differs dramatically in the various parts of the park. In the

western portion, temperatures are relatively mild; at Brooks Camp, for instance, summer high

temperatures average 63° F., while lows average 44° F. The weather is predominantly cloudy

or partly cloudy. In the wintertime, average high temperatures drop to 18.5° F., while winter

lows drop to an average of -2.8° F. Winds are generally moderate; in the Brooks Camp area,

however, summer winds are often sufficiently strong as to prevent airplane landings.

No long-term weather stations have been established at other points in the park. Park

managers, concessioners, and others familiar with Katmai, however, unanimously agree that

the weather on Shelikof Strait is poorer than that on the lee side of the Aleutian Range.

Precipitation levels and winds along the coast are consistently higher, and the number of

cloudy days are greater than at Brooks Camp. Summer temperatures are probably cooler

along the coast than at Brooks Camp, and although winter temperatures are probably warmer,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap1.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:14 PM]

winds may make wind-chill readings there more severe. Conditions at points in the Aleutian

Range zone are even worse than along Shelikof Strait. Cool temperatures, wind, clouds and

precipitation are the rule rather than the exception. [9]

A Prehistoric Cultural Crossroads

Because of the harsh conditions that predominate throughout much of the park, there are

relatively few locations known to have supported human habitation. As various historians and

archeologists have noted, humans have been living in Katmai country for thousands of years.

Flaked stone has been found on Takli Island, near the old village of Katmai, which indicates

human occupation beginning as early as 6000 years ago. Other artifacts found on the island

have indicated that humans also lived on the island from 4200 to 2800 BP and from 1800 to

1300 BP. Archeological finds have also been made at other points along the shoreline of

Shelikof Strait, including (from north to south) Cape Chiniak, Kukak Bay, Kaflia Bay, and

Dakavak Bay. Evidence at each location points to occupation dates more recently than 1000

BP. Although corroborating evidence has not yet been discovered, it is likely that early

humans lived along most or all of the bays and inlets along the park's eastern boundary, and

that they used much of the interconnecting coastline for fishing, hunting, or for purposes of

temporary shelter. [10]

Excavations along the Brooks River have shown that humans lived on the Bristol Bay side of

the peninsula as long ago as 4500 BP. Archeologists have determined that the artifacts

uncovered there constituted an extensive village which has been inhabited almost

continuously since that time. As such, the Brooks Camp area is considered a world-class

archeological site. It was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1977, and in

1993 it was listed as a National Historic Landmark. [11]

Other sites on the western side of the Aleutians point to human activity during the prehistoric

period. The remnants of a village near the confluence of the Grosvenor and Savonoski rivers

dates from about 1800 BP; this village, like that along the Brooks River, is also listed on the

National Register of Historic Places. Other habitation sites have been found near the mouth

of the Savonoski River and on the narrow neck of land between lakes Coville and Grosvenor.

Both sites date back less than 500 years. [12]

Native and European Interaction, 1741-1867

Vitus Bering, a Dane sailing in the service of the Russian czar, headed east to present-day

Alaska in 1741 and claimed the land for Russia. During the decades which followed, the

territory attracted sailors from England, Spain, and France. Russians, however, settled and

began to harvest the area's enormous sea otter population.

The first Europeans arrived in the Katmai country in the late eighteenth century, when

Russian fur traders appeared on the Shelikof Strait. By the time of their arrival, the Koniag

Eskimo were probably established in a number of villages along the coast; they were located

(from north to south) at Cape Douglas, Swikshak Lagoon, Kaguyak, Hallo Bay, Devil's Cove,

Kaflia, Missak Bay, Amalik Bay/Takli Island, Dakavak Bay, Katmai, and Kashvik Bay. On

the Bristol Bay side of the Aleutian Range, the Aglegmiut Eskimo were living in scattered

sites within the present park. These locations--along the Brooks River, the mouth of the

Savonoski River, the confluence of the Savonoski and Grosvenor rivers, and between Lake

Coville and Lake Grosvenor--are the same ones which were noted earlier for their prehistoric

occupation. [13]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap1.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:14 PM]

During the period of Russian influence, most of the area within the park was ignored by

Europeans. Although Russians, operating out of Kodiak, held economic dominance over the

Native sea otter harvest, few ever lived on the Alaska Peninsula side of Shelikof Strait.

Katmai village, near the south end of the park's coastal strip, was a trading post of the

Russian American Company from 1799 to 1867, and was the only location known where

European-based peoples resided. [14]

In order to trade with the coastal settlements, the Eskimo of the Bristol Bay country made

annual trips that wound through the Aleutian range. One of the routes used crossed from the

Savonoski River drainage to the Ninagiak River, then on to Hallo Bay. Another, the so-called

Douglas Pass route, may have followed Hardscrabble Creek to its headwaters, then crossed

over into the upper Kamishak River valley. A third followed the Naknek Lake system to the

mouth of the Ukak River, then followed the drainage to its headwaters at Katmai Pass; it then

descended through the cliffs and canyons of the Katmai River to Katmai village. As late as

the 1780s, Natives were still using several routes through the mountains. [15]

Because one of those routes began at the Katmai trading station, nineteenth century travelers

through the mountains began to increasingly rely on the Native route over Katmai Pass.

Russians knew about the pass by 1818, perhaps earlier; by 1845, traders and hunting parties

headed into the interior of the peninsula were using the Katmai trading post as a base camp.

They also used, but to a lesser extent, the old portage which wound up the Savonoski River

and down to Hallo Bay. [16] In order to supply their depots along the shores of Bristol Bay,

Russians occasionally crossed the Alaska Peninsula. But they used neither of the above trails

for those purposes; instead, they relied on routes which traversed either Iliamna or Becharof

lakes, both of which are outside the boundaries of the park. More often, they supplied them

by ship via Unalaska, or from the north via the Yukon River drainage. [17]

During the early and mid-nineteenth century, Russians considered Katmai village to be the

most significant post on the upper Alaska Peninsula. By 1863, 457 people were living there.

The fur trade carried on through the post had been consistently productive; during the halfcentury which ended in 1867, informed observers have estimated that 2000 to 3000 sea otter

pelts passed through each year. But few Russians ever lived there. In 1819, a census counted

four Russian men at the post. Forty-four years later, post operations may have been passed

into Native hands. [18]

Many of the Native sites that had been occupied at the time of contact continued to be active

during the Russian period. These included a settlement near the entrance to Swikshak

Lagoon, at or near Kaguyak, and on the shore of Kukak Bay. There may have also been

intermittent sites at Kaflia Bay, Dakavak Bay, and Takli Island during the Russian period.

But overall, the number of sites along the coast is considered to be rather sparse. This was

caused by the village depopulations which had been instigated at the hands of the Russian

American Company. [19] Away from the coastal areas, the Russian influence was less

pervasive. Therefore, it is likely that population levels at the four Aglegmiut sites in the

parks--at Savonoski, along the Savonoski River, between lakes Grosvenor and Coville, and

along the Brooks River--would have been less affected by Russian activities along Shelikof

Strait. The economy of both coastal and inland Natives was altered in order to cater to the

Russians' demand for furs.

A Perspective on the Early American Period, 1867-1912

Russian America was transferred to the United States in October 1867. In the waning months

of that year, Hayward M. Hutchinson purchased the remaining assets of the Russian

American Company. Soon afterward, he helped establish Hutchinson, Kohl and Company
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap1.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:14 PM]

which, a year later, was purchased by the newly-founded Alaska Commercial Company

(ACC). Although the Russian American Company had been active wherever the Empire had

shown a presence, both Hutchinson, Kohl and Company and its successor concentrated their

operations in areas outside of southeastern Alaska. Both companies, as noted below, operated

within the boundaries of present-day Katmai National Park and Preserve. [20]

On the upper Alaska Peninsula, one major effect of the transfer was a change of ownership in

the trading companies. By the summer of 1868 Hutchinson, Kohl representatives were active

in the waters off Kodiak Island; that October, the company was operating the Katmai trading

post. It was their only post within the boundaries of the present-day park. It was not until

1872 that the Alaska Commercial Company flag began flying over the Katmai post. [21]

During the early period of American rule, trading relationships were similar to those that had

been laid out during the Russian period. During the late 1860s and early 1870s, for example,

the Katmai post continued to exert much the same degree of influence over the Natives as it

had for decades. Post officials traded with various coastal villages to the north and south as

well as with Eskimos in the area surrounding Naknek Lake. (The American merchants, by

and large, did not venture inland from their posts; Native traders traversed the Katmai Pass

trail which connected Katmai with the remote villages in the interior.) The inland villages

were under the political control of Fort Alexander, located at the mouth of the Nushagak

River. But the fort's trade hinterland was relatively small, and did not reach as far east as the

present park boundaries.

During the late 1870s, the ACC brought new trading methods to the area. It laid out a series

of incentives designed to increase the sea otter catch. [22] Perhaps as a result of these

incentives, the yield on the southern portion of the Katmai coast was in decline by 1880. To

increase its yield elsewhere, the company opened a second coastal trading station near Cape

Douglas. That trend became accentuated in 1880 when officials at the ACC post in Nushagak

organized their first expedition to Kamishak Bay. For the next decade, local Natives were

directed to cross the peninsula and hunt furs for the summer season. Their "numerous camps"

were scattered from Augustine Island to Cape Douglas. [23]

Sea otter harvesting boomed in the late 1870s through the middle 1880s; the peak harvest

year was 1885. Coincident with the increased economic pace taking place in the area was the

spread of Russian Orthodoxy to the more lightly populated, remote areas of southwestern

Alaska. On the Bristol Bay side of the Aleutian Range, the priest at the Nushagak church

established a church at "Severnosky Village," at the east end of the Iliuk Arm portion of

Naknek Lake. The chapel remained active from the late 1870s until the 1912 volcanic

eruptions forced Savonoski's residents to abandon the village. Along Shelikof Strait,

Orthodox officials in Kodiak had established chapels at Katmai and Douglas by 1880. Those

chapels also remained active until 1912. At Kukak, a third chapel was probably built between

1890 and 1905. Little information on its operations has surfaced, however, and no trace of a

chapel has been encountered during recent archeological surveys. [24]

During the first four and one-half decades of American rule, church authorities felt that

Katmai, Douglas and Kukak were the most significant villages along the western side of

Shelikof Strait, while Savonoski was relatively prominent among the villages of the Bristol

Bay watershed. Other occupation sites along the coast included Old Kukak, Amalik Bay,

Hallo Bay, Kaflia Bay, Swikshak Lagoon, Dakavak Bay, and various islands bordering the

south shore of Kamishak Bay. Closer to Bristol Bay, other occupation sites were situated

along the Savonoski and Ukak rivers, at the west end of Lake Grosvenor, and on the north

side of Brooks River. [25]

In the late 1880s, the fortunes of the Alaska Commercial Company began to drop because of
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap1.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:14 PM]

a rapid decline in sea otter yields. The dropoff in the harvest was noted in many coastal areas.

By 1890, the census agent visiting Katmai noted that "The number of skins brought home

grows smaller and smaller every year." He made similar observations at Kukak and near

Cape Douglas. Contributing to the otter's decimation was their killing by whites, who

outfitted a "mosquito fleet" of 20-30 schooners and, quite illegally, hunted all summer long

and well into the winter season as well. [26] By the turn of the century, the sea otter trade

had dwindled to economic insignificance. A more critical blow to the company as a whole

came in 1890 when its Pribilof Islands fur seal harvesting contract was not renewed. The twin

blows were devastating, but the company survived by diversifying into other areas of

economic activity. Prospects brightened during the wild (if brief) Klondike gold rush period,

but settled down soon afterwards. [27]

In 1906, the Alaska Commercial Company decided to sell its trading posts on both sides of

the Alaska Peninsula to Omar J. Humphrey. The transaction was to include the trading post

at Katmai, where a single structure was given an assessment value of $150, and the post at

Douglas, with a building valued at $25. But in 1907 the ACC canceled the sale. During 1911

and 1912 it sold selected assets--in Kodiak, Afognak, and elsewhere--to a variety of

interested parties. The Katmai and Douglas properties, apparently valueless by this time,

were left unsold and were effectively abandoned. [28]

The depletion of the fur resource along the coast might have left the local Natives in

economic straits had it not been for the simultaneous establishment of the commercial salmon

fishing industry. As early as 1880 two "fishing establishments" had been founded on the

Karluk River on nearby Kodiak Island, and during the early 1890s a number of canneries

were established at various points on the island, several of which used workers from the

Katmai coast. Natives were by no means the chief work force at the canneries--gangs of

Chinese or Japanese laborers usually outnumbered them--but many Natives were provided a

reliable means of support.

No canneries were ever established along the Katmai coast, but in 1912, a seasonal fishing

station was established at Kaflia, just south of Kukak Bay. The coast around Kukak Bay was

so plentiful with salmon that the steam tenders operating from the Kodiak Island canneries

made an occasional visit, but no facilities resulted. Most of the Natives who lived in Katmai,

Kukak, and Douglas (Kaguyak) had, by this time, adopted a lifestyle which included summer

work in the fishing industry, either at a fishing station or cannery. Regarding the Eskimos on

the Bristol Bay side of the peninsula, there is little documentary evidence to suggest that

Katmai Natives were working for the canneries at Naknek, South Naknek or elsewhere in the

area. Reminiscences of former residents bring forth widely divergent opinions; some recalled

that during the 1910-1912 period the inland villages were almost depopulated during the

summertime, while others remember large numbers of Natives living in the villages all year

long. [29]

The travel across the Aleutian Range which had characterized the late Russian period

continued unabated during the first few decades of American hegemony. The later years of

the Russian period witnessed an increasing concentration of use over Katmai Pass. This trend

continued during the American period. A few travelers, during the first decade or two of the

American period, may have traversed the Aleutians via the well-worn route which crossed

the Savonoski and Ninagiak River watersheds. The vast majority, however, used the Katmai

Pass route. [30]

Some of those who crossed the peninsula via Katmai Pass did so to trade furs. By 1871,

however, trade over the trail was rapidly declining, and when Ivan Petroff visited Katmai in

1880 he noted that "The transit business [across the Aleutians] has long been a thing of the

past." The census taker crossed over the pass that year; ironically, his vivid description of the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap1.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:14 PM]

trail crossing, taken during a rare period of calm, clear weather, helped publicize the recently

abandoned route. [31]

Scattered travelers used the route during the coming years. In early 1889, the Earl of

Lonsdale visited the area as part of a fourteen-month exploring expedition. The following

year, a member of the Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper expedition crossed over, and

several miners heading from Saint Michael to Kodiak probably did so as well. Two other

members of the newspaper party, accompanied by eleven others, followed early in 1891. [32]

Few travelers were known to use the trail for the next several years, but from 1898 to 1901

the area witnessed a flurry of activity. In March 1898 George Fred Tilton, accompanied by

two Siberian Eskimos, trekked over the route in conjunction with the rescue of a whaling

fleet marooned in the Arctic sea ice near Barrow. Seven months later, an explorer with the

U.S. Geological Survey, Josiah Spurr, mapped the area as he crossed the pass. He gave the

world its best description of the area, and he also took the only known photo of the pass

taken before the 1912 eruption. [33]

More numerous were prospectors going to and from Nome, where gold had been discovered

in September 1898. Rather than sail around the Alaska Peninsula, some miners opted to make

a land crossing. Most chose the route during the wintertime, as part of a route that went by

land all the way to Nome. But prospectors apparently used Katmai Pass during the

summertime, too. The flow of miners over the pass had dwindled to a trickle by 1901. One of

the few to cross that year, however, was a young prospector named Rex Beach, who later

became a well-known author. In 1909, he published The Silver Horde, a best-selling novel

which described the rigors of crossing Katmai Pass. [34]

In addition to the explorers and gold-rush miners who were primarily interested in passing

through the Katmai country, others arrived in search of local mineral wealth. Several

expeditions during the 1860s and 1870s brought back rumors that oil existed near Katmai

Bay, but reports later in the century were less enthusiastic. [35] Oil also attracted outsiders.

Oil seepages had been spotted in several locations surrounding Puale Bay, and during the

1902-1904 period the bay played host to an enthusiastic (if brief) oil boom. [36] George

Curtis Martin, a government geologist, surveyed along the shore in the Katmai area at that

time. But nothing of commercial importance was found anywhere in the area, and by 1906

the boom had fizzled. Martin noted oil seepages along the shores of Kamishak Bay,

especially at Douglas River, but he cautioned against further exploration. "The geology of the

coast ... between Douglas and Katmai," he wrote, "does not warrant in the slightest degree

any petroleum prospecting. Along much of this coast are only volcanic and other crystalline

rocks, in which the occurrence of petroleum is an absolute impossibility." [37]

Other resources were sought as well. An 1895 expedition sent to search for gold and coal

cruised the coast of Shelikof Strait; it found no gold, but it did find minor coal deposits near

Cape Douglas, and three seams of "a pretty good coal" on the shore of Amalik Bay. Josiah

Spurr, who crossed Katmai Pass in 1898, was not impressed by the gold potential of that part

of the Alaska Peninsula, and R. W. Stone, who visited the Katmai coast in 1904, had no

better luck finding coal than had earlier explorers. [38]

By the spring of 1912, therefore, the Katmai area was wallowing in the economic doldrums,

primarily because area resources had either been extirpated or were lacking in commercial

importance. As has been noted above, the local sea otter population had been largely

exterminated by the turn of the century. The salmon fishery, while relatively healthy, was

being gathered from ships based well away from the Katmai coastline. Investigators had

discovered no gold, and had found only an inferior quality coal and oil resource. The area

held little or no potential as an agricultural area, and because of its untimbered state held
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 1)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap1.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:14 PM]

little interest to commercial lumbering interests. For a brief time, people had been attracted

to the area because it was a viable route to more distant points, but that period had ceased

more than a decade before.

None but the most foolhardy during that spring of 1912 could have predicted that the Katmai

area was on the verge of becoming an area of world famed interest. But as the next chapter

elaborates, that is precisely what was about to take place.

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

adhi/chap1.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap2.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:17 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

PART I: KATMAI NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE

Chapter 2:

Creation of Katmai National Monument, 1912-1918

The Eruption of Mount Katmai

On June 6, 1912, one of the largest volcanic explosions ever recorded took place in the area

surrounding Mount Katmai. The mountain was scarcely known to the outside world before

that time, but the explosion was of such intensity that it thrust itself into prominence. An

eruption of such a magnitude would have decimated entire populations had it occurred in a

more populated area. [1] As it was, however, the area was so bereft of human activity that

only one person, a tubercular, died from the effects of the eruption. [2]

Mount Katmai is one of a long string of volcanoes which comprise the Aleutian Range. The

range is geologically quite active, even in comparison to other volcanic regions; that activity

stems from the instability created at the intersection of the Pacific and North American

plates. To give an idea of the Aleutians' activity level, 46 of the 79 known volcanoes in the

Aleutians are known to have emitted ash, smoke, steam or lava at some time between 1741

and 1957. Of the historically active volcanoes, 26 have emitted ash, 25 smoke, 16 steam, and

13 lava. One has undergone a series of explosions. (Several peaks have emitted more than

one type of material.) [3]

Therefore, those in the surrounding area found it of little consequence when the area north of

Katmai Pass began to show signs of increased volcanic activity. Mount Katmai had never

erupted during historic time, and there were no known Native legends which told of such an

eruption. But Augustine Volcano, less than 100 miles to the northeast, had erupted at least

twice during the previous century, and Mount Peulik, less than 70 miles in the opposite

direction, had also erupted twice during the same period. As early as 1898, a passing observer

had noticed that earthquakes and other evidences of volcanic action in the area surrounding

Katmai Pass were "very frequent." Local Natives told him that one of the volcanoes near the

pass--they did not say which one--emitted smoke occasionally. [4]

As noted in the previous chapter, economic conditions in 1912 were such that most of the

residents of the Native communities within the present park were away for the summer.

Many of the residents of Katmai, Douglas, and Kukak were working on Kodiak Island in

conjunction with the canneries. On the Bristol Bay side of the Aleutians, at least some of the

residents who normally lived in Savonoski, Brooks River and the other villages headed to the

Naknek area for the summer. Although scattered residents remained at most of the Native

villages, the only real center of activity in the area was the Kaflia Bay fishing station.

Another fishing center was located at Puale Bay, 20 miles south of the present park

boundaries. [5]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap2.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:17 PM]

The first signs of an impending eruption were felt on June 1, perhaps a day or two earlier,

when ominous trembles were felt. The quakes continued to gain in intensity during the next

few days. By June 4 or June 5, the shocks were so severe that they were felt as far away as

Kanatak, 65 miles to the southwest, and Nushagak, 130 miles to the northwest. The area

around Mount Katmai probably emitted its first ejecta on the evening of June 5. [6]

Locals found the rumblings so ominous that they prepared to leave the area. Natives from

Douglas to Katmai did not flee to Kodiak Island; instead, they congregated at the Kaflia Bay

fishing station, evidently hoping to find a vessel that would afford safe passage out of the

area. [7] Other Natives headed toward Puale Bay, but made it no farther than Cape Kubugakli

when the eruption took place on June 6, and did not arrive at their destination until June 8. At

Savonoski, "American Pete" reacted to the increased shaking by heading to the seasonal

camp at Ukak to rescue some equipment. He witnessed the beginning of the June 6 eruption

while there. Soon afterward, however, he retreated to Savonoski, gathered the remaining

villagers and scurried across Naknek Lake. They covered the 60 miles to Naknek in a single

day. According to Palakia Melgenak, there were also some people at a "fishing lodge" on

Brooks Lake as late as June 6. Because the site was adjacent to the Iliuk Arm-Naknek Lake

route traveled by the Savonoski residents, it is presumed that the fleeing villagers would have

contacted their Brooks Lake compatriots if the latter had not already left on their own. [8]

The first big eruption took place at about 1 p.m. on June 6. Outbursts were almost continuous

for the next two days; particularly heavy explosions were noted at 3 p.m. and 11 p.m. on June

6, and 10:40 p.m. on June 7. After June 8, strong eruptions continued for several weeks; after

that point, activity was further reduced, although earthquakes and explosions were noted

during the entire summer. [9]

Residents in many Alaska communities were well aware of the eruption. The first blast was

so loud that it was heard in Fairbanks, 500 miles to the northeast, and it even carried as far as

Juneau, 750 miles off to the east. Dawson City, in Yukon Territory, also heard the explosion.

At Katalla, 410 miles east-northeast of the point of origin, residents reported that for three

days the Katmai outbursts sounded "like blastings in quick succession." The earthquakes

generated by the eruption were so strong that they were recorded in Washington, D.C. [10]

The ash, dust and grit spewed forth by the volcano spread far and wide. The ash was three to

four feet deep at Katmai village, while at Kaflia Bay, the ash was piled three feet high. [11]

The cataclysm dropped 6 to 12 inches of ash on Kodiak, and plunged the town into a gray

gloom which lasted for most of the next 60 hours. [12] An estimated 3,000 square miles was

covered by at least a foot of ash, and ten times that area was covered by an inch or more.

"Appreciable" quantities of dust were recorded in Fairbanks, Juneau, and the Puget Sound

cities.

To a lesser degree, the explosion's effects were felt even beyond Puget Sound. In Wisconsin

and Virginia, the volcano was considered responsible for a "curious haze" noted in the days

following the eruption. On a more general level, the dust veil produced a decrease in solar

radiation, and for the last six months of 1912 mean temperatures were lowered throughout

the northern hemisphere. [13]

Alaskans React to the Eruption

The press, both in Alaska and elsewhere, reacted immediately to the event. Within two days

of the eruption, newspapers in San Francisco and New York were reporting on it. But few

were certain as to the exact origin of the eruption. Reporters, at first, had no reliable

information to use, and some speculated that Iliamna or Redoubt volcanoes had exploded.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap2.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:17 PM]

[14] But on June 8, C. B. McMullen, who was captain of the Dora, a supply ship to villages

in the area, was able to get a wireless message out to Seward and other Alaskan cities. The

Dora had been out in Shelikof Strait when the explosion occurred, just 55 miles east of it. He

"pronounced" the smoke to have come from Katmai Volcano. Jack Lee, who was residing at

Puale Bay, declared that "Katma Mountain" was the culprit, although he could not see the

peak from where he lived. And "American Pete," who was probably closer to the explosion

than anyone else, told cannery workers in Naknek that Katmai Volcano had been blown "sky

high." [15] As a result, the press dutifully reported Mount Katmai as the site of the eruption.

Scientists who investigated the area in the decade after the explosion corroborated the

conclusions that these eyewitnesses had made. [16]

Not all, however, concluded that Mount Katmai was responsible for the eruption. Jack Lee,

the Puale Bay resident who had opined in June that "Katma Mountain" had erupted, told the

Seward Weekly Gateway on July 13 that he had just "visited Katmai in order to make a

careful study of the cause and effect of the eruption." He returned convinced that the source

of the eruption was "Mount Sevenosky." Notwithstanding the fact that "Mount Sevenosky"

was not a known name at the time (and it has not been identified or located since), his story

is also doubtful because volcanic activity was too intense at that time for anyone to have

penetrated sufficiently close to be able to view the eruption site. His partner at Puale Bay, C.

L. Boudry, was able to view the volcanic area from afar, and by July 21 he was quite aware

of a "new crater" that had developed on Katmai Volcano. He did not publicize his newfound

knowledge, however, and when he attempted to hike into the area, the smoke and acid forced

him to turn back. And in 1913, Alaskans William A. Hesse and Mel A. Horner climbed

partway up the slopes of Mount Katmai. Like Lee and Boudry, Hesse and Horner could see

that some other peak was more active than Mount Katmai. The 1913 explorers, however,

thought that the so-called "King of the Volcanoes" was an unnamed peak, southwest of

Mount Mageik, which was later named Mount Martin for the 1912 explorer. [17] It was not

until 1954 that a scientific team determined, based on the relative thickness of the ash layer

and other factors, that the primary explosion site was Novarupta, a smaller mountain located

seven miles west of Mount Katmai (see Chapter 12.) [18]

A key problem that had to be reckoned with was the welfare of the local residents. The U.S.

Revenue Cutter Service ship Manning was in port at the time of the eruption, and its captain,

Kirtland W. Perry, took personal responsibility for evacuating Kodiak residents to a safer

locale. Five days later, Captain W. E. Reynolds, who was commander of the U.S. Revenue

Cutter Service's Bering Sea Fleet (and Perry's supervisor), arrived in the Kodiak area from

Unalaska and took command. [19] By June 19, he had visited the Afognak refugee camp, and

after conferring with Perry and with various "leading men" of Kodiak, he decided to not

reestablish the villages of the Katmai coast. Instead, he thought it better to centralize the

former inhabitants at a new location. [20]

To implement his proposed strategy, Reynolds travelled to Seward, where he sent word of his

plan to the Treasury Department in Washington, D.C. His suggestions were promptly

approved, and on June 27 he headed south to implement them. By July 7, Reynolds was

scouting a site on Ivanof Bay, 300 miles southwest of Kodiak, that had been recommended

by an official at a nearby packing plant. [21] The Natives who accompanied Reynolds said

that they were pleased with the site, which was to be called Perry in honor of the captain of

the Manning, and by July 8, 78 former Katmai and Cape Douglas Natives had been brought

to that spot. But by August 1, the new residents had grown weary of the new site, and they

asked Captain Perry to be relocated. He obliged them by showing them a new coastal site 13

miles to the east, just north of Chiachi Island. By August 15, the Treasury Department had

approved of the change in venue, and by August 25 the residents (which by now had grown

to 92) had all been moved to the new site. They liked the site and decided to remain there,

and it soon became known as Perryville. It is still a viable community; its 1990 population
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap2.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:17 PM]

was 108. [22]

As noted above, some of the Natives who had formerly lived along the Katmai coastal

villages fled to the Kaflia fishing station. Others headed south to Cape Kubugakli and Puale

Bay. From there, they probably continued south to Perryville. [23] The Natives who had lived

in (Old) Savonoski and the other communities in the upper Naknek drainage set up a village

known as New Savonoski, which was on the south bank of the Naknek River five miles

upriver from South Naknek. The village, now called Savonoski, remains an active

community.

Some did not like the new environment, and tried to go back. Two families, in fact, moved

from New Savonoski back to Old Savonoski and remained there for a year before the dust

and heat drove them back to the new townsite. As "American Pete" noted in a 1918

interview, "Never can go back to Savonoski to libe [sic] again. Everything ash." [24] But if

they could not live there again, they could use the area as a hunting ground. As later chapters

note in greater detail, the vegetation and wildlife recovered rapidly in much of the region

surrounding the east end of the Naknek Lake system, and as early as 1918 former residents of

Old Savonoski were making annual bear hunts in the area surrounding the abandoned village.

These hunts continued as late as 1939, and Brooks River persisted as a Native salmon

harvesting area until the 1950s or 1960s. [25]

The National Geographic Society Shows an Interest

While the eruption depopulated a large area, and made it generally unattractive to those

living in other areas of the Alaska Peninsula, it incited a great degree of curiosity and

enthusiasm in the exploration and scientific communities. Within a fortnight of the initial

eruption, the Research Committee of the National Geographic Society (NGS) had sprung into

action. By providing him a research grant, the Society was able to persuade George C.

Martin, a U.S. Geological Survey geologist, to travel to the area. His report was to be a first

step in a systematic investigation of Alaskan volcanoes. He left Washington at once and

arrived in Kodiak in early July. [26]

Martin was unsuccessful in his attempt to travel to the scene of the Katmai eruption. Instead,

he spent a month on board the Manning, traveling on its various errands of mercy. His only

visit to the Katmai coast during that period was a short visit to Douglas village. Later, aboard

the Lina K., he visited Amalik Bay, and from there cruised down the coast to Takli Island,

Katmai village, and on down to Puale Bay. Due to heavy cloud cover, he never even saw

Katmai Volcano, and he did not venture inland from the coastal villages. [27]

After that trip, the National Geographic Society forgot about Katmai exploration for awhile.

Other endeavors were assigned a higher priority. But Frederick Coville, a botanist who

served on the NGS board of directors, refused to let the matter drop. Coville had undertaken

previous research which had explored the biological potential of volcanic ash. He read an

article by an old friend, Ohio State University botany professor Robert F. Griggs, which

pertained to revegetation rates on Kodiak Island after the eruption. Coville, sensing an

impending opportunity, wrote Griggs and asked if he would be interested in doing similar

research in the area. [28]

Griggs accepted, and what ensued was the first of five Katmai expeditions, each of them

sponsored by the National Geographic Society. In 1915, Griggs and two others spent from

June through August in the Katmai country. His original focus was Kodiak Island, but as he

noted, "I had come to study the revegetation, but I found my problem vanished in an

accomplished fact." Therefore, he moved west to the more deeply buried country near the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap2.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:17 PM]

volcano. His party was dropped off at old Katmai village; from there, they wound up the

Katmai River valley. The going was slow and treacherous, and they were unable to cross any

of the major watercourses. They had to be content with a fine view of mounts Martin,

Mageik, Trident, and Katmai. Even that degree of success was gained only after enduring

weeks of low cloud cover. [29]

Griggs Discovers the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes

The 1915 expedition provided an enticing glimpse into the country to the west, and it

convinced Griggs that a study of the eruption, including a "thorough exploration of the

immediate environs of the volcano," was a valid subject for future research. Fortunately, the

NGS agreed with Griggs's assertions, and the following spring sent him back to the area.

Taking three other men with him, he returned to the mouth of Katmai River and headed up

the valley with the intention of climbing Mount Katmai. They reached the summit on the

afternoon of July 19, 1916. After an 11-day spell of bad weather, the party climbed the

mountain a second time. Having observed steam clouds on the west side of Katmai Pass, they

spent the following day climbing Mageik Creek to get a closer look. They got almost up to

the pass, and saw little out of the ordinary. Griggs and Lucius G. Folsom, his hiking

companion, were getting ready to turn back when he "caught sight of a tiny puff of vapor in

the floor of the pass." [30] The fumarole intrigued them, and by the time they reached the

pass they found hundreds of steam jets scattered through the area. A large puff of steam off

to the west encouraged him to climb a nearby hillock for a better look, and

there, stretching as far as the eye could reach, till the valley turned behind a blue

mountain in the distance, were hundreds--no, thousands--of little volcanoes like

those we had just examined. They were not so little, either. ... Many of them

were sending up columns of steam which rose a thousand feet before dissolving.

After a careful estimate, we judged there must be a thousand whose columns

would exceed 500 feet. [31]

Griggs and Folsom, enraptured by what lay before them, wandered down the valley for

several miles. Griggs got as far as a view of Novarupta, and described it as "a plug of lava ...

which was formerly rather violently explosive," before the party had to return to its camp on

the coastal side of Katmai Pass. Griggs hardly slept that night, and was readying a return visit

the next day when the weather abruptly changed. Rising water in Katmai River caused him to

be cautious; reluctantly, he ordered the party to retreat to Katmai Bay. Ten days later they left

the area. [32]

The National Geographic Society was enthusiastic about the new discoveries, and "in view of

the extraordinary conditions of the Katmai region, unparalleled anywhere in the world,"

granted Griggs an additional $12,000 to make an extended examination of the so-called

"Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes." [33] Griggs headed a party of ten men which returned to

the area the following year; they included a topographer, a zoologist, a chemist, and two

botanist, but curiously enough no geologist. The party arrived in late June, and began its

investigations at a point several miles south of Katmai Bay; from there it followed the west

bank of Katmai River and ascended Martin Creek. On July 4, Griggs and Walter Metrokin, a

"famous one-handed bear hunter" who had also accompanied him the previous year, trekked

up to the pass together. Four days later, most of the rest of the party did the same, and

established a camp near the saddle. All were initially agog at what they saw. They eventually

split up into work details. They spent about a month on the west side of Katmai Pass; during

that time, the party descended the Ukak River valley at least as far as the end of the ash flow,

and beyond it almost to Old Savonoski. Members also climbed Mount Katmai (some for the

second time) and explored the upper Katmai Canyon as far as the so-called Katmai Lakes.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap2.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:17 PM]

After some additional exploration, the party headed back down to the coast and left the area.

[34]

Toward the Protection of the Volcanic Area

By the time the 1917 expedition had been completed and the result of its investigation

published, the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes had become well-known to many members

of the scientific community. But because the National Geographic Magazine was such a

popular publication--the Society had some 650,000 members at the time--the area had also

become familiar to a broad sector of the general public as a natural wonder and a scenic

masterpiece. [35] Those who directed the Society were convinced that the area should be set

aside as park land in order to preserve the unique qualities which had so recently been

investigated.

The National Geographic Society was not the first organization which recognized Katmai's

park potential. The beauty of the country, in fact, had been admired even before the

cataclysm which tore it asunder. In 1880 Ivan Petroff, the first Alaska census taker, had led a

party from Savonoski to Katmai Bay via Katmai Pass. Speaking about his trip in an 1881

article, he prophetically noted that

When we made this portage last October, we were struck by the fact that the

tourist might land at Katmai, and in one day's foot travel stand with us at the

summit of a mountain pass, the divide proper of the peninsula, where he would

be compassed on every hand by the grandest visions of Alpine scenery, snows,

and glaciers. [36]

Others praised the qualities of the Shelikof Strait coastline. An English adventurer, H. W.

Seton-Karr, noted after an 1886 visit that a cruise in a bidarka from Katmai south to Unga

would be unequalled, both for scenery and sport hunting. Thirteen years later, several

members of the Harriman Alaska Expedition spent a few days camped on Kukak Bay. While

there, they walked up the slope behind their camp and found themselves suddenly at the edge

of a 2,000-foot precipice, across from which was a glacier that "fairly took their breaths

away." The visitors to Kukak Bay told the remaining expedition members that they were

"well pleased with their expedition," and were henceforth boosters of the Katmai country.

[37]

With the 1912 eruption, much of the topography which had been admired in earlier years was

irreparably altered, and for the next two or three years the countryside surrounding Mount

Katmai lay inaccessible to the outside world. Neither Martin in 1912 nor Griggs in 1915

spoke in very endearing tones about the beauty of the region, primarily because neither party

was able to penetrate beyond the coastal valleys and canyons. When Hesse and Horner made

a reconnaissance of the area in 1913, they saw enough of the area to report dramatically of

"thousands of small fumaroles issuing columns of steam and smoke, and the ground was a

maze of wide jagged cracks like paths of lightning." [38] But they did not make their

observations known until after Griggs asked Horner about them.

The movement to create Katmai National Monument began on July 31, 1916, when Robert F.

Griggs and Lucius G. Folsom encountered the thousands of fumaroles beyond Katmai Pass.

As soon as they viewed them, they were certain that they had discovered one of the great

wonders of the world. As Griggs later put it,

The sight that flashed into view as we surmounted the hillock was one of the

most amazing visions ever beheld by mortal eye.... The first glance was enough
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap2.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:17 PM]

to demonstrate that we had found a miracle of nature which, when known, would

be ranked with the Yellowstone, the Grand Canyon, and other marvels, each

standing without rival in its own class. [39]

By the time he had returned to camp that night, the elated Griggs was already taking his

thoughts of the scenery beyond admiration. Perhaps with the convenience of hindsight, his

memories that night were as follows:

I recognized at once that the Katmai district must be made a great national park

accessible to all the people, like the Yellowstone. To make it known, to have it

set aside as a National Park, and to secure the means necessary for its

development would, I foresaw, require a tremendous amount of effort. [40]

His thoughts the next morning were every bit as occupied as those of the night before. How,

he wondered, was the public going to get to this remote region? He had practically proven,

after several attempts, that large numbers of people could not be landed through the surf at

Katmai Bay. Was a suitable harbor available nearby? From what he knew at the time, the

possibilities were not too encouraging. [41]

Griggs' observations on his 1917 trip were colored by the potential value that Katmai might

have as a tourist destination. For instance, when he and Walter Metrokin climbed up to

Katmai Pass on July 4, he was relieved to find that the fumarole activity was just as active as

it had been the previous year. From that, he concluded (incorrectly, as it turned out) that

geologic activity in the valley had reached a stable plateau and would continue without much

change for years into the future. Generations of tourists, therefore, would be able to enjoy the

wondrous display. The Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes, he opined, was "one of the greatest

wonders of the world, if not indeed the very greatest of all the wonders on the face of the

earth." [42]

Griggs made further remarks which appear, in retrospect, to have stressed the area's

eligibility as a candidate for a national park unit, a tourist area, or both. His 1917 ascent of

Mount Katmai, for example, was his third, but he chose to be more hyperbolic in his writeup

of this climb than of his previous two trips. He judged Katmai to be "the greatest active

crater in the world; furthermore, he called it "a far grander spectacle to look upon" than the

inactive and larger craters of Haleakala and Crater Lake, both of which were already within

national parks. He noted that Katmai Canyon was "almost as deep as the Grand Canyon;" on

a more general level, he felt that the canyon's colored rock walls, the waterfalls, and distant

lakes reminded him of the Grand Canyon and the Canadian Rockies "all put together." In

describing all he had seen, he declared that "for sublimity of scenery this place has no equal

in the whole world." [43]

From the time of his trip until Katmai National Monument became a reality two years later,

Griggs became a leading publicist and lobbyist for Katmai; he also became the area's preeminent geological authority, even though his training was in biology. When he returned to

Washington, for example, he was relieved to find that the National Geographic Society's

officers were as interested in publicizing the area as he. Griggs entitled the article on his trip

"The Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes" even though he included only two photographs and

five pages of text on the area beyond Katmai Pass. The Society's directors were old hands in

the cause of national park promotion, and when the article was published in the January 1917

National Geographic Magazine, it signaled the opening volley in the Society's crusade to

establish a new park area. [44]

The National Park Service Gets Involved
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap2.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:17 PM]

During the same period, the Society made an initial foray into the legislative arena. As

Horace Albright noted in an interview more than half a century later, the idea of a

government reservation in the Katmai district was first broached in the midst of the

negotiations which led to the declaration of Mount McKinley National Park. The McKinley

bill passed Congress on February 19, 1917, and was signed by President Woodrow Wilson a

week later. But no more governmental action for a park at Katmai took place for another

year. [45]

By the time the NGS directorate received the data from the 1917 expedition, the Society was

confident that it had gathered enough data to support its claims that the region constituted one

of the greatest scientific and scenic wonders of the earth.

The following February the Society laid out its case to the public. It published the results of

its 1917 work in an article whose title, "The Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes: An Account of

the Discovery and Exploration of the Most Wonderful Volcanic Region in the World,"

announced that the Society had more than just a scientific interest in the area. Neither this

article nor that from the previous year specifically mentioned that the volcanic district should

be preserved in a national park. But the idea was nevertheless implicit. As Griggs himself

later noted, "As a result of this report, the Katmai National Monument ... was created." [46]

As the following paragraphs suggest, Griggs's quote probably overstates the report's role in

the creation of the monument; in addition, the statement is an oversimplification because it

suggests that little effort was required and no opposition existed to the proposed land

reservation. In fact, both local interests and Interior Department officials questioned the

necessity for withdrawing such a large, unknown tract. Beyond that, the backers of a

monument had to convince many whose priorities lay elsewhere. The United States, at the

time, was in the midst of World War I in 1918; matters pertaining to the national parks, as a

consequence, were of secondary importance. To most Americans, moreover, the creation of a

park in a remote section of Alaska Territory was an issue of little or no concern.

Most of the efforts that led to Katmai's establishment, therefore, were low-key actions

partaken far from the legislative arena. The campaign was organized and conducted by

several officers from the National Geographic Society, along with Dr. Griggs. Together, they

mentioned the idea to various Department of the Interior officials, then to other governmental

representatives.

Little documentation exists regarding the methods that were used to obtain Interior

Department approval, but evidently little trouble was encountered in obtaining it. An

important part of the approval process may have been the fact that Franklin K. Lane, who had

been Woodrow Wilson's Secretary of the Interior since 1913, was also on the Society's Board

of Managers. Lane, therefore, was doubtless aware of, and probably interested in, the

Society's Katmai expeditions. Another point in the monument's favor was a worry, among

some geologists, that Yellowstone's geysers were declining; Katmai, therefore, was suggested

as a possible replacement. [47]

Soon after the publication of Griggs's article in the February 1918 National Geographic

Magazine, its editor, Dr. Gilbert H. Grosvenor, brought up the idea of a park to Secretary

Lane. He, in turn, suggested that he mention the idea to the officials at the newly-created

National Park Service. Grosvenor therefore requested a meeting with Stephen Mather, NPS

director and Horace Albright, the agency's assistant director, in Washington's Cosmos Club.

Professor Griggs also attended. The meeting was quite informal; Mather, Albright and

Grosvenor were old friends and leaders in the conservation movement. Albright, at the time,

was the agency's acting director; Mather had suffered a nervous collapse in the fall of 1916,

and was still recovering. [48]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap2.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:17 PM]

The real work of shaping the idea of a park from an idea into a legislative package took place

during the spring of 1918 during a series of discussions at the Cosmos Club which were

largely conducted by Grosvenor and Albright. Secretary Lane was kept informed of all

developments. [49]

The National Geographic Society, based on Griggs' original suggestions, hoped that the

Katmai district would become a national park. Charles Sulzer, Alaska's delegate to Congress

at the time, was in enthusiastic agreement on the subject, noting that "we could gain some

useful publicity to this great natural phenomenon of the North by creating a national park

there." [50] But the National Park Service had just weathered a strong wall of opposition in

the struggle to create Mount McKinley National Park. The Service recognized that trying to

press for another Alaska national park would sap whatever good will the agency had

established with Congress; besides, other areas were of more interest than Katmai as potential

national parks. As Albright recalls it, "I simply had to tell the National Geographic people--

Dr. Grosvenor, Associate Editor and Vice President John Oliver LaGorce, and Dr. Griggs--

that a national park was out of question, and that a national monument was the only kind of

reservation that would make possible the protection of Katmai." [51]

The Society weighed the pros and cons of national monument status for the Katmai district.

A national monument, in theory at least, conferred just as much protection as a national park.

It could be accomplished via a proclamation under the authority of the Antiquities Act of

1906, which permitted the president to create national monuments in order to protect "objects

of historic or scientific interest" on public lands. [52] By issuing a presidential proclamation,

the agency could avoid a bruising legislative battle like that which had been waged over

Mount McKinley.

Grosvenor and his fellow officers initially objected to the idea because they did not feel that

the Antiquities Act could be used to reserve large-scale land areas. Albright, however, noted

that both Grand Canyon and Mount Olympus national monuments had been established under

the act's provisions. Eventually, the Society agreed to push for a monument. [53]

Albright himself began the next step, the preparation of a presidential proclamation. It was a

team effort. The text appears to have been influenced by Dr. Grosvenor and Dr. Griggs.

George C. Schweckert, the NPS attorney, "probably" prepared the first draft. [54]

Griggs, who had the field experience, proposed the boundary lines (see Map 3). His original

boundary proposal called for a large triangular area which began just west of Puale (Cold)

Bay. From there the boundary line went due north to a point along American Creek midway

between the western end of Lake Coville and Nonvianuk Lake. The boundary then went eastsoutheast until it reached Shelikof Strait just north of Kaflia Bay. [55]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap2.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:17 PM]

Map 3. Evolution of original monument boundaries, 1918. Robert F. Griggs's

first proposal (dotted line) was rejected by the USGS, but a more modest second

proposal (heavy solid line) was accepted and became the monument bondary.

Griggs was also asked to consider--but refused to promote--an alternative

proposal (dashed line) with a smaller acreage than that accepted by the Secretary

of the Interior. Source: Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 5a. The

map accompanied Wilson's proclamation. (click image for an enlargement in a

new window)

The proposed proclamation was then given to the General Land Office (GLO) and the U.S.

Geological Survey (USGS) so that the proposed boundaries might be checked. [56] These

agencies were given the responsibility of providing data on land ownership or mining

activities within the proposed reservation. General Land Office personnel found little of

interest. [57] The National Geographic Society, in its role as advocate, also hoped that

Geological Society investigators would likewise find little of interest. Explorers who had

passed through the area before the eruption, after all, had found few areas of interest, and

descriptions of the post-eruption landscape clearly indicated that most of the previous

resources in the volcanic area had been buried by lava and ash.

But USGS surveys had pointed out several promising mineral discoveries. Puale Bay, for

instance, had been the scene of an oil boom from 1902 to 1905, and operations had been

intermittently active since that time. [58] In 1912, George Martin had seen commercial

possibilities for the ash deposits he had seen along the coast. At about the same time, Charlie
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap2.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:17 PM]

McNeil and Norman B. Cook found copper-bearing veins about 17 miles inland on a stream

running into a "southwest bight" of Kamishak Bay. (The stream was probably McNeil River.)

In 1915, Fred and Jack Mason discovered placer gold along a small stream just south of Cape

Kubugakli. Two years later, Robert Griggs discovered that "There are some places where one

can gather crystals of sulphur, almost free from impurities, by the bushel." In 1918, Alex

Grant found placer gold on American Creek; the same year, the Geological Survey reported

that work was continuing at the Shelikof Mining Company's prospect near Kukak Bay.

Many of these discoveries, to be sure, were outside of the boundaries of the proposed

monument, and most turned out to be of short-term duration and were economically

insignificant. [59] But enough was known about the mining activities surrounding Puale Bay

and Cape Kubugakli, both of which were within the proposed monument boundaries, that

they were brought to the attention of Secretary Lane. [60]

In order to clarify their position on the matter, Albright talked to some of the geologists who

had been asked to review the proposal. Some were opposed to the withdrawal, primarily

because "regardless of whether or not the Katmai country was valuable commercially, it was

so devastated and uninviting that it was absolutely safe in its existing state and there was

absolutely no necessity for giving it any governmental protection." [61]

While the monument proposal was being investigated by the GLO and the USGS, an Interior

Department official sent the details of the plan to Charles Sheldon, a longtime member of the

Boone and Crockett Club. The Club, a prestigious organization of sportsmen and

conservationists, had recently played an integral role in the setting aside of Mount McKinley

National Park as a game refuge, and Sheldon hoped that the Katmai proposal would also

include a large area of high quality wildlife habitat. Sheldon, therefore, "suggested that the

limits of the area occupied this national monument should be so drawn as to create a refuge

for bears." But Sheldon, who had lived in Alaska for several years, knew that the monument's

wildlife resources had to be downplayed. In 1918, a wartime scarcity of beef was causing

many Alaskans to lobby territorial officials for a repeal of all legal protection for bears.

Boone and Crockett members, therefore, responded by quietly pushing for a proclamation, all

the while cautioning that "the word bear should never be mentioned in connection with the

establishing of this monument." The Club's president, George Bird Grinnell, told Club

members that "The boundaries of this monument recommended by [Sheldon] ... are so drawn

as to create a refuge for bears." But neither NPS nor NGS documents reveal that the Boone

and Crockett Club had much influence in the matter. [62]

President Wilson Proclaims Katmai National Monument

After the GLO and the USGS had completed their investigation, NPS Director Mather (who

by now had actively assumed his post) was ready to present the proclamation to Interior

Secretary Lane. Griggs, who had been asked to consider two smaller monument areas,

vigorously defended his original boundaries, going so far as to invoke the vision of Jefferson

and Seward in their respective quests for the Louisiana Purchase and Alaska. He argued, in

particular, for the inclusion of the Puale Bay area because he felt it might be devastated by

some future eruption. But Secretary Lane, perhaps on advice provided by the Geological

Survey, insisted that Griggs' proposed boundaries be reduced to "exclude all lands except

those devastated by the great eruption." Lane thus chose the larger of the two alternative

proposals which Griggs had crafted. Excised areas included the large triangle of land

surrounding Puale Bay, and a long, narrow band located just north and northeast of the

original monument boundaries. [63]

The language of the final proclamation, which Mather and Lane then passed on to President
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap2.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:17 PM]

Wilson, warned "all unauthorized persons not to appropriate or injure any natural feature of

this monument or to occupy, exploit, settle, or locate upon any of the lands reserved by this

proclamation." The implicit prohibition against mining in the Katmai proclamation was thus

distinctly different from language contained in the recently-passed Mount McKinley park

bill. (In 1925, Glacier Bay National Monument was created by presidential proclamation, and

in 1936 Congress passed a bill allowing mining activities at Glacier Bay; for more than 50

years, therefore, Katmai was the only large Alaskan NPS unit that prohibited such an

activity.) [64]

The Society was convinced that the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes and the related volcanic

features did indeed "stand preeminent among the wonders of the world," and that nowhere

else on earth was there "anything at all similar to this supreme wonder." But one nagging

question which had come up during the deliberations concerned the permanency of the

volcanic wonders. Were the steaming vents really evidence of a vast underlying body of

molten magma, or did they only indicate the vaporization of surface water as gradually

cooling products of the eruption? In other words, were the cauldrons and "smokes" long

lasting phenomena, or would they fade away in just a few years? Griggs, who had seen the

valley in both 1916 and 1917, was convinced on his second trip that "everything was just as it

had been the previous year." [65] But others, both in the Society and the NPS, wanted more

evidence.

To answer their concerns, the Society organized another expedition to the Katmai district in

the summer of 1918, even though a larger expedition had been deferred because of the war.

Only two botanists, Jasper Sayre and Paul Hagelbarger, made the trip; both had also

participated in the 1917 expedition. Unlike previous adventurers, the two botanists arrived by

way of the Naknek River, then crossed Naknek Lake to the lower end of the Valley of Ten

Thousand Smokes. During their excursion, the two men also encountered "three good-sized

lakes not shown on any map," now known as lakes Brooks, Coville and Grosvenor. [66]

Regarding the primary purpose of their trip, the photographs they took and the temperatures

they recorded caused them to conclude that the condition of the fumaroles was "exactly the

same" as in 1917. Writing in a National Geographic Magazine article which appeared in the

spring of 1919, its editors stated that

It is clear that the studies made thus far give no indication of any diminution in

the Smokes, much less do they suggest a probable date for their extinction. It

may be considered established, therefore, that the Valley of Ten Thousand

Smokes is a relatively permanent phenomenon. [67]

With all parties satisfied that the monument was both worthwhile and of lasting value,

Secretary Lane took the completed proclamation over to the White House. There, on

September 24, 1918, President Wilson issued Proclamation No. 1487, which reserved

"approximately 1700 square miles" to create Katmai National Monument. The signing was

witnessed by Secretary of State Robert Lansing. [68]

The new monument was at last a reality. The area included within its boundaries was

relatively modest by today's standards; it included less than 30 percent of the present park

and preserve. A "modest reservation" of approximately 1,088,000 acres, it embraced little

more than the area of active volcanic peaks surrounding Mount Katmai, along with the

Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes and most of Iliuk Arm. That area, small as it was by Alaska

standards, was still half the size of Yellowstone National Park and 50 percent larger than the

state of Rhode Island. [69]

The purposes of the new monument were consistent with the amount of land reserved. Four
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 2)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap2.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:17 PM]

reasons were given in the proclamation: 1) the recognition of the importance of Mount

Katmai and the eruption which issued forth from there, 2) the opportunity to learn and

appreciate the field of volcanism because the eruption had taken place so recently, 3) because

it provided the opportunity to protect an active volcanic belt (as opposed to the "present

dying geyser field of the Yellowstone"), and 4) because the "great magnitude" and "inspiring

spectacles" contained within ensured "popular scenic, as well as scientific, interest for

generations to come." In a phrase reflective of that wartime period, the proclamation even

went so far as to imply that creation of the monument would be an "inspiration to

patriotism." [70]

When compared with the political process required to create today's NPS units, it seems

remarkable that a monument such as Katmai could have been created so simply. It also

seems remarkable that a single organization--in this case the National Geographic Society--

was able to play such a dominant role. There appears to have been an element of collusion

involved in the monument creation process because of the social relationships shared by the

Secretary of the Interior, the NPS hierarchy, and the National Geographic Society leadership.

The easy sociability of those men doubtless made monument designation an easier process

than it otherwise might have been.

It seems patriarchal to conclude that the National Geographic Society, so quickly and without

fanfare, was able to convince Interior Department officials and the President to reserve such a

large land mass. But that is precisely what took place. No other groups outside of government

appear to have known that such a monument was being proposed. Among Alaskans,

Governor Thomas Riggs (who had been working in the territory for years and had been

appointed to his position just a few months earlier) may have been the only one who was

even aware of the proposal, and he was given only an general outline of the proposed action.

(Riggs protested the monument idea; he also requested that a geologist survey the area before

designation took place. His pleas fell on deaf ears.) [71] During the early years of the NPS,

the only standard process--in Alaska or elsewhere--by which proposed park areas were

checked for their resource values were the GLO and USGS investigations. Outside groups,

local residents, and other interested individuals were typically given no opportunities to either

support or protest proposed parks. In the case of Katmai, the NGS does not appear to have

covered up information which may have diminished park values, but their position as

advocate made it difficult for them to objectively assess the monument's resources. [72]

As time would prove, a major resource value on which the monument idea had been based--

the fumaroles--would decrease in importance. Other aspects of the geologic landscape,

however, would continue to remain much as they had been for decades to come. Other

priorities, moreover, would eventually shoulder their way to the forefront, and as a result, the

public's perceptions of the monument would change. The establishment of Katmai as a

national monument, in September of 1918, was the beginning of National Park Service

management of the area. The agency still manages the district, but the actions it has taken to

effect that management have reflected a continuing evolution in public attitudes toward park

resources. That evolution is still in process today.

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

adhi/chap2.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

PART I: KATMAI NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE

Chapter 3:

An Era of Neglect: Monument Administration Before

1950

As noted in Chapter 2, the only parties responsible for the impending creation of Katmai

National Monument were the National Geographic Society and various agencies within the

Department of the Interior. Few others were even aware that the idea was being considered. It

was only after President Wilson signed Proclamation No. 1487, in September 1918, that

outsiders learned that the area had been protected.

Reactions to the New National Monument

Thanks to the publicity generated by annual articles in National Geographic Magazine, many

Americans were aware of the Katmai country at the time of its designation as a monument.

Most, however, knew little more than they had read in the Society's articles. National

Geographic subscribers probably approved of the proclamation, but the vast majority of citizens

cared little if at all about the fate of such a remote, unpopulated area. Surprisingly, the creation

of the million-acre reservation elicited few if any news reports or commentary, either in Alaska

or the United States. With the World War in its waning stages, the glut of overseas war

bulletins was far more important to the average reader than a national monument in a far-off

corner of Alaska. [1]

The National Park Service, not surprisingly, was a strong supporter of the new monument. Its

1918 annual report stated that "The American public owes deep gratitude to the National

Geographic Society for the discovery and exploration of this unique exhibit." Horace Albright,

its acting director, spoke with candor when he told the Alaska governor that

We feel that the establishment of the Katmai National Monument cannot possibly

be anything but a benefit to the people of Alaska. We are in the tourist business

and are engaged in attracting the attention of the people of America to its scenic

resources. Whether people visit the Katmai region or not, we want them to know

that some day it will be an interesting place to go, and besides it gives us an

opportunity to promote Alaska as a touring ground. [2]

Most Alaskans, however, did not approve of the new monument. Few, to be sure, knew what

lands were contained within the reservation. Instead, they were opposed the idea of government

reservations in general because they regarded withdrawals as a "locking up" of resources which

should have been available for local residents. Territorial citizens were still seething over the

closure of Alaska's coal and oil lands which had been imposed on Alaskans in 1906 and 1910,

respectively. The new reservation merely reopened earlier wounds and stirred a new wave of
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

anger and resentment. [3]

Thomas Riggs, who governed the territory from 1918 to 1921 and a longtime Alaskan, typified

local attitudes when he said that "practically all of the reservations should be eliminated and the

laws of the United States made to apply." He further noted that "Katmai National Monument

serves no purpose and should be abolished." He chided Acting Director Albright for allowing its

creation; he noted that volcanic ash made the soil "peculiarly fertile," stated that the monument

contained oil, and decried that "there is no possibility of the Katmai National Monument ever

becoming a favorite place for tourist travel." Riggs was fed up with a system in which "the

Territory has been at the mercy of any faddist who could go to Washington and get the proper

endorsements." [4] The governor, obviously frustrated at the tactics of outside conservationists,

stated that

For the sake of the future of Alaska, let there at least be no more reservations

without a thorough investigation on the ground by practical men and not simply on

the recommendation of men whose interest in the Territory is merely academic or

sentimental. [5]

Despite the broad denunciations of the action taken within the territory, the objections were

primarily philosophical. No one knew of instances in which individuals were deprived of a

living because of the proclamation. The land had no agricultural value, it contained less than ten

acres of private (Russian Orthodox Church) land, it was well away from established

transportation routes, and access to the monument's main features was almost prohibitively

difficult. Instead--and the criticism is valid considering the existing state of regional

development--many criticized the action because the creation of the reservation would prevent

development interests from ever knowing what resources were contained within.

As noted in the previous chapter, the Katmai area was the scene of scattered mining activity at

the time the monument was created. Those who were out prospecting, of course, had no idea

that a monument was being contemplated. And as it turned out, their activities caused no

friction with governmental authorities. In large part due to the elimination of potential parkland

around Puale Bay, no active mining areas were placed within the boundaries of 1918

monument. George Martin had noted the commercial importance of ash deposits and Robert

Griggs had mentioned the preponderance of sulphur crystals, but there is no indication that

entrepreneurs during this period had ever attempted to extract these materials for commercial

gain.

Early Monument Visitors

During the half decade after the creation of the monument, the monument continued to be

publicized, though to a lesser extent than it had been during the 1912-1918 period. The most

conspicuous group of visitors came from the National Geographic Society. In 1919, Robert

Griggs led his fourth Katmai expedition. Griggs and the main party entered the Valley of Ten

Thousand Smokes by way of Katmai Pass, but four members brought the main supplies into the

area by way of Naknek, Naknek River, and Naknek Lake (as the two-man 1918 expedition had

done). A tent base camp was established at the east end of Iliuk Arm. The party of nineteen,

which included five scientists, two topographers, two photographers, and ten assistants,

undertook a diversity of tasks which led them to Brooks Lake, Lake Coville and Lake

Grosvenor as well as the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes. Perhaps because he had already

given a thorough description of the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes in previous articles,

Griggs's writeup of the 1919 trip concentrated on the countryside adjoining the monument.

Griggs spared few adjectives in lauding the Naknek River system's salmon runs--in particular

the Brooks River run--and in describing Katmai's value as a bear, moose and waterfowl refuge.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

[6]

In 1923, Walter R. Smith and R. K. Lynt led a U.S. Geological Survey expedition which

included most of the area within the existing monument; the report also described the area as far

west as Brooks Lake and southwest to Becharof Lake. That same summer, Kirtley F. Mather

and R. H. Sargent led another USGS expedition which investigated the coastal valleys from

Cape Douglas north to Paint River, and also covered Battle Lake and the Savonoski River,

Moraine Creek and Funnel Creek drainages. The reports which followed those explorations

indicated that few if any rich areas of mineralization were likely to be found in either the

monument or the immediate vicinity. Before the reports were published, as noted above,

Alaskan interests had been angry at the creation of the monument, in part because of the

perception that valuable minerals would be made inaccessible. The reports, therefore, helped

create a somewhat friendlier public attitude toward the monument. [7]

Local interests were also mollified when attempts were made to develop the area's tourist

potential. During his 1919 expedition, Robert F. Griggs discovered an excellent harbor at the

head of Amalik Bay, which he called Geographic Harbor in honor of his longtime sponsor. He

noted that it would be easy to bring tourists there, and added that

Only 50 or 60 miles of automobile road is needed to open up all the wonders of the

area to the public. When that is constructed, the traveler may tour the Katmai

National Monument as easily as he now visits the Yellowstone. [8]

The Alaska Road Commission (ARC) responded to Griggs's suggestions in 1921 by visiting the

area and making an informal survey for a thirty-mile road. The ARC's report that year gave

development backers scant hope that a road into the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes would

ever be built. The reconnaissance report noted that

It appears that a road from any Pacific entrance would be prohibitive in cost, if not

impossible. The deep ashes mentioned drift around like snow with every wind. It

lies on the steep slopes like so much ground coffee and is always ready to slide

when disturbed. Until vegetation has again penetrated it, and formed a sod or soil

as a binding, it will not pack and can not be held in place. [9]

The glum report, however, did not dissuade those who hoped to open up Katmai to tourism.

Governor Scott Bone, for one, recommended road construction in his annual reports for 1922

and 1923. [10] The governor's reports for 1924 through 1931 noted that "When [Geographic

Harbor] can be developed and an auto road approximately 30 miles in length constructed into

the area, it will be readily accessible and draw many visitors." The NPS, which also hoped that

the area might be developed, was optimistic enough to declare in 1926 that such a road "may in

the future afford a fine entrance to the region." No government agency, however, seriously

considered constructing such a road, and no organizations outside of government advocated

road construction either. The National Geographic Society, having won monument status for the

volcanic area, made no efforts to develop the recently protected area. Alaska's governors were

doubtless aware that the construction of such a road would require superhuman skill, result in

high maintenance costs, and would, under the best of circumstances, attract few visitors. But

that did not stop them from pushing for highway construction. [11]

The 1920s brought large numbers of tourists "to the westward" (as southcentral Alaska was

described at that time) for the first time. Before World War I, few tourists who traveled up the

Inside Passage ventured far from the various of southeastern Alaska ports. But with the

construction of the government-sponsored Alaska Railroad from 1915 through 1922,

destinations such as Seward, Anchorage, Mount McKinley National Park and Fairbanks became

newly accessible. Katmai, as a result, was located much closer to the regular tourist routes than
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

it had been previously. Unfortunately, however, Katmai was still over 200 miles from the

nearest port commonly used by tourists. Besides, it had no transportation infrastructure.

Tourists, therefore, had to make a considerable effort to see the newly created volcanic

landscape. Few were willing to be so adventurous. [12]

Despite the difficulties in reaching the monument, a few tourists dribbled in during the 1920s.

In 1923, a party of forty spent two weeks exploring the area. As part of their trip, they hiked

Mount Katmai. Fifteen others also visited that year, and another seventeen in 1924. A fourperson party headed by D. W. Handy of Vermont visited in 1925. [13] Perhaps the best known

tourists were Captain Jack Robertson and Arthur Young, a pair of adventurous filmmakers who

travelled throughout the territory in search of footage. In 1925 the two produced, directed, and

starred in The True North, a seven reel travelogue of their trip to Siberia. Robertson and Young

took an indirect route; going by way of Fairbanks, they shot rapids along the Yukon River,

watched a spring break-up, and made a canoe from a moose hide. They also visited the Katmai

country, and observed Mount Katmai, the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes, and spawning

salmon. Using much of the same footage, the pair released Alaskan Adventures in 1926. Four

years later, Robertson included Katmai scenes along with those from other Alaskan venues to

produce a five-reeler called The Break Up. [14]

Although the monument attracted few sightseers, the potential for visitation to the newlycreated volcanic wonderland encouraged several to promote the area. Throughout the 1920s,

Kodiak advertised itself as the outfitting headquarters for trips to the monument, perhaps

because it had been the jumping-off point for some of the National Geographic Society trips to

the Valley of the Ten Thousand Smokes. The Alaska Railroad offered to arrange trips to the

monument. In the early 1930s a ship captain from Kanatak, Bob Hall, offered to take tourists

into the Valley. He had already visited the valley with a pack horse team, and felt that pack

horses taken in from Katmai Bay were the best way to access the heart of the monument. And

in 1931 an Alaska resident told Horace Albright, the NPS director, that the monument would

soon become "a regular port of call for the Alaskan steamers." No one, however, was willing to

make a substantial investment in Katmai tourism development. [15]

Initial National Park Service Management

Although both scientists and tourist entrepreneurs expressed an early interest in the area, the

National Park Service largely forgot about Katmai for the first twenty years after its

establishment. The analogy which Ernest Gruening used to describe Alaska is relevant here; this

period comprised Gruening's "era of total neglect." [316] The unit was ostensibly managed as

an adjunct to Mount McKinley National Park. (Glacier Bay, which was established in 1925,

was managed in a similar fashion.) But the National Park Service was unable to provide the

wherewithal to actively manage either unit, and there is no evidence that Harry Karstens, the

first superintendent for Mount McKinley, exerted any effort in managing either Katmai or

Glacier Bay during his seven-year tenure (1921-1928). Given the meager resources available,

Mount McKinley was hard enough to manage itself. Both Karstens and his successor, Harry

Liek, were stretched to the limit trying to maintain a minimal presence over the countryside

surrounding North America's highest peak. At no time during the 1920s and 1930s were there

more than six employees, permanent or seasonal, on the Mount McKinley park staff. [17]

Compounding the lack of staff was a lack of money. Prior to the coming of the New Deal

programs of the 1930s, national monuments were perceived to be areas designed to be protected

from encroachment, whereas national parks were intended to be "resort[s] for the people to

enjoy." Because monuments were designed for protection rather than public use, monuments

were given a fraction of the budget provided to national parks. As late as 1921, for instance, the

budget for all of America's national monuments was $8,000; in 1925, it was less than $21,000;
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

and in 1930 it was just $46,000. Funds allotted to monuments, during this period, comprised

less than 1% of the NPS budget. [18] What little money was available was divvied out to

monuments which received high visitation, or for capital projects intended to preserve and

protect prehistoric ruins. Katmai, which one report described as "the least visited of any" of the

country's 25 national monuments, and where "no protection is needed," was low on the priority

list. [19] Therefore, Katmai received almost no NPS funding during the first 30 years after its

founding.

Considering Katmai's visitation and remoteness, it is not surprising that Katmai received no

funds or staff. Many national monuments during this period also had to skimp along on little or

no funding, and most of the monuments had no full-time staff. (A custodian, either an

interested local citizen or a government agent whose duties were allied with those of the

monument, was often employed on an ad hoc basis.) The lack of a staff or budget at Katmai,

moreover, was probably an appropriate management decision, even if funds had been available,

and Katmai's resources probably suffered little for want of a staff presence. NPS officials were,

however, anxious to visit the area. Their only source materials on the monument were the

reports of the various NGS and USGS expeditions. In order to plan for future management and

to respond to occasional queries about the monument, agency officials hoped to add to that

information base.

Given the lack of a staff presence, however, the Service chose to close Katmai National

Monument to the public. The monument was ostensibly closed to entry on both its lands and

waters, and airplane landings were also prohibited. As might be expected from an underfunded

bureaucracy, the NPS did little to publicize the prohibition against entry, and had no power to

stop those who entered in violation of that ban. In addition, the agency did not announce the

need for permits or licenses for those who wished legal entry into the monument. The NPS, in

fact, issued no monument regulations for over thirty years after its establishment. The staff at

Mount McKinley National Park, who were located some 400 miles northeast of Katmai, appear

to have ignored the monument completely; not one of the Mount McKinley Superintendent's

Monthly Reports issued between 1921 and 1935 mentioned Katmai National Monument.

Glacier Bay National Monument, which was also under the titular jurisdiction of the Mount

McKinley superintendent, was similarly ignored during this period. [20]

Because the monument lacked a staff or budget, and because NPS officials knew virtually

nothing about the park except for what had been explained in the National Geographic

Magazine, the agency was vulnerable to anyone who had a claim, legitimate or otherwise, to

Katmai resources. In 1923, for instance, John J. Folstad petitioned the government to obtain a

General Land Office permit to mine coal on the western shore of Amalik Bay, opposite Takli

Island. (A permit, at that time, was necessary to extract coal from public lands.) Folstad,

evidently, had been occupying and developing the site for some time, using the coal for local

fuel needs. There is no record regarding how the NPS responded to this intrusion on its lands; it

probably felt that it better to eliminate a small portion of the monument than to sanction mineral

extraction in the monument. President Calvin Coolidge, accordingly, issued Executive Order

No. 3897 on September 5, which excluded 10 acres from the monument. Coolidge's action

paved the way for Folstad to gain a coal mining permit. There is no evidence, however, to

suggest that such a permit was ever obtained. [21]

Prominent groups of Outside visitors began to explore Katmai in the late 1920s. In 1928 the

well-known "Glacier Priest," Father Bernard Hubbard, landed along the coast northeast of the

Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes accompanied by a group of Santa Clara University students.

They tried to cross the Aleutian Range that year but were unsuccessful in their quest. The

following year, Hubbard and a coterie of students came by way of Katmai Bay and, with a film

crew, successfully entered the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes by way of Katmai Pass. [22] In

1932 he made the first wintertime ascent of Mount Katmai, and in 1934 made a final
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

exploration of the Ten Thousand Smokes area. Hubbard, who visited Alaska every summer

from 1927 through the 1940s, was a geology professor, explorer, filmmaker, and lecturer; his

movies about the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes were shown to audiences around the world

for years afterwards. [23]

The 1931 Boundary Expansion

In 1930, Robert Griggs made his fifth National Geographic-sponsored visit to Katmai. The

primary purpose of his trip was to investigate plant succession in the Valley of Ten Thousand

Smokes. As a result of his efforts he produced scientific articles which were published in the

American Journal of Botany, Ecology, and the Ohio Journal of Science. [24] That fall, Ernest

Walker Sawyer, an assistant to the Secretary of the Interior who specialized in Alaska matters,

asked Griggs to write him a letter which elaborated on why and how the habitat of the Alaska

brown bear should be protected. Griggs, who was trained as a biologist and had been

particularly impressed with the bear population during his 1919 expedition, readily complied.

Sawyer added a cover sheet, then mailed it to Ray Wilbur, Herbert Hoover's Secretary of the

Interior. Central to both letters was a request that the National Park Service significantly enlarge

Katmai National Monument. [25] Griggs, of course, had played a central role in the creation of

the original monument, and Sawyer may have thought that the popular scientist would be an

influential figure in the effort to create a large-scale brown bear preserve.

NPS officials, having read Griggs' accounts, were was not oblivious to the value of the Alaska

Peninsula as brown bear habitat. As early as 1926, they had advertised that in addition to its

geological values, "the surrounding region has some magnificent lake and mountain scenery.

Water fowl and fish are abundant, as are the great Alaskan brown bears, the largest of

carniverous [sic] animals." [26] And various wildlife conservation advocates, including popular

author Steward Edward White, had begun pressing for an NPS bear preserve in southeastern

Alaska. [27] But the Griggs-Sawyer letter was the first indication that outside parties wanted to

expand Katmai's boundaries in order to protect brown bear habitat.

In his letter, Griggs admitted that the brown bear's habitat was presently not in danger. But in

the future, he feared that the Kodiak bear had a bleak future. Therefore, "the Katmai National

Monument is the only place in the world where the great Alaskan brown bear can be preserved

for posterity." He felt that a broad spectrum of interests--Kodiak residents, Alaskan guides, and

the Alaska Game Commission (AGC)--would support the monument expansion. He noted that

there were no year-round residents in the proposed expansion area, that there were "no minerals

of value" except for a worked-out gold placer at Cape Kubugakli, and that only one man--the

trader at Kanatak, located 50 miles southwest of the existing monument--would be adversely

affected by the action. He was well aware of the clam cannery at Kukak Bay, but dismissed its

importance because its employees were "casual visitors." [28]

Taking care to avoid the oil-bearing tracts which surrounded Puale Bay, Griggs felt that the

"low mountains and open valleys covered with tall grass and tundra" should be added to the

west and southwest of the existing monument (see Map 4). A second important area was the

lake region--Brooks, Naknek, Coville, and Grosvenor--which was an excellent breeding ground

for waterfowl. Of particular note was the waterfall at the outlet of Brooks Lake, "where at the

proper season is one of the finest exhibition of leaping salmon to be found anywhere in the

world." A final area he wanted to preserve was the Aleutian Range from Kukak to Douglas.

Griggs admitted that the primary value of the Aleutian Range was its scenic grandeur, not its

bear habitat, and he was also quick to note the scenic advantages of all three areas. [29]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

Map 4. Evolution of expanded monument boundaries, 1930-1931. Robert F.

Griggs's proposal of 1930 (dotted line) was slightly expanded by the USGS

(dashed line). The version that was forwarded to Secretary Wilbur and

proclaimed by President Hoover (solid line) was a modification of the USGS's

sugested boundary. Source: Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska,

5a; the base map, drawn in April 1952, was included in Katmai's first

interpretive brochure. (click image for an enlargement in a new window)

Wilderness values also were important in adding the Aleutian Range to the monument. Griggs

noted that the range was

a vast mountain fastness whose very inaccessibility would almost guarantee the

preservation of primeval conditions. If visitors should ever invade the other

portions of the park, aboriginal conditions must inevitably be modified somewhat.

But here is an area so rugged that its primitive condition can be preserved for

centuries to come. All that is needed to that end is that the occasional hunters who

would otherwise stray that way should be debarred and nature be allowed to take

her course. [30]

The following January the NPS, in consultation with Griggs and the Interior Department, laid

out the boundaries of the proposed monument expansion. The Geological Survey, when asked

its opinion of the area's economic geology, offered a dim view of its suitability as parkland. The

agency noted that potential oil fields existed both north and south of the present monument, and

that in the vicinity of Cape Kubugakli, both gold and other economically valuable minerals had

been unearthed. In the Kamishak Bay region, "a number of metallic mineral deposits" had been

found; the underlying geology suggested that similar materials might exist in the area west and

southwest of Cape Douglas. [31]

The Service, in response, offered to pare the size of its proposed expansion, but in midFebruary, the Acting Director of the Geological Survey hardened its previous position and

dissented against any boundary changes. The Survey again expressed its concern about the

possibilities of oil and gold extraction, but on a broader level, the agency stated that it "is

keenly interested in having as much of the region as possible kept open for free use, in order to

stimulate its development." The USGS, continuing in its pessimistic vein, felt that the additional

acreage was irrelevant to the original intent of the park. [32]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

The NPS, not content with comments from the USGS, also solicited comments from Alaska

officials, namely the Territorial Game Warden and the Regional Forester. Neither was

enthusiastic about the proposal. Both felt that "the Alaska Game Commission has plenty of

authority to handle the situation and that the only thing needed is adequate law enforcement."

Neither thought that the NPS was in any position to provide extra staff. Both felt that the brown

bear was not in any particular danger. They stated that Alaska's resources needed to be

developed, not protected. [33]

The Service responded to the various comments by excluding the various oil claims surrounding

Puale Bay; the new boundary lines, however, were far closer to those in Griggs's original

proposal than those made in response to USGS's original criticisms. The revised boundaries,

which were justified in an April 22 letter from Secretary Wilbur to President Herbert Hoover,

thus ignored much of the Geological Survey's concerns about potential oil development, and

similarly ignored the criticisms voiced by Alaskan officials.

Apparently emboldened by renewed pressure from bear preservation advocates, who were also

pushing for a national monument on Chichagof Island in southeastern Alaska, the Secretary said

that "it would appear advisable to extend the boundaries of the Katmai National Monument so

that the brown bear within this monument can be protected rather than create a new monument

of Chichagoff for the same purpose." Wilbur noted that the expansion, which would enlarge the

monument by 1,609,600 acres, was also needed for the protection of moose; in addition, the

new area "has many features valuable for educational and scientific purposes." He concluded

that the proposed area "is of greater value from a educational and scientific viewpoint and for

the protection of wild life than for economic development." [34] The proposed expansion also

planned to reincorporate the 10-acre parcel that had been removed from the monument in 1923;

John Folstad had long since lost interest in his coal claim.

Wilbur's letter was favorably received by President Hoover, who made no modifications to it.

Then, on April 24, 1931, he issued Proclamation No. 1950. This document, just as the 1918

proclamation, was issued under the authority of the Antiquities Act. It gave little explanation for

the expansion; it only noted that adjoining the existing monument were "additional lands on

which there are located features of historical and scientific interest and for the protection of the

brown bear, moose, and other wild animals." [35] (The scientific interest and wildlife values

had no doubt been condensed from Secretary Wilbur's letter; the historical interest was probably

derived from language in the Antiquities Act.) The affixing of Hoover's signature to the

document more than doubled the size of the monument (see Appendix A). Katmai, with an

acreage of 2,697,590, thus became the largest unit of the National Park Service system, almost

half a million acres larger than Yellowstone National Park. For the next 47 years, Katmai would

continue to hold that honor. [36]

The nation's newspapers generally ignored the president's proclamation, just as they had ignored

Wilson's proclamation thirteen years earlier. News articles describing the expansion did not

surface until almost a month later. What appeared in the press appears to have been a result of

an orchestrated program instituted by conservationists, who were ecstatic about Hoover's

proclamation. A syndicated article noted that "the creation of a sanctuary for the Alaskan brown

bear, the largest and proudest race of carnivorous animals in the world is believed to have been

saved from extinction." "President Hoover," it continued, "has given a reprieve to untold

hundreds of wilderness aristocrats [brown bears], who had been condemned to death by the

guns of sportsmen." Until now, "the bears have been easy prey to sportsmen every summer

when they followed the streams down to the coast," but henceforth they "can spend their

summers at the various bear seashore resorts without interference from the two-legged creatures

who kill them at a great distance." Wildlife preservation advocates openly rued the extinction of

grizzlies in California, and hoped to avoid a repetition of that fate. [37]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

The New York Times' only response to Hoover's proclamation was a letter to the editor from

Robert Sterling Yard, the well known park and wilderness advocate, who noted that:

The largest and one of our most distinguished geological monuments has become,

also, by a flourish of the President's pen, one of the greatest wild life reserves in the

world. Matching Belgium's national gorilla park in Africa, there is now the

American brown bear park in Alaska. Thus have two of the world's most interesting

and powerful wild animals each a national government protecting them from

extinction.

The several scientific trips made by Dr. Robert F. Griggs of George Washington

University had brought to his attention the large number of big bears in that part of

the peninsula. They were not the Ursus Middendorffi of Kodiak Island, but Ursus

Gyas, scarcely smaller in size, and larger than the eight or more other sub-species

found elsewhere in Alaska.

In view of the warfare urged of late against the brown bear because of widespread

stories of its ferocity, Dr. Griggs had been urging the National Park Service for

more than a year to enlarge the Katmai National Monument as an extraordinary

and sufficient refuge for this beast. ... South of it is additional wild area also

abounding in bear which may be added if prospecting fails to discover expected oil

wells. Besides the Alaskan brown bear the Katmai National Monument has many

grizzlies. [38]

The comments emitted by Alaskans were not nearly so charitable. The Anchorage Daily Times

noted that "agitation for the salvation of the brown bear, inspired by the writings of Stewart

Edward White, led to the creation of the sanctuary in spite of the opposition to such action in

various sections of Alaska." [39] The Seward Daily Gateway editorialized:

Secretary Wilbur of Alaska Railroad fame, and President Hoover, who said he did

not believe in bureaus, both take the word of Stewart Edward White, Robert

Frothingham, [Outdoor Life] Editor [John A.] McGuire and other big game hunters,

that the great big brown bear of Alaska is doomed unless protected. So by official

decree the Katmai National Monument is increased in area. The fumaroles will now

have to move over, and make way for the brownies whom some one, or group,

must be killing by the thousands.

We have said it before and say it once more that the standing army of the United

States could not exterminate the bear. Hoover and Wilbur wouldn't believe that

statement of course unless some committee so advised them. We're not kicking

about the additional reserves because within a few years every acre will be a

reserve for some darn thing. [40]

Territorial officials predictably decried the removal of such a large area from settlement and

mining development, and declared that wildlife enforcement in the area was so ineffectual that

the extension would do little to protect large animal populations. [41]

Naknek residents grumbled as well. The monument extension severely limited the hinterland in

which legal trapping operations could take place. Trapping was a supplementary (and at times

primary) source of income for many local residents; it was one of the few ways in which both

white and Native residents could earn a living during the wintertime. Those who did not trap,

moreover, were often in sympathy with those that did. Naknek residents, like others in Alaska,

resented the taking of land because of the agitation of outside interests. Their protests were in

vain; they did not, however, last long. Residents soon recognized that the NPS was unable or

unwilling to police its newly-acquired territory, and activities in the area were carried on as
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

before. Trappers did not become aware that they were in violation of monument regulations

until 1936, perhaps later. [42]

Users of the Monument, 1931-1936

The expansion of the monument brought forth new plans to develop Katmai for its tourist

potential. Some thought that wildlife clubs would develop the monument, because they had

expressed themselves so strongly during the monument expansion process. Another potential

monument developer surfaced in 1933, when the owner of a travel service wrote that he hoped

to become active "promoting, showing, teaching, and selling" vacations to the Valley of Ten

Thousand Smokes. NPS Director Albright, however, openly worried that nothing should be

developed before the agency established a presence. Therefore, he discouraged both proposals.

[43]

A minor flow of visitors came to the monument, however, because of the advent of the air age.

In 1929, Anchorage Air Transport debuted tourist flights to the area in the form of a one-day

tour. For $265, the company offered to fly visitors into the still-active Valley of Ten Thousand

Smokes and provide them eight hours for exploration and sightseeing. In the early 1930s Frank

Dorbrandt, a pilot who flew for Anchorage-based Pacific International Airways, took several

parties into the volcanic country. Robert Ellis (of Alaska-Washington Airways) and other

charter operators also visited the area during the early to mid-1930s. [44] By 1940 John

Walatka, a pilot for Bristol Bay Air Service, had also become familiar with the monument; a

game agent praised him as one who "knows that park as few do and knows where all the cabins

are located." [45]

Local residents, after April 1931, continued to use the Katmai area just as they had before the

monument expansion. Trappers accounted for some of that use. Most of these men were

commercial fishermen during the summer and spent the remainder of the year in cabins and on

trap lines within the monument. Their use of the monument was clearly illegal, but no one from

either the territorial or federal government was charged with enforcing monument regulations.

Local Native residents took part in organized traditional use activities. Those who had fled Old

Savonoski in June 1912, for instance, made annual hunting pilgrimages from New Savonoski to

the Savonoski River valley until the late 1930s. Throughout this period these expeditions were

scarcely noticed by the authorities, but when permission was asked to continue the practice, the

NPS issued a denial and the hunts came to a halt. Another group grazed reindeer in the park.

Shortly after 1930, about 10,000 reindeer were brought from Nome into the Naknek River area,

and a portion of that herd had grazed for awhile in the area west of Lake Coville and north of

Naknek Lake. [46] The industry, however, soon declined, and by 1940 no reindeer were known

to live in or near the monument. [47]

Another management headache which the NPS acquired as a result of the expansion dealt with

the clam and salmon canning operations. The agency was aware of these activities; Robert

Griggs, in fact, had noted in his correspondence of November 1930 that "no people live within

the proposed reservation except casual visitors such as the hands of the clam cannery at Kukak

Bay." What the agency did not know was that canning interests had been investing in facilities

along the shore of Swikshak and Kukak bays since 1923. The canneries, however, escaped

General Land Office scrutiny because their operations had not been patented. The cannery

owners were probably never informed of the impending monument expansion. [48]

In February 1936, Surf Canneries called attention to its operations when it wrote Secretary of

the Interior Harold Ickes. A company representative noted that it owned a clam and salmon

cannery at Kukak Bay, and fishing cabins, docks, and other improvements in and near
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

Swikshak Bay; the appraised valuation of its facilities was over $90,000. The company

requested a patent for four tracts of land in the two bays, and implored the secretary to remove

those lands from the monument. [49]

Ickes, the Commissioner of the General Land Office, and the NPS Director Arno Cammerer all

recognized the validity of the claim. Cammerer was in no mood to delete lands within the

monument, so he instead proposed an executive order "so that all valid existing rights at the

time of the issuance of the proclamations shall be restored." [50] Higher-ups agreed with his

suggestion, and on June 15 President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued Proclamation No. 2177 on

their behalf. The new law stated that "it appears that it would be in the public interest" to

modify the proclamations of 1918 and 1931 to make "subject to valid claims under the publicland laws affecting any lands within the aforesaid Katmai National Monument existing when

the proclamations were issued and since maintained." The proclamation was intended to apply

to any operation which could prove its legitimacy. As shall be seen, both cannery companies

and trappers tried to take advantage of the 1936 proclamation by applying for patents. No

patents, however, were ever issued to either interest. [51]

NPS officials may not have been aware of it at the time, but the land they acquired in the 1931

proclamation gave them control over an area in which another Federal agency had previously

been active. Personnel from the U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, an agency within the Department of

Commerce, had visited the mouth of Kidawik Creek (Brooks River) each year from 1920

through 1925 as part of their predatory fish destruction program. In 1921, they blasted the north

end of Brooks Falls in order to ease the way for migrating salmon. [52] They did so in hopes of

decreasing salmon mortality. But subsequent studies were not performed, so the agency had no

way of knowing whether its action improved salmon reproduction.

The NPS Expresses an Interest

Although the 1931 proclamation made Katmai the largest of the National Park Service units, the

monument continued to be as woefully managed as it had ever been. The superintendent at

McKinley Park, Harry J. Liek, still ignored its existence, and the NPS directorate in

Washington saw no need to spend money or effort for an area that few people visited and where

the resources were perceived not to be in danger. When Franklin D. Roosevelt became

president, he unleashed a bevy of agencies intended to help the nation's unemployed. Several of

those agencies, including the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), the Civil Works

Administration, the Public Works Administration, and the Works Progress Administration,

brought workers out to America's parks to work on trail building, improvements, reconstruction

work, and similar activities. [53] But the only New Deal program that sent workers to an

Alaska NPS unit was the CCC, which operated in Mount McKinley National Park from 1937 to

1939. [54] Katmai, which was remote and had no staff, was not a site for New Deal projects.

During the mid-1930s, the NPS was finally able to direct some of its energies toward Katmai.

The agency had had its budget substantially increased with depression-era relief funds (its

operations budget rose from $2.5 million in FY 1934 to $11.2 million in FY 1937), and its

administrators were able to attend to conditions that it had long been forced to ignore. In June

1936, Arthur Demaray, who was second in command to NPS Director Arno Cammerer, came to

Mount McKinley National Park on an inspection tour. Demaray was not the first high official to

visit the park; Stephen Mather in 1926 and Horace Albright in 1931 had preceded him. [55]

What was special about the trip was his desire to see Alaska's national monuments. By the time

he had arrived at McKinley Park he had already visited Sitka and Glacier Bay. He had also

planned an aerial inspection of Katmai, but inclement weather forced him to cancel his flight.

[56]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

Demaray's trip took place shortly after outside pressure began to be applied regarding the

monument. The Alaska Game Commission warden in Dillingham, Hosee R. Sarber, visited

Naknek in early 1936 and was surprised to find that "quite a number of trappers" were operating

in the Naknek-Lake Grosvenor country, most of whom were unaware that they were within the

monument. The most aggressive was reported to be a man named Weatherspoon [Harry

Featherstone?], who had "several trapping cabins at or near the head of the Naknek Lakes."

[57] Shortly afterwards, the Game Commission made five patrols along Shelikof Strait and

found "several violators operating in and adjacent to the Park." Both of these reports were sent

on to the NPS Director Cammerer in Washington. Frank Dufresne, the Juneau-based Executive

Officer of the Alaska Game Commission, delivered much the same message when he visited the

director in late March. Mount McKinley Superintendent Harry Liek, who had apparently been

apprised of the situation by Dufresne, also passed on his concerns to Cammerer. Cammerer,

when confronted with the problem, was caught flat-footed because he knew little about the area.

All he could do, for the moment, was reiterate a sense of concern. [58]

Over the next few months, responsibility for the Katmai patrol was kicked about from one

official to another. Dufresne hoped that someone on the McKinley staff might carry it out; Liek

claimed lack of funds and hoped that Washington might fund the patrol. NPS officials hoped

that the Alaska Game Commission could continue its patrols, but the severely understaffed

agency was unwilling to do so without financial assistance from the park service. [59]

Demaray, shortly after his McKinley visit, broke the stalemate by assigning the patrol to one of

Liek's rangers, the expenses to be paid for from the general national monument appropriation.

Katmai was provided a $600 budget for the 1937 fiscal year. [60] The money was intended to

allow a Mount McKinley ranger to "make a reconnaissance survey in Mount Katmai National

Monument for the purpose of establishing a winter patrol in that area." Louis M. Corbley, who

was Superintendent Liek's chief ranger, was given the Katmai assignment in October 1936. He

was to arrive at Katmai by November 10 and remain for a minimum of five months, enough for

an entire trapping season. A maritime strike, however, quashed his immediate plans. He was not

able to visit Katmai until the following spring. [61]

Corbley spent most of June 1937 away from Mount McKinley. He sailed around the peninsula

to Naknek, then chartered a boat to go up the Naknek River. But the boat was unable to

overcome the rapids, so he returned to Naknek and chartered a flight to Lake Coville, Lake

Grosvenor, and the upper end of Naknek Lake. Corbley later flew over the Valley of Ten

Thousand Smokes. He landed just twice, at "Old Village" (probably Savonoski) and at Brooks

Lake, where he spent a few hours. His time being limited, he then returned to McKinley Park.

He gave no account of his one-day excursion save a brief trip report, which included no

information about either the structures or the people he encountered. [62]

The visit was the first that any National Park Service official had made to Katmai since it had

been established 19 years earlier. Information, even if brief and sketchy, had been compiled. So,

to use Gruening's analogy, the agency's management rose from that of "total neglect" to

"flagrant neglect." But Corbley, unfortunately, left the Mount McKinley staff within the next

few years. The agency made no attempt to make its patrol an annual event, and its previous

inclusion in the Mount McKinley budget was eliminated.

In the meantime, the Bureau of Fisheries, which had performed some rudimentary

"improvement" work by blasting out the north end of Brooks Falls back in 1921, applied to

make its presence more permanent. In response to concern about Japanese offshore fishing in

the Bristol Bay area, Congress directed the bureau to investigate the bay's salmon resources.

The plan, conceived in 1938, called for a data collection effort by both offshore and land-based

teams. Naknek River, one of five major study targets, received a three man team in 1939, which

made a survey of the river system's major spawning grounds. The following year the Bureau
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

established a weir and cabin near the outlet to Brooks Lake. As noted in Chapter 8, they were to

maintain their presence at the site for decades to come. [63]

Trappers and the Kinsley Investigation

Reports of Katmai trapping violations, first voiced in early 1936, reached a sufficient crescendo

by late 1937 that NPS officials were forced, once again, to pay attention to the monument. [64]

The NPS had no staff to deal with the problem, but they hoped to gain some assistance from

cooperating agencies.

The NPS soon found that few in the local area had much sympathy with them. Residents had

not been consulted about the 1931 expansion, but most had tacitly accepted the enlarged

monument as long as the regulations had not been enforced. [65] The first hint of enforcement

activity, however, brought resistance. Two of the trappers, Stephen M. Scott and John Monsen,

protested that they had a legal right to use the monument's lands. [66] In addition, several other

trappers headed a petition of 53 residents from the Naknek vicinity that implored Alaska

Delegate Anthony J. Dimond to "help us in any way possible" to relax the enforcement of

monument regulations. [67]

The NPS responded to the protests in two ways. First, it squelched any ideas that the agency

would willingly give up on Katmai. Also, it asked the General Land Office to find out which

trappers had valid land claims, based on the 1936 presidential proclamation. The GLO

undertook the task in January 1938, and assigned A. C. Kinsley, a special agent from the

Department of the Interior, to investigate.

Throughout this period, both the GLO and the NPS told the trappers that their claims were

being investigated; they did not try to evict any trappers from their cabins. But Stephen M.

Scott, speaking for four other trappers beside himself, complained to Anthony Dimond that "The

Game Warden and another gentleman of the Forestry Department have issued [an] order to get

out without so much as by your leave" sometime during 1937. [68] The NPS, when told of

Scott's charge, had no knowledge of such an eviction, and representatives from the Alaska

Game Commission, the U.S. Forest Service, and the Alaska Road Commission all told the NPS

that no one in their agencies had tried to evict anyone. [69]

Kinsley spent the next year investigating the validity of the trappers' claims. He visited the

Naknek area in July 1938, tried to contact each of the claimants, and submitted his

recommendations in the GLO Commissioner in January 1939. The GLO, in turn, forwarded

them to Cammerer in May. The GLO concluded that four trappers--Stephen M. Scott, John

Hartzell, Verner Eckman, and John Monsen--were already established in the area before the

1931 monument expansion. Therefore, as a result of the 1936 proclamation which validated

existing rights, the four had "a possibility of their claims being valid" even though they were

now located on monument land. [70] Roy Fure, another trapper, could not be contacted during

the initial investigation. During the summer of 1939, however, his claim of residency in the area

prior to 1931 was also substantiated. [71] The GLO found that four other trappers--Richard

Mitchell, Paul Chukan, Gunnar Berggren, and Sigurd Lundgren--had begun trapping after 1931

and thus had no valid claims to their property. [72] The GLO report did not investigate the

claim of other monument trappers, including John "Frenchy" Fournier, Martin Monsen, Alfred

Cooper, and a man named Karvonen. These people, presumably, began trapping after 1931;

their claims, at any rate, were never investigated. [73]

The GLO concluded the investigation by notifying Mitchell, Chukan, Berggren and Lundgren

that they were trespassers and should leave the monument if they had not already done so.

(Chukan and Berggren protested the decision, but were ultimately overruled.) [74] Scott,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

Hartzell, Eckman, Monsen, and Fure were free to continue residing in the monument.

Monument regulations, however, forbade them to trap. Those spotted in the monument with

trapping gear or hides were subject to arrest--if authorities were willing to expend the effort to

track them down. As time would prove, the legal process prodded some to abandon their trap

lines, but others continued to evade monument regulations for years afterward.

During the investigation, several trappers had contended that they were unaware that they had

been operating in the monument. The boundaries as set forth in the 1931 proclamation,

moreover, did not easily correspond with identifiable physical features. The NPS, therefore,

tried to get the GLO to survey the monument. At a minimum, they hoped to survey the northern

and western boundaries, where trapping activity was highest. The first such request was made in

early 1937, and was repeated in the spring of 1939, 1940, and 1941. [75] NPS officials

recognized that the man to conduct such a survey would be George A. Parks, GLO's District

Cadastral Engineer in Juneau. The engineer repeatedly promised to survey the monument's

western boundary. But Parks, for whatever reason, was unable to get a surveying crew out to

Katmai. [76]

Carson and Been Visit the Monument

During the adjudication process of 1938-39, officials at Mount McKinley National Park were

acutely aware that all of Alaska's NPS units were woefully understaffed. Officials at the Alaska

Game Commission, asked to enforce the game laws throughout the territory, felt likewise. Both

agencies soon realized that the best way to deal with poaching and similar problems was to

share enforcement responsibilities. To help the NPS in southwest Alaska, the Alaska Game

Commission asked its Dillingham wildlife agent, Carlos M. Carson, to keep tabs on Katmai

National Monument. In December 1939, the NPS reciprocated by naming the various Mount

McKinley rangers to be Deputy Game Wardens of the Alaska Game Commission. The

cooperative effort may well have been spearheaded by Mount McKinley superintendent Frank

T. Been, who replaced Liek in June 1939. [77]

In January 1940, Superintendent Been represented the NPS in Anchorage at a meeting of the

Alaska Game Commission. Shortly thereafter, he was told that "although it was not determined

from inspections, it was learned through reliable sources that trapping is being done at Katmai

National Monument, just as though there was no national park area there." Carlos M. Carson,

the AGC warden in Dillingham, decided to see for himself on March 20. He and pilot Grenold

Collins flew into the monument, and at the eastern end of Naknek Lake, Carson found three

trappers--Alfred Cooper, Martin Monsen, and John Monsen--and apprehended them for taking

fur in the monument. Been soon heard about it, and he gratefully approved the game

commission's request to prosecute the violators. [78]

Carson, in an April 7 letter, told Been that the area was "an animal paradise" in which "trapping

is done openly and widely." The superintendent, clearly alarmed at the news, wired the NPS

director with the news and requested funds "to patrol the monument during times of the year

when violations are most likely to occur." [79]

Carson apparently returned to the monument in May, apprehended several more trappers, and

confiscated fur from illegal operations in the monument. Been, meanwhile, told his Washington

superiors that the level of resource management at Katmai was clearly inadequate. Having been

granted funds to visit, he promised a full report on trapping activities. [80]

Superintendent Been spent most of the summer of 1940 in the field; during September, he

traveled around Katmai National Monument accompanied by Victor Cahalane, a biologist with

the U.S. Biological Survey. [81] The two flew from Anchorage to Naknek; they then took a
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

short flight that led to the lower end of Brooks Lake, to the Savonoski River and on to the

Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes. They returned to Naknek by way of lakes Grosvenor and

Coville. On September 4, they headed out on a boat trip which took them up the Naknek River

and on to Brooks River, and on to a trapper's cabin near the mouth of the Savonoski River.

They also boated around Brooks Lake in search of trapping activity, and hiked from the mouth

of the Ukak River into the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes. On their way out of the monument,

Cahalane and Been flew east over the Ukak River valley one last time, then went over Katmai

Crater and down to Kukak Bay before continuing on to Kodiak. The two then separated, Been

heading to Anchorage on his way back to McKinley Park. [82]

Been's report on the trip showed that the monument was far more scenic than he had been led to

believe. Before he left, he had received "rather definitely unfavorable comments about the

monument from men occupying important positions." [83] But his narrative was replete with

descriptions of the area's beauty and bounteous wildlife, and he emerged from the trip "strongly

inclined toward its retention in the national park system," noting that "the monument abounds in

natural wonders and grandeur." He recognized the tourist potential of the area, although he felt

that its remoteness precluded it from becoming a tourist center for many years. [84]

In addition, Been was pleased to discover that he found no signs of active trapping. On the

contrary, he saw several stripped cabins and abandoned caches. The trappers, hounded by

Carson, had apparently moved out of the park. [85] For the time being at least, Been was

satisfied that monument-based trapping had been squelched on the Bristol Bay side of the

Aleutian Range.

The 1942 Boundary Expansion

At the end of their trip to Katmai, Been and Cahalane spoke to the local Alaska Game

Commission agent in Kodiak, Jack Benson. The agent was aware that trapping was taking place

on the coast of the monument; he even knew the locations of several cabins. But he had no boat

assigned to him worthy of the Shelikof Strait crossing, and he had not yet been asked to include

the Katmai coast in his patrols. Been gave him permission to patrol that area and to act on

behalf of the NPS when so doing. [86]

Cahalane remained on Kodiak Island for the next several days. He accompanied Benson on his

patrols, and traveled with him over to the Katmai coast. He did not like what he saw. Two

months later, he sent his concerns on to Ben H. Thompson, head of the NPS Land Planning

Division. He noted that

it is perfectly feasible for poachers to base their operations on any one of the

numerous islands in the bays of the Shelikof Strait section while they may trap on

the mainland of the monument with greatly enhanced chances of escaping

detection.

He told Thompson that the best solution to the trapping problem was to extend the existing

boundaries to include the various islands in the coastal area. He noted that an added benefit of

including the islands was to prevent the possibility of any fox-farming operations being started.

But Kiukpalik Island, he noted, had had a fox farm for a number of years; therefore, he urged

that the island be excluded from any proposed additions to the park. [87]

Superintendent Been wrote a concurring note to the NPS Director in mid-December. He

suggested that the boundary be extended two miles from the shore line, and that "Any islands

touching this line should be included." Based on the maps he had available, he felt that the

monument would include just three new islands: Shaw Island, north of Cape Douglas; Ninagiak
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

Island in Hallo Bay; and Takli Island, at the entrance to Geographic Harbor. [88] He chose

those islands because they were the only coastal islands which, in his opinion, were not already

claimed as a fox farm and were sufficiently distant from the coast that a fox farm might

logically be located there. [89]

Been, meanwhile, asked authorities in Alaska to comment on the proposed monument addition.

Neither the District Land Office or the District Cadastral Engineer saw any difficulties in such

an action. Frank Dufresne, who worked for the Alaska Game Commission in Juneau, thought

that a boundary extension was the best way to ward off the illegal taking of game and fur in the

monument, but Jack Benson, the AGC agent in Kodiak, thought that the problem could be

managed under existing arrangements. Alaska Game Commissioner Andy Simons likewise

opposed the addition of the islands, citing possible impact on the fishing industry and negative

reaction from local residents. [90]

On January 30, 1941, Been sent copies of those comments to the NPS director. He noted that

"Examination of the opinions and comments contained in these letters shows no substantial

reason for opposing the Monument extension; the doubts raised are from exaggerated

impressions of Park Service protection restrictions." He did acknowledge possible negative

impacts to the clam fishery. [91]

To evaluate the legal ramifications of the boundary extension, the GLO Commissioner called in

A. C. Kinsley one more time, in order to investigate the validity of trapping operations along

the Shelikof Strait coastline. [92] His report on the area, completed in August 1941, revealed

that only two men had an existing fur farm lease: Earl L. Butler of Kodiak, who had initiated a

10-year lease on Kiukpalik Island in 1937, and John A. Smith, also of Kodiak, who began a 5-

year lease of Takli Island in 1939. Kinsley noted that "Mr. Butler's success with this island has

been small." Smith, he noted, had likewise encountered difficulty with his Takli Island lease.

He had failed to stock the island as demanded by the lease, and had been guilty of game

violations as well. No other people would be affected by the inclusion of any of the offshore

islands in the monument. [93]

Based on Kinsley's report, Secretary of the Interior Harold L. Ickes in November 1941

recommended a five mile boundary extension and noted that "it would in no way be harmful to

potential business enterprises in that general part of Alaska." The following January, Ickes sent

a draft proclamation to President Roosevelt, who circulated it to various executive departments.

[94] On August 4, Roosevelt signed Proclamation No. 2564, which formally moved the

boundary east to include "all islands in Cook Inlet and Shelikof Strait in front of and within five

miles of the Katmai National Monument." [95] The proclamation included about twenty

offshore islands, including Takli and Kiukpalik. Takli alone had an area of about 450 acres;

there were slightly more than 3,000 acres on all of the newly added islands. [96]

The new proclamation, combined with those given in 1918 and 1931, gave Katmai an area of

almost 2.7 million acres. But without a staff or budget, the National Park Service remained

powerless to manage the unit. Throughout the 1940s, as noted below, there would be repeated

attempts to establish active management authority over the expanse. The same period would

witness an increasing number of problems at the park, most of which were either caused or

exacerbated by the lack of a management presence.

Attempts to Establish a Management Presence

The recognition that trapping was taking place throughout the monument convinced Been that

Katmai needed on-site management even before his September 1940 inspection trip. He

sympathized with the anger that many Alaskans had no doubt vented to him when he wrote, "It
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

is hoped that funds will be provided so that the NPS will be able to administer the areas rather

than have them continue as illustrations of apparent mismanagement or service indifference."

He felt that in order to patrol the monument, "a custodian should be assigned at once--

preferably two who can travel together as there are many hazards." [97]

To implement his suggestion, he requested a $14,300 budget for Katmai in May 1940--enough

for two staff, a power boat and travel expenses. But in November the NPS Director informed

him that his request had been slashed to $3000, sufficient only for one Naknek-based

permanent ranger, supplies, and travel expenses. And in early 1941 he was told that "we shall

be fortunate if we get an appropriation for administration and maintenance." His request for a

patrol boat was denied. [98] Been responded by submitting a fiscal year 1943 budget for

$20,293. It called for both chief ranger and ranger naturalist positions. Also included was a

provision for purchase of a patrol boat and a 16-member dog team, along with needed travel,

supplies, and ancillary items. [99]

Joseph S. Dixon, a biologist for the Fish and Wildlife Service (F&WS), concurred with the need

for Been's request. Herbert Maier, the Acting Regional Director in San Francisco, was also

supportive that a presence be established at Katmai, noting that "it is difficult for us to see how

any area, particularly one of such an enormous size, can function without any resident

personnel." [100] But the national office slashed Been's budget to just $4,000: $2,000 to employ

a permanent ranger, $1000 for the purchase of a dog team and radio, $400 for a superintendent's

trip to the park, and $600 for miscellaneous expenses. [101] Congress ignored the Service's

Katmai funding request.

In January 1942, Been submitted 21 Project Construction Program (PCP) proposal forms for

projects at Katmai. The proposals were requested by the regional director, and afforded a means

of recording information and suggestions of one of the very few Service employees who had

any first-hand knowledge of the monument. The request for project proposals, therefore, did not

indicate a renewed interest in Alaska's monuments, and a actual establishment of a construction

program was considered "most unlikely." [102] Ten of the PCP proposals called for the

construction of remote shelter cabins. He also called for the construction of a monument

headquarters and visitor center in Geographic Harbor, unspecified developments at Brooks

River and Brooks Lake, and a series of roads and trails. Finally, he recommended a $25,000

project to restore Old Savonoski by reconstructing its buildings.

Been gave considerable thought to the location of the monument headquarters. He chose

Geographic Harbor, in part, "because of its proximity to travel from the states," and he also

liked the local scenery, the ample fresh water, its protection from winds and its location vis-àvis the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes. He noted, however, that

there is still some justification for having Naknek as the monument base until funds

are provided for its development. Naknek provides a place of residence for the first

personnel and is accessible to the part of the monument in which most of the

violations are occurring from hunting and trapping. Out from Naknek, the

development at Brooks Lake and Brooks River can be prepared and many of the

proposed shelter cabins constructed. [103]

Been had visited Naknek but not Geographic Harbor; his choice of the latter site, therefore, was

probably based on a 1940 visit by NPS biologist Victor Cahalane (with whom he had traveled

that summer), combined with descriptions provided by the 1919 National Geographic Society

expedition. [104]

Regional office staff had mixed feelings toward the proposals. The cabins, for instance, were

criticized because they would "provide shelter, indiscriminately, to 'friend or foe' of the park."
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

Regarding the Savonoski project, they thought it more appropriate that the village should first be

measured and have drawings made before a restoration was attempted. Another noted that the

Savonoski work would "require questionable methods and after the work is done considerable

annual maintaining will have to be done to prevent loss of work done." Agency officials

generally supported the other PCPs. The regional office recommended all but the Savonoski

project to the directorate in Washington, but none of the other 20 projects were funded. The

U.S. government, now fully involved in World War II, was not about to expend funds for

recreational or interpretive facilities in an Alaskan national monument. [105]

The Region Four office apparently used Been's personal knowledge of the monument,

combined with the information contained in his project construction proposals, to write

Katmai's first master plan. The plan, part of an agency-wide effort to get ready for the expected

tourist boom that was sure to follow the war, was written in the summer of 1942, and Been

approved it on September 10. Almost two years later, on June 29, 1944, it received

Washington's approval when it was signed by Assistant Director Hillory A. Tolson. What the

plan said is a matter of conjecture. Only two copies of the plan were produced, neither of which

are known to exist today. No evidence suggests that the plan was ever used as a context for

future monument decision-making. [106]

Been, who had a personal interest in the monument as a result of his month-long stay and his

role in the 1942 monument expansion, left the NPS to join the army in May 1943. His

successor, acting superintendent Grant Pearson, had been a McKinley ranger since the 1920s

and had little initial interest in Katmai. Because the war brought restrictions on both travel and

materials usage, few plans appeared for monument development.

Wartime Usage of the Monument

The onset of the war, however, resulted in a sharp increase in use in and around the monument.

In 1941, the U.S. Army Air Service established Naknek Air Base, [107] and commercial

salmon fishing stayed active throughout the territory. The growing popularity of travel by small

planes, combined with the presence of the nearby air base and Bristol Bay salmon canneries,

made the drainages of the upper Naknek basin increasingly attractive to recreational fishermen.

Military and construction personnel at the air base flew to Brooks River, the Bay of Islands and

other fishing spots and reportedly pulled "thousands upon thousands of trout" from the water.

Pilots for the Ray Petersen Flying Service, Bristol Bay Flying Service and Woodley Airways

flew an increasing number of cannery personnel into the lakes and rivers of the upper Naknek

drainage. [108] They were soon joined by Bud Branham and other pilots familiar with

southwestern Alaska. The NPS, whose nearest personnel were stationed 300 miles away, was

powerless to stop the onslaught. [109]

To cater to military personnel who wanted to fish closer to the base, the Army Air Service

established two nearby rest and recreation camps. Rapids Camp (also called Annex No. 1) was

located at the foot of the Naknek River Rapids, five miles southeast of the base, while Lake

Camp (Annex No. 2) was located at the west end of Naknek Lake, seven miles to the east.

Naknek River and the western end of the lake, therefore, were also subject to heavy fishing

pressure for the duration of the war. Neither camp was within the monument, but boundary

changes in 1969 and 1978 would bring them within the sphere of NPS influence. [110] (See

Chapter 5.)

Pearson and Kuehl Visit the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes

Pearson probably knew little about the extent of illegal fishing that took place at Katmai during
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

the war. But in August 1945, he received a request that promised legal use of the monument's

fishery. The U.S. Naval Operating Base in Kodiak sought permission to establish a fishing

camp in the monument near Brooks Lake. The camp, consisting of two 16' x 30' Yakutat huts,

was to be located "one-half mile east of Brooks Falls and one mile east of the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service Biological Station," at or near the site of present-day Brooks Camp. [111]

Perhaps in response to the Navy's request, Pearson visited Katmai to take a closer look. On

August 17 he left McKinley Park; shortly afterwards, he and Alfred C. Kuehl flew from

Elmendorf Field to Naknek Air Base on an Air Force plane, passing over the Mt. Mageik and

the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes en route. [112] Flying back over Naknek Lake the next

day, Pearson "was astonished to see that two-thirds of Katmai Monument didn't seem to have

been affected at all by the eruption." The two completed their explorations by hiking up into the

Valley, returning to wait for their plane, and heading out of the monument.

Pearson was obviously impressed by what he saw. He exclaimed that "This should make a hit

with tourists if we could ever get 'em in here." He reported that an airfield could be built in the

valley, and even suggested that a road could be built there from Naknek. Kuehl, by comparison,

was nonplussed by it all. Though he was convinced that Katmai was worthy of NPS

management, he felt that "the scenic values of the monument are not particularly outstanding

when compared with other scenic regions of Alaska," and that the "lakes within the area are

large but lacking in a magnificent adjacent setting." [113]

The two also differed on how realistic it would be to attract tourists to the remote location. The

ebullient, can-do Pearson noted that the two began to "scheme out ways and means to bring in

visitors and take care of them." [114] They may even have made tentative plans for a tourist

lodge, boat docks, trails, patrol cabins and administrative sites. But Kuehl, in his trip report, felt

that Katmai was so inaccessible that "visitor use, if any, will be extremely limited" and that

"Only the curious wealthy sportsman and the scientifically inclined able to stand the

expeditionary expense will be likely to view the area." [115]

Three weeks after Pearson returned to the park, he received a visit from Commander Jack

Benson about the proposed Brooks Lake camp. [116] Benson said that it was the Navy's plan to

allow its personnel to spend short furloughs there. Pearson liked the Navy's idea, and sent his

approval to his Washington superiors. But in mid-October, the Navy notified Pearson that its

plans had changed. It now proposed to build its main camp "near the head of the Naknek River,

just northwest of Naknek Lake" and thus near the Lake Camp facility. The superintendent was

told that the Navy would later build an auxiliary camp at the Brooks Lake site, but he heard no

more from them about it. [117]

Katmai Management Issues, 1945-1948

During the latter half of the 1940s, the NPS had a host of resource management issues with

which it had to grapple. A clam cannery on Kukak Bay demanded the right to operate.

Similarly, local interests sought the right to mine pumice and volcanic ash within the

monument, and additional prospecting was taking place for hard rock minerals. Each of these

operations were technically illegal, but had the support of Alaska's delegate to Congress and

Alaskan development interests. (Clamming and mining are covered in greater detail in chapters

8 and 11, respectively.) Trapping became an issue once again, and portions of the monument

became so heavily fished that officials began to worry that overfishing might deplete the fish

stocks.

But the government seemed no more inclined to provide basic funding than it had in previous

years. Much of its lack of interest was based on its low priority to NPS officials. Ever since the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

days of Stephen Mather, the NPS had gained popularity and legitimacy through publicity and

by encouraging appropriate tourist development. This policy worked well for most areas, but it

put Alaskan parklands at a great disadvantage. During the postwar period the agency was

particularly sensitive to the parks as recreational destinations. Katmai, which had recorded only

32 official visits in the 30 years after its establishment, was perceived to have little potential for

visitation because of its remoteness and inaccessibility. [118] By September 1945, the agency

had formulated development plans for Mount McKinley and Glacier Bay, and a plan for Sitka

was in the works. But regarding Katmai and Old Kasaan, NPS Director Newton Drury admitted

that "we are almost totally lacking in information upon which to base even tentative plans for

the[ir] future development." [119]

Little facilities development took place in any of Alaska's national park units during the 1940s.

Year after year the Mount McKinley superintendent proposed a budget which included

development plans for most Alaskan park units; just as predictably, the proposals went

unfunded. Sometimes it was the NPS directorate in Washington that wielded the budget ax;

more often the culprit was a Congressional committee. As funds subsumed in the war effort

were freed up for alternative uses and as Alaskan interests became more persistent in their

demands, increasing headway was made in the budgetary process. But no action was

forthcoming before the end of the decade. [120]

In January 1947, Frank Been returned from the army and resumed his duties as superintendent

at Mount McKinley. Not long afterward, Katmai issues crossed his desk when the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service informed him that trapping had resumed in the monument. [121] Carlos

Carson, the Fish and Wildlife Service agent in Dillingham, had discovered four men living and

trapping inside its boundaries. The four, one of whom was Stephen M. Scott, were quickly

arrested and hauled out for a commissioner's hearing. [122]

Been, through Carson, learned that the local trappers were pleading innocent to trapping

charges because they claimed ignorance of the boundary location. To mitigate the problem, he

contacted George Parks, the Regional Cadastral Engineer for the Bureau of Land Management

(formerly the GLO), regarding a possible survey of the northern and western boundary. Parks

considered the idea, but he was no more able to undertake such a survey than he had been

during the years preceding World War II. [123] Lacking a survey, Been relied on the Fish and

Wildlife Service agents to contact each trapper and explain the various boundary locations.

[124]

The following year, Carson found much the same activity going on. He told Been that he had

discovered a trapper's cabin at the mouth of Headwaters Creek, at the southwest end of Brooks

Lake. Kirk Adkinson, who lived there, was tried but released; Henry Nelson, who claimed a

residence just outside the monument, was declared innocent of any wrongdoing. Both had been

active in the monument the year before. Carson also found "fresh evidence of others using the

cabins within the park and on the bank of the upper Naknek Lake," and was told that "the army

[Air Force] boys go into this park and kill moose all winter." Finally, he heard that one local

trapper, Jim Marlette, was using a small plane and had "a sizable illegal beaver cache in there."

Recognizing that he was fighting a losing battle, he declared that "Something should be done

and quickly." He called for the installation of on-site staff, noting that "if there is not a Ranger

in there to protect things it might as well be turned out to the public." [125]

Been and Carson also knew that fishing pressure was steadily increasing in the monument.

There was a temporary lull in sport fishing after World War II, but Northern Consolidated

Airlines (NCA), along with independent pilot Bud Branham, took groups of fishermen into the

area as early as 1947. The three most popular areas were the waters surrounding present-day

Brooks Camp, Grosvenor Camp, and Lake Camp; Brooks River became so popular that the

Standard Oil Company of California sponsored a color film, in the spring of 1948, on the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

stream's rainbow trout fishing. [126]

During this period, fishing in Katmai was illegal--aircraft landings were against the law except

on official government business--but officials winked at the activity because it had an

insignificant impact, in most places, on area fish stocks. Fishing regulations specified that no

more than ten fish could be caught per day and that the total catch be limited to twenty fish, and

in most cases (so far as is known) fishermen followed those regulations. [127] Along Brooks

River, however, the fishery began to be abused. As Ray Petersen remembered the situation,

"poaching was rampant and the trout were caught with gobs of salmon eggs on giant Colorado

spinners and hooks." [128] By the summer of 1948, Fish and Wildlife Service representatives

stationed at Brooks Lake noted "quite definitely that the rainbow trout have decreased as the

result of the popularity to air borne sportsmen." [129]

Carlos Carson, the local fish and wildlife agent, was well aware of the growing abuses being

perpetrated in the monument. Fortunately, his March 1948 plea for a ranger did not fall on deaf

ears. Been reacted by offering him the position of Deputy Park Ranger, which gave him

"complete authority to act for the National Park Service." [130] He then sent a copy of the letter

to the Washington office. Hillory Tolson, an NPS Assistant Director, responded by suggesting a

presence by both NPS and F&WS personnel. He requested the Regional Director, Owen A.

Tomlinson, to send him a budget estimate for NPS patrols in the monument in cooperation with

Fish and Wildlife agents. He also suggested that Grant Pearson, then at Sitka National

Monument, should be sent on one or more trips to Katmai to check on fishing activities and the

possible careless use of firearms. The naming of George Kelez, a Fish and Wildlife agent

stationed at Brooks Lake, as a Deputy Park Ranger, was an additional action intended to

establish an enforcement presence. Kelez, however, was soon elevated to a supervisory position

and spent little time in the monument. [131] That August, regional office staff also considered

the appointment of F&WS agents at Kodiak as deputy park rangers. [132]

Plans, and a budget, were made to allow for Pearson to visit the monument, but no trips took

place that year. Been realized that it would be advantageous to have a resident ranger (not

necessarily Pearson) rather than a custodian who made brief visits. The ranger, to be stationed

"in a tent near the Brooks Lake salmon weir," would mingle with fishermen, advise them on

regulations, keep the area clean, post necessary signs, and maintain a register. The regional

director liked Been's suggestion when it was first promulgated in May; a month later, however,

he recanted, citing a lack of transportation for patrols. [133] Been, in response, held out for a

short-term ranger presence beginning in early September, and suggested that a suitable

candidate would be William J. (Willie) Nancarrow, who had just transferred to the park from

Lake Texoma, an NPS recreation area (now delisted) on the Texas-Oklahoma border. [134] The

regional office concurred, but in late July the Katmai assignment had to be withdrawn. The

Mount McKinley staff was limping along with only two of its regular four rangers; it therefore

could spare no one for duties outside the park. Kuehl went instead, but only for a short, factfinding visit. Some of the Katmai funds were later directed to Glacier Bay management efforts.

[135]

Alaskan Attempts to Dismantle the Monument

The trapping which was taking place in the monument caused NPS officials to redouble their

efforts to protect the resource. The operation of a clam cannery at Kukak Bay, pressure to mine

volcanic ash along Shelikof Strait, and reports of the discovery of valuable minerals within the

monument all caused additional worries among government bureaucrats. These activities,

however, had just the opposite effect among many Alaska residents. Those who felt that the

Federal government was intent to preserve Alaska at the expense of its citizens occasionally

pointed to Katmai as an example of "useless conservation." [136]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

It should have been no surprise, therefore, that territorial interests appealed to loosen the Federal

grip on the monument. This sentiment was expressed throughout the decade, but particularly

during the postwar years. As early as 1941, a Territorial Department of Mines report, noting an

"apparently rich mineral area" in the Aleutian Range and the favorable opportunities for

prospecting, concluded that the justifications for the monument were no longer valid. [137] Six

years later, commercial interests showed an interest in extracting pumice (volcanic ash) from

Takli Island and the shores of Kukak Bay, and as noted in Chapter 11, Alaska Delegate E. L.

Bartlett made a repeated series of attempts to open the area to the mining interests. [138]

Others wanted to entirely rid themselves of the park service's presence. In the spring of 1946 the

Alaska Legislature, incensed at the state of monument affairs, cited a long list of grievances and

passed House Joint Memorial 7, which demanded "that steps be taken to have the Katmai

National Monument abolished in the interest of the Territory of Alaska so that fishing and

mining may be carried on legally in that area." Governor Gruening signed the memorial on

April 2. [139] Six months later, Governor Gruening became annoyed at the way Washingtonbased Park Service officials were treating the cannery owners who utilized the Shelikof Strait

coastline, and at one point he grew so annoyed that he suggested to those officials that the

monument be abolished. The following February Delegate E. L. Bartlett, another champion of

local concerns, submitted H.R. 206, an Alaska statehood bill. The legislature and governor

quickly passed a memorial bolstering the delegate's bill. Bartlett was by no means the first

delegate to draft a statehood bill--James Wickersham had done that back in 1916--and he

would not be the last to do so. His bill differed from others, however, in that it called for the

state to gain control over practically all of Alaska's public lands, including those within Katmai

National Monument. [140] In October 1948, Jessen's Weekly, a well-respected Fairbanks

newspaper, joined the chorus when it editorialized that the monument should be returned to the

public domain because "absolutely nothing has been done to make its 'beautiful lakes and

mountain scenery' available to the public," and because the thousands of fumaroles which had

once been active in the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes had been reduced to a mere handful.

[141]

In January 1950 a strong challenge came when the Naknek Civic Club campaigned to open the

monument to trapping. Naknek had long had an economy based on fishing and trapping, and

because the 1949 fishing season had been so poor, local citizens pleaded to Alaska Delegate E.

L. Bartlett several times during the next few months. Bartlett, a longtime development advocate

and NPS foe, was sympathetic to their plight. He urged both the NPS Director and the

Secretary of the Interior to consider a substantial reduction in Katmai's area. [142]

Interior Department officials rebuffed each attempt. The 1946 legislative action did not result in

a Congressional bill, and the provisions in Bartlett's 1947 bill were resisted by NPS Director

Newton Drury, who called Katmai "among the most outstanding scenic and scientific areas in

the North American continent." Stateside conservation groups, such as the National Park

Association, also dug in their heels against any change in Katmai's status. Three years later,

Bartlett gained little more headway than he had earlier. [143] The park service tried to calm

development advocates by noting, somewhat apologetically, that Katmai was not the only

Alaska park being ignored; because of the relatively small numbers of visitors to Alaska, none

of the other NPS units were being developed either. They declared that even though the

fumaroles in the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes were "dead," they were still an outstanding

geological area. They also declared that they needed to assess the validity of the current

boundaries. [144]

Beyond that, the NPS was willing to make some significant compromises. They clarified to the

canning interests, for example, that nothing in the monument regulations prevented companies

from operating below the high tide line; furthermore, they were glad to issue them permits for

the structures and facilities they used. Regarding pumice extraction, NPS officials refrained
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

from opposing legislation which would grant permits for pumice removal. [145]

Management Activities, 1948-1950

The NPS, recognizing the increasing level of interest in the monument, slowly adopted a

conciliatory attitude to prospectors and fishermen who wanted to fly into the monument. The

agency was aware that local interests bridled against the longstanding regulation, and as early as

1946 an NPS official had urged that amphibious landings be approved. In the spring of 1949

Superintendent Grant Pearson was informed that prospectors had flown supplies into the

monument the previous fall. [146] Rather than prosecute the prospectors and further alienate

local interests, however, Pearson urged that the NPS adopt a regulation which allowed aircraft

landings between May 15 and September 15. The new regulation was implemented in July.

[147] NPS officials were less than enthusiastic that they had to make these concessions, because

they had no staff on hand to enforce monument rules and regulations. But they also wanted to

avoid a storm of protest that might occur if they tried to enforce the status quo.

Although these actions blunted some of the criticism, the NPS was clearly under increasing

pressure to develop the monument in some way. The agency therefore stepped up its efforts to

allot funds for the monument. But in the interim, it was forced to rely on Fish and Wildlife

Service officials to patrol the monument. Regional NPS officials recognized their dependence

on the F&WS when, in the fall of 1948, they laid out $500 to them for patrol work. [148]

Carlos Carson, who patrolled the monument the following March, found trapping as active as

ever. He found one cabin had been extensively used for trapping, and understood that "not a

few hunters fly into the Monument and hunt moose and bear." He also believed that a beaver

ring was working in the park. The following month, he reported an increased number of

violations. To combat these abuses, he again urged the establishment of a full-time park ranger.

[149]

NPS officials were thankful that Fish and Wildlife officials could assist them, and made

tentative plans to repeat the arrangement the following year. Both agencies, however, hoped

that the arrangement would be limited in its duration. The NPS took Carson's warning of

increased violations and pressed for a separate Katmai budget.

In the spring of 1949, regional officials took part in a department-wide six year program for the

development of Alaska's park areas. Remote Katmai was considered a less likely development

candidate than either Mount McKinley or Glacier Bay, but it was not ignored. The NPS

proposed that $39,635 be expended at the monument during FY 1950 for "a small residence,

utility services, essential equipment and a minimum amount of access trail construction." [150]

In FY 1951, the NPS proposed that Katmai receive a $10,000 Administration, Protection, and

Maintenance budget; this figure would be sufficient to support an eight month ranger detail at

Katmai. (The ranger was to spend the remaining four months at Mount McKinley.) The

administrative budget was proposed to double by FY 1954. Visitor facilities were not

contemplated until FY 1954 and 1955; the six-year plan called for a $150,000 construction

budget during the two fiscal years. [151]

Most of the suggestions made in the department's six-year plan were quietly shelved. The most

pressing priority in the plan, the realization of a FY 1951 administrative budget, barely

survived. By the time the proposal had emerged from the NPS directorate and the Secretary's

office, the $10,000 originally proposed had been slashed to $2,000. Small though the budget

was, it was an important step that the Interior Department was finally recommending funding for

Katmai. The $2,000 allotted to Katmai was minuscule--it was the smallest line item in the

$508,000 budget which had been designated to the Alaska program--but it was a start. [152]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

The 1951 budget, unfortunately, got no farther than those for previous years. [153] Perhaps in

reaction to its inability to increase budgets to Alaska parks, the NPS broadened its scope and

launched the Alaska Recreation Survey. The ARS, which is discussed in greater detail in

Chapter 4, promised to stimulate and direct recreation-based economic development. The

survey, however held little enthusiasm for Katmai as a tourist destination. An initial overview

mentioned that

No major development can be considered [for Katmai] until Alaska is further

developed and transportation will put the area within easy reach. It will be 10 years

or more before major developments will be needed.... Objectives for the time being

are protection of the wildlife and scenic values.

Citing the increase in military visitation and the increase in game and prospecting violations,

the report reiterated the need for a $2,000 Katmai budget, which would pay for a four-month

ranger patrol, supplies, and equipment. [154]

Ray Petersen Establishes the Katmai Concession

The $2,000 budget may well have been rebuffed, as others had been, had it not been for the

actions of Ray Petersen. A man who had been flying in southwestern Alaska since 1935,

Petersen was familiar with the exceptional quality of the Katmai fishing resource; since 1945,

he had headed Northern Consolidated Airlines, a small regional carrier which hoped to develop

tourist travel over its routes. To that end, he met in Washington in December 1949 with various

Interior Department officials. At the meeting, he laid out plans to create a series of fishing

camps along the shores of the larger lakes on the Bristol Bay side of the Alaska Peninsula. By

January 1950, his plans had become more specific: he hoped to operate camps at two sites

within Katmai monument--at the mouth of Brooks River and the western end of Lake

Grosvenor--and stake out three camps on BLM land north of the monument. [155]

Government officials were delighted at Petersen's plans. Those in the NPS had been searching

for years for an opportunity to develop the monument and thus legitimize its existence in the

eyes of the public. Petersen's plan offered to do just that. It gave the NPS the opportunity to

develop the monument without paying for it, and because his airline was a common carrier, his

plan offered the general public (not just guests at the fishing camps) a better opportunity to gain

access to the monument. The fact that Petersen was promising to abide by a strict, self-imposed

set of fishing regulations was in his favor, and he readily agreed to a number of other clauses

which NPS officials routinely required of businesses operating in the parks. By February 15, the

NPS had issued a draft Special Use Permit for the two camps, and on March 10, regional

officials and Petersen signed Concession Permit No. I-34np-299. Petersen had originally sought

a two-year permit; therefore, he was pleased to discover that it was valid through 1954. [156]

Whether by accident or design, the National Park Service reacted to the concession permit by

assigning a seasonal ranger to the monument for the 1950 summer season. On March 21, just

eleven days after the concession permit was signed, Mount McKinley Superintendent Grant

Pearson noted that "after June 1, 1950 a Park Ranger will be stationed within the boundaries of

Katmai." A month later he chose Willie Nancarrow, the same ranger who had been tentatively

chosen to go there in 1948, "as he has proven to be a very good all around man." [157]

The NPS's presence at Katmai that summer was modest indeed, and was easily overshadowed

by that of the concessioner. At long last, however, the park service was attempting to manage

its far-flung acreage in southwestern Alaska; as Ernest Gruening might have phrased it,

management concerns were elevated from "flagrant neglect" to "mild but unenlightened

interest." It had taken 32 years for the NPS to establish itself at Katmai--32 years of
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

management in the breach, and 32 years of repeated frustration at not being provided the

financial wherewithal to carry out any semblance of a development program. The agency still

had another 20 years to wait before it gained an independent management presence. In the

future, however, it would insist upon retaining at least a modicum of authority over the Katmai

country.

(left) John "Frenchy" Fournier was a Katmai-area trapper during the 1930s; he

was one of several wholeft the monument as a result of the Kinsley investigation.

(right) Both Harry Featherstone (left) and Roy Fure trapped in the monument
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

during the 1930s. Both photos taken in 19223 by Alyce C. Anderson, a Naknek

teacher. (Alyce Anderson Collection, LACL, courtesy of Theodore W. Anderson)

(top) Carlos M. Carson, a game enforcement officer based in Dilingham, was Katmai's de facto ranger from 1936

to 1950. He is shown in this 1953 photo with his wife, Ona, at Tanalian Point on Lake Clark. (bottom) This

poacher's cabin, photographed by Victor Cahalane in 1953, is located at the mouth of Headwaters Creek,

southwest of Brooks Camp. This cabin, of which nothing remains today, was probably built about 1930 by

Rongald Osberg. Later residents included Sigurd Lundgren, Axil Erling, and Kirk Adkinson. (Allen Woodward

Collection (top); NPS Photo Collection, neg. 66-107 (bottom) )
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

In 1942, the NPS incorporated a number of offshore islands in Shelikof Strait into the monument, primarily to

stifle the islands' fox farmers. The top photo shows a "fox ranch" on Kiukpalik Island, near Swikshak Lagoon,

while the bottom photo shows several "poacher's cabins" on the north side of Takli Island, near Amalik Bay. Both

photos were taken in late July 1953 by NPS biologist Victor Cahalane. (NPS Photo Collection (at HFC), negs.

11,830 and 11,832)
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

Louis Corbley, a Mount McKinley National Park ranger, was the first NPS employee to visit Katmai National

Monument, in 1937. The photo appears to have been taken in 1964. (File 27-8, in DENA Collection)
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

Mount McKinley Superintendent Frank Been (top, with a wolf named Wags) took part in the first detailed NPS

investigation of the monument in 1940. The photo was taken that November. Five years later, NPS official Alfred

C. Kuehl and Grant Pearson flew to Katmai on an inspection trip and hiked into the Valley of Ten Thousand

Smokes. In this photo, Pearson is seen at the edge of the sandflow; Knife Peak is in the background. (File 27-4, in

DENA Collection (top); File 204, KNM Box 311, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA SB (right) )
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]

Mount McKinley National Park Superintendent Grant Pearson, taken near the park headquarters in October 1956.

(File 27-36, DENA Collection)

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

adhi/chap3.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 3)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap3.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:25 PM]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

PART I: KATMAI NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE

Chapter 4:

Katmai Management, 1950-1969

NPS On-Site Operations Begin

When William Nancarrow travelled from his posting at Mount McKinley National Park to

Katmai National Monument in June of 1950, he knew that he was breaking new ground in his

agency's commitment to the long-neglected monument. He also knew that the agency could

spend little money at Katmai; a few thousand dollars was the best that an already stretched

budget would allow. He fully recognized that the primary purpose for his new assignment was

to correct the impression that the NPS had no interest in the area. The agency had to impose at

least a token presence in order to quash an increasing chorus, voiced particularly by local

residents, that the monument be abolished.

The Service's commitment to the monument that summer, as it turned out, was even more

tentative than had originally been planned. Mount McKinley Superintendent Grant Pearson had

hoped that Ranger Nancarrow would leave for Katmai in mid-June and return to the park on

September 15. Budget considerations, however, forced him to delay his trip until late June and

return to the park in late August. A total of $2042 was authorized that summer for management

and protection activities in the Katmai area. [1]

Nancarrow, who was joined by his wife in mid-July, spent the summer constructing a camp and

establishing the authority of the NPS with Northern Consolidated Airlines personnel. The

concessioner were cordial with him, and rented him a 9' x 9' tent to help him get established. He

considered staying there all summer, but both Pearson and regional office officials thought it

more appropriate that he establish his own facilities. [2]

Nancarrow established his camp about half a mile north of the new NCA tent complex, just

inland from Naknek Lake and in the same location as the present Brooks River campground. He

built a two-room tent frame that year, a cache and a well. [3]

His other major duty was to inform NCA guests and other visitors--principally Air Force

personnel--about NPS regulations, particularly as they pertained to fishing along the Brooks

River. Because his only transportation was a 14-foot metal boat, his travel was limited to short

excursions to the Bay of Islands and the Savonoski River mouth. In addition, the concessioner

flew him on an inspection trip to the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes, then on to Battle Camp

(outside of the monument) and Coville Camp. [4]

Early Staffing
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

The pattern which Nancarrow established proved to be a harbinger of Katmai management

patterns. From 1950 to 1954, the only NPS presence in the monument was a single Mount

McKinley-based ranger during the summer season. For a short time during the spring of 1951,

there was some question as to whether NCA (which had lost money on its 1950 camp

operations) would reopen its camps that summer. The NPS, however, was willing to send a

ranger even if the camps did not open. [5]

On June 1, 1951, Nancarrow returned to Katmai, but he was replaced on July 11 by Morton S.

"Woody" Wood. A relatively new ranger on the Mount McKinley staff, Wood was soon joined

by his wife Ginny. His first task was to enforce fishing regulations; in addition, he was asked to

explore as much of the park as possible and to take photographs of the flora, fauna and scenery.

[6]

During the next few years, the Katmai assignment was filled by a broad spectrum of rangers

(see Appendix B). Most had previously served at Mount McKinley, but a few were hired

specifically for the Katmai assignment. [7] During the six year period beginning in 1952, five

different rangers worked at Katmai. They included George B. Chaffee (1952), George L. Peters

(1953), Richard Ward (1954-55), Richard Riegelhuth (1956), and Warren Steenburgh (1957).

Most spent the summer enforcing fishing regulations or assisted NPS officials from McKinley

Park or San Francisco regarding proposed construction projects or planning efforts. Wood, for

instance, laid out an informal trail up the west side of Ukak River; Chaffee was asked to protect

the monument's fishery and make a series of wildlife observations, while Ward spent some of

the summer of 1955 evaluating various sites for a potential airstrip. [8]

In retrospect, the early rangers had to be an enterprising lot, because the budget allotted to them

remained meager. In 1950, for instance, the Katmai budget and staff time had been originally

designated for Mount McKinley. Soon afterwards it gained a separate line item. As late as the

1954, however, the Katmai budget remained below $3,000, and by 1958 it still remained under

$6,500 (see Appendix C). The NPS pushed for larger budgets, but the requests fell victim to the

budgetary process. [9]

Any attempts to provide more than a token budget faced a daunting set of hurdles. The problem

was a twofold one; NPS appropriations had always been small at all but the system's "crown

jewels," and it was difficult for Alaska park units, where visitation was light, to compete against

parks located along the major tourist corridors. In 1945, to make up for the accumulated neglect,

the NPS had lobbied Congress for an Alaskan park program, and by 1949 momentum for such a

bill had been sufficiently strong that the bill had passed the House of Representatives. But the

Senate killed it, and the outbreak of the Korean War in 1950 wiped out any progress which had

been made. [10]

In the early 1950s the NPS continued to make proposals for construction projects in Alaskan

parks. Few of those proposals, however, were accepted. The agency, by now gun-shy, refrained

from making specific recommendations for Katmai projects; this was probably because

Governor Gruening and Delegate Bartlett felt that Mount McKinley and Glacier Bay had a

higher near-term tourist development potential. [11]

The Alaska Recreation Survey

As noted in Chapter 3, park and regional NPS officials had grumbled for many years at the lack

of attention paid to the Alaskan national park units. The primary reason for their neglect was

their lack of visitation. The argument was a circular one; without facilities and access, prospects

for increased visitation would continue to be dim, and few were willing to visit an unimproved
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

park. Try as it may, the NPS was unsuccessful in gaining funds for new park facilities through

the normal budgetary process. In order to spotlight the needs in the system, therefore, the NPS

decided to undertake a program--the Alaska Recreation Survey (ARS)--which would spotlight

the agency's economic role in the territory.

This was by no means a departure from its previous policies. Since its earliest days, Service

programs had been successful because they had encouraged travel. As if to underscore that

connection, the U.S. Travel Bureau (an agency whose goal it was to publicize travel

opportunities) had been part of the NPS both in the late 1930s and the late 1940s. In further

pursuit of those goals, the agency undertook a series of studies, both before and after World

War II, which assessed the recreational resources of many of the states and territories. [12]

These studies were based on provisions in the Park, Parkway and Recreation Act of 1936. The

Alaska Recreation Survey, announced by the Director in January 1950 (and funded out of the

Washington office) was therefore consistent with previous projects. The Survey was to continue

for the next four years. The recreation survey, as it pertained to Katmai, was completed by the

summer of 1952. The recreation survey was followed by the so-called Katmai Project, which

took place in 1953 and 1954. The Katmai Project, which consisted of a series of scientific

studies, was an adjunct of the ARS and was designed to determine the value of the monument's

resources. [13]

The Alaska Recreation Survey was aimed not at just the parks, but at the whole territory. Its

purpose was to develop long range plans with three specific goals:

1) The protection of Alaska's scenic, scientific, historic, and other recreational

resources,

2) The development of park and recreational facilities for the people of Alaska, and

3) The development of tourist facilities in Alaska.

The pursuit of those goals would result in the publication of a two-part, four-volume study on

the economic impacts of Alaska tourism development. Several other studies specific to existing

or proposed park areas would also be produced. [14]

Chosen to head the effort was George L. Collins, who was head of the State and Territorial

Division at the regional office in San Francisco. [15] Collins headed one of two teams which

headed up to Alaska during the summer of 1950; remote Katmai was a focus of his work. He

first visited the monument in late June, when he accompanied Willie Nancarrow to newlyestablished Brooks Camp. He returned in mid-July, flying with the ranger out to the Valley of

Ten Thousand Smokes. [16] Sometimes alone, sometimes with colleagues Adolph Murie and

Lowell Sumner, he returned to Katmai each of the two following summers. [17]

Collins did not wait long to suggest ways in which the National Park Service might develop the

newly-staffed monument. In memos sent to the regional director after his 1950 trips, he urged

that a central base of operations be established at the mouth of what he called "O Creek," one

of several creeks that drained into the south shore of Iliuk Arm. He chose the creek because of

"its possibility for reaching the Valley of Smokes [sic] via a short section of road." He also

hoped to have outlying ranger stations, along with museums and an interpretive program. In

addition, he argued that full-time personnel should be stationed at the monument, that a winter

base of operations be established at Naknek Air Base (because the base was "ideally located for

all servicing purposes"), and that the road from Naknek to the present-day Lake Camp area be

upgraded to all-weather use. [18]

In July 1952, Collins submitted his final recommendations on Katmai development. Some of his

suggestions had changed during the past two years. He still envisioned that O Creek would be
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

the main tourist center and that Lake Camp would play a prominent role, but regarding a

permanent headquarters, he abandoned Naknek in favor of a location "somewhere in the

vicinity of King Salmon"--either at King Salmon itself, or better yet at the western end of

Naknek Lake. He eventually hoped to establish 12 ranger stations, seven to be located west of

the Aleutian Range and five along the Shelikof Strait coastline. Most of these stations were to

be "of the outpost type" and inexpensively built; the only exceptions would be at O Creek and

"perhaps at one of the places on the coast."

Collins was no idle dreamer. He recognized that "our first job is protection and exploration, with

planning and development coming right along on our heels." He advocated modest

developments at first: rustic cabins and a few trails. Eventually, however, he envisioned that

Katmai would become a place where "a typical couple" would

arrive at King Salmon, be transferred to a car or bus and transported to the docks

on Naknek Lake where they will be made welcome to Katmai by a ranger, put on a

boat or plane, and sent up to O Creek.

From the O Creek camp a trip by one-way road (with turn-outs) could be made up

the creek valley, climbing the side of Mount Katolinat, to the divide overlooking

the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes, where a dramatic view of the vast volcanic

center of the monument is possible.

On clear days flights from O Creek could be made over the volcanic center, and

over the coastal portion of the monument, with landings at Geographic Harbor and

Kukak Bay. Whether or not any public service facilities will be warranted on the

coast side of the area is a question which can be answered with time and

experience.

Another activity for the visitor basing at O Creek will be a boat trip on the principal

lakes and rivers of the area. Starting at Coville Camp, say, by river boat..., the trip

would be made down Grosvenor Lake, the Savonoski River, Iliuk Arm, and back to

O Creek. With a good portage across the two mile neck between the Bay of Islands

and Grosvenor Lake..., a party could come in from O Creek, or the headquarters

docks [at the west end of Naknek Lake], portage across, and take off by boat on the

lake and river trip clear around for over 100 miles. [19]

In order to implement his development plan, Collins felt that eight permanent employees would

be needed. Most critical was a chief ranger, who would serve as an acting superintendent. Next

in importance was an airplane pilot, followed by a co-pilot/district ranger, a chief clerk, a

naturalist, a construction and maintenance foreman, and a ranger. A superintendent was

considered the least important of the permanent positions. [20]

Lawrence Merriam, the regional director, then recommended a "Katmai National Monument

Program" to Conrad Wirth, NPS Director. Merriam was cautious in his proposals, and

suggested (as had Collins) that a trail to the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes "would be the

most desirable means of access, at least until such time as visitation increases to a point where

motor transportation is necessary to handle the larger crowds." He favored the "basic outline" of

Collins's program, but recommended that it be implemented and budgeted one stage at a time.

[21]

Despite the agency's planning effort, Congress appeared no more disposed to adopt a

development plan for Katmai than they had before the Alaska Recreation Survey commenced.

Perhaps they balked at the high public expenditures entailed, or perhaps they saw that Katmai,

still well away from the usual tourist routes, had little immediate potential for general visitor

development. For the time being, the plans were shelved. But the concepts contained within the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

plans proved sound. Perhaps coincidentally, many of the plans suggested by Collins were

eventually adopted by either the concessioner or the NPS. And some of the plans that were not

adopted, such as a visitor center located on Naknek Lake but away from Brooks Camp,

reappeared in future efforts to manage Katmai development.

Proposed Boundary Changes, 1951-1955

As noted in Chapter 3, the NPS had been under near-constant pressure in the late 1940s to

justify its retention of Katmai National Monument. This pressure continued after Northern

Consolidated Airlines opened its concessions camps in 1950. Based upon pressure applied by

local residents, as well as a general desire to show some evidence of economic return from the

monument, Governor Ernest Gruening and Delegate E. L. Bartlett implored the agency to either

develop Katmai or return at least part of the monument to the public domain. Gruening, though

frustrated at the situation, seemed willing to recognize the agency's lack of leverage; Bartlett,

however, paid little heed to the explanations proffered by NPS officials and seemed primarily

concerned with results. [22]

The agency, in its communications to outside parties, was able to discourage those who sought

to unravel NPS hegemony over Katmai. Within the organization, however, pragmatists

recognized that the monument might have to be reduced in size to mollify those who advocated

resource development. In 1947, for example, Alfred C. Kuehl and Leo Diederich flew over the

monument, and noted that "a large area along the west boundary drained by Takayofo and

Contact creeks might be unnecessary for monument purposes and that its elimination would

result in an easily defined boundary based on ridges." Kuehl estimated that on that basis, the

monument's size could be reduced by one-quarter. And in 1950, George Collins noted that "I

can find no excuse for including any more than Dr. Griggs [in 1917-18] wanted to identify and

protect under national monument status." [23] Others in the NPS, however, hoped to use that

process to gain jurisdiction over new lands. What resulted from the process was a series of

proposed boundary changes, none of which got beyond the proposal stage.

An NPS-sponsored study of changes in the Katmai boundary began in 1951, when the topic

became included in the Alaska Recreation Survey. Outside interests--commercial pumice

developers and Delegate E. L. Bartlett--pushed for the study. Even within the NPS, however,

opinion makers recognized that the existing boundaries were arbitrary and difficult to

administer. Lowell Sumner, an NPS biologist, was placed in charge of the boundary revision

study. [24]

In late June 1952 a phalanx of NPS officials, including both NPS Director Conrad Wirth and

Regional Director Lawrence Merriam, made an aerial reconnaissance of Katmai in hopes of

resolving the boundary situation. Above all, they were looking for "clearly defined boundaries

based on prominent natural features." Within those boundaries, they hoped to include lands

"essential for proper public use and enjoyment of the area, for protection of the significant

scientific, scenic, and historic features, and for the protection of the Alaskan brown bear, moose,

and other resident wildlife." Lands not needed for those purposes were to be excluded. [25]

Based on those criteria, Wirth wasted little time in his boundary recommendations (see Map 5).

Along the southwestern border, just inland from Cape Kubugakli, he suggested that the entire

river system draining into Kashvik Bay should be within the monument; the adjacent Kejulik

River system, however, should be entirely excluded. He left the western boundary largely intact,

but he felt that the western end of Naknek Lake should be included within the monument.

Along the northern boundary he extended Katmai to include all of the American Creek and

Douglas River drainages, but he excluded almost all of the Kamishak River drainage, a portion

of which was included within the existing monument. Significantly, Wirth did not attempt to
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

exclude sites of clam or pumice extraction from the monument. [26]

Map 5. Proposals for modification of 1931 boundaries by the Alaska Recreation

Survey, 1952-1953. In June 1952, NPS Director Conrad Wirth made an aerial

tour of the monument and suggested new boundaries (dotted line) that would

conform more closely to aquatic and topographic features. Planner Lowell

Sumner slightly modified Wirth's suggestions (dashed lines), and in September

1952, the Region Four office approved Sumner's line. In December 1953, NPS

biologist Victor Cahalane suggested expanding Sumner's line with acreage along

the proposed northern boundary (alternating dots and dashes). None of the

proposals were implemented. Source: Kauffman, Katmai National Monument,

Alaska, 29a; base map from Alaska Recreation Survey, November 1951. (click

image for an enlargement in a new window)

During the next month ground and air surveys continued over the monument, and by fall the

regional office had made minor modifications to Wirth's original proposal. The revised

boundary changed Wirth's recommendations by excluding the area surrounding Idavain Lake

and Sugarloaf Mountain and by including slightly more of the Kamishak drainage. The regional

office, in sum, recommended that three areas, totalling 105,600 acres, be eliminated from the

monument, and that seven areas, totalling 472,960 acres, be added to it. All in all, the NPS

proposed that 367,360 acres be added, a 13.6 per cent increase to the existing 2,697,590-acre

monument. [27]

The agency may have felt defensive that it was responding to perceived development pressures

with a document that increased the monument's boundaries. In a section entitled "Too Big?"

Sumner answered potential critics by noting:

It is a stated objection of the National Park Service to provide a year-round habitat

sufficient for the perpetuation of adequate samples of all wildlife species native to

the respective areas. Yet less than half a dozen areas in the entire system appear to

fulfill this requirement. And of these, only Katmai appears to contain all its native

species in approximately their original numbers. [Sumner's emphasis.]

The boundaries proposed here would provide a reasonable guarantee that ...

Katmai's outstanding wildlife resources and magnificent wilderness could be

efficiently administered and adequately protected while being made available for

public use.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

If the objectives of the 1931 proclamation are a guiding consideration, the answer

must from a biological standpoint be: "No. The area is the minimum necessary to

maintain itself indefinitely as a self-sustaining sanctuary for the larger and rarer

wildlife forms...." If the purpose of the monument is to preserve an adequate

sample of the strikingly beautiful Alaska Peninsula wilderness, the answer must

again be: "No. It is not too big. It is one of the very few areas dedicated to

wilderness preservation that is big enough to withstand the impact of drastic

changes outside its boundaries." [28]

Wirth took the revised boundary proposal before the Advisory Board on National Parks,

Historic Sites, Buildings, and Monuments on October 17, 1952; the Board responded by passing

a motion approving the principle of establishing topographically-based monument boundaries.

Sumner's report was soon approved by the regional and national directors. Wirth had hoped to

enact the boundary changes into law by drafting a proclamation for the president to sign. But no

such proclamation was known to be drafted, and the suggested boundary changes were later

modified by others in the agency. Notably, however, the NPS hierarchy firmly defended the

monument, and in a new twist, the agency went on record as embracing Katmai not just for its

biological and geological resources, but for its wilderness resource as well. [29]

In the summer of 1953 Victor Cahalane, Chief of the agency's Biology Branch, made a

helicopter investigation of Katmai's northern boundary as part of a general biological survey.

That December, he penned a memo to the Chief of Recreation planning; in it, he suggested

modifications to Sumner's proposed boundaries, "mostly because I was able to cover the region

more extensively." His suggestions were primarily based on wildlife considerations.

Cahalane had mixed feelings about the need for adding the western end of Naknek Lake into the

monument. He noted that "some other areas are more vital to properly rounding out the

Monument." He was far more enthusiastic about Kulik Lake, "one of the most beautiful bodies

of water I have seen." Openly worried that the lake would become "a popular site for week end

or cottage resort development," he urged that the lake and adjacent mountain slopes be included

in the monument. Regarding the Kamishak River valley, he hoped to include some or all of it,

having found it "distinctly productive in terms of animal life." Collins, however, listened to

local Department of Agriculture officials who told him of the valley's farming possibilities. He

therefore carefully avoided including prime agricultural areas within the revised boundaries.

[30]

Cahalane's recommendations, worthy as they may have been, ran headlong into a December

1953 petition from 66 Naknek citizens who hoped to reduce the monument's boundaries "by

opening the areas surrounding the Naknek Lake Group to about eight miles back from the lake

shores of this group in all directions." A Fish and Wildlife Service official, at an August 1953

hearing, was receptive to local complaints that beavers were obstructing many of the salmonspawning creeks at the west end of the monument. Local residents, who had just endured

another poor salmon-fishing season, hoped to push back the boundaries so that they might trap,

hunt, and go ice fishing. [31]

In a letter to Secretary of the Interior Douglas McKay, Delegate E. L. Bartlett expressed his

support for the petition signers, and again chided the Interior Department because it "has

resisted uniformly and successfully any attempt to restore to the public domain any of the area

within the boundary, [but] it has never done anything at all--that statement is almost literally

true--to open the monument to public use." [32]

Bartlett also insisted that a Congressional hearing be held on the subject. Bartlett's hearing took

place in Washington D.C., and an NPS representative was the only witness to testify. No

hearing was held in Alaska. As a result of that hearing, Bartlett chose not to submit legislation
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

that year aimed at reducing the monument's boundaries. [33]

McKay's response to the problem was to arrange for two parties of opposite philosophical

stripes, NPS Director Wirth and Governor Frank Heintzleman, to try and reconcile the situation.

That meeting took place on February 15, 1954. Heintzleman, a former Forest Service official,

was no great friend of the NPS; as recently as October 1953, he had announced that "I do not

believe it is desirable to withdraw any more areas at this time as national park or wilderness

tracts." At the meeting the NPS agreed that it would not insist on adding the entire west end of

Naknek Lake to the monument, and that it "would give further consideration to other possible

boundary adjustments." But the agency insisted on keeping the areas surrounding Brooks Camp,

because "they are important wildlife areas, especially for beaver, moose, and waterfowl." The

governor, having never visited the monument, was noncommittal, and in early March Wirth

wrote that no boundary recommendations would be forthcoming until after the agency had

completed its studies at the monument that summer. [34]

By the end of April the NPS had assembled the results of the previous summer's work. A 140-

page study, called the Katmai Project: Interim Report, summarized the existing base of

knowledge about the monument's geology, topography, biology, archeology, and volcanology.

The assembled data, of course, provided ammunition for defending the park from those who

would return it to the public domain. The report showed that certain areas in the monument

were indeed valuable from a scientific viewpoint. Some areas, inevitably, were shown to be

more valuable than others. [35]

Governor Heintzleman was impressed with the first-year study results. As he admitted in a letter

to NPS Director Conrad Wirth, the report convinced him that parks were not "merely places

where people can be assured of getting an outstanding but relatively inexpensive vacation."

They could also be valuable as undisturbed natural laboratories. [36] Bartlett or Heintzleman,

however, still hoped to open up portions of the monument. And Orme Lewis, an Assistant

Secretary of the Interior, agreed that "some [boundary] revision in the vicinity of Naknek Lake

and the northwest corner of the Monument would be reasonable and justifiable." [37]

In order to fully evaluate the situation, however, the NPS had to await the completion of the

scientific studies begun the previous year. In the summer of 1954, the scientists from a number

of federal agencies--Geological Survey, Fish and Wildlife Service, and Public Health Service--

along with personnel from the University of California Berkeley and the University of Alaska

took part. The various military branches played a major supporting role. [38] Heintzleman, as

governor, helped arrange transportation for the various scientists involved. Bob Bartlett, the

territorial delegate, finally visited the monument that summer and was able to see Katmai's

scenery and resources for himself. [39]

In January 1955, Bartlett again inquired about the progress of the NPS studies. In response,

Orme Lewis told him that the NPS had completed its studies and was "now considering the

advisability of recommending boundary modifications to the Department." Lewis was vague in

his response and left room open for negotiation. Regarding the Brooks River, however, the NPS

would not budge. "Wirth will recommend that this area be retained in the monument," Lewis

wrote. "Brooks Lake and the Brooks River region have the best potential public use areas in the

monument and also has great scenery, excellent fishing and wildlife habitat." [40]

That communication apparently ended the matter for the next few years. Good fishing in Bristol

Bay may have reduced the need for Naknek residents to trap near the monument. Others who

had militated for opening up the monument, such as the clam digging and pumice extraction

industries, had found a way to carry on their operations via NPS permits. And in June 1956, the

monument received widespread publicity when both the fishing camps and the volcanic area

were featured in The National Geographic Magazine. [41] Bartlett, evidently satisfied that NPS
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

officials were amenable to some degree of economic development, let the matter rest during the

remainder of his tenure as territorial delegate.

Soon after Alaska became a state, however, Bartlett--now a senator--again raised the question

of whether Katmai's boundaries should not be reduced. On February 16, 1959, he told Fred

Seaton, the Secretary of Interior, that "the time has come for a reexamination of Katmai

National Monument." Bartlett was frustrated that the NPS had taken no recent actions to reduce

the size of the monument. He argued that the monument had "areas less spectacular scenically,

perhaps, but worthy of continued inclusion for recreational uses," and that there was "acreage

that has no proper place within the Monument." [42]

Many Alaskans reacted to Bartlett's announcement. Both the Daily Alaska Empire (in Juneau)

and the Anchorage Daily Times gave the idea a prominent mention; the Times, calling the

monument a "huge empty area," hailed the proposal as a good idea. [43] One person who was

in fervent agreement was John H. Lee, the same man who had been living in Cold Bay (Puale

Bay) when Mt. Katmai erupted in 1912. The 91-year-old Lee, who was living at the Pioneers

Home in Sitka, urged Senator Bartlett that the size of the monument be reduced, and also said

that roads should be built on the rights-of-way of several former trails. [44] But the NPS gave

no indication that it was willing to consider a boundary reduction, and as Bartlett admitted to a

friend in the mining industry, "In all candor, I must say there isn't a chance whatsoever for this."

For that reason, he did not submit a bill with that purpose. [45]

In 1961, Alaska's legislators briefly considered sponsoring a bill which would have allowed

hunting in the monument. That September, Sen. Wallace Bennett of Utah introduced S. 2545,

which would have authorized regulated hunting in certain NPS areas. The chairman of the

Alaska Board of Fish and Game urged Rep. Ralph Rivers to add the Katmai and Glacier Bay

areas to the bill in order to overturn the agency's "conservative, out-dated and wasteful

philosophy" on hunting. Rivers did not comply with the board's request, however, and the bill

died quietly. [46]

Questions About Access: Brooks Camp Airstrip Issues, 1954-1956

Access has been a longstanding problem at Katmai. That the monument has traditionally been

located far from the major travel routes has been a sufficient problem by itself; compounding

the situation, however, has been the problem of how visitors could most efficiently move within

the monument. The Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes, the original raison d'être for the

monument, was remote from both population centers and transportation facilities, and the only

practical way in which visitors could visit the monument's lake country was on Naknek- or

King Salmon-based float planes. There was, quite simply, no central resource which all Katmai

visitors demanded to see, and planners could identify no optimal way in which to organize a

transportation system. Northern Consolidated, which had opened up its fishing camps in 1950,

established a transportation system based on land-based aircraft travelling from Anchorage to

King Salmon, after which float planes flew to Brooks Camp, Coville Camp (Grosvenor Camp),

and other sites within the lake system. Both the NPS and the concessioner, however, recognized

that the access system was imperfect. Both made repeated attempts, over the years, to improve

the monument's transportation system.

The first person who tried to design a Katmai transportation system was George Collins, the

NPS planner. Collins, as noted above, envisioned that an optimal system would include road

transportation from King Salmon to proposed docks on Naknek Lake. From that point he

suggested that either boats or planes would take visitors to O Creek, the site of the proposed

visitor center. He suggested a road into the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes, scenic flights over

the remote eastern portions of the monument, and a boat trip which might connect O Creek
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

with other points on Naknek and Grosvenor lakes. The notion that a boat trip would be able to

travel the Savonoski Loop, and that such a trip would ever be considered a commercial success,

seems fanciful today. Collins, however, was asked to look at Katmai's long-term development

prospects.

Northern Consolidated Airlines, by contrast, was more concerned with practical ways in which

to develop tourism possibilities. Based as they were at Brooks Camp, the monument

concessioner felt that the most practical way to attract visitors was to build an airstrip near the

camp. NCA officials wanted an airstrip built so that Anchorage-based planes would have access

to the camp as well as King Salmon-based float planes. An airstrip would also allow landings

on days when winds made it difficult if not impossible to land float planes on Naknek and

Brooks lakes.

Ray Petersen, head of the Katmai concession, first approached the NPS on the subject in the

spring of 1954. He was, at that time, in the last year of his five-year concession permit. In

return for a seven-year contract, he offered to construct permanent improvements--a lodge and

cabins--at its Brooks River facility. After the contract had been prepared, however, Petersen

backtracked and conditioned the acceptance of his building plans on the construction of an

airstrip in the vicinity. He hinted, moreover, that he might abandon the concession if no airstrip

was built. [47]

Regional personnel were in favor of an airstrip, and an NPS party had already visited the site

and had determined that its physical characteristics were appropriate for an airstrip. But when

Director Wirth was contacted about the idea, his response was that "if airstrip is to be built in

Katmai, I am not sure Brooks Lake is proper location. Further study needed before answer can

be given." [48] The Director, in fact, questioned the advisability of developing Brooks Camp

into a major concessions area because fishing (the only major camp activity) was incidental to

the values of the monument. He felt that the Savonoski area, at the east end of Iliuk Arm,

should be studied as an alternative concession area. [49]

Controversy over the airstrip continued for another year. In response to the Director's call for a

study, the superintendent and regional director visited Brooks Camp in June 1955. They agreed

that planes were better suited to Katmai than boats, and that wheel planes were more acceptable

for moving large numbers of visitors. They henceforth identified two sites south of the Brooks

River that would be acceptable for an airstrip. [50] Cost estimates were obtained for each of the

two airstrips, a connecting road, and a bridge across Brooks River. [51] In January 1956, the

results were sent on to Director Wirth. Meanwhile, the concessioner refused to promise a

building program. As a result, the three-year contract which was signed in February 1956

promised neither an NPS-sponsored airstrip nor a concession-sponsored building program. [52]

NCA officials were frustrated, of course, that the NPS had not approved the airstrip. But

Brooks Camp was not the only location where they had hoped to construct an airstrip. In 1954,

the same year it had moved to establish a Brooks Camp airstrip, it also planned to create an

airstrip near its Kulik Camp facility. Here, outside the monument, the company encountered

few if any bureaucratic stumbling blocks. That summer, employees began to blade off a 1500-

foot runway on Bureau of Land Management land just south of Kulik Lodge, and by the

following year, the strip had been extended to 2000 feet. By August 1956, workers had

completed "a usable road satisfactory for the operation of a Willys Jeep" between the landing

strip and Kulik Camp. To legalize its improvements, company officials in May 1955 applied to

patent an 80-acre parcel which included and surrounded the airfield. NCA obtained a patent for

the parcel on November 2, 1960. [53]

The Mission 66 Program
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

Just a year after the boundary controversy abated, the NPS launched a program which promised

the construction of long-awaited facilities. The program, Mission 66, was a long-range effort

aimed at NPS units throughout the country. It was intended to be complete in time for the

agency's 50th anniversary in 1966. Director Conrad Wirth conceived the program in 1955. The

following January, he garnered the enthusiastic approval of both President Eisenhower and

Secretary of the Interior Douglas McKay. He announced the program to the public on February

8. [54] The program was the agency's response to the huge increase in postwar tourism:

visitation to the parks had more than tripled between 1940 and 1954. Most of the money spent

on the Mission 66 program, which eventually totalled over $1 billion, went to park construction

projects, but staffing, maintenance and protection work was also included. Projects were to be

funded through the usual Interior Department appropriations process. [55]

Soon after the program commenced on a national level, an Interior Department official travelled

to Ketchikan and announced how the program was to be implemented in Alaska. The initial

budget, which had been recommended by Alaska's two park superintendents, allotted $9.25

million for Alaskan projects. The majority of the funding--$6.9 million--was intended for

Mount McKinley, the only national park in the territory. Glacier Bay, Sitka, and Katmai

national monuments divvied up the remainder. [56]

At Katmai, the NPS initially contemplated expenditures of "about $680,000 for new buildings

and utilities and about $80,000 for improved park roads and trails." Within that budget, the

agency hoped to construct the following:

* a visitor center at Valley Junction (in the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes) to

contain interpretive facilities, a ranger station, and a small (5 unit) lodge,

* additional ranger stations to be located at Savonoski, Kukak Bay and the Bay of

Islands,

* small campgrounds to be located at Brooks River, Savonoski, Valley Junction,

and on Knife Creek in the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes,

* nature trails to be located at Valley Junction and Old Savonoski,

* limited road projects--"these will be principally jeep routes"--from Ukak to

Valley Junction (flights would take passengers to the mouth of the Ukak River) and

from King Salmon to Lake Camp,

* docks, to be constructed along with some boathouse units,

* a headquarters area at King Salmon, where the necessary administrative, utility,

and residential buildings would be located, and

* utilities, including a radio communication system, necessary to serve the new

facilities.

A high priority in the program was the hiring of a permanent staff to protect, interpret, and

maintain the area. In order to pay for the new personnel, the plan called for the monument's

management and protection (M&P) budget to double from $5,000 in FY 1956 to $10,000 a year

later; by FY 1959, it proposed an M&P budget of $53,000. In order to pay for the numerous

new improvements, the plan called for a gradual increase in the maintenance and rehabilitation

budget from zero (in FY 1957) to $32,000 in FY 1966. Grosvenor Camp, the small

concessioner camp located between Coville and Grosvenor lakes, was scheduled to be

abolished. [57]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

The following May, the NPS laid out a modified, more capital-intensive program for the

monument, which had been approved by the agency's directorate in Washington. A report,

entitled Mission 66 for Katmai National Monument, described not only proposed facilities but

the underlying philosophy behind visitor development. [58] The NPS identified wilderness as a

major element of Katmai's attraction; therefore, it proposed a "restrained program" of Katmai

development. According to the report, the agency felt there was

no need for a large construction program to make this wildland area available to the

people. A few trails, much mileage of which would be simply in the form of

markers, several campgrounds with some shelters, a few boat landings, and a few

miles of "jeep" type road, some added concessioner facilities, and Katmai should

be able to prove itself hospitable to visitors of the next decade. [59]

NPS planners recognized that because the monument was remote and seldom visited (see

Appendix D), its biggest problem was one of neglect. Resources were not being protected, and

little visitor development was taking place. The solution, therefore, lay in new visitor facilities,

and in a better circulatory system: boats, boat landings, trails, and "jeep" roads. [60]

The Mission 66 program called for an expenditure of $1,151,200 over the nine-year life of the

program. The funds were to be used for the following purposes:

1) $404,700 was to be allotted for an airstrip, roads and trails. Central to this category was the

construction of an airstrip for wheel planes, to be provided near Brooks Camp. Twenty-five

miles of trails were also planned, most of which would be located in the Valley of Ten

Thousand Smokes. And two jeep roads were planned: a ten-mile jeep road from Naknek Lake

to the Valley, following the Ukak River valley, and a two-mile road which would connect

Brooks Camp to the proposed airstrip.

2) $40,000 was to be allotted for the development of campgrounds, shelters, docks and utilities.

Four campgrounds were contemplated: one at Brooks Camp, a second at the Naknek Lake end

of the jeep trail, a third near Valley Junction (at the end of the jeep road), and a fourth along

Knife Creek, at the upper end of the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes. Docks were planned at

Lake Grosvenor, Kukak Bay, and King Salmon.

3) $252,000 was to be allotted for NPS facilities in the monument. Katmai's visitor center was

to be constructed at Valley Junction, at the end of the proposed 10-mile jeep road, and would

include interpretive displays on volcanism and area ecology. An information and summer

headquarters was planned for Brooks Camp, along with five units of summer housing for

monument employees. Ranger stations were planned for the Bay of Islands, Old Savonoski, and

Kukak Bay, and five relief cabins for patrol rangers were also contemplated.

4) $454,500 was to be allotted for NPS facilities in King Salmon. Proposed facilities included

an administration building, for office and storage space; five housing units; a utility building

with a shop and garage space; a boathouse; and several fuel storage tanks. [61]

Wirth felt that the momentum generated by the Mission 66 program was the best way to ensure

the construction of facilities as laid out in the Katmai and other park plans. However, he had no

illusions that all of the projected facilities would be built. He felt that the plans should be

"accepted as a measure of development requirements and a guide for programming and

planning." Inclusion of facilities in the plan, however, did not signify their final budgetary

approval. [62]

Master Planning Efforts, 1957-1960
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

Shortly after the issuance of the Mission 66 prospectus, the ideas it contained served as a

foundation of the monument's master planning process. By this time, Katmai's master plan was

15 years old; it had been obsolete since 1950, when development had commenced.

The initial portion of the process was the Master Plan Development Outline, most of which was

completed in November 1957. The outline was intended to be brief; it consisted of introductory

material, several operations sections and several development sections.

The outline was a logical and more specific extension of the Mission 66 plan. It promised many

alterations of the status quo. Regarding Grosvenor Camp, the revised plan no longer called for

its abolition; officials, however, cautioned that "the present narrow spit on which the camp is

located is crowded with temporary structures which should be removed when expansion

transpires in the future." It also planned the establishment of a Ukak Ranger Station and docks,

to be located "not far from the delta of the Ukak and Savonoski Rivers;" a jeep road up the

river valley, and a Valley Junction Visitor Center "somewhere in the vicinity of the Junction of

the Lethe and Ukak Rivers." Additional ranger stations and floating docks were planned at the

Bay of Islands and on Kukak Bay. [63]

Two years later, most of those recommendations were incorporated into the monument's master

plan. The four-chapter narrative was approved a chapter at a time. Most of the plan was

forwarded from McKinley Park to the regional office in early 1960. The plan was not subject to

public comment; citizens of Naknek, however, heard about it and were vociferous in their

opposition to it. [64] In order to gain final approval, however, the plan had to pass a withering

gauntlet within the bureaucracy; at the regional level the various plan sections had to pass both

the Western Office of Design and Construction (WODC) and the regional director before they

could be forwarded to the Washington office. The process, balkanized at best, allowed

bureaucrats at various levels the opportunity to question individual sections of the plan. As a

result, the master plan was more of a reflection of current management thinking than a blueprint

for future development, and as such was altered when conditions demanded. Some sections of

the master plan were approved only by the park superintendent, while other sections were

approved by the NPS director. [65]

Access Issues Related to Mission 66, 1956-1958

As has been suggested above, the early years of the Mission 66 program brought rising, then

falling, hopes for those who hoped to construct a Brooks Camp airstrip. When the program was

launched in April 1956, the Mount McKinley superintendent made no provisions for an airstrip.

[66] But when the NPS director released the detailed plan a year later, one of several proposed

monument improvements was "an airstrip for wheel planes [to] be provided at a suitable

location compatible with air currents, topography and landscape considerations near Brooks

River Camp." The Master Plan Development Outline which followed made provisions for both

an airfield and a jeep road connecting the site to Brooks Camp. [67] Duane Jacobs, the

Superintendent at Mount McKinley, was an ardent backer of the airstrip, and he sent Neil Reid,

his park naturalist, to make another site survey in the spring of 1958. [68] Momentum for an

airstrip was halted, however, when Assistant Regional Director Herbert Maier requested that the

airfield should be delayed for further study and eliminated from park planning. [69] As a result,

the Control Schedule for the Mission 66 program rated the construction of the $180,000 airfield

as the Service's fourth (and last) priority. [70] For the remainder of the decade, officials made

no moves to implement an airstrip.

Other access issues were also addressed during the late 1950s. Mission 66, by and large, called

for a reliance on either boats or float planes for travel within the monument's lake system; plans

were thus made to build docks at Brooks Camp, Bay of Islands, Lake Grosvenor, Kukak Bay,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

and "near the Savonoski or Ukak Rivers on Naknek Lake." Regarding access from King Salmon

into the monument, the Master Plan Development Outline of 1957 made the same suggestions

as had George Collins five years earlier; namely, that the eight-mile road to Naknek Lake

should be improved. Both plans, however, were woefully short on how access would be

implemented. NPS planners were frank in admitting that future means of access was "one

problem difficult to analyze at the moment," and they similarly hedged on whether the agency

would sponsor improvements for the King Salmon-Naknek Lake road. [71]

An idea that was briefly toyed with during the period was relocating Brooks Camp boat docking

facilities from the mouth of Brooks River to Mortuary Cove, a protected embayment located a

mile northeast of the fishing camp. The idea was first broached in June 1957, when

Superintendent Jacobs mentioned it to regional officials. Jacobs felt that large boats could be

moored safely there regardless of the weather. All that was needed was the construction of a

jeep road connecting the two points. The idea was mulled over for a year, and was included in

the Master Plan Development Outline prepared in the fall of 1957. [72] The following year, the

superintendent sent out his naturalist, Neil Reid, to survey the site. Reid found the cove was

indeed "suitable as a shelter for boats; there are a few rocks and submerged trees, but in general

the water is deep and safe. A floating dock could probably be built here for temporary shelter of

boats." Unfortunately, however, the area's liabilities exceeded its advantages. He found that the

land behind the cove was "exceedingly swampy, and boggy for a considerable distance up the

ridge. Needless to say, mosquitoes are as thick as flies. The extreme end of the cove is unstable,

and gives the impression of being very nearly quicksand." As a result of his trip, the idea of a

boat landing in the cove was dropped--for the time being, at least. [73]

The Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes Road

The Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes was the centerpiece of Katmai National Monument when

it was established in 1918. Its inaccessibility, however, made it off-limits to visitors. In order to

render the site more accessible, Dr. Griggs had recommended that a road be built up the Katmai

River valley into the heart of the volcanic region. [74] And in the 1920s (see Chapter 3), the

Alaska Road Commission had investigated the possibilities of a road from Geographic Harbor

into the volcanic area.

Isolation and the lack of funds caused the project to be dropped for the next quarter century.

But in 1950, NPS planner George Collins suggested a road when he began making plans for

recreational development in the monument. In memos sent to the regional director, he urged

that a road be built from the south shore of Iliuk Arm up the Ukak River and into the Valley of

Ten Thousand Smokes. [75] In July 1952, he reaffirmed those plans when he suggested to the

regional director that a "one-way road with turn-outs" should be built up the creek valley to the

divide overlooking the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes. [76] But the regional director, in his

comments to the NPS director, warned that "The proposal to construct a road ... should be given

very careful study before this project is undertaken," and that "A trail would be the most

desirable means of access, at least until such time as visitation increases to a point where motor

transportation is necessary to handle the larger crowds." [77]

Given the regional director's dictum, there was little talk of a road for the next few years. But

when the Mission 66 program was unveiled in 1956, it included a ten-mile jeep road up the

Ukak River valley. (The plan called for either planes or boats to connect Brooks Camp with the

mouth of the Ukak River.) The road, however, was not a top priority; NPS employee quarters, a

visitor center, and an airstrip were all considered to be more important. [78] By 1958, as noted

above, Mount McKinley superintendent Duane Jacobs had concluded that a trail--not a road--

into the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes should comprise part of a "minimum first stage" of

Katmai's development program. The trail, unlike the earlier roads that had been proposed, was
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

intended to go all the way from Brooks Camp into the valley; the new route was decided upon

because weather on Iliuk Arm made it unsafe for boat travel. When NPS Associate Director

Eivind T. Scoyen and Regional Director Lawrence Merriam visited the monument that summer,

they seconded the idea that a trail into the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes was sufficient. [79]

Ray Petersen, the head of the monument concession, was frustrated by the NPS's attitude

toward Katmai development. He was well aware that the NPS, through the Mission 66 program,

had a plan that called for many new developments, but he was also aware that nothing had

become of those plans. The only NPS improvement in the entire monument, in fact, was the

small ranger-station complex (ranger station, generator house, storage cache, fuel tank, and

weather instrument shelter) which had been built from 1955 to 1957. [80] Ray Petersen, having

larger projects in mind, had advocated the construction of a road "from some point on Naknek

Lake" to the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes as early as September 1950, and was particularly

upset that the agency had shown little interest in building such a road. [81] Under the existing

state of affairs, few Katmai visitors saw the valley because chartering a plane was expensive,

and poor weather limited the opportunities for overflights. Petersen was certain that a road

connecting Brooks Camp to the valley was the most viable solution.

When Petersen met with the NPS in early 1960 to lay out his development plans, Director

Conrad Wirth and other officials promised verbal support for a road if Petersen would enhance

the facilities at Brooks Camp. [82] Petersen, true to his word, fulfilled his part of the agreement

during the summer of 1960. But when Petersen returned to Washington the following February,

Assistant Director Jackson Price noted that the best he could hope for would be "a pioneer road

of about twelve miles in length around the base of Mt. Katolinat which could be reached by

boat from Brooks River," the terminus of which would be the base for four-wheel vehicle trips

into the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes. [83] And according to George Sundborg, an

administrative aide to U.S. Senator Ernest Gruening, even a twelve-mile road was not possible

because of opposition from the Sierra Club or other preservationists. [84]

After Sundborg informed Petersen of the status of the project, Gruening arranged for a meeting

the following day with both Petersen and Director Wirth. At that meeting, Gruening convinced

Wirth to commence road construction despite objections; as Petersen remembers the

conversation, "the old Senator grabbed this guy [Wirth] by the scruff, and says 'you don't treat a

constituent like this.'" [85] Wirth capitulated.

Two months later, Katmai Ranger-in-Chief Robert Peterson was asked to determine the road's

right-of-way. He briefly considered a route which began at Research Bay (at the mouth of O

Creek), but decided instead to adopt the present route. [86] That August he led a party which

surveyed the route. The route was approved by regional officials, and a Project Construction

Program Proposal for a $153,120 road building job was drawn up. Construction equipment was

driven to Brooks Camp in March 1962 over the Naknek Lake ice. Road building began as soon

as the ground began to thaw. By July 4, eight miles had been roughed out, and the jeep road

was completed by the end of the season. [87] The first tours up the road began in 1963, using

either a 16-passenger bus (a converted, surplus military ammunition carrier built on a cab-over

1961 GMC frame) or an 8-passenger Chevrolet carryall. Visitors, by and large, enjoyed the trip.

The road surface, however, was considered too dusty when dry, and too unstable when wet.

Therefore, the road was graveled after the first season. [88]

The Congressional pressure which led to road construction threw the Mission 66 program for

the monument into disarray. The cost of the road project eventually totalled $205,000; the sum

was more than had been spent at the monument for all purposes since 1950. [89] It relegated all

other park functions to a lower priority; as time would tell, the practical result of the road

construction was that few other Mission 66 projects were constructed during the life of the

program. Road construction also had the practical effect of centralizing more of the park's
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

resources on concessioner-oriented activities, and it ensured that future activities revolved

around Brooks Camp rather than the more dispersed program called for in the Mission 66

prospectus.

The road spawned several ancillary developments. Spur trails to Margot Falls and the summit of

Overlook Mountain were completed in 1962. [90] The agency also built a 24' x 28' reception

center at Windy Creek Overlook, and by early 1963 had created the one and one-half mile trail

that connected the overlook with the Ukak River. [91] The Mount McKinley superintendent

hoped that the momentum of road construction would also result in the creation of an improved

Windy Creek Trail Camp near the overlook, but the plan did not survive the budgetary process.

[92]

The effects of the road project were also felt in Brooks Camp. Materials for three Panabode

cabins, which were used by construction personnel, were flown in during the spring of 1962. A

boathouse was also built that year, and the following spring a DC-3 on skis brought in the

materials needed to construct a warehouse. [93]

The Proposed Trans-Peninsula Highway

The construction of the Valley Road, in conjunction with the opening of the Alaska Marine

Highway system, caused many to seriously consider the idea of a road connecting the NaknekKing Salmon area with a ferry terminal on the east side of the peninsula.

During the 1916-1923 period, plans had surfaced for roads from Shelikof Strait into the Valley

of Ten Thousand Smokes. In 1942, Frank Been, the superintendent of Mount McKinley

National Park, was the first to propose a road that would connect Shelikof Strait with Bristol

Bay. He declared that such a project was feasible, and noted that

Except for the stretch between the Valley of 10,000 Smokes and Geographic

Harbor the construction will be easy because the terrain is almost level. The

highway will have military value and will tap the greatest salmon fishing region in

the world. It will therefore be commercially beneficial. Although the latter is

inconsistent with National Park Service functions, it will contribute to placing

Katmai on the map. The combined values should heighten the chances for getting a

road that will otherwise be based only on its recreational merits. [94]

But regional officials took exception to Been's idea. Most thought that proposing a road was too

bold a move for a park lacking even minimal facilities. Joseph Dixon, the regional naturalist,

was more specific in his criticisms. Citing the example of the Nizina mining road (in presentday Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve), where a road was abandoned because

traffic moved by plane, Dixon wrote that "road plans such as proposed for Katmai National

Monument might be entirely out-moded before they could be completed." He also worried that

if the road was considered valuable for military purposes, "such a road might be utilized by the

enemy as well as by us." [95] Dixon's persuasiveness, combined with the almost total lack of an

NPS budget, meant that Been's ideas were put on hold for years to come.

For almost twenty years, few people raised their voice about a trans-peninsula road. Grant

Pearson, who succeeded Been as superintendent, did not share his sentiments on the topic, and

after Collins's Alaska Recreation Survey work of 1950, plans were focused on either a trail or

road to provide access only from Naknek Lake to the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes.

The advent of statehood, however, reactivated the idea of building a road from the NaknekKing Salmon area to the opposite side of the peninsula. In the first session of the state
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

legislature, Naknek Representative Jay Hammond introduced a successful House resolution. It

requested that the Department of Public Works initiate an engineering survey for a road

connecting King Salmon with Bruin Bay, the latter a proposed ferry-terminal site located west

of Augustine Island. The Senate passed no such resolution. [96] Legislative highway boosters

steered clear of the Katmai area for the time being.

As soon as the NPS decided to build the Valley road, agitation began to build a road connecting

it to the outside road system. Senator Gruening, it may be remembered, convinced NPS Director

Conrad Wirth to construct the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes road in mid-February 1961.

Less than a month later, on March 6, the House passed a resolution asking "that a road be

planned and constructed by the state and the federal government from the Bristol Bay area

through the Mount Katmai National Monument to the southern coast of the Alaska Peninsula"

and "that the Kodiak-Homer ferry system be extended by the state to include a terminal at the

end of this road..." On March 30, the Alaska Senate passed the same resolution. [97]

Just a year after the NPS decided to build the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes road, the Alaska

House of Representatives passed two resolutions--HJR 38 and HJR 49--which advocated the

construction of additional highway mileage in Katmai National Monument. One urged that a

road be built from the outlet of Naknek Lake (which was the terminus of the existing road) to

the Brooks Lake terminus of the Valley Road. In its other resolution, the state house urged

construction from the terminus of the Valley Road east to Kukak Bay, where a state-sponsored

ferry terminal was to be built. The cumulative effect of the two resolutions was to support a

road that stretched all the way from Bristol Bay to Shelikof Strait. Senator Gruening supported

both resolutions. He noted that Katmai's biggest problem was its inaccessibility and felt that the

resolutions "would do much to remove this curse and open the park to vehicular traffic." But

NPS Director Conrad Wirth, upon hearing of the resolutions, quashed the idea. He told

Gruening that the construction of a lodge at Glacier Bay and a second hotel at Mount

McKinley--both of which Gruening favored--were more important than a trans-peninsula road.

[98]

In 1963 the state began operating its marine highway system, and the opening of a terminal in

Kodiak heightened interest in a trans-peninsula road. Hammond spearheaded a successful

House resolution that year urging the Department of Highways and the Department of Public

Works to study the most feasible route for such a road. [99] By fall, Hammond was convinced

that the optimal route was one which would connect Naknek with Kukak Bay. He passed those

ideas on to Senator Bartlett, who in turn talked up the idea with NPS Director Conrad Wirth.

NPS officials told Bartlett that there were no present plans to improve access to the monument,

and that they did "not consider a route through Katmai as a part of a State Highway system

either necessary or desirable." They felt sure that a feasible alternate route around the

monument could be found. Once built, the NPS might then consider building a spur road from

the new road into the monument. [100]

Bartlett, who admitted to a keen interest in the project, responded to NPS skepticism by asking

to comment on the monument Master Plan, which was scheduled to be completed in the spring

of 1964. [101] Hammond's initial response to the NPS's reluctance was a search for an alternate

route. By April 1964, however, his enthusiasm for the Naknek-Kukak Bay road had revived; his

supporters included Ray Petersen of the NCA and Grant Pearson, the former superintendent of

Mount McKinley National Park. Bartlett was sympathetic to Hammond's views, but far higher

on his priority list was the reconstruction of roads destroyed by the recent Good Friday

earthquake. Any plans regarding new roads would have to be delayed. [102]

The Park Service, while holding firm regarding a road through the monument, did not want to

appear opposed to all development. The agency, in fact, welcomed the opportunity to encourage

visitation along the Shelikof Strait coastline. In 1963, a starry-eyed planning team had
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

suggested that "A chalet possibly at Geographic Harbor could be a port of call and a stopping

place for those making the trip up the coast... This could be one of the outstanding experiences

the Monument has to offer." [103] Two years later, the master plan brief which guided

monument affairs chose Kukak Bay as the NPS's designated Shelikof Strait development site. It

noted that "The Alaska marine highway could be extended to include the Shelikof Strait and its

coastal areas," and promised to provide facilities and accommodations at Kukak Bay "when the

need becomes apparent." [104]

During the three years which followed the Good Friday earthquake, few efforts were made in

regards to a transcontinental road. In 1965, the state legislature pushed for a road north of the

monument when it passed a joint resolution requesting that the U.S. Bureau of Public Roads

provide technical and financial assistance in planning such a route. Little momentum, however,

resulted from its passage. [105]

Despite the Service's recalcitrant attitude toward any new road construction in the monument,

hopes remained high that a road might be built west through Katmai to Bristol Bay. Local

residents were solidly behind the project, as were officials at the Bureau of Public Roads, the

Alaska Department of Highways, the Federal Highway Administration, and the entire Alaska

Congressional delegation. Northern Consolidated Airlines, the monument concessioner, also

favored the road. Based on that support, Senator Gruening's assistant, George Sundborg, asked

NPS Director George Hartzog for his comments on the project. [106] The NPS, however,

responded the same way as they did in November 1963; that is, it urged the road planners to

locate a road outside the monument. Only then would it consider the possibility of a spur road

into the monument. [107]

Meanwhile, Alaska's road planners were weighing the pros and cons of two Katmai routes with

other rights-of-way across the Alaska Peninsula. Two routes which connected King Salmon to

Cook Inlet via Iliamna Lake were also considered. But in late November, Alaska's

Commissioner of Highways notified Hartzog that the Iliamna Lake routes were being discarded

from further consideration. The commissioner, Warren Gonnason, wrote that

Several routes in this corridor are practical from a highway construction standpoint.

However, the almost complete lack of a suitable harbor along Cook Inlet poses

nearly insurmountable problems from the standpoint of a coordinated and reliable

transportation network.

He further explained that the only two suitable harbors along the east coast of the peninsula

were Devils Cove and Geographic Harbor, both of which were located inside the monument.

He recognized that such a highway "would not be completely compatible with the aims of the

National Park Service," but justified his conclusions by noting that

a refusal to allow the Department of Highways to construct a highway in the

Monument could effectively bar us from extending our transportation network into

the vast area of southwestern Alaska. It should be needless to point out that the

ultimate economic development of this area is dependent upon low cost

transportation being provided.... It is our belief that the necessity for expansion of

Alaska's transportation network is a need which must be met. [108]

Director Hartzog was not about to be prodded, or intimidated, into acquiescing to a highway

that was not in the Service's best interest. When he wrote Gonnason on January 15, he

recognized Alaska's need to improve its road system. He reiterated, however, that the

construction of a highway bearing commercial traffic through the monument would be contrary

to the purposes for which the area was established. "We could not agree to such a road," he

stated, and further explained that "The two routes indicated ... would be particularly destructive
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

to park values." In conclusion, he noted that the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1966, and the

1966 law which created the U.S. Department of Transportation, were specifically intended to

give added protection to park lands against intrusion and the harmful effects of highway

construction. [109]

In response, the Alaska Legislature passed a joint resolution requesting the NPS to reconsider

its objections to the Katmai highway. [110] Local governments also did what they could. On

May 31, 1968, the Bristol Bay Borough Assembly passed a resolution supporting road

construction. Other resolutions were passed by the City of Anchorage (July 9), Kenai Peninsula

Borough (July 15), Kodiak Island Borough (July 22), and the City of Homer (August 26). [111]

But in April and again in August, the NPS reaffirmed its opposition to the project. That

opposition effectively squelched any thoughts of a monument road for the time being. [112]

King Salmon Facility Establishment

During the years in which Katmai was managed from McKinley Park, various locations were

considered for a headquarters site. The first to ponder the idea was Mount McKinley

Superintendent Frank Been, who had visited Katmai for several weeks in 1940. When Katmai's

first master plan was written in 1942, Been called for the construction of a permanent

headquarters and visitor center in Geographic Harbor, a well-protected cove along the Shelikof

Strait coastline. Been favored the site "because of its proximity to travel from the states." But

the superintendent was pragmatic enough to realize that "there is still some justification for

having Naknek as the monument base until funds are provided for its development. Naknek

provides a place of residence for the first personnel and is accessible to the part of the

monument in which most of the violations are occurring from hunting and trapping. Out from

Naknek, the development at Brooks Lake and Brooks River can be prepared and many of the

proposed shelter cabins constructed." [113]

By 1950, NPS personnel recognized that development along the Shelikof Strait was still a long

way off, and that the park headquarters, when established, should be located near where visitor

facilities were likely to be built. NPS planner George Collins, that year, argued that a winter

base of operations should be established at Naknek, because the community was "ideally

located for all servicing purposes." [114] But two years later, when he submitted his final

recommendations on Katmai development, he recognized the emerging importance of the King

Salmon area by recommending a headquarters location "somewhere in the vicinity of King

Salmon"--either at King Salmon itself, or better yet at the western end of Naknek Lake. He

found the location desirable because it provided quick access to the King Salmon Airport, and

would serve as the base of access for boat transportation to lakeside developments. Collins felt

that boat transportation would be an essential phase of the operation during foggy weather,

when plane transportation was impossible. [115]

Other NPS officials agreed with Collins's choice. Grant Pearson, the McKinley superintendent,

agreed that the Naknek Lake-Naknek River area was the best choice for a monument

headquarters; his second choice was King Salmon. The regional director concurred, and during

a 1952 visit to the monument, NPS Director Conrad Wirth also approved a King Salmon

headquarters site. The Civil Aeronautics Administration, which had owned property in the King

Salmon area since 1950, offered the agency sufficient land to establish its facilities. [116]

When the Mission 66 program was unveiled in 1956, it called for "a headquarters area at King

Salmon, where the necessary administrative, utility, and residential buildings would be located."

[117] A management survey team sent to the site that summer reconfirmed the desirability of

the site. A year later, a more detailed plan for Mission 66 activities noted that "There are

definite advantages for this decision, not the least important being that it eliminates an unsightly
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

development within the monument itself." [118] The Master Plan Development Outline, later

that year, noted that

In addition to the administration building it is planned to construct a single family

residence for the Superintendent and a 4-unit apartment house for staff members

and others in the local organization. In addition, there is proposed a heat plant

building, garages and marine docks. [119]

The agency had, by this time, found land on which to erect its headquarters complex. Duane

Jacobs, the Mount McKinley superintendent, began the process in February 1957. [120] At

year's end, he wrote that plans had been crystallized to locate monument headquarters at King

Salmon. Negotiations had been underway that year to secure two small tracts from other

agencies: a 4.68-acre parcel (later increased to 6.78 acres) from the Fish and Wildlife Service,

and a 4.65-acre parcel from the Civil Aeronautics Administration. The two parcels would

extend from the road which lined the edge of the airport down to the Naknek River. He

programmed funds for initial King Salmon construction, which was to include riverside docking

facilities, for FY 1959. [121]

When the NPS Associate Director and the Region Four Director visited the area in 1958, they

recommended that the initial development at the monument include King Salmon facilities,

including a three-bedroom residence for the superintendent and a combination garage, storage

space, and office space. A sufficient budget for a superintendent, however, was not passed;

therefore, the King Salmon facility package was put off until the 1962 fiscal year. But the NPS

was so certain that King Salmon was its headquarters site that it notified the Secretary of the

Interior, Fred Seaton, of its interest in obtaining the 11.43-acre site which had originally been

discussed in February 1957. On May 26, 1959, Seaton signed Public Land Order 1861, which

conveyed the tract to the NPS. [122]

Despite the general approval given the King Salmon site, its advisability came into question

once again in early 1959. In February, in a routine memorandum, Supt. Jacobs notified regional

officials that water access into the monument would necessitate docking facilities at the west

end of Naknek Lake; he therefore urged improvement of the existing truck trail which

connected King Salmon with Naknek Lake. In response, Jacobs was requested to make a routine

approval of a drawing regarding the King Salmon administrative site; in addition, he was asked

to provide information on Naknek River navigation. On April 21, Jacobs responded and

explained that river navigability was poor; it could be run only by shallow-draft boats, and then

only during a relatively brief high-water season. [123]

Jacobs, who had assumed all along that the monument would be served by either a King

Salmon-Lake Camp road or by air, felt that the rapids along the Naknek River had little

relevance to the applicability of King Salmon as a headquarters site. But when Merel Sager, the

Chief Landscape Architect in the Washington office, showed Jacobs' memo to Director Wirth,

the two requested that all further work on the King Salmon site be held in abeyance. Wirth and

Sager apparently felt that the Naknek River had been counted on to be a key route for freight

into the monument. The recognition that the river could not be relied upon forced Wirth, who

had tabbed King Salmon as the administrative site seven years earlier, to look at the matter of

monument access all over again. They recommended that a Regional Management Survey Team

investigate. [124] The survey team visited the King Salmon area in early July. Given the

recommendations from that visit, the director announced that he had no further objections to the

originally designated site. [125]

By March 1961, plans for a duplex residence and a heating/shop building were on line for the

1963 fiscal year. But the money required to build the Valley road was so overwhelming that the

project was again delayed. [126]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

Before development could begin, however, officials at another federal agency suggested that the

NPS consider another site in the King Salmon area. A Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) official

contacted the regional director in March 1962 and mentioned that the FAA's master plan called

for the construction of an access road and concession area at the north end of the NPS parcel.

[127] In response, the NPS noted its willingness to reconsider its development plans, and within

a few days it had found a new headquarters location. [128]

The new site, which was administered by the Bureau of Land Management, was initially

thought to be unsuitable for development, and for the next six months the agency weighed, yet

again, the advantages of King Salmon vis-à-vis other locations (such as Anchorage or Brooks

Camp) as a headquarters site. Soil tests conducted at the new site, and a reappraisal of the King

Salmon vicinity, found that the site was "not ideal in many respects for a headquarters, [but] it

was the most suitable site under the circumstances." The NPS, happy again at King Salmon,

waited for word from the FAA before it proceeded to a new location. The FAA, however,

recanted its development plans and withdrew its request for the NPS parcel. Instead, it merely

asked to utilize the northern portion of its air space. The NPS, in November 1962, acceded to

the request. Since that time, the agency has had no further threats to its property; its

headquarters location is the same size allotted to it in 1959. [129]

Plans for the facilities construction were finally approved during the 1964 fiscal year. On March

17, 1964, Steward and Company of Anchorage was awarded a $222,448 contract to erect

"residential and operational facilities" at King Salmon. [130] The administrative headquarters

was completed and accepted by the agency on November 14; facilities included a duplex

residence, of which half was used as an office and maintenance building. Soon afterwards, the

Supervisory Park Ranger began using the facilities for both winter and summer use. [131]

Master Plan Activity, 1963-1967

During the early 1960s, NPS personnel had been active on a master plan for Katmai National

Monument. Some portions of the plan, however, were approved more quickly than others, and

the chapter-by-chapter approval process made it difficult to envision that a single, unified

master plan would ever emerge from the process. The construction of the Valley Road,

moreover, meant that several aspects of the master plan had become obsolete. NPS officials

dutifully pressed ahead with the patchwork revision process.

But by early 1963 the outgoing regional director, Lawrence C. Merriam, had become convinced

that the master plan process needed to begin anew. To that end, he arranged with Oscar Dick,

the new superintendent at Mount McKinley, to have a master plan study team meet at the

monument that summer, and promised that one result of the meeting would be the revision of

the existing master plan chapters. [132]

The study team picked by Merriam was not a random assortment of bureaucrats. Four of the six,

to be sure, were NPS employees. But the group was singular in that several of its members

were outspoken wilderness advocates. Lowell Sumner, the NPS research biologist, had written

about the monument a decade earlier for the Sierra Club Bulletin; Robert F. Cooney, from

Montana, was an officer in the Wilderness Society; and Sigurd Olson was "a legend among

canoeists for his reflective essays on nature and the outdoor experience." Wally McCall (a

regional planner), Alfred Kuehl (the regional landscape architect), and Oscar Dick rounded out

the group. [133]

Merriam gave Dick, the field leader, a broad range of responsibility. A week before the group

convened, Dick reported that he hoped "to cover and discuss the entire area and come up with a

complete master plan." [134] The group, as it turned out, spent nine days in the monument, and
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

travelled the Shelikof Strait coastline as well as in the lake country. Sumner emerged from the

experience and penned a 50-page report which the new regional director, Edward A. Hummel,

deemed "of inestimable value help in formulating the Katmai master plan." But the report,

which was predictably rich in prose which embellished the monument's wilderness resource, did

not replace the existing master plan. NPS personnel continued to revise key elements of the

1960 master plan as late as November 1964. [135]

In August 1965, at the suggestion of the agency's recently-organized Alaska Task Force, the

Advisory Board on National Parks, Buildings, Historic Sites and Monuments returned to

Katmai for the first time in 13 years. The Board spent three days in the monument. The group

reached many of the same conclusions as had the Master Plan Field Study team of 1963, though

its report was presented with far less of a rhetorical flourish. The Board concluded that it was

comfortable with the present level of development. It noted that "Foot trails in the Valley, or at

least lines of cairns to mark routes, are needed, and over-night shelters for the hardy hikers, but

development in the ordinary sense is no present need." [136]

The Master Plan Brief issued the following month, however, offered ideas fundamentally

different from those suggested by the Advisory Board. The Brief, much as the Mission 66

program had done eight years earlier, called for new developments throughout the monument. It

envisioned four development nodes: Brooks Camp, Bay of Islands, Kukak Bay, and a Lower

Naknek Lake site. Brooks Camp and the Bay of Islands would be the sites of the largest

developments. The plan called for many new facilities at Brooks Camp: an auditorium, food

and supplies, an NPS district office, and a maintenance area. The proposed Bay of Islands

development was initially planned to be small, but it would eventually offer most of the same

services as Brooks Camp. Park planners envisioned that the "pillow count" (lodging capacity) at

Brooks Camp, currently 60, would be increased to 100 within 10 years and would eventually

expand to 300 or 350. Long-range plans called for lodging on a similar scale at the Bay of

Islands. Campgrounds with 50-100 sites were planned at both sites. The Lower Naknek Lake

area, which was outside of the monument, was proposed to have a dock and boathouse, boat

rental facilities, storage building, information and waiting room, and float plane landing area.

The exact site of the development, however, was dependent upon a survey to find adequate

water depths for the size of boats that were being planned. Kukak Bay, the final development

site, was more long-term in scope. A future multi-use development, on the same scale as

Brooks Camp, was planned there. Plans were put on hold, however, until travel to the coast

could be developed. [137]

The plan, however, was by no means a one-sided development document. The plan, for

example, called for the addition of some 541,900 acres to the monument; major additions were

called for in the Douglas and Kamishak river drainages and in the American and Hardscrabble

creek drainages. The plan also called for a Lower Naknek Lake addition, which would bring the

proposed Lower Naknek Lake development site within the monument's boundaries.

The Master Plan Brief also proposed that the Northern Consolidated camp at Lake Grosvenor be

abolished. Two reasons were given. First, planners felt that there had been "practically no use

of the camp in recent years by Park visitors;" second, the lake was planning to be included in a

wilderness area. The Wilderness Act had become law in 1964, and as a result, planners for the

first time were attempting to determine which of Katmai's lands belonged in the National

Wilderness Preservation System. They determined that most of the monument--slightly over

two million acres--should be so categorized. The only areas not proposed for wilderness were

Naknek and Brooks Lake, the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes road, and a buffer zone which

extended a few miles around each. [138]

In January 1967, the Master Plan Brief was updated, and several significant modifications were

implemented. The locations and degree of facility development remained as they had in the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

1965 plan. Those portions dealing with the need to expand the monument, however, were

excised; planners still recommended that the Lower Naknek Lake site be developed, but they

decided that it was no longer necessary to extend the boundary west to include it. In addition,

the revised plan treated wilderness differently; wilderness as a general resource was still

included, but specific suggestions regarding the designation of land within the National

Wilderness Preservation System were removed. [139]

Access Issues During the 1960s

During the 1950s, both NCA and the NPS had become increasingly aware that access within the

monument needed to be improved. Each, however, hoped that the other would sponsor the

needed transportation improvements. The bottom line was that given the numbers being

attracted to the monument, no one was willing to risk investing in transportation infrastructure.

As noted above, NCA had pinned its main hopes for monument access on the construction of an

airstrip near Brooks Camp. They had first presented the idea in 1954, and it was considered off

and on until 1958, when Herbert Maier, the Acting Regional Director, decided that the matter

should be tabled. The NPS made vague plans for an internal circulation system based on boats

and float planes, but the idea was never seriously considered during the budgetary process.

In early 1960, the idea of an airstrip rose again when the concessioner announced that it was

embarking on a building program. It planned to build a lodge, seven cabins, a rest room facility

and related improvements. NCA, having stuck out its financial neck, required no quid pro quo

from the park service. One of its officers, however, implored the agency to "do something

concrete" to develop the park; an airstrip was one of several suggested improvements. But the

NPS was cool to the idea of spending development dollars in a park that had received one of

the lowest visitation levels in the system. Asked to explain the agency's lack of interest, the

regional director searched for an excuse before noting that "since the concessioner has

developed and is using an airstrip at its Kulik camp outside the monument, we do not consider

another strip inside the monument to be of vital importance at this time." In a similar vein, the

1960 master plan downplayed the need for an airstrip, suggesting that "Katmai transportation

should be limited in general to boats and float planes unless future study determines the

necessity for a landing strip." [140]

Although the agency's 1965 Master Plan Brief noted that no airstrips for land-based planes

would be developed, [141] NCA made another attempt to construct an airstrip near Brooks

Camp. In 1966, airline officials began to recognize the need to purchase jet airplanes in order to

adequately serve its far-flung system; in order to afford them, they began speaking to Wien Air

Alaska officials about a possible merger. The two airlines announced the merger on March 15,

1967. The effect of the announcement, as it related to the Katmai camps, was a desire to extract

higher profits from them. The increasing number of visitors during the 1960s gave some hope

of enhanced revenues. Airline officials perceived that if access restrictions at Brooks Camp

could be eased, greater site development would ensue.

The NPS, at the time, was interested in issuing long-term contracts to concessioners throughout

the system. [142] But NCA officials felt so strongly about the necessity of the airstrip that they

tied its construction to the creation of a new contract, just as they had done in 1955. The

runway for such a strip was ideally to be 5000 to 6000 feet in length, which was enough to land

the Boeing 737-200s the airline was intending to purchase. But they were willing to settle for a

3000-3500 foot strip so that a Twin Otter or Skyvan SC7 would be able to use it. [143] The

concessioner argued that an airstrip was needed for reasons of safety and reasoned that

inasmuch as Alaska's other NPS units contained airstrips, Katmai should offer one as well.

[144] But in May 1967 NPS officials rejected the airstrip idea yet again, reasoning that such a
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

facility would change the "wilderness atmosphere and the feeling of isolation and remoteness

that it now has." The concessioner responded to the rejection by indicating it would "invest

substantially in the area if it warranted such action," but unless the airstrip question could be

resolved he promised no new improvements. [145]

The idea of a Brooks Camp airstrip was, by now, effectively dead. In January 1968, an NPS

official dutifully offered to incorporate the airport issue into the monument's master planning

process. That master plan, however, took five years to complete, and gave no encouragement

toward those who hoped to have an airstrip built. The 1974 final wilderness plan noted that "no

aircraft landing strips are planned within the monument," and proposed that the planned airstrip

site be included in the National Wilderness Preservation System. [146] When the Alaska

National Interest Lands Conservation Act was signed, however, the area surrounding the airstrip

was one of the few areas in the pre-1978 monument that was not designated as wilderness.

Meanwhile, other access questions continued to fester during the 1960s. In order to promote

transportation within the park, and to obviate the need for an airstrip, the 1965 Master Plan

Brief noted that "A program must be devised to permit access to the Monument for greater

numbers of people by means other than float plane. The development of harbor facilities on

lower Naknek Lake will make possible access to the area." It bluntly stated that "Naknek Lake

will be the principal traffic artery for the transportation of visitors and supplies to developed

areas on the lake shore," and it reiterated the need for a large boat which would shuttle visitors

back and forth between King Salmon, Brooks Camp, and the proposed visitor complex at Bay

of Islands. Alaska's Congressman, Ralph Rivers, also recognized the need. The NPS, however,

continued to urge that the boat be owned and operated by the concessioner, while others hoped

that the NPS would take on the job. [147]

In order to spur development in the monument, both the NPS director and the regional director

briefly expressed their willingness to sponsor a road connecting King Salmon and Brooks

Camp. The agency was then under considerable pressure because of its opposition to a transpeninsula highway, and had gone on record as considering such a spur road if the transpeninsula highway had been constructed outside of the monument. Recognizing the importance

of preserving the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes at all costs, officials may have felt that

constructing a spur road could be done without undue harm to Katmai's resources. The cost of

such a road, however, and the opposition of other NPS officials prevented such a concept from

gaining much headway. [148]

For the rest of the decade, the stalemate over transportation continued, although the

responsibility for its development shifted. By 1967, the NPS recognized that the concessioner

had neither the willingness nor the financial incentive to sponsor a tour-boat operation.

Therefore, the agency took control over its development, although it took no action to create

such a system. [149]

NPS officials, ever wary of protecting the monument's resource values, began to become

concerned during the mid-1960s about the proliferation of aircraft using the monument. Until

1949, the monument had ostensibly been closed to all aircraft except those on official agency

business. Thereafter, the monument had been open from May 15 until September 15. But by

1965, officials felt that the "Regulation permitting indiscriminate land of aircraft anywhere

within the Monument should be revised to designate specific sites adjacent to developed areas."

They were particularly worried that, with the growing popularity of helicopters, monument

values were in danger of being lost. [150] But no new regulations came forth.

For awhile, NPS officials resurrected the idea, first promulgated in the 1950s, of a boat docking

and float plane base at Mortuary Cove, just north of Brooks Camp. The cove was appealing

because the site was more protected than the area surrounding the mouth of Brooks River, and
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

because a remote site for takeoffs and landings would interfere less with guest activities at the

camp. The idea of developing the cove resurfaced in the 1965 Master Plan Brief; the plan also

proposed new camping, visitor contact and staff facilities along the road that was to be

constructed between the camp and the cove. [151]

A year later, the superintendent formally proposed construction at the site, suggesting that a

utility area and fuel storage facility be built in addition to a dock. An engineering company

surveyed the site that summer. Development at the cove continued to be considered as late as

October 1967. The construction proposal was considered over the next several years, but it was

never funded, and by 1972 the idea of improvements at the cove had been officially abandoned.

At various times during the 1970s, the agency proposed other uses there: as a temporary boat

storage, as the site for a relocated Brooks Camp campground, or as an overflow campground.

None of these were immediately implemented. Not until the 1990s did Mortuary Cove assume

its present role as a mooring area for park boats. [152]

Another access issue that the Park Service had to wrestle with was the problem of how to cross

Brooks River. During the 1950s, there was little relatively demand to cross the river; fishermen

did not need to cross it in order to fish its mouth or the Brooks Falls area. Those who fished the

south bank of the Brooks River, and the staff at the Brooks Lake fisheries station, used boats

provided by the concessioner. Several plans during the 1950s proposed the construction of a

footbridge; in 1956 a bridge was partially constructed, but it was damaged the same year by

high water. Nothing more came of the plans. [153]

When, in 1960, NCA proposed to improve its facilities, it began to pressure the Service for

support facilities. Among the items that it hoped the NPS would supply were docks, both for

float planes and skiffs. [154] The agency ignored NCA's request, at least for the time being.

The construction of the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes road exacerbated the river-crossing

problem. To make the crossing more convenient, the NPS included, in the road building

contract, a provision for the construction of two small docks. On the south bank a small, Lshaped dock was built near the present bus loading area, while on the north side a linear dock

was laid out at the head of a small embayment. This embayment, which no longer exists, was

located just upriver from the mouth of the Brooks River and downstream from the Valley Road

terminus. The concessioner used several small powerboats to ferry guests back and forth across

the river. In the mid-1960s the superintendent attempted to obtain funds for a narrow

suspension bridge, but the request was denied. [155] Lacking other choices, powerboats

remained the primary method of stream-crossing for the remainder of the decade.

Staff and the Enforcement Problem

During the 1950s, Katmai had subsisted on a minimal budget, and its staff had henceforth been

able to do little but oversee activities at the Brooks River fishing camp. The agency was able to

hire an additional ranger as early as 1955, but as late as 1959, the monument was still staffed by

two seasonal rangers and its budget was still less than $10,000. [156] The monument had not,

by that date, received a budgetary allowance for either roads and trails or for buildings and

utilities. Consequently, only two rustic buildings had been constructed: the original ranger

cabin, at the site of today's Brooks Camp campground, and the present visitor contact station.

Whatever trails had been cleared had likewise been the result of volunteer efforts of NPS

rangers. After the 1960 season, the Katmai staff still consisted of just two personnel: a rangerin-charge and a seasonal park ranger. [157]

From 1960 through 1964, the monument's budget roughly doubled, and further improvements

were witnessed. Several buildings were established at Brooks Camp in 1962 and 1963, when
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

the Valley Road was being constructed; in addition, a shelter was built at Three Forks

Overlook, at the road terminus. The completion of the road meant that additional staff were

needed to accompany the vehicles heading up to the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes. More

important, the Valley Road tour attracted visitors who were attracted to a broad range of

monument resources.

By 1965, basic facilities had been completed in King Salmon, and the Supervisory Park Ranger,

which heretofore had wintered at Mount McKinley, took up winter residency at the King

Salmon headquarters. [158] For the remainder of the decade, budgets and staff enjoyed a

healthy growth. The monument budget, which had been slightly over $20,000 in fiscal year

1964, grew sixfold in just five years. (From 1966 to 1967 it more than doubled.) New staff

residences--two cabins and three framed tents--appeared at Brooks Camp. By 1970, the

monument was able to boast two permanent employees--a management assistant and a park

ranger--along with five seasonal employees. [159]

The growth in staff gave the monument some help in the management of its resources. In the

1950s, monument officials had had scant ability to quickly visit the more remote portions of

their domain. The agency was never certain that its borders were secure against threats from

poachers. Based on their relationship with Fish and Wildlife Service agents, the first NPS

rangers knew that "serious poaching by hunters, trappers, and fishermen occurs regularly" and

that the need for "organized protection of wildlife and other resources ... is obvious." The

agency tried, without success, to bolster its appropriation to support its law enforcement

functions. [160] But rangers lacked that ability because they were seldom able to leave Brooks

Camp. They considered themselves fortunate when the concessioner offered them flights into

the more remote areas of the monument. [161] To aid in enforcement efforts, the Fish and

Wildlife Service continued to assist the NPS, and its officers continued to be deputized as park

rangers. Even so, enforcement personnel sallied away from Brooks Camp only two or three

times each summer, and an NPS visit to the coastal side of the monument was a rare event.

[162]

During the 1960s, additional staff helped control the increasing level of activity at Brooks

Camp. Outside of the camp and the Valley Road corridor, however, the agency remained almost

powerless to recognize, let alone gain control over, possibly illegal activities in the remote

sections of the park. Poaching, the worst of those problems, became an increasing problem

during this period. [163] By 1965, when the Advisory Board on National Parks, Buildings,

Historic Sites and Monuments visited the monument, they noted that "Katmai ... without planes

and with too few boats, is completely incapable of managing and protecting these grand places.

Poaching is a universal problem." [164] Regional office staff warned that three new rangers

were immediately needed "to provide even token protection and minimal observation to the vast

area."

The NPS tried as best as it could to control the poaching problem. In October 1966,

Management Assistant Darrell Coe made the first arrest for violating the monument's hunting

regulations when he cited Andy Runyan for guiding a client on a brown bear hunt. As part of

the same case, Coe also cited a pilot, Robert King, for landing in the monument out of season.

Both violators were convicted and fined. The NPS was pleased to gain the two convictions;

even so, the agency considered both fines woefully inadequate, because they did little to deter

poaching in the monument. [165]

The Runyan case, while nominally successful, was particularly frustrating because it

underscored the difficulty in enforcing the regulations against hunting. In so doing, it exposed

the laissez faire attitude which the local judicial system held toward hunting violations, and it

also showed that Park Service officials sometimes had to make decisions based on political

expediency rather than the protection of park values.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

The case, at first, was a clear violation of monument regulations. Runyan had taken a wealthy

Austrian hunter named Kurt Smolka into the monument to shoot a trophy brown bear on

October 26, 1966. The kill was made 19 miles inside monument boundaries, about 40 miles

southeast of King Salmon in the King Salmon River drainage. By dint of some excellent

detective work, Coe apprehended Runyan, confiscated the bear hide, and took the guide before

the U.S. Commissioner in Anchorage on October 31. Runyan was fined $300. Robert King of

Naknek, the pilot who flew Runyan and Smolka on the poaching expedition, was later fined

$200 ($175 suspended) for landing an airplane in the monument between September 15 and

May 15. [166]

Soon after making the case, Coe began getting telephone calls from Washington offices of the

NPS asking for a "full report" and inquiring about the procedures that had been followed. He

interpreted this as subtle pressure to drop the case; he believed that Oscar Dick, Superintendent

at Mount McKinley and his supervisor, had received the same kinds of pressure. In Coe's

opinion, Dick was transferred from McKinley to Bryce Canyon, Utah, because of his support

for Coe. (Dick left Mount McKinley in February 1967.)

Despite the surmised pressure, Coe pressed the case. Smolka paid the guide's $300 fine. The

hunter insisted on getting his bear hide back, and began to work through the Austrian

government to recover it. He claimed to have a museum on his estate and indicated his desire to

display the hide there. [167] The U.S. State Department, apparently anxious to please the

Austrians, asked the NPS to retrieve the bear hide. NPS Director George Hartzog, unwilling to

provoke an international incident, backed down. He ordered George Hall, who was en route to

McKinley to replace Oscar Dick, to recover the bear hide. Hall found it in an Anchorage

taxidermy shop, and the NPS paid to have it treated and shipped to the Austrian museum.

Appalled at the NPS's resolution of the Smolka case, Coe submitted his resignation at the end of

the 1967 visitor season. [168]

Perhaps because of the Smolka case, the lack of protection given the monument resulted in

nationwide press. In 1969, the Christian Science Monitor featured an article, "Millions of Acres

Get One Ranger," detailing the enforcement difficulties. It noted that "poachers are believed to

be robbing the monument of some of its rare wildlife [although] No one really knows..." Bears,

wolves, moose, and sea lions were all thought to be poached in large numbers. [169]

NPS officials were acutely aware of the problem. One regional official noted that

The existing staff ... is not adequate to survey and protect the Monument resources

considering the fact that the area is nearly twice the size of Yellowstone. The lack

of personnel has become a point of negative discussion among the bush pilots and

others familiar with the resources of the Monument... [170]

As the 1960s wore on, the budget allowed occasional overflights of the Katmai backcountry. In

early 1967, the enforcement effort was enhanced when two local pilots with the Bureau of Sport

Fisheries and Wildlife (part of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) agreed to fly patrols for

them. In 1969, the number of reconnaissance flights over the monument had risen to thirteen.

[171] Contributing to the lack of enforcement, however, was the inability to independently

travel into remote areas. Superintendent Gil Blinn, who arrived at the park in 1969, wryly

remembered the situation this way:

We would charter airplanes the first few years there, the Peninsula Airways. I

always had the disquieting feeling though that as soon as we got in the air the word

was out to the guide community that, hey, lay low for a couple of hours [because]

the Park Service is out in the park. And their activities were pretty well known. We

could never really confront it. We were [also] at a disadvantage because we had to
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

depend on others to provide the transportation to us and so we would go at their

convenience rather than when our need was. [172]

Such problems would ameliorate somewhat when the NPS gained the ability to use Office of

Aircraft Services equipment, but they would not be overcome until the agency obtained its own

airplane.

Creation of McNeil River State Game Sanctuary

Meanwhile, the state of Alaska was taking actions on its own to protect the brown bear. It set its

sights on the McNeil River, a bear-laden stream near the northeastern boundary of the

monument. McNeil River had jumped out of obscurity in 1954, when the National Geographic

Magazine published an article showing photographs of the site. (Cecil Rhode, on contract for

the Fish and Wildlife Service, was the writer and photographer. He was careful to avoid naming

or locating the site, but even so, word eventually leaked out.) Soon afterward the Alaska Game

Commission closed the area to bear hunting. [173] In order to guarantee its management over

the area, the state made land selections up and down the river valley between October 1966 and

January 1967. A total of 118,429 acres in six townships was chosen. During the ensuing session,

the Alaska legislature passed HB 156, to create a 83,600-acre McNeil River State Game

Sanctuary. Governor Walter Hickel signed the bill on April 19. McNeil River was the state's

second designated sanctuary, the first being Round Island, near Togiak. The refuge was

declared a National Natural Landmark in June 1968. [174] Designation of the refuge had little

immediate effect on area visitation; in 1969, for instance, officials recorded fewer than ten site

visits. [175]

Should Katmai Be Designated a National Park?

During the 1950s and 1960s, officials from both the private and public sector made frequent

observations that Katmai should become a national park. Ray Petersen, the new concessioner,

may have been first when he declared in the summer of 1950 that "the more I think of it the

more I am inclined to agree that this area should be changed to a national park." George

Collins, the NPS planner, also thought that Katmai should become a national park. [176] The

NPS, as part of its boundary-adjustment program in the mid-1950s, suggested "that national

park status ... will be recommended at the appropriate time." [177]

After a decade of operating the Katmai concessions operation, Petersen again suggested the

idea of a national park in a conversation with Senator Ernest Gruening, noting that a national

park had greater advertising value than a national monument. Gruening wrote to Alaska's

Commissioner of Natural Resources about the idea; he, in turn, passed the word on to Governor

William A. Egan and the Commissioner of Fish and Game. All rejected any notion of a national

park. Some were concerned about the loss of state authority, while others feared the increase of

regulations that was bound to accompany a full-fledged national park. [178]

During the 1960s the calls continued to be made for a national park, but most were internally

generated. NPS officials lost few opportunities to explain to others, both inside and outside the

agency, that Katmai was fully deserving of park status. In March 1961 Mount McKinley's

superintendent urged the regional director to consider the idea, [179] and The Advisory Board

on National Parks, Buildings, Historic Sites and Monuments, during their 1965 visit, felt that

the monument was "worthy of National Park status," and both the 1965 and the 1967 version of

the Master Plan Brief hoped "to redesignate the Monument to National Park status at the

earliest propitious time." [180] In December 1967, NPS Director George Hartzog declared to

Governor Walter Hickel,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

We are hopeful that Katmai National Monument will also become a national park

some day, as it too warrants such recognition. It is truly one of the great wilderness

areas of the world and contains outstanding scientific values also. [181]

Despite the growing recognition that the monument should be considered as a park, no senator

or representative brought that idea into the legislative arena. Not on an individual level, at least.

During the 1970s, as shall be seen in the following chapter, Katmai became a repeated object

of legislative deliberation as part of the larger Alaska lands issue.

In June 1950, Willie Nancarrow (second from left), a full-time employee at Mount McKinley, began serving as
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

Katmai's first ranger. He remained until mid-August and returned for a short stint in 1951. The photo, by Steve

Buskirk (second from right), was taken at Mount McKinley in October 1975. The other men are Jim Rogers (left),

Gary Brown (center), and Tom Adams (right). (File 27-112, DENA Collection)

Shown in this photo is Katmai's first ranger station, located at the site of today's Brooks River Campground. The

two-room, tent-frame residence remaind until 1956, when a log ranger station (today's visitor contact station) was

built. (Victor Cahalane photo, September 1953; NPS Photo Collection, neg. 66-110)
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

In 1952, the first Katmai interpretive brochure (left) featured Mount Martin, an

intermittently-steaming volcano. On the right is the log cache near the original

Brooks Camp ranger station. (File 404 (left) and File 207 (right), both in KNM

Box 311, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA SB)
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

In 1953 and 1954, several agencies collaborated on the Katmai Project, which brought a diverse group of scientists

to the monument. Shown here, in this August 1953 photo taken by Victor Cahalane at the Kukak Bay cannery, are

(front row) Dr. Rolf Werner Juhle (Johns Hopkins University), William F. Thompson (U.S. Army, Office of the

Quartermaster General), and Dr. John B. Lucke (University of Connecticut); in the back row are Mr. Sanders, a

mechanic,; Mr. Williams, the pilot; and Everett L. Schiller (U.S. Public Health Service). Within weeks after the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

photo was taken, Dr. Juhle lost his life in Knife Creek, presumably by drowning. (NPS Photo Collection, neg. 66-

182)

(top) The Katmai Project continued during the summer of 1954. Shown here, at Knife Creek Camp in the Valley

of Ten Thousand Smokes, are George B. Schaller, a University of Alaska biology graduate student; W. S. Woods,

the pilot; and NPS biologist Victor Cahalane. In the background is a Piper Pacer on tandem wheels. Cahalane took

the photo. (bottom) Robert Luntey, a recreation planner in the NPS's Region Four (San Francisco) office, was the

agency's coordinator of the Katmai Project. Cahalane took this photo in September 1953 (with moose antlers) at

the west end of Lake Grosvenor, near NCA's Grosvenor Camp concessions operation. (NPS Photo Collection,

neg. 12033 (top); NPS Photo Collection, neg. 66-171 (bottom) )
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

(top) Northern Consolidated Airlines built Brooks Camp in 1950, and for years afterward it was the primary

access route to the monument as well as Katmai's concessioner. This photo, taken in June 1959 shortly after

NCA's Cessna T-50 Bushmaster arrived, looks north along the Naknek Lake shore from Brooks Camp. (bottom)

In 1952, prodded by Alaska Delegate Bob Bartlett, the NPS commenced a boundary review study. Shown in an

aerial photograph taken that year is the village of Kaguyak, along Shelikof Strait. It was probably Lowell Sumner,

an NPS biologist, who marked the boundary and other features on the photo. Little evidence of Kaguyak remains

today. (Ward Wells Collection #2074-10, AMHA (top); File 602, KNM Box 311, Entry 7, RG 79, NARASB

(bottom) )
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

In August 1965, the Advisory Board on National Parks, Historic Sites, Buildings, and Monuments, visited Katmai

as part of its Alaskan tour. The top photo, taken at Brooks Camp, shows (left to right) Frank Melvin (NPS); NPS

Director George Hartzog, with a cigar; Ed Hummel (NPS), partially hidden by Hartzog; Ray Peterson (NCA),

second from right; and Dick Wittmer, a House Interior commitee staffer, at far right. (The other men are

unidentified.) The bottom photo, which was taken at Glacier Bay National Monument a few days earlier, shows
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

Director Hartzog (left) conversing with Advisory Board member Mel Grosvenor (NGS). (Ted Swem Collection

(both photos) )
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 4)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap4.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:38 PM]

(top) George Hall served as the Mount McKinley Superintendent (and de facto Katmai chief) from 1967 to 1969;

he then served, in Anchorage, as the first General Superintendent of the Alaska Group Office. P. G. Sanchez took

this photo in June 1967. (bottom) NPS officials who worked on Katmai issues from the 1940s through the 1970s

included Alfred Kuehl (landscape architect), Robert Luntey ( planner), Merrill Mattes (historian, in front), and

Bailey O. Breedlove (landscape architect). The photo was taken by Robert Howe in August 1967. (File 27-99,

DENA Collection (top); Robert Howe Collection, photo GB 828 (bottom) )

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

adhi/chap4.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

PART I: KATMAI NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE

Chapter 5:

Katmai and The Alaska Lands Controversy, 1969-1980

Early Attempts to Resolve Statewide Lands Issues

During the 1960s, a rising number of voices began to demand that some solution be found to

the problem of undesignated Alaskan land. For decades, there had been few pressures to

develop the great majority of Alaska's land resources; more than 95 percent of Alaska was

nominally administered by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. There were, to be sure, 1.3

million acres of privately-held lands, which were chiefly located in and around the state's towns

and villages. In addition, the federal government administered some 92 million acres of military

reservations, power and petroleum reserves, national parks and monuments, national forests,

and wildlife refuges, and it was also a trustee over two Indian reservations. Most of the state,

however, was a de facto wilderness that was open to travel, fishing, trapping, hunting, mineral

exploration, settlement, and appropriation under the federal land laws. Many Alaskans thought

that the vast majority of the state, particularly those portions remote from the contiguous

highway network, had little value. Most of those who lived Outside, moreover, knew little about

those lands and cared even less about them.

The initial step toward unraveling the prevailing laissez faire attitude took place on June 30,

1958, when the Alaska Statehood Bill passed Congress. The act was exceedingly generous to

the state. Instead of granting the state less than ten percent of its acreage, as had been true when

most of the western territories had been granted statehood, Alaska was allowed to choose

104,500,000 acres--almost 28 percent of its land area--to use or sell as the state saw fit. [1]

State planners, looking for future sources of revenue, selected lands which had the best

opportunities for oil, gas and hard-rock mineral extraction. During the 1960s, they selected

some 28,000,000 acres. Early selections, however, began to impinge on lands traditionally used

by Alaska's Natives. Alaska's aboriginal peoples had not been organized on a statewide (or

territory-wide) level before the early 1960s. By 1966, however, the Alaska Federation of

Natives was a reality, and the new organization soon began to lobby for a bill that would

guarantee control over their traditional use lands. [2]

Meanwhile, the National Park Service began its own efforts to resolve the growing lands issue.

The agency, over the years, had made no comprehensive studies regarding which areas

belonged in the NPS system; instead, the system had grown, one unit at a time, as a result of a

wide variety of pressures from transportation carriers, commercial interests, politicians, and

scientists. George B. Hartzog, who became Director in January 1964, hoped to engage the

agency in a systemwide inventory and evaluation effort. To that end, he appointed a series of

task forces to analyze park possibilities in various regional areas. Hartzog soon recognized that

if significant growth in the park system were to occur, that growth would have to be in Alaska.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

The Alaska Task Force, formed in November 1964, was composed of outsiders familiar with

the state--George Collins, Robert Luntey, Sigurd Olson, and Doris Leonard. (John Kauffmann,

an NPS employee, was chosen as an editorial assistant.)

The group issued a report the following January called Operation Great Land. The study

identified a total of 39 vaguely-defined "zones and sites containing examples of recreation,

natural, and historic resources," and urged that the agency make a "massive investment" in the

state. The study, the first which attempted to assess future parklands on a statewide level, was

the first volley in what would prove to be long battle, and even though the report was not

published, it provided the basis for future efforts. Regarding Katmai, the report called for a

small expansion at the west end of the monument, "about 20 miles long and 10 miles wide,"

and a larger expansion to the north, "about 100 miles long and 40 miles wide." Both of the

proposed additions had previously been considered, by Conrad Wirth and Lowell Sumner

(1952) and by Victor Cahalane (1953). [3]

Once Operation Great Land had broken the ice, other elements within the service began to

suggest expanding the monument. The 1965 Master Plan Brief, for example, suggested

boundary expansions in the same areas as those envisioned by Hartzog's task force. [4] Soon,

however, two events complicated the situation regarding land acquisition in the Katmai area. In

the fall of 1966, the state began to select land from various townships along the wildlife-rich

McNeil River. Within the next few months almost the entire drainage had been claimed. The

state's action was in slight conflict with NPS plans for the area; the NPS had identified McNeil

River, "with its superb brown bear habitat," as an area of significance in its proposed northern

expansion. But there was no conflict between the state selected lands and the proposed NPS

expansion which appeared in the 1965 Master Plan Brief. [5]

The second event took place when the Secretary of the Interior, Stewart Udall, slapped a land

freeze on lands north of the monument. Such an action had been anticipated for some time. The

Classification and Multiple Use Act, which had passed Congress in September 1964, had called

for the eventual classification and delineation of BLM lands for specific purposes. The act,

however, could not be applied until the Interior Department drew up supporting regulations.

The process might have taken years, but pressure by Native groups, who were angry at the

proliferating number of state selections, helped speed up the process. By August 1966, Interior

Department officials had told the NPS that a land freeze in the Katmai area was in the offing; as

a result, the agency's Master Plan Brief which was released in January 1967 proposed no new

lands to the monument. [6]

In March 1967 the proposed land freeze was published in the Federal Register. It took the form

of a proposed classification for over 6.6 million acres of BLM land in the Iliamna-Cook Inlet

areas, in which "subject to existing rights, publication of this notice segregates [i.e., prevents]

the described lands from all forms of appropriation [homesteading, oil leasing, transportation

corridors, etc.] under the public land laws..." [7] A hearing on the proposed action was held in

King Salmon on May 2; those in attendance generally supported BLM's proposal. After minor

modifications were made, the BLM announced in October the issuance of the classification

order, and by mid-December it was enforcing its provisions. [8] As a result, NPS hopes for

adding lands to Katmai (or other NPS units) were put on hold for the time being.

The 1969 Boundary Expansion

Udall's land freeze prevented NPS officials from considering the addition of any new

monument acreage along the northern border. It did not, however, prevent a western boundary

expansion. Before the freeze, the Service's New Area Studies Division had considered both

extensions as active proposals; Udall's action eliminated one of the two proposals. [9]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

In the fall of 1967, NPS Director Hartzog brought up the expansion proposal to both Governor

Walter Hickel and Senator E. L. Bartlett. In his letter to Hickel, Hartzog suggested future

tourism development when he explained that

Improved visitor access and facilities are directly related to the proposed boundary

extension to the [west] to include the rest of Naknek Lake. This extension will add

not only a very fine water resource but also a base for access into the monument to

be served by road from King Salmon. We are presently exploring this boundary

change possibility with the Bureau of Land Management. [10]

In July 1968, Secretary Udall met with White House officials to discuss the idea of setting aside

additional lands as monuments during the waning days of the Johnson administration. (President

Johnson, by this time, had already announced that he would not run for re-election.) Udall was

given the go-ahead to proceed with the project, which soon became known as "Project P." A

month later he met with NPS Assistant Director Theodor Swem, and requested him to prepare a

list of possible areas. Swem produced a wide-ranging list: in Alaska, candidate areas included

Mount McKinley, Katmai, Gates of the Arctic, St. Lawrence Island, Wrangell Mountains, Saint

Elias Range, Lake Clark Pass, and Wood-Tikchik. By October 18, Swem's list had been

narrowed considerably; included from a nationwide inventory were just six areas in which

Udall had shown an interest. Two of the six were in Alaska: an extension to Mount McKinley

and an extension to Katmai. [11]

Over the next two months, various officials critiqued the list, the result being that one new unit-

-Gates of the Arctic National Monument, in Alaska--was added to the list. The seven proposed

monuments were then announced in the Federal Register, and presented to President Johnson

for his signature. Johnson waited until the last moments of his term in office to resolve the

matter; he was, in fact, already dressed for Nixon's inauguration when he made his decision.

Johnson had the opportunity to create monuments transferring over 7.6 million acres to the

protection of the National Park Service. Of that total, 6.4 million acres would have been in

Alaska. He decided, however, to sign the proclamations for only the four smallest monuments,

which together preserved just 385,000 acres. Of the three national monument proclamations

proposed for Alaska, the only one he signed was Proclamation 3890, which expanded Katmai

National Monument 94,547 acres to the westward. [12]

Alaskan officials at both the state and federal levels were furious upon hearing that the Katmai

acreage had been removed from the public domain. They were slightly mollified to hear that the

Mount McKinley and Gates of the Arctic withdrawals had not taken place, but they were angry

at the Katmai withdrawal and even more angry that they had not been briefed on the proposed

withdrawals until they lay on Johnson's desk waiting to be signed. Howard W. Pollock, the

state's lone U.S. House member, called the process a "dictatorial step." [13] He vented his anger

by preparing amendments to the Antiquities Act which would prevent the Executive Branch

from creating monuments without a public review process. [14] Ted Stevens, who had just been

appointed as a U.S. Senator one month earlier, vowed to withdraw the monument designation

and asked the Senate Interior Committee to hold hearings in Alaska on the issue. (No such

hearings were held, however.) Mike Gravel, Alaska's Democratic senator, approved of the

Johnson proclamation. He added, "I would hope that the withdrawal will hasten the day when

more Americans can wander through the scenic lagoons, glaciers, lakes and craters which make

Katmai one of the natural wonders of the world." [15]

Other Alaskans were just as virulent in their opposition to the move as Pollock and Stevens.

State officials wrote the Congressional delegation and demanded that the Katmai withdrawal be

rescinded. Local residents protested the action as well; one fumed, "This latest addition has

absolutely no scenic value." [16]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

So far as is known, bureaucrats took no further action on the boundary expansion. But locals,

who had just had some excellent, accessible hunting and trapping grounds taken away from

them, did not forget. During the 1970s, as an increasing number of voices were raised to

expand the monument yet again, the citizens of Naknek, King Salmon and nearby communities

remained bitter about the 1969 proclamation, and stood implacably opposed to any further

expansion. NPS officials listened to their complaints and tried to sympathize with their plight.

Many, however, felt that the national interest outweighed local concerns. [17]

Katmai Gets a Superintendent

By the time President Johnson made his proclamation, Katmai had been a national monument

for more than 50 years. During the majority of that time, the monument had lacked on-site

administrators of any kind. Since 1950 the level of administration had slowly increased; late

1964 witnessed the creation of the monument's first full-time staff position, and in the spring of

1966 Katmai's ranger-in-charge, Darrell Coe, was elevated to the management assistant level.

That promotion, combined with the establishment of the Alaska Group Office, gave the park

greater independence and management authority than it had previously enjoyed. Thanks to the

efforts of Director George Hartzog, Katmai and the other Alaska NPS units were becoming

increasingly well funded. Personnel levels, which had been meager just a few years before, had

expanded to the point that by 1969 the total staff numbered thirteen. But the 2,697,000-acre

monument was still woefully understaffed; the management assistant remained the only fulltime, permanent appointment. And because Katmai lacked its own superintendent, it was still a

"satellite monument" which was still largely dependent upon officials in McKinley Park and

San Francisco. [18]

During the summer of 1969, Katmai's long period of dependence, at long last, entered its final

hour. Tom Atwood, the monument's management assistant, left the position in May. [19] John

Rutter, the head of the newly-designated Northwest District Office, reacted by contacting

Gilbert Blinn, a district ranger at Death Valley National Monument. Blinn, who had just

completed an ascent of Mount McKinley with fellow NPS employees Paul Haertel and John

Dalle-Molle, was interested in moving to Alaska. He was offered the management assistant's

position in August and assumed the position on September 7, 1969. Eighteen months later, in

March 1971, his position was upgraded to superintendent. His pay and the scope of his

responsibilities, however, were the same as they had been before. [20]

Problems Administering the Monument, 1969-1974

Blinn had no lack of issues with which to deal once he arrived at the monument. Brooks

Camp's garbage was one major concern, because of its effect on bear populations. (This

problem is discussed in detail in Chapter 9.) Another problem he faced was the lack of

continuity in local management. The problem was a long-standing one, because the local NPS

representative had usually served relatively short, two- to three-year stints at the monument.

Blinn solved that problem, in part, by his own longevity; he served as superintendent for almost

ten years.

Dealing with poachers was yet another management headache. Poaching was particularly

frustrating because there was little that Blinn could do about it. Two fellow bureaucrats, Dan

France from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and Bill Pinette from the U.S. Bureau of

Commercial Fisheries (later the National Marine Fisheries Service), were able to identify the

extent of the problem, and even knew the identities of the poachers. But as noted in Chapter 4,

however, the NPS was hamstrung because it had no plane. Making the problem worse was the

local U.S. District Court, which was too overloaded to give adequate emphasis to poaching
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

cases. And the Smolka case of 1966 demonstrated that when convictions could be obtained, the

penalties were often woefully inadequate. [21]

Superintendent Blinn recalled a particularly emotional encounter that underscored his lack of

enforcement ability. In 1971, he held a hearing in Naknek on the master plan which was then

under consideration. At the hearing, a man stood up and said, "You guys have had that

[Shelikof Strait] coastline out there for 50 years and you haven't done a thing with it. It's

obvious you are not managing the park." Blinn could only agree with the prevailing strong

feelings. He was well aware that guides were coming in freely and openly throughout the park,

yet he was denying the locals the chance to go up and get a moose or caribou. [22]

A partial solution to the problem was found in 1972 or 1973 when the NPS obtained the

services of an Anchorage-based Office of Aircraft Services (OAS) plane. Most of the OAS

flying was done in conjunction with the planning effort carried on by the agency's Alaska Task

Force. To assist monument operations, however, the OAS agreed to send one of its pilots, Bud

Small, out on weekly patrols across the monument during hunting season. Stationing observers

in the backcountry, and publicizing their presence, also helped cut down on poaching. But the

problem was not really solved. The wheel-based plane was unable to land anywhere in the

monument, and the radios which the observers used often failed to function properly.

Poaching was finally brought under control in the late 1970s. By 1976, Superintendent Blinn

had become certified as a pilot and owned an OAS-certified Piper Pacer, so he was free to visit

the hinterlands at a moment's notice. The following May, OAS provided the park its own plane-

-a Citabria on floats--and that fall, the OAS replaced it with a Cessna 185 Skywagon floatplane.

A fusillade of hunting-violations cases soon followed. Monument personnel, at long last, were

finally able to enforce the regulations with which they had been entrusted. By the time

Superintendent Blinn left the park in 1979, the monument's anti-poaching program was largely

if not totally successful. [23]

Most of the enforcement activity noted above took place in the lake country west of the

Aleutian Range. But poaching, to an unknown extent, was also taking place along the Shelikof

Strait coastline. Staff reacted by flying out on the coast from time to time; they also camped out

and acted as on-site observers. But no evidence of poaching activities was found. [24]

An oil spill in early 1970 caused additional headaches. In January an unknown source, believed

to be a tanker, discharged between 3,000 and 6,000 gallons of dirty ballast or slop oils

somewhere in the waters of southcentral Alaska. State and federal officials were powerless to

deal with the spillage, and by March the oil had spread from Montague Island, at the entrance to

Prince William Sound, southwest to Shelikof Strait. Some of that oil had come ashore at

Swikshak Bay, on Katmai's eastern shore.

Although oil had probably reached Swikshak Bay in February, National Park Service officials

had no inkling that contamination had occurred there until March 8, when the Federal Water

Quality Administration (FWQA) investigated. Six days later, a second visit revealed that "balls"

of oil had been found on bay beaches. But despite the obvious damage, officials had no baseline

information that could be used to determine if wildlife populations had been effected. It does

not appear, in fact, that NPS officials visited the site during this period. Lacking obvious signs,

such as dead mammals or birds, FWQA concluded that no damage had occurred. [25]

The matter was forgotten for the time being. But recognition that a spill had occurred, and that

even a small spill could be environmentally destructive, awakened NPS concerns about future

oil development in the area. In 1976 Thomas Kleppe, President Ford's Interior Secretary,

proposed an oil and gas lease sale in Lower Cook Inlet. The NPS expressed strong opposition to

such a sale, in large part because of its awareness that oil spilled in the area of the lease sale
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

would likely wash onto the shoreline near Cape Douglas and Kamishak Bay. Before the sale

could take place, however, Ford had been succeeded by Jimmy Carter. Cecil Andrus, President

Carter's choice for Interior Secretary, demanded that the sale be postponed. A sale finally took

place in October 1977; by that time, however, environmental stipulations tempered its

deleterious effects. [26]

Another problem area which had to be dealt with was the lack of up-to-date utilities at Brooks

Camp. During the 1950s, Northern Consolidated Airlines had maintained a rustic atmosphere at

the camp, and amenities relating to water, sewerage, and electricity had been kept to a

minimum. But in July 1954, NCA President Ray Petersen told NPS officials that he was

contemplating the construction of a lodge. He tried to convince the agency to install a utility

system. Regional Director Lawrence Merriam, however, bluntly replied that "it is not feasible

for the Service to provide such facilities for the concessioner, unless and until we have a

development in the immediate vicinity requiring utilities." In 1960, NCA again wrote the

agency, requesting water, power, sewer, and power facilities in conjunction with the lodge it

was planning. A lodge was, in fact, built that year, but the agency remained unwilling to invest

in facilities in support of a concessioner-dominated camp that had only one NPS building and

attracted few independent visitors. [27] As a result, the only NPS utility system was a generator

installed in 1956, and a 500 gallon metal septic tank installed in 1961. The concessioner's utility

system, which dated from the early 1960s, consisted of three cesspools, each five feet square

and six feet deep, together with water and electrical facilities. [28]

With the completion, in 1962, of the road from Brooks Camp to the Valley of Ten Thousand

Smokes, the number of visitors increased. The visitors, many of whom did not fish, required

better facilities than those expected of a fishing camp. It soon became apparent that the existing

infrastructure was obsolete and should be replaced. Shortly after the road was completed, the

Chief Engineer in the San Francisco office wrote a study that indicated major changes were

needed. Recognizing that planners were calling for a 300-350 person lodge, he recommended

that the concessioner needed a $40,000 sewerage system, to consist of a 10,000-gallon septic

tank, a disposal field, and sewer lines. He also recommended a $46,000 well and water system

and a $50,000 electrical generator system. [29]

Soon afterward, NPS officials recognized--as they had a decade earlier--that any utility

improvements intended for the concessioner should include themselves as well. Since 1960 the

agency had constructed several new buildings: a boathouse, a warehouse and various employee

cabins. Recognizing that the future would bring on more buildings, Mt. McKinley National Park

Superintendent Oscar Dick decided to combine the two systems. In 1966, he submitted a

Project Construction Proposal for systems to obtain, treat, store and distribute domestic water,

to collect and treat sewage, and to generate and distribute power. He proposed a leach field for

the treatment of sewage, and two 40-75 kilowatt units for power generation. [30] The PCP

conformed in all aspects to the existing master plan.

The concessioner was glad to hear that the two systems were going to be merged. In

anticipation of that event, NCA's John Walatka approached the NPS in November 1967 and

offered to sell the company's utility system to the agency. NPS officials recognized that the

NCA utility system was rapidly deteriorating; in order to spare further environmental harm,

therefore, the agency purchased the system in March 1969. [31] Thereafter, in return for a fee,

the NPS maintained all sewers for the concessioner except within five feet of the concessionerowned buildings. [32]

In 1967 a new master planning effort was announced. Thereafter, utility system development

was held in abeyance until a new master plan could be completed. [33] The initial draft of the

master plan was finally issued to the public in August 1971. During the ensuing years, sentiment

grew that Brooks Camp should be de-emphasized as a development site. The draft plan,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

therefore, allowed Brooks Camp to grow only to a 100-guest maximum, which was "large

enough to afford a profitable business operation, as well as to update the utility system and

support facilities to comply with current standards and visitor needs." [34] Planners, therefore,

gave a green light for the installation of an improved utility system. Construction, however, had

to await the final version of the master plan.

Meanwhile, engineers firmed up construction plans for the proposed system. In October 1970,

the NPS's Western Service Center, in San Francisco, issued a draft Design Directive for Brooks

Camp. The directive called for a new water supply, new sewer and electrical systems, and other

ancillary developments. The final directive, approved the following February, urged that the

utilities outlined in the 1966 PCP be constructed. The projected cost for the new systems was

$360,000. It was hoped that construction could begin in FY 1972. [35]

Following the preparation of an environmental statement, the NPS, in January 1973, issued a

notice for bids for the project. Specifications included the construction of new water, sewerage,

fuel storage and electrical systems; in addition, the project called for the erection of new boat

docks, landfill fencing and a fish cleaning station. The R. D. Peterson Company won the

$590,000 project. The master plan, by good fortune, was completed that December, and work

was able to commence in May 1974. [36]

The contract was completed in October 1975. During 1974 and 1975, therefore, disrupted

conditions prevailed at Brooks Camp. As Superintendent Blinn recalled the situation, noise

from the construction effort started about six in the morning and went on until ten at night. The

air was often dusty, and a number of trees had to be removed, some to make way for utility line

trenches, others because they grew at the site of the proposed leach field. [37]

Access problems for both planes and boats became an increasing problem during the early

1970s. The use of small powerboats, as noted in Chapter 4, had proven to be a less-than-ideal

method for crossing Brooks River. In addition, airplanes found it difficult to remain at Brooks

Camp because of windy conditions. Construction of a dock at Mortuary Cove was, by now,

deemed unfeasible.

To overcome the difficulties associated with crossing the river, two different planning studies in

the late 1960s called for the construction of a footbridge. [38] By 1971, a Brooks Camp design

directive noted that "a solution to the crossing of this river is necessary if the present concession

bus operation continues." Specifically, it noted that "a trail bridge has been suggested to cross

the Brooks River ... to transport fishermen, sightseers, supplies and solid waste across the river.

The bridge width shall be limited to six feet in order to exclude conventional vehicles." Due to

ecological factors, planners urged that the bridge be located one-quarter to one-half mile

upstream from the river mouth, not at the mouth itself. The report proposed that $176,000 be

spent for bridge construction in the 1972 fiscal year. [39]

When the Brooks Camp utility system was improved in 1974-75, access issues for both boats

and airplanes were not ignored. The construction of an improved dock, to be built near the

mouth of Brooks River, was included in the contract. The dock would provide a safe anchorage

for planes at Brooks Camp and would better service the boat traffic crossing Brooks River. On

the north side of the river the short, linear dock which had existed since the early 1960s was

lengthened from approximately 40 feet to 60 feet. In addition, a 68-foot extension was built on

the west side of the embayment, and a 173-foot extension added to the east side. [40] But the

bridge which had been requested in the 1971 design directive was not included in the utility

system contract.

The early to mid-1970s witnessed a healthy growth in the monument's budget. Between 1969

and 1975, the budget grew from $121,000 to $202,400. The increased budget allowed the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

monument to hire a few new staff. In 1969, just before the arrival of Superintendent Blinn, the

staff was limited to a single management assistant, a maintenance worker, four seasonal

rangers, and a seasonal clerk-typist. By 1975, permanent staff consisted of Blinn, a full-time

park ranger, and a maintenance mechanic. A half-dozen rangers and a clerk-typist worked

during the summer season. [41]

The increased budget also allowed for new improvements. Early on, Blinn hoped to deal with

the indiscriminate parking of vehicles on the south side of Brooks River by levelling out a

parking area away from public view. By the spring of 1971, he announced the impeding

construction of the lot, and urged both Wien Consolidated Airlines (WCA) and National Marine

Fisheries Service personnel to avoid parking near the boat dock except during loading and

unloading operations. The lot was completed in 1972. [42]

New buildings were also added during the period. Included in the Brooks Camp utility contract

was a generator and water treatment building and a fish cleaning building. In addition, the bunk

house used by the construction workers became the monument's visitor center in 1977, and is

presently called the auditorium. At King Salmon, a double-wide mobile home was delivered in

1974; it was used as the residence of the Maintenance Leader. [43]

Preparing a Master Plan and Wilderness Study

As noted in Chapter 4, the NPS issued its Master Plan Brief for Katmai in 1967. The plan was

revised only slightly from the 1965 plan. It was more conservative than before; for instance, it

did not call for an expansion of the monument, either to the north or west.

The conservatism of the 1967 document did not, by any means, indicate that agency personnel

had given up interest in increasing Katmai's acreage. Instead, it meant that NPS planners were

becoming more interested in looking at parklands across the state than merely on a park-bypark basis. In April 1966, the agency opened the Anchorage-based Alaska Field Office. It was

staffed by Harry Smith, a park planner. The office was nominally considered an organizational

arm of Mount McKinley National Park, and was headed by its superintendent. But its purpose

was planning, not operations; in addition, it served to coordinate the NPS's planning activities

with those of the State and other Federal agencies. After 1967, the office increasingly served as

a liaison to the Office of Cooperative Activities in Washington. Planning teams organized in the

Western Service Center in San Francisco spent the next several years preparing master plans for

Alaska's existing park areas. They also studied potential new park units. [44]

In December 1966, park planner Bailey O. Breedlove replaced Smith at the Alaska Field Office.

A year later, he was appointed as the team captain for a new Katmai master plan. Assisted by

team members from the Western Service Center and Mount McKinley National Park, Breedlove

plunged into the creation of a new master plan. He was told to have a draft plan ready by the

fall of 1968. [45]

The creation of the master plan team put new developments, such as a Brooks Camp airstrip or

a new utility system, on hold. It also had the practical effect of extending the concessioner's

contract for only one year at a time; a multi-year contract would probably have included

provisions for capital expenditures by the NPS and/or the concessioner. [46]

Regional officials originally hoped to complete the master plan draft by the end of 1968. Due to

a lack of funding, however, little or no work was accomplished that year. [47]

While planners waited for funding, a major new issue--wilderness--was thrust upon them. Most

of the monument was a de facto wilderness; the only developed areas were Brooks and
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

Grosvenor camps, the Valley road, the area surrounding Lake Camp, and a few scattered cabins

and shelters. During the 1950s and early 1960s, few Alaskans perceived that wilderness--either

in Katmai or elsewhere in Alaska, for that matter--was a valued resource. But the master plan

field study of 1963 clearly stated that wilderness was high on the list of Katmai's virtues. Other

NPS plans, since the early 1950s, had implicitly guarded the monument's wilderness resource as

well. [48]

In 1964, the Congressional passage of the Wilderness Act made wilderness a national issue. It

specifically identified what lands could qualify as wilderness, and set a ten-year timetable by

which Federal agencies had to determine which lands should be considered eligible as

wilderness. In response, the NPS made a crude wilderness determination in its 1965 Master

Plan Brief. Planners concluded that 2,023,890 acres in Katmai--75 percent of its total area--

were eligible for wilderness designation. [49]

Katmai planners ignored wilderness for the next three years. In the spring of 1968, however, the

Washington-based Assistant Director for Cooperative Activities began to worry about

completing the wilderness program on time. Because Katmai was then in the midst of its master

plan effort, he urged the master planning team to incorporate wilderness into its planning effort.

[50]

Breedlove, who now headed a wilderness identification effort as well as a master plan team,

spent the next year assembling a data base on monument resources. In June, he sent his

superiors the fruits of his labors, a massive compendium which was used by planners for years

afterwards. [51]

The master planning effort coalesced slowly, postponing the concessioner's plans for another

year. In the summer of 1969, however, momentum increased. The planning team visited the

monument and began to formulate new concepts on how Katmai should be managed. [52]

The team soon came to recognize that development at Brooks Camp was incompatible with the

wilderness values of the surrounding area and the wildlife values in the camp's vicinity.

Specifically, officials were nervous about the increasing number of bear-human confrontations

taking place in the vicinity. [53] In the short term, however, they condoned development. They

approved of pending utility and docking improvements and agreed that the concessioner needed

a few additional units.

Because of the ecological difficulties, however, the planners sought an alternate development

location and developed a long-range policy of eliminating Brooks Camp as primary visitor

facility. The team recommended that new lodges be established on the northwest shore of

Naknek Lake (to be reached by road from King Salmon) and at Kukak Bay. There were to be

no other overnight accommodations in the monument. [54]

Breedlove was responsible for the selection of an alternate site along the northwest shore of

Naknek Lake. The 1965 and 1967 master plans had called for access into the monument in the

Lake Camp area. Two years of NPS management at Lake Camp, however, had taught the

agency that the site was accessible by boat only from July through freeze up. Prior to that, the

water was too shallow. Breedlove, therefore, looked for a deep water dock along the north side

of the lake. He went so far as to make soundings along the shoreline in order to identify a

specific site where that port might be located. [55]

The events of 1970 seemed as deliberate as those which had taken place the previous two years.

The planning team took another trip to the monument that summer, but did not complete the

plan that year. Wien Consolidated got so miffed at the slow bureaucratic pace that Ray

Petersen, its head, unloaded a well-deserved vitriolic blast at Ernest Borgman, NPS's General

Superintendent for Alaska. The agency, normally cautious, was so apologetic that it acceded to
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

a five-year concession contract, the first it had awarded since 1961. [56] The master plan and

wilderness recommendations were presented to state officials that summer. Toward the end of

the year, the plan was given a final peer review; it preceded the March 1971 circulation of a

preliminary version of the plan. [57]

The public finally saw the draft master plan in August 1971. The plan followed in the same path

expressed by the planning team in 1969; in so doing, it attempted to change the direction of

Katmai development. Just as the 1953 Alaska Recreation Survey, the 1958 Mission 66 Program

proposals, and the 1965 Master Plan brief had done, the plan proposed a geographical

diversification of monument facilities (see Map 6). It proposed that the monument's major "usenode" and transportation hub would be located on or near the boot-shaped Naknek Peninsula,

and that a new all-weather road would be constructed from King Salmon to the site. Most

visitors would arrive at the site via a shuttle bus. Other proposed use nodes would be the Bay of

Islands, Kukak Bay, and Research Bay, the latter site being located on the south side of Iliuk

Arm. The plan envisioned that Geographic Harbor would become a secondary development,

while Brooks Camp would be a tertiary development. Lodging was proposed for all six sites.

The existing Grosvenor Camp facility, however, was scheduled to be replaced by a seasonal

ranger station and a campground. All six lodging sites were to be accessed by tour boats as well

as floatplanes. The new plan had some similarities to the 1965 and 1967 plans, but it differed in

that it called for lodging on the Naknek Peninsula, at Research Bay, and at Geographic Harbor.

[58]

Map 6. In August 1971, the NPS released a preliminary working draft of the

monument's master plan. It called for the largest development site to be located on the

Naknek Peninsula, with other large developments at King Salomon, Research Bay,

Bay of Islands, and Kukak Bay. The existing development sites, Brooks Camp and

Grosvenor Camp, were to be de-emphasized. Source: NPS, Katmai National

Monument, A Master Plan, August 1971, 17. (click image for an enlargement in a

new window)

Another new element was its attempt to de-emphasize the future role of Brooks Camp. Because

of ecological considerations, the principal long-range objective for the area was a reduction in
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

the number of visitors to that area. While conceding that Brooks would "remain a popular

fisherman's camp," planners vowed that it would remain the gateway to the Valley of Ten

Thousand Smokes only until an alternate site was developed at Research Bay. Over the short

term, planners continued to tacitly recommend that the camps grow in a virtually unhindered

manner. They intended to allow Brooks Camp to grow to a 100-guest maximum, which was

"large enough to afford a profitable business operation, as well as to update the utility system

and support facilities to comply with current standards and visitor needs." [59]

Though there was broad agreement in the general thrust of the proposed master plan, agency

personnel questioned many specific aspects of it. Specific sites for the Naknek Peninsula and

Research Bay developments had not been established; even so, criticism quickly surfaced that

most of the Naknek Peninsula was too windy and exposed for development, and that the water

depth at both sites was too shallow to allow boat or plane access. Regarding the Bay of Islands

site, some felt that its resource value was too great to allow commercial development. Also,

some felt that the Service's plan to eliminate Grosvenor Camp was fine in theory, but that "the

prospects of removing this camp ... are remote." [60]

The preliminary Katmai wilderness study was issued at the same time as the draft master plan.

The plan called for two areas to be designated as wilderness: one tract covering 2,551,000 acres,

and a smaller one which encompassed just 2,100 acres. The first tract covered most of the

Katmai's land area, and additionally included Lake Coville, Idavain Lake, various smaller lakes

in the eastern monument, and the islands in Shelikof Strait. The 2,100 acre tract was a narrow

corridor which extended between the Valley Road and Naknek Lake. The two proposed

wilderness areas comprised over 91 percent of the monument.

Planners were careful to exclude from wilderness any areas that might interfere with proposed

developments contemplated in the master plan. Naknek Lake, Brooks Lake, and Lake

Grosvenor were excluded because the concessioner used them; indeed, Naknek Lake was being

proposed for motorized boat use. The Valley road was also excluded, as was Naknek Peninsula

and the shoreline connecting the peninsula to King Salmon. [61]

Alaskans were given a broad opportunity to comment on both the master plan and the

wilderness study. On November 17 and 18, the NPS held public hearings in Anchorage; on

November 19 and 20, the meetings shifted to Juneau. Master plan hearings for both Katmai and

Glacier Bay were held on the 17th and 19th; wilderness hearings for the two monuments took

place on the 18th and 20th. Participants submitted most of the Katmai testimony at the

Anchorage meetings or in written statements submitted in the weeks which followed. [62] The

agency also held a hearing in Naknek for Bristol Bay Borough residents. [63]

The NPS received a wide spectrum of comments to its proposals, mostly in response to the

wilderness study. The bureau received over 200 letters in addition to the 30-odd statements

presented at the hearings. Most favored placing broad restrictions on development activity at the

monument. More than 85 percent of the letters supported either the NPS wilderness proposal,

conservation-organization proposals (which suggested that the Bay of Islands and most of Lake

Grosvenor be added to the NPS wilderness proposal), or various independent proposals which

suggested more wilderness than the NPS had proposed. Almost three-fifths of the speakers at

the hearings expressed similar viewpoints. [64]

Lovers of wilderness, therefore, finally got their opportunity to show support for Katmai's

wilderness. The monument was singular in that it still had the largest land area of any unit in

the National Park System. The public, moreover, had the opportunity to reserve over 90 percent

of the monument as wilderness. Katmai, however, did not have the tourist accessibility or the

awe-inspiring lure that brought forth large numbers of advocates in support of wilderness for

Mount McKinley or Glacier Bay. [65] While NPS officials had been well aware of Katmai's
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

wilderness resource for a decade or more, few advocates of conservation or outdoor recreation

spoke out for it. A notable exception to the norm was Dave Bohn, who extensively explored the

monument in the mid-1970s. As a result of his travels, and in celebration of the raw wilderness

he had encountered, he published Rambles in an Alaskan Wild in 1979. In eloquent, glowing

terms, Bohn described Katmai as one of the great American wilderness areas. [66] But most

conservationists, who by this time were immersed in a legislative battle over the fate of

Alaska's wild lands, seemed far more concerned about the Brooks Range, the area surrounding

Mount McKinley, the Wrangell-St. Elias area, and other wilderness tracts.

While conservationists, many of whom lived outside the state, gave strong support to

wilderness, most Alaskans opposed making the vast majority of the monument off-limits to

potential park service development actions. Governor William A. Egan, for instance, was one of

several that demanded that the NPS reserve a corridor for a future highway route across the

monument, and also called for a reservation for a future ferry terminal at Geographic Harbor.

[67] Egan and others also demanded the right to hunt wolves and otherwise manipulate wildlife

populations. Finally, Egan joined many Alaskans who opposed wilderness philosophically. The

Alaska Miners' Association, for instance, bridled against any proposed actions that would limit

access to the mining fraternity, and the Pioneers of Alaska detested "the creation of Federal

lands that under law would provide enjoyment for only a select few." [68]

Wien Consolidated Airlines, the monument concessioner, had mixed feelings about the draft

plans. It protested the proposed closure of Idavain Lake and the majority of Lake Coville and,

like Governor Egan, it urged the construction of a trans-peninsula road. But it supported the

idea of the Naknek Peninsula development site, supported the closure of the western end of

Lake Coville, and urged the NPS to add the Bay of Islands area to the proposed wilderness

acreage. [69]

The hearings held in Anchorage and Juneau were tame in comparison with that held in Naknek.

Locals were still angry over the 1969 monument expansion, and were in no mood to reasonably

respond to calls for greater land-use controls over the monument. Gil Blinn, who conducted the

meeting, remembered that "People didn't want to talk about the master plan. They wanted to talk

about how to abolish the whole park. The locals talked about how their ancestors, their fathers

had hunted and trapped up there and that was a right that was being denied them." [70]

One of the meeting participants was Jay Hammond, the state senator from Naknek. Hammond,

as noted in Chapter 4, had fought the park service all through the 1960s because he had

advocated the construction of a road through the monument. By 1971, he was still a stalwart

backer of the road and wrote an eloquent, impassioned letter to Governor Egan in defense of a

trans-monument route. At the hearings themselves, however, he did an abrupt about-face.

Superintendent Blinn, remembering that day, recalled that "When [the hearing] was all done he

came up and he shook my hand and he says, 'I think the Park Service is just doing exactly what

needs to be done.' He couldn't say that publicly, I'm sure. But it was really nice to feel that there

was some support there from him." [71]

The hearings brought to the surface what locals had been thinking all along. Residents of

Naknek and King Salmon, Native and non-Native alike, saw the monument as a place where

they were not welcome, where they couldn't hunt, trap, or fish. They saw all the visitors coming

into the park but they felt that the money was all going to the Anchorage-based concessioner,

with little impact on the local economy. [72]

ANCSA and the d-2 Process

Once the hearings concluded, Park Service officials got ready to consider the wealth of data
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

provided to them. To a large extent, the future of much of the monument was about to be

decided over the next few months. Before the comment period closed, however, Congress

passed a bill which would shed a significant amount of new light on the master plan and

wilderness study, and promised major changes on how the monument and the surrounding areas

were to be managed.

The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) passed Congress, and on December 18,

1971, President Richard Nixon signed it into law. The bill had been a long time coming. As

early as 1966, Congress had begun to recognize that a bill "dealing with Alaska Natives' land

problems" was needed. At about the same time, the Secretary of the Interior, as if in agreement,

ordered the large-scale land freeze. Bills intending to deal with Native concerns had little

chance for passage at first, but the remarkable discovery of oil on Alaska's north slope,

announced in March 1968, made legislators realize that the Native land question had to be

settled. The major oil companies soon concluded that a north-south pipeline was the most

expeditious way to get the product to market. Without a land settlement, they knew that no

pipeline would ever be laid across the Yukon River valley. [73]

Over the next three years, the bill which became ANCSA was debated with growing intensity.

Its original purpose was to determine which lands should be allotted to Alaska's Natives, and

how state land selections would be determined based on Native claims. It soon became

apparent, however, that a third element--a national interest lands component--should be

included as a provision within whatever bill emerged from the Congress.

This study is not the place to determine how ANCSA evolved from a bill into Public Law 92-

203. What emerged from the process was a document which recognized the rights of Alaska's

Natives to 40,000,000 acres of land, and also paid them $925,500,000 for extinguishment of all

previous aboriginal titles or claims to those titles. Most germane to Alaska's national park units,

section 17(d)(2) of the act gave the Secretary of the Interior authority to withdraw up to

80,000,000 acres as so-called "national interest" lands. These lands were to be managed as

national parks, national forests, national wildlife refuges, or as wild and scenic rivers. In

addition, section 17(d)(1) called for the withdrawal of other public interest lands in the state,

asking the Secretary to "review the public lands in Alaska and determine whether any portion of

these lands should be withdrawn ... to insure that the public interest ... is properly protected."

[74]

The act provided a series of timetables under which the various withdrawals were to be made.

The Secretary of the Interior was given just 90 days to withdraw lands under the so-called "d-1"

provision, and nine months to withdraw lands under the "d-2" provision. Lands not withdrawn

would become available for selection by the State of Alaska or for appropriation under the

public land laws. Two years after the act, any lands withdrawn under the "d-2" provision that

were not recommended as future national parks, refuges, forests, or wild and scenic rivers

would be released for other uses. The areas that were so recommended as parks or other

reservations had to be created within seven years after the act's passage; otherwise, the land

would be released for other uses. [75]

With the passage of ANCSA, therefore, Department officials realized that they had a major

planning effort on their hands. Three days after the act was signed, the Assistant Secretary

assigned NPS Director Hartzog and the head of the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife to

begin the process of identifying and prioritizing lands for preservation. Hartzog, in turn, asked

Ted Swem, the Assistant Director for Cooperative Activities, to coordinate NPS efforts. He

asked Richard Stenmark, from the agency's Alaska Field Office, to help in those efforts. [76]

Regarding Katmai, Swem and Stenmark had several models upon which they could base

recommendations for acreage expansion. The 1952-53 boundary studies, the Operation Great
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

Land study of 1964-65, and the 1965 Master Plan Brief had all suggested that the monument be

expanded to both the north and west. The western expansion had been enacted in 1969. During

the final stages in the legislative battle that led to ANCSA, Director Hartzog delineated 27

proposed NPS areas in the state. Most were proposals for new units, but additions to Mount

McKinley and to the north side of Katmai were also included. [77]

Stenmark traveled to Washington in early January 1972, and just two days later he laid out a

preliminary list of twelve new or expanded natural areas and ten cultural areas. The list called

for a 900,000-acre expansion of Katmai National Monument. That list wended its way through

the Interior Department, and on March 9, just before the 90-day deadline imposed by ANCSA,

Secretary of the Interior Rogers Morton made a preliminary withdrawal of 47.1 million acres for

d-1 purposes and another 80 million acres of d-2 lands. A slightly modified list, announced on

March 15, included over 33 million acres of new NPS acreage; among them was 1,218,490

acres of additions to Katmai National Monument. [78] The withdrawal, more than 300,000

acres larger than the amount roughed out in January, was significant because it was the first

proposal that called for additions to land south and southwest of the monument.

Predictably, the announced withdrawals brought forth wide disparities of opinion.

Conservationists reacted fairly favorably to them. NPS Director Hartzog, however, thought that

they were "a complete disaster" because many potential park areas were allotted to the Bureau

of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. Alaskan leaders, for entirely different reasons, were also

strongly opposed; one called it a "massive land grab," while another said the withdrawal

"staggers the imagination." [79]

The NPS and other Interior agencies spent the next six months fine-tuning the preliminary

selections they had made in March. Recognizing that a long-term land planning effort lay

ahead, the NPS appointed Albert G. Henson, a planner, to head a 38-member Alaska Task

Force (ATF) which worked in the Washington office. The regional office (in Seattle) and the

Alaska Field Office (in Anchorage) provided support services to the ATF, while the Denver

Service Center provided specialized technical support. The roles of the ATF and the existing

staff hierarchy, predictably, often overlapped; five members of the ATF, for instance, were

permanently stationed at the Alaska Field Office. [80]

The ATF was given the task of ensuring that the September 1972 withdrawals included the best

lands available. Time, however, was preciously short. It assembled in Anchorage in early June,

and after a month of intense field work made its first tentative recommendation. The task force

suggested that Katmai should be increased by 1,584,740 acres--more than 350,000 acres larger

than that recommended in March. [81]

Field work continued for another two months, and on September 13, just before the nine-month

deadline imposed by ANCSA, the Secretary announced the recommended withdrawals. Among

them were additions to Katmai National Monument totalling 1,411,900 acres. The potential new

parklands by this time formed a long, C-shaped band which girdled all but the eastern side of

the monument. [82]

Interest in Katmai's resources, at least within the agency, seemed to grow as task force members

learned more about the area. Because few organized groups or agencies showed much interest

in the lands surrounding Katmai, and because there were few competing uses for land outside

the monument, the momentum created by task force personnel soon manifested itself in

proposals to expand the monument. Gil Blinn, the first Katmai superintendent, remembers that

the monument had little outside interest or support when he arrived there in 1969; it was "still

unknown except in the National Geographic Magazines." Annual visitation beyond Lake Camp

was less than 2000 per year. "Frankly," he noted, "there wasn't much support for it. Just because

nobody knew of it." [83] In November 1971, the NPS had made a first-cut recommendation of
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

900,000 acres. During the ensuing ten months, however, that recommendation had grown to

over 1,400,000 acres. More study of the area, as shall be seen, would increase the recommended

acreage even further.

Katmai Issues a Master Plan

The stipulations in ANCSA demanded that by December 18, 1973, the Secretary of the Interior

make legislative recommendations to Congress on the 80,000,000 acres it had withdrawn in

September 1972. Conceptual master plans that would delineate management proposals for the

proposed areas, environmental statements, and detailed legislative support data for each area,

would also have to be completed by December 1973. [84]

The requirements of the act created confusion for those who were responsible for the

completion of a Katmai master plan. As noted above, a master plan and wilderness study for the

national monument had been in the preparation phase since the late 1960s, and hearings on the

drafts of both documents had been completed just a month before ANCSA was signed into law.

Park Service officials recognized that ANCSA required that master plans be completed only for

proposed areas. But in Katmai's case, it seemed quite illogical to create a master plan for only

the narrow, C-shaped "ring" which surrounded the existing monument. The agency, therefore,

decided shortly after the September 1972 withdrawals to use the information contained in the

draft monument master plan as the basis for creating a master plan for an expanded monument.

The ongoing wilderness study was thus handled differently from the master plan work. Until

this time, the master plan and wilderness study efforts had gone hand in hand; the two draft

reports were prepared at the same time, and hearings on them were held on consecutive days.

But ANCSA did not require that the Department of the Interior make any wilderness studies.

The two efforts, therefore, were separated. The master plan, produced by Washington-based

planners, covered the existing monument plus new areas proposed by the Department of the

Interior. The final wilderness study was produced through the Pacific Northwest Regional

Office, and covered only the area in the existing monument. The process which created the

master plan is discussed below; the creation of the final wilderness study is discussed in the

next section.

In the weeks following the November 1971 hearings, Katmai National Monument's master

planning team busied itself in responding to the broad range of oral and written testimony. The

revised plan was sent up the bureaucratic ladder, and in March 1972 NPS Director Hartzog

approved it. [85] Several months later, however, the regional office completed its final

wilderness recommendations for the monument, necessitating a few minor changes in the plan.

Personnel at NPS's Alaska State Office were told that the plan still needed an environmental

statement in order to be considered final. That statement was scheduled to be submitted to the

Washington office on October 1, 1972. Not for another month, however, was John Rutter, the

regional director, able to sign off on a completed master plan and wilderness study. [86]

On September 12, just before Secretary Morton made his 1.4 million acre Katmai withdrawal,

Al Henson of the Alaska Task Force announced that the NPS was commencing a planning

effort for an area well beyond the existing monument boundaries. Secretary Morton, in his

September 18 withdrawals, called for additions to Katmai National Monument. Henson,

however, declared that "The status of Katmai National Monument should be enhanced by

changing its name to Katmai National Park." Henson gave three reasons for supporting an

enlarged monument: 1) to include important brown bear habitat, 2) to realign boundaries to

include headwaters of all rivers presently contained in the monument, and 3) to make Katmai a

more representative example of the several landforms and biological systems found on the

upper Alaska Peninsula by including a major section of lowland tundra. He justified national
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

park status for Katmai because it would 1) increase assurance that the area will remain as

inviolate as legislative mandates allow, 2) increase public awareness of Katmai's values through

the increases in publicity for the area that will be generated by park establishment, and 3) meet

requests of conservation groups and recommendations of Secretary of the Interior's Advisory

Board on National Parks and Monuments. [87] The proposal to expand Katmai was to go

through many hurdles during the next eight years, but the NPS consistently called the expanded

unit Katmai National Park after Henson announced the name change, and other groups did as

well. [88]

Alaska Task Force members continued their efforts for the remainder of the year. Then, in

January 1973, Assistant Secretary Nathaniel Reed announced that all Department planning

efforts would henceforth be conducted by the Alaska Planning Group (APG), an ad hoc group

which consisted of planners from the various Interior agencies. The NPS Alaska Task Force,

which had been created the previous year, retained a nominal identity but was subsumed into

the APG. NPS planners in the new group took the reins in developing the master plan for

Katmai National Park. [89]

Because the master plan for the existing monument had already been finalized, and because

there were few land-use conflicts in areas being considered for park expansion, one of the few

major tasks facing the Katmai planners was the amount of acreage to add. By mid-March 1973,

a preliminary master plan and draft environmental statement had been completed. The bold new

plan called for an addition of 2,301,000 acres to the existing monument. As he had the previous

September, Henson justified the rationale for expanding the monument and reclassifying it as a

national park. He hoped that "Katmai would be a pure park and [have] no provision for mining,

hunting or other resource extraction." [90]

John Rutter, the Regional Director in Seattle, received a copy of the mid-March report. He did

not like what he saw. He had no quibble with the size of the proposed new park. His criticism

was with the lack of consistency it bore to the planning efforts which had been taking place in

the regional office for the past several years. He found numerous instances in which the APG's

plan ran contrary to decisions made in the formulation of both the master plan and wilderness

study. The APG, for instance, abandoned the idea that Naknek Peninsula should become

Katmai's major transportation hub, and it also concluded that Brooks Camp should be

eliminated. Rutter, who had overseen the creation of both the master plan and the wilderness

study, was angry at having both decisions overridden. He was particularly angry when the APG

suggested that a whole new wilderness study--one that included proposed as well as existing

NPS lands--ought to be conducted. [91] Stung by the regional director, the APG modified its

plans to fit in with those which already existed.

The Katmai plan was one of the first which the APG produced. By mid-June 1973, the Interior

Department planning group had made tentative recommendations for each of Alaska's new and

expanded NPS units. Not surprisingly, groups outside the Department saw things differently.

The Forest Service, for instance, hoped that it might be awarded a whopping 42,000,000 of the

80,000,000 acres included in the d-2 provision. Another group, the Joint Federal-State Land Use

Planning Commission (JFSLUPC), proposed a complex patchwork of uses on d-2 lands; it

recommended, for instance, that only 3,000,000 acres be closed to hunters. The JFSLUPC,

which had been created by ANCSA, held over thirty hearings in Alaskan communities on the

various proposals. [92]

The pressure of outside interests succeeded in watering down the Alaska Planning Group's

earlier proposals. In June, the APG had recommended that 49.1 million out of 85.3 million

acres be placed in National Park Service areas. When Secretary Morton forwarded the proposed

legislation to Congress on December 18, however, only 32.6 million of 83.5 million acres were

recommended as new or expanded NPS areas. Katmai National Park, which in June was
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

proposed to be expanded by 2,301,000 acres, had its expanded area reduced to 1,867,863 acres.

In addition, however, the NPS recommended that so-called areas of ecological concern be

established west, north, and northeast of the existing monument. [93]

On December 18, 1973 (the deadline set by ANCSA), the Alaska Planning Group issued a

master plan and a draft Environmental Impact Statement for Katmai National Park. The master

plan, which had been in the incubation stages since the 1960s, had originally been intended to

be a final master plan for the monument. But because of the proposed new parkland that was

also considered since the passage of ANCSA, the 1973 master plan was a strange hybrid, a

combination of a draft and final plan. To a large extent, the master plan served as a final master

plan for the existing monument and provided only a rough, general idea on how the agency

planned its management strategy. The draft Environmental Impact Statement, however,

concentrated on areas outside the existing monument, and discussed such issues as how large

the new park should be and what land uses should be allowed within the newly-expanded

acreage. [94]

The master plan, which reflected the concerns that Regional Director Rutter had expressed in

March 1973, offered several modifications from those originally presented in the August 1971

draft volumes. It noted, for instance, that the park's major visitor facility was to include lodgetype accommodations at the west end of the park. The Naknek Peninsula, though admittedly a

preferred site, was only one of three possible locations for that development; the other two sites

were in King Salmon and on "the morainal ridge at the West End of Naknek Lake." Research

Bay and Kukak Bay were both designated as primary development sites, as they had been in

1971. The role of Research Bay, however, was de-emphasized, having been "tentatively

selected as a possible visitor use-node" which "could become the gateway to the Valley of Ten

Thousand Smokes." Grosvenor Camp, which had been slated for replacement by a ranger

station in the 1971 plan, was allowed to remain. But the Bay of Islands development was

renamed North Arm and moved west several miles. Regarding Brooks Camp, the antidevelopment rhetoric of the draft plan was replaced with more conciliatory language; it noted

that "Further study is needed to determine the role of Brooks Camp and to stress the need of

maintaining the camp's impact on the environment." The 100-guest ceiling suggested in the

draft plan remained. Although the plan continued to suggest that Research Bay would

eventually replace Brooks Camp as the base for bus trips to the Valley of Ten Thousand

Smokes, the growing recognition that "conventional lodge or hotel-type units" were not

appropriate to the vast majority of the park militated against the growth of facilities which

might have supplanted those at Brooks Camp. This plan, like the 1971 draft, proposed shuttle

bus service to the west-end development site, and tour boats or charter float planes to the other

lakeside developments. [95]

The 1974 Final Wilderness Statement

As noted above, the NPS issued a draft wilderness study for Katmai National Monument in

August 1971, the same month it issued a draft master plan. Public hearings for both were held

that November. Soon after the mid-December passage of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement

Act, it became evident that the monument was going to be enlarged. The act, in fact, mandated

that a master plan be issued which encompassed proposed new monument boundaries.

Wilderness, however, was not specifically addressed in ANCSA. Planners operating out of the

Washington office prepared the master plan, while staffers at the Pacific Northwest Regional

Office in Seattle prepared the final wilderness statement.

The NPS did what it could to respond favorably to the written and oral comments it received.

Because most of the comments supported the protection of all of the NPS-recommended

wilderness acreage (if not more), the revised draft plan continued to have a large percentage of
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

the monument recommended as wilderness. In response to comments from Alaskan officials

who demanded the right to manipulate wildlife populations, the NPS responded that such

management was not incompatible with wilderness. And to those who demanded a site for a

future ferry dock in Geographic Harbor, planners responded that such a site had been excluded

from consideration as wilderness. [96]

The Park Service also tried to be accommodating to the monument concessioner. Wien, as well

as national conservation groups, had testified that the Bay of Islands area should be added to the

proposed wilderness; the NPS, which had had its own misgivings about development at the site,

concurred and moved the potential use node west to an area it called North Arm. Wien also

testified that much of the motorboat and float plane traffic emanating from Grosvenor Camp

headed down Lake Coville, and the NPS responded by removing the lake from wilderness. But

the NPS also moved to protect the wilderness qualities of the Savonoski canoe loop by placing

all but the western end of Lake Grosvenor in the proposed wilderness. Wien was unsuccessful

in removing the proposed closure for Idavain Lake. [97]

The most vociferous protests came from those who demanded that the agency create a corridor

for a future trans-peninsula highway. Governor William A. Egan, Wien Consolidated, State

Senator Jay Hammond, and boroughs on both sides of Cook Inlet all fought to keep a road

corridor open. [98]

The battle was joined much as it had been during the mid-1960s. On one side stood the

National Park Service, who held that a road would violate the values for which the monument

was created. It also argued that there were other trans-peninsula routes that did not impact on

the monument, and that the nature of the volcanic substrate was such that any road built through

Katmai Pass would be extremely expensive to build and maintain. On the other side stood state

and local interests who saw the road as a key to regional economic development. They felt that

a road through the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes would have little effect on monument

values, and that a road connecting the end of the Valley road with Geographic Harbor was the

least expensive route across the peninsula. The nature of the controversy allowed no common

ground between them.

In response to the many protests directed its way, the NPS had two effective replies. First, the

Director of the agency had consistently gone on record as opposing the road because it did not

serve any of the primary purposes of the monument. Second, the Alaska Department of

Highways had, sometime between 1968 and 1971, removed the conceptual proposal for the road

from its road construction program. The reason for the deletion is unclear; it may have been

related to a possible copper mining development near Lake Clark, or it may have been a simple

response to the Park Service's "outright refusal" to consider the route. Regardless of the reason,

the primary state road study route connecting King Salmon with Cook Inlet swept north of

Iliamna Lake. (Alternate state road study routes followed along the south shore of Iliamna Lake,

and southeast from King Salmon to Alinchak Bay via the north shore of Becharof Lake.) NPS

officials were able to deflect the brunt of public criticism by transferring it back to the state

highway department. [99]

State officials, stung by the Park Service's rebuke on the road issue, apparently tried to revive

the idea by showing federal officials the breadth of interest in the issue. The intended route

would not be an extension of the existing Valley road, but instead would go across the north

side of Naknek Lake from King Salmon, cross over the Aleutian Range, and come out at a

proposed Kukak Bay ferry terminal. Gil Blinn recalled that

when they had a hearing in Naknek on the idea, only ten people testified. The

Bristol Bay Borough, the Kenai Peninsula Borough and the State Highways

Division all testified in favor. Ernie Borgman came out representing the Park
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

Service, from Anchorage, and testified against it. A number of the local people and

people from Iliamna came out and testified against any road, although most of them

said if you're gonna have to put in a road we'd prefer it be through the park. They

also felt that the Park Service could control the use and development along that

road better than if the road ran through some other lands.

Blinn himself appears to have been a catalyst in subduing the pro-road forces. Before the

hearings, he called the Bristol Bay Borough manager and asked if he would accept written

comment. The manager replied in the affirmative because many could not get to the meeting.

Blinn therefore "put the word out to the environmental community and they got a number of

letters all opposing the road. And after that hearing the matter was just dropped. It never

surfaced again." [100]

Potential power development was another activity which, like road proposals, had ramifications

on wilderness eligibility. During the early 1960s, the Bureau of Reclamation had identified one

potential power site in the monument (and two others just beyond its borders) among 15

potential sites in southwestern Alaska. Lake Grosvenor was considered a potential hydroelectric

project site of 8,700 kilowatt prime capacity. A dam at American Creek, just north of the

monument, was thought to have a prime capacity of 14,300 kilowatts, and a Nonvianuk Lake

site might generate 27,300 kilowatts. None of the three sites, however, were in the top echelon

of those surveyed in southwestern Alaska. [101]

In 1969 the Federal Power Survey, sponsored by the Federal Power Commission, identified

many new sites for hydroelectric power production throughout the state. An inventory grade

preliminary study of the area by the Alaska Power Administration (APA), completed in 1972,

agreed that the best potential dam site in the area was on the Naknek River, approximately six

miles below Naknek Lake. Such a dam, if built, "could provide significant power supplies for

the King Salmon and Naknek areas," and offered an installed capacity of 108,000 kilowatts. It

would also, however, raise the level of Naknek Lake 116 feet, it would block the passage of

salmon into the Naknek Lake watershed, and would impact on a significant amount of NPS

land. The NPS was not considering Naknek Lake for wilderness designation, and the potential

dam site was outside of monument boundaries. But raising the lake level would raise the level

of the monument's four largest lakes--making one large reservoir in the western monument--and

would inundate both of the existing visitor facilities.

Recognizing the adverse effects it would create, the APA made no detailed studies of the

project. In May 1973 it effectively opted out of the project when it told the NPS that "any future

consideration of this development would depend upon a finding that the project is compatible

with Monument objectives and other values." [102] Potential power developments were no

longer a threat to wilderness eligibility.

It took NPS planners six months to issue their first response to the various public comments. In

May 1972, the NPS issued a preliminary, in-house response to the public testimony. The

revised wilderness plan called for two tracts, one of 2,541,890 acres, the other of 2,000 acres.

During the past six months, planners had added 3,540 acres, including the Bay of Islands and a

small island in Lake Grosvenor. Perhaps at the suggestion of WCA president Ray Petersen, the

agency had eliminated wilderness on Lake Coville; they had also deleted small amounts of

acreage surrounding various proposed development sites. The result was a net loss of 9,210

acres from the draft study. [103]

Two months later, the NPS released the results of the wilderness study to the public. Between

May and July, more changes were made, and the July 1972 plan recommended a total of

2,603,547 acres for wilderness: 2,601,547 in one tract, and 2,000 in the other. Added to the

proposed wilderness was all but the west end of Lake Grosvenor. In addition, the NPS added a
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

narrow "management zone" bordering the park, which had been excluded from wilderness in

the earlier drafts, and agreed to include a series of existing and proposed shelter sites in the

wilderness, conceding that such improvements were compatible with wilderness management.

The July plan, in comparison with the one submitted in November 1971, added 63,187 acres to

wilderness while deleting 12,740, for a net gain of 50,447 acres. [104]

Once the plan was issued, Park Service officials felt that the plan was final, and needed only to

await an appropriate time in which the President could send its recommendations to Congress.

A reviewer in the Secretary of the Interior's office, however, found several technical difficulties

in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) on the wilderness plan. [105] The procedural errors

were sufficiently egregious that he urged the FES to be renamed a revised draft. The NPS,

therefore, spent the next several months revising the earlier report. The regional office issued a

revised draft environmental statement on February 12, 1973. That document continued to

propose 2,603,547 acres in the monument as wilderness. [106]

Reviewers were given another three months in which to respond, and many of the same

organizations which had commented before submitted another round of comments. The result of

the organizational input may have had some bearing on the verbiage that was to appear in the

Final Environmental Statement, but the NPS continued to recommend the same wilderness

acreage that it had in July 1972. [107] The revised DES was then sent on to the Council on

Environmental Quality (CEQ), to be submitted to the President.

The CEQ worked on the Final Environmental Statement early in 1974. The Council had

originally hoped that it would be able to include Katmai in a mid-April presidential wilderness

announcement. Katmai's FES was slow in coming, however, and as a result, the president's

wilderness message was delayed for two months. [108]

On June 13, 1974, President Richard Nixon proposed wilderness for fifteen public land areas to

Congress. Among them was a recommendation that 2,603,547 acres be so designated in Katmai

National Monument. Also forwarded to Congress that day were wilderness proposals for two

Alaska national wildlife refuges, Semidi and Aleutian Islands; within the two refuges, 1,229,000

acres were proposed for wilderness. [109]

The Department of the Interior Considers an Expanded Park

As noted above, Congress (as part of ANCSA) gave the National Park Service and other land

management agencies the task of studying Alaska lands for their potential value as parklands,

refuges, national forests, and similar reservations. As part of that effort, officials in NPS's

Washington office began to rough out the boundaries for an expanded Katmai National

Monument in early 1972. By September of that year, in response to a series of Congressional

deadlines, they had sketched out a proposed 1.4 million acre expansion to the monument.

Beginning that month, NPS officials decided that Katmai would be recommended as a national

park. In 1972 and 1973, the Alaska Task Force--at first an ad hoc group directed by the

Washington office, later as one part of an Interior-wide Alaska Planning Group--investigated

the applicability of various lands surrounding the monument as potential NPS additions.

The public had several opportunities to comment on the advisability of establishing an

expanded Katmai National Park. Its first was in May and June 1973. The Joint Federal-State

Land Use Planning Commission, which had been created by ANCSA, held over thirty hearings

in Alaskan communities (and four others in Lower 48 cities) on proposals being considered for

a broad array of national parks, wildlife refuges, national forests and similar reservations.

Hearing locations where testimony was presented that related directly to Katmai included

Naknek, Kodiak, Dillingham, Iliamna, and Anchorage, as well as Seattle, San Francisco,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

Denver, and Washington, D.C. [110]

The testimony from the hearings was combined with the information gathered by Alaska Task

Force and Alaska Planning Group members to create a Draft Environmental Impact Statement

(DEIS) for the proposed park. This document, issued in December 1973 in conformance with

the guidelines set by ANCSA, called for the establishment of a 4,600,000-acre Katmai National

Park, one that was to be 1,870,000 acres larger than the existing monument (see Map 7). The

proposed park boundaries included all but the mouth of the Strike Creek and Kamishak River

drainages, all of the American Creek drainage, all but the mouth of the King Salmon Creek

drainage, and most of the King Salmon River and Kejulik River drainages. The boundary

extended the southern boundary along Shelikof Strait south to Puale Bay, and followed the

entire northern shore of Becharof Lake. Kulik Lake was to be included in the proposal, but not

Nonvianuk Lake or Battle Lake. [111]

Map 7. When the NPS released its draft Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed

Katmai National Park in December 1973, the proposed park boundaries (heavy black line)

encompassed 4,600,000 acres-far larger area than the size of the existing national monument

(heavy dashed line). The agency also proposed three areas of environmental concern (light

dashed line): tow north of the proposed park boundaries and another west of the park. Source:

Alaska Planning Group, Proposed Katmai National Park, Alaska, Draft Environmental Impact

Statement, 3. (click image for an enlargement in a new window)

In addition, the NPS recommended that three so-called areas of ecological concern (AECs) be

established: a 560,000-acre tract west of the proposed park, a 740,000-acre tract to the north,

and a 40,000-acre tract southeast of the McNeil River State Game Sanctuary. These areas would

serve as buffers to the park, and would be "managed so as to complement the purposes of the

park." [112]

The public was originally given until March 20, 1974 (later extended to July 22) to comment on

the DEIS. The Alaska Planning Group received 218 letters, 162 of them from individuals, the

remainder from governmental agencies and private organizations. [113] Because the JFSLUPC

had held such a wide range of hearings just a year before, no additional hearings were held on

the DEIS. A Senate subcommittee, however, had a hearing in Anchorage, as part of a series of

mark up hearings, in which the Katmai extension was discussed. [114]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

The Final Environmental Statement for the proposed Katmai National Park was issued in

January 1975. [115] It called for a slightly smaller park than that proposed in the December

1973 draft (see Map 8). The FES proposal recommended that Congress establish a 4,453,000-

acre park: the 2,399,000 acres in the lands and waters of the existing park, and an additional

2,054,000 acres of lands and waters adjacent to it. Three-fourths of the new acreage was to

come from d-2 lands, and another 22 percent was selected from d-1 lands. The remaining

acreage came from Native and state lands.

Map 8. By the time the NPS released its Final Environmental Impact Statement for the

proposed park in January 1975, the proposed boundaries had been slightly modified from those

recommended in December 1973 (see Map 7). The proposed acreage (4,453,000 acres) was

slightly smaller than had previously been proposed. The suggested primary development sites,

however, had changed little since the monument's draft master p lan had been released in

August 1971 (see Map 6). Source: Alaska Planning Group, Final Environmental Impact

Statement, Proposed Katmai National Park, Alaska, 5. (click image for an enlargement in a

new window)

The proposed park announced in the FES was 207,000 acres smaller than that outlined in the

draft EIS. In reality, the acreage difference between the two documents was much less, because

the acreage given in the draft EIS had not accounted for the last-minute reduction of acreage

surrounding Battle Lake. The northern boundary west of Kulik Lake was several miles farther

south in January 1975 than it had been in December 1973; it attempted, to a greater degree, to

follow natural drainage divides rather than township boundaries. Otherwise, the two boundaries

were virtually identical. The FES, like the draft EIS, had three areas of ecological concern.

Because the proposed park was smaller than before, the three AECs included the acreage that

had been in the draft EIS; otherwise, the AECs were unchanged. [116]

Once the Final Environmental Statement had been completed, it was forwarded to President

Ford's Council on Environmental Quality, then on to Congress. The Interior Department, after

three years of concentrated effort, had made its final recommendations as to how the Katmai

area should be managed. It was up to Congress to see what kind of park unit would be created.

Congress, bound by the dictates of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, was obligated to

act by December 1978. Although the park service and other Interior bureaus would continue to
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

provide assistance and consultation, it was Congress's responsibility to accept or modify the

advice and recommendations which the NPS had provided.

Planners Weigh the Future of Katmai

The issuance of the Katmai FES, along with ten similar documents for other proposed Alaska

park areas, was the last official act which the NPS was required to do as a result of ANCSA

provisions. NPS planners, however, continued to be active. For the next several years, the

agency carried on an intensive effort that would provide a more solid data base for

Congressional leaders to use. These same activities would create an expertise that would be

important for management of the areas when they were established, and assist the Interior

Department in implementation of interrelated aspects on ANCSA. [117]

The NPS was ready to play an advisory role as soon as Congress began submitting Alaska lands

bills. Several relevant bills were, in fact, submitted in 1974 and 1975. But neither the Nixon nor

the Ford administrations showed any inclination to work for passage of a consensus bill.

Legislative action, therefore, was delayed until 1977, when Jimmy Carter was president. [118]

Between 1975 and 1977, the NPS had no lack of issues to confront as they geared up for the

Congressional activity that was sure to come. The ad hoc task forces which had helped create

the various master plans and environmental statements had been disbanded upon publication of

the various FESs in late 1974 and 1975. In order to provide a continuing degree of expertise,

therefore, Director Gary Everhardt appointed ten planning professionals from the Denver

Service Center (DSC) to act as so-called "keymen." Ralph Root, a DSC biologist, was chosen

as the keyman for Katmai and Aniakchak in May 1975; by the end of June, he was on the way

to Anchorage, where he would serve for most of the next two years.

One of the problems which Root and other agency personnel had to confront was hunting in the

areas proposed for additions to Katmai. One and all knew that the upper Alaska peninsula was a

world famous brown bear habitat, and as Alaska had become better known and more accessible,

the areas surrounding Katmai attracted a steadily increasing number of hunters. A 1974 study

noted that 42 bears--15.3% of the 1972 brown bear harvest taken via Alaska Peninsula

commercial guides--came from the area proposed for inclusion into the park. The proposed

park, to a lesser degree, would also impact on the commercial-guide harvest of caribou and

moose. [119]

Professional guides, and others in the hunting industry, knew that the creation of an expanded

national park, with no provisions for hunting, would be disastrous. It would set a poor precedent

for the industry at large; more specifically, it would endanger the livelihood of several area

guides. Ben White, for example, had been operating out of Battle Lake camp since 1971 if not

before. M. Edward King, an area guide since the mid-1960s, hunted in the wide area extending

from the monument boundary north to Nonvianuk and Kulik lakes. Ray Loesche, a guide who

had been active since the mid-1950s, operated in areas both south and north of the existing

monument. Many other guides used the proposed park areas less frequently; an informal

compilation showed that a total of twelve had been operating in the proposed Katmai additions

in recent years, mostly for either trophy moose or brown bear. [120]

In order to fight the anti-hunting tide suggested in the NPS and Interior Department proposals,

the Alaska Professional Hunters Association (APHA) prepared its own proposals on how to

deal with the Alaska lands issue. In the Katmai area, it suggested that a 750,000-acre area

southwest of the existing monument, proposed as a part of Katmai National Park in the NPS

and Interior Department proposals, should be designated as the Katmai National Wildlife

Refuge. North of the existing monument, APHA recommended that the boundary be adjusted to
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

exclude all drainages flowing into Battle Lake, noting that "these drainages serve no useful

purpose for the Katmai Monument." The organization also suggested that "If Battle Lake is

included, APHA recommends that recreational hunting be allowed in the whole addition." [121]

NPS planners listened to much of what the APHA proposed. As noted above, they excluded the

Battle Lake area in the draft and final environmental statements, and also excluded the lowland

country north of Nonvianuk Lake. They refused, however, to include the lowland tundra area

between the monument boundary and Becharof Lake. All of the land proposed for inclusion in

Katmai National Park, moreover, was to be closed to sport hunters. The NPS policy, as

enunciated by Area Director Bryan Harry in a speech to the APHA, was that "Proposed new

parks where hunting closure is recommended include those where sport hunting is now of minor

importance or would interfere severely with subsistence activities." The NPS had apparently

concluded that, through judicious boundary selection, it had eliminated the most important

hunting areas in the proposed park. [122]

Despite the agency's rigid anti-hunting recommendation, some NPS personnel recognized the

legitimacy of having some hunting areas within the proposed park units. As far back as

September 1972, the agency had been forced to acknowledge, as part of the settlement of a suit

with the State of Alaska, that certain proposed park areas would have to be open to sport

hunting, and by December 1973, Secretary Morton's recommendations included provisions for

hunting in six of the proposed new park units. [123] Dealing with hunting created a rift within

the agency. Some insisted on having "pure" park areas, even if it meant lopping off areas which

allowed sport hunting; others felt that national parks, given special regulations, should allow

sport hunting; and still others thought that a new name was needed for NPS units that allowed

hunting. [124]

Ted Swem, who headed the agency's Alaska planning effort, wrote a colleague as early as

December 1974 that many of the proposed parks could support hunting and non-hunting zones

because 1) parks were large enough to allow zones and still have no conflict, 2) the proposed

parks contained some of the state's prime hunting country, and 3) hunting, he recognized was

one of Alaska's major livelihoods. [125] In 1976, a wide range of Washington officials became

convinced that the "preserve" category (an area where hunting was permitted) might be needed

as a fallback measure during legislative negotiations. [126] The agency, however, remained

outwardly steadfast in its opposition to hunting, specifically as it related to Katmai.

Another problem area concerned the necessity of establishing power generation sites in the

areas proposed as the expanded Katmai National Park. During the early 1960s, as noted above,

the Bureau of Reclamation had identified two potential hydroelectric sites in its survey of

southwestern Alaska: American Creek, thought to have a prime capacity of 14,300 kilowatts,

and a Nonvianuk Lake site, which might generate 27,300 kilowatts. In January 1968, the Alaska

Power Administration identified a potential dam site on the Alagnak River near the confluence

of the Nonvianuk River. None of these sites, at least initially, was considered as particularly

significant for hydroelectric development. [127]

After ANCSA was passed, the search for d-1 and d-2 lands brought about a renewed interest in

potential dam construction. A study made of d-2 areas 24 and 25 (that is, the areas immediately

north and immediately south of the existing monument) revealed that neither area contained

particularly favorable hydroelectric sites. North of area 24, however, the Federal Power

Commission, in its 1975 survey, had identified Kukaklek Lake as a hydropower site. The

Kukaklek project, which at that time was being considered as part of the proposed Iliamna

National Resources Range, was considered one of eleven "active potential sites" in the state that

would be eliminated if the various park proposals were enacted. [128] In addition, the Alaska

Power Administration considered a Kulik Lake hydroelectric site and noted that "it presently is

considered unfavorable for development." [129] Congress would have many Alaska lands
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

issues with which to wrestle in the upcoming months, but conflicts over power development in

the Katmai area would not be one of them.

Closely tied to questions of power development were those of the eligibility of certain streams

to nomination in the federal Wild and Scenic Rivers System. In 1968, Congress had passed the

National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and had designated the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation

(BOR), in the Interior Department, to conduct the inventory and evaluation process for rivers

throughout the country.

When the BOR made its initial Alaska survey, it tabbed two streams in the Katmai area--

American Creek and the Alagnak River--as having Wild and Scenic River potential. All or a

portion of both streams were situated in the area being considered as expansions to the existing

monument. The entire length of the American Creek was considered; for the Alagnak River, the

whole 64-mile length of the main stem was considered, along with the 11-mile Nonvianuk

River which originated in Nonvianuk Lake. [130]

To gain additional data on the rivers, and to investigate their eligibility as laid out in the

National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, the BOR made an aerial reconnaissance of the area on

October 31, 1972. [131] The following spring, an interagency field team conducted on-site

inspections of both water courses. Based on the data it had gathered, the BOR concluded that

American Creek and the Alagnak River met the criteria for inclusion in the Wild and Scenic

River System. Both flowed through sufficiently primitive environments that they qualified as

"wild" rivers within that system. [132]

During the period after the issuance of the Final Environmental Statement, the keyman for

Katmai recognized that many area water courses other than Alagnak River and American Creek

also had the potential for nomination to the Wild and Scenic Rivers system. Ralph Root

recognized that wild river designation for American Creek (or any other streams included

within a national park unit) was largely superfluous. In January 1976, however, he recognized

that several area streams--Kamishak River, King Salmon Creek, and Kejulik River--were not

included in some of the proposals being put forward. Worried about the rivers' protection, Root

proposed wild rivers studies for each of the three rivers. No action, however, was taken on his

proposal. [133]

The period following the issuance of the park's Final Environmental Statement also gave NPS

officials sufficient time to consider the legitimacy of various development sites which had been

espoused during the master plan process. Although the plan had called for the establishment of

the major use-node at the west end of the park, the site had remained amorphous, in one of

three general locations. NPS officials, who were still convinced that boat transportation would

be the best means of transporting visitors from the King Salmon area into the park, were most

interested in the North Arm and Naknek Peninsula areas as potential lodge sites. In August

1976, NPS officials inspected the Naknek Lake shore and discovered that the water on either

side of the North Arm was quite shallow and unprotected from strong winds which blew from

the southeast. But at the base of Naknek Peninsula, the water on both sides was deep and calm.

The officials gave little thought toward a development at a proposed North Arm site. Even

though the site had been moved west from the Bay of Islands area, the monument

superintendent expressed "concern and doubt" that a lodge should be built there. [134]

Park officials also made further investigations of the proposed development site at Research

Bay. The site, according to the December 1973 master plan, had been "tentatively selected as a

possible use-node" which "could become the new gateway to the Valley of Ten Thousand

Smokes." [135] Further study, however, found Research Bay to be a poor location for future

development. Rollie Ostermick, who served on the Alaska Task Force, told Root that both red

salmon and brown bears were plentiful in the area in August. He wrote that "There is a much
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

greater density of bears in the Research Bay-Margot Creek area than at Brooks during the

summer visitor season." He further warned that the bay was a poor location for both boats and

amphibious aircraft because of the shallow waters. Ostermick, after investigating the

surrounding area, suggested that a better development site lay on the moraine between Iliuk

Arm and the rest of Naknek Lake. [136] A year later, other officials who visited Research Bay

also concluded that the site was unacceptable. Their alternative, however, was a location along

the valley road about five miles east of Brooks Camp. A lodge at the new site, they reasoned,

would provide visitor accommodations, a shorter trip to the Valley, and a staging area for

backcountry users while avoiding the bear-human conflicts of the Research Bay site. [137]

NPS officials based Katmai's development plans, to a large degree, on the implementation of

tour boats on Naknek Lake. The superintendent, for instance, predicted that tour boats would

replace aircraft within a few years, and a planning team concluded that "boat transportation

would be the best future means of transporting visitors from the King Salmon area into the

park." [138] Neither the draft nor final master plans, however, addressed who was to supply the

necessary craft. The level of visitation, at least in the short term, made the resolution of such a

dilemma moot. Even if market forces had been more favorable, however, the logistics and

expense of setting up a marine operation militated against its implementation. The creation of a

deep-water dock on the north edge of Naknek Lake would be of some benefit, but other

physical factors stood in the way of such a service. [139] As one observer noted of the trip

between Lake Camp and Brooks Camp,

During times of low water only boats with a very shallow draft can complete this

trip. Transporting people in this manner would require large boats and this does not

appear to be feasible without dredging and consequently disrupting very important

fisheries resources. It is considered that the cost of purchasing, operating and

maintaining such boats would also be prohibitive. [140]

Rough water during windy weather was also an obstacle. But despite the many barriers, Wien

Air Alaska investigated the economic practicality of such a service during the summer of 1976.

The concessioner had been relying on a Grumman Mallard to access Brooks Camp for the past

several years, but had recently found the plane so uneconomical, and so unequal to the task of

transporting an ever-increasing number of tourists, that it cast about for an alternative. [141] Its

consideration of marine craft, however, was brief. The airline substituted other aircraft for the

Mallard, and the idea of instituting boat service on Naknek Lake was dropped for the time

being. [142] The idea was not revived until the 1990s, when the NPS began lake operations in

order to improve park management capabilities.

Planners estimated that the addition of the areas suggested in the 1975 Final Environmental

Statement would add significantly to Katmai's budget. They proposed that the monument's

budget, which was in the $200,000 to $300,000 range during the 1975-1980 period, be more

than doubled for each of the first five years after passage of a park bill. Funding for the fiveyear program was slated to run anywhere from $300,000 to over $700,000 per year. The

additional funds would pay for the equivalent of three to five new full-time staff, and would

also allow for the erection of six new units for permanent employees, four seasonal panabode

units, and a new King Salmon office. In addition, ranger quarters and adjacent campground

facilities would be needed at Kulik Lake, Murray Lake, Blue Mountain, Alinchak Bay,

Kamishak River, and Kejulik River. [143]

Issues in Monument Administration, 1975-1980

While planners in Anchorage and Washington were busy planning the future of a proposed

Katmai National Park, the administrators of the existing national monument were busy with a
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

host of problems of their own. Most of those issues dealt with the continuing problem of

access: ways to improve transportation within the monument, and questions of legal access to

areas nominated for wilderness consideration.

One of the most contentious issues which Katmai officials faced during this period related to

Lake Grosvenor access, and the battle over access erupted into a major confrontation between

the NPS and the concessioner during the fall of 1976. Lake Grosvenor was one of many that

were considered for closure during the wilderness nomination process. The draft plan, issued in

August 1971, had left it open, but a revised draft issued the following July concluded that all

but the lake's western end would be recommended for wilderness consideration. The NPS did so

for two reasons: it wanted to protect the wilderness qualities of the Savonoski Loop canoe route,

and wanted to keep open the flight path used by the concessioner using Grosvenor Camp. That

path headed west down Lake Coville to American Creek. As a result, the plan kept Lake

Coville, as well as the western end of Lake Grosvenor, out of the proposed wilderness. [144]

Once the revised wilderness plan was approved in 1972, administrative provisions in the 1964

Wilderness Act allowed Superintendent Blinn to apply de facto wilderness management to the

area, even though Congress had not acted on the agency's recommendation. Blinn explained the

new policy to representatives of Wien Consolidated Airlines (WCA), the Grosvenor Camp

concessioner, and for the next several years WCA and Wien Air Alaska (WCA's name after

May 1973) complied with the limitations on motorboat use demanded by the wilderness

regulations. [145]

The situation heated up in July 1976 when Wien's Grosvenor Camp manager, Van Hartley,

brought a jetboat into the monument. At first, he complied with the regulations, and he obtained

Blinn's permission before piloting the boat up Savonoski and Grosvenor rivers on his way to

Grosvenor Camp. But on August 21, Hartley illegally took a party of fishermen on the jetboat to

the east end of Grosvenor Lake. Hartley failed to slow down sufficiently in the shallows and

went aground. Blinn, along with his son and freelance writer-photographer Dave Bohn, were

canoeing nearby. They witnessed the accident, which resulted in minor injuries to two of

Hartley's fishing clients, and they helped extricate the grounded craft. Blinn, in a private

conversation with Hartley, reminded him that operating the jetboat at the east end of the lake

was in violation of NPS policy; he did not, however, make his feelings public, and did he not

cite him or otherwise penalize him.

Several days after the incident, Blinn (who by now had returned to Brooks Camp) heard rumors

that he had treated Hartley unfairly. He responded by visiting Grosvenor Camp and talking to

Hartley about the recent incident. Hartley felt that the NPS's policies were unfair, but he

understood them. But Chuck Petersen, the head of Wien's concessions operation, claimed he

was unaware of the wilderness management policy until he met with Blinn (to cover a broad

range of concessions issues) on September 1. He immediately protested the action, both at the

meeting and in a September 3 letter to the superintendent. In his defense, he claimed that

concessioners had been operating motorboats on Lake Grosvenor since the 1950s. He also

claimed that Blinn was being arbitrary and evasive and that he was enforcing the rules as part of

"personal vendetta" against him. Blinn, as a park superintendent, was in no position to lift the

motorboat restriction (even if he had wished to do so), so on October 7, he replied with a letter

which merely reiterated and explained the regulation. [146]

Petersen, however, would not give up. He sought, and obtained, a meeting with Pacific

Northwest Region Director Russell Dickenson on November 30. Dickenson, like Blinn, told the

Wien representative that he could not change Servicewide wilderness management rules; he

could only suggest that Petersen write NPS Director Gary Everhardt and ask for a waiver of the

1972 regulation which closed Lake Grosvenor to motorboat traffic. Petersen did as suggested

and wrote a vociferous, lengthy protest letter to the NPS Director. He also appealed his case to
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

Alaska's Congressional delegation. He then notified several of Grosvenor Camp's longtime

guests of the decision, and asked them to lobby the NPS Director in order to overrule the 1972

administrative regulation. [147] The lobbying effort worked. On January 7, 1977, Director

Everhardt notified Petersen that the agency would allow the use of motorized boat service on

Lake Grosvenor, pending action by Congress on wilderness recommendations. [148] The

concessioner, emboldened by its victory, considered the orchestration of a campaign that would

delete Lake Grosvenor and Grosvenor River from the wilderness proposal. But Petersen soon

realized that such an action would be largely unnecessary; with the exception Wien had been

granted, the company was able to use Lake Grosvenor essentially as it wished. [149]

The imposition of wilderness management on Katmai's land and waters brought complaints

from other disgruntled users. One of those was Edwin W. Seiler, who was the owner of a

nearby fishing lodge, a pilot, and a pioneer businessman in nearby King Salmon. In May 1977,

Seiler wrote Governor Jay Hammond and NPS Director Gary Everhardt about the newlyimposed float plane landing restrictions, opining that "This is something I believe Gil Blinn

cooked up with prodding from some overzealous environmentalists." Seiler hoped that the NPS

might relax the regulation "by issuing revocable licenses to responsible guides and Air-Taxi

operators." [150] NPS Director William Whalen, who responded to Seiler in August, didn't

directly answer his complaint; he took some pains, however, to put the problem in perspective.

He defended Blinn and the wilderness process, noting that "the closure of all waters other than

Naknek Lake and the Naknek River to aircraft and motorboats was based upon a concept of

using the Naknek Lake system for primary access, with the principal developments being

located in this zone and within the coastal zone. A wild lands type of management was to be

applied to the remaining portions of the national monument." But he also recognized that "most

wilderness areas in Alaska should have some degree of access by float plane.... It appears that

the temporary impact of aircraft landings on some wilderness waters should be acceptable." He

admitted that the issuance of permits had merit, but that the agency had not yet reached a

decision on how to proceed. [151]

Still another access issue that the NPS had to contend with was the problem of crossing Brooks

River in the vicinity of Brooks Camp. During the mid-1970s, an NPS contractor had built an

improved dock in an embayment on the north bank near the river's mouth. The company had

done so as part of the utility system installation. A bridge had been considered during one

phase of utility contract planning, but it was eliminated from the final contract.

No sooner had the new dock been installed than nature began to unravel the improvements. In

1975 and 1976, erosion from the river's current began to narrow the small spit between the boat

dock and Naknek Lake. The following summer, high runoff caused the area surrounding the

concession buildings to flood; water levels reached almost eighteen inches above the level of

the new dock. The area's beach was lost, and on the south side of Brooks River the bank

protecting the boat dock was eroded away. On the north side of the river, continuing erosion

threatened to undercut and destroy the new dock. To ward off further damage, sandbags were

placed underneath the dock, but officials recognized that they served only as a holding action.

[152]

The damage the river caused forced the Park Service to take a new look at its docks. In 1978,

maintenance personnel attempted to repair the dock on the south bank, but finding it unfeasible

to do so, they decided to dismantle it instead. On the north bank, they dredged out the boat

moorage area and tried to restore the dock to a pre-1977 appearance. [153] In 1980, another

year of heavy rains brought trouble. Early runoff once again gouged under the north end of the

1975 dock. It soon broke through, effectively turning the area surrounding the eastern side of

the dock into an island. All attempts to return Brooks River to its former course proved futile,

and in late May the east side of the dock was manually removed. As the summer wore on,

currents reshaped the shoreline to the point that the west side of the old dock parallelled the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

Naknek Lake shoreline and the north side protruded out into the lake. The northern portion of

the dock was buttressed with scrap lumber from sections of former dock material, and began to

serve as a fish viewing platform. [154]

The elimination of the two docks, of course, complicated access across Brooks River. Until

1977, crossing the river had been fairly easy because of a reliance on motorized skiffs. The

deterioration of the docks, however, made dockings more tenuous as new landing sites were

sought. In addition, the noise and fumes of the motorboats--noted by at least one Brooks Camp

visitor--and a national policy of greater energy conservation encouraged NPS personnel to

pursue alternate methods by which visitors could cross the river. [155] Improved access,

however, did not become a reality until the early 1980s.

Superintendent Blinn had dealt with these and many other issues during his tenure at the

monument. In June 1979, however, he left the park to become the superintendent of Badlands

National Park in South Dakota. Blinn, the monument's first superintendent, had served in his

position for almost ten years. His immediate replacement was Roy Sanborn, formerly a

Management Assistant in the Alaska Area Office, who served in an interim capacity for the

next two months. Blinn's permanent replacement was David Morris, who stepped into the job

from the Washington-based departmental manager program. Morris had worked in Alaska prior

to beginning his NPS career, and served as the Katmai superintendent for the next eight years.

[156]

The Proclamation of an Expanded Monument

The election of Jimmy Carter as president, along with the recognition that ANCSA required an

Alaska lands bill to pass Congress by December 1978, spurred Congress into activity. Carter

was widely considered as an environmentalist, and Rep. Morris Udall of Arizona, an avowed

environmentalist, headed the House Interior Committee, which was to be a prime mover of the

bill in Congress.

Although the primary existing package of parklands proposals was the one which Interior

Secretary Morton had signed in December 1973, one of the first bills of the 95th Congress was

submitted by Udall and other environmentally-leaning Congressmen. On January 4, 1977, Rep.

Udall submitted H.R. 39; similar bills were entered somewhat later by senators Lee Metcalf (DMT), Henry Jackson (D-WA), and Clifford Hansen (R-WY). H.R. 39, the initial legislative

vehicle by which Alaska lands would be considered, called for the setting aside of up to

115,000,000 acres in the four national systems, 64,100,000 acres of which would go to the

national park system. Virtually all of the NPS acreage was proposed as "instant wilderness;"

lands included in that category would be designated as wilderness without the usual review

process. [157]

Among its provisions, Udall's bill proposed the creation of a 5.1 million-acre Katmai National

Park--a full 2.6 million acres larger than the existing monument. It included all of the area in

the present park and preserve. It also included a large triangle of land northwest of the present

boundaries, which included the Alagnak River and surrounding lowlands; a large area to the

southwest, which included territory north and south of the King Salmon River; and an area

south of the monument which extended all the way south to Portage Bay. [158]

Some Alaskans were outraged by Udall's bill, and interests in the Naknek and King Salmon

areas reacted angrily to the proposed Katmai expansion. John Wood, a King Salmon fishing

guide, circulated a petition protesting the bill because of its "disastrous effects on existing

recreational and subsistence uses of the local fish and wildlife resources." He collected 329

signatures in just four days. He complained to Governor Hammond that "the proposed extension
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

has no significant value to warrant inclusion into the Monument as specified by National Park

Service policy." Perhaps as a result of Wood's activism, both the South Naknek Village Council

and Bristol Bay Borough quickly passed resolutions not to increase the size of the monument.

[159]

Congress did little for the next several months that promised a resolution to the Alaska lands

question. Meanwhile, scattered attempts were made to legislate a Katmai wilderness bill. On

January 11, Rep. Keith Sebelius (R-KS) submitted 27 wilderness bills, each of which was

compatible with the recommendations which the NPS had made to Congress in 1974. The only

bill which dealt with an Alaskan NPS unit was H.R. 1720, which pertained to Katmai. [160] In

the Senate, Henry Jackson and Clifford P. Hansen submitted S. 315, which was a broad-based

wilderness bill for various areas in Alaska and the Pacific Northwest. [161] Neither the House

nor Senate bills got past the committee stage, perhaps because the committee chairmen involved

wanted to deal with Alaska's land uses in one large bill rather than a series of smaller ones.

By the spring of 1977, others were making their voices known. In April, Interior Secretary Cecil

Andrus testified to Congress on H.R. 39; having not had time to analyze the bill, he could only

reaffirm the Carter administration's support for a strong Alaska lands bill. Two months later,

Sen. Ted Stevens introduced S. 1787, an Alaska-based "consensus bill" which proposed to set

aside 75,000,000 acres in the various management systems. The bill, far less restrictive than the

Udall bill, proposed to add just 400,000 acres to Katmai National Monument--just enough to

provide watershed protection to existing monument lands. It proposed another 1,590,000 acres

as "federal cooperative lands" which would be located within the monument but would be open

to all uses, save disposal, authorized by the public land laws. [162]

Meanwhile, in preparation for the time in which Andrus would make formal testimony, Director

Whalen began a review of its proposals in light of what had been presented in H.R. 39. [163]

Selected keymen were brought to Washington. They met with Roger Contor, the bureau's

Alaska lands specialist, to produce boundaries that accurately reflected up-to-date knowledge.

The results of the recent NPS investigations had significant ramifications for the Katmai park

proposal. In both the January 1975 Final Environmental Statement and in H.R. 39, a major area

suggested for new acreage was the lowland tundra addition located southwest of the existing

monument. Most of this area was not in the same watershed as existing monument waters, and

the flat, featureless character of the proposed addition seemed, to some at least, as separate from

the mountain, lake or coastal country which typified most of the monument.

By December 1975, residents of Naknek and King Salmon were calling the legitimacy of the

southwestern addition into question. [164] In response, Dr. John Dennis--biologist, member of

the 1972-73 Alaska Task Force, and chief proponent of the addition--recognized that the

proposal was controversial. He further recognized that the huge parcel offered substantial

subsistence moose and caribou hunting for local residents, and that some gravel extraction was

taking place there.

Dennis argued, however, that the lowland tundra was more valuable as parkland. He noted that

It is unique because it is situated on a glacial outwash. Sand dunes, which are

somewhat unexpectedly found north of the west end of Becharof Lake provide a

xeric environment where plant species uncommon to the Alaska Peninsula are

found. Another significant feature of the lowland tundra is that together with the

existing monument it provides a nearly complete cross-section of botanical life

zones across the northern Alaska Peninsula. The lowland tundra area also provides

winter habitat for a moose population ... an important waterfowl nesting and

molting area, especially for whistling swans [and] habitat for a wide-ranging herd
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

of caribou. Management of this region as a natural area would assure the protection

of the values discussed above, and may provide some sanctuary for the caribou,

should their wide-ranging habitat on this part of the peninsula be changed by new

and intensive land uses. [165]

Local residents, however, did not share the need for protecting that area. When John Wood

circulated the local petition against the extensions in January 1977, he did so on behalf of the

residents of Game Management Unit 9. His primary complaint with H.R. 39 was that "The

proposed ... extension would encompass two of the three dependable areas available for [local

recreational and subsistence] uses, i.e., all of Big Creek and the upper portion of King Salmon

Creek. The NPS's arguments ... are unjustifiable when weighed against the detrimental effects ...

on the lifestyle of the local residents." [166]

Gil Blinn, a recipient of the petition, had also been a recipient of numerous resolutions which

Bristol Bay Borough had passed against the monument expansion. Despite its negative tone, he

was pleased that Wood had identified specific areas of concern to local residents. He passed

Wood's petition on up through the hierarchy. In mid-February no less than the Acting NPS

Director, William Briggle, wrote Wood and asked for "Any additional information ...

concerning the specific types of uses that take place on the lands in question and where and

when these uses take place." Hoping to gain more specific input from the local authorities,

Blinn and Alaska's Area Director, Bryan Harry, visited the borough offices and asked for

specific comments rather than monolithically opposing NPS's expansion plans. [167] The

borough responded in mid-May with a resolution which proposed that King Salmon Creek, Big

Creek, and all other areas to the south and west be dropped from the proposals because they

were traditional hunting, fishing, and trapping lands for the communities of South Naknek,

Naknek, and King Salmon. They promised that if the park service would do that, they would not

oppose the other additions. [168]

By the time NPS Director Whalen gave his proposed park recommendations to Secretary

Andrus in mid-August 1977, the Katmai proposal had overcome local opposition. It was also,

however, substantially smaller than H.R. 39 had proposed because the lowland tundra addition

had been eliminated. Whalen urged Andrus to propose a Katmai National Park with 1,800,000

acres added to the existing monument. Because of the compromise made with local officials,

Whalen proposed that subsistence as well as commercial hunting of brown bear be prohibited in

the proposed park additions. The Fish and Wildlife Service, stepping into the void,

recommended in its own report to Secretary Andrus that the southern additions to Katmai be

added to the wildlife refuge system. On August 18, Assistant Secretary Robert L. Herbst

accepted that recommendation. [169]

On September 15, Secretary Andrus released the long-awaited Interior Department proposal.

Andrus called for the creation of ten new NPS areas and the extension of three existing areas.

He proposed that a total of 41,770,000 acres be set aside. In regards to Katmai, he

recommended that only 1,110,000 acres be added to a newly-designated Katmai National Park;

the acreage was largely a reiteration of Secretary Morton's 1973 recommendations except for

the elimination of the lowland tundra areas. The proposal also called for wilderness in those

areas of Katmai previously recommended by the NPS, plus an additional 89,000 acres in the

Headwaters Creek drainage west of Brooks Lake. It proposed the Alagnak River, but not

American Creek, for Wild and Scenic River status. Unlike the proposal offered by the NPS, the

Interior Department proposed that subsistence uses be allowed within the area outside the

existing monument. Hunting, however, was prohibited. Andrus's bill was a compromise

between Rep. Udall's far-reaching conservation bill and Sen. Stevens's lukewarm effort. [170]

In response to Andrus's recommendation, and also in response to a series of hearings the

Interior Committee held during the spring and summer, H.R. 39 was revised in October 1977.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

Still a solidly conservation-backed bill, it remained the primary mark-up vehicle for the next

several months. In March 1978, however, committee leaders had to defeat a rival proposal

which would have advocated less restrictive uses for Alaska's d-2 lands. Perhaps in response,

the committee again revised H.R. 39 to include a 210,000-acre national preserve adjacent to the

proposed Katmai National Park. [171]

Preserves differed from parks in that they allowed sport hunting. Most also allowed motorized

vehicle usage and mineral entry. [172] For the last several years, NPS officials had been

debating how to handle hunting in the Alaska park proposals. As noted above, some resisted

sport hunting within park borders, while others realized that if properly regulated, certain of the

proposed park areas should permit the activity.

Through 1976, NPS officials had, to outsiders at least, remained steadfast in their opposition to

hunting in the proposed Alaska park units. The internal dialogue continued, however, and by

January 1977 the Service's designated Alaska specialist, Roger Contor, recommended that the

agency "adopt the park-preserve combination, where needed, as the Service's position in

Alaska." Allowing preserves gave the NPS control over more land than would have otherwise

been possible; had park requirements remained rigid, areas which allowed hunting might be

administered by the Bureau of Land Management. Adopting the preserve concept also

prevented sport hunting advocates from opening up existing parks to hunting. [173] John

Kauffmann, a longtime Alaska hand, agreed with Contor and suggested that preserves could

permit such broad uses as hunting, mining, or motorized recreation if they did not interfere with

or damage a park's basic scientific values.

Based on that philosophy, the NPS legitimized the preserve category in areas deemed necessary

or appropriate. Preserve status was first employed on the Aniakchak and Lake Clark proposals.

[174] By August 1977, Director Whalen recommended preserve status for six proposed units:

three independent units, and three others in conjunction with proposed national parks. Thus, by

the time the House Interior Committee recommended a national preserve for Katmai, the

concept was already well established. The idea of a preserve had been used in the legislature,

too; in January, Udall's H.R. 39 had proposed them for Noatak and Yukon Charley, and had

also proposed a Chisana National Preserve adjacent to the proposed Wrangell-Kluane

International Park. [175]

The modified H.R. 39, which proposed a 1,300,000-acre Katmai National Park and a 210,000-

acre Katmai National Preserve, was brought before the full House on May 19, 1978 along with

two rival Alaska lands bills. The rival bills were defeated by substantial margins, and H.R. 39

passed by a resounding vote of 279 to 31. [176]

With just seven months to go before the seven-year timetable set by ANCSA elapsed,

momentum shifted to the Senate. The upper chamber, however, seemed in little hurry to deal

with the issue. Not until October 5, just eight days before adjournment, did the Energy and

Natural Resources Committee report its version of an Alaska Lands Bill to the full Senate. That

bill, generally unfavorable to conservation interests, would have created a national park and

expanded its acreage by 900,000 acres; it would also have created a 400,000-acre Katmai

National Preserve. Due to a combination of delaying tactics and parliamentary confusion,

however, the Senate--and the 95th Congress--adjourned in October without having passed an

Alaska lands bill. [177]

Secretary Andrus reacted to the lack of Congressional activity by acting on his own. He had

known for several months that Congress might leave the issue unresolved, and he was therefore

prepared to provide President Carter with a series of options on how to resolve the issue. In

mid-November, in order to protect the "integrity of Alaska lands" from state selection, he had

withdrawn over 110,000,000 acres of land. On December 1, Carter used that land as a basis for
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

declaring 56,000,000 acres of national monuments under the terms of the Antiquities Act.

Included in that designation was a 1,370,000 acre extension to Katmai National Monument. The

measure which created the enlarged park area was a stopgap, and those that promulgated the

proclamation hoped that it would remain in force only until a more formal legislative vehicle

could be approved. Nevertheless, after a seven year struggle, an enlarged NPS unit at Katmai

was at last a reality. [178]

The land added to Katmai was approximately 140,000 acres smaller than the park-preserve

combination which had been proposed in H.R. 39. Katmai's new boundaries differed from that

proposed by secretaries Morton or Andrus in that they extended north beyond Kukaklek Lake;

they included Nonvianuk Lake and most of the Nonvianuk River. In the Lake Camp area, the

boundary was extended west for three or four miles. Few changes were made at the south end

of the monument, but in the Brooks Lake area, the boundary was extended west to include the

Headwaters Creek drainage.

Establishment of Katmai National Park and Preserve

When Congress reconvened in January 1979, high on its agenda was the passage of the Alaska

lands bill it had failed to act on during the previous legislative term. To some extent, the

activities of the new Congress were a repeat of the old. The House Interior Committee, once

again, took the lead in guiding the legislation; once again, the conservation-minded committee

leaders succeeded in fashioning a bill strong enough to be brought to a vote. The bill,

introduced by Rep. Udall and again dubbed H.R. 39, moved swiftly through the committee. On

May 16, the full house defeated a weaker substitute bill, 268 to 157, then passed H.R. 39 by a

vote of 360 to 65.

Action then shifted over to the Senate. The Energy Committee, by that time, had passed a less

restrictive bill than that passed by the House, but pressure was growing to accept a more

conservation-oriented substitute on the Senate floor. Alaska's U.S. Senate delegation

recognized, as they had in 1978, that delaying tactics might succeed in forging a more prodevelopment bill. They were able to delay consideration of the bill on the Senate floor until July

1980. Senator Henry Jackson, who had crafted the Energy Committee bill, watched helplessly

as pro-development forces lost several lopsided votes on strengthening amendments. Jackson

recognized that he was almost certain to lose if he brought an Alaska lands bill to the floor, so

he was able to prevail on Majority Leader Robert Byrd to take the bill off the floor. Jackson,

with the support of Senator Stevens, then set in motion a series of meetings between key

senators; from those meetings came Amendment No. 1961, a substitute for the Senate Energy

Committee bill. The amendment, probably the best Jackson felt he could craft considering the

circumstances, was brought back to the Senate floor on August 18. The full Senate first voted,

72 to 16, to adopt the amendment as a substitute to the bill which had emerged from the Energy

Committee. Shortly thereafter, it voted 78 to 14 to pass the bill itself. [179]

The Senate bill, in general, was less restrictive in its land use proposals than that passed by the

House. Its proposals for the Katmai area followed the differences displayed in the bill at large.

H.R. 39, as passed in May 1979, had called for a 1,160,000-acre park expansion and a 210,000-

acre preserve, while the Senate's Amendment No. 1961 proposed a 1,037,000-acre park

expansion and a 308,000-acre preserve. [180] Both bills called for NPS jurisdiction of a similar

amount of land; the House bill proposed just 25,000 more acres of land in the combined park

and preserve than that proposed in the Senate substitute. Both bills called for the designation of

the Alagnak River (but not American Creek) as wild rivers. The House bill called for 3,630,000

acres of instant wilderness, while the Senate bill proposed 3,473,000 acres. The total amount of

land reserved in the Senate bill was about 25,000 acres less than Secretary Andrus had

designated in December 1978. [181]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

The Senate's passage of the Alaska lands act was not intended to be the last word. Two months

remained in the Congressional calendar to forge a compromise between the two competing

bills. Senate leaders, however, displayed a "take it or leave it" attitude. With little room on

which to compromise, Rep. Udall pinned hopes for an improved bill on a Senate-House

conference that was scheduled to take place after the 1980 elections. That election, however,

swept conservative Ronald Reagan into the White House; more important, it brought forth a

Senate Republican majority. Given those developments, Udall had no choice but to capitulate.

On November 12, he asked the House to approve the Senate-passed bill. It did so by voice vote,

and on December 2, President Carter signed the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation

Act (ANILCA) into law.

The administrative and legislative path which resulted in the Alaska lands act was long and

tortuous, one enlivened by bombast on both sides and heated debate on both the general

provisions of the bill and the land-use future of specific areas. It appears, however, that Katmai,

for all its size, was one of the less rancorous areas in the debate. Gates of the Arctic, the

Wrangell-St. Elias area, and the Mount McKinley expansion were high-profile battles between

development and conservation interests. Katmai, for the most part, was not. Sport hunting

created some debate in Katmai, as it did in other parks, and the threats of the removal of

subsistence hunting rights frustrated local residents. Compromises, however, were found to both

problems. Land use proposals, here as elsewhere, became more sophisticated as knowledge

grew about the areas in question. The efforts that resulted in the draft and final environmental

statements succeeded in their intended purpose, and by the time Congress began its debates,

most differences of opinion had been smoothed out.

Katmai was now more than half again as large as it had been prior to 1978. Congress had added

some 1,037,000 acres to the pre-1978 monument acreage and renamed it Katmai National Park;

in addition, it created a 308,000-acre Katmai National Preserve north of the park. [182] (See

Appendix A.) The Park Service hierarchy, now provided with a new mandate, readied itself for

a new series of challenges. They would be not long in coming.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

(left) Gilbert E. Blinn served as Katmai's first superintendent. He remained at the

monument for almost ten years, from September 1969 through June 1979. In this

photo, taken in August 1978, he is shown in Brooks Lake near the tail wing of a

Cessna 185 Skywagon on floats. (right) Rogers C. B. Morton, who served as

Interior Secretary under presidents Nixon and Ford, played a major role in the

planning process that created or expanded Katmai, Aniakchak, and other Alaska

NPS units. (Gil Blinn Collection (left); Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve

(right) )
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 5)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap5.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:47 PM]

(top) Key players in the formation of the Alaska Lands Act included (l-r) Rep. Don Young, R-AK, Sen. Mike

Gravel (D-AK), and Alaska Governor Jay Hammond. The trio is shown with President Ford when the president

visited Alaska on November 17, 1975. (bottom) This photo of Research Bay, with Mt. Katolinat in the

background, was taken by Victor Cahalane in August 1954, during the Katmai Project. During the mid-1970s, the

bay was the recommended site for Katmai's primary visitor node. Park staff, however, rejected the site when they

learned that the area harbored a high concentration of brown bears. (courtesy Gerald R. Ford library, photo

A7590-18 (top); NPS Photo Collection, neg. 12089 (bottom) )

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

adhi/chap5.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

PART I: KATMAI NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE

Chapter 6:

Management of Katmai National Park and Preserve

The half-decade which followed the passage of the Alaska National Interest Lands

Conservation Act was a relatively strong growth period at Katmai. The park's acreage, of

course, was significantly larger than it had previously been. In recognition of a larger park and

its elevation to national park status, Katmai's budget enjoyed a healthy growth. Like all of the

new or expanded Alaskan park units, Katmai underwent an extended management planning

effort. Plans were also developed for the Alagnak Wild River--administratively a part of the

new park--and for the two largest development nuclei, King Salmon and Brooks Camp. The

problems of Brooks Camp, by far the largest development within the park, were addressed first.

Issues Relating to Brooks Camp Growth

During the late 1970s, while Congress decided how large Katmai and the other Alaska NPS

units ought to be, Katmai staff had their hands full trying to manage the acreage they had. The

most contentious issue during the period dealt with the growth of Brooks Camp.

As noted in the previous chapter, NPS officials had had misgivings about the appropriateness of

Brooks Camp development for years. They had never been enthusiastic about its position as the

primary visitor node; suggested primary development sites had included O Creek (1950), the

Lake Camp area (1952), Savonoski (1955), Valley Junction (1956), Bay of Islands (1965),

Naknek Peninsula (1971), and West End/Research Bay (1973). By the early 1970s, those

involved in the master planning effort were openly suggesting that Brooks Camp be eventually

phased out. Even so, the agency went ahead with plans to establish a utility system and other

infrastructure improvements.

Once utilities had been installed, little more was heard about moving the camp. Instead, NPS

officials concentrated their efforts on razing the concessioner's original tent camp. They hoped

to see the tent frames replaced by more substantial structures, and hoped to see the camp move

from the mouth of the Brooks River to an area less sensitive ecologically. The tent frame camp

had not been occupied by camp guests since the mid-1960s. Since that time, the primary

occupants had been concessions employees.

The Service had raised concerns about the adequacy of these tent cabins as early as 1974, when

the construction of a new employee camp had been urged in exchange for the adoption of a tenyear contract extension. Wien Air Alaska, the monument's concessioner, was not so eager to

obtain a long term lease that it was willing to commit itself to a major construction program;

therefore, that option was not exercised. [1] Four years later, Wien showed no more willingness

than before to allocate funds for the project, and the project was tabled again. In the meantime,

however, the floods of 1977 had shown the vulnerability of the site, and the increasing number
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

of encounters between humans and bears in the area raised the concerns of park officials. [2]

By September 1980, the situation had grown so serious that Alaska Area Office began

preparing a plan designed to tie the renewal of the concessions contract to the construction of

new concessions facilities (see Map 9). In October, it issued a development concept plan (DCP),

one purpose of which was "to insure that the concessioner provide for the adequate expansion of

concessioner facilities and replacement of inadequate concession employee housing at Brooks

Camp." The DCP specifically noted that there were pressing needs for an addition to the Brooks

Lodge dining room, the replacement of the concessions housing and maintenance complex, and

the replacement of the Brooks Camp store. It suggested that the concessions facilities might be

relocated to an unspecified "interior woods site," a "Naknek Lake site," or a "Brooks River view

site." The interior woods site, where archeological concerns were relatively low and bear traffic

relatively infrequent, was the preferred alternative. [3]

Map 9. Brooks River area in March 1983. The path to Brooks Falls had just been cleared, but

the concessions camp was still located at the river's mouth. Brooks River, the park's main

visitor locus, flows from Brooks Lake to Naknek Lake. Source: National Park Service. (click

image for an enlargement in a new window)

Wien, however, had little if any interest in making a major capital expenditure at its Katmai

facilities. The airline had not erected any new buildings within the monument since it became

the primary concessioner in 1968. Wien officials recognized that the construction of new

facilities would cost more than $600,000. They therefore responded to the Service's housing

demands with only vague replies. [4]

During the winter of 1980-81, the NPS and the concessioner fought over the need for

concessioner facilities. The NPS demanded that Wien invest in them as a prerequisite for

contract renewal, but the concessioner refused to consider the investment, and proclaimed more

than once its intention of abandoning the concession if the NPS persisted in its demands. By

June of 1981, however, Wien had capitulated. It signed a new fifteen-year contract which,

among its other provisions, called for the construction of new Brooks Camp facilities. [5]

Shortly after NPS officials signed the concessions contract, the agency prepared a more detailed
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

draft DCP, which was released to the public in January 1982. It laid out the same three

alternatives that had been noted in late 1980. In addition, it offered an alternative in which the

three guest cabins which faced Naknek Lake would be converted into employee housing and the

Skytel would be enlarged. Again, the interior woods site (west of the NPS housing complex)

was selected as the preferred alternative. [6]

The January 1982 DCP served as the primary document guiding growth at Brooks Camp over

the next several years. Wien sold its interest in the Katmai concessions camps to KatmaiLand,

Inc. in October 1982. The new company, renamed Katmailand in 1983, constructed the new

concessions complex in 1984-85. In 1984 it expanded the Brooks Lodge dining room, and in

1985-86 it demolished the original Brooks Camp tent frames. [7]

The Park Service, during this period, was an active contributor to Brooks Camp's physical

growth. In one major development, the agency was finally able to circumvent the seemingly

age-old problem of crossing Brooks River. It will be recalled that boats had been the only

method used to cross the river since the camp opened in 1950. Few needed to cross before the

Valley Road was completed in 1962; since that time, the continuing growth of visitors to

Brooks Camp had made the crossing problem worse. The floods of the 1970s further

complicated the situation because it washed away the boat docks along both banks.

In the summer of 1978, NPS personnel tried to lessen the difficulties of the river crossing by

installing a boat pulley system. Rollie Ostermick, a seasonal ranger, designed and installed it.

The idea was sound, but the system was neither well designed nor well constructed, and did not

survive the summer. Edward Stondall, the Alaska Area Office maintenance chief, had another

idea. Taking Puget Sound's Hood Canal Bridge as a model, he thought that a floating,

removable bridge offered a realistic solution. Stondall designed the bridge during the 1979

summer season. He had to wait in order to gain the necessary funding and approvals, but in

1981-82, he was able to construct the footbridge with funds obtained from the Park Restoration

and Improvement Program. [8]

Other improvements followed. In order to allow visitors to Brooks Falls to watch the bears in

relative safety, the agency built a bear viewing platform southeast of the falls in August 1982.

Prior to its construction, people had watched bears from the right riverbank, and several cases

had arisen of bears brushing up against the legs of the visitors. The following year crews

rerouted the trail to the platform away from its former route along the riverbank. The new

roundabout route followed the road from the floating bridge to a point just east of the Valley

Road-Brooks Lake junction; from there a new trail headed northwest to the falls. The former

(riverbank) trail remains open but its use has primarily been limited to those who fish. [9] No

trails have been cut in the Brooks Camp area since 1983.

Finally, in order to accommodate new seasonal personnel, the NPS built several new Brooks

Camp support buildings. In the summer of 1980, it erected three Panabode-style seasonal ranger

cabins, which replaced four tent-frame residences which had been laid out in 1967. Three years

later, it constructed two new tent frames. [10]

Katmai's budget during this period enjoyed healthy growth. The monument had only three

permanent staff--the superintendent, chief ranger, and maintenance foreman--in addition to

fourteen seasonal workers. Its 1979 budget was slightly less than $300,000. Two years later,

however, the budget had risen to over $350,000, and the 1983 budget had exploded to over

$680,000. By that time three new permanent staff (a district ranger, administrative technician,

and resource management specialist) had been added (see Appendix B). The park also had

almost 20 seasonal workers, a healthy increase over the 1979 staff level. [11] Although

Katmai's area, of course, was far larger in 1983 than it had been in prior to December 1978,

much of the park budget continued to be spent in and around Brooks Camp. Therefore, it
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

should not have been surprising that the larger budgets resulted in new Brooks Camp

improvements. Because Brooks Camp was where most park visitors spent time while in

Katmai, Brooks Camp was also the place where the agency spent most of its construction and

maintenance funds.

Park Enforcement Activities

Most of the visitation, and most of the attention of park managers, was directed to Brooks

Camp and the Valley Road corridor. Beyond that small area, one of the biggest management

headaches was poaching. Poaching, of course, was an old problem, and as the 1970s wore on

the NPS was able to control the problem better than it had ever done before. The boundary

expansion of 1978, however, included many areas which hunters and trappers had been using

for years. Most of the licensed guides had areas outside the boundaries that they could use;

therefore, they did not challenge the agency's authority on the issue. Others, however, needed

more than mere gentle persuasion in order to prevent hunting and trapping within Katmai

National Park.

David Morris, who became superintendent in the summer of 1979, knew that his ability to fly

about the park was key to the enforcement effort. Prior to beginning his employment, he had

learned to fly. He soon recognized that a few people still flew into Katmai each year and

poached the wildlife; he also knew that two trappers had long been active along American

Creek, and despite the new monument had little desire to leave. One of the trappers, John

Neilsen, was persuaded to move his trap lines north to an area within Katmai National Preserve.

But John T. ("Trapper Jack") Graham hung on, and the laissez faire attitude which prevailed in

the area prevented Morris from quickly enforcing the poaching regulations. As a result, the

problem was not resolved until 1984, when Graham finally moved to Naknek. [12]

Pressures related to hunting and poaching resulted in two unsuccessful efforts to change the

existing regulations. Both efforts took place in 1983. In March, regional NPS officials moved to

modify the interim (1981) regulations relating to access by proposing that selected areas within

three Alaska NPS units be closed to various forms of vehicular access. Superintendent Morris,

spearheading the Katmai effort, recognized that brown bears were the species most likely to be

poached, and that poachers used floatplanes and motorboats to access areas with the heaviest

bear concentrations. He proposed, therefore, that aircraft landings be prohibited in the summer

and fall in lakes within the Margot Creek and Ukak River drainages, and that wintertime

landings be stopped in Idavain, Dakavak, Hammersly and Murray lakes as well as those in the

Contact and Angle Creek drainages. In addition, he proposed that the Savonoski River be

closed to motorboats and that the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes be closed to all motorized

access. [13]

When Morris announced the impending change in regulations, via an announcement in the

April 6 Federal Register, he probably felt that such a proposal would arouse little controversy.

The four public hearings, all to be held in communities west of the park, were scheduled only

two weeks later. The NPS, however, encountered a burst of opposition to its plans. One and all,

it seemed, began to attack the bureau for holding the hearings with such little public notice, and

many urged that the hearings be delayed. Beyond that, both Native groups and sportsmen

attacked the proposed closures. [14] Agency officials reacted by allowing an extended comment

period; then, having weighed public comment, decided not to implement the proposed

regulations, at least as they pertained to Katmai National Park. [15]

The other effort to change the hunting regulations was legislative. On January 26, 1983, U.S.

Senator Ted Stevens introduced S. 49, a bill that would have eliminated the prohibition on sport

hunting in eight Alaska national parks and monuments. (The bill, in effect, would have made
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

national preserves out of the eight units.) On February 15, Rep. Don Young introduced a similar

bill in the House, H.R. 1493. The bills, which would have allowed hunting throughout Katmai

and Aniakchak, were hailed by sportsmen's groups and the guiding community. They were

opposed by Native groups, who feared the loss of wildlife and its consequent impact on

subsistence lifestyles, and by environmentalists. [16] Stevens and Young were able to obtain

scores of co-sponsors for the bill, but the heads of several key Senate Committees opposed it.

[17] The bill was debated for three months in the Senate Energy and Natural Resources

committee; it finally emerged from the committee, on a bare-majority vote, in October. But it

was never considered by the full Senate due to pressure from conservationists. In the House,

H.R. 1493 never made it past the House Interior Committee. [18]

The King Salmon Headquarters Plan

The burgeoning budget growth that characterized Katmai during the late 1970s and early 1980s

resulted in more of everything at the park: more permanent personnel, more seasonal staff, more

equipment purchases, more office equipment, and the generation of more paperwork. At Brooks

Camp, the construction of Panabodes and tent frames, along with the acquisition of several

residences from the Fish and Wildlife Service, allowed the agency's housing stock to keep pace

(though barely) with the ever-increasing Katmai staff. But at King Salmon, where the

permanent staff resided the other two-thirds of the year, little construction had taken place since

the original buildings had been laid out in 1964.

In late 1982, the King Salmon headquarters complex consisted of just four main buildings, all

located on the western side of the road which divided the NPS parcel. The chief improvements

were the administration and maintenance building, where all administrative work took place in

a two-room office, and an attached duplex, which was occupied by the superintendent and chief

ranger. Both of these buildings dated from 1964. The only other residences were two trailers;

one, a double-wide dating from 1974, was used by the maintenance foreman; the other, a

single-wide brought in during the early 1980s, housed the administrative technician. [19]

Four other structures were found on the eastern side of the property. They included a small,

poorly heated administrative annex and a Butler-style storage building, both of which were

obtained in 1982 after being surplussed by the Federal Aviation Administration. That same year,

two tent frames were constructed for the use of seasonal employees. [20]

The existing physical plant was clearly inadequate for a park which had six permanent staff, a

growing seasonal staff (who worked in King Salmon as well as within the park), and a need for

work and storage space which was clearly more than the existing facilities could provide. In

response, the agency wrote a Development Concept Plan for the headquarters area. The plan

was approved in the fall of 1982 and issued to the public in January 1983. Its proposed

alternative called for seven new two- or three-bedroom housing units for the permanent staff,

four seasonal housing units, a new administration building, and a new maintenance building.

The plan called for the conversion of the existing administration and maintenance building into

one used exclusively for maintenance. Slated for removal were the two existing residence

trailers, the Butler building, the administrative annex, and the two tent frames. The plan was

clearly an ambitious undertaking; cost estimates for implementing the plan totalled $2,780,000.

[21]

Despite the severe overcrowding, almost nothing was done to implement the plan. Perhaps the

cost of the project, combined with the leveling off of Katmai's budget in the mid-1980s, forced

officials to improvise in their search for new housing. The only action taken in the next two

years was the removal, in 1983, of an increasingly unsafe single-wide trailer occupied by the

administrative technician. In its place a modular duplex was constructed. [22]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

Katmai Begins the Management Planning Process

In December 1978, Katmai National Monument was expanded by over 1.3 million acres. The

great majority of that land had previously been managed by the Bureau of Land Management.

The BLM had had a fairly laissez faire management style over its lands; that style had been

constrained since the imposition of the land freeze in the late 1960s and the ANILCA process

during the 1970s.

President Carter's proclamation of December 1, 1978, which expanded three existing NPS units

and created 10 new NPS-managed national monuments, brought threats of civil disobedience

from Alaskans who lived near several of the new and expanded park units. Little if any antiNPS publicity was directed toward the newly-expanded areas of Katmai National Monument,

but NPS officials were quick to recognize that the new parklands were not welcomed by many

Alaskans. They also knew that the agency had few enforcement personnel and that more

permanent legislation was being deliberated in Congress. For all those reasons, they took a

deliberately cautious approach in managing their new lands. In June 1979, the Interior

Department issued proposed regulations for the new and expanded national monuments; these

regulations permitted traditional subsistence activities (but not sport hunting), the use of aircraft,

and the carrying of firearms. [23]

The Alaska Lands Act, signed by President Carter in December 1980, provided specific

management direction for each of the new and expanded NPS units. In regards to Katmai,

ANILCA noted that "The monument addition and preserve shall be managed for the following

purposes, among others: To protect habitats for, and populations of, fish and wildlife including,

but not limited to, high concentrations of brown/grizzly bears and their denning areas; to

maintain unimpaired the water habitat for significant salmon populations; and to protect scenic,

geological, cultural, and recreational features." [24]

Accompanying the Act was a lengthy Implementation Directive from Secretary Andrus. This

report, which attempted to translate the goals of the act into specific steps required for its

implementation, called for the creation of a broad range of regulations, the preparation of a

series of general management plans, and a wide array of other documents. The Act, however,

had little enforcement power until interim management regulations could be issued. Proposed

regulations for the public use of the new park areas, based largely on those originally

promulgated in 1979, were issued on January 19, 1981 (the day before Jimmy Carter was

replaced by Ronald Reagan). After the public was given its opportunity to comment, final

interim regulations were issued in mid-June. Those regulations, once implemented, became a

new section of the government's Code of Federal Regulations. Although several new rules dealt

specifically with individual Alaska park units, none dealt specifically with Katmai. [25]

Meanwhile, work began on the creation of general management plans for the various Alaska

park units. Several of Alaska's NPS units were provided funding for the commencement of their

management plans in Fiscal Year 1982; funding for Katmai that year, however, was limited to

that which had been provided for the Brooks Camp and King Salmon development concept

plans. [26]

Alagnak River Planning Efforts

Brooks Camp and the King Salmon headquarters complex were the first two areas which

received attention by planners after the passage of the Alaska Lands Act. Soon afterwards

planners decided to focus their efforts on Alagnak River system. Work on the Alagnak began as

part of the general management plan process. In July 1983 an alternatives workbook, which
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

listed management options for the river, was distributed to the public. The public was given

time to comment on those options. Planners, however, were required to complete a management

plan by the end of 1983. Therefore, they selected the public comments which pertained to the

river, and prepared a management plan. The Alagnak River management plan was issued in

November 1983.

The Alagnak River, and its tributaries the Nonvianuk and Kukaklek rivers, had been popular

with fishermen since the 1960s. During the following decade, float trip enthusiasts discovered

the area. Because of its popularity, the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation nominated both the main

river and its tributaries as so-called wild rivers in the Wild and Scenic Rivers system. [27]

Several of the Katmai expansion proposals--the administrative proposals of the early 1970s as

well as legislative proposals during the late 1970s--called for the addition of large blocks of

land both north and south of the middle and upper stretches of the Alagnak River system. The

bill which was finally signed by President Carter, however, protected relatively little of the

drainage system within Katmai National Preserve. Included in the newly-created preserve was

the upper seven miles of the Kukaklek River and all 11 miles of the Nonvianuk River. For the

remainder of the Kukaklek River and for the uppermost ten miles of the Alagnak River, only

the southern bank was protected within the preserve.

In order to provide greater protection to the Alagnak, Congress, as part of ANILCA, designated

all but the lower 18 miles as a wild river. [28] Theoretically, the newly designated wild river

was 67 miles long, because it included both tributaries as well as the Alagnak's main stem. In

practical terms, however, the creation of the wild river protected only 47.9 miles of the

Alagnak: 19.5 miles of river that had already been protected along its south bank, and an

additional 28.4 river miles that had been left unprotected on both banks. [29]

Although the Alaska Lands Act incorporated the Alagnak system into the Wild and Scenic

River system, the only boundaries Congress provided were upper and lower river boundaries. In

order to provide lateral boundaries for the river corridor and to establish management goals,

Congress required that the agency produce a river management plan within three years after

ANILCA's passage. This deadline meshed well with another ANILCA mandate, that the agency

prepare a Katmai general management plan. When planners began preparing the GMP in the

summer of 1982, they included the Alagnak River corridor as part of their efforts. That August,

the planning team spent a day out on the river and got a first-hand look at its management

problems. [30]

By the summer of 1983, planners had decided (again, as part of the Katmai GMP process) upon

proposed boundaries for the Alagnak Wild River. In July and August, planners held a series of

public hearings on the Katmai GMP and the proposed Alagnak river corridor. By early fall,

general management planning had advanced so far that little extra effort was required to

complete a management plan for the wild river corridor. The NPS, therefore, separated the

public's comments which pertained to the river from those which dealt with the park and

preserve. Based on the public comments and agency mandates, the NPS issued the Alagnak

Wild River Management Plan that November. [31]

The management plan called for the creation of an NPS strip that was to parallel the river.

Provisions in ANILCA had mandated that the agency could acquire an average of one square

mile of land for each linear mile along the river. The need to protect natural and visual values,

however, gave planners considerable leeway in where lateral boundaries were placed, the result

being that those boundaries extended anywhere from one-quarter mile up to two miles away

from the river. A total of slightly over 24,000 acres was reserved. [32]

The NPS noted that the river's primary values were fishing, boating, wildlife, and wilderness,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

and the agency's management plan reflected the importance of those priorities. It proposed no

new administrative or visitor facilities, and anticipated making "no actions ... that would change

the regenerative capability of natural systems." It hoped to enter into a cooperative agreement

with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) "to more precisely define the status of

resident fishes within the Alagnak River drainage," and also proposed an archeological survey

along the river. No urgency, however, was suggested for either study. [33]

Creation of a General Management Plan

As noted in the previous section, work on a Katmai General Management Plan began in the

summer of 1982. That July a planning team from the Denver Service Center, together with staff

from the regional office and the park, conducted a field study. An Assessment of Alternatives

was prepared and presented to Regional Director John Cook on October 14. Three students

from the University of California at Santa Cruz spent several weeks working with the planning

team to analyze planning and management problems. [34]

Work continued on the General Management Plan in the summer of 1983. An Alternative

Workbook containing four alternatives was prepared and distributed, and a series of public

meetings was held in order to solicit comment on the alternatives presented. These meetings

were held in King Salmon on July 27, Naknek on July 28, and Anchorage on August 11.

The alternatives presented to the public as a result of the planning efforts that had taken place in

1982 and early 1983 offered strongly divergent directions on how Katmai might be managed in

the future. One alternative suggested that existing management should be continued. A second

alternative envisioned keeping Brooks Camp's concessioner and camping facilities at their

current levels. The NPS Brooks Camp facilities, however, would move to Brooks Lake.

Additional campgrounds would be established at Brooks Lake, along the Valley Road, at the

Bay of Islands, and in conjunction with the concessioner facilities at Grosvenor Camp, Kulik

Camp and Battle Camp. The concessioner would be encouraged to establish a boat service from

Brooks Camp to the Bay of Islands area and from Kodiak to development sites along Shelikof

Strait.

The workbook's last two alternatives called for more substantial modifications to the existing

development pattern. One alternative, which hoped to eliminate the Brooks Camp bear problem,

called for the relocation of the camp to "the spruce forest between Naknek Lake and Brooks

Lake." It also called for the eventual elimination of sportfishing on the Brooks River. In order to

make Katmai more appealing to the budget traveler, the alternative proposed the construction of

lower cost hostel-type accommodation and campground shelters. To provide greater park access

to local residents, the alternative urged the reopening of fishing areas closed by the 1969

monument expansion, the reopening of hunting and trapping areas closed by the Alaska Lands

Act, and the movement, five miles to the east, of the park's westernmost boundary.

The final alternative offered an even more Draconian scenario. It called for the elimination of

Brooks Camp, and urged its replacement by a concession-owned and -operated cruise boat

operation. Such a service would originate at Lake Camp, and its primary route would be east

across Naknek Lake to Research Bay. Visitors, thirty to forty at a time, would stop along the

way at Brooks River in order to observe wildlife; they would then go on to Research Bay,

where they would remain overnight before continuing by road to the Valley of Ten Thousand

Smokes. Lake Camp would be connected to King Salmon by shuttle bus service. The Grosvenor

Camp concession operation would be eliminated, and aircraft would be prohibited from both

Coville and Grosvenor lakes. Access to both lakes would be limited to canoes who had reached

the area via the Bay of Islands portage. [35]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

A draft plan, which would include General Management Plan, Wilderness Suitability Review,

and Land Protection Plan, was expected to be released to the public in the late spring of 1984.

Work, however, was delayed. The NPS did not choose its preferred alternative until sometime

in 1984, and by the close of that year the GMP was still in the publication preparation phase.

[36] The draft plan was finally distributed in March 1985.

The draft General Management Plan provided three scenarios for future park development.

Alternative A, similar to the workbook's first alternative, called for a continuation of existing

conditions. Alternative B, which combined elements from the second and third alternatives as

described in the workbook, called for diversified opportunities in the park and preserve.

Alternative C, similar to the workbook's fourth alternative, described a wilderness adventure

cruise. NPS planners called for the adoption of Alternative B as the proposed plan.

Under Alternative B, Brooks Camp development was to be kept at the present level for the time

being. Eventually, however, all NPS and concessioner facilities would be relocated on a phased

schedule to an unspecified area of spruce forest south of Brooks Falls. Boat service on Naknek

Lake, provided by private enterprise, would be encouraged. Grosvenor Camp would be

enlarged, and an NPS camping area would be established nearby. The camp would be used as a

staging area for scenic boat trips and fishing excursions up Lake Coville. Primitive camping

areas would also be established at Bay of Islands, the western end of Nonvianuk Lake, and

along the Valley Road at the Yori Pass access point. Activities compatible with wilderness

designation--canoeing, float trips, hiking, wildlife observation, and sportfishing--would be

encouraged throughout the park. Few changes were anticipated in the management of the

Alagnak River corridor. [37]

The draft Land Protection Plan, which was issued as an attachment to the draft GMP, identified

the various nonfederal lands within the park and preserve, and assigned priorities for acquiring

interests in each of these tracts. Based on its value to the park, agency officials designated each

nonfederal parcel into one of nine priority levels. The most valuable parcels--those assigned to

Priority 1--belonged to four owners or applicants. The State of Alaska owned approximately

75,300 acres of state lands near McNeil River State Game Sanctuary and along the southern

shore of Kamishak Bay. A 120-acre Native allotment, originally submitted by Palakia Melgenak

(see next section), included much of the Brooks Camp area. Three mining claims, staked out by

Ernest Pfaff (and later transferred to Hawley Resource Properties), were located northeast of

Battle Lake. And the Russian Orthodox Church owned three small parcels along the Shelikof

Strait coastline. The five parcels in Priority 2 belonged to concessioners, the two parcels in

Priority 3 belonged to Native corporations, and the forty parcels in Priority 4 were Native

allotments. [38]

Public meetings, intended to solicit comments on the draft plan, were held in King Salmon,

South Naknek, Naknek, Levelock, Igiugig, and Kakhonak on April 29, April 30, and May 1,

1985. A meeting was also held in Anchorage. The public comment period, which was extended

twice, remained open for a total of 135 days. [39] Planners incorporated those comments and

issued a revised draft plan, which was released for public review in December 1985. After

another 60-day comment period, the final GMP was prepared. David Morris, Katmai's

superintendent, recommended the document for approval in June 1986. NPS Director William

Penn Mott, however, did not approve it until October. Mott's superior, Assistant Interior

Secretary William P. Horn, finalized the document when he signed it on November 7, 1986.

[40]

The final GMP differed in several ways from the March 1985 draft. Perhaps the most

substantial change was in regards to a development plan for Brooks Camp, which was slightly

more tentative than the draft had been. The final plan did not call for the eventual relocation of

Brooks Camp; instead, it noted that "long-range plans may require either its relocation or
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

additional restrictions on sportfishing along Brooks River, or both actions may be necessary.

Ongoing studies documenting bear/human interactions in the Brooks Camp area will help guide

future decisions." It called for the preparation of a second Brooks Camp Development Concept

Plan to address such matters as an overflow camping area, a new visitor center, and an elevated

boardwalk which would both parallel and cross over Brooks River. [41]

Native Land Claims Become a Major Issue

Natives had lived on the upper Alaska Peninsula for thousands of years, and both before and

after the establishment of Katmai National Monument, Natives had used many areas in and

around the park. Prior to the 1970s, however, there had been few instances of land-use conflict

between Natives and the NPS.

As previous chapters have shown, Natives living in Naknek and the surrounding areas were

keenly aware that each of Katmai's acreage expansions had diminished the territory they had

formerly used for hunting, trapping, fishing, and berry picking. Several Natives claimed land in

the expanded park and preserve. That land, however, was subject to a lengthy granting process,

and as late as 1977, only about 130 acres of private land existed within Katmai National

Monument--less than 0.01% of Katmai's total land area. Of the seven private parcels, five were

owned by institutions (the Russian Orthodox Church, the State of Alaska, and the U.S. Air

Force) while the other two parcels were owned by non-Native individuals. Natives, either

individually or collectively, owned no land within Katmai National monument.

Events related to the December 1971 Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act had a major effect

on Native land ownership throughout the state, and Natives in the area surrounding Katmai

National Monument took advantage of the revised regulations which made it easier for them to

obtain land. The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) was aware of the impending appeal of the

Native Allotment Act of 1906; it therefore undertook a drive to obtain applications. In 1970 and

1971, organizations such as VISTA and Rural Alaska Community Action Program (RuralCAP)

fanned out into rural communities to explain the new regulations, and as a result some 9,000

Native Allotment applications were received. [42] As part of that movement, upwards of 25

Natives applied for Native allotments within the boundaries of present-day Katmai National

Park and Preserve. In addition, both village corporations and regional corporations applied for

land. By the time President Carter expanded Katmai National Monument in December 1978,

Natives had claimed almost 50,000 acres within the newly-declared unit; more than 90% of that

acreage had been claimed by Native corporations. Most of the acreage claimed was located at

the northern or western end of the newly-expanded monument. [43]

The process by which Natives (both individuals and corporations) acquired their lands was

largely in the hands of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Bureau of Land Management.

Before 1978, planners were the only NPS personnel familiar with the acreage that was being

considered for Native allotments adjacent to the existing monument boundaries. After 1978,

NPS managers treated most of the territory allotted to Natives as private lands; that included

lands going through the application process as well as those for which a Certificate of

Allotment had been issued.

Most of the lands included within the various Native allotments posed few problems for NPS

managers. Few applicants and certificate holders lived on their parcels, and many parcels had

no improvements on them. Furthermore, few allotments were located in areas where the NPS

had existing or planned developments. Only two potential allotments had potential conflicts for

agency officials: the Palakia Melgenak claim, which encompassed Brooks Camp, and the

Pomela Peters claim, in the Lake Camp area.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

The Melgenak Claim at Brooks Camp

Palakia Melgenak was a full-blooded Aleut who was born in Old Savonoski on July 21, 1877.

As noted in Chapter 2, she had fled the Katmai explosion in June 1912, and she had been

married to American Pete, another witness to the eruption. On March 31, 1971, the 93-year-old

woman applied for a parcel under the terms of the Native Allotment Act of May 17, 1906. The

parcel, which covered approximately 120 acres, included the Brooks Camp area, land on both

sides of Brooks River, the river itself, and almost one-half mile of Naknek Lake shoreline. Less

than a year later, on February 19, 1972, Ms. Melgenak died; Trefon Angasan, Sr. and Ralph

Angasan have served as applicants since then. [44]

It took the BLM more than a decade to fully process Ms. Melgenak's claim. During most of that

period, the prospects of her heirs obtaining a claim did not appear favorable. In March 1973, the

NPS provided the BLM with a brief history of its Brooks Camp operations during the 1950s

and 1960s; it also provided them with transcripts of tape recordings (made in 1961) of survivors

of the Mount Katmai eruption. Based on that information, the BLM told the NPS that the

allotment was in the process of being rejected. The Alaska Legal Services Corporation (ALSC),

who represented the applicant, then obtained sworn statements from several local citizens who

supported Ms. Melgenak's residence at Brooks River. [45]

The BLM surveyed the 120-acre allotment in July 1975. That November, field examiner Don

Whyde reported that, in his opinion, Ms. Melgenak had not satisfied the use and occupancy

requirements of the Native Allotment Act. Based on that report and the other collected

evidence, the BLM State Office sent much the same message to the Bureau of Indian Affairs in

January 1977. In April the Director of the BLM, Frank Gregg, echoed the same message. Ms.

Melgenak's claim appeared to be on the verge of rejection. ALSC, however, filed an extensive

letter making both legal and factual arguments on behalf of the claimant. [46]

All parties anticipated that a hearing might follow the BLM decision. But no hearing took place,

and the BLM largely ignored the parcel for the next five years. Finally, on March 7, 1983, the

BLM unexpectedly reversed its 1977 position. It announced that Ms. Melgenak's application

had been adjudicated, and that her claim had met the use and occupancy requirements of the

1906 act. [47]

National Park Service officials were stunned by the decision. Based on the 1977 decision, they

had been led to believe that the Melgenak claim would not be an impediment to their hegemony

over Brooks Camp. Little evidence had been presented to the BLM since the 1977 decision; the

NPS, therefore, found it highly illogical that the BLM would have changed its mind. [48]

The NPS, not surprisingly, appealed the BLM's decision to the Interior Board of Land Appeals

(IBLA). Trefon Angasan and the BLM opposed the appeal. [49] In the meantime, the Bureau of

Indian Affairs tried to assert its management authority over Brooks Camp. It told David Morris,

Katmai's superintendent, that "these lands have been occupied without consent or approval" of

the BIA, and requested that "all monies received by NPS for the use of the land after March 7,

1983 be placed in an escrow account pending final determination of ownership." Confusion

over Brooks Camp's legal status prevented the NPS or the concessioner from undertaking any

improvements for the time being, and Katmailand as a result had to delay the construction of its

employee housing complex for the time being. The decision did not, however, affect the

agency's ability to carry on normal managerial activities. [50]

The Interior Department submitted a Statement of Reasons shortly after they filed their appeal,

and gave six arguments as to why the allotment should not be granted. Most of those arguments

contained information not included in the case file. In December 1983, the IBLA recognized the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

overall worth of the appeal and concluded that the March decision should be "set aside and

remanded for further action consistent with this opinion." Hearings were needed to answer three

questions: 1) whether Ms. Melgenak's allotment application was submitted to BIA before

December 18, 1971, 2) whether there was sufficient evidence of her use and occupancy of the

parcel to justify approval of the application, and 3) whether her entry extended more than 160

rods along the shore of Brooks River. The NPS and the concessioner were given the go-ahead

to undertake camp construction projects. [51]

Three months after the IBLA rendered its decision, on February 10, 1984, the BLM issued a

contest complaint. It advised ALSC that Ms. Melgenak had not shown sufficient use and

occupancy of the lands she claimed. Her heirs, who by now were Trefon and Ralph Angasan,

were invited to request a hearing date in order to tell a judge how and when Ms. Melgenak used

the parcel for which she had applied. [52] Both sides prepared for the upcoming hearings.

The last of the three questions posed in December 1983 demanded technical evidence and legal

precedents that were unlike those needed to answer the other two. In August 1984, therefore, the

navigability issue was postponed until the validity of the allotment application could be

adjudicated. A month later, ten days of contest hearings were held in order to gather evidence

on the first two questions. Hearings were held in Anchorage, at Naknek, and at Brooks Camp.

The Angasans organized witnesses to speak on behalf of the applicant; Bill Tanner, who was

employed in NPS's Alaska Regional Office, organized the opposing testimony. [53]

The IBLA Hearings Division ingested the voluminous results of those hearings, and on

September 12, 1985 issued a decision. Regarding the timeliness with which the application was

submitted, Administrative Law Judge E. Kendall Clarke noted that "The record contains

sufficient evidence to permit the court to conclude that Melgenak's application was filed with an

agency of the Department [of the Interior] prior to December 18, 1971." The application was

therefore valid on that point. Regarding the applicant's use and occupancy, testimony by Don

Dumond (an archeologist who had conducted extensive work at Brooks Camp) and local longtime residents indicated that the applicant and her husband were living in a cabin south of

Brooks River in the 1920s, probably before 1924.

Based on that evidence, Clarke reported that "the court finds contestee to have met the

requirement of use and occupancy prior to 1931." The 1931 inclusion of the Brooks Camp area

into Katmai National Monument, therefore, had no effect on the validity of Ms. Melgenak's

application. But the court did not grant Angasan the entire allotment. It was "thoroughly

convinced that contestee made extensive use of the south side [of Brooks River], there is very

little evidence of substantially continuous use and occupancy on the north shore." The court,

therefore, rejected the applicant's claims to land north of Brooks River. It also rejected claims

for the river itself. [54]

Splitting the allotment in two was not what either party had in mind. In a way, the division

made sense, because most of the NPS and concessioner improvements were on the north side of

the river and the applicant's improvements were on the south side. Neither side, however, was

willing to settle for half a loaf. Accordingly, both the NPS and ALSC appealed the IBLA's

decision. [55]

After the appeals had been submitted, both sides realized that jurisdiction of the case was far

from over. In order to resolve the dispute, the Interior Solicitor's Office and the Alaska Legal

Services Corporation tried to arrange an out-of-court settlement. [56] The Interior Department

was willing to certificate a 10-acre allotment, south of the Brooks River, in the area surrounding

the two existing cabin ruins; it included a 100-foot frontage along the south bank of Brooks

River. Several restrictions, however, would be placed on the allotment. The certificate holder,

for instance, was not allowed to sell his property to anyone other than his heirs without NPS's
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

permission; he could not erect more than four structures on the property; he could not operate a

commercial business; no motor vehicles were allowed; and he could not otherwise deviate from

the regulations established for lands elsewhere in the monument. ASLC, in its response, thought

that the offer was "totally unacceptable," because Angasan was "unwilling to accept most of the

restrictions that the NPS seeks to impose on his title and lifestyle." The ASLC did not reject the

offer out of hand, but offered a counter proposal which modified most of the stipulations

proposed by the Interior Department. (It insisted, for instance, on the entire allotment south of

Brooks River, and the construction of up to eighteen structures on the property.) NPS made no

response to the counterproposal, and by June the attempt to short-circuit the legal process died.

[57]

Both sides, therefore, geared up for another battle. On June 19, the Interior Department

Solicitor's Office gave the IBLA its Statement of Reasons for Appeal, regarding why it should

be awarded lands south of Brooks River; one day later, Alaska Legal Services provided

arguments on why the applicant deserved title to the lands north of the river. Once those

arguments had been presented, both sides awaited a second IBLA decision, which was expected

to come sometime in mid-1988. [58]

The NPS felt that the best way to argue against the applicant's claims of early use and

occupancy was to show that the cabin which Ms. Melgenak had lived in was built after Brooks

Camp had been absorbed into Katmai National Monument. Testimony in the 1984 hearings had

suggested that the cabin (which by now was in ruins) had been built sometime after 1912, or

perhaps during the 1920s. If the NPS could prove that the cabin had been constructed after

April 1931 (the date when Katmai's boundaries were expanded), the applicant could prove no

physically-verifiable evidence of her use and occupancy of that parcel. In order to investigate

the cabin's age, the NPS brought Gary Ahlstrand, a research ecologist in the agency's regional

office and a tree-ring expert, out to the site in October 1984 and had him take core samples of

various cabin logs. The following September, Ahlstrand issued a report which concluded that

the cabin was constructed "sometime after mid-August 1931." Ms. Melgenak could, of course,

have been a seasonal resident for years beforehand; the cabin, however, was apparently built on

land which had already been designated as part of a national monument. Ahlstrand's report had

been completed by the time the NPS appealed the September 1985 IBLA decision. It was

therefore included with the agency's Statement of Reasons which it submitted in October 1986

with a request that a new hearing be held to verify its validity. [59]

ALSC, the attorneys for the applicant, objected to a reopening of the hearing. In a May 1988

decision, however, the IBLA felt it was "apparent that [Ahlstrand's report] and testimony

concerning its contents would be important to proper consideration of the issues raised in this

appeal." It therefore approved a supplemental hearing, to which ALSC reluctantly consented.

[60]

The NPS recognized that the proof offered of the cabin's date had little effect on the overall

outcome of the case. For that reason, agency lawyers initially hoped that more extensive testing

would not be required. [61] Later, however, they recognized that "additional tree-dating

analysis may be necessary to supplement [Ahlstrand's] original report." The recognition that

another ruined cabin had been located near the first brought Ahlstrand out to take more core

samples. By mid-August, Ahlstrand had written up a revised report on the Brooks Camp cabin

ruins; his research showed that the second cabin was built "no earlier than the summer of 1936,"

which was five years after Brooks Camp had fallen under NPS jurisdiction. [62]

Both sides in the dispute spent the next twelve months finding tree-ring experts and evaluating

Ahlstrand's research. By late November, the applicant had chosen Dave Horton, an Area

Forester for the BIA, to analyze the collected data. Horton viewed that data at the NPS regional

office on January 25, 1989. [63] Horton was later replaced by Dr. Donald L. Marx, a University
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

of Alaska Anchorage professor of business administration and a statistical expert. The NPS

initially chose Dr. Charles Stockton, a dendrochronologist and Director of the University of

Arizona Tree Ring Laboratory; he was later replaced by Dr. David M. Meko, Stockton's

assistant. [64]

Little took place in the case for the next few months. In early July, an administrative law judge

set the supplemental hearing for August 30 in Anchorage. [65] Three NPS witnesses--William

Tanner, Gary Ahlstrand, and David Meko--gave evidence and testimony about the two ruined

cabins. The applicant put forth no witnesses and entered one exhibit into evidence. The NPS

concluded, as a result, that the construction date of the two cabins were August 1931 and the

summer of 1936. ALSC did not dispute that testimony, but felt "this conclusion in no way

refutes the conclusion of Administrative Judge Clarke [in the September 1985 decision] that

Palakia was making use of her land long before the 1931 withdrawal." In January 1990, Judge

Harvey C. Sweitzer affirmed the construction dates of the two cabins. [66]

Key to the hearing testimony was whether evidence on the second cabin should be weighed by

the court. As early as October 1988, Melgenak's heirs objected to "any consideration regarding

the construction date of this second cabin," and argued that it was beyond the scope of the

proceedings to determine that date. But it was not until the eve of the hearing--August 22,

1989--that ALSC filed a motion to limit the scope of the proceedings to Ahlstrand's first (1985)

report. [67] The Hearings Division staff could not rule on the motion before the August 30

hearing. Three months later, NPS attorneys issued its opposition to ALSC's motion. Perhaps in

response, ALSC withdrew its original (August 22) motion. The cabin's construction date was

not only irrefutable but irrelevant; ALSC therefore dismissed this portion of the case. [68]

Once the administrative law judge had issued his findings of fact in January 1990, all steps

necessary for a final IBLA allotment decision had been completed. Administrative Judge Will

A. Irwin then considered the case, and on September 24, 1993, he issued his decision. In a clear

victory for the National Park Service, Irwin noted that "We reverse Judge Clarke's decision to

the extent he approved Melgenak's Native allotment application for the lands south of Brooks

River." However, "we affirm Judge Clarke's decision to the extent he rejected Melgenak's

application for lands north of Brooks River." Irwin, in sum, rejected all claims that the heirs of

Palakia Melgenak had made; C. Randall Grant, Jr., another administrative judge, concurred in

Irwin's decision. The NPS, as of this writing, is therefore the uncontested owner of all land in

the Brooks Camp area. [69]

It is unknown, at this point, if the claimants will try to appeal the IBLA decision. They are

legally entitled to wait as long as six years before appealing the decision to the U.S. District

Court. No appeals, however, have yet been filed. A lawsuit, if filed, could well delay final

resolution of land status for several years. The NPS, as a result, will be wary of initiating

building projects until the litigation is settled.

The Peters Claim at Lake Camp

The Pomela Peters claim proved to be just as troublesome as the Melgenak claim. On

November 13, 1970, the mixed-blood Eskimo from Naknek applied for a 160-acre parcel under

the Native Allotment Act of May 17, 1906. The parcel was located on the right bank of the

Naknek River and less than a mile south of Naknek Recreation Site #2 (the Air Force's former

Lake Camp facility). The eastern end of the parcel was located within the boundaries of Katmai

National Monument; the remainder was located on BLM land. On her application, Peters

claimed to have begun using the land in September 1937. Since that time, she declared that she

had spent all but the winter months there engaged in fishing, hunting, and berry picking. [70]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

It took the Bureau of Management more than a decade to process Ms. Peters' application.

Because of the large number of applications submitted, the process of adjudication and field

examination would have taken several years had no complications arisen. Ms. Peters, however,

had no previous legal ties and few physical ties to her parcel, and others, with some

justification, claimed a portion of the allotment. A 1975 field examination complicated matters.

Because the information on Ms. Peters' application was at variance with what the BLM field

examiner saw at the parcel, the examiner recommended that her application be rejected. No

rejection took place, although processing the application was repeatedly delayed. [71] On March

1, 1984, however, the BLM determined that the applicant had satisfied the use and occupancy

requirements of the 1906 act, and the allotment--now reduced in size to 155 acres--was held for

approval by the BLM. All signs pointed toward Ms. Peters' parcel being granted. By then,

however, the entire parcel had become absorbed within Katmai National Park, and it had also

been determined that the parcel contained an unimproved dirt road and a boat launch, the two

of which formed the easiest public access point to Naknek Lake. For each of these reasons, it

was necessary that the application be adjudicated rather than legislatively approved. [72]

The NPS showed little if any interest in the parcel during the 1970s and early 1980s. One

reason for its lack of interest may have been because park staff did not feel that the parcel

conflicted with any agency developments. When Ms. Peters first claimed her parcel, she

thought that it was located south of the Lake Camp parking lot and dock. It was not until the

late 1970s that the BLM realized that her allotment included those improvements. When the

BLM issued its decision in March 1984, it provided for a 60-day protest period, and it sent a

copy of its decision to the NPS's Alaska Regional Office. Significantly, however, the Service

did not protest the BLM's action. [73]

One of the few remaining requirements Ms. Peters needed before gaining title to her land was

the execution of a survey. The elderly lady hoped to live long enough to receive her allotment,

but she recognized that a government survey might be years in the future. In December 1986,

therefore, she speeded up the process by hiring a private engineering firm to survey the eastern

end of the parcel. (The remainder had been surveyed in 1964.) [74]

Although park officials had investigated the legal status of the King Salmon-Lake Camp road

and the Air Force recreation camp back in 1981, [75] they showed no particular interest in the

Peters parcel until November 1988. The maintenance staff hoped to construct day use facilities

at Lake Camp and improve the parking lot, but could not proceed until land title was cleared up.

[76]

The agency then initiated a series of letters which had as its goal the continued public use of

the Lake Camp area. The NPS had no desire to contest Ms. Peters' allotment, but it did hope to

continue its jurisdiction over its access route to Lake Camp. On April 6, 1990, therefore, it

requested that "the public dock, associated facilities, and access road" be excluded from the

allotment. The NPS felt justified in doing so because it contended that the Peters parcel

contained 340 rods of navigable shore space along Naknek River, but the 1906 act limited shore

space to 160 rods. It also argued that the access road and dock predated the 1937 use and

occupancy date claimed by Ms. Peters; as a result, it felt that even if the parcel did not violate

the shore space limitation, the agency had the right to include a reservation for Lake Camp's

public facilities. [77]

The BLM tried to be accommodating to the Service's request. It admitted that the allotment's

shore space might have exceeded that allowed in the 1906 act, and agreed to review the shore

space issue. Regarding the road and dock, the BLM invited the Service to submit historical

information on "public use prior to and during the allottee's claimed use and occupancy." The

BLM decided to cooperate even though the Service had lost its opportunity to protest. The

Service had lost its protest rights because it had failed to respond within thirty days of the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

March 1984 approval decision. [78]

On May 23, Garey Coatney of the NPS responded to BLM's request for historical data by

noting (inaccurately, as it turned out) that "the roads in question were built during and

immediately following World War II and have been used continuously ever since." [79] He also

noted that "Prior to the construction of the roads the area was occupied and used by many

persons other than the applicant and access to the river bank for landing purposes was essential

to this use." He provided supporting documentation--most of which was already in the

allotment file--to back up his contentions and to suggest that the applicant both recognized the

public use of the dock area and had attempted to exclude the dock area when she had applied

for the parcel. [80]

After the NPS provided its documentation, the BLM took more than a year to complete the

adjudication of Peters' allotment application. On September 25, 1991, the BLM decided that the

parcel's shore space was only about 119 rods, which was well within the 160-rod limitation.

[81]

The BLM, satisfied that Ms. Peters had fulfilled the requirements of the 1906 act, granted

Certificate of Allotment No. 50-92-0420, for a 134.34-acre parcel, on July 9, 1992. The

certificate was issued to "the heirs, devisees, and/or assigns of Pomela D. Peters;" Ms. Peters

had died on February 19, 1991. [82]

Recognizing that the Lake Camp parcel was going to be transferred into private hands, the NPS

began, in December 1991, to negotiate with Ms. Peters' heirs for the right to purchase the Lake

Camp property. [83] Ms. Peters' heirs, at one point, expressed a willingness to allow public

access to Lake Camp. By the spring of 1993, however, they had erected "No Trespassing" signs

along the road, and for a few weeks the road was barricaded. NPS officials were advised that

the new property owners were strongly divided over the issue of selling either an easement or a

portion of the property to the federal government. They responded, therefore, by giving serious

consideration to the use of Naknek Recreation Site #2 as a alternate access point to Naknek

Lake.

Backcountry Ranger Activities

Between 1980 and 1984, Katmai's budget more than doubled, from about $325,000 to almost

$700,000. One result of the increased budget was that the park, for the first time, was able to

station seasonal staff in locations away from Brooks Camp. Staff were usually placed at sites

where visitor concentrations demanded the enforcement of park regulations. Their numbers,

however, were highly sensitive to the budgetary process, and when park budgets levelled off in

the mid-1980s fewer backcountry rangers were able to be deployed. [84]

The first Katmai backcountry rangers were used to protect the monument's wildlife during the

spring and fall hunting seasons. Rangers were assigned beginning in 1972, perhaps earlier.

These "stakeout teams" were dropped off in various remote sites for several weeks each year.

The teams continued to be assigned until 1983 and were used again in 1985. [85] Other early

"backcountry" rangers were those assigned to Lake Camp. Until 1984, Lake Camp rangers were

given other duties, either at Brooks Camp or King Salmon. They were assigned beginning in the

late 1970s and continued through 1985.

The first summertime backcountry rangers were deployed in 1978, the last summer before the

monument was expanded. Rather than assigning two individuals to backcountry duty for the

entire season, the superintendent arranged for each of the interpreters, Brooks Camp rangers,

and the Lake Camp ranger to take week-long sojourns into the backcountry. The most
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

commonly patrolled area was the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes. [86]

The revolving system of backcountry ranger deployment continued until 1982, when two new

ranger positions were established to operate a new camp at the outlet to Nonvianuk Lake.

Dennis and Penny Knuckles, who filled those positions, were kept busy advising those

intending to float the Nonvianuk River. [87] Rangers continued to staff the Nonvianuk Lake

camp until 1988. In 1983, the first rangers were deployed to Big River during its short but

furious silver salmon run. They remained there each year until 1988, but never stayed for more

than a few weeks. A similar ranger presence was established along the Kamishak River. In

1984, additional rangers were assigned to patrol the far-flung coastal areas of the park. A twoperson team was assigned to the Aniakchak coastline in June; in July and August, they

conducted week long patrols of all the rivers and bays between Kashvik and Swikshak, utilizing

base camps at Amalik, Kukak, and Swikshak Lagoon. Coastal patrols continued through the

1988 season. [88]

In 1985, the Nonvianuk Lake, Big River, and coastal rangers were complemented by the

assignment of a ranger to the Grosvenor Camp area. The ranger, Lyndi Denlinger, was asked to

evaluate the nature and severity of conflicts developing along American Creek. The abandoned

National Marine Fisheries Service cabin was used as a base camp that summer. The following

year rangers continued to monitor American Creek activities, but the campsite was moved west

to a site two miles up American Creek from Lake Coville. [89]

The late 1980s and early 1990s witnessed the continued placement of personnel in strategic

backcountry locations. Nonvianuk Camp has been staffed each year since 1988, rangers were

stationed at American Creek from 1988 through 1990, and park personnel were stationed at

Fure's Cabin in 1989. A ranger crew resided along Big River and Kamishak River in 1988, and

a team was dispatched to the Takli Island-Geographic Harbor area for a short time during the

summer of 1989. The March 1989 grounding of the T/V Exxon Valdez resulted in the

deployment of additional rangers to accompany the various oil-spill cleanup crews. Personnel

were stationed at Fure's Cabin in 1990 and 1991; during the summer of 1991, rangers were also

sited near Swikshak Bay and Amalik Bay. [90]

The Katmai Wilderness Plan

The Alaska Lands Act, passed in December 1980, established a 3,473,000-acre wilderness area

within the renamed and newly-expanded Katmai National Park. Of the land which had been in

the former monument, the bill adopted almost everything that had been recommended by

President Nixon in his June 1974 wilderness message. (Of the administrative recommendations

of 2,603,547 acres, everything had been accepted with the exception of the 2,000-acre plot

which lay between the Valley Road and Naknek Lake.) In addition, Congress added to the

wilderness system another 650,000 acres of land which had not been managed by the National

Park Service prior to 1978. Altogether, more than 90 percent of Katmai National Park was

designated as wilderness. Also, over 60,000 acres of Katmai National Preserve--about oneseventh of the total preserve acreage--became part of the National Wilderness Preservation

System.

In addition to the lands designated by ANILCA as so-called "instant wilderness," Congress

mandated that

Within five years from the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary [of the

Interior] ... shall review, as to their suitability or nonsuitability for preservation as

wilderness, all lands within units of the National Park System ... not designated as

wilderness by this Act and report his findings to the president. [91]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

In response to that mandate, the NPS began a renewed study of Katmai's wilderness resources

in 1984, and it included a wilderness suitability review in the same process which brought about

the Draft Katmai General Management Plan and Land Protection Plan. (Such reviews took

place for NPS units throughout the state.) All of the Katmai land which had not already been

designated wilderness, a total of approximately 667,500 acres, was subject to the wilderness

suitability review. [92]

Given that mandate, the NPS broadly defined those lands which would be considered for

wilderness designation. All federal lands which met all of the other suitability criteria were

considered suitable. Those lands being selected were suitable if retained in federal ownership

but unsuitable if conveyed out of federal hands; their suitability, therefore, was pending. Lands

that had been developed according to the criteria set forth in the Wilderness Act were, of

course, unsuitable for wilderness. Given those parameters, planners determined that 528,000

acres of the lands being considered--79 percent of the total--were suitable for wilderness.

Another 31,000 acres (5 percent of the total) had pending suitability. The remaining 109,500

acres (16 percent) were deemed unsuitable for wilderness designation. [93]

During the 16-month period that elapsed between the issuance of the draft and final Wilderness

Suitability Review, the legal status of various parcels changed as did planners' interpretations of

their suitability as wilderness. As a result, the wilderness plan that was signed by the Assistant

Secretary of the Interior in November 1986 and passed on to the President declared that 491,807

acres in the park and preserve (71 percent of the available acreage) was suitable for designation.

Another 29,865 acres (4 percent of the total) had pending suitability, and the final 175,622 acres

(25 percent) were unsuitable for wilderness.

In March 1986, during the preparation phase of the final Wilderness Suitability Review, the

NPS began a wilderness scoping process, which was intended to help agency officials decide

which lands declared to be suitable for wilderness should be recommended for wilderness. This

process, which took place for parks throughout Alaska, was intended to identify public and

agency concerns and to define the major issues which would influence wilderness decision

making. Public meetings were held in over 40 communities across the state; two of those

hearings were held in King Salmon on October 16, 1986. [94]

Based on the scoping process, the agency, in June 1988, released a draft Environmental Impact

Statement on its Katmai wilderness recommendations. The document noted that the combined

park and preserve had 643,448 acres that were suitable for wilderness designation. (The

November 1986 wilderness suitability review had declared that only 491,807 acres were

suitable, but subsequent changes in the criteria for suitability increased the suitable acreage by

over 150,000 acres.) [95]

Four alternatives were identified on how to deal with the remaining wilderness resource.

Alternative 1, the no-action alternative, called for no new wilderness. Alternative 2, which was

recommended by the NPS, urged the creation of 245,284 more acres in wilderness (38 percent

of the study area) and another 49,617 acres for future wilderness consideration. Alternative 3,

considered designating 497,539 acres (77 percent of the study area) as wilderness and another

57,000 acres as a potential wilderness addition. Alternative 4, the maximum wilderness

alternative, would consider 586,448 acres (91 percent of the study area) as wilderness; the other

57,000 acres (9 percent of the study area) was considered as potential wilderness. [96]

Alternative 2, the agency's preferred alternative, recommended four significant new tracts of

wilderness. Those areas included Lake Coville, Iliuk Arm, the northern portion of Naknek Lake

(including the Bay of Islands area), and a large block of land located in and around Kulik and

Battle lakes. Several small areas along the eastern coast were also recommended for wilderness.

The large State-owned tract along the shore of Kamishak Bay and the various Russian Orthodox
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

Church parcels were recommended as potential wilderness additions. No new areas in Katmai

National Preserve were recommended for wilderness. [97]

Although the NPS recommended the addition of almost 300,000 acres to the National

Wilderness Preservation System, it expected few changes in the prevailing activity pattern. Most

of the areas proposed for addition were already de facto wilderness. Several areas had a

historical pattern of activities (such as motorboat usage or float-plane landings) that would have

been contrary to wilderness use patterns outside of Alaska. The Alaska Lands Act and parkspecific regulations, however, decreed that those activities were compatible with wilderness

designation. [98]

Once the draft EIS had been issued and distributed, the NPS solicited public comments on it.

Public hearings were held in Anchorage on July 18, in Arlington, Virginia on July 19, and in

King Salmon on July 20. [99] In response to the draft, 68 people attended the various public

hearings and 110 letters were received commenting on the draft document. The public was

given until August 29 to comment. Congress, however, mandated that the final EIS be issued by

September 30. Given just one month to translate the many comments and opinions into a final

recommendation, NPS officials were unable to make a thorough evaluation of the received

comments. The final EIS, as a consequence, contained the same acreage recommendations as

the draft: 245,284 acres of wilderness and 49,617 acres of potential wilderness. [100]

The final wilderness EIS, as promised, was finalized by the Assistant Secretary of the Interior at

the end of September 1988. After that point, it was made available for action by Congress. The

legislature has not yet acted upon the recommendations contained in that document.

Katmai Land Exchange Proposals

Local interests seized upon the public comment period created during the wilderness review

process to try to gain greater access to lands on the park's western boundary. As noted above,

ANILCA had decreed that the newly-expanded portions of Katmai National Park would be one

of only three newly-created NPS units which did not allow subsistence activities. (The other

two areas were Kenai Fjords National Park and the areas added to Glacier Bay National Park.

The only other Alaska NPS area closed to subsistence was the pre-1978 portion of Denali

National Park and Preserve.) Some local residents demanded subsistence access to the newlydesignated areas of the park; they, after all, wanted the same access that was allowed for those

living adjacent to most of the other ANILCA park lands.

Bristol Bay Borough officials felt that the best way to redress a historic grievance would be the

creation of a new wilderness-plan alternative, the central tenet of which would be a land trade.

Taking their cue from the recently-completed Land Protection Plan, borough officials proposed

that two plots of land in the northeastern corner of the park be conveyed from the State of

Alaska to the National Park Service. In exchange, they proposed that 22,500 acres of NPS land

on Pike Ridge (just north of the western end of Naknek Lake) be conveyed to the State of

Alaska; in addition, they proposed that the NPS move the park's western boundary in the King

Salmon area back to what it was before President Carter issued his proclamation in December

1978. Officials proposed the land trade in order to increase the acreage available for subsistence

hunting and trapping activities. [101]

Borough officials felt that they were making a fair, equitable trade that would be advantageous

to both parties. The NPS stood to gain more acreage than it lost; the two parcels of State land

totalled almost 75,000 acres, all of it eligible for the national wilderness preservation system.

The area it stood to give up, however, totalled less than 35,000 acres. It had little if any potential

as wilderness. Almost one-third of that total, moreover, was not owned by the NPS, and the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

agency could exert few management controls over it. The agency, for its part, recognized that a

traditional use trail wound along Pike Ridge; because of that trail, it was difficult to manage the

ridge in the face of agency regulations which discouraged motorized travel.

The idea of a land trade was not new. It had first been proposed in 1982 by Dick Sellers, a local

Alaska Department of Fish and Game employee. He knew that the state had little interest in its

land at Kamishak Bay; its Department of Natural Resources (DNR), in fact, had already

proposed that the acreage be sold to private interests--and that hunting on that parcel was

inconsistent with the management of other Katmai National Park lands. In order to protect the

parcel's habitat value, he suggested that the state transfer it to the NPS for "land of equal value

elsewhere in the State, most ideally ... from the western side of Katmai National Park." [102]

Sellers presented his ideas to David Morris, Katmai's Superintendent. Morris recognized that

several areas within the park could be effectively managed as a preserve, and after a brief

survey found seven areas which "we would be most comfortable with in preserve status." The

area considered most eligible for conversion from park to preserve was a 59,520-acre parcel

which surrounded the western end of Naknek Lake. [103] Sellers and Morris were thus in full

agreement that a land exchange would be in the best interests of both parties. But the process of

effecting such an exchange promised to be long and tortuous.

The state, in response to Morris's study, fashioned a modified land trade proposal. The state still

planned to swap federal for state land. It offered, however, to divest itself of both its Kamishak

Bay parcel and one located south of McNeil River State Game Sanctuary. In exchange, it hoped

to gain title to all of NPS's land south of Naknek Lake in Range 42 and Range 43 of the Seward

Meridian; in addition, it hoped to gain all of the land south of that point which had been added

to Katmai by Carter's 1978 proclamation and the subsequent passage of the Alaska Lands Act.

Adelheid Herrmann, the local Alaska House member, presented Morris with the idea in January

1984. Morris responded by agreeing to present the idea as one of the several alternatives in the

park's general management plan, which was then being prepared. [104] Morris cautioned,

however, that removing lands from National Park designation would require an act of Congress.

[105]

On one key point, the state and NPS had been operating at cross purposes in both the 1982 and

1984 discussions. The state, in each case, had proposed that NPS land be traded for state land,

while NPS proposals had called for the acquisition of state land in return for the conversion of

NPS land from park to preserve status. Sellers recognized the inconsistency, and in a March

1984 memo offered several possible land trades. He urged that a meeting be held between staff

of each of the several agencies involved. [106] That meeting took place on May 2. At that time

the NPS made it plain that it did not want to give up its ownership of any Katmai lands. It

reiterated its willingness, however, to consider preserve status for the area south of Naknek

Lake, and identified parcels in several other Alaska NPS units which it was willing to trade to

the state. It therefore appeared that a three-way trade was in the works. [107]

Given the probability of a land trade, ADF&G went out of its way to protect the Kamishak Bay

parcel from activities which would have complicated the exchange process. It asked DNR to

close the area to mineral entry, it closed the area to brown bear hunting, and it rejected various

applications for cabin or tent-frame construction. [108]

The Park Service, however, ran into complications in its attempts to expedite the land trade. It

assessed the value of the various properties it was willing to divest to the state, and in

September 1984, NPS Regional Director Roger Contor admitted that "It appears ... that at best

the National Park Service would have only about 80 percent of the dollar value necessary for

the exchange." He anticipated that he would need additional lands with an appraised value of

approximately $2 million. He therefore wrote to the Bureau of Land Management, requesting

them to "assess the availability of public lands or other interests under [your] jurisdiction that
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

might be included in the exchange and would be of interest to the state." [109] The BLM,

however, was less than enthusiastic about the idea, and by early 1985 it appeared that neither

NPS nor DNR were actively pursuing the land-trade idea. [110] Although Superintendent

Morris had promised that the park's draft General Management Plan would discuss a land-trade

alternative, no such alternative was included when the plan was released in March 1985.

The land exchange idea was ignored for the next few years. In 1988, it sprang back to life when

Ray Bane, the park's new superintendent, became concerned about the growing pressure to

develop fishing camps along the Kamishak River. Several trespass camps, by this time, had

already developed near the river mouth, and both Bane and state officials sought a way to deal

with the increasing development pressure. Bane met with regional officials and considered

various ideas, including a federal-state cooperative agreement, a Memorandum of

Understanding (MOU), the extension of McNeil River sanctuary, and transfer of state lands to

the NPS. When appraised of Bane's interest in the matter, officials at the NPS and the state

Department of Natural Resources recognized the obvious difficulties of the last alternative.

Instead, they proposed an MOU for interim management of the Kamishak Bay lands. [111]

State DNR officials prepared a draft cooperative land management agreement, but NPS officials

were unwilling to accept any agreement in which regulations conflicting with NPS's

management philosophy had to be followed. The goals of the two agencies proved to be too

disparate, and by October 1989 state and federal officials agreed to postpone further discussion

of a cooperative agreement. [112] Neither a land trade nor a cooperative agreement has been

seriously pursued since that time.

As has been seen, officials at the local, state, and federal level had been aware throughout the

1980s of the potential advantages of a land trade, and efforts to consummate a mutually

advantageous agreement had taken place, off and on, over a seven year period. All had failed.

Seen in the light of those events, it appears that the Borough's attempt, in August 1988, to add a

land-exchange alternative to the Katmai wilderness plan was not a logical reflection of the

historical process which various governmental officials had already undertaken. The Borough's

plan was a renewed attempt to suggest a modified version of that which had first been

propounded by ADF&G officials in 1982 and 1984. Unfortunately, there was little in the plan

which had not already been discussed; it was not surprising, therefore, that NPS officials did not

incorporate its ideas into the final wilderness plan.

Park Activities, 1983-1992

Katmai operations, in recent years, have grown by fits and starts. In 1983, its budget was about

$680,000, and had more than doubled in just the past three years. For the next six years,

however, the budget remained at close to its 1983 figure; from 1983 through 1989, the annual

budget remained between $640,000 and $700,000. Given the prevailing inflation rate, Katmai's

budget actually declined during the mid-to-late 1980s. Although the budget remained stagnant,

the number of permanent staff between 1983 and 1989 jumped from six to nine. (The seasonal

staff level remained between 20 and 25.) The deployment of seasonal staff into the

backcountry, noted above, reduced their numbers at Brooks Camp to the point that the NPS was

no longer able to provide interpretive services on the Valley Road bus tour. Since 1989,

however, the park budget has once again enjoyed renewed growth; in 1992, for example, the

budget was more than $1,150,000, and the number of permanent positions had increased to

thirteen. [113] (See Appendix C.)

As noted earlier in the chapter, the early to mid-1980s witnessed the issuance of two

Development Concept Plans. Both plans called for the construction of new buildings. At Brooks

Camp, the concessioner responded to the DCP by constructing an employee residential complex

and a lodge extension. But at King Salmon, the issuance of the headquarters area DCP resulted
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

in little construction activity. Overcrowding there remained an overwhelming problem.

In the mid-1980s, park officials finally agreed to install new structures at King Salmon, but in

doing so they ignored the DCP recommendations. In order to provide more office space, they

scouted out areas outside the NPS parcel and applied to lease space in the King Salmon Mall, a

two-story business building which was erected beginning in 1985. The mall was completed the

following June, and the superintendent, chief ranger, and administrative technician moved into

offices on the second floor. Their action freed up office space for the maintenance staff. [114]

A patchwork of other improvements have come to the administrative complex in recent years,

but not as the DCP would have envisioned. The Butler Building was removed as planned, but

the annex office remained and, in 1986, began serving as a carpenter shop and a storage area

for the park library and museum. The tent frames were also not removed; instead, they were

converted into cabins in 1985 and 1986. In 1988, two trailers which once belonged to the Fish

and Wildlife Service were added just south of the duplex which had been built in 1983, and in

1990 a new tent frame was constructed just east of the administrative annex. Most of the

improvements were financed by Park Restoration and Improvement Program funds. [115]

Outside of the King Salmon complex, the NPS has erected relatively few structures in the last

few years. Since 1983, the only new Brooks Camp facilities have been a storage shed erected in

1988, an incinerator building erected in 1990-91, and two wall tents built in 1991. In 1992, park

staff erected a large bear viewing platform on the south side of Brooks River near the floating

bridge. [116] The only NPS facilities built elsewhere in the park in recent years have been

seasonal tent camps.

The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill

As has been suggested, many activities kept the small Katmai staff busy, both winter and

summer, during the 1980s. In the early spring of 1989, however, an environmental disaster

caused all other management activities to be relegated to the back burner for months to come.

Shortly after midnight on March 24, 1989, the Tanker Vessel Exxon Valdez ran aground on

Bligh Reef, southwest of Valdez. On board was more than 53 million gallons of oil. Within five

hours, more than 10 million gallons had spilled into the waters of Prince William Sound. [117]

Much has been written about the spill, and this report is not the place to discuss either the

general chronology of the spill nor the ways in which the NPS and other agencies organized

themselves in order to contain the spilled oil. Other publications, both by the agency and

outside parties, have addressed these points. [118] This section will be limited to a description

of how the NPS dealt with the oil which spilled along the Katmai shoreline. Sections in later

chapters will describe how oil spill activities shed light on the agency's knowledge of the park's

natural and cultural resources.

In the earliest days of spill activities, Interior Department officials, including the NPS, thought

that the oil could be contained within Price William Sound. At the request of the Exxon

Corporation, an Incident Command Team (ICT) was organized on March 27 and March 28. ICT

chief Dave Liebersbach, however, soon found that no one in the Valdez area wanted to utilize

the team's services. The U.S. Forest Service, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Coast Guard, the

State of Alaska, and Exxon all chose to use their own resources in fighting the spill. The ICT

was therefore relieved from its duties in Valdez; soon afterwards, the NPS called on the team to

protect Kenai Fjords National Park. [119]

Most ICT activity for the next several weeks took place in the Kenai Fjords area. Before long,

NPS officials began to recognize that the oil would soon move farther afield; some, however,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

thought that the prevailing currents would impact the shoreline of Lake Clark National Park

rather than Katmai. Only a few NPS employees, one of whom was Katmai superintendent Ray

Bane, felt that Katmai would be threatened. On April 6, less than two weeks after the Exxon

Valdez ran aground, Bane requested ICT assistance in combatting the spill along the eastern

shoreline of the park. A list was quickly drawn up which identified the primary areas--harbors,

bays, rivers, and lagoons--that needed protection. [120]

During the week which followed, NPS staff wrote a Katmai oil spill contingency plan; the three

authors of the plan were Daniel Hamson and Cordell Roy, both Environmental Specialists in

the agency's Alaska Regional Office, and Janis Meldrum, Katmai's Resource Management

Specialist. In addition, they began to organize a series of teams that would assess the park's

coastline prior to the oil's arrival. [121] (See chapters 10 and 12.)

Bane, Hamson, and Roy also sought out a place from which they could organize their park

protection efforts. Seward, the existing base of operations for Kenai Fjords work, was one

obvious choice; in addition, the three considered Homer and Kodiak. The trio chose Kodiak

(over the objection of many in the Anchorage office) because it had good air access, because a

wide range of vessels was available, and because it was closest to the Katmai shoreline. The

park soon established a Superintendent's Representative at its Kodiak office. [122] The ICT, in

recognition of the spread of the spill, also looked for a branch office west of Seward. Bane

hoped that the ICT would establish its office in Kodiak. On April 7, the ICT commander

announced that branches would be located in Kenai and Homer, and that ICT operations along

the Katmai shoreline would be directed from Homer. Three days later, however, an ICT team

was dispatched to Kodiak. Spill operations were soon transferred to Kodiak, and by the end of

April both the Kenai and Homer branches had closed. [123]

Once an administrative apparatus had been set up, NPS officials readied a series of teams

which would assess the coastline's natural and cultural resources before oiling took place. Early

organizers, operating out of the Homer ICT office, hoped to send teams out immediately, but so

many specialists were at work at Kenai Fjords that few were left over for other NPS areas.

Eventually, enough were freed for the task that officials at the Homer ICT were able to organize

and train three assessment teams. Between April 15 and 18, the teams sailed off to survey the

Katmai coastline. The teams, supported by Kodiak-based helicopters, returned to Homer by

April 29. [124]

Small quantities of oil were seen on Katmai's beaches (at Cape Douglas) even before

assessment teams arrived for their surveys, but most teams were able to inventory Katmai's

coastline while it was still in a pristine condition. On April 18, the first oil was spotted at Kukak

Bay, 50 miles south of Cape Douglas; by the end of the month, the first evidences of oil had

reached the southern end of the park. Large quantities of oil first reached Cape Douglas on

April 26, and reached areas to the south during the following week. [125]

In order to deal with the onslaught of oil, the Kodiak ICT issued an Incident Action Plan on

April 16. The plan focused on identifying areas for feasibility and priority of booming. Bane

himself, along with an Exxon-contracted booming expert, flew the coastline in order to identify

areas suitable for booming. Bane recognized that Katmai's wide bays were largely unsuitable for

the technique. He felt, however, that deflection booming, which promised the prevention of

some oil from bays, might work. [126]

Because most NPS officials felt that the Lake Clark shoreline was more likely to suffer impact

than Katmai, they were unable to place either booms or skimmers in position at Katmai before

huge quantities of oil arrived. The Soviet skimmer Vaydagursky, the first oil spill response

vessel, was hard at work in Shelikof Strait on April 30. Two days later, the ship was joined by

fourteen others, including nine skimmers and two dredges from the U.S. Army Corps of
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

Engineers. The ships' combined effort could do little to stop the onslaught. The vessels collected

relatively little oil, and storms which whistled through the strait on May 1 drove oil into areas

that had previously been pristine. Some boom was finally laid at Hallo Bay, but it was too late

to prevent a heavy infusion of oil. By May 2, the damage was complete. More than 90 percent

of the Katmai coastline experienced at least some degree of oil spill impacts. [127]

Little could be done except to begin the cleanup process. On May 10 the first Exxon crew, 40

workers strong, went to Cape Chiniak, just north of Hallo Bay. It spent the better part of a

month there, shoveling oil-contaminated materials into bags for removal from the beach. The

weather and organizational snafus prevented the deployment of additional crews until mid-May,

and it was not until mid-July that cleanup was in full swing along the Katmai coast. [128]

The crews were hired by Exxon, and their duties were limited to the mopping-up of oil.

Resource considerations, however, could not be ignored. Because the Shelikof Strait coastline

was prime bear habitat, and because the coastal area contained a number of first-rate

archeological sites, Superintendent Bane required that a so-called Resource Protection Officer

(RPO) accompany each cleanup crew. The RPOs did not prevent negative consequences to area

bears; one was shot and killed by a VECO-employed "bear guard," and numerous others were

harassed by the mere presence of humans. The establishment of RPOs, however, doubtless

prevented greater damage to the area's natural and cultural resources. [129]

By July 27, four of the hardest hit areas of the Katmai coastline had been "treated" or subjected

to cleanup work. These were 1) Cape Chiniak and Chiniak Lagoon, 2) Hallo Bay beach and

lagoon, 3) the south shore of Cape Gull and Kaflia Bay, and 4) Cape Douglas. Most of these

areas, despite those efforts, were not clean; additional work was needed. [130]

Work continued for another month and a half. By early August, crews had removed some

56,000 bags of spoil from 65,000 yards (37 miles) of Katmai beaches. By mid-August, another

18,000 bags of spoil had been filled and 23,000 yards of coastline covered. On September 15,

after cleanup efforts stopped, the total count was 95,151 bags of spoil collected from 111,585

yards (approximately 63.4 miles) of Katmai's shoreline. Overall, it appeared that about 320 of

the 398 miles of park shoreline had received oil, although only a few beaches had been heavily

impacted. Within that area, the spill had killed at least 8,400 birds. [131]

Following the summer cleanup crews was a two-man NPS post-oiling assessment team, which

assessed the relative cleanliness of park beaches and guided cleanup priorities. This work,

directed from the NPS office in Kodiak, began in May and lasted throughout the summer. The

team spot-checked many segments of Katmai's coastline; it remained active until its September

30 demobilization. [132]

Beginning in mid-June, the NPS also brought in a crew of bio-technicians to carry on more

comprehensive resource surveys. These studies, funded primarily by Exxon and headed by NPS

biologist Will Troyer, gathered information to support the damage assessment process as

outlined by the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act

(CERCLA). Specific work involved the creation of long term transects for determining the fate

and persistence of oil extruded by the Exxon Valdez. [133]

By the end of the 1989 cleanup season, one and all knew that Katmai's beaches were far from

clean, and that more work crews would be required the following summer. In order to identify

sites where future cleanup efforts could be best employed, the Department of the Interior

organized the Winter Interagency Monitoring Program (WIMP). As part of the program, the

NPS set up nine permanent reference stations along Katmai's coast. William R. Miller, an NPS

ranger stationed in Kodiak, was assigned to periodically visit those stations and report on the

location and quantity of oil. None of the nine stations, however, were visited that winter. [134]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

In late March 1990, spring assessment efforts began. Those assessments, funneled through a

Technical Advisory Group (TAG) process, laid out what the location and scope of the summer's

cleanup work. At the insistence of Regional Director Boyd Evison, the NPS modified many of

the TAG recommendations due to the agency's stricter levels of environmental sensitivity. He

also insisted that Resource Protection Officers be used again. [135]

In 1990, cleanup took place without much of the fanfare that had characterized the previous

season's operations. Crews hired by Exxon were again brought to Katmai's shores. Those crews

were seen along the coast throughout the summer; they had arrived by late June and remained

until late August. Many beaches which had been cleaned in 1989 did not need further work,

and several of those that were visited needed only a cursory cleanup. [136]

The RPOs hired to oversee the cleanup efforts did their best to prevent encounters between

bears and humans. Their duties included the prevention of cleanup crews from making

indiscriminate flyovers and beach landings that could disturb wildlife, and the monitoring of

archeological and historical sites in order to prevent looting. [137]

The RPOs had a mixed record of success in keeping intact Katmai's beach resources from the

cleanup crews. Most RPOs established a good working relationship with the Exxon field

supervisors. Some of those supervisors, however, were poor managers, and some among the

cleanup crews were uncooperative. But as the summer wore on, the overall situation improved,

and each of the assigned site cleanups were completed to NPS specifications. [138]

By July 1990, it was becoming increasingly clear to the Coast Guard (which was serving as the

Federal On-Scene Coordinator of the oil spill effort) that some areas affected by the spill would

be minimally improved by further cleanup efforts. Most beaches still had evidence of oiling, but

it was felt that the cleanup was becoming excessively costly in view of the contribution it was

making to minimize threats to public health or the environment. By the end of the summer, the

NPS largely concurred in that assessment. A September 6, 1990 report by its Katmai Shoreline

Assessment Team noted that little additional oil could be removed from park beaches without

the use of chemicals, the application of which would compromise water quality. The beaches

were sufficiently clean, in fact, that a comprehensive assessment would no longer be needed. A

report issued later that month by the regional office's Office of Oil Spill Coordination reinforced

those conclusions. It noted that oil still remained in scattered patches along Katmai's coast, but

that the cleanup crews had removed the maximum oil possible given shoreline conditions,

weather, and environmental constraints. [139]

With the cessation of cleanup operations in September 1990, plans began to be formulated for a

cleanup operation the following year. The 1991 cleanup process promised to be a downsized

version of what had taken place in 1989 and 1990; the 1990-1991 winter monitoring process,

therefore, was also smaller than the previous year's efforts had been. The Kodiak office, which

had been active the previous winter, was shut down, and the NPS made no plans to monitor

Katmai's beaches. Both Exxon and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

conducted selected monitoring of oiled beaches that winter, but few if any of those beaches

were located within the park. The only real activities, therefore, were planning efforts.

NPS officials emerged from the winter with the decision that no further cleanup would take

place on Katmai's shorelines. As they had concluded the previous September, they knew of a

few sites, such as a segment of open beach just south of Cape Douglas, where further cleanup

would be of some benefit. But they also knew that the local environment would be more harmed

by the cleanup process than if the area were left alone. The state, however, felt that treatment

was needed at those few sites, and in order to maintain interagency rapport the NPS agreed to

having them cleaned. [140] But the NPS insisted that Inipol, a popular bioremediation technique

used elsewhere in the spill zone, not be applied onto Katmai's beaches.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

The 1991 Katmai cleanup took place under that compromise. Oil was removed manually at first;

later, bioremediation took place with Customblen, a chemical found to be less harmful than

Inipol. The whole process began in June and was over in just two weeks. [141] The completion

of the season's work brought to an end the three-year process of cleaning up the park's beaches.

Scientists and park personnel would spend many more years studying the spill's effects on the

coastal wildlife and marine resources. The work of cleaning the beaches, however, would be

left to nature.

The Brooks River Area Development Concept Plan

In recent years, the NPS has witnessed an accelerating rate of visitor use throughout the park.

Most of the park has been largely unaffected by the rising visitor levels. But Brooks Camp, the

park's major development site, has proven so popular that problems related to its management,

in recent years, have commanded the great majority of the park budget. [142] The two most

critical Brooks Camp management issues since the mid-1980s have included bear-human

interactions and the sheer volume of Brooks Camp use. The Brooks River Area Development

Concept Plan, initiated in 1988, is the method by which the NPS has attempted to confront

those issues.

The interaction between bears and humans at Brooks Camp is a problem which has existed

since the 1960s. The steady increase in visitor levels since that time has exacerbated the

situation. By the late 1970s, the NPS had considered bear-human interaction at the mouth of

Brooks River to be such a problem that they prevailed on the concessioner to move its

employee complex to an area away from the most common bear travel routes.

In 1982, as has been noted, the NPS undertook the preparation of a Katmai general

management plan. [143] The Katmai GMP emphasized resource protection and called for few

new developments. The draft plan, which was particularly sensitive to Brooks Camp's clash of

resources, called for the camp's eventual relocation; a major reason for moving the camp was to

avoid future bear-human conflicts. The final plan, however, was more tentative. It

recommended a stabilization of activities at the camp, and recognized that more data had to be

gathered about the nature of bear-human interactions before a move could proceed. The final

plan also demanded that a Development Concept Plan be prepared that will "address the need

for, size, and location of visitor facilities" in the camp. [144]

Dave Morris, Katmai's superintendent, knew that the completion of the DCP would provide a

blueprint for Brooks Camp's future. He also knew, however, that the document would take

several years to complete. In the meantime, he tried to gather data pertinent to the problem of

bear-human interactions at the camp. In 1985, he agreed to sponsor a study directed by Dr.

Barrie Gilbert, a biologist at Utah State University. [145] The study, which was completed in

1988, showed (among other things) that the bears which visited the camp in mid-September

were less habituated to humans than those who frequented the camp earlier in the season. Safety

problems, therefore, were bound to increase if the lodge remained open after the first week in

September. [146] Given the results of that study, Superintendent Bane ordered the concessioner

to close Brooks Lodge on September 10. [147]

The other trend, the increase in day use visitors to Brooks Camp, has been caused by two

factors: the increase of fly-in anglers and other day-trippers during the decade, and the decision

to open up the camp as a major package tour destination. By the late 1980s, the increase in

visitor levels in such a limited area had become so great that park officials concluded that

stringent controls had to be instituted in order to provide visitors with a quality park experience.

Creating a development concept plan was the agency's way to confront the rising activity levels.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

Statistics reaffirm the exploding popularity of fly-in trips during the 1980s. In 1981, three

commercial use licensees brought only about sixty day-trippers to the Brooks Camp area, while

eight years later some sixteen licensees flew more than 1,850 visitors to the camp. [148] The

package tour, also popular today, did not begin until 1988. The two largest tour operators in the

state, Westours and Princess Tours, approached Katmailand in hopes of working out a deal

using the company's planes as well as its ground transportation. Katmailand knew that the tour

operators could contract with another carrier if agreeable terms were not worked out. The

company, therefore, cooperated in providing a new, day-long tour which included both a fly-in

trip to Brooks Camp and the Valley of the Ten Thousand Smokes bus tour. [149]

With growth at Brooks Camp came the demand for more regulations. The concentration of

people there had long concerned planners; efforts had been made during the Mission 66

planning process, as well as the Master Plan process of the early 1970s, to shift new

development to another area. By the mid-1970s, park officials had begun to worry that the

summertime visitor-use levels were impinging on the health of the local bear and fish

populations. This concern was confirmed by Dr. Gilbert's research findings. [150]

By the early 1980s, a broader concern was being registered among park officials because they

encountered a wide variety of Brooks Camp-area public use problems, ranging from the

scarcity of firewood to complaints of noise pollution. [151] These problems began to worsen

when guests staying at lodges outside the park began to arrive in increasing numbers. As early

as 1985, park officials recognized that the camp was becoming too crowded, [152] and in the

late 1980s the advent of tours from the major tour operators exacerbated the worsening

situation. One of the worst of those problems related to Brooks Camp air traffic.

Ray Bane, who assumed the superintendency in the summer of 1987, vowed to meet those

problems head-on. Noting that "existing facilities in the Brooks River/Camp area are being

stressed by visitor uses and demands," he initiated a series of management actions designed to

ease the strain of overcrowding. Bane required that all pilots fly at least 1000 feet over the

Brooks Camp area; he prohibited step-taxiing and takeoffs within 200 feet of the beach; and he

imposed, and enforced, a limit of one fish per day on Brooks River. [153] He also saw to it that

the Development Concept Plan which had been called for in the recently-completed General

Management Plan should be initiated.

The effort to create a Brooks River Area DCP began with an all-day meeting in February 1988.

To provide data for the plan, the agency contracted with the University of Washington to assess

visitor use and attitudes at the camp. In addition, park resource management personnel

evaluated various potential development sites. [154] By 1990, continued work by park staff,

regional staff, and the DCP planning team had resulted in the creation of a revised set of

alternatives. [155]

The agency issued an alternative workbook in the summer of 1991. The plan's Alternative 1,

which called for continued development in the existing area, would allow new NPS housing and

a visitor center at the camp. Alternative 2, slightly more restrictive, would add new concessioner

cabins and the NPS visitor center while reducing the number of NPS residences. The two

remaining alternatives would raze all camp improvements, by both the concessioner and the

NPS, north of Brooks River. Alternative 3 called for the removal of both NPS and concessioner

facilities to Iliuk Moraine, while Alternative 4 called for the conversion of Brooks River into a

day use area, a reduction in NPS facilities, and the elimination of all concessioner facilities.

[156]

Public meetings pertaining to the DCP were held in June and July 1991, and the public was

given until September 15 to comment. The planning team spent the next several months

digesting the public's opinions. Those comments showed a wide diversity of opinion; some
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

advocated the two alternatives which would have removed all Brooks Camp facilities, but just

as many were happy to have few if any modifications to the existing camp. The team then

began to prepare a draft Environmental Impact Statement which would include a preferred

development alternative. [157]

It appeared obvious to some, particularly to researchers and NPS field staff, that the number of

visitors to Brooks Camp needed to be reduced. But many entrenched elements--the

concessioner, outdoor sports groups, influential clients, and some members of the NPS

hierarchy--were strongly opposed to any change in the status quo.

Based on the power possessed by those who like Brooks Camp the way it is, many felt that the

NPS would recommend in its draft EIS that the camp not be moved. During the winter of 1992-

93, however, a series of events took place which further jeopardized the camp's viability as a

visitor node.

The problem was fuel leakage. As noted in chapters 4 and 5, a generator and 300 gallon

underground fuel tank had been installed at the camp in 1956; then, in 1974-75, the R. D.

Peterson Company, on an NPS contract, had constructed a complete utility system. Among its

other provisions, the contractor installed two 8000 gallon underground diesel storage tanks near

the NPS warehouse, a 2000 gallon underground diesel tank near the new generator building, a

three-inch fiberglass underground fuel line connecting the 8000 gallon tanks to a fill box along

the shore of Naknek Lake, and several two-inch fuel lines which connected the diesel tanks to

most of the camp buildings. The contract also resulted in the installation of a 16-foot-deep

water well, which was located near the lake shore east of the generator building. [158]

The fuel system worked properly for the next several years. By 1981, however, park staff

recognized that the water they drank had a diesel taste. Maintenance personnel surmised that

fuel leaking from the 2000-gallon tank or the adjacent two-inch line had entered the water

table. To circumvent the problem, they abandoned the old water well and installed a new one

100 yards into Naknek Lake and due east of the warehouse. They made no attempt, at that time,

to investigate the leak near the generator house. [159] In 1991, new problems erupted. Park

staff decided to remove the 300 gallon tank which had been installed back in 1956; during the

removal process, they found oil contamination underneath the old tank. That same summer, a

fuel line ruptured near the Skytel. Over on the south side of Brooks River, personnel noted

spilled fuel near the diesel and gasoline tanks in the agency's parking lot. They also suspected

that leakage was taking place along the line which connected the parking lot to the boat dock.

[160]

The NPS, alarmed by the accumulating leakage, tried to determine its extent. In early 1992, it

hired a testing firm which found, much to the agency's chagrin, that the soil in the area east of

the generator building was heavily contaminated. The soil near the ranger cache and Skytel was

also sullied, though to a lesser extent. To gain more information on the problem, NPS staff then

conducted a tank tightness testing project, which attempted to isolated the weak links in the fuel

delivery system. To their dismay, they found leaks throughout most of the system, both tanks

and lines. None of the six large tanks were found to be devoid of leaks, and leaks were also

detected in the fuel lines. Based on that knowledge, NPS officials laid out a two-year plan that

called for the removal of the entire fuel distribution system. They also proposed a long-term

remediation program in order to cleanse the soil of oil-borne pollutants. [161]

In January 1993, the existence of the Brooks Camp fuel leakage, along with similar problems in

Glacier Bay National Park, were broadcast to the statewide media. Agency officials had made

no attempt to hide the extent of the damage, but the problem was publicized at the same time

officials were weighing the various alternatives in the Brooks River Area DCP. That problem,

combined with others at the camp--migrating bears, a world-class archeological site, the sheer
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

number of people in such a limited area--suggested to park officials that the camp should be

moved. [162]

When this manuscript was completed, in the spring of 1993, the NPS had made no final

decision as to whether Brooks Camp would be moved. But regardless of what decisions are

made when the development concept plan is completed, it is unlikely that existing conflicts will

diminish any time soon. If the DCP recommends the removal of Brooks Camp, the political

process that will likely ensue may escalate into a major confrontation, either within the agency

or between the agency and outside pressure groups. If it recommends the status quo, however,

the existing resource conflicts will only worsen in the future. When viewed in retrospect, the

present DCP may likely be seen as an opening volley in a long-term engagement.

David Morris, seen standing by a Stationair 6 at King Salmon airport in this August 1985 photo, was the

superintendent of the Katmai and Aniakchak NPS units from August 1979 until April 1987. (David Morris

Collection)
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 6)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap6.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:53 PM]

In notes that accompanied this September 5, 1940 photo, biologist (and photographer) Victor Cahalane remarked,

"Drying salmon on racks at the mouth of Brooks River. Aleut Indians come here every August to sieze red salmon

and dry a winter's supply for themselves." During the 1980s and 1990s, the Natives' historical use of the area

would loom as a major NPS management issue. (NPS Photo Collection, Cahalane neg. 357)

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

adhi/chap6.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap7.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:56 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

PART I: KATMAI NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE

Chapter 7:

The Katmai Interpretive Program

Today, Katmai has a multifaceted interpretive program. Several educational activities are

offered to park tourists. An excellent park brochure is available, a visitor contact station and

auditorium await the inquiring visitor, and various books, maps and other information

pertinent to Katmai can be purchased. A permanent employee and several seasonal staff are

assigned to interpretive functions. Interpreters greet visitors upon arrival at Brooks Camp,

rove through the area providing advice and information, and counsel anglers, bear-watchers

and campers about the area's brown bear population.

The interpretive program, however, did not develop overnight. By necessity, each facet of the

program had to await the development of a sufficient budget, visitor facilities and visitor

volume. As shall be seen, the NPS made many plans, as part of its recurrent master planning

process, on how the interpretive program ought to be developed. As previous chapters have

shown, however, many of the facilities envisioned in Katmai's various master plans have

never been constructed. In other cases, interpretive facilities planned for existing

developments were never installed. It appears, when seen retrospectively, that most of the

present interpretive program has developed because of a series of ad hoc actions taken in

response to real or perceived problems, or because of the extra effort of individual

employees. Relatively few interpretive facilities or activities, by contrast, were manifested as

a direct result of long range planning efforts.

Early Interpretation

Before 1950, when the Katmai fishing camps were constructed, the monument had no

interpretive program. That summer, as part of the Alaska Recreation Survey, NPS personnel

included interpretation as a marginal aspect of the unfolding plans. George Collins suggested

that "museums and the interpretive program should be implemented in the near future." To

that end, Regional Chief of Interpretation Dorr Yeager spent several days in mid-July in and

around Brooks Camp. [1]

The NPS established its first seasonal ranger at Brooks Camp that summer. For the next five

years, Katmai was served by a single ranger, and the duties of that position were such that

there was little time for interpretation. Even so, the demands for interpretation were light. The

annual visitor total during the first five years of camp operation probably did not exceed five

hundred, and the overwhelming majority were lodge guests who loved to fish and had little

knowledge or interest in the other monument resources. Campers and other independent

tourists were rare; the 1951 ranger was moved to note that "There are several parties that

camped here this summer, one of which remained for a week." [2]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap7.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:56 PM]

Evidence that the NPS was concerned about interpreting Katmai's resources came in 1952

when it published the monument's first brochure. Herbert Evison, chief of the agency's

Information Division, began planning for the three-fold brochure that February; by June,

5000 copies had been printed and were ready for distribution. [3] The brochure turned out to

be the first of several which have been produced for the monument. The 1952 version was

revised slightly and reprinted in 1955, 1958, and 1959. In 1963 and 1968 the agency

produced new brochures; the latter version was reprinted in 1972. The following year the

NPS produced its fourth edition of a Katmai brochure; it was reprinted in 1975 and 1983.

The present, black-bordered brochure was produced in 1984. This fifth edition was reprinted

in 1988 and 1990; in 1992, it was reproduced again with a slightly modified text and map. [4]

In 1955, the agency began to show an slightly increased interest in developing interpretation

at the monument. That summer Dorr G. Yeager, the Regional Chief of Interpretation, made a

second visit. [5] The following April, the first semblance of an interpretive plan was released

as part of the monument's Mission 66 prospectus. Recognizing the lack of a program, the

plan hoped to begin one in 1959. That program, based on visitor nodes planned for Valley

Junction (ten miles up the Ukak River from Naknek Lake), called for evening programs to be

given at Brooks Camp, nature walks to the Brooks Lake Fish and Wildlife Service facility, an

interpretive display to be located either in the concessioner's dining hall or in the NPS ranger

station, and a visitor center at Valley Junction containing displays on ecology and volcanism.

In order to further interpret the local resources, a "pumice flow" trail was to be built at Valley

Junction and a nature trail at Savonoski. [6]

Almost none of what was called for in Katmai's Mission 66 program was actually built, and

the budget during the mid-to-late 1950s remained low. Therefore, few of the interpretive

developments called for in the prospectus came to pass. The prospectus did, however,

identify some of the major interpretive themes, and the general ideas laid out served as the

basis for later developments.

The first on-site interpretation began in the summer of 1956. The completion of the Brooks

Camp ranger station provided a site where information about the monument could be

dispensed. Richard Riegelhuth, the camp's only ranger, had numerous other duties, so the

station could not be continuously staffed; during its open hours, however, visitors often

dropped by. In addition, Riegelhuth installed 29 temporary signs and markers, most of which

pertained to fishing regulations. In September, he gave two ranger talks in the concessioner's

dining hall. They were the first interpretive programs to be presented at Katmai. In 1957,

evening programs were given "when the number of visitors warranted it." [7]

Although the interpretive program, by this time, appeared to be growing, the rangers were

often frustrated because most visitors showed little interest in learning about monument

resources. As a result, Mount McKinley's park naturalist, Neil Reid, visited Katmai in June

1958 to attempt a diversification of existing activities. [8]

Reid soon recognized that developing a widely accepted interpretive program would be a

challenging task. In speaking about the predominant monument visitor, he wrote that

Fishermen are a recognized special interest group, and require specialized

contact techniques. They are not interested in interpretation, per se, but are to a

limited extent desirous of information, i.e., They are not concerned with the

glacial origin of the Monument lakes, but in the good fishing areas of the lakes;

they care little about the ecology and natural history of the rainbow trout, but

demand to know what the fish are biting on.

He therefore challenged rangers to conduct their interpretation in ways that would prove
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap7.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:56 PM]

interesting to their audience. Along those lines, he recommended that "a good interpretive

display on native fishing and drying techniques would probably be of interest to even the

most ardent fisherman." [9]

Perhaps as a result of that trip, the interpretive program grew even more that summer. The

evening programs continued, with 62 visitors in attendance; in addition, rangers conducted a

number of short guided hikes to points of interest near Brooks Camp. Fifty-two people took

advantage of the hikes; another 174 visited the ranger station. [10]

Thereafter, however, efforts at interpretation declined. In 1959, Brooks Camp guests were

offered a slide program, nothing more; the following year, not even that was offered until

July. Agency officials knew that a successful interpretive program demanded the preparation

of a standard slide talk, the appointment of a ranger naturalist, the completion of a broader

range of research projects, and some form of interpretation for the ongoing camp

archeological investigations. The lack of funding, however, prevented the realization of those

goals. [11]

In September 1960, as part of the ongoing master plan process, NPS staff prepared the first

document which specifically addressed the Katmai interpretive program. Neil Reid, who

prepared the overview, bemoaned that

No interpretive facilities exist, nor are interpretive personnel stationed within the

monument. It is essential, therefore, that interpretive services be presented by the

ranger-in-charge on an informal basis. Evening talks are given about once a

week under the most adverse conditions. Talks are presented in the concession

mess hall, adjacent to a diesel generator, to an audience whose sole interest is

fishing. This will be alleviated to some extent by the completion of a new

concessioner lodge next summer [1961], but the inability to schedule diversified

interpretive services in the monument will still be the most obvious shortcoming

of the program.

Reid bewailed the fact that Katmai's rangers had little research information upon which they

could base an interpretation program, and he was similarly perturbed by the difficulties he

had in trying to organize an interpretive program while residing over 400 miles away from

Brooks Camp. In order to strengthen the program, he urged that a ranger-naturalist be added

to the staff, and also urged the completion of new popular publications and audio-visual

materials relating to the monument. Despite all the difficulties, however, Reid felt that "the

present interpretive program in the monument is probably sufficient to meet the needs of the

fisherman-visitor." [12]

During the early 1960s the sole interpretive activity continued to be the evening program.

Because of low visitor levels and other demands on the ranger's time, the talks were still

given intermittently. Their location, however, changed. The new Panabode-style Brooks

Lodge was completed in 1961, and talks--whose subject matter was the Valley of Ten

Thousand Smokes and other remote sites in the monument--were given there all that summer.

But the lodge, which served a variety of functions, was sometimes a poor site for programs.

By 1963 the agency was giving slide shows again, a format particularly ill-suited to the

lodge. Officials therefore decided to hold programs in the boathouse that year. By the

following summer, however, programs were once again being held in the lodge, and

continued to be shown there until the mid-1970s. [13]

Effects of Valley Road Construction
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap7.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:56 PM]

The largest construction project during that period, the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes road,

had a strong influence on the monument's interpretive program. The agency decided to build

the 22 mile road in February 1961; before long, Katmai officials began planning for the

interpretive opportunities that the road would bring. In April 1961 Robert L. Peterson, the

monument's Ranger-in-Charge, urged Superintendent Samuel King to "construct a modest

visitor center adequate for the interpretation of the monument's geological history." King

evidently accepted Peterson's suggestion, and by the time the road was opened to tourist

traffic in 1963, the agency had erected a small visitors' reception center. At first, interpretive

displays in the overlook cabin were limited to a plastic relief map of the Valley of Ten

Thousand Smokes and a world map on which the location of the great volcanic eruptions had

been superimposed. Four years later a new exhibit, consisting of historical photographs from

the early National Geographic Society expeditions, was added. [14]

The NPS and the monument concessioner, Northern Consolidated Airlines, collaborated in

creating a new visitor activity related to the new road. NCA brought in two tour vehicles, a

16-passenger GMC bus and an 8-passenger Chevrolet Carryall, and began providing tours in

the summer of 1963. The NPS, for its part, agreed to provide interpretive services. The

agency was able to assign new seasonal naturalists to Brooks Camp, and one was assigned to

each Valley tour. While riding along on the tour vehicle, the NPS naturalists, most of whom

were women, gave a running commentary about the local plant life, wildlife and geology.

[15] After arriving at the road terminus, they then conducted visitors on a three-mile hike

across the volcanic landscape to the Ukak River crossing. A total of 56 bus tours were given

that first summer for 262 people. [16]

The remainder of the decade witnessed modest growth in the number of Katmai visitors (see

Appendix D). From 1963 to 1969, the number of Brooks Camp visitors more than doubled,

from 693 to 1,407. Most of those visitors were guests at Brooks Lodge, who were part of an

NCA three- or seven-day package tour; an increasing number of them, however, stayed at the

campground or were day visitors. Visitors' reasons for going to Katmai also changed during

the decade. Prior to 1963, most visitors were still fishermen. By 1965, however, an observer

remarked that "already enough tourists get to Brooks that the diehard fishermen are going to

Grosvenor," and by 1971, the head of the concessions operation stated that "The bulk of the

tourists are middle age or elderly people, many of them retired, or school teachers who are

making the trip of a lifetime. The sports-fishermen among them are a distinct minority." [17]

Tourists were far more interested than anglers in learning about Katmai, and the NPS knew

that they needed to accommodate the needs of the non-fishing visitors. As the number of

tourists grew, the number of bus tours and evening programs similarly increased. By the end

of the decade, both the tours and programs were being held more than 75 times each summer.

In 1966, in order to further develop the interpretive program, rangers revived the afternoon

walk to Brooks Falls, an activity which had been offered since 1958. The NPS added a new

seasonal naturalist in the late 1960s, and by 1969 naturalists were able to conduct 52 such

trips. Approximately one-third of all Brooks Camp visitors attended them. [18]

Other key elements of the interpretive program were also begun in the late 1960s. One was

the opening of the so-called "Eskimo pit house" (more accurately known as an ena or semisubterranean house). Archeologists who had been working in the Brooks Camp area since the

early 1950s had excavated several well-preserved houses, popularly known as barabaras, as

part of their investigations. In late 1966 a proposal was advanced, "the direct and practical

aim" of which was "the excavation of aboriginal dwellings ... that would be suitable for

consolidation of tourist displays." The proposal was accepted, and during the next two

summers dwelling number BR20-3-A was excavated and preserved. Dr. Don Dumond, the

archeologist in charge of the Brooks Camp investigations, built the roof himself in July and

August 1968. The display was open for public inspection by the end of that summer; by 1970,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap7.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:56 PM]

metal photo signs to interpret the exhibit were being prepared. [19]

At the same time the ena was being completed, NPS staff began the practice of giving

orientation talks to new Brooks Camp visitors. NPS staff had been aware of the dangers of

having bears in camp for years, and a 1966 bear attack in the campground heightened their

concern. Soon afterwards, therefore, Brooks Camp naturalists began giving informal

presentations to new visitors. They met them on the beach when they got off the airplane,

oriented them to the area, and told them about area activities, fishing regulations, and how to

avoid encounters with bears. [20]

Evolution of Interpretive Themes

During the 1960s, the first efforts were made to fashion a set of interpretive themes that

would guide the information received by Katmai's visitors. In 1963, for instance, NPS

biologist Lowell Sumner penned a master planning field study which emphasized the

protection of Katmai's resources. Sumner, not surprisingly, noted that the monument's

interpretive themes should be geared to its sense of wilderness. [21] Two years later, the

monument's Master Plan Brief noted that its major "communications objectives" were "to

interpret the Monument's resources, with the main interpretive theme focused on the

volcanology and geology of the area. ... Only slightly less important is the interpretation of

the primitive wilderness." The plan called for developments at Brooks River, Windy Creek

Overlook, and the Bay of Islands. Based on that plan, the broad park story would be

interpreted at Brooks Camp, the volcanology and geology was to be presented at Three

Forks, and the wilderness theme--more specifically defined as biological interpretation--

would be presented at Bay of Islands. [22]

As noted in Chapter 5, a major planning effort was launched on behalf of Katmai (and other

existing and proposed Alaskan parklands) in the late 1960s and early 1970s. The primary

Katmai planning documents were the December 1973 master plan and the 1974 Final

Environmental Statement for a proposed, expanded Katmai National Park. The work most

relevant to interpretation, however, was the interpretive prospectus. This document, which

was written in conjunction with the master plan effort, was proposed by the agency's Alaska

Group Office in January 1971. The final interpretive prospectus was completed in May 1973,

just before the final master plan. [23]

The master plan, on which interpretive efforts were based, provided a specific interpretive

theme. "The park interpretive program," it noted, "aims to cultivate in the visitor an

awareness that Katmai is a large, diverse natural area essentially unaffected by modern man

and that this pristine area can serve as a guide and reference point in man's exploration and

use of his environment." It recommended five subthemes which would be used as

springboards to an understanding of the major theme. They included 1) volcanology, with an

emphasis on the creation of the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes, 2) wildlife, using the brown

bear as a major example of a naturally regulated animal population, 3) vegetational

dynamics, relating ecological factors to present-day plant cover, 4) human use of the area,

and 5) wilderness use as a form of recreation. [24]

The interpretive prospectus provided specific direction on how to carry out the theme

expostulated in the master plan. It praised many aspects of the existing interpretive program,

particularly the bus tours. It showed, however, that further improvements were needed.

Regarding Brooks Camp, it noted that the agency needed to "come out of the woods [where

the existing ranger station was located] and build a place that will be identified with the Park

Service--a small building that can serve as a ranger station-information center, and locate it

near the lodge for high visibility and easy access." It also recommended that the Windy Creek
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap7.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:56 PM]

overlook cabin be replaced with "more suitable facilities" and an improved series of exhibits.

At the King Salmon Airport, it recommended that "an attractive portable exhibit" be located

in the baggage unloading area. The prospectus assumed that the primary visitor facility would

be relocated from Brooks Camp to the west end of Naknek Lake; it therefore called for

introductory exhibits at the new site, as well as one which would pertain to Native use of the

monument. [25]

Growth in Backcountry Use

In January 1969, President Lyndon Johnson added more than 94,000 acres to the western end

of the monument. The Lake Camp area, a popular boat launching area for local residents,

became part of the monument; as a result, monument visitation multiplied to a figure five

times what it had been before Johnson's proclamation. During the 1970s, total visitation to

Katmai remained fairly stable. Visitation to Brooks Camp, however, enjoyed a fairly healthy

growth, and significant number of visitors began to enjoy Katmai's backcountry.

Before 1965, few had ventured into Katmai's backcountry for recreational purposes. World

War II had brought the first few adventurous souls, most via floatplane, to the monument's

lakes and rivers in search of fishing opportunities. The handful who used Katmai's

backcountry increased slightly in 1950, when Northern Consolidated Airlines opened its five

fishing camps. Some Katmai visitors left camp for the day by renting fishing boats, and

others chartered planes to take them to more distant fishing holes or to view scenic areas such

as the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes or the Shelikof Strait coastline. But only a smattering

of Katmai's early visitors, be they lodge guests or independent travelers, overnighted outside

any of the established camp areas.

The construction of the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes road in 1962 gave visitors easier

access to that area. It did little, however, to lure people into the wilderness which extended

beyond the road corridor. Park Service brochures from the 1950s and 1960s, and a

smattering of travel publications, encouraged the traveler to seek out Katmai's backcountry.

[26] The two most advertised ways to enjoy the backcountry were a canoe trip over the socalled Savonoski Loop and a hike from the road terminus into the Valley of Ten Thousand

Smokes. Before 1965, however, a mere handful of outdoor enthusiasts had travelled over

either route. [27]

Backcountry use grew during the late 1960s, although the lack of reliable statistics makes it

difficult to ascertain its popularity. In 1968, monument staff estimated that 240 visitors had

penetrated Katmai's backcountry that summer, most of whom had taken hiking trips into the

Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes. [28] A year later, however, an NPS planner noted that "less

than a couple of hundred persons each year penetrate beyond Brooks Camp," [29] and in the

early 1970s monument staff recorded less than 100 backcountry visits per year. [30] It is

unlikely that backcountry use witnessed a dramatic decline between 1968 and 1973; more

likely, the number of users probably fluctuated between 100 and 150 during that period.

The number of backcountry users in recent years is difficult to discern because park staff

have inconsistently defined the term "backcountry." [31] Despite the variation in the available

statistics, it appears that the number of people who have overnighted in the backcountry rose

slowly between the early 1970s and the mid-1980s. In both 1984 and 1985, for instance, park

staff tallied between 350 and 400 people who overnighted in Katmai's backcountry. Since

that time the number of campers has probably continued to rise. [32]

Many types of visitors have overnighted in Katmai's backcountry over the years.

Backpackers have been the primary users. A sizable number of those attracted to the sport
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap7.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:56 PM]

fishing resource also use the park, and Katmai has also attracted scattered numbers of

canoeists, ocean touring enthusiasts and mountain climbers. Among backpackers, the Valley

of Ten Thousand Smokes has remained the area of choice, and Novarupta, the most popular

destination, attracts over a hundred campers per year. The Savonoski Loop has remained a

well-advertised attraction for canoeists, but fewer than a score per season attempt to traverse

it. [33]

Many recreational users, primarily sport fishing and float trip enthusiasts, visit Katmai's

backcountry but do not overnight there. Although, as noted above, some day-trippers had

visited the backcountry in the 1940s and 1950s, the number of day users remained low until

the monument was expanded in 1978. The expansion of acreage coincided with a boom in

fly-in fishing, and ever since, both fishing and float-trip activity have become increasingly

popular. In 1981, the 18 licensed guiding companies took fewer than 1,300 fishers out into

the Katmai backcountry. Four years later, however, the numbers had risen to 32 guide outfits

and almost 3,800 fishermen, and in 1989, 42 licensed guiding companies took over 5,600

fishers into the remote areas of the park. [34]

A Cooperating Association is Established

Most of those who had stayed at Brooks Lodge over the years paid for their trip on the

American Plan. That pricing arrangement combined the cost of lodging and meals, and freed

guests from paying for anything except for liquor and incidental supplies. In order to provide

for those incidental needs--film, curios, cigarettes, fishing flies, and similar items--the

concessioner had operated a small store ever since the camp opened in 1950.

During the 1960s, NPS personnel became increasingly aware that the growing population of

tourists demanded books, maps, and other educational materials related to park resources.

NPS staff, as noted above, had long decried the lack of suitable materials related to the

monument. In order to meet the demand, therefore, NPS staff began selling materials under

the auspices of the Mount McKinley National Park Association. By the early 1970s,

sufficient materials were available to consider the opening of a more independent NPS sales

outlet. In 1971, therefore, the Alaska National Parks and Monuments Association, a quasigovernmental educational organization, opened a Katmai branch at the Brooks Camp ranger

station. Seasonal staff sold $285 worth of books and maps that summer.

The history of Katmai's cooperating association has been one of almost continuous growth.

From its modest beginnings in 1971, its revenues grew quickly; by 1974 its sales topped

$1,000, by 1979 it exceeded $3,000, and three years later it topped the $6,000 mark. Its sales

have continued to grow since then; in 1990 it earned almost $9,000, and in 1994, sales topped

$27,000. The Katmai branch of the Alaska Natural History Association (the name by which it

has been known since 1978) has also grown geographically. The Brooks Camp operation

remains, and continues to be its primary revenue producer, but in 1980 a new King Salmon

branch sold $447 of goods and in 1984 an outlet for map sales was begun at the Nonvianuk

Lake ranger station. (The Nonvianuk outlet lasted only briefly.) ANHA's primary Katmai

sales items continue to be books and maps, but it recent years it has begun selling note cards

and videos. [35]

ANHA's Katmai branch has been able to sponsor the publication of two books and a

newspaper. In 1985, Carolyn Elder and the Katmai staff collaborated on a pamphlet entitled

The Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes. By the early 1990s, both visitors and staff had become

aware that the park needed a thorough, up-to-date guidebook, and in response the association

sponsored the Jean Bodeau book, Katmai National Park and Preserve, Alaska, which was

published in 1992. Both publications have sold well; Bodeau's book was been largely
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap7.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:56 PM]

responsible for the high 1992 sales figure for ANHA's Katmai branch. [36]

The early 1990s also witnessed the publication of an ANHA-sponsored newspaper, called

The Bear Facts. The eight-page black-and-white newspaper, packed with tips on park

resources, what to see and do, and how to enjoy the park in safety, was first published in

1990. The following year it was published in color. In recent years, it has become

increasingly detailed; in 1992 the newspaper grew to twelve pages in length, and the 1995

edition was 40 pages long. A new paper, called The Alagnak and pertaining to activities in

that wild and scenic river corridor, was printed for the first time in 1995. [37]

Interpretive Activities Since 1970

The major Katmai interpretive activities have remained fairly stable since 1970. Three

primary activities have been the evening program, the afternoon nature walk to Brooks Falls,

and the day-long bus ride.

These activities, all operated out of Brooks Camp, have changed in several ways during the

last twenty years. The evening program, for example, has primarily been a slide show, but

various movies have also been shown. Two alternatives have also been tried. In the late

1970s programs were held out on the beach as well as in the visitor center, and in 1985 an

afternoon movie was shown in addition to the evening program. [38]

The primary destination for Brooks Camp nature walks has always been Brooks Falls. In the

1960s and 1970s visitors accessed the falls by following a trail which wound along the south

bank of Brooks River. Confrontations with bears, however, became increasingly frequent. To

eliminate the hazard, a bear viewing platform was erected in 1982, and the following year

visitors to Brooks Falls followed a new route which avoided the riverbank. [39] By 1989, the

bear platform had become a victim of its own popularity; it was cancelled because crowds

grew too large for the viewing platform. The agency began stationing a naturalist there, both

to provide information and to allow everyone an opportunity to spend time on the platform; it

posted additional staff at the trailhead to prevent overcrowding near the falls.

During the 1970s and 1980s, seasonal staff tried to diversify the interpretive program by

offering walks to the Beaver Pond, Dumpling Mountain, or the so-called "Eskimo pit house."

Visitors, however, expressed little interest for any of these walks, and each activity was

discontinued after a season or two. In the 1990s, however, the increasing popularity of

Brooks Camp revived interest in the hiking program. Since 1991, hikes on the Dumpling

Mountain trail have become increasingly popular, and since 1992 the interpretive staff has

offered a daily walk to the "Eskimo pit house." [40]

The bus tour has been a constant fixture of the Brooks Camp scene since 1963, but the type

of vehicle used and the party responsible for interpretation have both changed. Nine different

vehicles have been used over the years: a 16-passenger bus (a converted military ammunition

carrier built on a cab-over 1961 GMC frame), an 8-passenger Chevrolet carryall, a 1960-

vintage 40-passenger bus, two 1974 Dodge vans, three 1982 Chevrolet Suburban vans, and a

29-passenger school bus. [41] NPS naturalists provided interpretation on the buses for over

twenty years, but in the spring of 1986, due to budget cutbacks, they had to abandon the

service. The concessioner, informed of the move just a month before the season began, was

understandably upset and railed, without success, to have the service restored. But the Service

had no alternatives. To smooth the transition, NPS personnel agreed to train the

concessioner's drivers as tour guides. [42] The concessioner provided tour guiding services

until 1994, when an NPS interpreter, on a five-day-per-week basis, again began riding out to

Three Forks Overlook.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap7.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:56 PM]

The agency has also tried to institute interpretive programs outside of Brooks Camp. In 1977,

rangers moved into the old National Marine Fisheries Service cabins near Grosvenor Camp,

and presented interpretive programs to camp guests for each of the next three years. [43] In

1981, a ranger was stationed at Kulik Camp to present interpretive programs, and from 1983

through 1985 park rangers from Nonvianuk Ranger Station gave informal programs to guests

at nearby Cry of the Loon Lodge. [44]

At Brooks Camp, the increasing number of visitors caused rangers to become more wary than

ever of bear-human confrontations. The orientation speeches on the beach, which had been

begun in the late 1960s, continued, and in 1977 park personnel began giving the talks to

passengers arriving in private as well as commercial planes. [45] By 1979 staff were

distributing a booklet on bear safety to all visitors, and three years later they instituted a

roving interpretive patrol, intended to keep bears and people apart and to instruct fishermen

on the catch and release regulations. [46] The roving patrol continues; the beach speeches

were moved to the Visitor Contact Station in 1992, and in 1995 they were replaced by a tenminute video.

Many activities and presentations have also been provided to inform local residents about

Katmai's resources. Beginning in the early 1970s park staff presented programs, some to

adult groups and others to school children, in Naknek, King Salmon, Egegik, Dillingham, and

other local communities. Similar park outreach activities have taken place ever since. In

1973, the park augmented its environmental education program by inviting the Bristol Bay

School sixth-grade class (from Naknek) to Brooks Camp for a three-day stay. That school

was involved in the program until 1983, and again in the early 1990s. Students from Igiugig,

Dillingham, and Barter Island also visited Brooks Camp during the 1970s and early 1980s,

and an Elderhostel program began in 1993. [47]

As a result of the increasing level of visitation, the park hired its first permanent Interpretive

Specialist, Mark Wagner, in 1991. He remains the park's only full-time interpreter.

Interpretive Improvements

For the first twenty-five years in which the NPS had a presence at Brooks Camp, no facilities

had been constructed to accommodate the monument's interpretive program. Katmai, unlike

many NPS units, had no visitor center. So long as visitor levels remained low and the

concessioner was the primary party responsible for attracting visitors to the monument, there

was little need for one. During the 1960s and early 1970s an increasing number of

independent tourists brought on new demands for a visitor center. As noted above, the need

for an NPS "ranger station-information center" had first been voiced in the 1973 Interpretive

Prospectus. The low Brooks Camp visitation, however--less than 1,500 visitors per year in

those days--made construction of such a structure a low priority.

As luck would have it, construction activities at Brooks Camp gave park service officials the

golden opportunity to gain a visitor center without the expense of constructing one. In 1974

and 1975, the R. D. Peterson Company installed the Brooks Camp utility system, and in

order to house their workers they built a 20' x 40' bunkhouse for the work crews. NPS

officials, who retained custody of the building after the completion of the utility project,

decided to convert the bunkhouse into a visitor center and activity hall. The renovated facility

was opened to visitors in June 1977, and slide shows and movies have been shown there ever

since. [48] The new visitor center, open only for specific programs, projected a functional,

bare-bones appearance at first. But in 1979 two exhibit shelves and a wood stove were

installed, and in 1987 a new display on bear behavior was added. [49]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap7.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:56 PM]

Interpretive needs also played a role in the replacement of the cabin at Three Forks Overlook.

The cabin, built in 1963, was remodelled and enlarged in May 1979 much as had been

suggested in the 1973 Interpretive Prospectus. NPS staff from its Harpers Ferry facility

installed several color photo panels as well as a geological display case and scrap book.

(Conditions in the shelter mandated the removal of the photographs the following year.) The

photo panels were replaced in 1981 and were removed in 1993. The display case was also

removed; only the scrap book remains today. [50]

In 1987, officials from the National Park Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the

Alaska Department of Fish and Game pooled their resources and installed an interpretive

kiosk in King Salmon's MarkAir Terminal. The kiosk featured interpretive displays on

Katmai, Aniakchak, and the various local wildlife refuges. Superintendent David Morris, in a

recent interview, noted that the kiosk filled a critical need; with its construction, visitors

finally "had some idea of what was going on, instead of just being tossed out in thirty knot

winds not knowing where to go." The kiosk is still there, but in 1989 airport terminal

expansion demanded that it be moved to the south side of the Alaska Peninsula Highway, the

official name of King Salmon's main street. The kiosk is little used today, and the information

contained on it is not always accurate. [51]

More interpretive signs are on the way. In 1986, Harpers Ferry Center (NPS) officials began

preparing a wayside exhibit plan, and in 1991 they issued their report. They recognized that

Brooks Camp and other visitor nodes had few signs, and with mushrooming visitor levels

there was a corresponding increase in the need to inform visitors about park resources and

regulations. The plan, which gained final approval in 1992, called for the removal of all

existing signage throughout the park and their replacement by 21 wayside exhibits. Over twothirds will be installed in the Brooks Camp area; the remainder will be at Three Forks

Overlook, Lake Camp, and the outlet of Kukaklek Lake. Installation had been scheduled for

the summer of 1994, but it has been delayed pending the outcome of the Brooks Camp

Development Concept Plan. [52]

Some success has been achieved in recent years in the acquisition of new visitor

interpretation facilities. In King Salmon, as a result of continued cooperation between the

NPS and the F&WS, a new visitor center was opened in the airport terminal in May 1992.

The center, which features displays, brochures, and an Alaska Natural History Association

outlet, is staffed all summer and is opened for more limited operations throughout the winter

months. In 1995 it was rededicated with all new exhibits. It is now supported by the Bristol

Bay Borough and the Lake and Peninsula Borough as well as by the NPS and the F&WS.

[53]

Intermittent pressure has been applied in recent years to replace the Brooks Camp visitor

center. The center, built in 1974, was adequate for the presentation of most evening

programs. It was too small, however, to double as a visitor information center. The decade of

the 1980s, however, exacerbated the need for an adequate visitor facility. The decade

witnessed strong visitor growth; Brooks Camp visitation mushroomed from 2,200 in 1980 to

5,800 a decade later. The increasing number of visitors, furthermore, overtaxed the limited

confines of the visitor center and the small ranger station, the only two NPS structures

available for public use.

Some within the agency felt that the best way to meet deal with the space crunch was to

construct a new visitor center. By 1987, considerable work had already been done on the

siting, design, and conceptual planning for such a structure, but the budget limitations which

Katmai had to endure during the mid-1980s made construction of such a facility impossible.

[54] The late 1980s brought more favorable budgets, but by that time the park's new

emphasis on a Brooks Camp Development Concept Plan, with the possibility that the camp
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 7)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap7.htm[3/19/2013 1:31:56 PM]

would be de-emphasized as a visitor node, put the construction of a new visitor center on

indefinite hold.

Recognizing that an increasing number of visitors would require more facility space, the NPS

decided, in 1989, to convert the old (1956) ranger station into a visitor contact station. The

following year it converted the old boathouse, which had been serving as a VIP guest cabin,

into the new ranger station. The former visitor center was renamed the auditorium that year. It

continues to serve much the same function as when it opened in 1977.

Conclusions

In retrospect, it appears that the success (or lack of success) of Katmai's interpretive program

has been a function of visitor levels, budgets, and staff availability. During the earliest years

of NPS's presence at Brooks Camp, rangers were fully occupied at other tasks. In 1956,

however, the addition of new staff allowed time for the presentation of the first evening

programs. In 1963, construction of the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes road brought a bus

tour to Katmai; the visibility of the tour brought new staff who interpreted the monument's

biological diversity and volcanic landscape. In the late 1960s, the addition of new staff

brought forth a third Brooks Camp interpretive activity, the Brooks Falls nature walk.

Since that time, the increasing complexity of bear-human interactions have been the driving

force behind most new aspects of Katmai's interpretive program. The beach speeches and

roving patrols have been instituted to ensure that visitors have a safe experience at Brooks

Camp; the bear platform talks, and many of the evening programs, have provided information

about the habits and habitat of Ursus arctos. Many other activities besides the evening

program, bus tour, and nature walk have been tried, but none have enjoyed more than shortterm success.

For many years, Katmai was one of the least visited units in the National Park Service

system. The lack of visitation, combined with planners' long-held notions that Brooks Camp's

role as a visitor node should be de-emphasized, prevented the development of visitor

facilities. Until 1977, the small Brooks Camp ranger station served as the only NPS visitor

facility, although evening programs were presented, courtesy of the concessioner, in Brooks

Lodge. The completion of the Brooks Camp utilities project gave the agency the opportunity

to convert a bunkhouse into a makeshift visitor center. Evening programs have been

presented there ever since. In recent years, pressure has intermittently surfaced to construct a

new Brooks Camp visitor center, but pressure to move the camp has prevented the realization

of those plans. The NPS nevertheless recognizes that Brooks Camp is the primary visitor

node; therefore, it has installed few interpretive facilities elsewhere in the park.

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

adhi/chap7.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

PART I: KATMAI NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE

Chapter 8:

Fish and Aquatic Resource Management

The phrase "fish and aquatic resource management" encompasses several topics. These include

National Park Service efforts to manage sport fishing activities, to conduct fishery research, to

manage the use of on-shore facilities supporting commercial fishing adjacent to the park

(including clamming), and to deal with sister resource management agencies determined to

enhance aquatic habitats and park fish populations for commercial exploitation outside the park.

Although 24 species of fish are reported in Katmai National Park and Preserve, only two

species have been the subject of most management and research efforts. These are sockeye

salmon and rainbow trout, both of which are found in Brooks and Naknek lakes, the Naknek

River, Brooks River and many other lakes and streams in Katmai. Five species of Pacific

salmon--chum (dog), coho (silver), sockeye (red), pink (humpback), and chinook (king)--are

found in Katmai. Of these, the sockeye are the most numerous and widely distributed in park

and preserve waters. Bristol Bay is the largest producer of sockeye salmon in the world. Based

on the period 1980 to 1989, about 4.4 percent of Bristol Bay salmon spawn in the waters of

Katmai National Park and Preserve. [1]

The combined park and preserve includes more than 70 percent of the 3,640-square-mile

Naknek River drainage. The adjacent Kvichak River drainage also includes territory within

Katmai. Together, the two drainages attract over 19.3 million sockeye salmon each year.

Averages for the period 1980 to 1989 indicate that slightly over half of those sockeyes are

commercially harvested as they approach the mouths of the Naknek and Kvichak rivers. An

additional 844,000 are harvested in the False Pass interception fishery and 123,000 are taken in

foreign high seas fisheries. About 1.5 million enter the Naknek River drainage, while an

additional 6.6 million enter the Kvichak River drainage. Approximately 182,000 of those

heading up the Kvichak enter the drainage of the Alagnak River. [2] Streams in the Naknek and

Alagnak drainages are in Katmai National Park and Preserve, or have tributaries in it. [3]

Humans have exploited Katmai's aquatic resources for centuries. Archeological evidence

documents that the streams and lakes in the park have been rich fisheries for more than 2,000

years. [4] Over the millennia, the Katmai fisheries have provided subsistence for Native

Alaskans living in the region and, more recently, offshore commercial and sport fishing for nonNative visitors to the Naknek drainage area. By the mid-1980s, subsistence users were

harvesting over 180,000 salmon annually and sport anglers were taking over 25,000 salmon in

the Bristol Bay region. [5]

In addition to large numbers of salmon that return to Katmai lakes and streams each year, there

is a large population of rainbow trout in those lakes and streams. Some of the trout grow to over

30 inches in length. People also fish Katmai waters for Arctic grayling, Dolly Varden, Arctic

char, lake trout, and northern pike. [6]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

Curiously, Robert F. Griggs, the scientist who did so much to cause the expansion of Katmai

National Monument beyond the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes, did not mention the area's

outstanding fishing in correspondence urging the 1931 expansion, although he noted the

spectacle of fish leaping at the Brooks River falls as a visual attraction. [7] But when the

National Park Service began active management of Katmai, the fishery resource quickly

became a focus of management concern.

Subsistence use, commercial use outside the park, potential commercial use inside the park, and

sport fishing pressure have combined to stimulate investigation and require controls on the

taking of Katmai's fish. Commercial use of clams found in the tidal zone on the Shelikof Strait

side of Katmai also required management activity, in the form of permits for use of on-shore

clam processing facilities and worker housing. Efforts to manage Katmai's salmon and trout

populations follow, while attempts to manage the clam resource are included at the end of the

chapter.

Early Users and Investigations

Commercial rather than sport fishing first affected Katmai's fish populations. The first salmon

cannery was opened on Kodiak Island, on Karluk Spit, in 1882; one year later, the first Bristol

Bay cannery opened at Nushagak. Every year since then, commercial fishermen have influenced

the Katmai-bound salmon population. [8]

Shortly after World War I, the first of two salmon canneries opened on the eastern margins of

the present park. In 1922, the Kamishak Canning Company built a cannery at Kamishak Bay. It

put up only one pack, however, and was not used again. A year later, the Hemrich Packing

Company opened a clam-canning operation at Kukak Bay. The year after it opened, it also went

into business as a salmon cannery. In 1925, the company leased its facility to the Seashore

Packing Company, who put up a pack for the next three years. The Hemrich Packing Company

operated the salmon and clam cannery on its own in 1928, but leased it again to the Seashore

Packing Company for the 1929 through 1931 seasons. In 1932, the cannery was leased by the

Pioneer Packing Company. The plant was closed for the next two years, but Surf Canneries

purchased it and operated it in 1935 and 1936. The site was abandoned after the 1936 season.

The Kukak Bay facility differed from most of the other canneries in that it did not employ fish

traps as part of its operations. [9]

The post-World War I period was also the time when fisheries interests began to enter the

Katmai area from the west. The U.S. Bureau of Fisheries [10] decided to undertake a predatory

fish destruction program in the various major Bristol Bay tributaries. (At that time, salmon was

the only fish desired by local canneries. Therefore, any species which preyed on salmon was

considered undesirable.) The Bureau included a broad survey of fish populations as part of that

survey, and studied the Naknek Lake system as well as the other major drainages. In early June

of 1920, a four man party headed by A. T. Looff of the College of Fisheries, University of

Washington, began its Naknek Lake investigations.

Looff and his crew quickly surveyed the margins of the lake and found that

Practically all the fish entering Naknek Lake either pass up Kidawik Creek [Brooks

River] or Simenoffsky [Savonoski] River. The lake shore ... offers no inducement

for spawning fish owing to the amount of ashes accumulated from the eruption of

1912. All other tributaries are thickly impregnated with ashes. [11]

The crew found Kidawik Creek to be "an ideal salmon stream with fine spawning bottom ...

where good numbers of lake trout and some Dolly Vardens were taken." They camped at its
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

mouth and then ascended to "a waterfall from 5 to 8 feet high, over which it would be

impossible for fish to ascend during low-water stage." In an attempt to improve its spawning

possibilities, the crew proceeded to modify the falls. They had no powder, but

felt that a cut could be made with steel bars, etc. We therefore secured several

stone-cutting gads, a steel bar, top maul, hammer and pick, and, after diverting the

flow of water near [the left or north] side of the stream, a cut was made 10 feet in

width, sloping back about 15 feet, through which the fish could easily pass.

A crew returned the following year and used dynamite to widen the slot. [12]

Fisheries crews returned to Naknek Lake and the Brooks River each year from 1920 through

1925; in 1924 and 1925, they also included Lake Coville and Lake Grosvenor in their

investigation. During that time, they killed more than 13,000 sportfish, primarily rainbow trout,

lake trout, and Dolly Varden. The Bureau of Fisheries ignored Naknek Lake for the next

decade. Below the lake, however, it remained active. In 1928, it established a fisheries station

five miles upriver from Naknek, and maintained a salmon-counting weir at the site until 1932.

[13]

In 1936, biologists showed renewed interest in the Brooks Lake area. They noticed that Brooks

Falls was not a block to red salmon under normal conditions. During seasons of low water,

however, they observed that many died unspawned below the falls, presumably because of

injury caused in attempting to negotiate them. Based on that overview, they made plans for

"blasting steps in the falls" in the spring of 1937. Those plans, however, were put on hold for

the time being. [14]

In 1938, concern about Japanese offshore fishing in the Bristol Bay area brought about a

renewal of interest in Katmai's fisheries resource. Congress directed an investigation of the

salmon fisheries of Bristol Bay. The plan, conceived in 1938, was to have one team tag and

mark fish in the bay, while land-based teams were to set up operations along the five major bay

drainages. Naknek River received a three man team in 1939, which made a survey of the river

system's major spawning grounds. [15] The following year, the Bureau of Fisheries decided to

concentrate their Naknek basin research efforts along the mile-long Brooks River. Fisheries

personnel were well aware of the stream's abundant fish runs and felt that the stream was

representative of others draining into Bristol Bay. [16]

The Bureau of Fisheries, which became part of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 1940,

asked the National Park Service for, and received, permission that year to build a research

station and fish weir on Brooks Lake. The "station" was to consist of nothing more pretentious

than a small frame building or tent frame to shelter personnel temporarily stationed at the lake.

[17] Park Service reviewers criticized design of the structure, which turned out to be a large log

building. Despite the quibbling, the Park Service approved plans for a field laboratory on

Brooks Lake. Early the following year, they granted the F&WS a permit for use of Katmai's

lands and waters. [18]

In the spring of 1940, fisheries personnel made a 21-day trip from Seattle to Naknek on the

F&WS vessel Scoter. Initially, building materials were taken up the Naknek River to a landing

area below the rapids. The materials were then moved overland by tractor-drawn sled to the

west end of Naknek Lake. From there, the materials were rafted and towed by small power dory

to the mouth of Brooks River.

To get from there to the outlet of Brooks Lake, personnel first dragged materials in small oneman rafts up Brooks River to the mouth of Brooks Lake. But it soon became clear that this

system would not deliver materials to Brooks Lake and allow construction of a weir before the

arrival of the year's salmon run. The Fish and Wildlife Service therefore arranged for Woodley
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

Airways to fly the unrafted materials to Brooks Lake, although this meant cutting lumber to

sizes that would fit into a floatplane or strapping longer pieces to the floats. A trail connecting

Naknek and Brooks Lakes was also roughed out that year. The herculean efforts to speed

delivery and construction worked. Fisheries personnel completed the weir in 1940 in time for

the arrival of the first salmon. [19]

The following year, George Eicher and George Hill drove a tractor and sled overland from the

west end of Naknek Lake to the southwest end of Brooks Lake, then on to Brooks Lake's

outflow, all in a harrowing three-day trip. The tractor then headed east and hacked out a rough

road as it went; it reached Naknek Lake near the mouth of Brooks River. The mile-long road

was used repeatedly and was gradually improved over the years. The road is still used and is

maintained by the National Park Service. The 30-mile tractor route which Eicher and Hill used

from the outlet of Naknek Lake to Brooks Lake, however, was never used again. [20]

Fisheries research in the Naknek drainage continued during World War II. U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service personnel at the Brooks River weir counted escapements into Brooks Lake of

97,496 sockeye salmon in 1940, 125,948 in 1941, 360,899 in 1942, 272,929 in 1944, and

184,319 in 1945. [21] Construction on the Brooks Lake research station, which had begun in

1941, was completed by the close of the 1943 field season. In 1941, F&WS personnel also built

and operated a second station just below the Naknek River rapids. They proposed that year that

they would construct a fish ladder over Brooks Falls in 1942 or 1943, just as they had in 1937,

but the reduction in personnel caused by the war forced them to postpone their plans. [22]

At war's end, F&WS biologists began tagging studies on Brooks River and aerial spawning

ground surveys on the entire Bristol Bay watershed. "Index areas" were identified on each of the

main river systems and photographed each year. Researchers then counted fish in the

photographs and developed annual statistics. [23]

Throughout this period, the National Park Service had only the vaguest idea of what the U.S.

Bureau of Fisheries and its successor, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, were doing along the

Brooks River and elsewhere in the monument. The NPS had no jurisdiction over most of

Naknek Lake before President Hoover expanded the monument in April 1931, and for years

afterward the Service had no inkling of the activities and improvements which had been

undertaken by Bureau of Fisheries personnel during the 1920s. What compounded the problem

was NPS's own ignorance of the area. The first NPS presence in the monument was a brief 1937

visit, and the first detailed reconnaissance did not take place until September 1940. [24] As

noted above, fisheries personnel in the spring of 1940 asked permission to construct the Brooks

Lake fisheries laboratory, and agency representatives met several times during Been's field visit.

Thereafter, little communication took place for the rest of the decade.

The eastern side of the monument witnessed both fisheries research and commercial activities

during the 1940s. The U.S. Bureau of Fisheries had established a Kodiak office in 1924, and

ever since, the agency had made intermittent studies of the salmon spawning areas along the

monument's eastern shore. In 1941, the Alaska Game Commission agent at Kodiak noted that

the Bureau of Fisheries (which had become part of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service the year

before) had two watchman's cabins on the south side of Kaflia Bay. Why they were located

there is uncertain; because there were no fish traps in the area, the cabins were probably

associated with a salmon research study. [25] As noted above, a salmon cannery (in conjunction

with a clam cannery) had been located at Kukak Bay from 1924 to 1932 and from 1935 to

1936. Salmon canners ignored the monument's eastern shore for the next decade, but in 1947 the

Cape Douglas Canning Corporation packed salmon at Swikshak Bay. Mainland Fisheries then

purchased the corporation's equipment and moved it to Kukak Bay, from whence it operated a

salmon and clam cannery from 1948 through 1951. The cannery lay idle for the next three

years, but after the 1954 season Mainland abandoned the site. [26]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

Construction of the Brooks River Fish Ladder

As noted above, Bureau of Fisheries personnel first considered and planned the installation of a

fish ladder at Brooks Falls in 1936. For the next ten years, they sought the funds to construct the

facility, apparently unaware that the NPS would have any objections to it. In 1947, engineers

and biologists at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Montlake Laboratory at Seattle designed

the fishway.

In 1948, a four-man crew went to Brooks River to start construction. Materials went to Brooks

Lake by air and to the falls by tractor and sled. Gravel and sand for concrete came from the

beach at Brooks Lake. [27] Four U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service employees--John Hurst, Mike

Michel, Mike Wold, and Jerry O'Neil--blasted and hewed the ladder from solid rock to make it

as natural-appearing as possible. Ten feet in width and at the south side of the falls, the ladder

had seven pools, each one foot above the other. A headgate metered water into the topmost

pool. The fisheries employees completed the ladder, except for the bottommost pool, in 1949.

[28] The remaining portions were completed early the next summer, and the ladder opened on

August 7, 1950. Willie Nancarrow, who was serving as the NPS ranger that summer, reported

that "in the next week a marked increase in the number of fish going through the weir could be

seen." [29]

Alfred C. Kuehl, Landscape Architect for the Region Four office of the NPS, first became

aware of the fish ladder construction in August 1948. He visited Brooks River as F&WS

engineers were finalizing plans for the ladder. [30] He came again in September 1949 during

the midst of construction work. This time Herbert Maier, Assistant Director of Region Four,

accompanied him. Neither protested the construction, either while visiting the site or after they

returned to San Francisco. [31]

In late June 1950, Kuehl and George L. Collins, Chief of the Park Service's Alaska Recreation

Survey, arrived at Katmai to find the fish ladder nearing completion. They made no protest at

the time, but Collins was clearly perturbed at what he saw. After they returned to the regional

headquarters, Collins let the regional director know his feelings:

I doubt that anyone in the Service paid much attention to the fact that the Fish and

Wildlife Service has started a fish ladder at the falls on Brooks River. If there is a

permit or understanding regarding that abortion whoever in the Service authorized

it ought to be made to go to Katmai and tear it out singlehandedly. [32]

Regional Director Owen Tomlinson, in turn, protested to the agency's Washington office.

Forwarding photographs taken by Kuehl and Collins at Brooks River a month earlier,

Tomlinson wrote that "this structure hardly complies with Park Service principles relating to the

preservation of natural structures." Tomlinson noted that the regional office had no formal

agreement in its files authorizing U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service operations in Katmai. He asked

for information on the authority for F&WS operations in the monument "so we can prevent

further occurrences of this nature." [33]

After receiving Tomlinson's memorandum, the NPS directorate in Washington wrote to the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service. The NPS asked the F&WS why it built the ladder without

authorization. The F&WS, in response, admitted its error in constructing the ladder without

written permission, but pled that Kuehl and Collins had expressed no objection when at the

construction site. Eicher, who was at Brooks River in 1948, 1949, and 1950, recalled that Kuehl

made several suggestions for making the fishway compatible with the surroundings. He

suggested placing spoil from the blasting in the depression at the north end of the falls and

keying the ladder weirs into the excavated trough as much as possible. This would hide the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

weirs when filled with water. [34]

After receiving the F&WS letter, Acting NPS Director Ronald Lee expressed surprise that Park

Service officials had witnessed fish ladder construction for two years without protesting. He

asked Alfred Kuehl to explain his actions. Reviewing the situation in 1951, Kuehl noted he had

reported the fish ladder's construction to the regional director after both his 1948 and 1949

visits. He admitted, however that he "considered the installation no more objectionable than the

fish weir across the mouth of Brooks Lake." He also erred, he admitted, in assuming that the

F&WS and the NPS had signed an Inter-Bureau agreement relating to permissible activities at

the site. Not until after his 1949 visit did he find that no such agreement had ever been signed.

In sum, however, Kuehl felt that he had acted properly. On the one hand, he felt that the ladder

had "not resulted in a glaring distractive feature." Beyond that, he felt that the area surrounding

the Brooks River was of marginal value to the agency. He noted that an inspection of the

boundary had been made in 1947, and "at that time it appeared that it might ultimately be

advisable to eliminate approximately 25% of the Monument area which would include the

entire Brooks Lake region." Those reasons, plus "a desire to maintain amiable relations in view

of the splendid protective services rendered by the Fish and Wildlife Service in the Monument

for many years" prompted him to refrain from protesting against the fish ladder's construction.

[35]

Collins, who was an ardent defender of Katmai's resources, saw things in a wholly different

light. He was angry that the NPS had acquiesced to the F&WS along the Brooks River, and was

angry at Kuehl who, by not protesting a year or two earlier, might have prevented the fish

ladder from being constructed. He also hinted darkly that personal relationships may have gotten

in the way of Kuehl's professional responsibilities. Kuehl, he knew, was a good friend of

George Kelez, the head of the F&WS Bristol Bay program, and his friendship may have muted

any opposition he may have had to it. [36] It is more likely, however, that Kuehl stood by

during the fish ladder's construction because he was simply not aware that the NPS would want

to object to such an activity without first obtaining a permit.

Sport Fishing Before 1950

Commercial fishermen had been using the products of the Naknek drainage since the 1880s,

and fisheries personnel had been investigating Naknek Lake and its tributaries since the early

1920s. The first record of sport fishing in the area, however, does not appear until the early

1940s. By this time, pilots such as Ray Petersen, Bert Ruoff and John Walatka had become

familiar with the monument; they may also have tarried awhile and tossed a line into its lakes

and streams. By 1942, pilots were carrying Naknek cannery workers into the monument on

charter flights. Work at the canneries was intense but periodic. During breaks between the

salmon runs, Ray Petersen and his fledgling Ray Petersen Flying Service began flying them to

Brooks Lake and other local fishing holes. [37]

About the same time, off-duty military personnel from Kodiak Naval Operating Base, Naknek

Army Air Base (later called King Salmon), and Fort Richardson in Anchorage began to visit

Katmai for the sport fishing. To accommodate the increasing number of anglers, the U.S. Army

Air Corps established two rest and recreation camps nearby. Naknek Recreation Annex No. 1,

informally called Rapids Camp, was the enlisted men's camp and was located at the foot of the

Naknek River rapids, five miles southeast of Naknek Air Base. Annex No. 2, called Lake

Camp, was the officers' camp. It was located at the west end of Naknek Lake, eight miles east

of the base and seven miles upstream from Rapids Camp. The initial public land withdrawal at

the two camps took place on January 22, 1943. [38]

By 1945, the Navy at Kodiak was considering the establishment of its own fishing camps in the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

area. The agency hoped to create two such camps, each of which would be composed of socalled "Yakutat huts," prefabricated wood structures with low-pitched roofs. Kodiak's camp

commander wanted to first establish a camp "near the head of the Naknek River, just northwest

of Naknek Lake." He later hoped to build a second camp "one-half mile east of Brooks Falls."

[39] The General Land Office soon gave the Navy permission to build a Naknek River camp,

and Grant Pearson, the Superintendent of Mount McKinley National Park, thought that the idea

of a Navy camp near Brooks Falls was "reasonable." Soon afterwards, the Navy backed off and

decided not to build either facility. Personnel from Kodiak, however, continued to fly into the

area. In 1948, Mark Meyers, an F&WS enforcement agent at Kodiak, reported that the military

took several parties a week into Brooks River for fishing vacations. The military personnel,

presumably from the naval base at Kodiak, took more large trout than they could consume. [40]

The Air Force, which had been created in 1947 as a separate agency within the Department of

Defense, moved two years later to formally establish the two recreation annexes near King

Salmon which had been informally created in the early days of World War II. In May 1949, the

Air Force applied to have the two sites withdrawn as recreation areas "Inasmuch as military

facilities are presently constructed on the unsurveyed site of the public domain...." The agency

initially withdrew more than 300 acres at each site; in September of 1949, the Air Force reduced

its request to 10 acres at each site. [41] In 1956, the Bureau of Land Management approved the

Air Force request. Public Land Order 1350 of October 23, 1956, withdrew the camp sites from

the public domain for Air Force recreational use. [42]

Military use at the west end of Naknek Lake and on the Naknek River continued until Lake and

Rapids camps were permanently closed by the Air Force in 1976. Its use of Brooks River,

however, dropped off shortly after the establishment of the Northern Consolidated camps in

1950. [43]

During the mid- to late 1940s, an increasing number of both civilian and military personnel

visited Katmai's lakes and streams. Cannery workers visited the monument less often and were

soon replaced by fishermen who began to arrive from locations across the territory and from the

United States as well. Many of those anglers were brought into the monument on Northern

Consolidated Airlines, a newly-created carrier headed by Ray Petersen. The three principal

fishing destinations in the Katmai area were "The lagoon at the outlet to Naknek Lake, the

connection between the Coville and Grosvenor Lakes and to the Brooks River." (Those

locations are the site of present-day Lake Camp, Grosvenor Camp, and Brooks Camp,

respectively.) [44]

As the number of fishermen to the Brooks River increased, so did the pressure on the fishing

resource. By 1948, as many as 20 anglers per week were rainbow fishing on Brooks River. A

Standard Oil film produced that year included scenes in which "anglers had accumulated so

many of the huge fish they were scarcely able to carry the weight to their plane." [45] The fish

resource was being abused to the point where "trout were caught with gobs of salmon eggs on

giant Colorado spinners and hooks." Fish and Wildlife representatives stationed at Brooks Lake

that summer noted "quite definitely that the rainbow trout have decreased as the result of the

popularity to air borne sportsmen." [46]

Ray Petersen, who was an ardent fisherman as well as an airline executive, was an early

advocate for the imposition of fishing regulations. He could see that two distinct fishing groups

flew into the Brooks River area: Alaskans, who were "hardware and bait" fishermen, and

"stateside" anglers, who were fly fishing enthusiasts. Petersen knew that any regulations that

might be established would have to favor one group over the other. Petersen observed that fly

fishermen outnumbered the "hardware and bait" fishermen; he therefore advocated that Brooks

River be limited to fly fishing only. George B. Kelez, who headed the Fish and Wildlife

Service's efforts at the Brooks Lake laboratory, agreed. [47]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

Senior Park Service officials also expressed concern about overfishing at the monument. They

believed the Park Service needed to find some way to protect Katmai National Monument and

regulate the public's use of it. But they had been unable to establish a presence at the

monument. [48] (As noted in Chapter 3, they had hoped to send a ranger to Katmai during that

summer. Funding for the position, however, had fallen through.) NPS officials were aware that

agency regulations prohibited airplane landings in the monument by all but official personnel;

as a corollary to that regulation, they had the power to arrest anyone who landed a float plane

on Naknek or Brooks Lake. Superintendent Grant Pearson of Mount McKinley National Park,

however, recognized that it was far more prudent to change the regulation than to prevent

visitation. In 1949, therefore, the monument was opened to summertime air traffic.

Sport Fishery Management, 1950-1976

In June 1950, shortly after Northern Consolidated opened its first fishing camps in Katmai

National Monument, the F&WS established its first monument-wide fishing regulations. (As

noted below, the agency assumed that it had the right to do so, even in an NPS unit.) The

regulations stated that "The limit of catch per person per day shall not exceed two red salmon,

and ten fish or 10 pounds and one fish of any other species. Possession of more than one day's

limit of fish by any one person at any one time is prohibited." On Brooks River, tackle was

restricted to two flies; elsewhere in the monument, tackle could "consist of not more than two

flies or not more than one plug, spoon, or spinner, to which may be attached not more than one

treble hook." [49]

Once they had established a presence, the NPS recognized that the goals of NPS and F&WS

management were often disparate, and NPS officials felt that they too ought to have a say in

determining monument fishing regulations. Clarence J. Rhode, Regional Director of the F&WS

in Alaska, visited Brooks Camp on July 12 in hopes of clarifying the agencies' fishery

management responsibilities.

After his return to Juneau, he told the F&WS director that, in his opinion, the F&WS exercised

authority over the management of commercial fish such as salmon. The NPS, however,

exercised authority over game fish such as grayling and trout. What complicated the matter was

that of Brooks River's two main species, one (rainbow trout) was a game fish and was sought by

anglers, while the other (red salmon) was a commercial fish and was prized primarily by the

Bristol Bay canneries (although it was a popular sports fish, too). Rhode was concerned that the

NPS ranger was paying little attention to the salmon-fishing regulation. On a more general

level, he was

highly disturbed over the general impression being voiced in that area that the Park

Service is highly critical of the Fish and Wildlife Service. This seems unwarranted

to me, inasmuch as we have many times gone a long way to assist and cooperate

with the National Park Service. [50]

Local interpretations and incomplete definition of authorities created further complications.

Fifteen days before Rhode had visited Katmai, one of his agency's wildlife biologists had

stated, in a meeting with Park Service officials in Anchorage, that sports fishing for salmon (a

commercial fish) was not covered by commercial fisheries regulations. Therefore, according to

the biologist, there would be no F&WS objection if Katmai visitors fished for salmon close to

the Brooks River fish ladder. F&WS regulations, however, did prohibit the taking of game fish

(such as rainbows) within 500 feet of fish ladders. [51]

Another problem faced by both NPS and F&WS officials was the overfishing of salmon.

During the late 1940s the trout population had suffered from overfishing, but the problem was
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

eliminated when new fly-fishing regulations had been imposed. The regulations imposed for

salmon were not particularly strict, and by 1951 officials agreed that the current salmon catch

rate--up to 100 per hour at times--was harmful to the fishery. [52]

After the close of the 1951 fishing season, Rhode wrote NPS Director Demaray and made some

suggestions that, he hoped, would clear up the jurisdictional tug-of-war and restore a healthy

salmon run back to the Brooks River. He urged the NPS to prohibit angling--for any species--

within 300 feet below Brooks River Falls and within 300 feet of the weir at the exit of Brooks

Lake. By this time, the NPS had also suggested that the daily salmon catch be limited to two,

including those caught and released. [53]

Northern Consolidated, which operated the various fishing camps, met with Regional Director

Lawrence Merriam and fought against the agencies' proposals. Don Horter, who served as

NCA's publicist, noted that national magazines and newspapers such as Argosy, Colliers,

Esquire, The New York Times, and The Saturday Evening Post were about to publish stories on

Katmai's superlative fishing. Horter protested against any regulations that would restrict angling

at the base of Brooks Falls because "most of the fishermen come to the monument in order to

hook salmon at the base of Brooks Falls." [54] The concessioner was also disturbed about the

proposal to limit catch and release. Horter said he had fished Brooks River for seven years and

believed unlimited catch and release would not harm the fishery, and vowed that the two

regulations would force NCA to abandon its Brooks Camp operation. Merriam sent the details

of his meeting to NPS Director Arthur Demaray. [55]

On October 3, Director Demaray responded to Rhode and readily accepted his suggestion

regarding fishing at the weir. Because of NCA pressure, Demaray rejected any regulations

concerning Brooks Falls. The director, however, held fast with the agency's suggestion that

anglers be limited to a daily catch of no more than two red salmon, including fish hooked and

released. Fisheries personnel believed that even "catch and release" weakened salmon and

would diminish the fishery. [56]

More discussions took place between the two agency heads during the winter of 1951-52. Many

compromises were suggested; at one point, the Chief Counsel of the NPS suggested that bait be

limited to flies within 100 yards above and below the Brooks River weir. That suggestion was

rejected. [57]

By late spring, the compromise regulations were finally agreed upon and were submitted to the

Federal Register. The new catch limits were the same as those issued in 1950 except that they

included the NPS-suggested limitation on catch and release fishing. Allowable types of lures

were also modified; instead of allowing a treble hook to be attached to each artificial lure, not

more than two single hooks were allowed. In addition, fishing was prohibited within 100 yards

of the weir. Finally, a compromise was reached in regards to fishing at Brooks River falls. The

two agency heads decided to prohibit fishing within 100 yards above the fish ladder and on the

ladder itself. Fishing below the ladder, however, was not prohibited. [58]

During the 1950s, most of Katmai's visitors were attracted by the sport fishing. Most approved

of the various fishing regulations. Others, however, felt them to be overly restrictive. A 1953

visitor, for example, complained that the Katmai ranger "did not approve of the fly I was using."

He went on to suggest that any sort of fly be permitted and grumbled, "Another thing, no one

cares to catch many fish as they must clean their own if they wish to have them cooked. There

are no icing facilities so there is no incentive to catch fish to bring home." [59]

The first scientific look at the sport fishing potential of and assessment of sport fishing

pressures in the area came in 1954. At the request of the NPS, John Greenbank of the F&WS

did a sport fish survey of Katmai National Monument. Greenbank and assistant Ronald Lopp
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

worked through the summer of 1954 and described monument waters, examined fish

distribution and abundance, sampled fish populations, and conducted creel censuses in various

locations. Overall, the survey found fish populations high and fishing pressure light. Most

fishing within the monument occurred in Brooks River. Practically no fishing took place in

Brooks Lake. Naknek Lake was fished only at the mouth of Brooks River. A limited amount of

fishing, probably not over 200 hours in the summer of 1954, took place at Lake Grosvenor and

in front of Coville (Grosvenor) Camp. Pike Lake, north of Brooks Lake, experienced about 50

hours of fly-in fishing. There was also fishing in the vicinity of the Air Force camps on Naknek

River. Overall, the censuses recorded that during the summer there had been 843 fishing hours

on Brooks River with a total of 906 fish, primarily rainbow trout, caught; 1794 fishing hours on

Naknek River with a total of 1279 fish, primarily rainbow trout, caught; and 128 fishing hours

on Naknek Lake with a total of 98 fish, mostly red salmon and lake trout, caught. [60]

When the field survey was completed and the collected data was analyzed, Greenbank made

several recommendations. He suggested that: 1) the restriction of fishing in Brooks River to

artificial flies be retained, 2) the prohibition against use of two or more hooks or flies per line

be rescinded, 3) the prohibition against fishing within 300 feet above Brooks Falls be

abandoned, 4) the daily catch limit for sockeye salmon be two fish killed, with no limit on the

number caught and released, 5) all size limits on fish be dropped, and 6) no fish of any species

be artificially stocked in waters of the monument, and no new species introduced. Greenbank

further recommended that consideration be given to development of a lake trout and northern

pike sport fishery, establishment of a perpetual catch reporting system for Brooks River, and

continuation of field studies. He believed that it was particularly important to conduct a survey

of the rainbow trout population of the Naknek River system. [61]

Efforts to perfect fishing regulations for Katmai continued. In the summer of 1955, Dorr G.

Yeager, Regional Chief of Interpretation of the NPS, visited Katmai and discussed angling

regulations with F&WS personnel, including Regional Director Clarence Rhode. As a result,

Yeager believed that it would "not be objectionable to permit the use of hardware with barbless

hooks in a definite area." He thought the "lower pool on Brooks River beside the fish rack on

the east side of the river" might be a suitable spot to test this relaxation of fly-fishing only

restrictions. [62]

In 1956, the NPS responded to earlier suggestions by adopting new fishing regulations.

Following John Greenbank's advice, it removed limits on the number of red salmon which were

hooked and released. (Greenbank's other suggestions were ignored.) The agency also agreed

with Dorr Yeager and opened the lower 880 feet of Brooks River near its mouth to fishing with

"plugs, spoons, and spinners with not more than one barbless treble hook and not more than one

attractor blade" as well as to artificial flies. [63]

Katmai fishermen, who still comprised the vast majority of monument visitors, welcomed the

new, relaxed regulations. A few, however, felt that Katmai's regulations could be safely

ignored. An NPS naturalist who visited Brooks Camp in 1958 noted

that fishermen not only were confused about the administration of the Monument,

but resented the Park Service's attempts to regulate fishing along the Brooks River.

After expending an estimated $1,000 for a fishing trip to Alaska, fishermen are not

willing to accept a barbless hook regulation. This regulation does not inhibit the

"expert fisherman," and is largely ignored by the run-of-the-mill fishermen. The

ranger that attempts enforcement of the fishing regulations will have his hands full.

[64]

To ward off their feeling of possessiveness, Park Service officials warned NCA and anyone else

who would listen that sport fishing was only incidental to Katmai's scenic and scientific values.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

Other monument values were more important. [65] This policy was not specific to Katmai; but,

as later formalized, it was applied to all Park Service areas. Fishing was to be permitted

throughout the National Park System but under management programs directed toward

"perpetuation, restoration, and protection of native species and wild populations of fishes [and]

directed so as not to decrease the wildlife, scenic, scientific, or historic values of the Park."

Promotional types of publicity related to fishing in America's national park areas were to be

discouraged. [66]

In 1959, Alaska became a state. The Statehood Act, among its other provisions, specified that

Mount McKinley National Park was the only park unit where state fish and game regulations

would not apply. As a result, control of sport fishing largely passed from the federal

government (Department of the Interior) to state government (Alaska Department of Fish and

Game). By early 1961, state fishing regulations were in effect at Katmai. Federal regulations

also remained in effect. [67] The two sets of regulations would seem, at first glance, to be

confusing. They do not appear to have conflicted, however, and Katmai park rangers appear to

have had little difficulty in enforcing both sets of regulations.

In 1960, the new state government created a series of local advisory committees to provide

information and advice to the Department of Fish and Game on fishing areas throughout the

state. The Naknek Advisory Committee was appointed to oversee fishing conditions and

policies throughout the Naknek drainage. The committee, later renamed the Naknek/Kvichak

Game and Fishery Advisory Committee, is still active. [ 68]

In 1966, the Ranger-in-Charge pointed out the need for creel checks to promote barbless hook

provisions on Brooks River. [69] Nothing seems to have come of this. Inspecting sport fish

might not have given much information on fish mortality due to barbed hooks and, in any case,

creel censuses are usually conducted to measure harvests, describe fish populations, and enforce

regulations including the regulation on barbless lures in the lower river. Only indirectly are they

used to promote a point of view or the need for a change in policy.

In 1969, the heavily-fished western end of Naknek Lake was added to the monument. Augie

Reetz, Alaska's Commissioner of Fish and Game, loudly decried the move, noting that "From

the standpoint of fish and game management or, more specifically, fish and game utilization,

National Monument regulations are too restrictive." The Naknek River wound back and forth

across the western boundary line, and state and federal officials recognized that actions had to

be taken to create consistent fishing regulations. A year later, the state moved to regulate the

fishing in the newly-added acreage when the Naknek River above Big Creek was designated a

single-hook area. This restriction remained until 1976. [70]

Since 1963, the number of Brooks Camp fishermen had been progressively outnumbered by

those who did not fish, and by 1970 anglers constituted only about 10 to 20 percent of Brooks

Camp visitors. Many of those anglers, however, were dedicated to their craft. An NPS official,

who visited in late July, noted that

Skilled fly fishermen take many trout and grayling in the Brooks River, releasing

most. One particularly expert sportsman, remaining at Brooks Camp for an

extended trip, personally told me of catching and releasing 17 grayling in one hour.

(The limit is one grayling per day.) During the salmon runs, visitors "snag"

numerous salmon along the shore of Naknek Lake, at the mouth of the river and at

the base and above Brooks Falls. This does not appear to be a serious impairment

in the breeding activity of the salmon (a limit of two salmon per day and two in

possession is imposed at Brooks River area versus ten in possession in most of

Alaska). [71]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

Depending on the situation, state fishery management officials could be either more liberal or

more conservative than the Park Service in their attitudes toward Katmai sport fishing. In 1971,

the state prohibited fishing within 50 feet of the fish ladder. Two years later, however, the

prohibited distance was increased to 300 feet, except when the ladder was closed. [72] In 1972,

the Alaska Board of Fisheries increased the limit of the Katmai area salmon catch from two to

five; at the same time, however, it reduced the bag limit of other fish species (including

rainbows) from ten to five. Two years later, however, a poor salmon run forced the state to

temporarily lower the bag limit to two. [73]

Partly in response to the reduction in the bag limit for rainbow trout, the National Park Service,

in 1973, simplified its regulations pertaining to fishing in Katmai. The NPS eliminated the

regulations which it had adopted in 1950 regarding catch limits; the agency apparently felt that

the state regulations, which had been adopted in 1972, were sufficient. The NPS also revised its

regulations on bait and lures; it eliminated the cumbersome language which it had adopted in

1950 and 1956, and replaced it with two simple regulations. First, fishing throughout the

monument was permitted only with artificial lures, and second, only fly fishing was permitted

on the Brooks River between Brooks Lake and the posted signs near Brooks Camp. Because the

National Marine Fisheries Service was no longer operating a weir along the Brooks River or

using the fish ladder, the restriction which dated from the 1950s regarding fishing from the weir

was eliminated. Another restriction which had prohibited fishing from the fish ladder was also

eliminated; that restriction, however, was superfluous, inasmuch as a state regulation already

prohibited fishing within 300 feet of the ladder. [74]

State officials instituted other measures during the period to protect Katmai's rainbow fishery. In

the late 1960s and early 1970s, the state created the so-called "Bristol Bay Trophy Fish Area,"

and new regulations were instituted in an attempt to preserve the fish stocks. Beginning in 1970,

the Bay of Islands was included in the trophy fish area. Fishermen visiting the Bay of Islands

were slapped with a bag limit of just one rainbow, 20 inches or longer, per day. They were also

required to use single hooks rather than treble hooks, and an unintended consequence of the

new regulation was an increasing number of dead trophy fish. [75] Officials worried that

another result of the trophy fish area's creation would be that Brooks River would be subjected

to additional fishing pressure. In May 1974, therefore, the State Fisheries Board closed Brooks

River to fishing from May 20 to June 10 to protect spawning rainbow trout. By 1976, Brooks

River's closure dates had changed; the new dates were from April 10 to June 7 instead of from

May 20 to June 10. [76]

Fisheries Research and Management Activities, 1950-1976

Before 1950, the Fish and Wildlife Service--specifically, the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries

(BCF) within the Service--had been the only government agency with an active management

presence in Katmai National Monument. The establishment of the NPS facility and concessions

camps in the summer of 1950 brought about a temporary jurisdictional conflict, as has been

noted above. By 1951, however, the agency heads had smoothed over their disagreements.

Through it all, the Fish and Wildlife Service continued its job of counting and studying the

Brooks River salmon run.

For the remainder of the 1950s, the agency vacillated from year to year in the interest it showed

toward Bristol Bay research efforts. Funding during some years allowed tagging programs, foot

and photograph surveys, and similar research efforts. But during other years, the F&WS decided

to focus its Alaskan research efforts away from Bristol Bay. The Brooks River weir counts

continued, but most other Western Alaskan investigations were placed on hold. Regardless of

funding levels, the agency continued to staff the Brooks Lake laboratory and maintain the

adjacent weir. [77]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

In April 1941, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had obtained a permit from the NPS in order

to gain legal use of monument lands. In 1959, however, the NPS suggested that a more formal

procedure, in the form of a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), be prepared to govern

relations between the two agencies. On February 15, 1960, a ten-year MOA was signed by the

directors of the F&WS and the NPS; it remained in force until March 7, 1970. Two days after

the MOA expired, the regional directors of the two agencies signed a ten-year extension to the

agreement. [78]

In 1961, commercial fisheries research in the monument underwent a major change when the

BCF decided to expand its fisheries research from the Brooks Lake-Brooks River area to the

entire Naknek drainage system. The Brooks Lake building became a coordinating center, and to

provide for its expansion, new housing was needed. The BCF constructed two four-room log

cottages just south of the Brooks Lake laboratory. [79]

By 1962, studies were being conducted at remote sites within the monument, and to support

those studies, the agency built several remote cabins in the monument. By 1965, the agency had

built one at the east end of Lake Coville, just west of Grosvenor Camp, and it has occupied

another cabin located two miles above the mouth of American Creek. [80] A third BCF cabin,

located at the southeastern end of Lake Grosvenor, was built in the late 1960s. In 1969, it was

described as a plywood one-room tent frame type cabin with two adjacent storage sheds which

was being used for anadromous fish research. All three temporary camps were still active in

1971. The BCF, during the 1960s and early 70s, also had fish weirs and counting fences on

Hardscrabble Creek, Hidden Creek, West Creek, and at the outlet of lower Kaflia Bay.

Therefore, the agency probably erected shelters of some sort at those locations as well. Each of

these had probably been abandoned by 1971. [81] Meanwhile, the salmon counting activities

along the Brooks River, which had been the mainstay of the BCF's work for more than 25

years, were discontinued after the 1967 season. [82]

During the same period in which the BCF decided to expand its operations, the philosophy of

its research also changed. In addition to counts, the agency's studies became on-the-ground

projects that began to affect Katmai's resources. From 1960 to 1965, fisheries scientists

completely blocked a Brooks Lake tributary, West Creek, just to see if salmon heading for it

would spawn elsewhere. Other experiments involved chemical trickery to influence Hidden

Creek salmon to spawn in West Creek rather than their natural spawning grounds. These

experiments resulted in the loss of at least one genetic stock of salmon in Brooks Lake

tributaries. [83]

In 1970, the Fish and Wildlife Service split into two parts: the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and

Wildlife and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The work at Katmai, which had

been administered by the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, was transferred to the NMFS. The

new agency continued the work of the old. In 1973, the NMFS conducted the second year of a

Naknek Lake salmon incubator project and also conducted limnological and biological sampling

of the lake system. The following winter, however, the incubators froze and the project was

abandoned. The NMFS did not staff the Brooks Lake fisheries station in 1974 or thereafter. [84]

In 1976, the issue of manipulative fishery research, which had first surfaced during BCF studies

conducted from 1960 through 1965, came to a head when the NMFS proposed large scale

artificial salmon reproduction in Katmai National Monument. Specific sites for the salmon

enhancement program were to be Idavain Creek and the streams which emptied into Brooks

Lake. Alerted to the proposal by Katmai Superintendent Blinn, Acting Area Director Robert

Peterson advised the National Marine Fisheries Service to abandon plans for manipulative

fishery research in national parks in Alaska. [85]

With the exception of that proposal, NMFS ignored the monument during the mid-1970s. In
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

1976, the agency began allowing NPS personnel to use the Brooks Lake cabins. The following

spring, it decided to transfer its facilities to the Park Service. In 1979 the NPS, under the

direction of interim superintendent Roy Sanborn, rehabilitated the two Brooks Lake cottages

and the Brooks Lake fisheries laboratory which was converted into a residence. That summer,

and each summer since, the buildings have been used by NPS personnel. [86]

The various remote NMFS structures have not fared as well. The primitive cabin at the east end

of Lake Coville remained active as part of a salmon fisheries research project until 1972. By the

following year, however, it was "not fit for habitation without minimal repairs" and was

abandoned. In 1985, NPS rangers lived in the cabin, which by now was dilapidated. The cabin

was torn down the following year. Along American Creek, the former BCF cabin remained

active from 1963 through 1970 but was afterward abandoned. The cabin at the southeast end of

Lake Grosvenor was also used for only a short time. It was abandoned in the early to mid1970s. [87]

A continuing sore point that marred relations between the National Park Service and the Fish

and Wildlife Service throughout the 1950s and 1960s was the Brooks Falls fish ladder. As

noted above, the F&WS had built the ladder from 1948 through 1950 with the silent

acquiescence of the NPS, though without its permission. The NPS protested its construction in

1950, but by that time, the ladder was already complete.

The fish ladder remained controversial throughout the 1950s; the NPS wanted to get rid of it,

while the F&WS defended it. As part of the NPS-sponsored Katmai Project, an official with the

U.S. Public Health Service recommended that the ladder be removed. Perhaps in response to

that recommendation, F&WS fishery engineer George Eicher wrote an analysis on how the

ladder had affected the river's fish runs. The analysis showed the red salmon population before

the ladder's construction was larger than it had been afterwards. It was quick to point out,

however, that external factors, not the ladder, caused the reduction. [88] In the mid-1960s, the

NPS formalized its principles of aquatic management for natural and historical areas. This led

to an immediate push to do something about the Brooks River fish ladder. The F&WS fought

the prospect. In the end, attuned to a sensitive political climate engendered by low Bristol Bay

fish runs in the early 1960s, on-scene Park Service officials recommended coming back to the

fish ladder issue later. [89]

Park Service field personnel continued to raise the issue, noting in 1970 that when the ladder

was open it greatly reduced the number of salmon that could be seen trying to leap the falls.

[90] In the early 1970s, they blocked the ladder's upstream exit with wood planks (ineffectively,

as noted below). It has remained blocked ever since.

Although most of the Fish and Wildlife's facilities in Katmai were established on the Bristol

Bay side of the monument, the bureau was also concerned with the Shelikof Strait fishery. Prior

to statehood, it claimed jurisdiction of all areas below the mean high tide line. (It also, as noted

above, claimed jurisdiction over commercial fish throughout the monument.) It carried out

occasional patrols in the strait during the 1950s. In addition, the F&WS made scattered attempts

to monitor the fisheries resources on the monument's eastern shore. The bureau, operating from

its Kodiak office, had been making occasional studies of salmon spawning areas in the

monument since the 1920s. Before 1950, as has been noted, the agency had established

watchman's cabins on Kaflia Bay. Then, in the summer of 1953, the agency stationed a salmonstream guard in a tent about one mile south of the Kaguyak Village site. Both improvements

were probably erected in conjunction with a nearby fish trap. [91] The agency, during the

1950s, may also have been active on other portions of the coastline.

After statehood, much of the fisheries management along the Shelikof Strait was transferred to

the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. The ADF&G sought out a site from which it could
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

manage, survey, and patrol the salmon fisheries along the monument's eastern coastline, and in

March 1962 it obtained a ten year Special Use Permit from the NPS for a site on Kashvik Bay,

up to three acres in extent, in which to erect one or more field structures. By June, the ADF&G

had decided to erect a weir, cabin, and storage shed at the site. In support of its activities, the

state also received permission to erect a small fueling station, which was constructed at Amalik

Bay. [92]

Fisheries Research and Management Activities Since 1976

The federal government, through its long-term efforts at the Brooks Lake laboratory, had

amassed a wealth of data on the Brooks River and Naknek Lake salmon resource. Beyond that,

however, there had been little attention paid to Katmai's sport fish populations in the two

decades which followed John Greenbank's 1954 survey work. During the mid-1970s, both state

and NPS officials decided that more research into Katmai's sport fishing populations was sorely

needed. What followed was a 15- to 20-year-long research effort which included five rainbow

trout studies, two sockeye salmon studies, two studies which analyzed the effectiveness of the

fish ladder, and a bibliographic study which compiled the many research efforts which had been

made to date.

Since statehood in 1959, state fishery managers in the Naknek drainage had emphasized the

large king salmon and rainbow trout sport fisheries of the Naknek River and Bay of Islands area

of Naknek Lake. Only periodic, short, fishery assessment trips were made by state biologists to

Brooks Camp and the Brooks River. Little or no information was available on the health of

rainbow trout populations in Brooks Lake, its tributaries including Headwaters Creek, and other

areas used by sport anglers such as American Creek and Idavain Creek. To provide that

information, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game commenced a spawning survey of the

Brooks River rainbow trout population. That survey began about 1975 and continued until

1978. [93]

The NPS, during the same period, also attempted to gain information on the Brooks River

rainbow trout population. NPS officials, of course, were vitally concerned with gaining data on

Brooks River trout populations, and wanted to augment the ADF&G data. Rangers, therefore,

conducted summer creel censuses along the river during the 1975, 1976, and 1977 seasons. The

data they collected, however, were not systematic nor of sufficiently long duration to be fully

definitive. [94]

In 1977-78, the NPS funded preparation of an information synthesis of all fishery and aquatic

research information available for the Naknek River drainage. The Arctic Environmental

Information and Data Center, part of the University of Alaska, compiled a 244-page report with

an extensive bibliography. This report later proved valuable as an information source for

resource managers and research personnel for all that was known about Katmai's fish

populations and aquatic habitat. [95]

In the early 1980s, NPS management began to worry about the decreasing size and number of

trophy rainbows, both at American Creek and in Naknek Lake. In order to provide a more

complete database than NPS rangers and state biologists had been able to collect during 1975-

77, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, in 1983 and 1984, conducted a study (with

funding from the NPS) on the possible overharvest of Katmai's rainbow trout. [96] To

document rainbow trout harvests and categorize sport fishermen types, ADF&G personnel

conducted intensive, long-term creel censuses and solicited mailed questionnaires from

fishermen on the Brooks River, Naknek River, and the Bay of Islands portion of Naknek Lake.

Detailed information was developed on the number of rainbows kept versus those caught in

each significant fishery. Fish population statistics such as length, weight, sex, and age were
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

developed for the Naknek and Brooks rivers, American Creek, and Idavain Creek; in addition,

spawning ground surveys were conducted on the Naknek and Brooks rivers, Idavain Creek, and

Headwaters Creek.

From 1981 to 1985, the ADF&G also conducted a somewhat smaller but related rainbow trout

study in the Naknek River drainage. So-called "Floy" tagging was conducted on eight of the

drainage's streams and lakes. (Floy tags are visible plastic tags, manufactured by the Floy

company, which show where and when the tags have been attached to the fish; they also

provide other information.)

The two studies concluded that current sport fishing levels had no significant adverse affect on

the size, age composition, or numbers of available rainbow trout in the Naknek River drainage.

Spawning ground surveys indicated sufficient numbers of spawners to perpetuate populations

and to provide quality sport fishing to anglers using the drainage. Five specific regulatory

proposals or options were identified in the event sport fishing effort increased or management

philosophies changed. None of the proposals, however, were implemented over the short term.

Lou Gwartney, the state fishery biologist leading both studies, believed that with the large and

growing philosophy of catch and release throughout Katmai, there seemed little cause for worry

about the health of the park's rainbow trout fishery. [97]

The fifth significant rainbow trout study at Katmai was a radio-tracking effort funded by the

NPS and jointly conducted by the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Alaska Department of Fish

and Game. In 1984, 46 spawning and post-spawning rainbow trout were tagged with radio

transmitters; 25 were in the Naknek River, and the remaining 21 were in the Brooks River

drainage. Some of the latter were tagged above and some below Brooks Falls. The study

revealed fascinating details about the summer and winter range of Naknek and Brooks River

rainbows, the timing and speed of their migrations, and the degree to which overlap occurs in

the life history and habitat use requirements of both populations. The Bay of Islands area of

Naknek Lake was highlighted as the principal summer range of adult Naknek River rainbows.

The summer range of adult Brooks River rainbows was found to include Brooks River, Brooks

Lake, and, to a limited degree, Naknek Lake. In the latter instance, some intermingling occurred

during summer between a few Naknek and Brooks River fish. The study suggested, however,

that Brooks River and Naknek River rainbows were really two separate populations of locallyadapted fish that do not share habitat to any significant degree. Naknek rainbows appeared to

conduct far more extensive migrations than did Brooks River rainbows. [98]

Another scientific study focused on the genetics of sockeye salmon within the Naknek River

drainage in Katmai. The NPS funded the study, and Fish and Wildlife Service personnel

conducted the research. They performed genetic analyses on fish tissue samples taken from

sockeye salmon spawning in five tributaries to Brooks Lake; four tributaries to Naknek Lake;

and in Brooks River, both above and below the falls. The analyses showed that the five stocks

spawning in Brooks Lake tributaries are genetically distinct from one another. They are also, as

a whole, genetically different from the somewhat homogenous group that comprises the Brooks

River and Naknek Lake tributary fish. The results also suggested that, despite the fish ladder at

Brooks Falls, there was little or no interbreeding between sockeye salmon stocks originating

from below the falls and sockeye salmon stocks from Brooks Lake tributaries. Sockeye salmon

that spawn in the upper and lower Brooks River were not found to be genetically different.

Investigators felt that this could be either because the fish ladder allowed interbreeding between

formerly distinct stocks or because Brooks Falls was never enough of a barrier to preclude free

exchange of sockeye salmon destined to spawn within Brooks River. [99]

In 1985, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, with NPS funding, studied the effectiveness of the

fish ladder. (A related, very preliminary analysis had been written by George Eicher almost

thirty years earlier.) The 1985 study concluded that although sockeye salmon would use the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

ladder, they did not need it to ascend the falls. Fish and Wildlife Service investigators felt that

coho and pink salmon might benefit slightly from the ladder; numerically, however, they were

an insignificant portion of the Brooks River fish runs. Their principal conclusion was that the

ladder was not necessary for salmonid fish passage. [100]

A year later, National Marine Fisheries Service biologists who had worked for years at the

Brooks Lake research station were also asked to characterize the effectiveness of the fish ladder.

They concluded that 1) there is no compelling evidence that the ladder has had a significant

impact on any fish populations upstream or downstream of the falls since it was installed in

1949-50, [101] 2) removal or renovation of the fish ladder would be unlikely to have any

significant impact one way or another on fish passage or production of sockeye salmon from the

Brooks system, [102] and 3) the argument suggesting the ladder may have increased adult coho

salmon access to the area upstream from the falls is even weaker than any evidence that the

ladder has increased sockeye salmon escapements above the falls. [103] The fish ladder, in

other words, had little or no effect on the spawning success of Brooks River salmon.

The 1985 Fish and Wildlife Service study did more than just analyze salmon spawning runs

with and without the fish ladder. It also suggested five management options, ranging from doing

nothing to totally removing the ladder. The recommended option called for drying up the ladder

for an interim period during which further studies could be accomplished prior to possible

restoration of the site. [104] The NPS adopted this recommendation, but in so doing it ran into

a furor of opposition. Commercial fishermen, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, the

Bristol Bay Borough, and the Alaska Congressional Delegation all protested, and both the

Alaska House of Representatives and the Alaska Senate passed non-binding resolutions against

the Park Service's position. In response to the outcry, U.S. Senator Ted Stevens included

language in the NPS's 1987 supplemental appropriations bill which directed that no effort be

made to remove, obstruct, dewater, fill or otherwise damage the Brooks River fish ladder. This

thwarted implementation of the NPS's policy of restoring park features and ecosystems to their

natural state. Ironically, the protestors prevailed despite scientific conclusions by professional

biologists from the NMFS, the NPS and the F&WS that the fish ladder did little or nothing to

enhance fish populations.

No major administrative actions have taken place regarding the fish ladder since 1987. The

upper end of the ladder is still blocked by wood bracing, as it has been since 1973. Even so,

some water passes through the ladder, and intermittent fish passage occurs. An increasing

amount of erosion has been taking place on the south bank, just south of the fish ladder. The

placement of sand bags has thus far kept erosion to a minimum. That solution, however, will

ultimately prove to be only temporary. [105]

In 1991, the NPS funded a study of the effects of jet-driven boat turbulence on sockeye and

other salmonid reproduction in Alaska streams. Much of the field work planned for the study

occurred on American Creek in Katmai. The study was conducted by the Alaska Cooperative

Fish and Wildlife Research Unit at the University of Alaska Fairbanks. The study, completed in

1994, found that jet driven boats can indeed kill salmonid embryos in redds. Water pressure was

not found to be the culprit; instead, mortality occurs when river substrate (gravel) is moved by

the direct discharge from a jet unit. The authors found that limiting jet boat activity may be

warranted in small streams where the potential for substrate disturbance is high. Any such

restrictions, however, should be made on a case-by-case basis. [106]

Changes in Sport Fishing Regulations Since 1980

In 1985, restrictions on sport fishing methods tightened further within the Bristol Bay region.

The State Board of Fisheries, upon recommendation of the Alaska Department of Fish and
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

Game, closed all Katmai streams to fishing from April 10 to June 7. (As noted above, this

prohibition had been effect on the Brooks River since 1976.) From November 1 through April

9, the ADF&G allowed bait on all streams; the NPS, however, overrode this regulation and

demanded that only artificial lures be allowed. From June 8 through October 31, tackle was

limited to unbaited, single-hook lures in all streams and within a one-half mile radius of stream

mouths. Fish eggs were banned as bait year-round above the old (1969) Katmai National

Monument boundary along the Naknek River. This ruling negated the prior, state-imposed

regulation, instituted in 1977, regarding the subsistence taking of whitefish, via bait in the

Naknek River, between mid-November and the end of March.

Along the Brooks River, the state and NPS imposed further restrictions. From June 8 to October

31, the state ruled that only single-hook, artificial flies could be used. Bag limits were also

lowered. From June 8 to October 1, the daily bag limit on rainbow trout was lowered from five

to two; only one of the bagged fish was allowed to be 20 inches or more in length. From

November 1 through June 7, the limit remained five rainbows, but only one of them could be 20

inches or more in length. A further regulation, instituted by the NPS, demanded that anglers take

their catch immediately to the fish-cleaning station and not leave it in the grass as had

previously been done. [107]

By the early 1980s, it was clear to NPS staff that the July salmon run created many conflicts

between bears and fishermen. Barrie K. Gilbert, a scientist studying Katmai's bears (see Chapter

9), also recognized the obvious conflict. In 1985, therefore, he recommended that the fishing

regulations be tightened to lower bag limits. He also proposed that fishermen be required to

keep the first two salmon caught. [108]

In 1987, the Alaska Board of Fisheries approved a regulation stating that only unbaited artificial

lures could be used in the entire Naknek River drainage between March 1 and November 14.

The NPS, that year, also submitted a proposal to reduce the bag limit to two salmon and one

trout throughout the park and preserve. The Fisheries Board rejected that proposal, which was

consistent with what Gilbert had recommended. It based its decision, in part, on an Alaska

Department of Fish and Game determination that the fishery was healthy. The board also

concluded that other management considerations, namely the safety of large numbers of people

sport fishing in close proximity to feeding bears at several stream sites in Katmai, were not

within its purview. The board also expressed concern about the large area covered by the

proposal and some confusion about the proposal's objectives. The Department of Fish and

Game, however, recognized at the board meeting that the NPS had authority to promulgate its

own regulations to address the problem. [109]

Given that dictum, Katmai Superintendent Bane instituted a temporary regulation, beginning in

June 1988, which established a daily limit of one fish, of any species, along the Brooks River.

Bane did so in order to reduce the incidence of bears acquiring fish from visitors. He found that

public response to the restriction was "overwhelmingly supportive," and felt that the regulation

was successful in reducing bear-human conflicts. The NPS regulation became permanent in

May 1989. In 1990, the Alaska Board of Fisheries further restricted harvests in the area by

designating catch and release for rainbow trout, both on the Brooks River and within a onequarter mile radius into Naknek Lake, from June 8 through October 31. [110]

Use of Katmai's Fishery By Local Residents

Few local residents were known to have fished in the monument, either for sports or

subsistence purposes, before 1960. Edwin W. Seiler, however, was an exception. Seiler, who

arrived in the area in the late 1940s, was the proprietor of Air Martel, King Salmon's first

business establishment. A pilot, Seiler enjoyed fishing the various lakes in and around the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

monument, and in early 1952 he asked NPS officials for a permit to land aircraft within Katmai

National Monument for ice fishing. Seiler justified his request for such a permit by saying that

the military had "cleaned out" fish stocks in the immediate area. The NPS, however, denied

Seiler's request. Regulations forbade the wintertime landing of aircraft within Katmai, except

for the Service's administrative activities and necessary activities of the concessioner. [111]

During the early 1950s, the NPS was asked to address the issue of subsistence fishing by

Natives of the Katmai area. The Bureau of Indian Affairs, in early 1952, requested that Natives

be exempted from fishing regulations. After an exchange of telegrams and letters between the

Superintendent of Mount McKinley National Park and officials at the Service's regional and

national offices, the agency decided to exempt Natives from the Katmai fishing regulations

after August 20 of each year. (This date was probably suggested because of the annual

activities, noted in Chapter 6, that took place at the mouth of the Brooks River during this

period.) Rainbow trout were excluded from the exemption. [112] These and other provisions for

Katmai fishing were published in the May 28, 1952 Federal Register.

Another subsistence fishing issue arose in 1953 when the NPS received a request for

experimental use of a "King Salmon" net in Naknek Lake. Citing practice in Norway as a

precedent, Naknek resident Gunnar Berggren asked for a permit to place the net at 30 fathoms

in Naknek Lake to see if there were fish at that depth. Katmai ranger George Peters denied

Berggren's request, noting that such activity could be authorized only for scientific purposes.

[113]

During the spring of 1965, the possibility of opening Naknek Lake to commercial fishing arose

as an issue. Local residents, anxious to develop a new fishery, contacted the Alaska Department

of Fish and Game and Alaska Congressman Ralph J. Rivers; these two parties, in turn, wrote

the NPS about the legality of such a practice. Park Service replies, however, were prompt and

discouraging. NPS management authorities prohibited fishing for profit in park and monument

waters. The NPS noted that an additional reason for denying the commercial fishery was the

protection of the sport fishery. Superintendent Oscar Dick noted that

Sports fishing was not the primary justification for its existence as a National

Monument. We believe, however, that the existence of this great natural wild

fishery is one of several unique resources that makes it one of the outstanding

wilderness regions in the world. We also believe that its fishery has contributed a

great deal to the economy of the surrounding area, and will contribute much more,

as now managed for recreational purposes. [114]

In 1976, proposals relating to both subsistence and commercial fishing on Naknek Lake

surfaced at a meeting of NPS and Bristol Bay Native Corporation (BBNC) officials. The BBNC

delegations first asked about the legality of harvesting the lake's whitefish by net. Katmai

Superintendent Gil Blinn said that such a practice would be permitted. The Native delegation

then asked what the chances were of having a fish hatchery on the lake. Ralph Root, the

"keyman" assigned to Katmai, indicated that "it would be a more difficult problem there

because the entire lake is already under National Park Service jurisdiction." [115]

The Native subsistence regulations, implemented in 1952, remained unchanged for the next

twenty years, and it was under these regulations that Natives carried on their late-season fishery

near the mouth of Brooks River. In 1972, however, the state softened its regulations and

allowed Native subsistence fishing throughout the monument on a year-round basis. [116]

In June 1975 local citizens, acting through the Bristol Bay Borough, moved to further broaden

access to the fishery when a resolution was passed which requested the National Park Service to

allow the use of salmon eggs in Naknek Lake and River. Locals wanted to increase their
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

subsistence fish take in the monument, specifically of whitefish, and passed the resolution

because they had been constrained by the NPS regulation which had limited monument fishing

to those using artificial lures.

The NPS tried to accommodate local concerns, and prepared a draft environmental assessment

which laid out several alternatives. The favored alternative was one which allowed wintertime

bait fishing, using salmon eggs as bait, along Naknek River from November 15 through April 9.

The NPS held three public meetings on the subject in local communities in November 1975. As

a result of those meetings, the favored alternative was revised to allow bait fishing along the

river from November 15 through March 31. (Both local residents and the NPS did not want to

endanger the Naknek River's rainbow fishery, and local residents were willing to shorten the

open fishing period in order to minimize the size of the rainbow trout catch.) The

Environmental Assessment was approved on January 13, 1976. [117]

After receiving the NPS report, the State Board of Fisheries slightly modified its

recommendations. When the regulation was implemented in 1977, it allowed wintertime bait

fishing on the Naknek River from November 15 through March 31 of each year. The extent of

that fishing, however, was only "from markers located just above Trefon's Cabin downstream to

the Monument boundary." [118] That regulation remained until 1983. By that time, the

regulation had little meaning. During the winter of 1981-82, the Alaska Board of Fisheries had

passed a subsistence regulation which allowed sockeye salmon fishing "along a 100 yard length

of the west shore of Naknek Lake near the outlet to the Naknek River as marked by ADF&G

markers" from October 1 through December 31 (see Chapter 12).

Clamming Operations

Along Katmai's Shelikof Strait coastline lie a number of productive clam beds. High quality

clam habitat stretches from Hallo Bay to Cape Douglas and in Kashvik Bay, at the south end of

the present-day park. Clamming production began, predictably, in southeastern Alaska; then, in

1916, the Cordova area witnessed the territory's first large-scale clam cannery. The more remote

Katmai clam beds became known soon afterwards, less than five years after Katmai was

designated as a national monument. [119]

Clamming commenced on the Shelikof Strait coast in 1923 when Hemrich Packing Company,

Inc. began operations. The company's cannery was located at Kukak Bay, but the clamming

beds, as noted in a company brochure, were at "Swickshak Beach." [120] In 1924, as noted

earlier in the chapter, the cannery began processing salmon as well, and either Hemrich or one

of its lessees operated the combination clam and salmon cannery until 1932. No commercial

clamming took place along the coastline during 1933 and 1934. Surf Canneries then purchased

Hemrich's facilities and operated them through the 1936 season. By 1936, Kukak Bay had a

clam and salmon cannery appraised at $89,000, while Swikshak Bay had "fishing cabins, docks,

and other improvements" valued at $2,000. [121]

During the mid-1920s, most or all of the clam digging took place at Swikshak Bay. As time

wore on, however, workers discovered that high quality clam habitat stretched from Kukak Bay

to Cape Douglas. By 1931, Kashvik Bay was being harvested as well. Hemrich and its lessees

were the sole users of the mainland beaches during the 1923-1932 period. When the facilities at

Kukak and Swikshak bays closed down, however, a Kodiak Island packer moved in. [122]

The clamming facilities, and most of the clam beds, were located outside the original (1918)

boundaries of the monument. When Katmai's boundaries were expanded in April 1931, both the

canneries and the clamming beaches were absorbed into the monument. Because of an

oversight, the language of the 1931 proclamation did not specifically address the rights of
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

existing users. It was not until the mid-1930s that clamming interests discovered the error; a

June 1936 presidential proclamation was issued that recognized the rights of all those who had

used the land prior to the boundary expansion. (See Chapter 3.) Surf's management intended to

follow up on the proclamation by obtaining a patent to its lands. The company's operations,

however, were shut down in September 1936 when a fire swept through and destroyed the

Swikshak Bay cannery. The company made no further attempts to patent its properties, and

appears to have abandoned its interests at both Kukak and Swikshak soon afterwards. By 1941,

fire had destroyed the Kukak Bay cannery as well, and both the wharf and pilings were found

to be "in a bad state of repair." [123]

In 1944, the firm of Kester and Kline of Kodiak operated a clam cannery in Swikshak Bay. The

cannery was allowed to operate to supply the U.S. Army. The NPS permitted the operation as a

part of its wartime program. The company reapplied for a permit in late 1945. The agency, in

response, temporarily held the view that with the war ended, there was no reason to continue

using federal lands for military supply purposes. [124] The agency later gave the company a

one-year permit to operate its Swikshak Bay cannery; no permit was offered, however, for clam

harvesting. [125]

By March 1946, Kester and Kline had changed its name to the Cape Douglas Canning

Corporation (CDCC). The company was assured that they could operate without a permit so

long as they stayed below the high tide line; given that assurance, they harvested clams that

summer. [126] Late in 1946, CDCC applied for a clam harvesting permit. The company got

bogged down in a bureaucratic runaround between the BLM, the NPS, the Assistant Secretary

of the Interior, and the Division of Territories and Island Possessions. The Assistant Secretary,

trying to steer a middle course, urged the NPS to issue the permit. Recognizing that the

territorial delegate and territorial officials were becoming increasingly restive at the absence of

a Katmai development program, he advised NPS officials that the issuance of the permit might

placate those officials:

I am hopeful that some solution of this problem may be arrived at which will

permit this use of the land, as well as any other use, so long as it would not be

destructive of a significant portion of the historical, scientific and scenic values of

the withdrawn area. This flexibility might go far to minimize the case for abolition

of the so far unused monument.

Soon afterwards, the service issued Cape Douglas Canning Corporation a permit to operate a

cannery in Katmai National Monument from February 1, 1947 to February 1, 1952. The

corporation operated a clam and salmon cannery that summer. [127]

The issuance of Cape Douglas's permit brought up a murky legal point. The legislation which

had established Katmai in 1918, and expanded it in 1931 and 1942, specifically noted that the

monument's boundary was the high tide line. Cape Douglas, however, had proposed in its

permit to erect a temporary building at the end of a sand spit, the pilings of which would extend

below the high tide line. The legal difficulty was presented to the Interior Department's

Solicitor, Mastin G. White, for his judgment. On January 10, 1947, White ruled that "the

National Park Service may grant a revocable permit for this clam canning operation ... with the

right of access to navigable water over intermediate tidelands..." [128]

After the first season's operation under the permit (1947), the corporation asked for permission

to relocate its clam cannery from Swikshak Bay to Kukak Bay. Permission was granted. The

company, which became Mainland Fisheries in April 1948, added a salmon canning facility and

operated at Kukak Bay for the next four years. [129] Later that year, Mainland requested a

permit to operate for ten years at Swikshak Bay. [130] The Department of the Interior

responded to Mainland's request, in January 1949, by providing the company a five year permit
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

good until January 1954. Later, Mainland received an extension to its permit, and the company

was allowed to use 2.7 acres on the east bank of Swikshak Lagoon from October 6, 1950 to

January 1, 1961. [131]

At Swikshak Bay, Mainland Fisheries built a 40-foot by 40-foot Quonset hut for a cannery

building, placing it on piles on the site of the old Surf Cannery which had been destroyed in the

1936 fire. Mainland also built a 40-foot by 110-foot dock adjacent to the cannery and a 30-foot

by 100-foot platform to the rear. A mess hall, store-supply building, and bunkhouses not

destroyed in the fire were rehabilitated. [ 132]

In January 1950 the Whiz Cannery Corporation asked if it could put clammers' cabins on the

shore of Swikshak Bay. Mainland Fisheries, which already had a permit to use the bay,

objected. The NPS held up the Whiz permit due to the Mainland Fisheries' objection. Thus, in

early 1951, Whiz sought Congressional help by writing to Alaska's Delegate to Congress, E. L.

Bartlett. The agency replied that despite Mainland Fisheries' objection, the existing permit did

not provide for exclusive use. In March 1951, Whiz Halferty Canneries was given a five-year

permit to put up clam diggers' cabins on a five acre parcel at Swikshak Bay. The permit was

valid until February 28, 1956. [133]

During the early 1950s, clam digging took place at Kaguyak Bay, probably in conjunction with

Mainland Fisheries' Kukak Bay operation. Lowell Sumner, a biologist from NPS's Region Four

office, noted that "the clam diggers sail their fleet of skiffs in here" each summer. The six

shacks they occupied comprised the "village" of Kaguyak. Kaguyak, at that time, still boasted a

Russian Orthodox church which dated from the pre-1912 era. By 1952, however, little was left

of the 20 remaining barabaras. By 1965, the church had apparently been burned by clam diggers

who were living in it. [134]

Mainland Fisheries, in 1951, went into receivership and ceased operations. Whiz Halferty

remained inactive as well. In June 1954, however, an official of the latter company, now known

as Halferty Canneries, wrote the NPS and requested that Mainland's twenty acres of Kukak Bay

cannery buildings be added to Halferty's permit. Assured by company officials that the plant

was planning to operate again, the BLM gave it a permit to use the facilities improvements at

Swikshak Lagoon, Swikshak Bay, and Kukak Bay. The permit was valid from February 1956

until February 1961. [135] Little is known about the extent of clam harvesting operations during

this period.

On October 15, 1959, Halferty Canneries transferred its clam-harvesting interests to the Alaska

Packers Association (APA). In December 1960, the new company requested a new five year

special use permit. Neither the BLM nor the NPS had any objection to the arrangement, so the

BLM, in May 1961, gave the APA a permit which ran until December 1965. APA cited four

frame buildings in Swikshak Lagoon as its headquarters. [136]

The APA was an active clam harvester. During the summer of 1961, the company deployed 76

men to Katmai's beaches and yielded 410,117 pounds of razor clams. The company was

probably also active in the monument in 1962, but not afterwards. Where production took place

during those two summers is not known. One place it probably occurred was Kashvik Bay,

because a contemporary map identifies an Alaska Department of Fish and Game cabin in the

area. That cabin was probably used to monitor an ongoing clam harvesting operation. [137]

A 1963 planning report provided this overview of the Katmai coast's clam resources:

Kukak Bay has long been the site of a commercial cannery which sometimes lapses

into disuse only to again be reactivated, for such commercial activities are marginal

on the Katmai coast, owing primarily to distance and secondly to weather. This

particular site is abandoned at present, but a larger cannery at Swikshak Bay is still
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

in operation. This one is only about 5 miles from a major clam digging stretch of

bay at Kaguyak. [138]

That same year, the Alaska Packers Association constructed and tested a hydraulic clam

harvester at Swikshak. The test was successful, and further use of hydraulic harvesters was

recommended because it promised to increase productivity and open up new areas to harvest.

The hydraulic harvesters could be mounted on vessels, or they could be built on vehicles which

were suitable for operation in shallow water or on land. [139] They would doubtless have gone

into commercial production. That same year, however, concerns about poisonous shellfish led

the Alaska Department of Health and Welfare to declare all beaches in Alaska suspect. The

department prohibited commercial use of clams, mussels, and similar shellfish taken from

Alaskan beaches. For the next seven years, commercial clamming remained technically closed

in Alaska; as a result, the APA's permit was not renewed. It was not until April 27, 1970 that

health officials approved Swikshak and some other Alaskan beaches for commercial clamming.

[140]

Little remains of the facilities which were associated with the various commercial clamming

operations. At Kukak Bay, portions of the old cannery on the southeast shore had burned down

by 1941. In 1947, however, Alfred Kuehl's photographs show that the mess hall, bunk houses,

manager's house, store, oil tank and wharf were clearly intact. [141] By 1953, however, an NPS

report recommended that the "old cannery" be destroyed. By the time Superintendent Blinn

arrived, the structures were "pretty well collapsed." [142] He advocated their destruction in

1973, but could not raze them until ownership could be determined. They still stood in 1985;

the site that year was recommended as a tidewater ranger station. [143] At Swikshak Bay, 1947

photographs show that Cape Douglas's cannery complex contained one or two bunkhouses, a

mess hall, and a wharf. As indicated by the APA's application to the BLM, four buildings were

still intact in early 1961. By April 1972, however, Katmai personnel deemed them hazardous

and unsightly, and they destroyed them all. [144]

Katmai's clam industry roared back to life soon after health officials deemed the beaches as

healthy again. A major factor contributing to the activity level was that the Swikshak area was

one of only three beaches in the state that had been cleared for clam harvesting. [145] By 1971,

approximately 200,000 pounds of razor clams were being harvested per year in the monument.

The beaches, by this time, had become littered with shacks, wood stoves, debris, and discarded

car bodies.

Over the next two years, Superintendent Blinn moved to clean up the area. In 1972, six special

use permits were issued for commercial clam operations at Swikshak Bay. Special conditions in

the permits required permittees to erect only temporary shelters at these camps. At the end of

the season the permittees were required to remove all structures. [ 146] In 1973, harvesters

visited both Swikshak Bay and Kamishak Bay. At the end of the 1973 season two structures

remained standing at Kamishak. The first was a cabin used by Alaska Department of Fish and

Game personnel who monitored the clamming operations and the second was that of a tardy

clammer. [147] In order to clean up the accumulated refuse, Blinn paid one of the clam diggers

$10,000 to barge the materials back to Kodiak Island. [148]

Clamming permits issued in the following years contained a proviso prohibiting the

construction of beach cabins; harvesters were required to live on a houseboat or barge. The

Alaska Department of Fish and Game, meanwhile, requested permission to build a permanent

structure for its research and monitoring operations at Swikshak. [149] Clamming operations

during that period were restricted to Swikshak Bay. [150]

By 1977, the monument issued only one permit for clamming operations, to Daniel Konigsberg.

The state remained active that year; it held a permit, valid until 1979, which allowed it to
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

maintain a cabin at Swikshak for purposes of razor clam research. [151] From 1978 to 1981, the

only clamming permit was issued to Jesus Briones, of Kodiak, who harvested at Swikshak Bay.

Briones and Bruce Swanson, who applied for a joint permit in 1982, were the last permittees.

[152] In 1985, an illegal clam operation took place at Hallo Bay. The operators were cited, and

they left soon afterwards. [153]

Fish and Wildlife personnel first installed a weir at the head of Brooks River in 1940 and counted fish there

almost every year until 1967. The weir was dismantled each fall and stored for the winter; in this photo, only the

horses (support timbers) are still in place; the remainder is stacked in the grass on the far shore. The roof of the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

Brooks Lake research station can be seen in the right rear of this 1951 photo, taken by NPS ranger Morton

Woods. (Photo A4, File 207, KNM Box 311, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA SB)
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

(top) Since the 1940s, Brooks Falls has been a famed destination for sport fishermen. This photo was taken in

July 1964. (bottom) The fish ladder at the south end of Brooks Falls was constructed by Fish and Wildlife Service

personnel in 1948-1949; it has proven to be a management headache for the NPS ever since. This photo was

taken by Victor Cahalane in August 1954. In the early 1970s, the NPS placed planks over the upper end of the

ladder. The agency has moved to eliminate the ladder several times but has not yet done so. (Ward Wells

Collection #4218-30, AMHA (top); NPS Photo Collection, neg. 12,049 (bottom) )

Kukak Bay, over the years, has served as the site of both a salmon and clam cannery. Operations began here in

1923 and continued off and on until 1936. The site was abandoned and fell into disrepair, but canning began

again in 1948 and remained until 1951. Victor Cahalane took this photo, looking west, in August 1953. The site

was abandoned in 1954. Tattered remnants of the cannery still remain at the site. (NPS Photo Collection, neg.

11,891)
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 8)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap8.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:01 PM]

Swikshak Bay, like Kukak Bay, has been the site of both salmon and clam canning. Beginning in the 1920s,

clams were harvested there, and during the 1930s a salmon cannery was in operation. A salmon and clam cannery

operated during the mid-1940s; 20 years later, a clam cannery was headquartered there. Victor Cahalane

photographed the site in July 1953; the cannery is to the left, while the other building is the living quarters. In

1972, the NPS ordered the buildings demolished. (NPS Photo Collection, neg. 11,856)

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

adhi/chap8.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap9.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:05 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

PART I: KATMAI NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE

Chapter 9:

Bear Management

What may be the world's largest protected population of Alaskan brown bears occupies

Katmai National Park and Preserve. Classified as Ursus arctos, the bears number between

2,000 and 3,000 on the Alaska Peninsula. Approximately ten percent of this population lives

in the national park and preserve. [1] Their seasonal life cycle sometimes brings them into

contact with humans attempting to use the same natural resources. Large, strong, and fast, the

bears are curious and often hungry. Because of these traits, they can be a safety hazard

whenever humans invade their habitat.

Each year the bears emerge from hibernation in April or May. They move from their denning

sites down to the coastal plain where they feed on caribou, moose, clams, the previous year's

berries, and the carcasses of sea mammals that have washed ashore. In late June or early July

the bears leave the areas to which they have dispersed and begin to concentrate along

salmon-spawning streams. They remain there until August when they move to areas where

berries can be obtained. A few streams support a salmon run in late September or October,

and some bears will congregate along their banks at that time. Then, in a period between

mid-November and mid-December, the bears re-enter their dens where they will remain until

the following spring. [2]

The bears' rounds lead them into areas where humans are active. From prehistoric times

humans in the Katmai area, like the bears, depended upon the annual salmon runs for food.

More recently, those subsistence fishers have been largely replaced by recreational and

commercial fishers, but the problem caused by bears and people sharing the same territory

has continued.

Humans have also hunted the Katmai bears, both in the past and in the present, for their meat

and skins, to protect subsistence campsites, and as trophies. While this did not seriously

affect the bear population in the time of primitive weapons, firearms and aircraft have

become increasingly serious threats to the bears.

Bears Become a Significant Management Element

"Bear management" is a relatively recent phenomenon at Katmai. Archeological evidence

indicates that bears and people were present in the Katmai area for thousands of years prior

to the 1912 volcanic disturbance that led to scientific interest in the area. That interest led to

designation of a portion of the Katmai area, the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes, as a

national monument. [3] The proclamation which created the monument did not mention bears

or any other biotic elements.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap9.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:05 PM]

It was not until 1930, when Robert Griggs reported on yet another National Geographic

Society-sponsored expedition, that bears and other wildlife species were recognized as

important area resources. Griggs's discoveries were thrust into the middle of a long-running

national debate on how Alaska's brown bears might be preserved. As Chapter 3 points out,

the National Park Service found that the bureaucratic cost of expanding an existing national

monument would be less than that of creating a new one. Wildlife advocates, during this

period, had urged the NPS to establish a new monument, either on Admiralty Island or

Chichagof Island, whose primary purpose would be bear preservation. Instead, the bureau

found it more expedient to expand Katmai and Glacier Bay national monuments, even though

their bear populations were less known than in southeastern Alaska. In April 1931, Katmai

National Monument was more than doubled in size "for the purpose of including within said

monument additional lands ... for the protection of the brown bear, moose, and other wild

animals." [4]

Gradually increasing awareness followed on the part of the National Park Service. The

agency knew that it was responsible for stopping the illegal hunting of bears and other

animals within the expanded monument boundaries. Without funding, however, it was

powerless. As noted in Chapter 3, several trappers spent the winter months in the expanded

park; the activities of a few of them predated the 1931 expansion. The trappers sought small

game as a way to generate income. For their subsistence needs, however, they hunted large

animals and fished as well.

The need to protect Katmai's wildlife populations was one of the principal reasons the first

NPS staff person (a ranger from Mount McKinley National Park) visited the monu- ment in

1937. Protection efforts prior to that visit were limited to occasional actions on the part of

Alaska Game Commission officers, whose principal responsibilities lay elsewhere. Most

concern expressed at this time was about illegal trapping, rather than about bear hunting or

fishing. [5] However, some commercial fishermen shot bears, as a Park Service biologist put

it, "in vindictive retaliation for their feeding on salmon." [6]

After World War II, the NPS renewed its interest in Katmai National Monument. Anx-ious

to know more about the resources of the monument, in 1947 the NPS appointed Clarence J.

Albrecht as a collaborator without compensation. He was authorized to collect natural history

materials, including not more than two "Kodiak" bears. Albrecht was sponsored by the

Chicago Museum of Natural History. [7] During his hunt he killed a sow and two cubs, and

his permit was amended after the fact to accommodate this. [8]

Eager to protect the monument's wildlife, in 1948 the NPS deputized as a park ranger Carlos

M. Carson, the Alaska Game Commission officer at Dillingham. The appoint-ment was made

to encourage enforcement activities within monument boundaries. [9] The NPS also sent

copies of its rules and regulations and maps of Katmai National Monument to the F&WS to

encourage that agency to help with wildlife protection. [10]

It was only after administrative facilities and fishing camps were established within

monument boundaries that bear management was seriously addressed.

Early Bear Management Policies

While statistical data are not available, anecdotal records indicate that the Brooks Camp bear

population was at an ebb in the early 1950s. [11] The first ranger stationed at Brooks Camp,

Willie Nancarrow, noted that bears were plentiful along Savonoski River but not at Brooks

Camp; to be safe, however, he constructed a cache adjacent to the residence he built that

summer. [12] In July 1951, the Katmai ranger took a reporter to Savonoski River to see bears
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap9.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:05 PM]

fishing, perhaps because they were not in evidence at Brooks Camp. [13]

In 1952, after weighing the matter, NPS officials decided that photographers seeking to take

pictures of bears would not need to be accompanied by licensed guides. [14] This is the first

recorded decision on bear-people management policy at Katmai National Monument.

By 1953, the concessioner was noting bear problems. Bears severely damaged Coville (later

Grosvenor) Camp that spring. They destroyed stored food, several mattresses, sleeping bags,

a heating stove, a radio transmitter, and a radio receiver. The Coville cabin suffered smashed

windows, a torn off door, and ripped tent walls. [15]

When the concessioner asked what it should do about the raiding bears, Lawrence C.

Merriam, the director of Region Four, replied that "a key factor in preventing bear

depredations lies in making sure that food, garbage, and odors related thereto do not reach the

animals." The Service recommended prompt disposal of garbage by burning, not burying, and

by using elevated food caches. The concessioner was also advised that caches would be

necessary where supplies were left during the winter. In the view of the NPS, the Katmai

bear situation was

fundamentally no different from the one [which] existed at Mt. McKinley

National Park for several years, except that the Katmai problem is in an earlier

and less complicated stage. For this reason it should be less difficult at Katmai to

avoid the spoiling of additional bears through contact with human food supplies.

[16]

This early decision, that Katmai bears should not be habituated to garbage, reflected a gradual

shift in Park Service policies. At other park units, bears fed at garbage dumps and were

considered tourist attractions. Yosemite National Park was relatively progressive in its

approach; the dumps were closed in 1940 and "problem bears" were removed to remote

portions of the park. At Yellowstone, however, a park garbage dump was a designated tourist

attraction until the early 1940s, and bears fed on park garbage until the summer of 1969. Not

until the late 1960s--shortly after bears, lured by garbage, killed two Glacier National Park

campers in one night during the summer of 1967--did the NPS decide, on a servicewide

basis, that garbage-habituation of bears was unnatural and dangerous to people. [17] In

policy, if not in practice, NPS staff in the San Francisco office led the way in adopting the

far-sighted philosophy of separating people from bears.

Work on the Katmai Project, the two-year scientific investigation begun in 1953, resulted in

additional recommendations for bear-people management in Katmai National Monument.

The project's interim report recommended protection of Katmai's bears, as well as its wolves

and wolverines. The report also noted that

the bears are generally not dangerous when unmolested. It is therefore

recommended that guns should be prohibited in the Monument except for use by

a ranger in eliminating certain individual bears which at times may become a

threat in the vicinity of populated camps. [18]

Victor H. Cahalane, NPS's chief biologist, elaborated on desirable bear management policy at

Katmai in his 1959 book, A Biological Survey of Katmai National Monument. Recognizing

that most Katmai visitors were fishermen, Cahalane noted that

In a sanctuary such as Katmai National Monument, the brown bear comes into

direct contact with man chiefly in three types of localities: 1) on salmon streams,

2) on trails, and 3) at camps. (As hunting is not permitted in the Monument,

relatively few contacts are made outside these three types of places.)
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap9.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:05 PM]

Cahalane went on to write that the NPS was obligated to allow the bears of Katmai

to pursue their normal mode of existence, as far as possible, despite use of the

area by visitors. Means for insuring the latter's safety must avoid disruption of

the bear population, for these animals constitute a major asset and attraction.

[19]

In his study of Katmai's wildlife, Cahalane had uncovered only two instances up to 1954 of

bear raids on camps with humans present. One was at Fure's cabin, in the Bay of Islands area

of Naknek Lake, and the other was at a Fish and Wildlife Service camp near Kaguyak, on

Shelikof Strait. [20] Then, in the fall of 1961, another incident took place when Northern

Consolidated Airlines' Grosvenor Camp was raided a second time. Ranger-in-Charge Robert

Peterson had to return from McKinley to Katmai in order to investigate the break-in and the

bear's subsequent shooting by the concessions staff. Peterson reported that the damage report

was accurate and that the bear, although shot, was "recovering satisfactorily." [21]

During the late 1950s, the new State of Alaska attempted to drastically alter bear

management. The Alaska Fish and Game Commission, shortly after statehood, announced in

its hunting regulations that both Katmai and Glacier Bay national monuments would be open

to public hunting. It took that action based on the fact that the NPS had proprietary (not

exclusive) legal jurisdiction. The NPS, not surprisingly, objected to the state's position, noting

that the U.S. constitution's supremacy clause overruled any states' rights in the matter, and

within a year the Commission had withdrawn its legal challenge. Hunting was henceforth

prohibited in both monuments. During the interim period, the state had informed the guiding

community of the change, and independent hunters knew about it upon reading the hunting

regulations. The extent of hunting in the two monuments during the short-lived "open season"

is not known. [22]

Problems with Brooks Camp Garbage

During the 1950s, relatively few bears were seen at Brooks Camp, and they were not

considered to be a problem. The camp diary, which was kept each year from 1953 to 1957,

notes that bears were a relatively rare sight. Bears or bear tracks were usually seen once or

twice a year; in 1954, however, they may have been entirely absent. A bear who wandered

into the area in early October 1955 was shot along the Naknek Lake shoreline. NCA

personnel did not know who was responsible for the shooting, and it was not connected with

any damage to the camp. [23]

One reason that the Brooks Camp bear population stayed low was that the camp had a

relatively effective way to get rid of its garbage. (This system may have been instituted by

NCA personnel, or it may have been suggested, as noted above, by Regional Director

Lawrence Merriam, who issued guidelines for garbage disposal after the 1953 Coville Camp

break-in.) Cans and bottles were routinely sunk in Naknek Lake or were buried at the edge of

camp (at or near the site of the auditorium, which was built in 1974), and most other

materials were burned. [24]

In the early 1960s, however, the camp changed its methods of garbage disposal. Material

waste and garbage were sent by barge to one of several open dumps on the shore of Naknek

Lake. These dumps were southeast of the camp, between the Beaver Pond and Iliuk Moraine.

Bears eventually discovered their whereabouts, and because bears at that time were relatively

uncommon at Brooks Camp, the NCA camp manager often took guests to the dump to watch

bears. By 1965, however, the NCA employees who were assigned to haul the garbage
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap9.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:05 PM]

complained because bears were waiting for them when they arrived at the dump. Their safety,

as a result, was being threatened. The situation became so serious that an NPS planner, who

visited in 1964, concluded that "the brown bear problem is all but insoluble." [25]

Darrell Coe, the Katmai Ranger-in-Charge at the time, spoke to the camp manager about the

situation and tried to encourage the concessioner not to exploit the bears. Coe also tried to

discourage the bears from feeding at the dump by surrounding it with an electric fence.

Neither remedy was entirely successful. The bears did not find the electric fence to be a

serious obstacle, and Coe noted that one of the bears in question might have to be shot. [26]

Paul J. F. Schumacher, the Region Four Archeologist who visited Brooks Camp in 1965,

partially solved the problem encountered on the garbage runs. He suggested to the

concessioner employees that they vary the times of their garbage runs. The employees

reported to Schumacher that his solution had worked--that is, the bears did not wait for the

boat--for the two days Schumacher remained at Katmai. [27] But the major problem, on how

to keep the bears away from the garbage, remained unsolved.

By June 1966, Coe had become sufficiently worried about the increasing presence of bears

that he advised his boss, the Superintendent at Mount McKinley National Park, that it was

time for a consistent policy on bear-human relations. [28]

In the meantime, Coe attempted to solve the problem as best he could. That summer he

closed and covered the dump adjacent to Naknek Lake and opened a new dump two miles

south of Brooks Camp, on the jeep trail to the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes. [29] The

new dump was relatively inaccessible; using it required NCA and NPS personnel to ferry the

garbage across Brooks River, then truck it out to the dump. In an effort to keep the bears

away, an NPS bulldozer covered the garbage with earth once each week, then leveled the

landfill. An electrified cyclone fence was later installed to surround the landfill. But to

lighten the load taken out to the Valley Road dump, the NPS installed several burn barrels at

Brooks Camp. The bears, not surprisingly, were attracted to the burn barrels, and the camp

began to attract its first significant bear populations. [30]

That same summer, a brown bear injured a sleeping camper at the Brooks River campground.

On July 21, 1966, John W. Huckabee of Temple, Texas, was the victim. Huckabee had

caught, cooked, and eaten a fish, then failed to clean up his camp site. He went to bed with

his unwashed frying pan lying nearby. A bear attracted by the odors ransacked the site and bit

Huckabee, who was in his sleeping bag, in the buttocks and thigh. The bear dragged a yelling

and thrashing Huckabee about ten feet before another camper arrived to scare the bear off. An

Air Force helicopter called in from King Salmon evacuated Huckabee to the Dillingham

hospital. [31]

Later that summer, Coe reported that a bear had been making repeated raids on the Bureau of

Commercial Fisheries camp. (The bear may have been the same one who had injured

Huckabee in July.) By the end of October, Coe had found it necessary to "remove" the

offending bear by shooting it. [32]

Katmai's program of trapping and transplanting bears was the result of a sophisticated bear

trap on skids that Coe and Maintenance Foreman Bill Ross Jefford built at King Salmon in

early 1967. The trap's door was raised by a small motor after a bear entered the trap. Once the

bear was safely within, the trap and bear could be barged across Naknek Lake where the bear

could be released at a point several days overland travel from Brooks Camp. Later, the Air

Force at King Salmon occasionally volunteered its helicopters to transport problem bears.

[33]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap9.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:05 PM]

Katmai Bear Research, 1967-1969

Coe also used the early months of 1967 to make initial contact with Professor Frederick C.

Dean, head of the University of Alaska Wildlife Management Department, about studying

Katmai's bears. Coe, Alaska Field Office research biologist Richard G. Prasil, and Dean

conducted preliminary discussions in February at Fairbanks. Then the NPS issued a purchase

order for $1,400 for a survey of brown bear distribution and human-bear problems at Katmai.

[34]

Dean began his work at Katmai in June. [35] A month later, the nature of the problem

became more personal when a bear shredded his tent and sleeping bag in the Brooks Camp

campground. A report at the time noted, "Luckily, Dr. Dean was not in either at the time of

the depredation." [36] Dean and his wife spent the rest of their visit in Coe's cabin. [37]

During his time at Katmai in 1967 (he made trips in June, July, and September), Dean

participated in trapping and transplanting a bear from Brooks Camp, flew over much of the

monument, and closely examined bear-human interaction in the Brooks Camp area. Dean did

many of the things typical visitors to the monument did. While canoeing, fishing, and hiking,

he was better able to understand how the visitors' activities might bring them into contact

with the bears. [38]

Pleased with Dean's preliminary work, which was submitted at the end of the 1967 season,

the Alaska Field Office of the NPS sought $10,000 for further study. This was to "determine

bear toleration of human infringement of their territory;" that is, to find out what caused bears

to attack humans who were not interfering with the bears' normal activities. [39] The study

proposal was funded, and Dean spent the next two years researching the topic.

In the meantime, bear problems worsened. Tom Atwood, who replaced Coe after the 1967

season, found a continuation of bear problems at Katmai the following spring, and

telephoned his concerns to the Western Regional Office on July 16, 1968. According to

Atwood, seven bears regularly wandered through Brooks Camp and 20 were in the general

vicinity of the fishing camp. The regional director replied to Atwood,

As you state, it is difficult to imagine that we could not expect bear troubles there

since the National Park Service and concessionaire buildings as well as the

campground have been placed within the bears' natural fishing grounds at Brooks

River.

The regional office went on to advise he that he should attempt to relocate troublesome bears.

He specifically suggested that he contact the Alaska Department of Fish and Game about

transplanting the bears to another part of the state. Atwood was further advised that a clean

camp was important to bear safety. The regional office sent bear-proof garbage cans to assist

with this. Atwood was to shoot bears only under specific emergency conditions where human

safety was immediately involved. In addition to providing this guidance, the regional office

noted that the monument needed a long range bear management plan. Such a plan, which

Darrell Coe had discussed in 1966, would spell out specific management needs and control

measures proposed for bear management. [40]

Following the region's advice, Atwood anesthetized four young bears that frequently

wandered through Brooks Camp. Three were relocated, probably by barge. The fourth

drugged bear wandered off before it could be captured, and it drowned in Brooks River. [41]

Because electric fences around temporary dumps within Brooks Camp did not deter bears,

arrangements were made for Brooks Camp residents to keep their garbage indoors until it

could be removed to the dumps on the road to the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes. The fish
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap9.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:05 PM]

cleaning station, a screened shed, was treated with Pine-Sol or a similar solution. [42]

During the 1966 through 1968 seasons, the Park Service and the concessioner grew

increasingly antagonistic on how to manage Brooks Camp's bear population. The Service told

the concessioner that the way to avoid bear problems was to keep all food indoors until it

could be hauled to the dump along the valley road. The concessioner, however, paid scant

attention to the plan and took the attitude that it was the Park Service's responsibility to keep

the bears away from the buildings, if necessary by relocating them. [43]

When Gil Blinn arrived at Katmai in September of 1969 to succeed Tom Atwood, he found

that the bear safety measures implemented in 1968 had not lasted. The concessioner was

throwing garbage out the back door of the kitchen into a garbage can and leaving it there

overnight. The fish cleaning shed, a frame structure with window screening around it, was

cleaned about twice a week. Between cleanings, fish entrails sat in a wooden bucket on the

floor of the building. Although the shed was surrounded by an electric fence, the bears

quickly learned to break down the fence by felling a tree across it. [44]

Blinn had been hired, in large part, to solve the Brooks Camp bear problem. Fortu-nately, he

was soon given the wherewithal to do so. Professor Dean, the University of Alaska biologist,

delivered the final report on his two-year study in the fall of 1969. In it he analyzed the

nature of the Katmai bears and the humans who visited them. He also noted several policy

questions that the NPS had to face. Among these was the goal of preserving the monument's

wilderness characteristics. One problem to be addressed was how to permit human visitation

and provide concession services without destroying the qualities that attracted visitation. A

second policy issue was: who would control development at Brooks Camp, the NPS or the

concessioner? In Dean's view, expressed in 1967, "the concessionaire appeared to have the

upper hand and was doing a great deal of whatever he desired." [45]

Dean suggested bringing visitors into Katmai by boat to better express the philosophy of the

monument as a natural museum rather than a recreation area. In particular, he believed that

visitors needed to be made to understand the concept of bear country versus human country.

He assessed the 1967 NPS approach to bear safety as "drifting from incident to incident" and

stressed the need for an evaluation of what sort of experience the agency desired visitors to

have in Katmai and particularly with bears. [46]

Specific management actions proposed in Dean's study included the following:

* Erection of physical devices to establish boundaries between "bear country"

and "human country." Fences or catwalks for human use were possibilities.

* Prohibition of the use of garbage cans by concessioner employees and visitors

as bait to provide opportunities to observe and photograph bears. Further,

existing procedures--for burning garbage and protecting garbage awaiting

burning with electric fencing--needed to be enforced. Also, the incineration

process needed to be improved.

* More extensive transportation of problem bears. Dean cited examples of two

bears transported by barge which returned to Katmai shortly after their

transportation. Bears needed to be removed several drainages away, thus making

removal three or more drainages distant mandatory. This required air transport,

not barges.

* Better control of human behavior. Dean suggested that alcohol consumption at

Katmai needed to be better controlled. He also proposed making visitors noisier,

perhaps by encouraging them to carry whistles. Beyond this, Dean urged that
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap9.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:05 PM]

people understand the types of situations which could lead to trouble. [47]

In discussing employee safety, Dean noted that employees were more at risk relative to bears

than visitors, but pointed out that differences of opinion existed as to the severity of this risk.

Fish and Wildlife Service and NPS conclusions on such risk differed, and needed to be

reconciled. Campground users were another subject of concern as, unprotected by walls, they

were more vulnerable to bears. Dean stated that

...serious injury and death is a matter of time until, rather than a question of will

there be. Bears and humans in the campground must be separated by a fence,

cabin walls, a raised platform or some other system. [48]

In ending his report, Dean recommended further study of bear and human behavior.

Blinn found Dean's analysis and recommendations valid. He suggested carrying out those of

Dean's recommendations which were in line with current NPS management policy. But there

were some problems with a few of the recommendations. Fences, Blinn thought, would create

an artificial situation that would diminish the visitor experience. Visitor education seemed to

be working, and more education might stave off the inevitable bear-imposed injury. The

garbage could and should be handled better. Procedures for handling Brooks Camp garbage

should be extended to the F&WS research station the next time the permit for that station was

reissued. [49]

The following spring, therefore, Blinn began working to educate Park Service employees,

concessioner employees and visitors about the necessity of not placing food or trash outside

buildings. Garbage was to be kept inside overnight and then burned in outside barrels before

being hauled to the Valley Road dump, where it would be thoroughly incinerated. Blinn also

recommended that in the future, garbage disposal units should be installed in NPS and lodge

areas. [50]

The new procedures were not easily accepted. The concessioner, which by now was Wien

Consolidated Airlines, was begrudging in its response to Dean's recommendations, and the

NPS had to prod the company into compliance. Wien continued to take the attitude that it was

the NPS's responsibility to keep the bears away from the buildings. When bears, in 1970,

destroyed the screened fish cleaning shed, the concessioner asserted that it was the fault of

the NPS and did not rebuilt the shed. [51] By the end of the 1970 season, however, the

garbage problem had been largely overcome. What difficulties remained were ironed out

during the next several years. [52]

Bear Management Activities, 1970-1974

Even as Blinn was attempting to deal with bears in Katmai National Monument, the NPS was

attempting to deal with bears in parks and monuments on a nationwide basis. An advisory

committee dealing with Yellowstone National Park developed three management objectives.

The NPS headquarters office, apparently impressed by the committee's findings, forwarded its

recommendations in January 1970 to the various park units. Parks were advised to:

* Maintain populations of grizzly and black bears at levels that were sustainable

under natural conditions as part of the native fauna of the park.

* Plan the development and use of the park so as to minimize conflicts and

unpleasant or dangerous incidents with bears, and

* Encourage bears to lead their natural lives with minimum interference by
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap9.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:05 PM]

humans.

Each park with bear problems was directed to review its management plan and revise it to

"fully achieve" the systemwide bear management objectives. [53] In response, Ernest J.

Borgman, who replaced George Hall as General Superintendent for Alaska at the end of

1969, outlined some of the measures recommended by Dean and Blinn. He endorsed Blinn's

opposition to the use of fences and pointed out the folly of bear relocation. (Five bears, as it

turned out, had been relocated since 1968; four had returned by the following spring, and the

fifth had been killed by hunters outside the monument. One bear, he noted, had returned to

Brooks Camp after swimming 12 miles of open water. Another bear had returned after being

airlifted 100 miles from Brooks Camp.) Borgman concluded:

Once a totally clean camp and campground are established, should a bear

continually enter it [Brooks Camp] and become a nuisance, it is suggested that no

attempt at transport to another area be made unless it is a transport of a bear

carcass. [54]

Borgman dismissed the possibility of closing Brooks Camp and establishing a lodge facility

in some other spot. He wrote, "...there are virtually no areas that are bear-free except the

Valley of 10,000 Smokes and the glaciated areas. We must face the fact that if we are to

occupy Katmai, we are occupying bear country." [55]

Over the next several years, the problem of managing bear-human interaction proceeded

along the lines proposed by Dean, Blinn, and Borgman. Blinn, in 1972 or 1973, wrote a

memorandum entitled "Katmai National Monument - Bear Policy for Developed Areas" that

established a policy which accepted bears as a necessary and desirable part of the Katmai

environment. Visitors were to be instructed in bear safety. Garbage was to be kept away from

bears. Bears were to be kept out of "people territory" through harassment, yelling, throwing

rocks and similar means. Bears showing no fear or respect for people were to be transplanted.

Bears showing unprovoked aggression toward people were to be destroyed. [56]

As the decade wore on, the monument's bear policy became further refined. Some policy

alterations resulted from scientific studies of bears, while others resulted from incidents

initiated by bears.

One of the first policies to be questioned was bear transplantation. Borgman, who reviewed

the situation in 1971, recognized that relocating "offending bears" was still necessary. He

recognized, however, that transplanting bears was hardly an undiluted success. Based on the

experience of the last four years, Borgman estimated a 50-50 chance of success in

transplanting bears in Katmai. [57]

Additional steps were taken to increase the safety of Brooks Camp visitors. In order to

publicize bear habits and bear behavior, as Dean's study had recommended, NPS rangers

began in the late 1960s to give on-the-beach briefings to each new arrival (see Chapter 7).

Then, in 1971, rangers distributed to visitors a newly-designed bear safety brochure. [58]

Both the brochure and the talks provided specific guidelines for personal safety. Anglers

were not to yield fish to bears. Campers were to keep their camp clean and to store food

properly. They were shown the elevated cache in which their food could be kept and given

plastic bags in which to place their trash and carry it to the ranger station. All visitors were

told that the safety of future guests and the well-being of the bears depended on following

these guidelines. [59]

A major event in bear-human relationships at Katmai occurred in 1972 when Brooks Camp

was invaded by 15 to 20 bears. The bears caused over $21,000 in property damage that year.

The problem was attributed, in part, to a very poor fish run, which left the bears hungry.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap9.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:05 PM]

They even dug up the sewer pipes in their search for food. [60]

The most serious bear incident recorded in the Katmai area occurred several miles west of the

monument boundaries in July 1973. A brown bear attacked a Naknek couple, Mr. and Mrs.

Richard Jensen, on the Naknek-King Salmon road; it was one of many such incidents that has

occurred in or near the two communities over the years. Mr. Jensen, severely lacerated,

required 200 stitches and remained in critical condition for some time. [61]

July 1973 was also the month in which a new technique in bear behavior modification was

attempted at Katmai. Supervisory Park Ranger Steve Buskirk borrowed a shotgun and 12-

gauge No. 6 shells from Jim Faro, an Alaska Department of Fish and Game officer. Buskirk

replaced the shot in the shells with rock salt. On July 31 he used the shotgun and rock saltloaded shells to "pepper" a sow and its 1-1/2-year-old cub which had been visiting Brooks

Camp trash cans on a regular basis. The peppering took place near a trash can. On August 2,

Buskirk peppered the sow again as she walked down the Naknek Lake beach. In Buskirk's

opinion, the first peppering was successful (the sow never returned to the trash cans). The

second peppering was not successful, he concluded, because it was not for a distinct act. [62]

When peppering began, bears familiar with Brooks Camp were little affected; but by July of

1976, a ranger reported that most bears would bolt at the sound of a round being chambered.

[63]

Problem bears continued to be tranquilized. With the assistance of the Alaska Department of

Fish and Game, two "rogue bear cubs" in 1972 were removed to an area outside the

monument. The following July, a chartered float plane flew a bear to Geographic Harbor.

The plane crash landed and sank, and the bear drowned. No bears were removed in 1974; one

was transplanted in 1975. [64]

Planning and Policy Development, 1975-1985

In January 1975, as part of a nationwide survey, Katmai staff were quizzed on how well they

were managing their bear population. In response, Chief Ranger Mike Tollefson noted that

bears had damaged monument facilities on nine occasions the previous year; there were three

incidents in the campground and six incidents in the concessioner's area. All reported

incidents had occurred at Brooks Camp; most had taken place at night.

Tollefson gave a mixed response to questions which asked the degree to which monument

facilities were bear proofed. The monument had three burn barrels in use, none of which

were bear proofed, and an unprotected sanitary landfill. Overall, however, it was estimated

that bears' opportunities for obtaining food from human sources were "low" or "none."

In order to minimize bear problems, it was noted that rangers had spent 27 person-days the

previous summer providing information about bears to visitors, 40 days handling garbage, 8

days handling injury and property damage situations, 10 days on research, and 2 days in

training. Future efforts called for a continuation of scientific research, preparation of

additional visitor information materials and warning signs, refinement of bear relocation

techniques and improvement of garbage control. [65]

In order to avoid unfortunate bear encounters, monument personnel in 1975 were more

concerned than ever about prevention. NPS rangers continued to give visitors a bear safety

brochure, and supplementary materials were available at several camp locations. Warning

signs were posted. Numerous NPS patrols were deployed when bears were in camp or along

the beach, high risk areas were restricted, and bear advisory messages were included in every

interpretive program offered. Caches were available to those who camped out at the Brooks
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap9.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:05 PM]

Camp campground. But no bearproof storage facilities (except for the interior of Fure's,

Baked Mountain, and other cabins) were available to backcountry users.

By 1975, Katmai had developed an ad hoc four-step bear policy, of which prevention of

bear-human encounters was its primary goal. If avoidance didn't work, and bears became

habituated to camp areas, peppering took place. NPS policy stated that if a bear

does not become bold, but rather remains skittish around people, it will be

allowed around camp. A nonaggressive bear is tolerated. As long as the bear

does not show an interest in burn barrels it may wander at will.

If peppering was unsuccessful, relocation was attempted. Two darting guns, used with the

drug Sernylin, and two culvert traps were used to trap and confine bears slated for relocation.

The final step was destruction. This step was undertaken, however, only if a bear returned

after relocation and all other measures had failed, or if it threatened human life. [66]

After a five year lull, bear research began again in the spring of 1974. Biologist Will Troyer,

with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, did an aerial survey of bear denning sites; that

summer, he conducted another aerial survey which monitored bear activities along salmon

streams. [67] From 1975 to 1979, Troyer, who was now employed by the NPS, studied the

distribution of the Katmai bear population. Central to that effort was the capturing and radiocollaring of several Brooks Camp bears. He had mixed success with collaring--some bears

managed to slip their collars--but Troyer was able to track the movements of those who

retained them, some back to their denning sites. Meanwhile, aerial surveys of the monument's

bear population continued each year during the mid- to late 1970s. [68]

In 1979, methods of handling garbage were modified in order to further bear proof the

Brooks Camp area. The camp's burn barrels, which had been used since 1966, were

abandoned because the burning had begun to affect the camp's air quality. The barrels were

replaced by a trash compactor which was installed in the double-walled annex to the NPS

ranger cache. The method of hauling garbage away from Brooks Camp also changed. Since

1966, refuse had been hauled to the dump along the Valley Road. Beginning in 1979,

however, the compacted trash was barged to Lake Camp, then trucked to the Naknek dump.

[69]

Park personnel were sufficiently successful with bear-avoidance techniques and peppering

that no bears needed to be transplanted between 1976 and 1979. In July 1980, however, a

bear was spending so much time around the campground that it was removed to Idavain

Creek. The transplant was a mixed success. It did not stay away--in fact, it was back at

Brooks in four days--but it stayed out of trouble for the rest of the summer. [70]

In 1982, the NPS signalled its continuing interest in resource management in general, and

more specifically in bear management, when it hired Kathy Jope as the park's first resource

management specialist. Jope had recently emerged from a graduate program in which she

had studied bear behavior and bear-human interactions; she was also familiar with bear

management problems at other NPS units, having served previous stints at Glacier and Denali

national parks. [71]

An early project in which she became involved, and an area of long standing safety concern

regarding bear-human encounters, dealt with Brooks River Falls. The trail that led to the falls

paralleled the river's south bank, and visitors often encountered bears along the way. Once

they got to the trail terminus, photographers and other visitors often got uncomfortably close

to bears as they fished at the base of the falls. In order to separate visitors from the bears, the

NPS built an elevated bear viewing platform just southeast of the falls in 1982. The

following summer, based on Jope's recommenda-tions, the agency blazed a new trail to the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap9.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:05 PM]

falls which stayed well away from the riverbank and avoided high potential bear habitat. [72]

In the late 1960s, Frederick Dean's report had recommended that physical barriers be erected

in certain areas to establish boundaries, such as fences or catwalks, between "bear country"

and "human country." That recommendation was adopted in 1983 when snow fencing was

placed at strategic locations in and around Brooks Camp. Additional fencing was erected in

1984. Soon, however, sections of it no longer remained standing, and before long the fencing

was removed. [73]

Peppering techniques were also modified during this period. As noted above, peppering had

begun in 1973, and for the remainder of the decade, NPS staff experimented with different

sizes of shot. Finally, rubber shot was used. [74] Beginning in 1983 or 1984, peppering was

restricted to the side rump of bears aimed from a minimum distance of 30 yards. The policy

was intended to discourage bears from coming into the campground and housing areas, but

permitting them free use of the river and beaches to pursue fish and other usual foods. [75]

NPS planning was revised to reflect the latest bear avoidance techniques. The park's first draft

Resource Management Plan, approved in 1982, noted that the creation of a bear management

plan was its top-rated natural resource management project. In 1983, as a result, the park

developed and implemented a bear plan. That plan emphasized the prevention of conflict

between bears and humans and requested more research on bear-human interaction. Three

years later, the plan was revised. [76]

Bear Research in the 1980s and 1990s

In July and August 1982, Joan Beattie, a student at the University of California Santa Cruz,

studied the bear-human interaction patterns at Brooks Camp. She concluded that most

interactions occurred in areas of human use and that as visitor use increased, bear-human

interactions did, too. She recommended that the NPS print a multilingual bear brochure,

move the bear platform farther away from Brooks Falls, widen the trails, and redesign the

floating bridge to allow bears to move underneath it. [77]

In 1983, Katmai attempted its first bear survey in eight years when, in July, August, and

September, it counted 110 bears which congregated along seven of its salmon streams. [78]

A year later, the NPS let a two-year contract for studying bear-fisherman conflicts along

Brooks River. The contract was awarded to Dr. Barrie Gilbert of Utah State University, who

first visited the park in October 1984. [79] He and a graduate student, Anne Braaten, spent

much of the 1985 and 1986 seasons observing bear behavior. Gilbert turned in an interim

report in the spring of 1987. [80]

Gilbert, in his report, noted that the park was doing an excellent job separating bears and

humans; after all, no contacts or injuries had been recorded during the time frame of his

study. Nevertheless, he discovered that three situations increased the proximity to

unacceptable levels. First, increasing numbers of fishermen, either in the river or on the trail,

often competed with bears. Second, some fishermen did not adhere to the fishing regulations,

some of which had been designed to deter competition between bears and humans. Finally,

some fishermen took a dim view of having to share the river with bears. Having isolated

those reasons, NPS personnel were given a clear blueprint on how to proceed. [81]

Susan Warner, a Katmai wildlife biologist, conducted further bear management studies in the

summer of 1987. Warner recognized that the park was undergoing, at that time, an

environmental assessment on the park's fishing regulations. Given the alternatives outlined in

the environmental assessment, Warner concluded that there were two alternatives which
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap9.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:05 PM]

would best reduce the level of conflict between bears and people. First, she recommended

that there be sections of Brooks River where fishing would be restricted. Second, she felt that

the length of the Brooks River fishing season should be reduced. [82]

In June 1990, Dr. Gilbert turned in a final report related to his mid-1980s bear observations,

the recommendations of which had far-reaching implications. He noted, for instance, that

sows with cubs avoided the Brooks River during peak visitor periods, and he reiterated that

the risk of aggressive confrontations between bears and humans increased substantially

during the fall. As a final recommendation, he noted, "From the perspective of reducing the

multiple sources of disturbances to bears, a change in camp location is one option that could

resolve a host of management problems." This was a poignant suggestion in light of the

Brooks River DCP, which was distributed the following year for public comment. [83]

NPS personnel, in the past several years, have come to recognize that the maintenance of the

Brooks River bear population is one of Katmai's most critical management issues. Agency

officials have long realized the difficulty in managing the resources along Brooks River, and

they realize it requires constant public education and an ever-broadening knowledge of bear

behavior in order to provide a safe experience to the growing number of visitors. But they

also recognize that the opportunity to view brown bears in the wild is one of the major

reasons why visitors come to the park.

The NPS has been actively managing the Brooks Camp bear population for over thirty years,

and to a large extent they have been successful in preventing injuries to both bears and

people. Even so, problems continue. Many bears still need to be peppered from time to time;

more rarely, bears need to be destroyed. And human visitors are by no means immune; the

July 1991 injury of an NPS employee along the Brooks Falls trail--the first bear-caused

injury in 25 years--took place even though all necessary precautions were taken. [84]

As has been noted in Chapter 6, many visitors and agency officials are convinced that a large

and increasing number of visitors is incompatible with the health of the local bear population.

As a result, they feel that Brooks Camp will need to be moved some day. Others, however,

feel that the camp is optimally situated where it is. Park managers, caught in the middle,

recognize that the best way to avoid management difficulties, in the short term at least, is to

pursue an active bear management program. To that end, the Park Service sponsored a bear

behavior study during the 1990 summer season. Less specific bear management studies took

place in 1991 and 1992. The year 1992 also saw the construction of a second bear viewing

platform, located just upstream from the floating bridge. The platform, which had been

funded by the Alaska Congressional delegation over the objections of agency staff, allowed

an ever-larger number of visitors to safely view the Brooks River bears. [85]

The Exxon Valdez oil spill of March 1989, disastrous as it was, brought forth some of the

first studies which dealt with Katmai resources east of the Aleutian Range. The various

VECO-sponsored oil cleanup crews quickly became aware that the mouth of various coastal

streams was excellent brown bear habitat. NPS rangers, as a result, were dispatched to the

area to provide the crews a modicum of safety. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game

responded to that concern by sponsoring a study of the spill's effect on the Alaska Peninsula

brown bear population. Both the National Park Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service

cooperated in the study, which began in 1989 and was renewed in 1990 and 1991. On the

heels of that study, the NPS carried out its first population index surveys along the Shelikof

Strait coastline when it surveyed Big River and Kukak Bay during the summer of 1992. [86]

<<< Previous <<< Contents>>> Next >>>
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 9)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap9.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:05 PM]

adhi/chap9.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap10.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:08 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

PART I: KATMAI NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE

Chapter 10:

Cultural Resource Management

Today, the Katmai area is of tremendous interest to cultural resource professionals. Located at

the northern end of the Alaska Peninsula, it is a zone of cultural transition and complexity, a

place where humans have lived and intermingled for thousands of years. Both the history and

archeology of the area are remarkable. As a reflection of its importance, nine Katmai properties

are listed in the National Register of Historic Places. But when the monument was proclaimed

in 1918, few cared about investigating or protecting the region's historical resources, and few

were aware of its archeological resources. Most of what is known has been gathered only since

the 1950s. Early investigations were usually funded through universities; more recently, agency

personnel have performed most of the work.

Early Cultural Resource Concerns

Before 1950, as has been noted, the National Park Service had no on-site personnel stationed in

Katmai. The agency's major concerns during the early years of the monument were the

protection of wildlife populations and the removal of illegal residents. It therefore had only a

tangential interest in the area's cultural resources.

The agency's first interest in the area's cultural complexity was a legal one. NPS personnel were

concerned, at an early date, whether area Natives had justifiable claims to land within the

monument. During the 1930s, Interior department officials had become aware that Natives from

New Savonoski had been visiting the Savonoski River valley every summer since 1918, both to

hunt and to tend the graves of their ancestors at Old Savonoski. The Natives, having been told

that hunting was prohibited, probably ceased their hunts in the area after 1939, but they

continued to visit Old Savonoski for years afterwards. [1] (They never tried to resettle the old

village because the layers of pumice, and the resulting soil acidity, made residence impossible.)

In early 1941, Cadastral Engineer George Parks told Mount McKinley's superintendent, Frank

Been, that no Natives had filed for allotments in the monument, nor would such allotments

likely be filed in the future. [2]

Been should have known better. By that time, he had already learned firsthand that local

Natives not only visited the monument from time to time but that they also occupied several

cabins on a seasonal basis. The previous summer, he had visited the mouth of "Brooks Creek,"

where he found a "fishing village" which consisted of two cabins--both on the south side of the

river--and a series of tents. At the time of his first visit the site was populated by a woman and

two boys. He returned a week later and found the chief of New Savonoski with his wife and

three younger men, one of whom mentioned that about forty people would soon be gathered

there to harvest the fall salmon run. [3]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap10.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:08 PM]

Natives continued to use Brooks Camp for their fall fish harvest for decades to come. In 1950,

the opening of the concessions camp exposed them to an increasing degree of scrutiny and

competition from sport fishermen. The Native population, as a result, began to feel out of place.

They reacted by postponing their fish-harvesting activities until after the camp had closed. After

1960 their use of the area declined, but it did not cease altogether. It should hardly have been

surprising, therefore, that an elderly Native woman, in the spring of 1971, filed a claim for land

at the mouth of Brooks River. [4] (See Chapter 6.) About 1950, the Bureau of Land

Management gave notice that all land claimants, Natives, settlers, or squatters had up to two

years to file claims for land not previously recorded. No applicants came forward at this time to

claim land in the monument. This notice, however, was evidently overturned at some later date

in order to allow the Brooks River and other Native claims to be filed. [5]

NPS also expressed an interest in Katmai's cultural resources by gathering information on

culturally significant sites. Archeologists began searching for sites on the northern part of the

Alaska Peninsula in the 1920s. Before 1950, however, the only known site recorded in the

monument was one which Robert Heizer located on Takli Island in 1935. Heizer, at the time,

was working in conjunction with Ales Hrdlicka, an archeologist affiliated with the Smithsonian

Institution, whose primary work was at Uyak Bay on Kodiak Island. [6]

Although little of significance had been recorded in the monument before 1950, NPS officials

knew of several archeological sites that had not yet been investigated. They were aware, for

example, of Katmai village and Old Savonoski, both of which had been abandoned in the 1912

eruption. During his 1940 visit, Superintendent Frank Been learned of another abandoned

village at the junction of the Grosvenor and Savonoski rivers. Been visited one of the three old

villages, Old Savonoski, that summer and became so intrigued by the place that he proposed that

it be reconstructed and displayed for interpretive purposes. That proposal, however, was

rejected by his superiors in the regional office. [7]

Been also learned, from personnel at the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries facility at Brooks

Lake, that the area along Brooks River was rich in cultural resources. On the south side of the

river, he saw "the site of Indian houses which were now only depressions in the ground," a

grave with a Russian cross, and other sites indicating that Natives had been occupying the area

for generations. Early NPS personnel who served in the area made similar observations. [8]

The Katmai Project

In 1950, the NPS established its toehold at Brooks Camp and Northern Consolidated opened its

various fishing camps. The deployment of personnel to the monument showed that the National

Park Service was unwilling to ignore the area. Little interest was shown in Katmai's cultural

history, however, until 1952, when the National Park Service organized the Katmai Project, a

multidisciplinary research project largely funded by the Office of Naval Research (ONR). Three

major investigations took place as a result of that project. [9]

In 1953, the NPS arranged for two University of Oregon graduate students, Wilbur A. Davis

and James W. Leach, to survey three Native villages--Old Savonoski, Kukak Bay, and Katmai-

-which had been abandoned since the 1912 volcanic eruption. Davis and Leach visited all three

sites, but were unable to locate anything at Katmai village because of the depth of the ash flow.

They therefore investigated Kaguyak (Douglas village) as an alternate site. At the close of the

season, the crew visited the Brooks River fishing camp. Upon their arrival, they were told that

NCA personnel had recently discovered several artifacts while digging a root cellar. [10]

Perhaps based on that news, the students recorded four extensive sites--two north of Brooks

River, the other two south--and excavated a trench in the site closest to the fishing camp. The

Brooks River sites were destined to be the first of many found in the area. Before long, in fact,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap10.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:08 PM]

archeologists recognized that the various terraces which wound through the area between

Brooks Lake and Naknek Lake comprised a huge, world-class archeological complex. [11]

Though initial plans had called for the Katmai Project to expire after the first year, ONR was

able to fund a second year of projects. Heeding the call to assign work to local academic

institutions, the NPS invited University of Alaska anthropologist Wendell Oswalt to carry on

survey work in Katmai that summer. As a result, Oswalt conducted a survey along the Shelikof

coastline, where he located sites near Cape Douglas and at Devils Cove. He then excavated a

small site at Kaflia Bay. [12]

The third activity that took place as a result of the Katmai Project was the preparation of a

historic resource study. In the spring of 1953 Herbert Kahler, the agency's chief historian, told

regional officials of the need to compile a Katmai bibliography. [13] But George Collins, the

Alaska Recreation Survey chief, encouraged John A. Hussey to prepare a full historical

narrative. That summer Hussey amassed a huge amount of data, chiefly from files available in

the San Francisco area. Hussey had originally hoped to write a detailed account of conditions at

Katmai from prehistoric times to the present day, but the press of other work necessitated that

the detailed portion of his history be truncated in 1918, the year Katmai was designated a

national monument. [14]

During the next few years, NPS officials got wind of other cultural resources that had never

been scrutinized by professionals. Grosvenor Camp, for example, was found to be a culturally

important site, just as Brooks Camp had been. Roy Fure, the trapper who had lived in the Bay

of Islands area for years, noted that an "old Indian" had once lived at the site for about five

years and had built a sod hut and sweat house. [15] Near Kulik Camp, an NCA employee had

discovered a site in the early 1950s, and in the early 1960s another concessions employee had

found a site near the outlet to Kukaklek Lake. These sites, both of which were outside the

existing monument boundaries, were finally visited by archeologists in 1963 and 1965,

respectively. [16]

In 1959, interest was kindled in conducting a comprehensive archeological survey of the

monument. Ivar Skarland, the head of the University of Alaska's Anthropology Department,

suggested the idea to officials in the Western Regional Office. The project would require a crew

of six for the next three to five summers. The university would supply the requisite labor, while

the NPS would provide funding. The project, however, never got beyond the planning stages;

the NPS submitted a budget for the project, but funding was not approved. [17]

University of Oregon Investigations

In 1960, archeological efforts were resurrected at the park through the efforts of the Bureau of

Commercial Fisheries, an agency which at that time was part of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service. The BCF hoped to gain some long-term indication of the aboriginal salmon catch

somewhere in Alaska. The agency chose Brooks Camp as its research site for two reasons: a

BCF research station was located in the area, and previous research had shown that a

longitudinally extensive deposit was located in the area. [18] George Harry, the BCF agent who

organized the project, had recently moved to Alaska from Oregon; because he knew of the

expertise of anthropologists at the University of Oregon, he contacted department head Luther

S. Cressman, who agreed to serve as principal investigator for a Brooks Camp-based project.

Cressman, in turn, applied to the National Science Foundation (NSF) for additional support

funds. The BCF and NSF shared funding obligations that year; the latter organization, however,

promised funds for an additional year. The NSF, as it turned out, provided a total of five years'

support for Brooks Camp research; it funded the University of Oregon in 1960 and 1961, and

again in 1963 through 1965. [19]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap10.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:08 PM]

Dr. Cressman enlisted Don Dumond, then a graduate student, to be the field supervisor for the

1960-61 Brooks Camp excavations. Dumond, working with one assistant, located three

additional sites in 1960, all on the south side of Brooks River, and excavated one of them. The

following year, Dumond and two assistants located two new sites on the river's north bank and

excavated one of the sites which had been located in 1960. Altogether, archeologists had

located nine sites in the Brooks Camp area and had excavated three of them. [20]

The University actually had two crews in the area in the summer of 1961. The second crew, led

by Wilbur A. Davis, worked along the lower Naknek River and located four sites. All were

located outside of the monument, although the data that the sites contained helped explain the

cultural evolution that took place at Brooks Camp, Savonoski, and other sites inside of Katmai's

boundaries. Davis's greatest contribution to the monument's cultural history, however, may have

been the series of interviews he conducted with elderly local residents. Several people who had

witnessed the 1912 eruption were still alive, and Davis was able to obtain reminiscences from

three of them: Mike McCarlo, Pelagia Melgenak, and Harry Kaiakokonok. [21]

Excited by the extensive deposits and the cultural complexity found within them, the University

of Oregon applied to the NSF for two more years of field work. The grant, which was approved,

designated Cressman (by now an emeritus professor) and Dumond (by now a Ph.D.) as joint

Principal Investigators. Dumond, as before, continued to serve as field director. The University

of Oregon archeologists anticipated that field work would be limited to Brooks Camp, but the

NPS took advantage of their expertise and contributed additional financing which allowed two

more years of archeological surveys in the monument.

Dumond, overseeing a crew of five, spent the summer of 1963 at Brooks Camp surveying and

testing the area's archeological resources. His crew identified thirteen new sites, most of which

were south of Brooks River; in addition, he located over 1000 large depressions and estimated

that over half of them would reveal evidence of aboriginal occupation. Two other archeologists,

Harvey Rice and Michael Nowak, were assigned to surveys elsewhere in the park. The two

recorded the sites at Grosvenor and Kulik camps, located a new site at Cape Chiniak, visited

previously-known sites at Grosvenor Camp and along the Savonoski River, and surveyed

Kukak Bay as the site for a future excavation. [22]

In 1964, Dumond and an assistant continued their Brooks Camp work. A crew of five was

stationed at Kukak Bay for an excavation. An additional two archeologists made a

reconnaissance of the Katmai coastline, locating sites near Dakavak Bay, on Missak Bay and

Swikshak Lagoon, and excavated a major new site on Takli Island. The summer's work was so

productive that the results brought forth more questions than answers, and Dumond requested

an additional season of research support. In 1965, crews made further investigations at Takli

Island and found new sites at Amalik Bay. The work that year provided data that "seemed as

complete as it was reasonable to expect," and the University of Oregon, for the time being at

least, concluded its NSF-sponsored archeological work in the monument. [23]

University personnel, however, were destined to make many more visits to Katmai in the

pursuit of archeological data. In 1966 Paul Schumacher, Regional Archeologist at the NPS's

Western Regional Office, learned that the National Geographic Society might be interested in

funding a research project in the area. [24] Schumacher, therefore, asked Dumond to suggest

several avenues of research. The NGS, as a result, funded the excavation and consolidation of

one or more aboriginal houses at Brooks River. Several barabaras had been excavated in

previous years; the NGS, however, hoped to unearth one of the largest or best-preserved

examples, re-create its traditional appearance, and display it to tourists. Dumond worked with a

crew of three during the summer of 1967, and excavated three houses in his search for an

adequate display site. He had initially felt that he might need to recreate a composite of houses,

but one of the three, upon further investigation, proved optimal for interpretive purposes.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap10.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:08 PM]

Dumond, working alone, returned the following year and finished the reconstruction of the

display house. [25]

The work which the archeologists completed during the 1960s was not accomplished in a

vacuum. Although the archeologists took pains not to interfere with regular monument activities

and operations, some effects were bound to take place. Many of the excavations, for instance,

took place in relatively close proximity to Brooks Lodge and the other camp buildings. As a

result, so many visitors took note of the crew's activities over the next several years--in part

because of several open trenches in the camp area--that Brooks Camp's seasonal rangers were

asked to provide informal interpretive services. [26] The "digs" taking place on both sides of the

river were sufficiently interesting that they were advertised as one of Brooks Camp's major

attractions during the mid-to-late 1960s. [27] Archeologists also discovered, much to their

chagrin, that Brooks Lodge (constructed in 1960-61) was located on a site rich in artifacts. They

were in no position, however, to interfere with the construction work. [28]

Archeological Work During the 1970s

Dumond and his associates at the University of Oregon felt, as a result of their investigations

during the 1960s, that they had sufficient data to provide a broad model of cultural development

on the northern Alaska Peninsula. He had, during that time, investigated sites at Brooks Camp,

along Shelikof Strait, and on Bristol Bay. He had hoped that data found at sites at Bristol Bay

would be able to help explain Brooks Camp's cultural development. But as he completed his

monograph on the subject, he came to the realization that the Brooks River cultural sequence

could not adequately be explained by data gathered at existing Bristol Bay sites. [29]

He responded to the paucity of data by applying to the National Science Foundation for a twoyear grant (later extended for a third year) to investigate sites along Naknek River and the upper

Ugashik River drainage. Most of that data, while helpful in explaining the Brooks River cultural

sequence, did not take place within the present boundaries of the park. Seven sites were located

along Naknek River in 1973, none of which were located in the park. Of the Naknek area sites

discovered in 1974, only one--located just below the outlet of Naknek Lake--was situated

inside of the present park. In 1975, most of the archeological exploration took place in the

Ugashik River drainage, but based upon information provided by a local hunter, a new site was

recorded along the western park boundary. The site location, more specifically, was in upper

Big Creek, west of Brooks Lake. [30]

In 1973, another archeological survey took place along Shelikof Strait. In conjunction with a

shorebird survey, Allen McCartney examined the coastline from the railing of a U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service ship. McCartney's search was largely unsuccessful. He found only one

previously unrecorded site in the monument, at Missak Bay. [31]

Archeological work was also conducted at Brooks Camp during the same period. The NPS, via

contract, had a utility system installed in the summers of 1974 and 1975. The contract called for

the underground installation of fuel tanks, water lines and sewer lines across much of Brooks

Camp. In order to mitigate some of the impacts of the construction activity, the agency

dispatched Harvey Shields, a University of Oregon graduate student, to Brooks Camp during

the late summer of 1974. His major project was the excavation of an ena (semi-subterranean

house), but he also unearthed a number of artifacts and three burial sites which lay in the path

of construction. [32]

Try as he may, Shields found it impossible to keep up with the pace of construction. He found

the construction workers uncooperative--their schedule apparently did not provide for on-thespot archeological mitigation--and as a result "at least eight aboriginal houses and at least two
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap10.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:08 PM]

burials were seriously disrupted." Dr. Dumond, who served as project supervisor, lambasted

regional NPS officials for ignoring the monument's cultural heritage. He urged that only

archeologists be allowed to excavate; at the very least, he demanded that all excavations be

done in the presence of an archeologist. But the damage had already been done. The acting

regional director responded, somewhat sheepishly, that the agency was still in the process of

creating a construction proposal monitoring system; he hoped that the newly-established system

would prevent a recurrence of the Brooks Camp difficulties. [33]

Inventory and Nomination Activities

In 1975, the NPS launched an effort to place some of the monument's most significant sites on

the National Register of Historic Places, the government's list of valuable cultural properties.

That October, the Regional Archeologist in the Pacific Northwest Regional Office, Fred

Bohannan, wrote an Archeological Resources Assessment for the monument. The assessment

was a tardy response to Executive Order 11593, proclaimed by President Richard Nixon in May

1971, which required all federal agencies to "locate, inventory, and nominate to the Secretary of

the Interior all sites, buildings, districts, and objects under their jurisdiction or control that

appear to qualify for listing on the National Register of Historic Places" by July 1, 1973. [34]

Bohannan's assessment consisted of an inventory and evaluation of the monument's sites. Of the

29 sites which had thus far been inventoried, he considered 19 of them, alone or in tandem with

others, to be eligible to the National Register. The sites comprised eight nominations: Brooks

River, Kaguyak, Kukak, Old Savonoski, Savonoski River, Takli Island, and sites located near

Cape Chiniak and Dakavak Bay. (The Savonoski River nomination was composed of two

archeological sites, while the Takli Island nomination was composed of twelve sites.) The

remaining sites in the monument were not nominated. [35] Bohannan's recommendations were

accepted by the National Register officials, and all eight nominations were entered onto the

register between February and July 1978. [36]

The same year in which Pacific Northwest Regional officials began inventorying known

archeological sites, Denver Service Center personnel commenced an inventory of structures in

the monument. Robert Carper, from DSC's Historic Preservation Division, visited Katmai in

August 1975. The following spring, he completed a report showing the results of that inventory

and nominating eligible structures to the List of Classified Structures, which was the agency's

catalog of structures having archeological, historical, architectural, or engineering significance.

Carper's inventory noted that the monument included a total of 102 structures; 32 were owned

by the NPS, 33 by other governmental agencies, 35 by the concessioner, and one by a company

working on an NPS contract. Few of those structures, however, were particularly noteworthy.

Only 78 of those structures were enclosed buildings, and only three were recommended for the

List of Classified Structures. Those three were the reconstructed ena ("Eskimo Pit House") near

Brooks Camp; "Important Packer Scotty's" (Stephen M. Scott's) Cabin, also near Brooks Camp;

and Fure's Cabin, in the Bay of Islands area of Naknek Lake. Carper was most enthusiastic

about Fure's Cabin, which he noted as "The most significant and extant post-eruption

structure." [37] In conjunction with that report, Superintendent Gil Blinn nominated the cabin to

the National Register of Historic Places in January 1976. The state's Historic Sites Advisory

Committee judged that it fulfilled the criteria for inclusion to the register. The NPS, however,

did not forward the nomination to the National Register office in Washington, D.C. [38]

Soon after the release of Carper's report, more information was gathered on the park's historic

structures. Ranger Mike Tollefson compiled a history of the old trappers' cabins, and park

personnel during the next several years found opportunities to visit most of them. All available

information confirmed that Roy Fure's original cabin, in the Bay of Islands, was the most

structurally sound historical structure in the park. It was relatively accessible to visitors, and
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap10.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:08 PM]

was of considerable historic significance as well. [39]

Park staff did what they could to preserve the old cabin. Broken windows and rotting

floorboards were replaced, and the interior was placed off-limits to visitors. By 1982, however,

rising budgets gave Katmai officials the opportunity to consider a more extensive rehabilitation.

Officials visited the site that summer and decided to rehabilitate it. [40] The following summer

they returned and made further structural examinations. They also collected some nine nautical

charts and 90 other historic objects from the site. The two collections were removed to King

Salmon and became the basis for the park museum. [41] Based on those visits, they prepared a

historic structure report for the cabin and the various outbuildings which surrounded it. [42]

The rehabilitation project, however, was delayed until 1987. In a process that was akin to the

recently-completed Moore Cabin project in Skagway, two NPS cabin builders dismantled Fure's

Cabin and separated salvageable logs from those which were no longer useful. Many of the sill

logs, floor boards, roof planks and roofing needed to be replaced; other portions of the cabin

were still in good condition. Reassembly began late that summer; the following year

rehabilitation was completed, the salvageable logs being interwoven with fresh-cut replacements

brought in from King Salmon. Additional historical materials were collected from the cabin area

and transferred to the park museum. The builders that year had hoped to reconstruct the

adjacent windmill and several minor outbuildings. That work, however, did not begin until

1993. Most of the necessary work was done that year; the remainder was completed in 1994.

[43]

Actions toward recognizing the historical importance of the cabin went hand in hand with its

physical rehabilitation. Based on the 1982 site visit, together with additional data which had

been gathered by Gil Blinn in the mid-1970s, NPS historian Joaqlin Estus prepared a new

National Register of Historic Places nomination form on the site. Shortly afterwards, Estus used

much of the same information for the historical data section of the 1984 historic structure report.

[44] The acquisition of new evidence caused the National Register nomination form to be

revised in December 1983 and again the following August. Finally, on February 7, 1985, Fure's

Cabin was entered onto the National Register. [45] During the reconstruction process, historian

Bonnie Houston gathered a substantial amount of additional data on Roy Fure, his cabin, and

his career as a trapper. Supplemental documentation was submitted in November 1988 and was

accepted by the Keeper of the National Register on May 19, 1989. [46]

Recent Archeological Investigations

Since the mid-1970s, most of the park's archeological activity in areas west of the Aleutian

Range has taken place in the Brooks Camp area. Unlike earlier efforts, most has been conducted

by NPS archeologists. Large excavations have been a relative rarity; more common have been

small-scale compliance activities. No broad survey efforts have been undertaken in recent years.

The largest single project in recent years was brought on by the floods which washed through

Brooks Camp in the late 1970s. As Chapter 5 noted, high waters in 1977, 1978, and 1980

played havoc on the camp's docks. They also endangered several of the area's cultural sites,

located as they were on both banks of Brooks River. Two sites, located on the south bank

below Brooks Falls, were of particular concern.

To monitor the flood's impact on the site, Superintendent Gil Blinn ask Don Dumond to return

to Brooks Camp in 1977 and assess the threat posed by river erosion. His recommendations,

together with similar conclusions offered by NPS Area Office archeologist Dick Hsu, resulted

in two years of site testing. [47] In 1979 Harvey Shields, now an Area Office archeologist,

tested the site; in 1981, Shields returned and performed similar work at the site immediately
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap10.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:08 PM]

downstream from the location of his earlier testing. [48]

In 1982 and 1983, archeologists carried on a full-scale excavation at the two sites which had

been tested in 1979 and 1981. Harvey Shields, who had been participating at Katmai off and on

since 1974, designed the project and served as Principal Investigator, while Roger Harritt, a

University of Oregon graduate student, served as crew foreman. Others who served as crew

members included Cindy Amdur Clark, Fred Clark, Dale Vinson, and Anne Worthington. Don

Dumond, who served as technical advisor, visited for short periods during each of the two

summers of the project. In 1984, Dumond himself headed a crew of three who, in a two-week

period, completed the excavation of a burned semi-subterranean house. [49]

Three other recent projects have been completed, all by government archeologists. In 1983, as

part of a larger Bureau of Indian Affairs survey, Neil Crozier located a historic burial complex

on the park's western boundary. In 1989, archeologists with the NPS Mining Compliance

Program surveyed an area north of Battle Lake. They recorded three sites: two lithic scatters and

a probable hunting blind. Finally, Patricia McClenahan made an resurvey of the sites which

comprised the Brooks River area National Register site. Her 1988 efforts resulted in the

submittal, on March 24, 1989, of a National Historic Landmark (NHL) nomination for the area.

On February 3, 1993, the NHL nomination was approved by the National Park System Advisory

Board, and on April 19, Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt officially designated the district

as an NHL. [50]

Most of the remaining park archeological effort has been compliance work completed in

conjunction with development projects. Section 106 of the 1966 National Historic Preservation

Act requires that federal agencies weigh the broadly-defined historic importance of any site

under their jurisdiction against any development actions that may be undertaken on those sites.

Section 106, therefore, applies not only to Brooks Camp and other National Register sites, but it

also applied to any park site with potential National Register eligibility. Given those

requirements, NPS archeologists have been engaged in compliance activities in Katmai since

1974.

Relatively few compliance activities took place in the 1970s and early 1980s. The number of

compliance actions, however, grew to four in 1982 and was at least ten for each year between

1987 and 1989. In 1991, an archeologist was added to Katmai's staff, and perhaps as a

consequence, an increasing number of compliance actions took place. Eleven were recorded in

1991 and another 31 in 1992. Altogether, 97 Katmai compliance reports were prepared through

1992, 66 of which dealt with development activities in the Brooks Camp area. Of the remaining

31 compliance actions, 9 occurred along the Valley Road corridor, 5 in the King Salmon

headquarters complex, 4 at various places along the Shelikof Strait coast, 2 at Lake Camp, 2 at

Fure's Cabin, 2 in the Nonvianuk Camp area, 2 at Grosvenor Camp, and 5 at scattered sites

along Katmai's lake shores. [51]

Most compliance projects have been relatively minor, consisting of one or two archeologists

spending just a few hours at a site. But several have been more extensive, and in a few

instances major finds have been located. In 1988, for instance, archeologists on a project related

to Brooks Camp leach field development uncovered a heretofore unknown ena (pit house), the

only known intact example of a clay seal-oil lamp, and indications of previously unsuspected

cultural sites. That same year, two Takli Island visitors encountered a prehistoric skeleton, and

compliance personnel investigated the surrounding area. In 1991, an archeologist investigating a

fuel-line spill unearthed evidence of another ena; a year later, compliance actions related to a

new well resulted in the discovery of a caribou tooth and other material from what may be the

Beach Ridge cultural period (3800-4100 years ago), of which little is presently known. [52]

Once the NSF-sponsored surveys and excavations of the 1960s were completed, little
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap10.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:08 PM]

archeological work was completed along Katmai's eastern littoral for the next 25 years. In

March 1989, however, the Exxon Valdez oil spill brought renewed attention to the area. At first,

NPS officials were confident that the oil could be contained within Prince William Sound, but

by April 6 they felt otherwise. They hurriedly organized three field teams which assessed the

coast's natural and cultural resources. Included in those teams were archeologists Pat

McClenahan, Richard Jordan, and Rick Knecht; McClenahan worked for the NPS, while the

others were on contract. Much of their survey work was restricted to the area below the high

tide line. As part of that survey, they found a number of previously-unrecorded sites. [53]

Cleanup crews, sponsored by Exxon Company U.S.A., were deployed to Katmai's beaches in

1989, 1990, and 1991. Damage assessments were also conducted in conjunction with the

cleanup. In 1989 and 1990 Exxon archeologists conducted aerial, pedestrian, and ship-based

surveys, tested selected sites, and monitored cleanup operations. Only rarely did artifact

collection take place. In 1989, company archeologists investigated 37 sites; a year later, they

investigated another 14. In 1991, student archeologists from SUNY Binghamton conducted oil

spill impact research on Katmai's shores. As part of their work, they located several previouslyundiscovered archeological sites. [54]

Development of Museum Collection

As detailed in chapters 2, 11 and 12 as well as in the present chapter, scientific expeditions have

been venturing into the Katmai country for more than 75 years. Some of those research efforts

have been conducted by NPS investigators, others by those who had little or no connection with

the agency. Many resulted in the collection of archeological, biological, or geological

specimens. Prior to the 1980s, however, none of those collections were retained in the local

area.

In 1983, Kathy Jope, Katmai's resource management specialist, moved to establish a park

museum. As a result of the investigations which had taken place at Fure's Cabin, nine historic

maps and 90 other objects had been removed. They, together with 165 copies of photographs

from the early National Geographic Society investigations, formed the core of the new

collection. Some of the items were stored, for the time being, at the Brooks Camp visitor

center, while others were removed to King Salmon's ranger annex. [55]

In 1984, most of the park collection was consolidated in King Salmon. But the cramped, tworoom ranger annex had little room for artifact storage; besides, it was poorly heated and

ventilated, and thus inadequate for proper museum curation. To upgrade the facility,

maintenance workers installed new insulation, a new ceiling, and shelving. Two years later, a

reorganization at the park took place, and half of the building was given over to the park's

library and museum. [56]

New artifacts were continuously added to the park's museum collection. By 1985, the park

received its first archeological, archival, biological, paleontological, and geological specimens,

and the collection numbered more than 400 total artifacts. That number swelled to 2600 the

following year and to almost 5000 in 1987. Large archeological accessions swelled the

museum's collection even further; by 1988, the collection numbered more than 82,000 items.

[57]

By the end of 1992, Katmai's museum inventory included 128,807 items. Over 95 percent of

them--125,468 items--were archeological in nature. The herbarium contained 1446 biological

specimens. In addition, the park collection had 789 historical artifacts, 512 archival items, 420

geological specimens, 153 paleontological specimens, and 19 ethnological artifacts. [58]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap10.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:08 PM]

Other NPS offices contain additional Katmai materials. Biological and archeological items are

located in the Alaska System Support Office, and the agency's Harpers Ferry Center keeps

additional archeological items.

Most of the items collected during earlier expeditions remain outside of NPS control.

Archeological collections pertaining to Katmai are located at the University of Oregon,

University of Alaska Fairbanks, Peabody Museum, and SUNY Binghamton, while the Bristol

Bay Historical Society keeps a historical item. Geological collections with Katmai specimens

are located at the University of Alaska Fairbanks and the U.S. Geological Survey, while

biological collections are located at Ohio State University and the University of Alaska

Anchorage. Other institutional and private collections, as yet unknown, are likely to also

contain Katmai artifacts. NPS staff are carrying on a continuing effort to locate those artifacts

and provide for their preservation. [59]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap10.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:08 PM]

(top) In September 1953, Victor Cahalane visited American Creek and photographed traper Roy Fure's storehouse

(left), cabin (center), and cache. Fure used the buildings during the 1930s and, perhaps surreptitiously, thereafter.

(bottom) Another of Fure's cabins was located in the Bay of Islands portion of Naknek Lake. Architect Robert

Carper took this photo in April 1976. Agency personnel restored the cabin in 1987-1988; the adjacent windmill

and outbuildings were restored in 1993-1994. (NPS Photo Collection, neg. 66-188 (top); Carper, Classified

Structure, Field Inventory Report, Katmai National Monument, 10 (bottom) )

Savonoski Village, along the south bank of the Savonoski River, was a viable Native village the June 1912

volcanic explosion forced its residents to flee. This photo, taken from the air by Victor Cahalane in July 1953,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 10)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap10.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:08 PM]

shows that "Old Savonoski" was still clearly visible. The Russion Orthodox Church is the large building in the

rear of the photo. (NPS Photo Collection, File 66-82)

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

adhi/chap10.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap11.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:10 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

PART I: KATMAI NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE

Chapter 11:

Minerals Management

By most accounts, the area contained within the boundaries of present-day Katmai National

Park and Preserve is relatively low in mineralization. The NPS unit extends out over four

million acres of Alaskan topography. Considering the acreage involved, relatively few sites of

economically-viable mineralization have been located. Those sites, however, contain

verifiable quantities of gold, copper, silica, pumice, and other minerals, and those who would

hope to develop Katmai's mineral potential have been quick to point out the potential for

additional ore bodies. They, and those who have been philosophically opposed to the idea of

closing lands to mineral exploration, have often clashed with NPS managers, whose mandate

has usually been to discourage mineral exploitation. This chapter chronicles the history of

mineral development in the Katmai area.

Early Mineral Exploration

Prior to 1918, the Katmai country was open to mineral exploration and location. The first

miners to visit the area crossed over Katmai Pass in 1890. They did not actively prospect, but

used the pass on their way from Saint Michael to Kodiak. Josiah Spurr, an explorer with the

U.S. Geological Survey, used the same route in December 1898. Following in his wake were

a ragtag army of prospectors who crossed over Katmai Pass on their way on their way to the

Nome gold fields. So far as is known, none found "pay dirt" along the way. [1]

In addition to the explorers and gold-rush miners who passed through the Katmai country,

others arrived on prospecting expeditions. Of particular interest was the area's petroleum

potential. Several expeditions during the 1860s and 1870s brought back rumors that oil

existed near Katmai Bay. [2] The drilling of an oil well near Puale Bay in 1902 brought forth

a crescendo of interest in the area's petroleum resources. During the next two years three

more wells were drilled, but nothing of commercial importance was found. By 1906 all but a

few diehards had left the area. Operations, however, continued intermittently for years

afterward. [3]

In response to the Puale Bay activity George Curtis Martin, a government geologist, surveyed

Katmai's shoreline for evidences of coal and oil potential. Martin was told of oil seepages

along the shores of Kamishak Bay, especially at Douglas River, and was also told of gas

seeps on Gas Creek, at the head of Kejulik River. But he did not visit either one, and

cautioned against further exploration. "The geology of the coast ... between Douglas River

and Katmai," he wrote, "does not warrant in the slightest degree any petroleum prospecting.

Along much of this coast are only volcanic and other crystalline rocks, in which the

occurrence of petroleum is an absolute impossibility." [4]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap11.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:10 PM]

Other resources were sought as well. An 1895 USGS expedition, under the direction of

William Healey Dall and George F. Becker, was sent to search for gold and coal along the

coast of Shelikof Strait. It found no gold, but did find minor coal deposits near Cape Douglas.

On the shore of Amalik Bay, he found three seams of "a pretty good coal." He noted that

"The small dimensions of the seam, however, forbid anticipating any commercial future for

it." [5] Josiah Spurr, who crossed Katmai Pass in 1898, was not impressed by the gold

potential of that part of the Alaska Peninsula. Ralph W. Stone, who looked for coal along the

Katmai coast in 1904 as part of Martin's survey, found it in the same general vicinity as his

1895 predecessors. He examined the Cape Douglas coal seams and found that "because of

their small extent and bony character" they had no commercial value. He was unable to

resurvey the Amalik Bay coal seam. [6]

The 1912 eruption in the Mount Katmai area created a thick ash layer over hundreds of

square miles of the surrounding landscape. Some mineral resources, therefore, were doubtless

lost, but others were created, and mineral exploration continued unabated. George Martin,

who returned to the Katmai coast during the summer of 1912, was effusive about the

commercial possibilities for the coastal ash deposits. And an industrial chemical

manufacturing company, upon reading one of the National Geographic articles on the subject,

was so intrigued that it wrote the magazine and asked where samples could be secured. [7]

Others moved inland in search of hard rock deposits. Around 1912, Charlie McNeil and

Norman B. Cook found copper-bearing veins about 17 miles inland on a stream running into

a "southwest bight" of Kamishak Bay. (The stream was probably McNeil River.) Z. T. and C.

D. Halferty located seven claims in the Kuliak Bay area in 1913 and 1917. [8] In 1915, Fred

and Jack Mason discovered placer gold along a small stream, locally called Lonesome Pine

Creek, just south of Cape Kubugakli. Two years later, Robert Griggs discovered that "There

are some places where one can gather crystals of sulphur, almost free from impurities, by the

bushel." In 1918, Alex Grant found placer gold on American Creek; he made several

attempts to work the gravels but failed. [9] The same year, the Geological Survey

encountered the Shelikof Mining Company working at its copper prospect near Kukak Bay.

Of those discoveries, only the Mason claim, which produced a small amount of gold, tin, and

molybdenum over an eight-year period, ever witnessed ore production. [10]

In 1916, the National Geographic Society began to lobby various governmental officials to

create a national monument in the ash-laden area surrounding Mount Katmai. In order to

placate territorial authorities, the officials who roughed out the initial boundaries were careful

to exclude known areas with commercial development potential; the southern boundary, in

particular, was drawn so as to exclude the Cold Bay (Puale Bay), Cape Kubugakli, and Gas

Creek mining properties. The relative lack of activity within the proposed boundaries

encouraged park advocates to push for the creation of a monument which prohibited mining.

In so doing, they ran counter to territorial tradition. Prospecting and mining were prohibited

in most NPS units in the United States. In Alaska, however, both of the units which had been

established thus far, Sitka and Mount McKinley, allowed the practice. [11]

After the NPS had decided on a tentative boundary, it asked the U.S. Geological Survey if it

had any objections to the proposed monument. The few reports on the area's geology which

had been completed thus far indicated the presence of a few deposits, but the vast majority of

land under consideration had never been explored. Based on such scant information, the

USGS indicated that it would not intercede against the withdrawal, but neither could it muster

much enthusiasm for it. Some of its members, including Dr. Martin, were opposed to it, at

least until such time as geological studies could be conducted.

NPS Director Stephen Mather was sensitive to the USGS's viewpoints, and repeated them to

Secretary of the Interior Franklin Lane. The secretary, who was the single most important
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap11.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:10 PM]

decision maker, conditionally agreed to the reservation despite the USGS's objections. USGS

officials knew that the creation of the monument would not affect their ability to conduct

their geological studies. Acting NPS Director Horace M. Albright, who also recognized the

Geological Survey's concern, assured Alaska Governor Thomas Riggs that the withdrawal

"can be modified later if this is necessary in the interests of the commercial development of

Alaska." Albright, reflecting Lane's opinion, felt that it was "just as well to have it [as a

monument] pending a thorough investigation by the Geological Survey." [12]

Alaska Governor Thomas Riggs, not surprisingly, decried the existence of the new

monument. He was philosophically opposed to the creation of any reservation that limited

development possibilities; regarding Katmai, he opposed its creation because he was certain

that it contained commercial possibilities. In a letter to Mather in November 1918, he said

that

I beg to advise that there are no devastated lands owing to the great eruption,

unless they are overrun by lava, the volcanic ash making the soil peculiarly

fertile. I am also advised that there are oil indications within the withdrawal, and

a short way outside of the lines drawn, there is at present an oil well, driven and

capped, awaiting the time when it shall be possible to take up oil lands. [13]

Mining in the Katmai Area, 1918-1945

Soon after Wilson established the monument, the area surrounding the monument became a

focus of interest for petroleum developers. On February 25, 1920, Congress enacted a law

which allowed Alaska land to be leased for oil exploration purposes. During the next few

years, known or suspected petroleum areas were blanketed with oil claims. The Cold Bay

(Puale Bay) field, where a well was drilled beginning in May 1922, was the territory's most

popular leasing area. By June 30 of that year, 222 entrants had applied for 564,170 acres of

Cold Bay oil-lease lands. Leases probably covered the Cold Bay region and stretched

northward to Katmai's southwestern boundary. North of the monument, the knowledge that

oil seeps had been discovered on the shoreline of Kamishak Bay brought forth a flurry of

leases. These leases were scattered along the bay's southwestern shore and also went ten

miles up the Kamishak River. The flurry of excitement, however, was all for naught. The few

marginally-successful wells drilled in the Cold Bay field were more than twenty miles

southwest of the monument. No drilling took place on the margins of Kamishak Bay, and the

oil leases were eventually cancelled. [14]

A small mineral development on the west shore of Shelikof Strait was responsible for the first

alteration of Katmai's boundaries. In the early 1920s, John J. Folstad began working a coal

seam on the western shore of Amalik Bay, opposite Takli Island. (This was probably the

location which had been discovered by Dall and Becker in 1895.) In response, Folstad

petitioned the government for a permit to develop the site. The NPS, recognizing the value of

coal, knew that the petition might well result in pressure to open the entire monument to

mining. The agency, therefore, felt it better to remove the area from the monument. On

September 5, 1923, President Calvin Coolidge issued Executive Order No. 3897, which

excluded 10 acres from the monument. [15]

In 1923, the long-expected Geological Survey expedition finally took place. As noted in

Chapter 3, both Walter R. Smith and Kirtley F. Mather led survey parties into the Katmai

country. Smith's party described and mapped much of the existing monument, and also

fanned out to areas as far west as Dumpling Mountain and as far southwest as Becharof Lake.

Mather's party surveyed the area to the north. It covered each of the coastal drainages from

Paint River south to Cape Douglas, and also headed inland to survey the Savonoski River,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap11.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:10 PM]

Kulik Lake, Battle Lake, and Moraine-Funnel Creek drainages. The geologists found several

mineralized areas in their surveys, most notably in the Paint River drainage and the Cold Bay

area. The area within the monument, however, was "very little mineralized." Regarding the

reputed petroleum deposits near Kamishak Bay, Mather could muster only a tepid

enthusiasm. He felt that a search for petroleum was justified "throughout such of the

southeastern portion of the Kamishak Bay region," but urged prospective drillers to first

exploit the Cold Bay field first, where the geological structures appeared to be more

favorable. [16] For the remainder of the decade, no other mining activities took place either

inside the monument or in the immediately surrounding area.

In November 1930, Robert F. Griggs spearheaded an effort to extend Katmai National

Monument's boundaries to the north and west. In a letter to an Interior Department official,

Griggs gave a broad rationale for expanding the park and noted that there were "no minerals

of value" except for a worked-out gold placer at Cape Kubugakli. As part of his expansion

recommendations, he took care to avoid the oil-bearing tracts which surrounded Puale Bay,

and recognized that the trader at Kanatak, 50 miles southwest of the existing monument and

dependent on any oil development that might take place, would be adversely affected by his

proposed expansion. [17]

The following January the NPS, in consultation with Griggs and the Interior Depart-ment,

laid out the boundaries of the proposed monument expansion. The Geological Survey, when

asked its opinion of the area's economic geology, offered a dim view of the area's suitability

as a parkland. The agency noted that

the general conditions are such as to indicate the possible occurrence of

prospective oil fields both to the north and south of the present Katmai National

Monument. Many oil claims have been located in both of these areas, and

doubtless the status of permits that have been granted can be obtained from the

General Land Office.

In addition to the oil possibilities, gold has been produced from claims in the

vicinity of Cape Kubugakli and indications of gold have been found at a number

of other points, stibnite, molybdenite, galena, and tetrahedrite--all minerals of

economic value, if they occur in quantity--have been reported from veins near

Cape Kubugakli. Regarding the area north of the present monument in the

Kamishak Bay region, Mather reports a number of metallic mineral deposits in

those places where igneous activity not related to recent volcanism has been

intense. Conditions analogous to those described by him probably also occur in

parts of the unsurveyed regions west and southwest of Cape Douglas, which is

included within the boundaries of the enlarged monument. [18]

The Service, in response, offered to pare the size of its proposed expansion by suggesting that

the northern boundary become "a line from Hallo Bay westerly to the forks of Gorge and

Hardscrabble Creeks." The line west of that point followed that which Griggs had originally

proposed. In mid-February, however, the Acting Director of the Geological Survey rejected

that compromise. He hardened his previous position and dissented against any changes to the

1918 boundary. The Survey again expressed its concern about the possibilities of oil and gold

extraction. On a broader level, the agency stated that it "is keenly interested in having as

much of the region as possible kept open for free use, in order to stimulate its development."

The USGS felt that the additional acreage was irrelevant to the original intent of the park.

[19]

The Service responded to the comments provided by the USGS and other government

agencies by excluding the various oil claims surrounding Puale Bay; the new boundary lines,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap11.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:10 PM]

however, were far closer to those in Griggs's original proposal than those drawn in response

to the USGS's original criticisms. The revised boundaries, which were justified in an April 22

letter from Secretary of the Interior Ray Wilbur to President Herbert Hoover, thus ignored

much of the Geological Survey's concerns about potential oil development. Wilbur concluded

that the proposed area "is of greater value from a edu-cational and scientific viewpoint and

for the protection of wild life than for economic development." [20] On April 24, 1931,

President Hoover signed the proclamation which expanded the monument. A tacit effect of

the expansion was its reincorporation of the 10-acre parcel that had been removed from the

monument in 1923. (Folstad had long since lost interest in his coal claim.)

During the 1930s, as noted in Chapter 3, a small but stubborn group of trappers resided along

the lakes in various parts of the monument. Some prospectors doubtless also entered the

monument, and a few of the trappers also prospected from time to time. As a result, three

mining sites were located on the margins of the monument. Roy Fure and Martin Mickelson,

both of Naknek, found a cinnabar vein in 1934 while traveling up Gorge Creek. Mickelson

retorted about 200 pounds of the Gorge Creek vein but found that the mercury it contained

was not of sufficient value to develop further. Fure, who continued to prospect in the area,

found several more deposits just north of the original find. [21] In 1938, along American

Creek, Bill Hammersly found additional placer gold deposits in the same general area where

Alex Grant had prospected twenty years earlier. Hammersly continued to work the stream

gravels each summer until 1941, by which time he had located 18 placer claims which

stretched one to two miles upstream from the monument boundary. He found extensive bench

gold deposits; its quantity, however, was insufficient to sustain extended operations under

existing conditions. The only other reported gold deposits were located along the shores of

Brooks Lake. These deposits, located inside the boundaries of the monument--and thus

extracted illegally--were apparently discovered in the late 1930s or early 1940s. Only small

amounts were ever found. [22]

The situation was much the same along the Shelikof Strait. As noted in Chapter 3, most of

those who were attracted to the area were fox farmers. Once there, however, they sought

whatever means they could to scratch out a living. On the north shore of Takli Island, W. E.

Baumann located several placer claims beginning in 1931. There is no evidence, however,

that either he or others in the area found anything of economic significance. [23]

In 1941, J. C. Roehm, an investigator from the Territorial Bureau of Mines, visited the

Naknek Lake region and investigated the mining possibilities for various area properties.

Roehm visited the American Creek claims and attempted but failed to visit those along Gorge

Creek. He also hiked up into the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes. Roehm emerged from his

survey convinced that Katmai had been needlessly expanded and that mineral development

would surely follow a reduction in its boundaries. Based on what he had seen and heard,

however, he could generate little enthusiasm for hard rock mining. The NPS, which had little

other information on the area, concluded that the monument had a general paucity of

economically retrievable minerals. [24]

Attempts to Extract Volcanic Ash

The Katmai area, in all likelihood, would have had little mineral activity had demand been

limited to hard rock minerals. Little of interest had been located either in or near the

monument. But what Katmai had in abundance was siliceous volcanic ash, otherwise known

as pumicite. The 1912 eruption had extruded over five cubic miles of the material, enough to

cover a 3,000-square-mile area a foot deep. [25] Because the ash had no commercial value,

development interests ignored it, and almost no one felt slighted when the 1918 and 1931

proclamations placed most of the ash deposits within the monument's boundaries.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap11.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:10 PM]

The value of pumicite, however, began to increase during World War II. Both the army and

navy needed base materials in the construction of roads and airfields, and military personnel

found pumicite superior to the locally-available sand and gravel. After the war, Alaska faced

an unprecedented demand for materials in the building construction industry, and various

private sector interests recognized that pumicite might fulfill those needs. In 1946, Gus

Sutherland founded the Anchorage-based Alaska Katmalite Corporation and gathered

materials from Augustine Island; the same year, Don Goodman and Harold Swank visited the

island and took a number of pumicite samples. [26]

Goodman and Swank soon found that the pumicite located on Augustine Island was an

inferior material for making so-called "pumi-blocks." Casting about for an alternative, they

visited Takli Island, took samples, and found them to be well suited to their needs. They then

formed the Pumice Block Company, which was based in Anchorage, and sent a small crew

which "was active in developing deposits" on the island. [27]

Goodman and Swank knew that both Geographic Harbor and Takli Island were located in

Katmai National Monument and were thus off-limits to mining, but they also hoped that the

region's need for building materials might allow pumice removal to take place. To address the

problem, Goodman and Swank's attorney, J. L. McCarrey, wrote territorial delegate E. L.

Bartlett in April 1947 and explained the company's dilemma. Bartlett forwarded his letter to

the NPS, who replied that it had no authority to grant the company a permit. [28] The only

option lay in the issuance of an executive order which would withdraw Takli Island from the

monument and restore the property to the public domain. He wrote Secretary of the Interior

Julius Krug on the matter, hoping that he might be able to prepare an executive order for

President Truman's signature. [29] Krug, after consulting with the NPS, the USGS, and the

Division of Territories and Island Possessions on the matter, decided that it was best to first

study the matter, in order "to assure ourselves that any enterprise along this line ... has a

reasonable chance to succeed, as well as to determine the effect of the elimination of this

Island from the national monument." He promised that a USGS geologist would be assigned

to the task. [30]

A study of the area's ash deposits was completed that summer by the Alaska Territorial

Department of Mines, who agreed to assist the USGS in their work. J. C. Roehm, by now an

Associate Mining Engineer with the department, visited six sites along the Shelikof Strait

coastline: at Takli Island, Kukak Bay, and two sites each in Geographic Harbor and Kinak

Bay. After testing samples from each site, he found that Kukak Bay was "best in quality of

any noted during the investigation." He further noted that "This [Kukak Bay] deposit could

easily be mined with mechanical shovel and is readily accessible to barge loading. There

appears to be abundant material in this deposit for a small pumice block operation for several

years." [31]

The developers soon constructed a pumi-block plant and were ready to go even before the

Territorial Bureau of Mines had completed its report. Their only wish was to supply a

critically-needed element to the Anchorage building industry. Environmental degradation,

moreover, was not a problem as they saw it. The nature of pumice and the windy conditions

prevalent along Shelikof Strait, in their opinion, were such that "no type of excavation,

loading or hauling can in any way disfigure any part of this area." Both the developers, and

Territorial Delegate Bartlett, were amazed that federal officials would wish to block the

operation. [32]

Bureaucratic conflict and legal wrangling, however, prevented them from receiving

permission to mine or even receiving answers as to its legality for the remainder of 1947. The

USGS, the primary agency which Krug had assigned to the task, needed only to approve the

completed report and issue a covering statement; no such statement, however, was
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap11.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:10 PM]

forthcoming from the agency. Over at the NPS, meanwhile, renewed debate developed

regarding the proper legal course to adopt. One official, repeating the stand originally taken

in April, stated that the NPS could not legally issue a mining permit, but another felt that

even the excision of the area from the monument would not provide the legal right to mine.

[33]

In January 1948, development interests renewed their efforts to have the Katmai coastline

opened to pumicite extraction. By this time Don Goodman had sold his interests in the

company, and Swank and Ken Hinchey had founded the Ken Hinchey Company, based in

Anchorage. Citing an increased demand for pumicite-based materials at Fort Richardson,

Hinchey demanded to know the status of the USGS's investigations. The letter eventually

reached the desk of Newton Drury, NPS Director, who responded that the USGS was still

dragging its heels because of an extended leave taken by the field representative assigned to

the project. [34]

Perhaps because of Bartlett's incessant harping, the report which Secretary Krug had

requested in May 1947 was finally submitted by the USGS in March 1948. [35] Its results

caused the developers to change their strategy. During 1947 they had consistently stated their

intention to operate on Takli Island, but when the report's conclusions became known they

prevailed upon Bartlett to allow exploitation at one or more sites on the mainland. Delegate

Bartlett passed those concerns on to the NPS. [36]

During the spring of 1948, the legal cloud which had formerly hung over pumice extraction

began to lift. Officials concluded that if one or more areas were removed from the monument,

pumice mining could legally take place. They could not, however, allow mining in the park

without specific Congressional legislation which permitted the activity.

Given the continuing economic and political pressures toward development, Director Drury

and other NPS officials had to choose one of three courses to follow. Should it stand pat and

try to resist development pressures? Should it reduce its boundaries? Or should it allow

regulated use? Having little knowledge of the area, they wrote biologist Robert F. Griggs,

leader of the National Geographic expeditions, for his opinion. Griggs replied that the latter

choice was best. He had little difficulty with the extraction of pumice from Kukak Bay; of

greater concern was the safety of those who had to navigate Shelikof Strait. The NPS, in

response, tentatively adopted Griggs's position on pumice extraction, and noted that "Kukak

Bay appears to offer the best opportunity for initial operations and the least conflict with

preservation of primary monument values." Kukak Bay was a good choice for two reasons;

not only did the area contain an excellent source of pumicite, but a cannery was also active in

the bay. Given a choice, the NPS favored combining two adverse land uses into a single

small area. [37]

Bartlett agreed with NPS officials that legislation allowing pumice mining activities should

be pursued. Bartlett offered to introduce the legislation, and the NPS initially offered some

assistance in drafting it. [38] Little activity, however, took place that year. Agency officials

seemed less than enthusiastic in working with Bartlett, and it slowly became apparent that no

legislation would be forthcoming any time soon. By mid-December the situation was no

closer to a conclusion than it had been a year earlier. The year again ended with Bartlett

promising to introduce appropriate legislation legalizing pumice mining. [39] The slow pace

of events that year may have been due, in part, to a slackening demand for pumicite as a

building material. (Ken Hinchey, who had hoped to develop the Katmai deposits, appears

have abandoned his quest in the fall of 1948.) Whatever the reason, Bartlett had little cause

to pressure the Park Service on the subject during most of 1949. That November, however,

interest in pumice extraction was renewed when Arthur Waldron, the general manager of

Anchorage Sand and Gravel, asked to gain access to the area. [40]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap11.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:10 PM]

During January 1950, the reason for the NPS's dilatory tactics became clear. The agency

decided that it would be better to eliminate a small area from the monument, via presidential

proclamation, than to have Congressional authorization allowing pumicite removal. [41]

Agency officials feared that legislation allowing pumicite mining would set a poor precedent

and open the door to widespread mining activities in the monument. In search of an

alternative, they discovered that the Materials Disposal Act, which passed Congress on July

31, 1947, allowed pumicite to be disposed by lease or permit if the appropriate area could be

eliminated from the monument. An additional reason officials liked the bill was that it gave

them the means to restore the lands to the monument at a later date. [42]

Agency officials quickly carved out a 6,000-acre area around Kukak Bay that was proposed

for elimination from the monument, and an official in the Department of the Interior's Alaska

Field Office was able to tell Waldron that

positive action is in the offing by the Department.... This action is not official, of

course, until it comes out under the Secretary's or President's signature, but it

does let you know that the Department has not forgotten you and that everything

is being done that can be to bring you this about quickly for your use this

summer." [43]

Director Drury forwarded the agency's position on to the Secretary of the Interior, who by

now was Oscar L. Chapman. [44] The Secretary's staff prepared a suggested executive order,

and on May 19 submitted it, along with an explanatory cover letter, to President Harry S.

Truman. Chapman recommended that Truman sign the proclamation. [45]

What happened to the proposed proclamation after that point is unclear. Before it reached the

President's desk it had to clear the Attorney General, the Bureau of the Budget, and the

Federal Register; perhaps because of those delays, the proclamation still had not reached the

President by June 9. By mid-July, NPS officials were still convinced that the proclamation

would become law. [46] But Truman never signed it.

Two reasons have been advanced as to why the proclamation was never implemented. John

Kauffmann, in his study of Katmai's boundaries, has suggested that the Attorney General

blocked it because of its shaky legal foundations. [47] Another reason may have been lastminute Interior Department misgivings regarding the necessity of pumicite removal from the

monument. As early as November 1949, Department officials had begun to complain that all

of the areas which had been surveyed in Roehm's 1947 study were located in Katmai

National Monument, and several urged that a renewed search of the coast be made for

pumicite deposits outside of the monument. In January 1950, therefore, the U.S. Geological

Survey was formally asked to find out whether pumice deposits could be located between

Anchorage and the monument. [48] The USGS, in searching their admittedly incomplete

records, was unable to find any such pumice deposits. Interior department officials, however,

were confident that additional pumice-extraction sites could be located. Chapman's May 1950

letter to Truman, in fact, noted that

since the deposit in Katmai National Monument [at Kukak Bay] is located at a

considerable distance from Anchorage through treacherous waters, it is probable

that this source can serve only as a temporary expedient, at best. In the

circumstances, this Department is hopeful that a suitable site for pumicite

removal can be found nearer Anchorage and outside the monument. [49]

Truman himself may have noted that it was inconsistent to lop off 6,000 acres of a national

monument while simultaneously suggesting the preparation of studies that might eliminate

the necessity to mine Katmai's pumicite deposits. Regardless of who (if anyone) recognized
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap11.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:10 PM]

the inconsistency, the practical effect of Truman's not signing the proclamation was a

renewed search for accessible pumice deposits.

Robert M. Moxham, a geologist with the U.S. Geological Survey, was commissioned to

search a wide area which had been subject to recent volcanism and to find an optimal site for

pumice extraction. He undertook field work on the subject in the summer of 1950. His report,

which was completed in late 1951 and distributed in January 1952, compared the pumice

deposits of Katmai National Monument with those of Augustine Island and the AniakchakVeniaminof region. After weighing the attributes of six sites in the monument, two sites on

Augustine Island, and four sites in the Aniakchak-Veniaminof area, Moxham concluded that

"it appears that the pumice deposits in the Amalik Bay-Kukak Bay offer geological and

geographic advantages" over any other sites, either those outside or within Katmai National

Monument. [50]

Moxham's report noted, among other things, that an Anchorage company had recently been

active removing pumice in the monument. In the summer of 1950 John Grove, who headed

the Stock and Grove Company, brought a crew of six into Geographic Harbor; the following

year, the company repeated the process in the same location. [51] The company appears to

have operated legally because it worked below the high tide line and was thus outside the

monument boundaries; it was illegal, however, in that it kept its equipment and a shed above

the high tide line without having a special use permit. The NPS apparently had no inkling of

its presence during the summer of 1950 (although territorial officials were well aware of it).

They caught wind of it, however, that winter. In 1951, George Collins of the Alaska

Recreation Survey visited the site and informed other NPS officials on the details of Stock

and Grove's operation. Because he lacked a permit, Grove was issued a cease and desist order

in early September, and the company permanently shut down its Katmai pumice operations.

[52]

By the end of 1950, Bartlett had become aware that pumice mining would not be opened by

way of a presidential proclamation. Having lost faith with the Department of the Interior, he

returned to the idea which had been dropped a year earlier. On July 13, 1951, he introduced a

bill into the House of Representatives--H.R. 4794--which would have allowed a 15-year

period for pumicite removal "from such areas as [the Secretary of the Interior] may designate

along the shores of Shelikof Strait in Katmai National Monument, Alaska." [53] The bill was

quickly approved by Robert F. Griggs and was presented favorably to the Advisory Board on

National Parks, Historic Sites, Buildings, and Monuments. On October 4, the Interior

Department wrote the committee that it too had no objection to the bill, provided that such a

bill not set a precedent for further mining activities in the national park system. [54]

Conservation-oriented Congressmen soon tried to block Bartlett's bill. Their opposition

provoked this outburst from an obviously frustrated Alaska Governor Ernest Gruening:

The whole question of the extreme and fanatical conservatism that is represented

by some of our conservationists is going to haunt us repeatedly in Alaska.

Katmai National Monument is the result of a volcanic explosion which moved

millions, if not billions, of tons of material and scattered it to the four winds of

Heaven, some of the dust travelling as far east as Wisconsin. It is pretty fantastic

to prevent a worthy commercial undertaking from removing a few tons of

pumice from some corner of this vast Monument, which is larger in area I

believe than the states of Rhode Island and Delaware, and whose original

attractiveness, with its 10,000 smokes reduced to a few or none, has largely

vanished. [55]

Despite opposition, the bill remained under consideration for the remainder of the 82nd
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap11.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:10 PM]

Congress. Territorial development interests such as Gruening, Bartlett, and the Alaska

Development Board all backed the bill. In late 1951 a new company, Pacific Pumice, from

Washington state, added momentum to it by requesting a pumice removal permit. [56]

Bartlett's influence resulted in committee passage of H.R. 4794 on February 20, 1952, and the

full House passed it on March 3. The following day the bill was referred to the Senate Interior

and Insular Affairs Committee, and as Bartlett ruefully described it, members "seemed

altogether unwilling to approve the bill, at least in its present form." The Senate bill never got

out of committee, and was forgotten for the remainder of the 82nd Congress. [57]

Bartlett, however, was unwilling to give up. At the beginning of the 83rd Congress, on

January 13, 1953, Congressman Wesley A. D'Ewart of Montana introduced H.R. 1529, which

was identical to the bill (H.R. 4794) which Bartlett had submitted during the 1951-52

Congressional term. [58] Three days later Bartlett submitted a similar bill, H.R. 1801. The

House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee ignored Bartlett's bill, but on February 18 it

amended and passed H.R. 1529. On March 2, the full House passed the amended bill; two

days later it was presented to the Senate. For over a year it seemed destined to the same fate

which had befallen it during the previous Congress. But on March 30, 1954 the bill,

sponsored by Sen. Hugh Butler of Nebraska, finally emerged from the Senate Interior and

Insular Affairs Committee, and on April 5, 1954, it was passed by the full Senate. [59] The

House and Senate bills being identical, it was forwarded to President Eisenhower on April 7.

On April 15, 1954, the president signed the bill, and it became Public Law 332 of the 83rd

Congress. [60]

The signing of H.R. 1529 marked the end of a seven year struggle to obtain a site for

pumicite inside Katmai National Monument. In conformance with the act's provisions,

Secretary of the Interior Douglas McKay designated Takli Island (not Kukak Bay, as the

studies seemed to suggest) as the area to be set aside for pumice extraction. [61] The longsought victory, however, was pyrrhic. During the late 1940s and early 1950s, it may be

remembered, several companies had indicated an interest in pumice extraction. But by the

time the bill became law, that interest had diminished, and one of them went so far as to

inform Bartlett that an expanded shale product, called Baselite, had replaced pumice as a

building construction material. [62] True to the law's provisions, Takli Island remained open

for pumice extraction for the next fifteen years, but no company with an interest in

commercial pumice extraction stepped forward. The permit quietly expired on April 15, 1969,

and no interest in pumicite development has appeared since then.

Despite the herculean efforts made by both developers and legislators to tap into Katmai's

pumicite deposits, few on-the-ground impacts ever resulted. Takli Island was the site of a

small operation during 1947, and Geographic Harbor witnessed some activity in 1950 and

1951. The latter operation, which took place along the west shore of the upper harbor, was

never very sophisticated; major on-site equipment consisted of a barge, a Caterpillar, a duck

(a large, amphibious truck) and a shack on skids. The shack remained for years afterward, but

by 1985 all that remained was a large pumice berm, two four-foot pilings, and a few scraps of

metal. [63]

Mining Policies and Surveying Activities, 1945-1970

Pumicite was not the only mining-related pressure that NPS officials had to deal with

regarding Katmai during the postwar years. As noted in Chapter 3, Bartlett spearheaded a

1947 effort to eliminate the monument as part of an ill-fated statehood bill. [64] By

November 1948, pressures to develop the monument had become so great that NPS Regional

Director Owen A. Tomlinson told Director Drury that "we believe the Service should

seriously be considering the possibility that it will have to submit to legislation authorizing
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap11.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:10 PM]

mining in Katmai National Monument in the event substantial evidence is produced

indicating that it is a mineralized area." Tomlinson was well aware that both Mount

McKinley National Park and Glacier Bay National Monument were open to mining, and he

was prepared to allow mining in Katmai as well, perhaps believing that it would ward off

calls to abandon the unit entirely. [65]

Several factors had brought pressure on the Park Service to open Katmai to mining. One

factor was the obvious frustration that Alaskans felt at having a huge expanse that was offlimits to them, not only for mining and trapping but for recreation and tourism purposes as

well. What added additional momentum to the cause was the discovery that a several local

residents had located a "rock mineral of high value content" the previous fall. On November

14, 1948, pilot Bill Smith flew Charlie "Red" Robinson, trapper Jim Marlette, and a

planeload of supplies to the eastern end of Lake Grosvenor. The location of the ore body is

not known; it may have been the cinnabar deposits along Gorge Creek. Their entry into the

area, however, was not discovered until the following April. Carlos Carson, the Dillinghambased fish and game agent and deputy NPS park ranger, suspected that their entry was illegal

and deduced that their mining activities were as well. Carson dutifully informed his superiors

at the Region Four office in San Francisco, which set off a wave of concern. Armed with a

stack of regulations, Carson may have asked the miners to cease their operations, or perhaps

the miners gave up after investigating the ore body more closely. At any rate, nothing more

was heard of their operations. Because of that reason, and because only scattered pressure

surfaced during that period to develop the pumice deposits along the Shelikof Strait shoreline,

no bill emerged during this period to allow mining at Katmai. [66]

Scattered amounts of other mining activity surfaced during the postwar years. In 1947,

George Hadden occupied a cabin on the north shore of Takli Island; he was probably

prospecting the same claims which W. E. Baumann had located back in 1931. (Takli Island

had been absorbed into the monument in 1942. Mining claims made before that date,

however, could still be developed.) [67] Marlette continued to prospect as well as trap, and

had another camp along the Kulik River, north of the existing monument. His cabin was later

eliminated by Northern Consolidated Airlines personnel, who had established a fishing camp

on the river's north side, just west of Kulik Lake, in 1950. [68] (The camp was later moved

southwest to its present location.)

The Katmai Project, the interdisciplinary effort spearheaded by the Office of Naval Research

in 1953 and 1954, provided an opportunity to investigate the monument's geological and

mining resources. As originally outlined, one of the project's six objectives was "the volcanic

activity and general geology of the area, including ... the nature and extent of mineral

resources in the monument." Activities accomplished in 1953 under this objective were

limited to geological and volcanological examinations. [69] The following year, however, the

U.S. Geological Survey (one of the project's cooperating agencies) assigned A. Samuel Keller

and Hillard N. Reiser to investigate the monument's geology and mineralogical potential.

Their study also included a broad surrounding area, including Becharof Lake, Kulik and

Nonvianuk lakes, the Kamishak River drainage, and the upper King Salmon River drainage.

Keller and Reiser, who were primarily interested in the area's oil and gas deposits, gained the

data for their study primarily by examining aerial photography and perusing existing reports,

not by extensive field investigation. [70] To those who wanted to mine or drill, their

conclusions were not encouraging. They were able to locate three broad bodies of coalbearing rocks--west of Cape Nukshak, south of Geographic Harbor, and north of Dakavak

Lake--but downplayed the monument's coal mining potential. In a similar vein, they

described the location of several known or purported oil and gas seeps, but concluded that "it

is unlikely that favorable petroleum strata can be reached at practical drilling depths on most

of the structures that could be drilled." Keller and Reiser roughed out their report in 1954. It
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap11.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:10 PM]

was not completed, however, until 1956, and it was not published until 1959. [71]

Another report completed in 1954 dealt more specifically with the monument's hard rock

mineral potential. G. Donald Eberlein, a mineral deposits geologist with the USGS, prepared

a "Statement of Mineral Resource Potential in Katmai National Monument" as part of the

Survey's Katmai Project work. The study was based on existing documents and included no

field work. It noted that the most promising mineral find was the gold deposit near Cape

Kubugakli. Beyond that, however, Eberlein was pessimistic. He concluded that "we cannot

rule out the possibility of ultimately finding additional deposits in the Monument ... although

the likelihood that such deposits occur is not very great." [72]

The advent of the various Northern Consolidated fishing camps, in 1950, and the recognition

that the NPS taking a more active role in managing Katmai's resources dampened the

enthusiasm of those who hoped to open the monument to hard rock mining. During the early

1950s few if any petitioned Bartlett on the subject, and the delegate was also worried that

Congress would be confused if a bill permitting all forms of mining throughout the

monument was being considered at the same time as a bill allowing pumice extraction along

the Shelikof Strait coastline. [73]

In mid-April 1954, however, the pumice extraction bill became law, and by the end of the

month Bartlett had introduced H.R. 8893, a bill which would have permitted mining in the

monument. Nick Zimin, a would-be prospector from South Naknek, requested its submission

before Congress. The bill was referred to the House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee

and was not considered further. [74]

Bartlett, undaunted, submitted an identical bill for Zimin, H.R. 250, at the beginning of the

next Congressional session in January 1955. An Assistant Secretary of the Interior, however,

recommended that the House committee not enact the bill, and the matter was quietly

dropped thereafter. [75] The following year Zimin tried one more time; the never-say-die

prospector told Governor B. F. Heintzleman that if he could get a prospecting permit "I'll

prove that the Katmai area is rich in minerals." Neither Heintzleman nor Bartlett, however,

were in a position to help, and no bill was submitted that year. The only gesture of hope that

Heintzleman could give Zimin was that "some mining companies" had expressed an interest

in investigating known mineral prospects in the monument. Heintzleman, recognizing the

power of Alaska's resource industries, knew that if significant mineral bodies could be

located, mining companies would request an elimination of that particular area from the

monument. But no mining investigations took place. [76] Three years later, a representative

of the Alaska Miners Association brought up the subject once again to Bob Bartlett, who by

now was a U.S. Senator. Bartlett, by now battle-weary, replied that

In all candor, I must say there isn't a chance whatsoever for this. Over the years I

have made a valiant effort in this regard but have been opposed by the NPS and

the conservation groups which have been effective in their opposition. [77]

In 1961, mining played an indirect role in a proposed legislative package pertaining to the

monument. In February of that year, Ray Petersen of Northern Consolidated Airlines visited

Ernest Gruening, one of Alaska's U.S. senators, and convinced him that Katmai needed a

road constructed between Brooks Camp and the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes. Gruening,

in turn, convinced the National Park Service to fund the project. The senator awoke to the

scenic beauties and tourist potential of the Katmai country, and advanced a proposal to

Governor William Egan that Katmai become a national park. Egan, however, rebuffed the

idea because he knew that the creation of a national park would further restrict "industrial

efforts" to promote Katmai's mineral and oil resources. Egan's Commissioner of Natural

Resources, Phil Holdsworth, was trying to convince Egan that the state should advocate
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap11.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:10 PM]

looser restrictions over Katmai mining. Holdsworth, a longtime mining man, agreed with the

position of the Alaska Miners Association, which was proposing that the boundaries of

Katmai be changed so that the heavily mineralized northeast portion could be opened to

exploration. Gruening, in such an atmosphere, could see that his park proposal would gain

little headway, and it was quietly dropped. [78]

In 1965, Alaska's Congressman, Ralph Rivers, made a similar suggestion. As part of an

Alaska parks "wish list," he proposed to NPS Director George Hartzog that a mineral survey

be made of the monument. Rivers, like Gruening four years before, hoped to convert Katmai

into a national park. Neither the idea nor the mineral survey, however, were considered

further. [79]

Those two brief flurries of bureaucratic activity were an exception during a decade of relative

calm. No mining activities nor mineral surveying activities took place in or near the

monument during the remainder of the 1960s, nor were there any legislative attempts during

the period to open the monument to mineral prospecting. [80]

Proposed Offshore Oil Activities, 1960-1980

In 1957, the economy of southcentral Alaska was bolstered by the discovery of oil along the

Swanson River, north of Sterling on the Kenai Peninsula. By 1959 there were high

production wells on the peninsula, and exploration and development also extended to

offshore Cook Inlet, where additional oil and gas fields were brought into production. [81]

The enthusiasm generated by these wells caused industry and state officials to look to the oil

and gas resources in the Katmai area. As early as 1961, Department of Natural Resources

Commissioner Phil Holdsworth noted in a letter to Governor Egan that the monument was

"nearly surrounded now by oil and gas leases and at least parts of the Monument are of

interest to the oil and gas industry." He was plainly frustrated that the monument was offlimits to oil and gas exploration. [82]

Over the next few years oil became an increasingly prominent part of Alaska's economy. By

1965, five oil and eleven gas fields had been developed. Kenai Peninsula, however, remained

the most successful production area. Upper Cook Inlet, west of Anchorage, began oil

production in late 1965 and was considered to have high future growth potential. The lower

Cook Inlet, adjacent to Katmai and also considered a potential petroleum-drilling area, was

virtually untouched. The enthusiasm generated from the Kenai Peninsula discoveries had also

created interest in Bristol Bay and the Gulf of Alaska. By 1966, seismic crews had already

been sent in to check both of these areas. [83]

During the late 1960s, oil production in upper Cook Inlet grew quickly, and for the next few

years about 80 percent of the region's oil came from offshore wells. Some small scale oil

exploration work was also taking place in the lower Bristol Bay area. [84] NPS officials

looked warily at the pace of events going on in the waters east and west of the monument.

They recognized that development along Katmai's shores was not imminent. If commercially

successful wells were found closer to the monument boundaries, however, petroleum

exploration companies were bound to impact on Katmai and its resources. [85]

Oil companies began to send their first field parties into the monument during this period.

During the summer of 1966, crews from Standard Oil and Sinclair Oil took part in a

geological research program; the location of their field work is unknown. A special use

permit, issued by the National Park Service, legitimized their activities. The crews limited

their investigations to field surveys and the taking of samples. In 1972, three oil companies

were given special use permits to conduct geological exploration along the coast of Shelikof
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap11.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:10 PM]

Strait. Oil companies were probably active in the area throughout the late 1960s and early

1970s. [86]

With the Prudhoe Bay oil discoveries and the massive efforts made to build the Trans-Alaska

pipeline, attention during the first half of the 1970s shifted away from the Cook Inlet and

Bristol Bay oil provinces. By 1976, however, lease sales were being proposed for both areas.

The proposed Outer Continental Shelf lease sale for Bristol Bay did not directly impact

Katmai, either the existing monument or the national park which was then under

consideration. It did, however, impact park planning. NPS officials had heard predictions that

King Salmon would grow to a town of 25,000 people if oil development in Bristol Bay was

successful. They recognized that any such developments would have a significant impact on

Katmai's resources. [87]

The proposed oil and gas lease sale in lower Cook Inlet promised more direct impacts to

Katmai (see Chapter 5). The Bureau of Land Management had jurisdiction for land beyond

the three-mile limit, and in July 1976 proposed a lease sale in which the closest drilling

leases would be located just six miles from the monument coastline. As part of the same

project, drilling was also proposed near the south shore of Kamishak Bay, which was an

"area of ecological concern" as outlined in the Final Environmental Statement for the

proposed Katmai National Park. [88] (Two years later, the proposed AEC was added to the

monument; in 1980, it became part of Katmai National Park.)

NPS officials, who responded to the draft EIS on the project in August 1976, had two major

concerns related the lease sale. First, they worried about the effects of development related to

oil extraction, transport, and treatment; specifically, the lease proposal called for the

construction of a refinery facility at Cape Douglas. Second, officials were concerned about

the effects of an oil spill on the shoreline environments of Kamishak Bay and Cape Douglas.

[89]

The BLM responded to comments and issued a final EIS in December 1976. The project EIS

was approved, and Secretary of the Interior Thomas Kleppe scheduled a lease sale for

February 23, 1977. In the meantime, however, Kleppe was replaced by President Carter's

choice for Interior Secretary, Cecil Andrus. Just a few days before the proposed lease sale

date, Andrus postponed the sale until October. [90] The postponement gave both developers

and protection advocates time to work. In August 1977, Secretary of Commerce Juanita

Kreps asked the various federal land managers to identify potential marine sanctuaries "in

areas where leasing appears imminent." Russ Dickenson, who was then directing the NPS's

Pacific Northwest Regional Office, recommended a marine sanctuary for the waters adjacent

to Katmai National Monument. Dickenson's suggestion was directed to officials at the

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, who managed marine sanctuaries under

the 1972 Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act. On October 27, 1977, the

postponed lease sale finally took place. Because of Dickenson's action, however, the tracts

located closest to Katmai were removed from the sale. [91]

The mid-1970s also brought a revival of interest in the monument as a site for geological

explorations. The NPS issued special use permits to Exxon Corporation and Amoco

Corporation in 1977 "to conduct bedrock outcropping investigations along the Shelikof Strait

coastline." The following year Chevron Corporation and Mobil Corporation were issued

special use permits for the same purpose. In 1980 Amoco, Marathon Oil and Chevron were

issued special use permits. [92]

Despite all the bureaucratic activity created by, and in response to, the proposed lease sales,

no significant onshore or offshore developments have taken place as a result. In Bristol Bay,

governmental agencies and oil companies have continued to show an interest in drilling. But
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap11.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:10 PM]

opposition to drilling, primarily by fishermen, has prevented large-scale development, and the

population of either Naknek and King Salmon has never risen to more than one thousand

persons. In Lower Cook Inlet, the lease sale proposed in 1976 did not take place. The marine

sanctuary proposed in 1977 was never implemented, either. [93] Drilling has taken place, at

times with great commercial success, in upper Cook Inlet. In lower Cook Inlet, however, no

serious attempts have been made to implement an oil lease sale since the late 1970s.

Mining and the Alaska Lands Act

The passage of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, in December 1971, set in motion a

series of events which, in December 1980, resulted in the passage of the Alaska National

Interest Lands Conservation Act. As noted in Chapter 5, a major activity which took place

during that nine year period was the preparation of a large number of plans and studies. These

documents helped determine which Alaskan areas would be added to the National Park

System and which regulations would govern the uses of those newly-added lands.

From the beginning, Katmai was part of the planning process. One portion of that process, as

it applied to Katmai, was the identification of mineralized areas within the existing

monument, a similar identification process in areas being considered for additions to the

monument, and the identification of areas where high potential mineralization was likely to

occur.

The minerals identification process had actually begun back in 1969, when Bailey Breedlove,

a park planner working in the Alaska Field Office, assembled an inventory of mineralized

areas in and around the monument. [94] Breedlove's compilation revealed that there had been

no active mining in the monument since the pumice operations of the 1950s, and that there

had been never been a commercial placer or lode mine within the monument's boundaries.

He knew that there was no standard system by which Katmai (or other Alaska) mining claims

had been recorded, so there was no way to ensure that all active claims had not been

accounted for. Another NPS planner, however, found out that the last proofs of labor for a

Katmai claim in one of the three nearby recording districts had been recorded in 1919. Based

upon the long period in which Katmai's minerals had lain fallow, the planner felt confident in

concluding that no valid mining claims existed within the monument. [95]

The draft master plan was released in November 1971. Before the master plan became final,

officials commenced a monument wilderness study. The designation of wilderness for

Katmai promised to have no real impact on mining, because prospecting and mineral entry

had always been prohibited. Designation would, however, legislatively augment the existing

preclusions under Presidential proclamations. The NPS was also quick to point out that

"Should it be in the national interest, Congress could disestablish any part or all of the

wilderness and the Monument and open the lands to mineral investigation and development."

[96] Congress, however, had seldom if ever taken such an action before, and those who

coveted Katmai's mineral resources knew that wilderness designation would effectively

prevent their commercial development.

As noted in Chapter 5, the draft wilderness proposal, released in July 1972, called for over 90

percent of the monument to be included in the National Wilderness Preservation System. In

response to the draft, the NPS received a barrage of criticism from development-oriented

agencies and individuals. Both the USGS and the U.S. Bureau of Mines, for example, noted

that no detailed geological studies had been done since the mid-1950s, that the most recent

study had not been based on field exploration, and that no detailed mineral exploration had

taken place during the last half century. The two agency heads were horrified with the NPS's

conclusion that no mineral deposits occurred in the monument, because little was known of
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap11.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:10 PM]

their extent. To make up for the lack of data, the two agency heads urged the completion of a

full-scale, monument-wide mineral survey, which would use methods far more sophisticated

than had been employed by the early prospectors and geologists. Only after such a survey,

which would also include a determination of the value of geothermal resources, could the

monument's wilderness resource be safely decided. [97]

In reply to those and similar criticism, NPS officials stubbornly noted that the 1964

Wilderness Act, under whose provisions the Katmai wilderness study was being written, did

not require the agency to conduct a mineral survey. As to geothermal resources, the agency

conceded that they might well be excellent, but the mandate set forth in the original (1918)

proclamation which established the monument did not permit the development of such

resources. The Park Service held firm. Six years later, when ANILCA was signed into law by

President Carter, almost all of the acreage included in the 1974 document became designated

as part of the National Wilderness Preservation System. [98]

Less than a year after given an opportunity to comment on the Katmai National Monument

wilderness plan, agencies and individuals were asked to give their opinions regarding a

proposed 4,660,000-acre Katmai National Park. The boundaries of the park were drawn, in

part, to avoid highly mineralized areas. Those who were familiar with Katmai's known

mineral resources, however, were quick to recognize that the proposed park included several

sites near the existing monument boundary, including the Kubugakli gold placers and the gas

seeps in the Kejulik River drainage. North of the monument, the expanded park would

include the various cinnabar deposits along Gorge Creek and Hammersly's gold claims along

American Creek.

In addition, the proposed Katmai National Park was to include several new groups of mineral

claims, all of which were north of the existing monument boundary. Mineral claims in the

area could legally be established prior to August 1971, and prior to that deadline, four copper

and gold claims had been located along the south shore of Kulik Lake and six others were

clustered in the upper Strike Creek drainage. A site containing an unknown mineral was also

located in the upper Douglas River drainage, but no claim had been made there. In one of the

NPS's three proposed "areas of environmental concern," there was also a series of unpatented

lode claims, known collectively as the Pfaff claim, which were located on 1800 acres of land

northeast of Battle Lake. None of the four mineral areas within the proposed park were

patented. [99]

In addition to the mineral claims, the proposed park addition contained 224 current oil and

gas leases and one current oil and gas lease application, all located north of the existing

monument. (Many other oil and gas leases had been applied for in the 1920s, 1950s, and

1960s. All had been terminated or cancelled.) The agency noted that geologists had mapped

structures favorable to the production of oil within the proposal area. Based on the

information in Keller and Reiser's study, however, the NPS felt that it was "unlikely that

practical drilling operations in many areas will be able to reach structural and stratigraphic

traps that have the potential for containing oil." [100]

When asked for their comments, in April 1974, the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S.

Bureau of Mines did not like the idea of an expanded Katmai National Park any more than

they liked most of the existing monument being converted to wilderness. They again noted

the "high grade" deposits near Kulik Lake and Battle Lake, they noted the high geothermal

properties of the area, and continued to stress the high (though unproven) mineral potential of

various geological structures in the area. The Alaska Oil and Gas Association, as expected,

noted that the proposed park "appears to us to be a premature course of action and would not

be in the best interest of the nation's citizens." The State of Alaska, Exxon, the American

Society of Civil Engineers, and other organizations and individuals made similar comments.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap11.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:10 PM]

But NPS officials were unmoved by such arguments, and the Final Environmental Statement

continued to nominate for park status each of the known mineral potential areas that had been

proposed in the draft document. [101]

In addition to those who responded with written comments, Ernest Pfaff spoke directly to

NPS officials of the need to keep a portion of the proposed northern addition open to mining.

Pfaff, the Naknek prospector who also held claims northeast of Battle Lake, told NPS staff

that he had been prospecting in the area, particularly in the Kulik Lake drainage, ever since

1950. He had found five or six mineral deposits in the drainage during that time, but had

recorded none of them. In the fall of 1972, he located what appeared to be a paying prospect

north of the upper end of Kulik Lake, but because of the land freeze, he was unable to stake a

claim. [102]

Mining at Katmai Since 1978

By the time President Carter had signed the proclamation enlarging Katmai National

Monument, in December 1978, the boundaries which had been proposed in 1973-74 had

been enlarged in some areas and reduced in others. Each of the mineralized areas noted

above were included in the newly-created portions of the monument. The practical effect of

the park's creation was to prevent any new prospecting or oil exploration to take place,

although the various unpatented mineral claims could legally operate in accordance with the

various state, BLM, and NPS regulations.

Soon after the Katmai enlargement, NPS personnel tried to ascertain the number of mining

claims in the newly-expanded area. Their search revealed a total of eight claims--four lode

and four placer--in three claim groups. They included four placer claims in the Sugarloaf

Association group, the Dog #5 lode claim, and three lode claims which comprised the Pfaff

claim group. None of the unpatented claims had records of previous mineral production.

Two of the claim groups were declared null and void within a few years of the NPS's

acquisition of the area. The Sugarloaf Association gold claims were located a few miles north

of Sugarloaf Mountain, on a unnamed tributary to the Alagnak River. Richard Jensen, the

claimant, filed for the claim on December 29, 1978, shortly after Carter's proclamation

expanded the monument boundaries. The property, however, had been closed to mineral

entry on March 15, 1972. Jensen had no legal ground upon which to stand upon, and on May

18, 1983 the BLM ruled that his claim was null and void. [103]

The second claim was equally spurious. On October 1, 1979, Scott Douglas filed for the Dog

#5 lode claim, which was located near the Knife Creek Glaciers on the slopes of Mount

Katmai. That area had been included within Katmai National Monument in 1918, and had

been closed to mineral entry since that time. The BLM had no choice but to declare his claim

null and void, which it did on May 9, 1982. [104]

After May 1983, the Pfaff claim was Katmai's only active mining claim group. Ernest Pfaff

discovered the lode, located four miles east of Battle Lake camp, in 1964. The mineralized

vein, which straddles the border of the park and preserve, consisted primarily of gold- and

chalcopyrite-bearing quartz, and also contained malachite, pyrite, and an unidentified silversulphosalt mineral. An undetermined about of ore was shipped during the next several years.

[105]

No production took place at the claim during the 1970s. In 1978 the claim's ownership was

transferred to the National Park Service. Each year thereafter Pfaff, in accordance with

regulations, submitted an Affidavit of Annual Labor to the NPS and either an Evidence of
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 11)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap11.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:10 PM]

Assessment or a Notice of Intent to Hold to the BLM. These regulations did not require him

to carry on an active mining operation, and during the early 1980s the mine continued to lay

idle. In July 1984, Pfaff transferred his interest in the claims to Hawley Resource Properties,

owned by Charles Hawley. In 1985, the new claimants announced that they "may soon

propose to reopen" operations at the site. As a result, the NPS sponsored a survey of the fish

species, aquatic insect populations, and water resources of the area surrounding the mine. But

the new claimant made no further moves to develop its claim. In 1988, the claimant let its

interest in the claim lapse, and on May 5, 1989, the Bureau of Land Management declared

the claim null and void. [106]

Sporadic oil exploration activity has also taken place in recent years. As noted above, various

oil exploration companies had obtained special use permits to conduct geophysical

exploration during the 1960s and 1970s in order to test for economically recoverable

petroleum in Cook Inlet and Shelikof Strait. That activity has continued, on an intermittent

basis, to the present. In 1982, Amoco and Chevron received special use permits; the

following year, Arco Alaska obtained a permit. Arco has remained an active exploration

company in recent years. In 1991, they established ship-based camps in Kukak Bay and

Geographic Harbor and proceeded from there to various parts of the Shelikof Strait coastline;

the following year, they returned to the same two spots for further explorations. [107]

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

adhi/chap11.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 12)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap12.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:14 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

PART I: KATMAI NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE

Chapter 12:

Other Resource Management Issues

Scientists in a broad variety of disciplines have been carrying on research at Katmai for

decades. In a broad sense, the first researchers were the various nineteenth century travelers

who made casual notes on the geological and biological composition of the surrounding

countryside. In recent years, those who have used Katmai for their studies have included

university students and faculty, state and federal agency personnel, geological and oil industry

representatives, and scientists under the sponsorship of private nonprofit organizations. All who

have used Katmai for their research have made important contributions; equally important, the

NPS has incorporated (or attempted to incorporate) the results of that research to better manage

the unit. This chapter will describe only the most extensive Katmai projects, or those which

have required significant involvement by NPS staff. The management ramifications which

followed those projects have also been described.

Early Research Efforts

Although a number of travelers who passed through the Katmai country in the nineteenth and

early twentieth centuries described the area in general terms, the first scientists to study areas

within the present-day park did so as part of governmental expeditions intent on describing the

economic potential of area minerals (see Chapter 11). Both the Coast Survey and the

Smithsonian Institution investigated reports of petroleum in the area as early as the 1860s, and

in 1895 George F. Becker and William Healey Dall, representing the U.S. Geological Survey,

searched for gold and coal. In 1904, George C. Martin, T. W. Stanton, and R. W. Stone

searched the Katmai coastline for its coal and petroleum possibilities. [1]

The 1912 eruption increased scientific interest in the area. Geologist George Martin, who

rushed to the area that summer, did not write a scientific article about his trip; neither did

botanist Robert Griggs, who ventured into the area in 1915. The two expeditions were sponsored

by the National Geographic Society. Both leaders limited their travel to the Shelikof Strait

coastline; both tried but failed to reach the center of the recent volcanic activity. [2]

In 1916, however, Griggs's discovery of the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes brought forth the

first purely scientific writings to emanate from observations made at Katmai. No academic

colleagues accompanied Griggs on his 1916 trip. The following year, however, he organized an

expedition which included a topographer, a zoologist, a chemist, and two assistant botanists.

The topographer, Charles F. Maynard, created an excellent contour map of the newlydiscovered area; the remaining expedition members contributed articles and monographs to the

scientific literature. Additional parties, each sponsored by the National Geographic Society,

returned to Katmai in 1918 and 1919, and the scientists among them made additional

contributions to geology, volcanology, biology, and other subjects. [3]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 12)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap12.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:14 PM]

Once the flurry of interest generated by the various National Geographic Society expeditions

had died down, the new monument was largely ignored by both agency managers and scientists

for the next twenty years. As noted in Chapter 3, the NPS became increasingly interested in

Katmai during the late 1930s, but only dispatched a single employee to the area for a brief trip.

NPS officials were particularly interested in the level of volcanic activity in the Valley of Ten

Thousand Smokes. [4] Their interest, in large part, was politically based; if the dramatic

fumarolic activity seen during the NGS expeditions had died away, the monument would have

lost one of the major reasons for its existence. (Development advocates felt that Katmai, created

to be a second Yellowstone, was worthless if it had no fumaroles; NPS officials countered that

the devastated volcanic landscape and the area's spectacular wildlife demanded the area's

continued management as a national monument.)

In 1939, in answer to an inquiry about the monument's wildlife, NPS officials could muster up

only a one-paragraph summary. Recognizing its collective ignorance, the agency dispatched

two men, biologist Victor Cahalane and Mount McKinley Superintendent Frank Been, to

Katmai the following summer. [5] Their purpose was to make a general reconnaissance and to

make a rough inventory the area's biological diversity. Cahalane gained enough information that

summer that he wrote an article on the monument's bird species; in July 1944 it was published

in the Auk, the quarterly journal of the American Ornithological Union. [6]

The Katmai Project

In 1950, Northern Consolidated Airlines established its various Katmai fishing camps, the NPS

detailed its first summer ranger, and the agency's Region Four office initiated the Alaska

Recreation Survey. The ARS, which brought George Collins and other NPS staff to the

monument, was designed to stimulate and plan Katmai visitation.

Both Collins and the resident rangers quickly learned that monument land-use planning

required a level of biological knowledge far greater than what had been ascertained thus far. In

1951, a report noted that

the principal current problem [at Katmai] is to make a reasonably accurate

inventory of the biological resources.... Wolves appear to be more numerous in this

area than in all other parks combined, which makes a wolf-moose-caribou study

imperative.... A biologist should spend at least 3 or 4 months annually in Katmai

National Monument for the next 3 or 4 years to determine the wildlife protection

and management needs. [7]

The summer rangers were urged to accumulate as much wildlife observational data as possible

consistent with their other duties. Their lack of access to areas outside of Brooks Camp,

however, severely limited their scope of work.

In order to grapple with these and other research gaps, and to show monument detractors that

the monument's resources were of national significance, the agency's Washington office

designed the Katmai Project, a broad-scale scientific study effort. Planning for the project took

place in late 1952. The NPS knew the subject areas in which research was needed. Lacking

funds, however, they contacted a number of agencies and universities in hopes that a

cooperative arrangement could be worked out. [8] In early 1953, the NPS formally proposed the

project to the Office of Naval Research. (The agency noted that the information was needed

"both in the interest of science and to obtain information of military importance.") The ONR

approved the proposal shortly thereafter, and by June a team of seventeen scientists was on its

way to Katmai. [9]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 12)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap12.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:14 PM]

Many agencies and universities contributed to the project. Scientists involved hailed from Johns

Hopkins University, the University of California Berkeley, University of Connecticut,

University of Oregon, University of Wisconsin, U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Public Health

Service, the National Park Service, and the Army's Office of the Quartermaster General. In

addition, the Army, Navy, and Air Force supplied equipment and logistical support. [10]

Geology was the largest single subject area scrutinized by the scientific team during the Katmai

Project. Ten of the seventeen team members were geologists, volcanologists, or

geomorphologists. Remaining members consisted of a geographer, a biologist, a mammalogist

and parasitologist, an entomologist, and three archeologists. Robert S. Luntey, a recreation

planner from NPS's Region Four office, served as project leader; he set up an office in the

Naknek Air Force auxiliary base at King Salmon and oversaw operations from there. [11]

The team members arrived in the monument on June 19, and by July 4 they had set up four field

camps: near the head of Knife Creek, near the mouth of the Savonoski River, in the abandoned

clam cannery on Kukak Bay, and two miles west of Brooks Camp. Additional small spike

camps were made as the season progressed. Most members were gone from Katmai by midSeptember. Luntey, however, stayed on until October 7. [12]

The project, as originally outlined, called for an investigations to take place in six subject areas.

The U.S. Geological Society participated so avidly, however, that ten papers--four of them

dealing with geology, geomorphology, and volcanism--emerged from the season's work. [13]

All were capable efforts. One of the most surprising conclusions that emerged from the season's

research was that C. N. Fenner's thirty-year-old theory on how the eruption had taken place was

in error. Fenner had postulated that during the eruption the active rhyolite magma had dissolved

the old andesite core of Mount Katmai. Fenner's theory was considered controversial even

during the 1920s, but not until the 1950s were research funds available to test it. [14] Dr.

Garniss H. Curtis of the University of California, the geologist chosen to examine Fenner's

ideas in the field, emerged from the 1953 field season with sufficient evidence to cast doubt on

Fenner's conclusions. He was anxious to return to the field and elaborate on an alternative

hypothesis. [15]

Two other papers which incited popular interest dealt with current volcanic activity in the

monument. During 1953 both Mount Spurr and Mount Trident had erupted. Mount Spurr,

located north of Katmai, blanketed Anchorage with a quarter inch of ash and alarmed citizens

throughout the territory. Mount Trident, located in the monument, erupted a half mile of lava; it

then steamed for the next six months. Six other volcanoes in the monument also steamed with

varying degrees of intensity during the summer of 1953. The scientific papers were valuable to

both the general public and NPS officials in that they described and analyzed each volcanic

event and placed the recent volcanic activity within a historical context. [16]

Once the 1953 field season was complete, the NPS began preparing for another year of field

work. The Office of Naval Research grant had lapsed, but the NPS hoped that the momentum

gained from the first year's work would induce additional sponsorship funds. As late as March

1954, NPS Director Conrad Wirth was still unsure as to how a second year of work would be

funded. ONR and other governmental agencies, however, finally released the funds which

allowed the summer's research to take place. [17]

The summer of 1954 witnessed a continuation of the previous summer's studies of volcanic and

seismic forces, plant and animal ecology, archeology, and ethnology. Two additional studies

began that summer; one dealt with an investigation of the monument's sedimentary rocks, the

other a survey of Katmai's fresh water fishing resources. Each of the governmental agencies

which had been active the previous year continued their involvement; in addition, the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 12)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap12.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:14 PM]

Department of Agriculture and the Fish and Wildlife Service joined in. Participating universities

included the University of California and the University of Alaska. [18]

Two particularly notable studies emerged from the 1954 investigations. Dr. Curtis of the

University of California, who had emerged from the 1953 season convinced that C. N. Fenner's

theory relating to the 1912 eruption was in error, returned to the field with graduate student

Jack Sheehan. The two measured the thickness of the ashfall around Mount Katmai and

discovered it to be thickest around Novarupta, a volcanic plug six miles to the west. Additional

evidence convinced Curtis that a column of molten andesite lying in the conduit beneath Katmai

suddenly found access through a newly created fissure at Novarupta. His startling conclusion

was that Novarupta, not Mount Katmai, was the location of the primary 1912 eruption. [19]

A less spectacular study was performed by Victor Cahalane, who finished up his third year of

Katmai field work in September 1954. Cahalane, who was assisted in his final season by

George B. Schaller, a University of Alaska graduate student, inventoried and described a wide

variety of the monument's birds, mammals, and vegetation. He made additional notes on the

monument's ecological zones, the rate of vegetation regrowth in the Valley of Ten Thousand

Smokes, and similar topics. Cahalane's study, which was not published until 1959, was the only

NPS-sponsored study to emerge from the Katmai Project. [20]

With the exception of Bureau of Commercial Fisheries studies, little research took place at the

monument for almost a decade following the Katmai Project. [21] In 1962, however, research

began anew when the University of Alaska's Geophysical and Marine Institute began

investigating earthquake activity in the monument. That work, which also included students

from Dartmouth University, Syracuse University, and Columbia University, continued for the

next four years. [22]

Astronauts in the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes

In 1965, the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes became the site of an entirely different research

effort. Ten astronauts from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Manned

Spacecraft Center (MSC), in Houston, flew into King Salmon Air Force Base on June 27 and

spent the next week in the monument. The astronauts--Edwin E. ("Buzz") Aldrin, William

Anders, Charles Bassett, Alan Bean, Eugene Cernan, Roger Chaffee, Walter Cunningham,

Russell Schweickart, David Scott, and Clifton Williams--were accompanied by geologists from

the U.S. Geological Survey's Division of Astrogeology, located in Flagstaff, Arizona. [23]

The astronauts had all been chosen as candidates for future moon missions. As such, they were

involved in a long-term training regimen which included trips to the Hawaii's geological

landscape, Iceland's lava flows, the jungles of Panama, and the deserts of Nevada. They had

come to Katmai because NASA scientists had concluded that the fine-ground red pumice stone

that covered the floor of the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes was similar in texture to that

which might be found on the moon. In addition, the relatively recent date in which the volcanic

landscape had been created made it similar to that of the lunar surface. [24]

The party, which numbered 28 in all, spent their evenings at Brooks Camp, but by day they flew

by helicopter into the volcanic area, where the geologists led the astronauts on hikes and

explained the surrounding landscape features to them. [25]

The following year MSC sent an additional party of astronauts to train in the Valley of Ten

Thousand Smokes. A total of 24 spent the week of August 22 to August 26 in the monument;

the party included astronauts John Bull, Edward Gibson, Edward Givens, Bruce McCandless,

Edgar Mitchell, Stewart Roosa, Harrison Schmitt, and Paul Weitz. They were again
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 12)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap12.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:14 PM]

accompanied by USGS geologists. Their activities were much the same as those of the 1965

group. [26]

The Geophysical Institute's Work at Baked Mountain

The same year in which NASA first ventured out to the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes,

scientists from the University of Alaska prepared to do the same. The university, it will be

recalled, had begun earthquake research at the monument in 1962, and during the winter of

1964-65 its Geophysical Institute prepared to increase its level of research at the monument. Dr.

Robert Forbes, a member of the Institute staff, received a National Science Foundation grant for

research on the petrology and geochemistry of Alaskan volcanic rocks. As part of that grant,

Forbes hoped to study the lavas of Mount Trident, which had erupted just twelve years before.

His colleague, Dr. Eduard Berg, had received an NSF grant on seismic and volcanic

investigations in the monument. The two planned to continue the Institute's ongoing earthquake

investigations.

The Institute contacted the NPS about the project, and in February 1965 Director Hartzog

approved its plans. The stepped-up program would require the attention of up to four scientists

at a time. To house them, the Institute planned to build a "small temporary ... research station

near [Mount] Trident." It also planned to install seismographs near Brooks Lake and elsewhere

in the monument. [27] By April, however, the Institute's plans had changed. It requested

permission from the NPS to build a field base camp just south of Baked Mountain, several

miles west of its originally selected site. That camp was to include an 8' x 20' prefabricated

plywood residence and workroom, and a 7' x 10' generator hut. The Institute also planned to

install three seismometers, one each in the Lethe, Angle, and Ikagluik creek drainages. [28]

That summer, it installed its base camp in the area it had indicated. It installed only two

seismometers, however. One was located just north of Baked Mountain, the other just south of

the confluence of the Savonoski and Grosvenor rivers. [29]

The Geophysical Institute obtained a five-year permit from the NPS in April 1965, and research

began at soon as the buildings and equipment could be installed. For the next few years a oneor two-person crew flew by helicopter out to the Baked Mountain station in June. The station, at

least in its first years of operation, remained active throughout the summer. [30] During the

mid-1970s, the site was used as the base camp for a University of Alaska researcher who was

charting the historical changes in the level of the lake in the Katmai caldera and recent changes

in the Knife Creek glacier. After 1977, however, the site was abandoned and the institute let its

special use permit lapse. The site may also have been used as a base camp by the University of

California Berkeley and the USGS, who teamed up on a petrology and geochemical study of the

1912 ash flow. They did not, however, occupy the cabin to the exclusion of recreational

visitors. The project ran from 1976 to 1982. [31]

The NPS exerted little management authority over the Institute's operations in the monument.

The agency commenced a wilderness study in the late 1960s, and as part of that study created a

nine-acre enclave surrounding the Baked Mountain cabin. Later, however, it eliminated the

enclave, because it worried that a designated non-wilderness zone would invite further

developments that would be incompatible with the overall wilderness setting. [32] The only

problem the agency had with the facility dealt with its unkempt appearance. A 1969 NPS

planning study noted that the site needed policing, and recommended that the Service persuade

the University to "remove debris and camouflage the site and structures to blend more

harmoniously into the landscape." [33]

Few if any visitors hiked in the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes prior to the completion of the

Valley Road. Since then, however, the number of hikers has slowly increased. One of the most
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 12)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap12.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:14 PM]

popular Valley hikes is an unmarked (though easily visible) route from Three Forks Overlook to

Novarupta, and one reason for its popularity has been the shelter afforded at the Baked

Mountain cabin. [34]

When the University abandoned the cabin it left much of its equipment at the site. In 1984, the

NPS inventoried the accumulated refuse. It made plans to haul it out, but did not do so. During

the summer of 1990, personnel from the Novarupta drilling project (see below) rehabilitated the

site. They installed new roofs on three buildings and tore down a partially collapsed metal

building; dug a new outhouse pit, then moved and re-anchored the existing outhouse; did some

interior work in the main cabin; and removed fourteen helicopter loads of accumulated debris.

[35]

Alaska Lands Act Biological Studies

Once Victor Cahalane completed his work in connection with the 1953-54 Katmai Project, little

NPS-sponsored research pertaining to the monument's biological resources was done for the

almost twenty years. Some work, however, was accomplished. Fred Dean, of the University of

Alaska, conducted bear research from 1967 through 1969. Then, from 1969 to 1971, NPS

biologist Richard Prasil conducted several sea mammal surveys along the Katmai coast. [36]

And throughout the period, the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries continued to gather data on the

monument fishery.

The passage of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, in December 1971, was indirectly

responsible for a boost in research at the monument. As noted in Chapter 5, it set into motion a

series of planning studies. One of the most detailed of those studies was a Department of the

Interior report which recommended that Katmai National Monument become a 4,453,000-acre

national park.

In order to justify the expansion of the monument's boundaries, the agency undertook a massive

series of studies evaluating the resources of proposed park areas. In the fifty-odd years in

Alaska prior to ANCSA, the NPS had produced fewer than 50 reports on Alaska. Between 1972

and 1978, however, the agency or its contractors completed more than 175 reports. [37] The

large majority of the newly-created reports dealt with proposed areas that were not adjacent to

existing NPS units. The Katmai area, however, was better known than many other areas, and

offered fewer resource conflicts. In comparison with other proposed park areas, therefore,

relatively little research was performed in the Katmai area during the period leading up to the

Alaska Lands Act.

What was done, however, was significant. The first such study was undertaken by Dr. John

Dennis, an NPS biologist from the Alaska State Office in Anchorage. Dennis began with a

photographic survey of vegetation zones, then spent the next two years identifying plants and

laying out study plots. Those plots were in the tundra area west of the monument as well as in

the western portion of the monument itself. [38] Dennis was transferred away from Alaska

midway through his study and was thus unable to complete it. Some of the work he began,

however, was completed by a biological study team; during the 1976 field season, it analyzed

the ecosystems of the lowland tundra vegetation zone located in the Big Creek and King

Salmon River drainages. [39] Dennis felt strongly that the expanded park should include a

significant portion of the western tundra, and largely because of his efforts a large portion of it

was included in the Department of the Interior recommendations in 1973 and 1974. As noted in

Chapter 5, however, most of the area he recommended was eliminated in 1977 due to

opposition from local residents. [40]

Park planners knew that the question of subsistence would have to be addressed in any Alaska
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 12)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap12.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:14 PM]

lands legislation that would be written. Because planners knew little about the subsistence

patterns of Katmai-area residents, they contracted with Steven Behnke, who visited six local

communities in early 1977 and inquired into the residents' use of local plants and animals. His

report, issued in October 1978, showed that residents of seven local communities--Levelock,

Igiugig, Kakhonak, Naknek, South Naknek, King Salmon, and Egegik--utilized the area

surrounding the existing monument for their subsistence needs. Subsistence uses by one or more

of the seven communities took place adjacent to the monument's western and southwestern

boundaries; north of the existing boundaries was a significant area not utilized by residents of

any of the local villages. Residents used the area for collecting firewood, picking berries,

fishing, trapping, and for hunting small and large game. [41]

Some excellent research also took place on the area's eagle population. Will Troyer, another

Anchorage-based NPS biologist, commenced his studies in 1974. Using a low-flying float

plane, Troyer flew over the monument and the area included within the proposed park in search

of active eagle nests. He repeated his survey almost every year until 1981. [42]

Other governmental entities stepped up their research efforts during the period, even though the

resulting research had little bearing on upcoming legislation. The University of Alaska

Geophysical Institute, for instance, sponsored three projects. In 1977, it sponsored the

construction of two transponder sites in the Cape Douglas area in order to support outer

continental shelf studies. (The Lower Cook Inlet Oil Lease Sale, as noted in Chapter 11, had

been proposed just a year earlier.) In addition, the Institute and the USGS's National Center for

Earthquake Research operated a short period seismic station in order to identify earthquake

clusters and volcanic centers within the monument. The OCS work continued until 1978; the

earthquake and volcano studies lasted two years longer. [43]

Several other government agencies undertook Katmai-based research projects during the 1970s.

The Alaska Department of Fish and Game, as well as the National Park Service, made several

surveys of the monument's moose population. [44] The National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration was also active during the decade. It performed hydrographic and mapping

surveys along the Shelikof Strait coastline during the early 1970s, and studied the Lower Cook

Inlet's surface currents late in the decade. In conjunction with the latter project, the agency

planned to establish a field camp in the monument, probably in the Cape Douglas area. [45]

Resource Management Since 1980

Before the 1970s, little thought had gone into planning the type of research that should take

place at Katmai. Because it was a national monument, its research values were not as highly

recognized as those at the national parks. As a result, the NPS had sponsored relatively few

projects. After the passage of the Alaska Lands Act and the creation of Katmai National Park

and Preserve, however, its research values were more highly emphasized.

Those values had begun during the 1970s. In 1975, a biologist named Ralph Root had been

assigned as the keyman for the Katmai and Aniakchak proposal areas, and in June 1976 he

created a prioritized list of resource study needs. [46] Soon after the passage of ANILCA, park

staff continued Root's idea when they assembled the first Katmai Resources Management Plan.

(The idea of an RMP had been broached as early as 1970, but had been ignored during the

hectic period leading up to the Alaska Lands Act.) The draft RMP was completed in April 1982.

Among its other attributes, it described sixteen proposed natural resource projects and the

recommended priority for each. [47]

In September 1982, Katherine Jope began work as Katmai's first Resource Management

Specialist. One of her first accomplishments was the preparation of a wildlife monitoring plan.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 12)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap12.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:14 PM]

Based on that plan, which was an outgrowth of Will Troyer's research, she devoted time during

each of the next five years toward monitoring the park's bear and eagle populations. Jope also

created species checklists for the park's plants, birds, and fish, and added significantly to the

park herbarium. [48]

Jope also updated the park's resource management plan. The RMP was first revised in April

1983. Later revisions were submitted to the regional director in January 1985 and April 1987.

(The regional director, however, did not sign either document.) The RMPs, which grew larger

and more complex with each passing revision, reflected the park's changing management needs

and research accomplishments. [49]

Research in recent years has covered a broad array of subject areas. Several projects, for

instance, have investigated the park's air and water resources. The Arctic Environmental

Information and Data Center, for instance, had completed a study of Naknek Lake's aquatic

system back in 1978, and in 1985 and 1986 the University of California staff sponsored an acid

rain monitoring project. In 1990, the NPS and the University of Alaska initiated a two-year

water quality baseline study, and an air quality particulate sampling study soon followed. [50]

Most recent biological research has involved the monitoring of wildlife populations. Most

research has involved the monitoring of the most visible animal species: moose, caribou, seals

and sea lions, and eagles, swans, and other bird life. [51] Other research efforts, however, have

taken place. In 1986 both a lichen and spruce beetle survey were completed. In the early 1990s

four vegetation studies were undertaken, and in 1992 a count was made of the park's snowshoe

hare population. Large animal monitoring was undertaken by the state Department of Fish and

Game. A majority of the other biological work, however, was completed or sponsored by the

NPS. [52]

Geological research has also taken place in recent years. The most well-publicized research

effort has been the Novarupta drilling project, discussed below. In addition, the University's

Geophysical Institute established a new short-period seismic station at Cape Douglas in August

1981. That station was taken over by the newly-formed Alaska Volcano Observatory (AVO) in

1988. Still operating, it is the only AVO-operated seismic station in the park. [53] In addition,

the USGS conducted field work in the park--specifically in lands within the Mount Katmai and

Iliamna topographic quadrangles--from 1984 through 1986 as part of the Alaska Mineral

Resource Assessment Program (AMRAP). Finally, the USGS has recently established its own

seismic network. It was established in 1987 with twelve seismic stations. The number of stations

has changed each year since then. In 1993, sixteen stations were being used to collect project

data. [54]

A newly revised resource management plan was due to be issued in 1989. But because of the

Exxon Valdez oil spill, the resource management planning process was delayed. In the spring of

1991, however, work finally began on planning a revision to the 1987 plan, and by May 1992 a

draft RMP had been submitted to the regional director. It was then made available for public

comment. The final RMP was signed by Superintendent Bill Pierce and Regional Director John

M. Morehead in August 1994.

Novarupta Drilling Project

In recent years, scientists and NPS officials have carried on many discussions over a proposed

Katmai research project. That project involves the drilling of three deep holes into the Valley of

Ten Thousand Smokes, two of them located near Novarupta Volcano. [55] The goal of the

volcanological project was to test a number of theories concerning magma cooling and

mineralization in a volcanic area. Scientists chose Novarupta because their research objectives
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 12)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap12.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:14 PM]

required a volcanic site of recent eruptive activity with a relatively simple geologic structure,

and Novarupta is probably the only known location where a vent of a large explosive eruption

is preserved without the collapse of its structure. Scientists, by and large, were enthusiastic

about the project. NPS officials, however, were more guarded, and they openly worried about

the effect that drilling would have on Katmai's expansive wilderness acreage. The project, they

knew, would demand helicopter-supported base camps in the fragile Ukak River valley

ecosystem; the withdrawal of three million gallons of water from a nearby lake; and the

construction of a pipeline, several miles long and maintained by off-road vehicles, to transport

the withdrawn water. [56]

The NPS first heard about the project in September 1985, when Dr. John C. Eichelber-ger, a

geochemist at Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, briefed agency officials in

Anchorage. Their initial conference was followed by a series of meetings in mid-October. For

the next two years the NPS was aware of little project activity; the scientific consortium, during

that period, busied themselves with the development of a study plan. [57]

By 1987, those who advocated deep drilling as a geological research method had formed an

organization called Deep Observation and Sampling of the Earth's Continental Crust

(DOSECC), which was supported in part by the National Science Foundation. Several meetings

were held that year between DOSECC, USGS, and NPS representatives. At a December 15

meeting, NPS Regional Director Boyd Evison noted that he was, in general, supportive of

legitimate research. He indicated that Katmai's enabling legislation allowed some research

opportunities. He further stated that the NPS might support the project if certain safeguards

could be assured. He cautioned, however, that because most of Katmai was in the National

Wilderness Preservation System, Congressional action would probably be necessary before the

project could proceed. [58]

The following year, the group sponsoring Katmai drilling became known as the Interagency

Coordinating Group (ICG) of the U.S. Continental Scientific Drilling Program. The ICG, an ad

hoc governmental group, included the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy

(the main funding agency), and USGS. Non-governmental participants included Sandia National

Laboratories, Livermore National Laboratory, Stanford University, and the Universities of

Alaska and New Mexico. The NPS, during this period, remained willing to consider the project.

It wondered, however, whether there were locations outside the National Park System where

drilling might be conducted without the detrimental environmental impact. The agency,

therefore, requested the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to seek alternative sites for the

ICG research project. [59]

Without waiting for word from NAS personnel, project scientists began field investigations. A

multi-agency team of geologists and geophysicists, using helicopters for access, prowled around

the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes during the summer of 1989. They made precise gravity

and magnetic measurements at 150 points in the vicinity of Novarupta in an attempt to pinpoint

the size, shape, and location of the eruptive vent. They used helicopters for access and stayed in

a temporary camp. They were sufficiently intrigued with what they found that they prepared for

a second summer of geological exploration. Recognizing that they might be making a long-term

commitment to research in the area, they collaborated with the NPS on a long-overdue

refurbishment of the 25-year-old Baked Mountain cabin complex. Both the cabin reconstruction

and a second year of research activity took place during the summer of 1990. As a result of the

two years' research, a project workshop was held in December 1990, and the papers presented

there were published the following summer. [60]

Meanwhile, plans for the drilling operation moved forward. During the fall of 1989, Sandia

personnel began preparing an draft outline of an Operations Plan for the proposed drill holes.

[61] Project personnel announced that the plan would be completed in early 1990. They knew,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 12)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap12.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:14 PM]

however, that after the plan was approved, several bureaucratic obstacles had to be overcome

before drilling could proceed. First, the NAS had to submit a positive report on Novarupta's

"uniqueness" as a research site. Second, the NPS had to initiate National Environmental Policy

Act compliance requirements by preparing a Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental

Impact Statement. Finally, the EIS had to be prepared and approved. By January, NPS

personnel had been informed that the NAS was about to issue its report. Sandia officials were

hopeful that the EIS could be begun by July 1990, that the NPS could issue its final decision in

late 1991 or early 1992, and that drilling could begin during the 1992 field season. [62]

The National Academy of Sciences, in a 1990 report, verified that the site was uniquely suited

to scientific drilling, but Sandia's Plan of Operations was not completed until the following

year. The NPS, in 1991, agreed to coordinate the issuance of the environmental impact

statement. That December, it selected Dames and Moore to write the EIS. Meanwhile, personnel

from the USGS and Sandia Lab took part in a third consecutive year of Katmai field studies.

[63]

By April 1992, interest in the project had grown in the scientific community, and the

consortium which backed the project now numbered 18 universities and government agencies.

(Opposition to the project was sporadic and muted.) Three of the sponsoring agencies--The

USGS, Department of Energy, and the National Science Foundation--agreed to provide the

majority of the funding for the two-year drilling project. Public meetings were held that month

in both Anchorage and King Salmon. The NPS was getting ready to prepare its EIS, and sought

public scoping comments before proceeding further. Agency officials estimated that document

preparation would take about a year; given NPS approval, researchers hoped to begin drilling

three holes, from 700 up to 4,000 feet deep, in 1994. [64]

During the summer of 1992, work finally got underway on the writing of the environmental

impact statement. In December, NPS officials were confident that it would be available for

public review the following spring. [65] A preliminary draft of the EIS was completed that

month. Reaction in Washington, however, was so strong that Sandia National Laboratories was

asked to write a revised plan of operations. In mid-1993, plans called for the issuance of the

draft EIS later that year, a final EIS in 1994, and for drilling to begin in 1995. But in late 1993,

just before the draft EIS was released to the public, personnel in the Interior Secretary's office--

including Alaska representative Deborah Williams; George Frampton, the Assistant Secretary

for Fish and Wildlife and Parks; and Tom Collier, Secretary Bruce Babbitt's Chief of Staff--

helped convince the ICG to withdraw the entire proposal. The group officially abandoned the

project in the spring of 1994. [66]

Exxon Valdez Resource Assessment Work

Soon after the Exxon Valdez began spilling its oily contents into the waters of Prince William

Sound, NPS officials became aware that the spill would probably escape the sound and impact

lands under their jurisdiction. They were cognizant that the marine environment included in the

various park units was teeming with life, and that much of that life was becoming endangered

by the advancing oil. They also knew that only the barest amount of data had been collected on

the biological diversity of the parks' coastal areas; as a result, they had little way of knowing

what might be lost. [67]

As noted in chapters 6 and 10, the agency's response to overcoming the lack of shoreline data

was the creation of a series of intelligence gathering teams. These teams were used at Kenai

Fjords, Lake Clark and Aniakchak as well as Katmai, and were composed of both natural and

cultural resource specialists along with supporting personnel.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 12)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap12.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:14 PM]

At first, few NPS officials felt that the Katmai shoreline was in danger from the spilled Exxon

Valdez oil. It was not until mid-April that most in the agency recognized that oil would be

lapping up against Katmai's shores by the end of the month; only then did they dispatch

assessment personnel to the area. Three teams, each operating from a fishing vessel but with

helicopter support, were used along the Katmai coast. Team 1 investigated the stretch of

coastline from McNeil River to Cape Douglas, Team 2 from Kiukpalik Island to Kukak Bay,

and Team 3 from Kinak Bay to Kashvik Bay. The three teams left Homer between April 15 and

April 18, and they had all returned by April 29. And it was just in time, too; the first major oil

slick reached the Katmai coast on April 26. [68]

Katmai was hit badly by the oncoming oil slick. On May 2, Katmai Superintendent Ray Bane

flew down the coastline and, at Hallo Bay, he counted six dead birds per 100 feet of beach. The

park's bear population was also injured because they fed on the washed-up bird carcasses. [69]

As noted in Chapter 6, the NPS and VECO did what they could, during the 1989 cleanup

operations, to minimize their impact on park bears and other coastal wildlife. They were largely

successful, although one aggressive bear was killed at Kukak Bay by a VECO-employed

Resource Protection Officer. [70]

After oil cleanup took place, another resource crew visited the various Katmai beaches in order

to reassess the condition of the resources. These three- to four-person NPS crews, most of

whom hailed from the Lower 48, were on the job in May and worked all summer long. In

addition, the park brought in bio-technicians, funded primarily by Exxon and headed by retired

NPS biologist Will Troyer. These crews, who reported for duty on June 19, gathered

information to support the damage assessment process under the terms of the Comprehensive

Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act. Later, they did resource monitoring

and beach assessment work. [71]

The pre- and post-oiling assessment crews gathered a large amount of data about the biological

diversity of the Katmai coast. Some crew members made notes about the vegetation and

wildlife encountered during their beach visits, and a large percentage of the coastline was

photographed for the first time. But the data, beneficial though it may have been, was not

scientifically valid. Some crew members did not have the training to make accurate

observations; others did not have the time. Many felt that their primary duty was to describe the

degree of oiling which had taken place; biological descriptions were secondary. NPS legal

advisors, who mulled over the evidence for a tort investigation against Exxon, determined that

the data were not sufficiently rigorous to be able to prove how much ecological destruction had

taken place. [72]

Troyer noted, in his season-ending report, that more than 300 miles of the Katmai coastline had

received some oil impact and that many miles, despite the cleanup efforts, were still heavily

oiled. In accordance with the Winter Interagency Monitoring Program, several sites along the

coast were scheduled to be monitored that winter. No monitoring, however, took place. [73]

The events of 1990, in some ways, paralleled those of the previous year. In late March an

interdisciplinary group, consisting of U.S. Coast Guard, Exxon, and NPS representatives,

assessed the condition of the Katmai coast. These assessments, funneled through a Technical

Advisory Group process, laid out what the location and scope of the summer's cleanup work. At

the insistence of Regional Director Boyd Evison, the NPS modified many of the TAG

recommendations due to the agency's stricter levels of environmental sensitivity. Evison also

insisted that Resource Protection Officers be used again. [74]

After the summer cleanup crews had left, NPS representatives returned to the Katmai beaches

and made additional notes on the persistence of oil. The following May, the interdisciplinary
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 12)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap12.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:14 PM]

crew repeated its assessment work. Because relatively few areas were thought to be in need of

additional cleanup, however, little spring assessment work was done. Some of the assessment

teams deployed in 1990 and 1991 made biological notes at the sites they visited. Their

observations, however, were just as informal as those of 1989 had been. [75]

Although the cleanup process, and the assessment work which preceded and followed the

various cleanups, provided park officials with some biological data, the damage assessment

program promised greater scientific rewards.

The Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) program was authorized by the Exxon

Valdez Oil Spill Trustees Council in the summer of 1989. Under the auspices of this program,

numerous projects were authorized that had, as their primary purpose, the determination of the

degree of damage which various sites had suffered and their ability to recover in subsequent

years. The NRDA was an interdisciplinary effort, and ostensibly a cooperative venture between

the various state and federal agencies. Recognizing the economic rewards that the damage

assessment process might yield, however, other agencies refused to allow the NPS full

participation. As a result, none of the 83 natural resource studies authorized during the 1989-

1991 period were led or co-led by the National Park Service. [76]

So far as is known, fewer than a score of those studies utilized sample sites under NPS

jurisdiction, and only seven of them studied Katmai's shoreline environment. The Alaska

Department of Environmental Conservation and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration served as co-leaders of two air and water studies which took samples at the

park. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game, in two different studies, used Katmai in order

to test the effect of the oil spill on pink and chum salmon populations. The ADF&G also

sponsored three other studies: one which focused on bivalves (clams), another a terrestrial

mammal study involving carnivores (including brown bears) and small mammals, and a third

which specifically focused on brown bear populations. Five of the studies were active in 1989,

four in 1990, and one in 1991. All seven tested numerous areas, only a few of which were

located within Katmai National Park and Preserve. [77]

On October 8, 1991, Judge H. Russel Holland approved a settlement proposal for claims by the

United States and the State of Alaska against Exxon Corporation and Exxon Shipping Company

for criminal violations and civil damages resulting from the oil spill. Holland's decision meant

that the damage assessment phase of the oil spill investigations was nearing an end. (The

following summer turned out to be the last in which damage assessment projects took place.

None of those studies used Katmai as a field site.) The next phase was restoration project work.

Restoration planning had begun back in the summer of 1989, and late that year a Restoration

Planning Work Group had been formed. [78] The first restoration projects, however, did not

take place until 1992.

A total of 17 natural resource-based restoration projects took place in 1992. The NPS was the

lead agency for only one of those studies, however. That study--which concerned the recovery

of intertidal mussel beds--utilized Katmai as a field location. Tom Sucanek, from the

University of California at Davis, did the field work that year. In 1993, the only NPS project of

43 "preferred projects" was a continuation of Sucanek's study. [79]

Two other oil spill related studies that took place in 1992: a bald eagle nesting productivity

survey, and an aerial survey of harbor seals and sea lions, the latter done by Gail Ervine and

Carl Shock for the NMFS National Marine Mammal Laboratory. Both projects were funded

with oil spill monies; project participants were NPS employees. [80]

Subsistence Issues
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 12)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap12.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:14 PM]

As noted in Chapter 5, Katmai National Monument did not allow subsistence activities prior to

the passage of the 1980 Alaska Lands Act. According to Title II of the act, subsistence activities

were allowed within the area that was added to the pre-1978 acreage of Denali (Mount

McKinley) National Park. No provision was made, however, for subsistence within the newlycreated portions of either Katmai National Park or Glacier Bay National Park. For that reason,

ANILCA decreed that a Subsistence Resource Commission be established for Denali. No such

commission was established for Katmai or Glacier Bay.

Subsistence was, however, authorized in the 374,000-acre Katmai National Preserve, which was

located just north of Katmai National Park. Denali, Glacier Bay, and Katmai all had preserve

units attached to the national parks, and ANILCA also created seven other preserves scattered

around the state. Preserves differed from parks or monuments in that they permitted sport

hunting, but each preserve also allowed a full range of subsistence activities. It is not known

why Congress created a Katmai National Preserve at the northern end of the park and did not

make such an area west or south of the existing monument. The data presented in Steve

Behnke's 1978 study (noted earlier in this chapter) may have helped; it showed that most of the

expanded park area was not used for subsistence purposes by local residents. Most of the area

included in present-day Katmai National Preserve, however, was used by the residents of

Levelock, Igiugig, or Kakhonak. [81]

The preserve, once created, was largely ignored by the National Park Service for the next

decade. The state, through the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, managed subsistence

activities. NPS officials, lacking active management authority, may have felt that they had no

business in regulating subsistence activities, or they may have ignored the preserve because it

presented few management conflicts. Besides, more pressing problems were found in Brooks

Camp and other, less remote locations. The extent of their management, therefore, was the

issuance of cabin permits and occasional law enforcement activities. [82]

The park's relative lack of concern about its subsistence problems is reflected in the priority

given subsistence studies in the various resource management plans. In the 1982 RMP, the

preparation of subsistence management plan was considered both a natural resource and cultural

resource priority. It was ranked fourth among 16 potential natural resource projects, but last

among six cultural projects. [83] By 1985, the preparation of a subsistence plan was considered

relatively unimportant; of 22 nominated natural resource projects, the plan was ranked 16th. In

1987, two subsistence projects were considered: 1) preparation of a subsistence management

plan, and 2) a monitoring study which would show the effect of subsistence use on Preserve

wildlife populations. Of 51 natural resource projects, the monitoring study was ranked 15th,

while the management study was ranked 38th. Because of their relatively low ranking, neither

of these studies were immediately enacted. [84]

Park staff continued to give subsistence issues a relatively low priority for the rest of the

decade. In December 1989, however, the Alaska Supreme Court ruled that the state's

subsistence program violated the Alaska Constitution. It requested that the Alaska legislature

prepare a new subsistence program that would be in conformance with both ANILCA and the

constitution. The 1990 legislature, however, was unable to act. The issue dominated the regular

legislative session that year, and was considered so important that Governor Steve Cowper

called the legislature into special session to deal with the issue. The legislature was still in

session on July 1; on that date, the federal government began managing the subsistence

resources on federal land in Alaska. Nine days later, the special session adjourned, still without

a subsistence bill. Since that time various federal agencies, not the Alaska Department of Fish

and Game, have been responsible for managing subsistence. [85] The NPS responded to its new

responsibilities by hiring several subsistence specialists for Alaska park units. Susan Savage,

one of those specialists, was hired as Katmai's first Subsistence Manager in the fall of 1991.

[86]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 12)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap12.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:14 PM]

The creation of a subsistence staff position allowed more attention to be given to subsistence

issues. By May 1992 a draft subsistence management plan had been prepared and included as

one of three elements in the park's Resource Management Plan. That plan, as noted earlier in

the chapter, was signed by the superintendent and regional director in August 1994. The park

has also attempted, with mixed success, to monitor Katmai National Preserve wildlife

populations. It has coordinated moose and caribou monitoring with Alaska Fish and Game

personnel, but it has had relatively little success in monitoring the Preserve's furbearer

populations. It has also begun to study the current and historical subsistence patterns of

residents of Levelock, Igiugig, and Kakhonak, the three villages which lie closest to the

preserve. [87]

A subsistence issue that has emerged since 1990 deals with Native subsistence fishing on

Naknek River near Lake Camp. For decades, perhaps longer, local Natives had been harvesting

late-spawning red salmon ("redfish") along the Naknek River, and beginning in the late 1950s

they used set nets which they placed near the outflow of Naknek Lake. In 1967, however, the

Alaska Fish and Game Department closed the river to set net activity above New Savonoski.

When Katmai National Monument was expanded in 1969 to include the western end of Naknek

Lake, federal authorities (who now had concurrent jurisdiction over the area) also determined

that the practice was illegal because no provisions for subsistence were included in President

Johnson's proclamation. Despite both federal and state prohibitions, local Natives continued to

carry on the late season fishery. NPS officials were either unaware of the activity, or they tacitly

allowed it to continue.

When the Alaska Lands Act was passed in 1980, subsistence regulations at the western end of

Naknek Lake did not change because the area, designated as part of Katmai National Park,

continued to prohibit subsistence activities. During the winter of 1981-82, however, the Alaska

Board of Fisheries passed a regulation which allowed sockeye salmon fishing "along a 100 yard

length of the west shore of Naknek Lake near the outlet to the Naknek River as marked by

ADF&G markers," but only from October 1 through December 31. Another regulation allowed

occasional subsistence fishing on Naknek River from June 23 through July 17. This subsistence

redfish fishery was contrary to NPS regulations; even so, it continued for the remainder of the

decade. [88]

The National Park Service had the power to close down the redfish fishery. The fishery

continued, however. Dave Morris, who was superintendent when the regulations were

implemented, undoubtedly knew about the late season fishery but tacitly allowed it. His

successor, Ray Bane, was unaware of its existence. [89] NPS personnel did not become

reawakened to the regulations until May 1990, when Acting Superintendent Jim Ryan attended

a meeting of the Subsistence Work Group Panel, an informal assemblage of officials appointed

from the various federal agencies. Ryan was perplexed that such regulations were on the books

because ANILCA specifically stated that "Existing levels of subsistence use will continue in the

preserve but will not be allowed in the park." He himself had been advising prospective

subsistence fishermen that such activities were prohibited. But the NPS had no opportunity to

remove the offending regulations when the Federal government took over subsistence

management that summer, and the subsistence redfish fishery continued to operate in the Lake

Camp area until the fall of 1991. The temporary regulations which guided subsistence activities

between July 1991 and June 1992 continued to include the two regulations noted above. [90]

Katmai officials soon recognized that the subsistence fishery was incompatible with the 1969

Presidential proclamation which had extended Katmai's boundaries to the western end of

Naknek Lake. Katmai's superintendent, therefore, proposed in early 1992 that the ADF&G

regulation allowing subsistence fishing near its marker be eliminated. The Bristol Bay Native

Association and several local citizens opposed the move, and Senator Stevens intervened on
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 12)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap12.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:14 PM]

their behalf. The new regulations were nevertheless implemented, and the subsistence fishery

was closed beginning in the summer of 1992. [91]

Perhaps in reaction to having their subsistence rights revoked, Native groups began pressuring

NPS officials to have the entire park unit opened to subsistence uses. The Bristol Bay Native

Association, in October 1992, passed a resolution stating that "if the Federal Subsistence Board

and National Park Service do not do so, the United States Congress is urged to take appropriate

legislative action to open Katmai National Park to subsistence fishing..." The NPS, citing

existing legislation, had no choice but to oppose such a move. Natives, still seething over the

issue, presented their concerns in early March 1993 at a Dillingham meeting of the Joint

Federal-State Commission on Policies and Programs Affecting Alaska Natives. Congress did

not take formal action on the matter. But the NPS, given time, has softened its stance, and by

the fall of 1994 park officials were tacitly allowing the practice. [92]

One of the major findings of the Katmai Project of 1953-1954 was the discovery that Novarupta Volcano, not

Mount Katmai, was the primary site of the June 1912 voclanic eruption which devastated the area and created the

Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes. This photo, taken by Victor Cahalane in July 1953, shows a portion of the stillsteaming Novarupta Volcano. (NPS Photo Collection, neg. 11,922)
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 12)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap12.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:14 PM]

(left) In June and July 1965, and again in August 1966, Katmai hosted groups of

astronauts, who travelled to the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes because its ash

deposits wre "believed to be similar to the surface of the moon." They flew into

the valley on helicopters based at nearby King Salmon Air Base. (right) An

astronaut in training peers into the eroded ash deposits of the Ukak River valey.

(Bartlett Collection, NPS Box 2 (both photos) )
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 12)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap12.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:14 PM]

During their 1966 trip to Katmai, Robert L. Smith of the USGS discussed the valey's geological formations to a

group of astronauts in training. (NASA photo S-66-50451)
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 12)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap12.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:14 PM]

(top) A USGS geologist (left), based in Flagstaff , discusses geological formations with (left to right) Charles A.

Bassett II, R. Walter Cunningham, and Alan L. Bean. (bottom) Astronauts Eugene A. Cernan (left) and Roger B.

Chaffee gathering geology specimens during their 1965 field trip. (NASA photos 65-H-1223 (top) and 65-H-1212

(bottom) )

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

adhi/chap12.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 13)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap13.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:21 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

PART II: ANIAKCHAK NATIONAL MONUMENT AND PRESERVE

Chapter 13:

Aniakchak's Natural and Cultural History

Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve is located about a third of the way down the

Alaska Peninsula. The park unit is due west of the southern end of Kodiak Island, 150 miles

southwest of Katmai National Park and Preserve, and 400 miles southwest of Anchorage. The

park encompasses the peninsula's mountainous spine and various capes and bays fronting

against the Pacific Ocean. A total of 602,779 acres are enclosed within Aniakchak's boundaries:

137,176 acres in the national monument, and 465,603 acres in the national preserve.

The unit became part of the national park system on December 1, 1978, when President Jimmy

Carter proclaimed Aniakchak National Monument as part of the 56,000,000-acre withdrawal

which created ten new park units and expanded three others. Two years later, on December 2,

1980, Carter ushered Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve into being when he signed

the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act.

Aniakchak was created in order to protect Aniakchak Caldera and the wilderness which

surrounded it. Section 201 of ANILCA designated that the monument and preserve should be

managed for the following purposes, among others:

To maintain the caldera and its associated features and landscape, including the

Aniakchak River and other lakes and streams, in their natural state; to study,

interpret, and assure continuation of the natural process of biological succession; to

protect habitat for, and populations of, fish and wildlife, including, but not limited

to, brown/grizzly bears, moose, caribou, sea lions, seals, and other marine

mammals, geese, swans, and other waterfowl and in a manner consistent with the

foregoing, to interpret geological and biological processes for visitors. Subsistence

uses by local residents shall be permitted in the monument where such uses are

traditional in accordance with the provisions of Title VIII. [1]

Natural History

The park unit is comprised of four physiographic zones. The volcanic zone is located in

Aniakchak Caldera, and is comprised of precipitous cliffs, tilted rock strata, ash flows, and

other volcanic features. The upland zone is comprised of the other Aleutian Range peaks within

the unit, most of them covered with ash and few of them exceeding 3,000 feet in elevation. On

either side of the Aleutian peaks lie the river valley zone; major drainages in the unit include

the Aniakchak, Meshik, and Cinder rivers. Finally, the ocean-coastal zone, along the Pacific

littoral, is characterized by a rugged assemblage of cliffs, offshore rocks, and islands.

Aniakchak's climate is cool, windy, and wet. Storms, brought by Pacific Ocean winds,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 13)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap13.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:21 PM]

frequently visit the area. Although no rain gauges or other weather measurements are located in

the monument, annual precipitation along the coast probably averages 100 inches or more.

Precipitation on the Aleutian peaks and in the caldera is doubtless higher yet. Sunny days in the

summertime are rare, and cloudy skies predominate in other seasons as well. High winds and

rough waters often make navigation in small boats hazardous; low cloud ceilings make aviation

takeoffs and landings difficult and sometimes impossible. [2]

With the exception of a few isolated cottonwood and willow trees, which grow in the Cinder

River drainage, the most prominent vegetation stands are the willow and alder shrubs which

grow in thickets near Meshik Lake. To the north and west of the Aleutian Range, moist or wet

tundra predominates, while alpine tundra is found east and south of the mountains. On the peaks

and in the caldera, the vegetation is more sparse than that found in the lowlands; volcanic ash

predominates in many areas. [3]

Native Use

Little is known of the Aniakchak country before European explorers arrived in the area.

Although local (Chignik area) residents often consider themselves to be of Aleut origin,

linguistic research suggests Koniag (Eskimo) origins. Limited investigations into the prehistory

of the Alaska Peninsula suggest that an unknown group of Eskimos--perhaps Pacific Yupik,

Central Alaskan Yupik, or some intermediate form--were replaced by the 1850s by Aglurmiut

(Aglegmiut) Eskimos, who moved southward from the Kuskokwim delta. The new group,

however, did not migrate all the way south to the Aniakchak area. [4] Archeologist Don

Dumond and linguist Michael Krauss have each located the Eskimo-Aleut linguistic boundary

in the Port Moller area, approximately 100 miles southwest of Aniakchak Bay. [5] Dumond

identifies historic Natives of the area between Chignik and the Katmai country as being

Peninsula Eskimo, while Krauss refers to them as either Alutiiq or Sugpiaq, both forms of selfidentification for Pacific Eskimo. Jeff Leer, a linguist, has divided the Alutiiq into the Koniiag,

who inhabit the Alaska Peninsula from Chignik northward, and the Chugach, who live on

Prince William Sound and the Kenai Peninsula. [6]

While a clear boundary between Eskimo and Aleut languages appears to have been established

during the late prehistoric period, there may be no such boundary between the material cultures

of the two groups. Archeological investigations have produced three schools of thought.

Proponents of one school suggest that an apparent boundary between technological traditions

may have existed quite close to the linguistic boundary noted above. [7] Others have concluded

that sometime after AD 1000, a broad cultural zone was established on the central peninsula in

which the technological elements of Eskimo and Aleut cultures were combined by the

inhabitants to form their own unique assemblage. [8] Still others feel that because of ecological

stress, many parts of the peninsula were devoid of inhabitants during portions of the late

prehistoric period; at other times the boundary may have shifted up and down the peninsula. [9]

Archeologist Donald Clark agrees with the disparity between language and other culture traits,

noting that "Koniag speech is Eskimoan but physical anthropologists have identified physical

traits which suggest racial strains other than Eskimo in ancestral Koniag remains." [10]

The lack of substantial archeological surveys carried out within the Monument and Preserve has

prevented more than general conclusions being drawn about the area's prehistory. [11] The only

known survey, taken just east of the mouth of the Aniakchak River (see Map 10), revealed that

a small settlement had existed there in the late 16th century or early 17th century. Considering

the site's advantages--its location at the mouth of a salmon stream, the year-round availability

of fresh water, and the modicum of protection from winds--the site may have been used for

hundreds if not thousands of years. Other Native hunting, fishing, or settlement sites probably

exist elsewhere in the park unit, but they have not yet been located. [12]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 13)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap13.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:21 PM]

Map 10. Aniakchak Bay Cultural Complex, located at the mouth of the Aniakchak River. (click

image for an enlargement in a new window)

Russian Exploration and Settlement

When Europeans began exploring the margins of Alaska in the mid-eighteenth century, the

Native inhabitants of the central Alaska Peninsula became witnesses to their meanderings. But

the Aniakchak coastline--hidden, isolated, fog-shrouded, and storm-tossed--was largely

ignored. The only early explorers to come close were Alexei Chirikof and Captain James Cook.

Chirikof, who commanded one of the two vessels in Vitus Bering's expedition, landed on the

island that bears his name, 80 miles to the southeast, in early August 1741. In June 1778, on

Captain Cook's third voyage, the two ships under his command passed within 50 miles of the

coastline. [13]

The fur-trading promyshlenniki followed the first Russian incursions. Starting at the western

end of the Aleutian Islands, they initially captured the sea otter on their own, but soon began to

enlist the aid of Natives, either through simple trading relationships or by slavery and the use of

brute force. [14] Between 1767 and 1783, the fur trade depleted the sea otter population along

much of the south side of the Alaska Peninsula. Native hunters doubtless camped along the

coast during this period, but the locations of specific camps are unknown. [15] No known

settlements which dated from this period are located in the present park area. The closest known

Native village was Kaluiak, a Kaniagmiut village on the shores of Anchorage Bay, which was

apparently decimated during this period. [16] In addition, the Russians establish a permanent if

short-lived artel, or fur trading camp on Sutwik Island. This camp, called "Sutkhvin", operated

at some point between 1770 and 1800. [17]

Once the Natives had been subdued, the various Russian fur trading companies formed

cooperative trading relationships with them. Along the Alaska Peninsula, hunting pressure was

decreased to the point that the otter harvest remained at or near a sustained level for decades to

come. Whether hunting took place along the Aniakchak coast is not known. No villages are
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 13)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap13.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:21 PM]

known to have existed near the bay during the early nineteenth century, with the possible

exception of either Kaluiak or Kujulik (the latter being located along the shores of nearby

Kujulik Bay). [18] However, one or more Russian explorers must have visited the bay and

spoken to local residents because von Krusenstern's atlas, published in 1827, noted both "Baie

Amah-chack" (Aniakchak Bay) and "C[ap] Koumlick" (Cape Kumlik). [19]

Shortly after von Krusenstern's atlas was published, Russian surveyors entered the bay. In

1831-32, Ensign Vasiliev of the Imperial Russian Navy mapped the Pacific Coast from Cook

Inlet to Cape Kumliun, the latter point being located between Aniakchak and Chignik bays. The

results of his work were published in 1836. [20] His survey work was corroborated in the 1840s

by the expeditions of Lindenberg and Kashevarov. By 1850 most of the prominent coastal place

names, including Kujulik Bay and Amber Bay, had already been established. Both the place

names and the navigational data served as the standard for the area until well into the twentieth

century. [21]

Despite these incursions, the area was largely neglected once the initial sea otter population had

been harvested. Russians, who held a titular claim on the coast, had few if any reasons to stop

there, and navigators from other countries showed even less interest in the area. The area's

distance from Russian settlements, and the financial difficulties of the Russian American

Company, suggest that few non-Natives visited the Aniakchak area during the first two-thirds of

the nineteenth century.

The changeover in control to the United States, in 1867, initially brought few changes to the

central Alaska Peninsula. The only activity that appeared to show promise was the fur trade. The

Alaska Commercial Company, beginning in 1880, established stores near Mitrofania, just south

of Chignik, and Sutkum Village, on Sutwik Island. These two stores served as collection points

for trappers in the area. Few furs, however, were gathered from the Aniakchak coastline, and by

1897 pelts were so scarce that both stores had closed. [22]

Fisheries Interests Invade the Area

The first large-scale migration of non-Natives to the area arrived in pursuit of the salmon

resource. In 1882, just four years after the first Alaska cannery opened, a cannery was

established in Cook Inlet, at Kasilof. [23] Seven years later, the first canneries were established

in Chignik Lagoon, 50 miles southwest of the park unit. Three salmon packing plants were built

that year because the run of red salmon, or "redfish," was consistently one of the strongest on

the peninsula. [24]

The early Chignik canneries apparently employed a fleet of gill netters and purse seiners to

harvest the catch. [25] During the 1890s, however, the canneries increasingly came to rely on

pile traps. [26] Fish traps were useful because they were efficient and relatively inexpensive,

and because the labor costs for their operation were relatively low.

In 1910 a new cannery, operated by the Columbia River Packers Association (CRPA), was built

at the head of Anchorage Bay. The association came out on the short end of a communal

fishing contract, which rationed the number of Chignik Lagoon traps. As a result, it sought out

new trap sites. In 1913 it had established a trap in Hook Bay, the first trap outside of Chignik

Bay, and in 1917 it constructed its first trap in the present-day park. [27]

The coastline northeast of Chignik offered a large number of bays and coves with potential as

fish trap sites. Some of the most promising sites were located in Aniakchak Bay. While not as

rich as Chignik Lagoon, this area was advantageous because the Aniakchak River, more than 25

miles long, offered the most extensive drainage system on the Pacific Coast between Chignik
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 13)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap13.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:21 PM]

Lagoon and the Katmai country. [28] The correspondingly low stream gradient, moreover,

offered high quality salmon habitat. While Chignik Bay and Chignik Lagoon runs featured red

salmon, the streams in the Aniakchak area attracted primarily pink salmon, with smaller runs of

red, coho and chum salmon. [29] Species other than red salmon were not considered of

commercial value before 1910, but concerted marketing efforts during the next several years

made their harvest worthwhile. [30]

Between 1914 and 1918, the number of Alaskan traps more than doubled, from 240 to 552. [31]

As part of that trend, the Columbia River Packers Association drove the first trap in Aniakchak

Bay in 1917 (see Map 11). The trap was located just southwest of the mouth of the Aniakchak

River. [32] In 1919 the CRPA installed a second trap from the island near the river's mouth. No

traps existed for the next few years. By 1924, however, the 1917 trap had been re-established,

and during the next five years four new traps had been built along the Aniakchak coastline. In

1925, a trap was installed in Kujulik Bay, near the mouth of North Fork; a second followed in

1926, on the north shore of Aniakchak Bay; a third trap, erected in 1928, was erected near the

mouth of Aniakchak Lagoon; and a fourth, was built in 1929 at the southwestern end of

Aniakchak Bay. The final trap in the area was not erected until 1937; it was located south of

Elephant Head Point on Cape Kumlik. [33]

Map 11. Location of Aniakchak Bay Fish Traps. (click image for an enlargement

in a new window)
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 13)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap13.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:21 PM]

Several of the traps driven along the Aniakchak coastline did not last long. Three of the four

traps erected between 1925 and 1929, in fact, had been permanently removed by the end of the

1930 season. The other traps noted above, however, operated for a longer period. The trap

located southwest of the Aniakchak River mouth, for instance, operated from 1924 to 1937. The

trap near Aniakchak Lagoon operated from 1928 to 1947, and the Cape Kumlik trap operated

from 1937 to 1949. Until 1932, the CRPA controlled each of these traps. That year, however,

they came under the de facto management of the Alaska Packers Association. The APA

purchased the sites outright in 1940, and continued to operate them until they closed. [34]

The operation and maintenance of the various fish traps brought seasonal residents to the area.

The first watchmen to live there, during the 1917-1919 period, lived on a small bunk scow

which had been hauled onto the island located near the Aniakchak River mouth. [35] That site,

due to its exposed setting and lack of fresh water, proved unsatisfactory. When the CRPA

began erecting new fish traps in the mid-1920s, therefore, they found a more suitable site and

endeavored to erect a sound structure. Company workers erected a bunkhouse at the north end

of Aniakchak Bay (see Map 10). For years afterwards, this building served as the headquarters

for the various fish trap crews. [36] The crews, which numbered between twelve and twenty

men, arrived in June to erect the various traps. They spent the summer maintaining them,

guarding them from fish pirates, and unloading the collected fish into the cannery tenders. At

season's end, in late August, they disassembled and removed each trap before leaving the area.

[37]

The establishment of fish traps in Aniakchak Bay created the first regular ship traffic along the

Aniakchak coastline. This traffic may have prodded the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey into an

investigation of the area. As late as 1922, government explorers had noted that "Aniakchak and

Kujulik Bays are uncharted and are avoided by seagoing boats." [38] Interest in the area's fish

resources, however, resulted in new mapping efforts. The Coast and Geodetic Survey

dispatched two ships into the area, and during the 1924 through 1926 seasons they charted both

bays. [39] By 1926, the Coast Pilot reported that "the channel between Kumlik Island [east of

the south end of Aniakchak Bay] and the mainland is apparently clear and is constantly used by

the cannery tenders when running between Aniakchak Bay and Chignik." [40] Tenders arrived

"every few days" in 1930; in the late 1930s, tenders such as the Unga or the Semidi came every

day or every second day. [41]

Trapping and Oil Prospecting

Trappers began to infiltrate the Aniakchak area during the same period that Columbia River

Packers Association personnel began exploring Aniakchak's coastline. It is not known when

they first entered the area, but by the early 1920s it was reported that "several trappers operate

inland from the heads of some of the bays along the Pacific coast." Most were Chignik residents

who trapped during the wintertime (principally December and January) for fox, mink, ermine

and wolverine. [42] By 1925, trappers had explored and identified the Meshik River flats, the

Amber Bay lowlands, and most of the Aniakchak River drainage. [43] Their comings and

goings, however, were not so numerous as to have created any known trails, and apparently

none of the trappers knew of the existence of Aniakchak Crater.

Adolf Van Hammel, C. W. Olsen, Charles Weidemann, and Albert Johnson were the four white

trappers active in the 1920s. A Native named Shurka also trapped at that time. Olsen lived at the

head of Amber Bay, but the others had cabins scattered about the Aniakchak River drainage.

[44] By the 1930s, most of these men had been replaced by John Hillborn, Henry Erikson, Alec

Pedersen, and Clemens Grunert, Sr. They continued to trap until the 1940s, when falling fur

prices and an increased standard of living among local residents discontinued the practice. [45]

Erikson and Hillborn had ceased trapping by 1943, but Grunert and Pedersen stayed on until the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 13)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap13.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:21 PM]

late 1940s. [46]

In the early 1920s a short-term boom in oil speculation, along with a series of geological

investigations, combined to provide the first thorough descriptions of the area's topography,

biota and economic potential. The peninsula's petroleum resources, which had been known

since the 1860s, began to be developed in 1903 when a series of wells were drilled near the

southeast end of Becharof Lake. The boom town of Kanatak sprang forth at the head of Puale

Bay, and hopes ran high for a year before the excitement ended (see chapters 3 and 11). [47] In

1910, the Federal withdrawal of Alaska lands from new oil leasing brought what little business

remained to a standstill, and for a decade the Kanatak area was virtually deserted. In 1920,

however, interest was revived with the passage of an oil leasing act, which allowed prospectors

to once again stake claims in Alaska. [48] The Chignik and Aniakchak areas were thought to

offer high potential for oil because a popular opinion prevailed that many areas on the Alaska

Peninsula offered recoverable oil reserves. More specifically, it was felt that the oil-bearing

strata of the Kanatak and Cook Inlet fields also underlay the Chignik district. Therefore, a

small-scale flurry of oil exploration took place over the next several years as oil claims were

staked over much of the central Alaska Peninsula. [49]

The Aniakchak area, where oil seepages had been reported "from the country west of

Aniakchak Bay and east of the high mountain in the central part of the peninsula" as well as "on

the cape between Amber and Aniakchak bays" was the recipient of much of that enthusiasm.

[50] The General Land Office began offering 2560-acre oil permits as early as December 1920,

and activity continued for most of the decade. During the 1922 fiscal year 35 entries, totalling

115,200 acres, were made in the so-called Aniakshak field. For the next two years the

speculative fever quickened and "Aniakshak" became the most popular field in the territory; 88

new entries were made covering 225,280 acres in fiscal year 1923, while 43 entries, covering

112,808 acres, were made the year afterwards. [51] Most of the entries were made by

speculators who hailed from the Seattle and Tacoma areas. The "Aniakshak" field covered a

broad area along the Alaska Peninsula, only a portion of which was located in the present

Monument and Preserve. Even so, more than 70 such permits were staked within the present

NPS boundaries. The permits were scattered throughout the unit; the only area which was not

staked was the caldera itself and the countryside south of it. [52]

The flurry of lease activity stimulated some exploration into the Aniakchak area. Perhaps the

first surveyor was W. W. French, an engineer who had taken out at least two oil and gas leases.

French led a party through the area in July 1921; as part of the trip they entered Aniakchak

Caldera, the first party known to have done so. The following year E. D. Calvin, a government

engineer, also entered the area to lay out public land survey lines. [53] In 1922, geologist

Walter Smith noted that "since 1920 there have been several oil prospectors and land-survey

parties staking claims or running lines ... west of Aniakchak Bay." [54]

It appears, however, that few of the permittees ever visited the area. Most claimants were

"pencil prospectors" who hoped to cash in on the work of others. On that basis, interest in the

area's oil potential remained high until the summer of 1922, when the first governmentsponsored geological survey party investigated the area. The group found that most of the

reigning enthusiasm was groundless. They failed to find several instances of oil seepages, one

of which had been reported on the cape between Amber and Aniakchak bays. Their report

further noted that "the country southwest of Wide Bay, especially the Aniakchak district, is

covered by large areas of igneous rocks, in which oil does not occur." [55] A second survey

party, dispatched to the Chignik area the following summer, gave a similar conclusion. It found

that "no oil seepages, residues, or gas springs have been authentically reported from the Chignik

District," and that "the outlook for oil in the Chignik district is not hopeful." [56] These reports

effectively stifled further oil exploration, and within a decade the government had cancelled

most if not all of the existing oil permits. [57]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 13)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap13.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:21 PM]

USGS Surveyors Investigate Aniakchak Caldera

While the wave of interest in oil possibilities did not succeed in stimulating new economic

growth on the central peninsula, the various governmental surveys succeeded in revealing the

topography and resources of the area for the first time. As late as 1923, maps of the country

inland from Aniakchak Bay were either blank or contained erroneous information. [58] The oil

excitement, however, provoked the U.S. Geological Survey, which was responsible for

exploring and evaluating the mineral potential of Alaska lands, into sending two major

expeditions into the Aniakchak area. In the summer of 1922, a party of six men, headed by R.

H. Sargent, topographer and Walter R. Smith, geologist, surveyed the area from Kanatak

southwest to Chignik. Their explorations were primarily limited to the eastern drainages of the

peninsula. Three years later, another six-man party, headed by Sargent and geologist Russell

Knappen, surveyed both sides of the peninsula from Mt. Chiginagak southwest to Mt.

Veniaminof. In the Aniakchak drainage, both parties found an essentially primeval landscape,

devoid of trails or permanent residents. [59]

The investigations produced mixed results. As noted above, results gained from the 1922

expedition served to dampen the enthusiasm over oil exploration, and the 1925 expedition,

whose stated purpose was to investigate oil and gas possibilities, found few encouraging

possibilities. [60] Sargent and Smith's expedition, however, was the first to report the discovery

of a large "extinct volcano," Aniakchak Caldera, midway between the Bristol Bay and Pacific

coasts. The caldera had been identified twice before; in 1919, famed Katmai explorer Robert F.

Griggs had spotted it and called it "Old Crater," and in 1921, oil prospector W. W. French had

entered the caldera. Griggs, however, was in no position to elaborate on what he had seen, and

French had made no report of his discovery. [61] In 1922, USGS expedition members entered

the caldera on two separate occasions (see Map 12), and the following year M. W. Taylor, of

Seattle, visited the caldera as well. [62] It is a testimony to the area's weather, as well as its

isolation, that generations of explorers, fishermen, local residents and governmental officials

had passed along the Pacific and Bristol Bay coasts and had failed to identify it. Trappers or

prospectors may have seen the caldera before 1922, but no one reported its existence before

Sargent and Smith explored the area. [63]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 13)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap13.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:21 PM]

Map 12. This "Sketch Map Showing Location of Aniakchak" was drawn by the

U.S. Geological Survey during the 1920s. It was reprinted in Father Bernard

Hubbard's 1932 publication, Mush, You Malemutes! (page 179). (click image for

an enlargement in a new window)

Father Hubbard Visits the Area

Two events in the early 1930s, a volcanic eruption and the visit of a well-known lecturer,

brought a modicum of fame to the Aniakchak area. In May 1931 Half Cone, a cinder cone

located within Aniakchak Caldera, belched forth a series of explosions which darkened the

surrounding skies for weeks. [64] Major eruptions took place on May 1, May 11 and May 20,

with intermittent activity during the interim. The eruption, which was considered moderate in

comparison to those that had taken place at nearby volcanoes, [65] covered the Chignik area

with half an inch of ash. Light ash fell up to 300 miles away. Due to its isolation, however, the

eruption received scant attention in the state and national press. [66]

The eruption would doubtless have slipped into ignominy had it not been for the efforts of

Father Bernard R. Hubbard, a Jesuit professor from Santa Clara University. Hubbard was a

geologist who specialized in glaciers and volcanoes. Since 1927 he had spent each summer field

season in Alaska gathering data. As his career unfolded, however, he found that his talents were

best applied in describing his adventures to the non-scientific community. As "the Glacier

Priest," he launched into an increasingly public arena. By 1932 he had become a lecturer, author

and film producer, and maintained each of those roles through the remainder of the decade. His

best-selling books, and the articles he contributed to National Geographic, Saturday Evening

Post, and other magazines, contributed little to the scientific literature. His writings, however,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 13)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap13.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:21 PM]

played an important role in bringing Alaska into the consciousness of the American public.

Hubbard's earliest field explorations pursued strictly scientific objectives. His initial studies

concerned the Juneau Icefield, but a visit the following year to the devastated landscape of the

Katmai country intrigued him to such a degree that the volcanoes of the Alaska Peninsula

directed his research activities for the next several years. [67] Perusing the geological literature,

he encountered USGS reports on the Aniakchak and Veniaminof calderas, and as he noted,

"with these sources of information and Mr. Sargent's map, [I] determined upon a thorough

exploration of the craters." [68]

To implement his plan, Hubbard left San Francisco for Alaska in mid-May of 1930, and

reached Chignik the following month. The party, composed of Hubbard and four student

assistants, took a cannery tender to the mouth of the Aniakchak River. It then ascended the river

in a 15-foot open motorboat as far as it could. The party spent several days exploring the

caldera on foot, and found its floor to be lush with vegetation and wildlife. Although the USGS

had classified the volcano as inactive, his group found steaming vents which led them to believe

that Aniakchak was capable of additional activity. [69]

Spurred on by the excitement of the spring 1931 eruption, Hubbard returned to Aniakchak the

following two summers. In 1931, his party traveled by boat from Chignik to Kujulik Bay and

proceeded northbound into the Aniakchak River drainage. The following summer Hubbard,

accompanied by pilot Frank Dorbrandt, flew into the caldera, landed on Surprise Lake and

explored the immediate area. Their visit was relatively brief. [70]

Hubbard's books and articles dramatically portrayed that Aniakchak Caldera was strange and

unworldly. He portrayals were effective because he knew his subject matter; furthermore, his

audiences were largely unfamiliar with either Alaska or volcanic landscapes. The vast majority

of his verbiage, redolent in impassioned prose, stands up to scientific scrutiny. But in his glib

pursuit of dramatic detail he erred in certain key facts, including the size of the eruption, the

probable date of caldera formation, and the number of previous explorers to have visited the

crater. [71] He also mistakenly implied that the eruption had had a devastating impact on the

area's ecosystem. [72] His assertion that much of the wildlife and plant life in the caldera was

killed by the blast is correct. Anadromous fish populations, however, were scarcely affected.

Records from the bay's fish traps show that the annual catch for the 1931 through 1934 seasons

was significantly larger than that for the 1929 and 1930 seasons. [73]

The 1931 National Monument Proposal

Shortly after returning from his 1930 trip to Aniakchak Caldera, Father Hubbard wrote up his

experiences for the popular press. In October a full-page story on the Alaskan "moon craters"

appeared in the New York Times; two months later, Barrett Willoughby penned a longer article

on Hubbard's adventures for the Saturday Evening Post. The two articles dealt with both

Aniakchak Caldera and nearby Mount Veniaminof. [74]

NPS Director Horace M. Albright read Willoughby's Saturday Evening Post article and on

December 23 told several assistants, including Arno B. Cammerer, that "we ought to keep these

areas in mind as possible additions to the national parks or monuments some time in the future."

Cammerer, in his reply, saw no reason to wait; he noted, "Isn't now the time to get them

reserved as a national monument, to prevent hunting and thus to preserve the wonderful wild

life as best we can?"

NPS staff then contacted R. H. Sargent of the USGS, who had visited the area both in 1922 and

1925. Sargent felt that the area contained "many advantages as well as scenic and scientific
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 13)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap13.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:21 PM]

features that are not found anywhere else including Katmai." He noted that Hook Bay was a

"natural harbor" and would be the best development location. He also noted the presence of

"three men who have been trapping around Aniakchak for several years and they would

undoubtedly be opposed to any restrictions." On January 10, Cammerer let it be known that he

wanted to "get this crater area reserved as soon as possible as a monument under the Service."

Wallace R. Atwood, a geography professor affiliated with the New York-based American

Geographical Society, responded with a long memo to the Director which elaborated on the

area's values, evaluated the problems which might encumber monument designation, and

suggested several possible boundary configurations. [75]

The NPS offered a bold proposal for the two new monuments. The Aniakchak proposal called

for the withdrawal of an area larger than the present-day monument and preserve (see Map 13).

The irregular boundary included most of the western and central side of the peninsula; it went

as far south as Landlocked and Bluff creeks, and stretched north to the Cinder River-Meloy

Creek drainage. On the Bristol Bay side, the proposed monument included everything from the

shoreline to the peaks except for a small area surrounding Meshik and Port Heiden. On the

Pacific Coast side, the proposed monument included Cape Kumliun, Weasel Mountain, and

Hook Bay. North of Cape Kumliun, however, the boundaries remained several miles distant

from the shoreline. Atwood, who drew the preliminary boundaries, had followed Sargent's

advice and avoided most of the area close to the Pacific Coast; this was in deference to the

seasonal fish traps and the smattering of area trappers. [76]

Map 13. Proposed Aniakchak National Monument, 1931. (click image for an enlargement in a

new window)

NPS staff hoped that they would soon be able to prepare a monument proclamation that the

Secretary of the Interior and President Hoover could approve. Before the NPS could do so,

however, it sent out routine letters of approval to the heads of the U.S. Geological Survey, the

Bureau of Fisheries, and the General Land Office. [77] The Bureau of Fisheries noted only the

presence of a fish trap in Hook Bay; the GLO was concerned only with the oil permits which

were scattered about the area, none of which had been developed. [78]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 13)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap13.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:21 PM]

The USGS, however, took a dim view of the proposed monument. As was noted in Chapter 3,

the USGS had been asked just a month earlier for its opinions regarding the expansion of

Katmai National Monument. It was unenthusiastic to both proposals. The agency head noted

that the Survey "feels a keen interest in having as much of a region as possible kept open for

free development;" he also felt that national monuments, as a rule, "should be the smallest that

will properly include the particular natural object." He was particularly concerned that a

potential oil area, located along Bluff and Violet creeks, was being considered for inclusion in

the monument. The USGS recommended that the proposed monument be limited to a roughly

circular area, 20 to 25 miles in diameter, which centered on Aniakchak Caldera. [79]

The NPS was unwilling to see such a drastic reduction in the initially-proposed boundaries. It

knew, from the USGS reports, that geologists had found little cause for optimism in the area's

oil potential. It may also have known that none of the land which had been opened to oil permit

activities in the early to mid-1920s had ever been drilled upon, much less enjoyed commercial

success. (The GLO cancelled the various oil permits in 1931 and 1932.) The NPS, therefore,

responded to the USGS's boundary by eliminating the portion of the proposed monument which

had been located south of the Meshik River. The potential oil-bearing province west of Kujulik

Bay was thus excluded from the monument. [80]

The NPS emerged from its consultation with other agencies with a smaller monument than it

had originally proposed. Its boundary was far larger than the USGS would have preferred; the

NPS, however, felt that its alternative boundary was defensible. [81] The proposed monument

was then presented to various Alaskan officials for their consideration.

The Aniakchak proposal, as noted above, was brought forth at the same time that Katmai

National Monument was being considered for expansion. In addition, the conservation

community was lobbying for a national monument on Chichagof Island in order to protect the

brown bear population. The Aniakchak area was significant for its geological values; the nature

of its resources was fundamentally different from the other two areas, which were being

considered for their wildlife resources. Little was known, at that time, of the Aniakchak area

bear population. Walter Smith and Arthur Baker, in their 1922 report for the USGS, noted that

"bears seem to be [relatively] numerous in the more remote parts of the peninsula," and three

years later, Russell Knappen of the USGS reported that he had seen 54 bears during his summer

of field work. [82] The Aniakchak area, however, was so remote that few if any outsiders

hunted in the area. Most federal officials, territorial officials, and conservation leaders were

similarly ignorant of the area's wildlife resources.

Although the Aniakchak proposal was geological in nature and thus distinct from the Katmai

and Chichagof proposals, it was inevitable that the three monuments would be compared and

contrasted as a package. On March 13, the NPS presented the three proposals to Hugh W.

Terhune, the Alaska Game Warden, and Charles H. Flory, the Regional Forester of Alaska.

Both men abhorred the idea of a national monument on Chichagof Island. Perhaps because of

its relative lack of resource conflicts, they considered the Aniakchak area to be "of outstanding

interest." Creating a national monument there, furthermore, "would probably do more toward

bear protection in Alaska than the other two projects." [83]

What happened next is uncertain. Between mid-March and early April 1931, NPS officials

apparently met and decided to discard both the Aniakchak and Chichagof proposals in favor of

an expansion to Katmai National Monument. The existence of the oil permits may have caused

the NPS to be gun-shy about pushing the Aniakchak proposal; the agency was also tacitly

aware that no scientific or conservation organizations had expressed support for such a

monument. The NPS, in comparing the three proposals, probably recognized that expanding

Katmai gave it the opportunity to protect a well-known population of bears which might

otherwise have been endangered. By contrast, Aniakchak's resources--despite Father Hubbard's
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 13)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap13.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:21 PM]

publicity--were not particularly well known. The site, moreover, was remote, and the area's

geological and biological resources were not in danger. That it was easier to manage one

monument than two may have also been a factor in the agency's decision to bypass the

Aniakchak proposal.

By April 8, NPS staff had decided upon the Katmai proposal to the exclusion of all others.

Once they had done so, they quickly prepared a presidential proclamation and forwarded it to

Secretary of the Interior Ray Wilbur. He, in turn, sent it on to President Hoover who, on April

24, 1931, signed the proclamation which expanded Katmai National Monument. [84] The

agency dropped the matter of an Aniakchak National Monument at that time, and did not

consider it again until the 1960s.

Land Use Development, 1931-1970

Soon after the NPS considered the area as a national monument, commercial clamming interests

discovered the beaches of Aniakchak Bay. Razor clams were found in Aniakchak Lagoon as

well as on beaches to the south. Axel Olsen located a cannery at the southwestern end of the

bay in the summer of 1932, and 12,948 pounds of clams were processed there that year. Clams

were hauled from the harvesting areas to the cannery by automobile. The cannery operated for

only a short time. Local sources have suggested that it failed because the clams were too sandy,

because transportation costs were too high, or because intensive harvesting reduced the clam

population to noncommercial levels. The clam population eventually rebounded, and in recent

years Kodiak fishermen have harvested the Aniakchak Lagoon clam beds. Commercial

operations, however, never returned to the area. By 1977, all that remained of the 1930s-era

cannery was "a pile of wood and machine parts in the grass along the coastline." Most

prominent among the rubble was the cannery's boiler and an automobile skeleton. [85]

During the Second World War, Port Heiden was the site of an air base. General Simon B.

Buckner, head of the Army's Alaska war effort, requested in the early summer of 1941 that a

staging base be built there in support of activities in the Aleutian Islands. The air base, called

Fort Morrow, was one of several landing sites which pilots could use while flying between

Elmendorf Field (Anchorage) and Cape Field (on Umnak Island, near Dutch Harbor). Fort

Morrow was abandoned by the military shortly after the end of the war; the airfield, however, is

still maintained. There are numerous quonset huts and other wartime structures still evident at

the site, although most have been partially dismantled for their lumber. [86]

During the late 1940s, the Aniakchak area continued to support some of the same activities

which had taken place before the war. A few trappers still roamed over portions of the

Aniakchak River drainage, and fish traps continued to operate on Cape Kumlik and near the

mouth of Aniakchak Lagoon. By 1950, however, both of those activities had ceased.

Afterwards, most of those who visited the area were local residents. Subsistence uses lured

Meshik and Chignik residents into the area in order to harvest the area's game animals (chiefly

caribou and moose), fish, and berries. In addition, a few Chignik residents, using purse seiners,

fished commercially along the Pacific Coast and made occasional stops along the coastline. No

permanent residents lived north of Chignik, east of Meshik, or south of Ugashik. [87]

During the early 1950s, development interests considered the area for commercial pumice

production. As noted in Chapter 11, the Anchorage area construction industry had been eyeing

the pumice deposits of the Katmai coastline since 1947. A study of six sites along the coast

showed that Kukak Bay offered excellent possibilities as a pumice extraction site. The NPS,

however, was reluctant to open the national monument to commercial mining. The Secretary of

the Interior hoped that the issue might be defused if an alternate extraction site could be found

outside the monument, so in 1950 he prevailed on the U.S. Geological Society to study two new
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 13)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap13.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:21 PM]

areas: the Aniakchak-Veniaminof area and Augustine Island. R. M. Moxham, the geologist

assigned to the task, surveyed four sites in the Aniakchak-Veniaminof area. He concluded that

the distance from Anchorage and the poor quality of the local pumice deposits made all four

sites relatively unfavorable for development. Since the early 1950s, few have shown an interest

in the Aniakchak area's pumice deposits. [88]

In the late 1950s, the area was subject to a renewed round of oil speculation activity. Interest in

Alaska's petroleum possibilities had been growing since World War II, and Richfield Oil

Corporation's major oil strike, on the Kenai Peninsula in July 1957, brought on a heightened

degree of interest. In the Aniakchak area, the first 2560-acre oil and gas lease was filed in

March 1957. During the next four years, more than 70 others applied for a lease. These leases,

however, were just as unsuccessful as the oil permits of the 1920s had been. So far as is known,

no drilling or other field development ever resulted from the flurry of lease applications. [89]

Before 1950, the Aniakchak area was generally unknown to sport hunters. That year, however,

a local guide named Alec Pedersen began conducting hunts in the area. He used the CRPA

bunkhouse, at the mouth of the Aniakchak River, as a base camp. The area became an

increasingly popular hunting destination, particularly to bear and caribou hunters, and by the

1960s other guides had also entered the area. By the end of the decade several lodges had been

established in the area; they attracted, and continue to attract, a small number of Outside

sportsmen. [90]

Farther Bernard R. Hubbard, a Jesuit priest, explorer, and geologist, travelled through the Aniakchak area in June

1930 with a small group of Sana Clara University students. The top photo is taken just east of the mouth of the

Aniakchak river; it shows two barabaras, a small offshore island, and a cannery tender. The bottom photo shows

Aniakchak Caldera as it looked prior to the 1931 eruption of Vent mountain. (National Geographic Magazine,

September 1931, 324)
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 13)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap13.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:21 PM]

(top) In June 1931, Hubbard (right), along with pilot Harry Blunt (left) and Al Monsen, flew over Aniakchak

Caldera but were unable to land. Later that summer, Hubbard and a group of students hiked into the caldera from

Kujulik Bay. (bottom) A year later, pilot Frank Dorbrandt flew Hubbard and his students into the caldera and

landed on Surprise Lake. The photo shows (left to right) Father Hubbard, student Ken Chisholm, Native guide

George Peterson, students Rod Chisholm and Ed Levin, and Father Galtes. (Santa Clara University Collection,

photos ACK-00-15 (top) and ACK-35-263 (bottom) )
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 13)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap13.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:21 PM]

In July 1973, NPS photographer Keith Trexler took this photo of a local fisherman drying salmon on a grassy

knoll just east of the mouth of the Aniakchak River. (NPS, AKSO Slide # 5463-32)
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 13)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap13.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:21 PM]

The top photo, which looks east, shows the area surrounding the Columbia River Packers Association bunkhouse,

at the north end of Aniakchak Bay, as it looked in July 1973. A wood-roofed barabara is in the foreground. the

bottom photo, taken in August 1990, shows the same area looking in the opposite direction. (NPS, AKSO Slide #

5463-22 (top); author's collection (bottom) )

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

adhi/chap13.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 14)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap14.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:26 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

PART II: ANIAKCHAK NATIONAL MONUMENT AND PRESERVE

Chapter 14:

Aniakchak and the Alaska Lands Question

During the 1960s, the National Park Service administered only four units in Alaska: Mount

McKinley National Park and Katmai, Glacier Bay, and Sitka national monuments. Although

all four units had been incrementally increased in size over the years, no new area had been

created since 1925. For decades afterward, the agency had been unable to maintain even a

token presence in the various Alaska national monuments, but in the 1950s an increasing

NPS budget, the implementation of the Mission 66 program, and pressure from Alaskan

development interests had brought about the construction of the first visitor facilities.

In January 1964, George B. Hartzog, Jr. became NPS director. Hartzog wanted to be sure that

the "surviving landmarks of our national heritage" would be protected, and recognized that if

any significant park system growth was to occur, that growth would have to be in Alaska.

That November, therefore, he appointed the so-called Alaska Task Force--composed of

Sigurd F. Olson, Robert S. Luntey, George L. Collins, Doris F. Leonard, and John M.

Kauffmann--to prepare an analysis of "the best remaining possibilities for the service in

Alaska." The report that emerged from that effort, called Operation Great Land, evaluated 39

zones and sites across the state which contained recreational, natural, or historic values. It

was the first report to contain a statewide survey of areas which had park potential. Two of

those areas were the Aniakchak Crater Zone and the Mt. Veniaminof Zone, both of which

had been proposed as national monuments in 1931. The Aniakchak Crater Zone, which was

"possibly 20 miles square," was nominated because it was "one of several recently active

volcanoes on the Alaska Peninsula and Aleutian Chain which possess symmetrical beauty

and possibly other values warranting conservation and/or interpretation." [1]

In 1966 the NPS asked Roger Allin, a longtime Fish and Wildlife Service employee in

Alaska, to prepare his own recommendations for future parks. Allin's report, entitled Alaska:

A Plan for Action, was relatively brief, and suggested the creation of just four new park

areas. Those areas were roughly equivalent to today's Wrangell-St. Elias, Gates of the Arctic,

and Lake Clark NPS areas, along with Wood-Tikchik State Park. He mentioned the

Aniakchak area in his report, but suggested that it be considered for parkland "at some future

date." Allin also suggested that NPS officials pay "early attention" to the Service's two

landmark programs. [2]

In 1967, the agency responded to Allin's recommendations when the Aniakchak area was

evaluated by the National Natural Landmarks Program. This program, which was created by

the Secretary of the Interior in 1962, was intended to identify and encourage the preservation

of areas with unique and significant natural values. For its first several years, the program did

not apply to Alaska. Then, on May 3, 1967, Assistant NPS Director Theodor Swem made

$20,000 available to the University of Alaska to study potential sites in the state. The

Aniakchak and Veniaminof areas were among ten sites which were examined that year. [3]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 14)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap14.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:26 PM]

Alaskasearch, the company which evaluated the various sites, felt that Aniakchak Crater was

fully eligible as a national natural landmark. Ellis Taylor, the author of the report, noted that

Aniakchak, the real estate agent would say, has everything. Scientific

importance, popular appeal, dramatic, heroic proportions, a mysterious past and

an unpredictable, possibly spectacular geologic future, even hot and cold running

water.

The consultant found that "From no viewpoint is Aniakchak unimpressive," and it stated that

the crater "is recognized by geologists as an outstanding feature, unmatched in many ways,

by volcanic phenomena of far greater renown." The report's recommendations were quickly

seconded by Interior Department officials. In November 1967 the NPS, which was

responsible for carrying out the NNL program, approved the designation of Aniakchak Crater

as a National Natural Landmark. The 20,000-acre site, however, could not receive official

designation until it received the Interior Secretary's approval. In 1969, former Alaska

governor Walter Hickel became the Interior Secretary, and in August 1970 he gave final

approval to the NNL designation. The landmark was later renamed Aniakchak Caldera. [4]

During the late 1960s and early 1970s, the NPS continued to formulate plans to create new

parklands in Alaska. As noted in Chapter 5, the agency proposed several new park units

during the waning days of the Johnson administration, and one monument extension--at

Katmai--was implemented. Other park proposals, propounded by both the Interior Secretary

and by Alaska's Congressional delegation, did not survive. None mentioned Aniakchak. [5]

In November 1971, NPS personnel produced two rough blueprints for future Alaska

parklands. Richard Stenmark, an Anchorage-based employee who had served as an advisor

to Secretary of the Interior Walter Hickel, laid out a "National Park System Alaska Plan"

which included a list of potential historical, natural, and recreational areas in the state. That

same month, Director Hartzog produced a map of potential national parks and monuments.

His map, in many ways, paralleled Stenmark's list. Hartzog, however, envisioned an

Aniakchak Crater National Monument, whereas Stenmark failed to include it. [6]

Interior Department Boundary Proposals

A month later, on December 18, 1971, President Nixon signed into law the Alaska Native

Claims Settlement Act. As noted in Chapter 5, the act set into motion nine years of activity

regarding the disposition of Alaska's federally-managed lands. The Department of the Interior

was the focus of activity for the first several years after ANCSA's passage. Intense debate

took place over the number of acres that would be divided between Federal agencies, the

State of Alaska, and various Native corporations; within the Federal government, equally

intensive debate took place between the NPS, the Fish and Wildlife Service (and its Bureau

of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife), the Bureau of Land Management, and the U.S. Forest

Service. The various agencies made their recommendations by 1975; not until 1977, however,

did Congress confront the Alaska lands question. As shall be seen, Congress was unable to

come up with a workable plan during the seven-year period which ANCSA had designated

for that purpose. President Carter, therefore, allowed for a continuation of Congress's

deliberations when he created a series of national monuments in December 1978. The House

passed its version of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act in May 1979. In

August 1980, the Senate passed a somewhat different bill. Shortly after Reagan's election in

November, the House agreed to the Senate's version, and Carter signed the bill into law on

December 2.

The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act stated that any lands proposed for one of the four
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 14)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap14.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:26 PM]

conservation systems (the so-called "d-2" lands) had to be withdrawn within nine months,

and Interior Department officials recognized that a preliminary land withdrawal needed to be

made within ninety days. Based on those deadlines, the NPS had no time to waste in

beginning its planning effort.

In late December, Richard Stenmark flew to Washington, and by January 4 he had completed

an initial identification of NPS interest areas. The January list was based, to a large extent on

his November 1971 compilation. Significantly, however, the November list had omitted

Aniakchak; two months later, however, he included a 167,000-acre Aniakchak Crater unit.

The NPS was not the only agency which coveted the area. On January 7, the Bureau of Sport

Fisheries and Wildlife released its own list of interest areas; Aniakchak Crater was included

on that agency's "wish list" as well. [7] That conflict was eliminated in favor of the NPS on

March 9, when Interior Secretary Rogers C. B. Morton withdrew approximately 80 million

acres of "d-2" lands. Fourteen areas, comprising 33.4 million acres, were withdrawn to the

NPS. One of those areas was Aniakchak Crater, which comprised 279,914 acres--over

100,000 acres larger than Stenmark had originally recommended in January. Areas outside of

the March withdrawal area were open to selection by the state or by Native corporations. [8]

The NPS, hoping to learn as much as they could about the lands in and around the March

withdrawals, commenced a review of applicable lands soon afterwards. The agency created

the 35-member Alaska Task Force, whose purpose it was to compile available information

about the proposed park units. The ATF was subdivided into several teams. Team 4,

organized to fashion reports for the Aniakchak, Katmai, and Lake Clark proposals, consisted

of Urban E. Rogers, John Dennis, James Isenogle, and Keith Trexler. [9]

In July, in a meeting with Secretary Morton, the ATF recommended that eleven areas,

totalling 48.9 million acres, be studied as additions to the NPS system. One of those areas,

Aniakchak Crater, was to extend out over 740,240 acres, almost three times the size of what

Morton had withdrawn four months earlier. [10] Renewed efforts then began to balance the

demands of the various conservation agencies. On September 13, at the end of the ninemonth deadline imposed by ANCSA, Morton withdrew 79.3 million acres for the four

conservation systems. The share he recommended for inclusion into the NPS, 41.7 million

acres, was midway between what the agency had been provided in the March withdrawal and

what it had requested in July. But the Aniakchak Crater withdrawal, at 740,200 acres,

remained almost as large as NPS leaders had recommended in July. The monument included

much of today's monument and preserve; in addition, it included Cape Kumliun, the Weasel

Mountain area, and much of the Meshik River valley. [11]

Provisions in ANCSA decreed that by December 18, 1973, the Secretary of the Interior had to

issue a final legislative recommendation on which Alaska lands would be considered for the

four conservation systems. In order to effectively fulfill that recommendation, intensive study

of each area would be needed. A conceptual master plan, a draft environmental statement

(DES), and detailed legislative support data would have to be completed by that date for each

area. The NPS had already spent time in the field gathering data intended to meet the

September 1972 deadline. Additional data would now be needed to establish the resource

values within each unit. [12]

In June 1973, the task force issued a preliminary DES and master plan for the Aniakchak

area. It was the first Aniakchak document the agency had released to the public. The plan

called for a huge, 1.5 million acre Aniakchak Caldera National Recreation Area (see Map

14a). The acreage was twice as large as anything which the agency had proposed before. The

plan was also remarkable in that it proposed a national recreation area--not a national

monument--and the name of the area's major feature had been changed from a crater to a
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 14)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap14.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:26 PM]

caldera. [13] The new boundaries extended along the Pacific Coast from Cape Kunmik to

Chignik Bay, and along the Bristol Bay coastline from Cape Menshikof to the south end of

Port Heiden. Even Meshik village was included. The task force justified the expanded

boundaries because it wanted to include a representative sample of Alaska Peninsula

ecosystems and because it hoped to include entire drainage basins whenever possible. The

Bristol Bay lands were included in order to preserve significant caribou habitat; the Hook and

Kujulik bays were included because they offered relatively high quality landing places. [14]

Map 14. Aniakchak Administrative Proposals, 1973. (click image for an

enlargement in a new window)

The task force distributed the document to various governmental bodies, Native groups, and

conservation organizations. Several of the report recipients--most probably the State of

Alaska and various Native groups--protested the proposed plans. They pointed out that the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 14)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap14.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:26 PM]

area which was bounded by the caldera, the upper Cinder River drainage, Amber and

Aniakchak bays, and the upper Meshik River drainage had been withdrawn as "d-2" land in

1972, and the only encumbrances on that land were the regional and village deficiency lands

(noted above) which had been applied for by Native corporations. Outside the "d-2" lands,

however, most of the land in the proposed park unit had been selected by the State of Alaska,

by Meshik village, or by the Koniag Regional Corporation. Those state and the various

Native groups took a dim view of being included in an NPS unit. Another difficulty in the

plan was the existence of 115 mining claims on Cape Kumliun, at the south end of the

proposed unit. [15]

Those protests were heeded by NPS officials. When the Alaska Planning Group, [16] in July

1973, presented its latest land use recommendations to the Assistant Secretary of the Interior,

it called for only a 680,000-acre Aniakchak Caldera National Monument among the 49.1

million acres it suggested for national park units. The area recommended was less than half

the size of the park unit which had been recommended a month earlier; it was slightly

smaller than what Secretary Morton had decided upon in September 1972. The idea of a

national recreation area was discarded, never to be brought up again. [17]

On December 18, 1973, just two years after ANCSA became law, Secretary Rogers C. B.

Morton made his final recommendations to Congress. He recommended that 83.5 million

acres be added to the national park, wildlife refuge, national forest, and wild and scenic river

systems. Only 32.6 million acres, however, were recommended for NPS management, and he

proposed a mere 580,000 acres for Aniakchak Caldera National Monument, far less than had

been recommended in June. [18] (See Map 14b.) Gone was the middle Meshik River valley,

Cape Kumliun, and the Weasel Mountain area. Several of the eliminated lands re-emerged as

Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs). [19] The APG identified three such areas: 1) a

206,000-acre area northwest of the proposal, along the Bristol Bay coast, 2) an 82,000-acre

area just west of Aniakchak Caldera, and 3) Sutwik Island, 46,000 acres in extent. The

boundaries that remained in the monument itself were similar to those in today's monument

and preserve. [20]

The 580,000-acre recommendation was a painful compromise, unacceptable to advocates in

both the conservation and development communities. The National Parks and Conservation

Association called the acreage "less than optimal" because it had been promulgating a 1.7

million acre proposal which would have included the Meshik and Cinder River watersheds,

the Bristol Bay coast, and Cape Kumliun. The State of Alaska, on the other hand,

recommended that a mere 138,000 acres be protected; it saw little need to protect anything

but the caldera and the acreage immediately beyond. [21]

Interior Department Land Use Proposals

Before 1972, the National Park Service knew virtually nothing about the Aniakchak area.

Some NPS staff may have been aware of the data Albright had collected relative to the

proposed 1931 monument; beyond that, information was probably limited to that written by

Father Hubbard and by U.S. Geological Survey personnel. Between March 1972 and June

1973, Alaska Task Force personnel were asked to supply sufficient resource information for

a preliminary draft environmental statement and master plan; by December 1973, a DES and

final master plan were due.

Planners, as they commenced their studies, knew that Aniakchak presented special problems.

For example, the area was of particular interest to Native groups. ANCSA, the act which had

started the "d-2" process, had granted 40 million acres of land (and almost $1 billion) to

Alaska's Natives. Soon after ANCSA's passage, Koniag, Incorporated (a newly-established
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 14)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap14.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:26 PM]

Native regional corporation) announced its intention to file for thousands of acres of socalled regional deficiency lands in the proposed park unit. In addition, the Afognak village

corporation got ready to file for a large amount of village deficiency lands. Natives wanted

full title over some of those lands; on other lands, it applied only for subsurface (i.e., mineral)

rights. In addition, several individual Natives filed for land parcels in the area. In one

category or another, Native corporations claimed most of the area within present-day

Aniakchak National Preserve. [22]

Hunting was another concern altogether. The NPS did not normally allow hunting in national

parks or monuments, and when the Alaska lands process began (after the passage of ANCSA)

it fully anticipated that hunting would be similarly prohibited in the proposed parks of the

forty-ninth state. But a roundabout series of events quickly derailed those assumptions.

The problem began in early 1972, shortly after the passage of ANCSA. The December 1971

act placed a 90-day freeze on much of Alaska's federal lands in order to give Federal

agencies, as noted above, the opportunity to make preliminary land selections. In March

1972, at the end of the 90-day period designated by ANCSA, Interior Secretary Rogers C. B.

Morton withdrew 80 million acres of Federal lands. But two months earlier, on January 21,

the state had filed for 77 million acres of federal land; it did so in order to fulfill its

obligations under the 1958 Statehood Act, which allowed the state to select 103 million acres

of land for its own use. Not surprisingly, much of the land in the two selections overlapped;

in fact, 42 million of the 80 million acres which Morton withdrew had been selected two

months earlier by the state. Alaska's Attorney General, John Havelock, was so incensed at

Secretary Morton's action that on April 10, he sued the Federal government in order to gain

title to the state's full allotment. That lawsuit, Egan v. Morton, was settled on September 2 in

an out-of-court agreement made without the consultation (and over the objections) of NPS

officials. [23] In that agreement, the state agreed to drop its claim on the 42 million acres

which had been claimed by both parties. In return, the Interior Department agreed to a series

of provisions. One of those provisions opened 124,000 acres of land in the Aniakchak area--

around Amber Bay, Cape Kumlik, and Aniakchak Bay--to sport hunting. [24] (See Map 15.)

Map 15. Areas Recommended as Open to Sport Hunting as a Result of September 2, 1972
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 14)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap14.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:26 PM]

Memorandum of Understanding Between the Federal and State Governments. (click image for

an enlargement in a new window)

It is not known why the Aniakchak area became the first Federal area that the state demanded

to be opened to hunters. Outside sportsmen had been visiting the area for more than a decade

in search of brown bear, moose, and caribou. Use, however, was not heavy, and several other

Federal areas--the Lake Clark area or the Wrangell-St. Elias area, for instance--were more

popular to the hunting fraternity.

The Alaska Task Force planners recognized that both the hunting areas, and the areas of

interest to Native corporations, were located in areas close to the Pacific coastline. They also

recognized that the area was being preserved because of two primary features: a dry caldera

"where visitors can walk within a mountain," and "a river which can be followed from its

origin within a mountain to its mouth at the sea." For each of those reasons, initial

(September 1972) plans concentrated park development in the caldera and river area. The

primary development and interpretive sites, therefore, were on the southwestern side of the

caldera and on Surprise Lake within the caldera. There was also a proposed campground on

the Aniakchak River; it was located just outside "The Gates," a gap in the caldera's eastern

wall. Other proposed development sites were located on Meshik Lake and Hook Bay; the

park headquarters, visitor center, and a campground were all to be located at Meshik village.

In order to access the various sites, the agency planned three different transportation modes:

floatplanes, tour boats, and all-terrain vehicles. By June 1973, development had been

expanded to include campgrounds at the mouth of the Aniakchak River and on Sutwik

Island. [25]

The June 1973 report had called for the establishment of a national recreation area

surrounding Aniakchak Caldera. The designation at first seemed inappropriate because the

area appeared to have such a low potential for recreational development. But a recreation

area, not a national monument, was suggested for two reasons. First, sport hunting (because

of the September 1972 agreement) had to be allowed in the coastal portion of the proposed

unit; second, Koniag Incorporated was interested in mining some of the lands it had selected

(and had a legal right to do so). A recreation area, therefore, was an appropriate designation

for a park unit (such as this one) where a relatively broad range of land uses was allowed.

Consistent with the recreation area designation, the NPS proposed to open all of Aniakchak

area to mineral extraction, so long as it was "consistent with other values." It also proposed

that hunting be allowed throughout the unit, except within the caldera itself. [26]

The December 1973 Draft Environmental Statement and Master Plan made several significant

modifications to the earlier plans. Development plans were changed to eliminate the proposed

facilities at Sutwik Island and Hook Bay (which were now located outside the proposed unit)

and to add a foot trail which would parallel the entire length of the Aniakchak River. The

surface transportation network proposed in June remained. All references to all-terrain

vehicles, however, were eliminated; in its place, the report noted that "Surface corridors will

be set aside after research determines the type of vehicle and corridor management which

will not permanently damage the surface." [27] The land uses proposed in the December 1973

plan were more restrictive than the June plan had been, perhaps because a national

monument--not a recreation area--was being proposed. Hunting was still allowed, but only

on the coastal area which had been subject to the September 1972 agreement. Mining was

also more restricted; the plan called for its prohibition except where Natives had selected

subsurface rights. [28]

The December DES also indicated that the Aniakchak River had been nominated to the

National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. As noted in Chapter 5, Congress passed a law in

1968 which created such a system, and by February 1970 the Secretary of Agriculture and
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 14)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap14.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:26 PM]

Secretary of the Interior had agreed on a series of supplemental criteria by which wild and

scenic rivers would be established. The Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, which was assigned

the task of evaluating Alaska's rivers, sponsored an interagency float trip down the

Aniakchak River in July 1973. The state and federal personnel which participated in the river

trip took three tumultuous days to float the 27-mile river. The group concluded that its scenic

and recreational values were high and the commodity values of adjacent lands were low.

They therefore urged the BOR to recommend that the entire river area, including the portion

of it located inside the caldera, be classified as a so-called "wild" river. (Wild rivers were the

most restrictive of three river categories in the system.) They further noted that if the river did

not become part of the proposed monument, it should be protected as a separate entity in the

National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. [29]

The issuance, in December 1973, of the Aniakchak DES and Master Plan documents

signalled the beginning of a six-month public comment period. The documents were

distributed to a wide variety of interest groups and individuals, many of whom responded

with opinions and suggestions. The Alaska Planning Group digested those suggestions and in

October 1974 issued its Final Environmental Statement. The report offered few major

changes from those proposed the previous December. The development plan remained much

as it had been before, and the degree to which mining and hunting would be allowed was

similarly unchanged. [30]

NPS Keyman Activities

The October 1974 boundary and land use recommendations remained until 1977, when

Congress began using them as a basis for legislation. During the interim, the NPS did what it

could to gather new information about the proposed unit. Most of it was gained through the

efforts of Ralph Root, the so-called "keyman" for Katmai and Aniakchak, who worked out of

the Alaska Area Office from July 1975 through March 1977. (See Chapter 5.)

Root began his tenure by inspecting the two proposal areas. Then, after learning what the

FES had planned for the area, he met with other task force personnel to set priorities for

proposed studies. The FES had provided a multiplicity of purposes for the proposed

monument, so Root and his colleagues simplified the situation. He noted that

Primary stress will be placed on the caldera, its flanks, and related geology, as

well as on the entire Aniakchak River drainage system, and not on wildlife

values. Research on volcanic features and mechanisms, as well as the study of

plant succession in and around the caldera will be emphasized. [31]

In January 1976, he followed through on the results of that priority list by proposing a

geological study of the monument, to include both an overview and a description of areas of

special geological interest. By August, the study had been awarded to Dr. Robert Forbes of

the University of Alaska Fairbanks' Geophysical Institute. Forbes soon learned, however, that

the U.S. Geological Survey had recently completed a study in the area and that the agency

was planning to conduct many of the same activities that were specified in his contract. He

therefore deferred to the USGS and returned the contract award to the NPS. [32] The USGS,

true to its word, completed the first of several agency-sponsored studies of Aniakchak

caldera in 1977, and has continued to produce various technical papers on the area's geology.

No geological overview of the Aniakchak area, however, was ever produced. [33]

Root also tried to stimulate other avenues of research, particularly into plant succession in the

proposal area. In June 1976, he urged the funding of a biological survey of the monument;

four months later, he noted that "a study of existing vegetational patterns and successional
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 14)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap14.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:26 PM]

trends ... is necessary as baseline data upon which to measure future visitor impact on

vegetation, especially in the caldera." [34] He also urged the completion of a cultural

resource survey, and a peregrine falcon nesting and population survey. None of these studies,

however, were undertaken during the post-ANCSA planning period. The only related study

which shed light on the agency's research needs was a ADF&G-sponsored bear migration

study which was conducted from 1970 through 1975. This study covered a 2800-square mile

area, which included most of the proposed monument; the geographical focus of the study

was Black Lake, over forty miles southwest of the caldera. [35]

Root, and the agency, had many other concerns to contend with during this period. Hunting,

for example, was a high visibility problem. Some organized groups, such as the Alaska

Department of Fish and Game and the Alaska Professional Hunters' Association, saw the

September 1972 agreement between the state and federal government as an opening round

victory. Based on that agreement, they fought to open the entire proposal area to hunting.

Environmental groups, on the other hand, tried to ignore the agreement and demanded that

hunting be prohibited throughout the proposal area. [36]

The NPS was caught in a quandary on the issue. The agency knew it had to allow hunting in

the proposal area; it could not, however, decide how much hunting area to allow. In

December 1975, Area Director G. Bryan Harry told a group of hunters that the area open to

hunting might well extend beyond the parcels outlined in the September 1972 agreement; the

only area which he insisted be closed was the caldera itself. [37] The agency continued, as it

had since 1973, to propose that the entire proposal acreage be included within a national

monument. But in March 1976, after much internal discussion, the NPS changed course and

decided that the proposal area should be divided into a 340,000-acre national monument,

where hunting would be prohibited, and a 240,000-acre national preserve, where hunting

would be allowed. Two years before, the agency had created the first two national preserves--

at Big Cypress in Florida and Big Thicket in Texas--in order to designate park units which

allowed hunting. Aniakchak, it was proposed, would follow that model. That November,

however, just three days after Jimmy Carter was elected president, the agency reverted back

to its previous position and espoused a 580,000-acre national monument with "specified

lands that would be zoned to permit sport hunting." [38]

Many of the difficulties regarding hunting in the Aniakchak area were based on a lack of

data. The agency's only statistical source for harvest data was the harvest tags turned in by

hunters. These data were gathered by game management unit. The various game management

units were far larger than the proposed park unit; statistics on harvest data, therefore, were

poor indicators of how much hunting took place in the Aniakchak area. [39] To learn more

about area hunting patterns, the NPS agreed to sponsor a study of the monument's subsistence

and sport hunting activities. That study was performed in 1975-77 by Merry Tuten, who

worked under the auspices of the University of Alaska-Fairbanks Cooperative Park Studies

Unit. Tuten's research concluded that the subsistence harvest was not sufficiently strong to

demand hunting restrictions. She stressed, however, the preliminary nature of her research.

She noted that the Alaska Fish and Game Department should be ready to reduce the amount

of sport hunting allowed if the population of game animals fell. [40]

Finally, Root gained valuable information on area development plans by the various Native

corporations. Bristol Bay Native Corporation, which had interests in the western end of the

proposed park unit, and Koniag, Inc., which had interests in the central and eastern portions,

had aggressive development plans for the area. A BBNC leader, for instance, urged that the

NPS construct a permanent visitor shelter within the caldera (the agency had proposed only

an unimproved interpretive site), and a Koniag official hoped that "some form of visitor

services," presumably a lodge or other tourist node, would be established in the area. [41]

Both corporations hoped to establish a wide variety of economic development projects on
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 14)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap14.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:26 PM]

their lands, and the creation of an NPS unit in their midst promised to enhance visitor

development possibilities. The regional corporations themselves, however, showed little

interest in spurring that development.

Mining was the other activity which Native corporation officials hoped to develop. The U.S.

Geological Survey and the state's Division of Geological and Geophysical Survey, in their

various reports, had offered few indications of mineralization in the proposal area, and no

known mining claims had been established within the proposed boundaries. [42] In 1975,

however, a geochemical reconnaissance financed by Koniag Corporation located a porphyrytype copper deposit, with above normal amounts of copper, molybdenum, lead, zinc, and

silver, in a two-mile-long band on Cape Kumlik. In 1976 the corporation announced that it

was actively "pursuing the exploration of mineral values" in the area. The NPS knew that

Koniag would develop the area if it was profitable to do so, and the agency made plans to

respond to the development, either by allowing an access road into the area or by excising the

eastern end of Cape Kumlik from the proposed monument. Testing, however, revealed that

mineral values in the area were too low to support a commercial operation, and the

corporation did not implement its development plans. [43]

Koniag also eyed the area's possibilities for oil and gas development. The corporation had no

immediate plans to drill in the area and filed no oil and gas leases, but wanted the right to be

able to develop the area in the future. To foster that development, an amendment was passed

to ANCSA on January 2, 1976 (see Map 16) which gave the corporation subsurface rights to

oil and gas in the eastern half of the proposal area. [44]

Map 16. Areas in Which Subsurface Rights Were Provided to Koniag, Inc. by ANCSA

Amendments of January 2, 1976 (P.L. 94-204, Section 15 (a)). (click image for an enlargement

in a new window)

Scattered oil and gas exploration activities, in fact, took place in the proposal area. During the

summer of 1975, Root discovered that a geophysical seismic crew had been active along

Northeast Creek, north of Amber Bay. A crew was also active at Yantarni Bay, east of the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 14)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap14.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:26 PM]

proposal boundary. A year later, a helicopter-based oil-company crew planned an extensive

exploration in the proposal area. [45]

The NPS put substantial effort into planning for visitation into the area. As noted above, it

had assembled and refined a series of development plans as part of the October 1974 Final

Environmental Statement. During the ensuing years, those plans were modified as staff

gained new knowledge about the area. In the FES, development sites had included the

headquarters and allied facilities (at Meshik village), a developed campground (at Meshik

Lake), two primitive campgrounds (just east of the caldera and at the mouth of Aniakchak

River), and two interpretive sites (on the southwestern rim of the caldera and at Surprise

Lake). Plans called for Meshik village, the caldera rim, and Meshik Lake to be connected by

a multipassenger surface transportation; the nature of the transport system, however, had not

been decided upon. This plan remained intact until November 1976. [46] A month later,

however, new NPS plans emerged which called for the construction of 16' x 20' Panabodestyle backcountry shelters at Meshik Lake, previously a developed campground site; Surprise

Lake, previously an interpretive site; and a newly-designated site along Lava Creek, at the

north end of the proposed unit. NPS staff also modified the proposed transportation system to

eliminate any references to specific routes. [47]

Although NPS officials created relatively sophisticated visitor development plans, they had

few illusions that the creation of a new park unit would result in significant new visitation.

An agency-sponsored study indicated that "Use of planned facilities is expected to remain

well below capacity for many years." The agency predicted that annual visitation in 1980

would remain below 500; by 1985, fewer than 1,000 people would be visiting the park unit

each year. Half of those visitors were expected to be local residents; many of the remainder

would be sport hunters. [48]

The monument, it appeared, would be of little interest to non-hunting recreationalists. Few

were known to have visited the area since Hubbard's expeditions in the 1930s, and only one

was known to publicize his visit. That visitor was Ben Guild, an Eagle River resident. Guild,

a mycologist and former hunting guide, spent six weeks in the caldera in 1973, living in a

tent. He returned there in 1976, constructed a stout 10 x 12 tent cabin and lived in it for a

month. Guild loved the caldera; to show others its beauties, he took photographs, shot

extensive movie footage, and wrote a book on the area's vegetation. Local residents thought

him odd; they called him the "Wild Man of Aniakchak." The NPS, however, was thankful for

his contributions. Staff took advantage of his accommodations as well as his knowledge of

the area; Guild cooperated with them because the NPS, in his opinion, was the agency best

qualified to manage the area. [49]

Congress Establishes the Monument and Preserve

In November 1976, Democratic candidate Jimmy Carter defeated Republican Gerald Ford for

the presidency, and the following January, Congress began its consideration of an Alaska

lands bill. On January 4, environmentalists weighed in with their version of the bill when

Rep. Morris Udall introduced H.R. 39 (see Map 17a). That bill, among its other provisions,

called for the creation of a 580,000-acre Aniakchak National Monument, the same size which

had been called for in the Secretary of the Interior's proposal in December 1973. [50] Udall's

bill, which was intended as an opening gambit and not as a final legislative vehicle,

prohibited sport hunting throughout the monument and did not address the oil and gas

extraction rights which had been included in the 1976 ANCSA amendment. [51]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 14)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap14.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:26 PM]

Map 17. Aniakchak Proposals, 1977. (click image for an enlargement in a new

window)

Those who hoped to minimize the Park Service's role in the state found the acreage in Udall's

bill excessive. Two years before, the State of Alaska and the Joint Federal-State Land Use

Planning Commission had made their own recommendations. The state had recommended a

138,000 acre preserve--just a rectangle which included the caldera and its flanks--where

sport hunting would be allowed. The JSFLUPC, only slightly more protective, recommended

a 183,000 acre monument (sport hunting would be prohibited) plus a broad, east-west

corridor for an Aniakchak Wild and Scenic River. [52] Those recommendations were

incorporated into S. 1787, a so-called "consensus bill" which was introduced by Senator Ted

Stevens on June 30, 1977. This bill (see Map 17b) called for the creation of a 180,000 acre

Aniakchak Caldera National Preserve. [53]

While Congress was holding public hearings on H.R. 39, the Interior Department was making
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 14)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap14.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:26 PM]

its own study of the various proposals. Cecil Andrus, Carter's Secretary of the Interior, let it

be known that he would re-evaluate the previous proposals, noting that the new

administration would not be bound by recommendations "the staff had made in years gone

by." Instead of following the model set by former Secretary Morton, he based his

recommendations on those included within Rep. Udall's H.R. 39. [54] He asked the NPS (and

the other Interior Department agencies) to prepare revised acreage recommendations. Given

the broad expertise which the various keymen had gained over the past two years, NPS

Director William J. Whalen felt comfortable in recommending 50.9 million new acres to the

system. Regarding Aniakchak, he proposed a 345,000-acre national monument and a

212,000-acre national preserve. [55]

Andrus compared the NPS recommendations with those of the other Interior agencies, and on

September 15 issued the Carter administration's legislative recommendations. They called for

the addition of 41.8 million acres to the NPS system. The proposal (see Map 17c) called for a

364,000-acre Aniakchak National Monument and a 249,000-acre Aniakchak National

Preserve. In his testimony before a Congressional subcommittee, he stated that his Aniakchak

proposal had been endorsed by both the State and the Native corporations. It was slightly

larger than Secretary Morton's had been, the boundaries having been changed, where

possible, to follow topographic features rather than township and section lines. Andrus also

noted that

This is basically the same proposal made in 1973 as it relates to land use,

however, the preserve classification is now used for the coastal portions ... in

accordance with traditional classification to allow hunting and oil and gas.

Andrus proposed no "instant" wilderness at Aniakchak for either the monument or preserve.

He did, however, include a provision that both units would be studied for wilderness

designation within seven years after the units were established. [56]

As noted in Chapter 5, the House of Representatives passed an Alaska Lands bill during the

95th Congress. Passage of a modified version of H.R. 39 took place on May 19, 1978;

included in the bill was a provision for a 350,000-acre monument and 160,000-acre preserve

for Aniakchak. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, on October 5, sent the

bill to the full Senate. That bill was so unsupportive of other park areas that conservationists

referred to it as a "rocks and ice" proposal; at Aniakchak, however, it called for a generous

510,000-acre monument and a 140,000-acre preserve. The Senate adjourned without having

passed either the Energy Committee's bill or any other Alaska lands measure. [57]

The administration knew that ANCSA called for the disposition of the Alaska lands issue by

December 18, 1978. Because Congress failed to act on the matter, Secretary Andrus

recommended that President Carter invoke the Antiquities Act and designate much of the

acreage under consideration within national monuments. On December 1, Carter followed up

on Andrus's recommendations and, in a series of presidential proclamations, created 15 new

and two expanded monuments, covering a total of 56 million acres. Proclamation 4612

created the 350,000-acre Aniakchak National Monument (see Map 18a). At the urging of

Secretary Andrus, Carter also withdrew the area between the monument and the coast so that

the next Congress could consider its potential as parkland. [58]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 14)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap14.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:26 PM]

Map 18. Aniakchak Boundaries, 1978-80. (click image for an enlargement in a

new window)

Many Alaskans were angry at what they perceived as the high handed tactics Andrus and

Carter had used in "locking up" the various national monuments. Many, however, felt that the

monuments would be temporary until a Congressional solution to the Alaska lands question

could be found. On January 15, 1979, at the beginning of the 96th Congress, Rep. Morris

Udall reintroduced H.R. 39, a "refinement" of the bill which had passed the House the

previous year. Udall found the passage of a bill rougher than the previous year; even so, he

and Rep. John Anderson (R-IL) were able to push a compromise bill, H.R. 3651, through to

a House vote. The Udall-Anderson bill, renumbered H.R. 39 at the last minute, passed the

House on May 16, 1979. The bill called for the creation, at Aniakchak, of a 350,000-acre

monument and a 160,000-acre preserve. [59]

H.R. 39 was referred to the Senate Energy Committee on May 24. The committee, however,

was in no hurry to proceed, and did not begin its work until October 9. Using Sen. Henry M.

Jackson's S. 9 as a vehicle for markup, the bill moved sporadically until early 1980. The

committee then put off consideration of the bill until July. Environmentalists and Interior

Department officials began to worry that the Senate would refuse to confront the Alaska

lands question again. In February 1980, to prod the Senate into activity, Secretary Andrus

withdrew 36.9 million acres as wildlife refuges and an additional 3.2 million acres of "natural

resource areas" adjacent to recently-designated national monuments. One of the four "natural
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 14)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap14.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:26 PM]

resource area" withdrawals was a 160,000-acre reservation at Aniakchak. [60]

In late July, the Energy Committee resumed its markup of the Alaska lands bill. The bill,

which was heavily influenced by senators Jackson and Stevens, finally emerged from the

committee in mid-August, and on August 18 the full Senate passed Amendment No. 1961, a

substitute for Sen. Jackson's Energy Committee bill. Amendment No. 1961 called for the

inclusion of just 137,000 acres in Aniakchak National Monument. In addition, it proposed a

466,000-acre Aniakchak National Preserve. [61]

Senate leaders adamantly proclaimed that they would not budge from the bill they had

passed. The House, however, was hopeful that a compromise could be reached between the

two bills. Largely because of the dilatory tactics of Sen. Stevens, the two bodies were unable

to reach a compromise, and they were forced to delay their efforts until after the 1980

election. The sweeping Republican victory that year, however, forced Rep. Udall to back

down and agree to the Senate's version of the bill. On December 2, 1980, President Carter

signed the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (Public Law 96-487) into law.

[62] The act created a 602,779-acre Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve (see Map

18b). Within that preserve, it designated the 32-mile Aniakchak River and its 31 miles of

tributaries as wild rivers (according to definitions in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers

Act). None of the acreage in the monument or preserve was designated as wilderness.

Congress did, however, mandate that the area be studied for its wilderness potential with five

years of the act's passage. [63]

The acreage included in the Aniakchak unit was substantially smaller than the 1.5 million

acres that had been proposed, in June 1973, as an Aniakchak Caldera National Recreation

Area. It was dramatically larger, however, than the acreage which NPS officials had called

for in early 1972. Exploration of the area by agency staff helped identify the most significant

areas to protect, and because there were few major land-use conflicts in the area, the area

which had been set aside in December 1973 was similar to that which was included in the

Alaska Lands Act. The only major point of dispute during the seven-year period that led up

to ANILCA was the number of acres in which hunting would be allowed. Viewed in

comparison with the acreages included in various Interior Department plans and the two

House-passed bills, the existing monument and preserve appears to have been advantageous

to sport hunters, miners, and other consumptive user groups.

The Alaska Lands Act gave a far broader purpose for establishing the unit than the Final

Environmental Statement of October 1974 had provided. Section 201(1) of the act declared

that the unit would be managed

To maintain the caldera and its associated features and landscape, including the

Aniakchak River and other lakes and streams, in their natural state; to study,

interpret, and assure continuation of the natural processes of biological

succession; to protect habitat for, and populations of, fish and wildlife, including,

but not limited to, brown/grizzly bears, moose, caribou, sea lions, seals, and

other marine mammals, geese, swans, and other waterfowl and in a manner

consistent with the foregoing, to interpret geological and biological processes for

visitors.

The act also provided that "Subsistence uses by local residents shall be permitted in the

monument [and preserve] where such uses are traditional...." Subsistence uses were permitted

in all of the newly-created preserve areas; it was also allowed in most of the new park and

monument areas. As Merry Tuten had shown in her 1977 report, subsistence was a major

land use in the area, and the new law allowed for its continuation. As was noted in Chapter 5,

however, this provision for subsistence use had not been extended to Katmai National Park
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 14)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap14.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:26 PM]

lands. [64]

The Aniakchak area, at long last, had been given Congressional protection. It was now time

for the National Park Service to manage the area so that its purposes, at outlined above, could

be realized. A large amount of work would need to be accomplished in pursuit of those goals.

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

adhi/chap14.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 15)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap15.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:29 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

PART II: ANIAKCHAK NATIONAL MONUMENT AND PRESERVE

Chapter 15:

Management of Aniakchak National Monument and

Preserve

Initial Planning Efforts

Aniakchak National Monument, covering approximately 350,000 acres, was proclaimed by

President Jimmy Carter on December 1, 1978. As noted in Chapter 14, Carter did not intend

that his action would be permanent, and many hoped that the 96th Congress, which would

meet in 1979 and 1980, would complete what the 95th Congress had failed to do in 1978.

In the meantime, the National Park Service assumed authority over a large expanse of new

acreage. The agency had no management plan for Aniakchak or any of the other new NPS

units, so on December 26, interim management guidelines were issued for the newly-created

parklands. The guidelines recognized that the Bureau of Land Management (which had

previously administered the lands) assumed primary responsibility for interim management,

and were predicated on the assumption that they would be in effect for only a short time. On

June 28, 1979, the NPS issued proposed general management regulations for the new

parklands. Those regulations, however, were never adopted. [1]

The period between December 1978 and December 1980, regarding many of the new Alaska

monuments, was marked by rancor and conflict. Disputes erupted between the BLM and the

NPS over interim management strategy, and communities near several of the new units

loudly protested the presence of the new monuments. The NPS tried to protect the new areas

by reprogramming existing funds that would have brought new staff into the area. That

request, however, was denied. Faced with the prospect of having no protection over the

monuments, the agency reacted by creating the so-called Ranger Task Force. The ad hoc

group was composed of senior level rangers on temporary duty from various Lower 48

assignments.

Little if any conflict took place at Aniakchak. The Congressional deliberations of the 95th

Congress had brought forth few resource conflicts over the area, and as consequence, few

complained when the area was proclaimed a national monument. Local residents appear to

have been supportive of Carter's proclamation, and so far as is known, no one from the

Ranger Task Force had need to visit the area. Use of monument land during 1979 and 1980

continued much as it had in previous years. [2]

The passage of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, which created

Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve, had little immediate effect on the area. The

area acquired its own budget--$61,400 for the 1981 fiscal year. No moves, however, were

made to establish an independent administrative presence. Following an ad hoc, incremental
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 15)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap15.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:29 PM]

philosophy, the agency decided, for the time being, to direct the unit from Katmai National

Park and Preserve's offices in King Salmon, and Dave Morris became the superintendent of

both the Katmai and the Aniakchak NPS units. Despite the plans which had been laid out

during the mid-1970s, there was no attempt to establish a headquarters facility at Meshik

village (Port Heiden). No construction was attempted within Aniakchak's boundaries, either.

The agency recognized that there was little need for an active management presence. No NPS

personnel, in fact, visited Aniakchak for more than one and a half years after President Carter

signed ANILCA into law.

NPS management began to express an interest in the unit in 1982. Two brief visits were

made that summer. The following May, Superintendent Morris helped complete a Statement

for Management which provided a list projects that the agency needed to complete in the

fields of administration, natural resources, cultural resources, and visitor use and

interpretation. The list was unrealistically long--too long to be completed in the short term--

but it provided a basis for future park efforts. [3]

General Management, Land Protection, and Wilderness Plans

Section 1301 of the Alaska Lands Act stated that a "conservation and management plan" had

to be developed and transmitted "to the appropriate Committees of the Congress" by

December 1985. Given such a deadline, the so-called Aniakchak Planning Team--consisting

of the Katmai/Aniakchak superintendent, regional office staff, and planners from the Denver

Service Center--was organized to compile a general management plan, a land protection plan,

and a wilderness suitability review. Concentrated planning efforts began in the summer of

1983. An aerial survey took place. More important, the two-ranger team of George Stroud

and Lynn Fuller spent two months living in the old Columbia River Packers Association

bunkhouse (locally known as the Alaska Packers Association cabin) at the mouth of the

Aniakchak River. Stroud and Fuller made a reconnaissance of the Pacific coastline,

conducted an informal biological survey, and made their presence known to passing fishers

and other area visitors. As a highlight of their summer, Stroud and Fuller joined a three-man

planning team as they explored the caldera and rafted down the Aniakchak River. [4]

In February 1984, the team distributed an "Issues and Management Alternatives" booklet for

public review. The report requested public comment on how the unit should be managed and

suggested three management scenarios. Alternative A called for a continuation of existing,

minimal style of management, where the agency would play a passive, reactionary role.

Alternative B called for the continuation of existing land uses but an increasing level of

resource management and protection. The alternative called for the construction of a patrol

shelter at Meshik Lake, a seasonal ranger station at Port Heiden, and the improvement of the

CRPA cabin at the mouth of the Aniakchak River. Alternative C called for an even higher

level of both use and resource management. It called for a patrol shelter at Meshik Lake;

visitor use shelters in the caldera; a visitor use shelter at the mouth of the Aniakchak River as

well as improvements to the CRPA cabin; the construction, in Port Heiden, of both an area

manager's office and a visitor information station; and the implementation of a surface

transportation system connecting Port Heiden with the caldera rim and other points of

interest. [5]

The alternatives were then presented for informal public review. That June, rangers Stroud

and Fuller returned to the CRPA cabin and continued their work of the year before.

Meanwhile, the planning team began compiling the a draft version of the general

management plan, land protection plan, and wilderness suitability review. They had decided

on a preferred alternative by the end of 1984; the draft document was issued in February

1985. [6]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 15)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap15.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:29 PM]

The draft GMP recognized that the underlying management emphasis was to "better

understand its natural and cultural resources and to ensure that natural ecological processes

and cultural resources are preserved through monitoring and protection activities." In order to

fulfill that philosophy, the draft plan offered elements from both Alternative A and

Alternative B as well as a few elements that had existed in none of the three alternatives.

According to the plan, no new facilities were to be established, either at Port Heiden or

inside of the monument and preserve. The only proposed improvements would be the

restoration of the so-called public use cabin (CRPA cabin) at the mouth of the Aniakchak

River and the laying out of an identified hiking corridor between Meshik village and the

caldera rim. The plan called for the placement of a part-time coordinator in Port Heiden and

Chignik Bay village (but no NPS facilities), and several parts of the unit would be subject to

periodic NPS management activities. Staffing for the unit would consist of a year-round

resource management specialist and two seasonal rangers. [7]

The land protection plan, issued at the same time as the GMP, noted that only 12,507 acres--

just two percent of the monument and preserve--were owned by nonfederal entities. (The

State of Alaska had jurisdiction over three parcels totalling 7,577 acres, and the Port Lions

Village Corporation had gained interim conveyance to a 4,930-acre tract.) But another

206,444 acres in the preserve--some 44 percent of the preserve--had been claimed or

selected, either by Native corporations or Native individuals. The eight different tracts were

primarily located in two large blocks, at the eastern and southern end of the preserve,

respectively; together, the various tracts included most of the preserve's coastline. The largest

claim, noted in Chapter 14, was the 152,780-acre parcel selected by the Koniag Regional

Corporation for in-lieu oil and gas rights.

Neither the eight selected tracts, nor any of the four nonfederal tracts, appeared to be in

imminent danger of development. The National Park Service, therefore, assembled a priority

list for them in the order of their perceived value to the agency. It was most interested in

acquiring Native claims located on the shores of Surprise Lake and Meshik Lake, because

construction of improvements on those parcels would be contrary to park goals as expressed

in the draft GMP. For the same reasons, the agency was next interested in acquiring title to

three tracts which abutted Aniakchak and Amber bays. As called for in the plan, the NPS

outlined six purchasing priorities which included all twelve of the parcels which were not

owned by the federal government. The agency was quick to point out, however, that no funds

had been authorized, appropriated, or obligated for such purchases. [8]

The wilderness suitability review, which was also part of the GMP package, revealed that the

entire monument and preserve was a de facto wilderness. The NPS, however, was in no

position to recommend wilderness on lands over which it did not have full jurisdiction. The

review, therefore, concluded that the 383,887 acres under unencumbered federal jurisdiction

(64 percent of the monument and preserve) were considered suitable for wilderness (see Map

19). The 206,444 acres which had been selected by Native corporations or individuals were

given a "suitability pending" designation, and the 12,507 acres which were in nonfederal

ownership were unsuitable as wilderness. [9]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 15)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap15.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:29 PM]

Map 19. Aniakchak Wilderness Recommendation (1985-88). (click image for an enlargement in

a new window)

Soon after the draft plan was issued, in late April and early May 1985, public meetings were

held in King Salmon, Naknek, Anchorage, and other local communities. [10] The public was

given four months to comment on the draft plan, and the plan was modified to accommodate

many individual concerns. The general level of development recommended in the draft GMP,

however, remained just as it had before. The land protection plan was also the same as

before, except that three tracts--two selected properties and an interim conveyance--had

recently become unencumbered federal land. The two selected properties had been Priority 2

land parcels in the draft land management plan. Because these two parcels were no longer a

problem to NPS land managers, the large in-lieu oil and gas tract became a priority 2 parcel.

The wilderness suitability review was also similar to what had been called for in the draft

plan. The only changes were that the parcels which had recently become unencumbered

federal land were now "suitable" instead of being in the "suitability pending" category. The

final plan declared that 404,962 acres (67 percent of the unit) was suitable for wilderness,

185,310 acres had "suitability pending," and 12,507 acres were unsuitable for wilderness

designation. The three plans were signed by Superintendent David Morris and Regional

Director Boyd Evison in June 1986, by NPS Director William Mott in October 1986, and by

Assistant Secretary of the Interior William Horn in November 1986. [11]

Wilderness Recommendations

As thorough as their efforts had been thus far, NPS planners had one more task to complete

in order to satisfy the ANILCA mandates. As noted above, Section 1317 of the act had

required the completion of a wilderness suitability review for each new park unit by

December 1985. The same section, however, required that by December 1987 the President

"shall advise the Congress of his recommendations with respect to such areas." In order to

provide the information on which such a recommendation could be based, agency planners

began preparing a series of draft environmental impact statements. Work began in March

1986. Beginning in September, the first in a series of wilderness meetings was held around
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 15)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap15.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:29 PM]

the state; one of those meetings was held in King Salmon on October 16, 1986 to discuss

wilderness designation at Aniakchak. Preparation of the Aniakchak EIS followed.

In spite of the Congressional deadline, the draft EIS was not able to be completed until May

1988. The document offered four wilderness alternatives. Alternative 1, a no-action plan,

recommended no wilderness. Alternative 2 offered 293,336 acres of wilderness, or 49 percent

of the combined park and preserve. Alternative 3 offered 451,916 acres of wilderness, or 75

percent of the NPS unit. Alternative 4 recommended wilderness throughout the area. [12]

The public comment period for the report began in mid-May, and in July two public hearings

were held, one in Arlington, Virginia, the other in Anchorage. A public meeting was also

held in King Salmon. The public was given until August 29 to comment. Well over one

hundred people expressed written or oral comments on the draft plan. Based on those

comments, the NPS created a final EIS. They did so quickly, because Congress required that

the document be completed by September 30.

After mulling over its options, NPS planners chose Alternative 2. This alternative, which

recommended wilderness designation for the entire monument, the Aniakchak River system,

and the western side of the Cinder River drainage, was selected because it included the most

valuable features in the unit and the federal lands which surrounded them (see Map 19).

Alternatives 3 and 4 were avoided because they impinged on existing hunting camp

operations and because they conflicted with lands which had been selected by Native

corporations or patented by the State of Alaska. [13]

Congress has not yet acted on the EIS, and Aniakchak still contains no designated wilderness.

Whether wilderness will be created in the near future depends, in part, on the success of

recent legislation which would allow the Koniag Regional Corporation to sell its extensive

in-lieu oil and gas acreage to the Federal government. (See section below.) In October 1990,

Rep. Don Young (R-AK) introduced the Alaska Peninsula Wilderness Designation Act of

1990 (H.R. 5956) which would have designated as wilderness the entire 602,779-acre unit in

addition to providing for the sale of the in-lieu acreage. The bill was submitted in the waning

hours of the 101st Congress--too late for it to be considered in committee. A similar bill,

H.R. 1219, was introduced in March 1991 and fared better than its predecessor. The bill

passed the House on August 3, 1992. The bill was then referred to the Senate Energy and

Natural Resources Committee. The upper chamber, however, did not hold hearings on it and

no further action was taken in the 102nd Congress. [14] In April 1993, similar bills (H.R.

1688 and S.B. 855) were introduced which would have also allowed the sale of Koniag

subsurface rights. The House bill contained language which created wilderness for the entire

monument and preserve; the Senate bill, however, contained no such language. Those bills

were opposed by the Clinton administration; perhaps because of that opposition, neither bill

emerged from its respective committee. [15]

Subsistence Management

As noted above, Section 201(1) of the Alaska Lands Act declared that Aniakchak National

Monument and Preserve would be open to subsistence uses. In order to regulate subsistence,

the act declared that by December 1981, a series of regional advisory councils and local

advisory committees would be established for the state's public lands. It also required the

appointment of a series of National Park Service advisory commissions. Section 808 noted

that

the Secretary [of the Interior] and the Governor shall each appoint three members

to a subsistence resources commission for each national park or park monument
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 15)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap15.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:29 PM]

within which subsistence uses are permitted by this Act. The regional advisory

council ... shall appoint three members to the commission each of whom is a

member of either the regional advisory council or a local advisory committee

within the region and also engages in subsistence uses within the park or park

monument. Within eighteen months from the date of enactment of this Act, each

commission shall devise and recommend to the Secretary and the Governor a

program for subsistence hunting within the park or park monument.... Each year

thereafter, the commission ... shall make recommendations ... for any changes in

the program or its implementation which the commission deems necessary. [16]

Events proved that creating the Aniakchak National Monument Subsistence Resource

Commission would be far easier than fulfilling its Congressional mandate. The nine member

commission was not able to meet until April 18, 1984. That meeting, however, attracted only

four members, which did not constitute a quorum. Meeting dates set for later that year were

repeatedly delayed. The following March, a five-member quorum met in King Salmon and

adopted its first resolution. The resolution, which consisted of four separate

recommendations, was intended "to assure that present and future local residents adjacent to

the monument retain accessibility to the subsistence resources of the monument."

Interest in the commission waned over the next few years. During the six-year period

following the March 1985 meeting, the commission met only thrice: in 1986 and 1987, both

of which were held at King Salmon, and once in 1990 at Port Heiden. A quorum could not be

mustered for any of the three meetings. The primary business of those meetings was the

creation of a subsistence hunting plan. Initial recommendations were formulated at the 1986

meeting, and in 1987, a final recommendation was passed which was forwarded to the

Governor and the Secretary of the Interior. A central tenet of that resolution was the

Monument's subsistence uses "be limited to those persons who had their primary place of

residency within the local region on December 2, 1980, members or their immediate families,

and their direct decedents who continue to reside in the local region." [17] Two of the five

recommendations which were passed in 1985 and 1987 were accepted by the Secretary of the

Interior; the other three were not acted upon.

The agency's appointment, in 1991, of a Subsistence Specialist for the Katmai and Aniakchak

units signalled a renewed interest in subsistence issues. In order to revise the subsistence

recommendations made in 1985 and 1987, the NPS organized two meetings of the Aniakchak

National Monument Subsistence Resource Commission in 1992: in March at Port Heiden and

in November at King Salmon. As a result of the two meetings, both of which fostered a

quorum, the commission passed six draft recommendations. Those recommendations have

not yet been finalized. [18]

Visitor Use

Because of its remoteness, Aniakchak has had one of the lowest annual visitor totals of any

unit of the National Park Service system. When the agency gained jurisdiction over the unit,

few had an inkling of how much visitation existed. NPS planners knew that a smattering of

subsistence users and sport hunters used the park. But the area attracted only a handful of

non-hunting recreationalists; as a 1983 document admitted, "There is not a tradition of

conventional visitor use of the area. Indeed, fewer than ten visitors per year are known to

enter the area for the purpose of viewing its major geologic features." [19]

Merry Tuten's 1977 study had provided an overview of subsistence usage in the area. Beyond

that, one of the only ways to estimate the number of park visitors, at least in the early years,

was to analyze hunting guide areas. Tuten had indicated that between 1973 and 1976, thirteen
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 15)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap15.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:29 PM]

hunting guides had maintained at least one camp within the boundaries of the present

monument and preserve. Since the passage of ANILCA, however, only eight hunting guides

have conducted commercial hunts within six state-designated guide areas (see Map 20). (In

one of the guide areas, a son took over from his father; in another area, one partner purchased

the interests of another.) Knowing the number of active hunting areas provided a rough

estimate of the number of sport hunters to visit the area.

Map 20. Hunting Guide Areas in Aniakchak National Preserve, 1988. (click image for an

enlargement in a new window)

Commercial use licenses, or CULs, provided another method for estimating the number of

visitors. Because the area was so remote, almost all recreational visitors to the monument and

preserve came by commercial conveyances. Beginning in 1980, the NPS began issuing

commercial licenses as a way to regulate the activities of air taxi operators, fishing and

hunting guide services, and other companies who intended to use the various park units on a

temporary basis. (In 1981, the licenses were renamed commercial use licenses.) By the mid1980s, most of the companies who took visitors to and from Aniakchak had obtained CULs

from the NPS. CUL holders were required to pay the NPS a nominal annual fee. At first,

they were not obligated to tell the agency how many of their patrons visited the various park

units. As time went on, however, the agency became increasingly insistent that commercial

operators complete a so-called activity summary of trips made to the various parks.

Data obtained from the various commercial use licenses indicates that few non-hunters

visited Aniakchak for recreational purposes in the early to mid-1980s, and park staff estimate

that fewer than 20 visitors per year came for recreational purposes during this period. Most

who did make the trek out to Aniakchak did so in hopes of taking a float trip down the

Aniakchak River. From 1981 through 1987, the number of non-hunting CUL holders--that is,

the number of companies who hoped to conduct non-hunting trips to Aniakchak--rose from 3

to 9 (see Table 1). During that period, however, no more than two non-hunting companies

were known to take visitors to Aniakchak in any given year. In the late 1980s and early

1990s more companies became interested in the budding tourist trade. The number of non-
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 15)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap15.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:29 PM]

hunting CULs rose from 13 in 1988 to 20 in 1992; at the same time, the number of

companies known to actually carry visitors to Aniakchak varied between 3 and 7. Throughout

this period, between four and six hunting-guide operations were active in the NPS unit.

Table 1. Commercial Use License Activity in Aniakchak National Monument

and Preserve, 1981-1993

Non-Hunting: Hunting:

Year CUL Holder Act. Summ. CUL Holder Act. Summ.

1981 3 1 0 0

1982 5 1 0 0

1983 7 2 1 1

1984 7 1 2 2

1985 9 2 2 2

1986 8 2 4 4

1987 9 2 5 5

1988 13 6 6 5

1989 13 5 5 5

1990 16 7 5 5

1991 20 7 5 5

1992 20 3 4 4

1993 14 unk. 4 unk.

Source: Commercial Use License files, AKSO-EC files. For

equivalent statistics for Katmai, see Norris, Tourism in Katmai

Country, 143-45.

Because visitor numbers were so low, the NPS made no attempt to tabulate them prior to

1989. [20] That year, however, visitation was significantly augmented by personnel brought

in to fight the Exxon Valdez oil spill.

The spill, as described in Chapter 6, took place shortly after midnight on March 24. The

Aniakchak area, located almost 500 miles southwest of Bligh Reef, seemed an unlikely

recipient of Exxon Valdez oil. But by the end of March oil had begun seeping out of Prince

William Sound, and NPS personnel recognized that prevailing currents would ultimately

bring it to the shores of Katmai and Aniakchak. To command the threat, the agency launched

a three-pronged strategy. First, it brought a team of experts north from Olympic National

Park in Washington to assess the preserve's 68 miles of beaches prior to oiling. This team,

led by Douglas Houston, left the Homer Incident Command Team center for Aniakchak on

the M/V Polar Star on April 19 and returned on April 29. [21] The second aspect of the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 15)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap15.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:29 PM]

strategy was the clean-up itself. Oil began washing up on Aniakchak's beaches on July 2, and

in mid-July cleanup crews were in full swing mopping up oil and debris. Crews that summer

canvassed slightly over half the length of Aniakchak's coastline. (About one-third of the

Aniakchak coast was never oiled). The amount of waste collected, however, was small.

Cleanup crews at Katmai, for instance, collected over 95,000 bags of spoil. At Aniakchak,

however, only 154 bags of spoil were collected. [22] The final way the NPS dealt with the

oil spill was by conducting a post-oiling assessment, which was done in August. The team

from Olympic National Park undertook this responsibility, along with two biotechnicians

who worked out of the CRPA cabin. Forty beach assessments were made along the

Aniakchak coastline. [23]

Oil cleanup and assessment operations continued in 1990, though at a reduced scale from that

of the year before. Aniakchak, which had been only lightly oiled, was not visited by Exxonfunded oil cleanup crews. Instead, the NPS decided to contract with the City of Chignik, 50

miles to the southwest, for cleanup. The agency issued the city a special use permit, and

crews were paid through a funding program implemented by the State of Alaska. The NPS,

however, contributed much of the support cost. [24]

The result of all this activity was the arrival of hundreds of people to Aniakchak who had

little interest in recreation. As noted in Table 2, a total of 1318 people visited the area in

1989, but only 853 recreational visits took place. Therefore, perhaps 450 or more agency

personnel and cleanup crew members came to Aniakchak because of the oil spill. In 1990,

perhaps 50 such visits took place.

Available statistics (see Table 2) suggest that recreational visitation to Aniakchak has grown

significantly in recent years. Since 1989 (the first year in which figures are available) the

number of recreational visits has risen, on the average, 25 percent each year. In 1992, an

estimated visitation of 1638 was tallied. [25]

Table 2. Visitation to Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve, 1989-

1992

Year Total

Visits

Recreational

Visits

Overnight

Visits

1989 1318 853 917

1990 1018 966 1201

1991 1478 1469 913

1992 1646 1638 1034

Source: NPS, "Summary of Obligations and Program Evaluation,

Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve," AKSO-EEI files.

Perhaps as the result of that growth, interpretive information has become increasingly

available in recent years. In 1986 David Manski, the Resource Management Specialist

assigned to Aniakchak issues, wrote the unit's first site bulletin. In the late 1980s, an

interagency interpretive kiosk in King Salmon, with a section reserved for Aniakchak, was

installed. The Katmai visitor newsletter, which debuted in 1990, likewise contained

information on Aniakchak. In 1992, an Aniakchak visitor information folder was produced,

and an NPS-sponsored Katmai book, which also discussed Aniakchak, was completed. [26]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 15)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap15.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:29 PM]

NPS Personnel Establish a Presence

Soon after the unit was created, NPS staff in King Salmon recognized that they needed to

establish a presence in order to become familiar with local resources and to let local residents

know of their presence. In the spring of 1982, Superintendent Morris hired a seasonal ranger

who would concentrate on Aniakchak affairs. The summer, however, did not go as planned.

As Morris noted in his annual report,

Marc Matsil was hired to be "the" Aniakchak ranger, working out of the office in

King Salmon. The concept of operations was that Marc, together with the Lake

Camp ranger would conduct a series of three two-week patrols into the

Aniakchak area to begin gathering data from an operational point of view. The

logistics were terrible, weather worse, and it was all compounded by a complete

lack of radio communication. Two patrols were successfully completed (without

injuries or loss!) and the third was cancelled the day before departure due to a

search and rescue incident developing at Brooks. [27]

Undeterred, Morris continued to push for a ranger presence. The recognition that a master

plan was in the offing exacerbated the need to station a ranger at Aniakchak. For various

reasons, therefore, George Stroud and Lynn Fuller, as noted above, stayed at the CRPA cabin

for most of the summer of 1983. The following year, the pair returned. They lived there for

less than three weeks and spent the remainder of the summer along the Katmai coastline. [28]

Seasonal NPS personnel did not return to Aniakchak for the next several years. In the

meantime, however, the agency moved to establish a management presence. In November

1984, David Manski was hired as a resource management trainee. The terms of his contract

called for him to serve a 22-month stint in the regional office, where he worked on problems

common to many NPS units. Early in that training period, however, he learned that the focus

of his work would be Aniakchak. [29] During that period, therefore, he spent some time

working out of the King Salmon administrative office, working on both Katmai and

Aniakchak issues. [30] In October 1986, Manski finally became the full-time, King Salmonbased Aniakchak resource management specialist. Inasmuch as he was the only staff person

assigned to Aniakchak, he also worked on non-resource issues at the monument and

preserve. [31]

The general management plan, which was approved in November 1986, called for Aniakchak

to be staffed by two seasonal rangers as well as an RMS. As noted in the following section,

Manski was successful in organizing various resource management activities at the unit.

Rangers, however, have visited the unit only infrequently. In 1988, Frank and Penny Starr

spent the summer at the CRPA cabin; they arrived on June 17 and remained until August 30.

Manski left his position in September 1988 and the agency has not supported a full-time

Aniakchak staff position since that time. It was not until 1991 that the next ranger stayed at

the cabin. John Eppling and his wife Shakti, who served as a volunteer, were dropped off at

the CRPA cabin on June 20 and stayed until September 12. Both the Starrs and the Epplings

carried on the same general responsibilities that Stroud and Fuller had done beforehand; they

established an agency presence, documented the area's natural and cultural resources, and

apprised park management about human use levels. [32] Except for brief visits, rangers have

not returned to Aniakchak since 1991.

Because the NPS has had such a transient presence in the area, personnel who worked there

during the 1980s concentrated on informing park users of park regulations. No enforcement

effort was in place. Many illegal activities may have taken place at Aniakchak during that

period, but the agency had few ways of knowing of their existence. Agency staff knew that
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 15)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap15.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:29 PM]

the creation of a resource protection program, when deemed necessary, would require a light

aircraft and the budget necessary to support its use. [33] Those requirements were fulfilled in

1991 when the park filled a second pilot position. The following year the first arrest was

made inside park boundaries; the citation was given to an individual who shot a caribou

without a state hunting license. [34]

Resource Management Activities

Shortly after the passage of the Alaska Lands Act, park staff assembled the first Aniakchak

Resource Management Plan. The plan, which was completed in April 1982, assessed the

status of available scientific information and proposed a series of studies of park resources. It

proposed five natural resource studies: 1) on the impact of sport hunting, 2) on the impact of

subsistence use, 3) an evaluation of local weather conditions, 4) a basic inventory of

vegetation and wildlife resources, and 5) a geological study of Aniakchak Caldera. It also

proposed two cultural resource studies: 1) on the characteristics of subsistence use, and 2) a

cultural resource baseline study. Of the seven studies, the highest priority was assigned to the

cultural resource survey; second on the priority list was the geological study. [35]

As noted above, the NPS hired David Manski, the Aniakchak resource management

specialist, in November 1984. Manski, however, was a trainee and was based in Anchorage

until late 1986. Before his arrival in King Salmon, the agency's only resource management

activities conducted since ANILCA had been Stroud and Fuller's observations during the

1983-84 seasons. Soon after Manski arrived, however, several studies were commenced

which helped fulfill the needs listed in the 1982 RMP.

In 1987, a five-person interagency research team from the University of Alaska Fairbanks

conducted two scientific studies inside Aniakchak Caldera. Koren Bosworth of the NPS

worked on a vegetation inventory; during that time, 138 species of vascular plants and 130

bryophyte and lichen collections were obtained. That same summer, Gordon H. Jarrell of

UAF conducted a small mammal study in the caldera. Barbara A. Mahoney and Gary M.

Sonnevil, both from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, began a two-year fishery survey of

Surprise Lake. And David Manski of the NPS coordinated the effort and conducted some

biological sampling. The team operated from a base camp located at the west end of Surprise

Lake. [36]

The following year, the NPS sponsored an updated, more detailed biological survey of the

caldera. Mahoney and Sonnevil completed their fishery survey, and a research team headed

by biologist Kristine Sowl inventoried the local birds, mammals, and vegetation. In addition,

the team began a two-year limnology study of Surprise Lake. They collected physical,

chemical, and biological information from the lake and from several tributary streams. In

1989, the second year of the limnology project, water samples were taken at two smaller

caldera lakes and at four Katmai lakes, and the results were compared with those gathered

the previous year. [37]

A limited amount of research during this period took place outside of the caldera. In 1987, as

an adjunct to the caldera biological survey, Koren Bosworth, along with Mark Schroeder and

Dave Manski, conducted a short-term botanical inventory along the coast. [38] In September

1988, a fisheries investigation was conducted along Albert Johnson Creek and the North Fork

of the Aniakchak River as part of Mahoney and Sonnevil's caldera study. That same year, a

survey of Aniakchak's coastal bird colonies was also carried out. That study was intended to

duplicate a similar effort which the State had conducted ten years earlier. [39]

Biological research in the park was renewed in 1992. The agency sponsored a biological
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 15)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap15.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:29 PM]

reconnaissance of the monument and preserve. Field camps, staffed with two NPS

biotechnicians, were established inside the caldera and at the mouth of the Aniakchak River;

in addition, a reconnaissance survey was made between Aniakchak Bay and Meshik Lake.

Crew members collected both quantitative and qualitative data on the area's vascular plants,

mammals, and birds. [40]

In order to gain information on the brown bear population in the area, the NPS funded and

participated in an interagency study of bear migration. As noted in Chapter 14, the ADF&G

had conducted a study of the Black Lake bear population in the early to mid-1970s. In 1988

the NPS, the ADF&G, and the F&WS joined forces in a follow-up to the earlier study. The

study used the NPS's (and other agencies') staff but, like the earlier survey, it did not take

place on NPS land. [41]

Although the NPS, in the 1982 Resource Management Plan, noted that a cultural resource

survey was the number one project priority, such a study has not yet been attempted. Instead,

bits and pieces of cultural resource information has been gathered, most of which has dealt

with the historical site at the mouth of the Aniakchak River. Stroud and Fuller, during their

visits in 1983 and 1984, gathered historical information on the old CRPA cabin; they also

repaired it sufficiently to "make it habitable and reasonably bear proof." The GMP, which

was completed in 1986, noted that "The existing public use cabin ... at the mouth of the

Aniakchak River will continue to be maintained consistent with its historical design, and will

be available to both public users and park staff." A short time later, David Manski updated

the unit's RMP and specifically requested emergency funds for cabin stabilization. The

request was approved, and the park requested the assistance of regional office staff in

restoring the old bunkhouse. [42]

In June 1987, archeologist Roger Harritt, historian Sandra Faulkner, and historical architect

David Snow visited the site. Harritt found several barabaras in the area and uncovered

evidence that humans had been using the area up to 400 years ago, while Faulkner described

the area within the historical context of Father Hubbard, the well-known lecturer and author

that visited Aniakchak three times in the early 1930s. Snow investigated the building's

structure and took photographs; based on that data, he prepared a set of elevation drawings.

[43]

It was intended that the cultural resource team's efforts would result in a Historic Structure

Assessment Report (an abbreviated form of historic structure report) for the bunkhouse. No

HSAR, however, was ever prepared. The information collected in 1987 has since been

augmented by information which was included in a National Register of Historic Places

nomination form. Photographs and related information pertaining to the bunkhouse have been

collected by other NPS cultural resources staff. [44] Park officials, in recent years, have

shown a consistent interest in expending funds on restoring the cabin. That restoration,

however, has not yet taken place.

The second highest research priority noted in the 1982 Resource Management Plan was for a

geological study of the caldera. Since its publication, several caldera studies have been

completed, some by the U.S. Geological Society and others by university personnel. Tom

Miller and Robert Smith, the USGS geologists who had begun investigating the Aniakchak

area in the mid-1970s, completed two studies on the calderas of the so-called Eastern

Aleutian Arc, and a team of USGS investigators have discussed the caldera's tephra deposits.

In addition, the region has attracted university geologists from as far away as Maine. [45]

No commercial mineral production has taken place in Aniakchak, and no oil and gas wells

have been drilled in or near its boundaries. As previous chapters have illustrated, however, a

small amount of interest has been shown in the copper porphyry deposits on Cape Kumlik,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Chapter 15)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/chap15.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:29 PM]

and intermittent interest in the area's oil and gas deposits has taken place ever since the

1920s. That interest, primarily in regards to oil and gas, has continued since the

establishment of Aniakchak National Preserve in December 1980. (Hard rock mining and oil

and gas drilling is prohibited in the monument.) Chevron U.S.A. and Arco Alaska obtained

special use permits in 1982 and 1983, respectively, to visit the preserve and obtain geological

samples. In 1984, five different oil companies showed an interest in the area's oil potential;

the following year just one company, Shell Western, applied to visit the area. Interest in

Aniakchak waned for the remainder of the decade. But in 1991, under Alaska Mineral

Resource Assessment Program regulations, the Minerals Management Service obtained a

permit for further exploration work; the agency's primary area of interest was "The Gates"

area at the east end of Aniakchak Caldera. [46]

In 1993, the staff in King Salmon began to compile a new Resource Management Plan for the

monument and preserve. The draft of the plan was completed in December of that year. The

plan, however, has not yet been subject to public review.

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

adhi/chap15.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

NOTES

Chapter 1

1 As Chapter 12 notes, it was not until 1954 that scientists concluded that Novarupta, not

Mount Katmai, was the primary site of the 1912 eruption.

2 Unless otherwise specified, the term "park" will refer to all of the area within both Katmai

National Park and Katmai National Preserve.

3 NPS, The National Parks: Index 1989 (Washington, GPO), 1989. By way of contrast, the

combined area of the two largest parks in the Lower 48 states -- Yellowstone and Everglades

-- is 2,618,728 acres.

4 For a brief description of natural resources in the old (pre-1978) Katmai National

Monument, see John A. Hussey, Embattled Katmai (San Francisco, NPS, August 1971), 1-

13; for a more lengthy description, see Victor Cahalane, A Biological Survey of Katmai

National Monument (Washington, D.C., Smithsonian Institution, 1959).

5 Alaska Planning Group, Final Environmental Statement (FES), Proposed Katmai National

Park, Alaska, 1974, 37; Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 6.

6 APG, FES, Katmai, 37.

7 Ibid., 48-49.

8 Louis R. Huber, "Flight to Katmai," Alaska Sportsman 16 (April 1951), 40; Frank

Dufresne, "Katmai Adventure," Field and Stream 56 (February 1952), 42; APG, FES,

Katmai, 53, 57, 61.

9 APG, FES, Katmai, 32.

10 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 42-45; APG, FES, Katmai, 63-64.

11 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 45; Federal Register, December 18, 1992, 60248.

12 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 46-47.

13 Ibid., 79-82, 86-87.

14 APG, FES, Katmai, 64.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

15 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 77, 87, 123.

16 Ibid., 123, 128-29.

17 Ibid., 87, 104, 123, 129, 131.

18 Ibid., 150, 157-58.

19 Ibid., 157-65.

20 Ibid., 171-74.

21 Ibid., 173, 176, 178, 227.

22 Ibid., 190-96, 208-09.

23 Ibid., 178-80, 190. The ACC held monopolistic control of the Katmai area fur trade

through most of the late nineteenth century. For a short time during the early 1880s, however,

the Western Fur and Trading Company had a station at Douglas, and probably one at Katmai

as well. Other competitors may have come and gone as well.

24 Ibid., 220-23; NPS, Kukak Valley (49Mk6), National Register of Historic Places

Nomination Form, NRHP Files, AKSO-RCR Collection.

25 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 214, 226-258.

26 Ibid., 202-04, 210-11, 231-32. The schooner fleet appears to have been most active in

Kamishak Bay; between sailings, the hunters holed up in "low structures of rocks, canvas,

and drift logs" which were located on the low, barren islands near the bay's southern shore.

27 Ibid., 185-87.

28 Ibid., 187-89.

29 Ibid., 213-18.

30 Ibid., 244, 260.

31 Ibid., 263, 269, 272-75.

32 Ibid., 275-89.

33 Ibid., 290-98.

34 Ibid., 299-310.

35 Ibid., 312-15.

36 W. R. Smith and Arthur A. Baker, "The Cold Bay-Chignik District," Mineral Resources of

Alaska: Report on Progress of Investigations in 1992, USGS Bulletin 755 (Washington, GPO,

1924), 205. During the 19th and early 20th centuries, Puale Bay was called Cold Bay. This
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

report has used the term Puale Bay, both to be consistent with present usage and to

distinguish this bay from the better-known Cold Bay which is located 300 miles to the

southwest.

37 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 323-27.

38 Ibid., 317-20, 326.

Chapter 2

1 Robert F. Griggs noted that if the eruption had been on Manhattan Island, the smoke and

steam would be seen in Albany; the sound of the explosions would be heard in Chicago, and

the sulfuric fumes would eat clothes on lines in Denver. Ashes would be a foot deep in

Philadelphia, and there would be no point to rescue workers in New York City ... it would

have been opened in yawning chasms, and the lava that boiled up would overflow everything,

covering all but the tips of the tallest buildings. Griggs, The Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes

(Washington, National Geographic Society, 1922), 1.

2 The lone victim, a woman who lived in the Kodiak area, died three days after the eruption.

She had been suffering from tuberculosis and nephritis for some time; the ash-filled

atmosphere and the stress surrounding the evacuation of area residents were doubtless the

primary contributors to her premature demise. John A. Hussey, Embattled Katmai: A History

of Katmai National Monument (San Francisco, NPS, 1971), 355.

3 Howard A. Powers, "Alaska Peninsula-Aleutian Islands," Howel Williams, ed., Landscapes

of Alaska (Berkeley, University of California Press, 1958), 64-67.

4 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 334-35; Powers, "Alaska Peninsula-Aleutian Islands," 64.

5 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 329-32.

6 Ibid., 336.

7 On June 12, they were finally picked up by the U.S. Revenue Cutter Manning and taken to

Afognak. Hussey, Embattled Katmai, pp. 356-59 notes that the Manning brought 114

refugees to Afognak "from a region that is dangerous to human life." It is not known if all

came from Kaflia Bay.

8 Ibid., 331, 336-39.

9 Ibid., 343-44. Popular accounts are unanimous in calling the Katmai eruption one of the

largest in recorded history. Father Bernard Hubbard, for example, called it "the most

stupendous cataclysm of Nature that has occurred during man's existence on earth." (Bernard

Hubbard as told to Barrett Willoughby, "Volcanoes Packed in Ice: an Explorer's Adventures

in Alaska," Saturday Evening Post 203 (August 23, 1930), 18.) Others, however have given

the dubious honor of the greatest historic volcanic eruption to the 1815 explosion of

Tambora, on the Indonesian island of Sumbawa, which killed 92,000 people. (Hussey,

Embattled Katmai, 351; Powers, "Alaska Peninsula-Aleutian Islands," 71.) Still others have

declared that the greatest eruption was the 1883 eruption of Krakatau, an island west of Java,

which killed 35,000; Santorini (Thera) Volcano in the Aegean Sea, which erupted in 1500

B.C.; a volcano which erupted in New Zealand in 186 A.D.; or the eruption of Mt. Etna, on
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

Sicily, in 1669. (R. J. Blong, Volcanic Hazards: A Sourcebook on the Effects of Eruptions

(Sydney, Australia, Academic Press, 1984), 11; Stuart and Doris Flexner, The Pessimist's

Guide to History (New York, Avon Books, 1992), 387.) The "size" of a volcanic eruption can

be estimated in any one of several ways, but the recently-developed volcanic explosivity

index--which combines the volume of eruptive products, the height of the eruption cloud,

and the duration of the main eruptive phase--suggests that Tambora's eruption was the largest

in historic times. Katmai, Santorini, and Karakatau all run a close second. (Blong, Volcanic

Hazard, 11.)

10 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 343-44.

11 Ibid., 356, 359.

12 NPS, "Mission 66 for Katmai National Monument," c. 1957, Inactive File A98, KATM;

Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 343-45.

13 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 344-46.

14 Ibid., 346-47; New York Times, June 8, 1912, 4.

15 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 339-40.

16 Ibid., 347-48, 373, 389, 397, 406.

17 Ibid., 370-71, 375-78.

18 Ibid., 349.

19 Ibid., 360.

20 Ibid., 353, 362.

21 Ibid., 362-63; J. S. Osmund to F. Barker, April 14, 1925, in "1925 Correspondence" folder,

Columbia River Packers Association collection, Columbia River Maritime Museum.

22 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 364-68; Alaska Department of Labor, Alaska Population

Overview, 1990 Census and Estimates (Juneau?, July 1991), 95.

23 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 367-68.

24 Ibid., 368-69.

25 Ibid., 368-69.

26 Ibid., 371, 381.

27 Ibid., 371-75.

28 Ibid., 381-82.

29 Ibid., 382-388. As noted below, Griggs's other four NGS Katmai trips took place in 1916,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

1917, 1919, and 1930.

30 Griggs, Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes, 63.

31 Ibid., 64.

32 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 389-400.

33The "Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes" was a dramatic if somewhat hyperbolic appellation

provided by Griggs shortly after his visit. Ibid., 399-400.

34 Ibid., 401-08.

35 Ibid., 408.

36 Ibid., 273-74.

37 Ibid., 321-22.

38 Ibid., 378.

39 Griggs as quoted in Dave Bohn, Rambles Through an Alaskan Wild: Katmai and the

Valley of the Smokes (Santa Barbara, Capra Press, 1979), 36; Hussey, Embattled Katmai,

395.

40 Griggs as quoted in Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 398.

41 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 399, 408. To satisfy his curiosity in that regard, the expedition

he led the following year included a search for a better harbor. As part of his 1917 trip, he

led a scouting party east from the Katmai Lakes area that hoped to find a good harbor on

Shelikof Strait, perhaps at Kinak Bay. The party, however, took a wrong turn and was unable

to find such a harbor.

42 Ibid., 403-04.

43 Ibid., 407.

44 Ibid., 400-01.

45 Ibid., 410-11; William E. Brown, A History of the Denali-Mount McKinley Region,

Alaska (Santa Fe, NPS, 1991), 92.

46 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 409-10.

47 Ibid., 410; Larry Rice, Gathering Paradise: Alaska Wilderness Journeys (Golden, Colo.,

Fulcrum, 1990), 10.

48 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 411. On page 75 of his autobiography, The Birth of the

National Park Service: The Founding Years, 1913-33 (Salt Lake City: Howe Brothers, 1985),

Horace Albright mentioned that the Cosmos Club meeting took place in the spring of 1917,

not 1918, and that only he and Grosvenor attended. Perhaps two such meetings took place.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

49 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 411-12.

50 John M. Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska: A History of Its Establishment

and Revision of Its Boundaries (Washington, NPS, July 1954), 2.

51 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 412.

52 United States Code, 1982 edition. Titles 16 and 18 (Washington, GPO, 1983), 334.

53 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 412.

54 Ibid., 411-12, 415; Horace Albright to Thomas Riggs, November 9, 1918, in File 42, RG

101, ASA.

55 Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 5a.

56 Albright, The Birth of the National Park Service, 75.

57 The only private land in the monument, in fact was a 13.74-acre Russian Orthodox

Mission Site at old Katmai village. The site was granted a patent on July 27, 1914, despite the

fact that it had been uninhabited and buried by ash for the past two years. U.S. Patent 423847

(Entry J 01276), at BLM State Office, Anchorage.

58 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 324-25, 327-28.

59 Large-scale mineral exploitation of the Katmai district was never a threat; therefore,

Warren Bielenberg's statement that "The [National Geographic] Society's interest in

protecting the Katmai volcanic crater and Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes from mining

exploitation led to the establishment of Katmai National Monument" must be considered

hyperbolic. William H. Sontag, ed., National Park Service, The First 75 Years: Preserving

Our Past For The Future (n.p., Eastern National Park and Monument Association, 1990), 16.

60 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 410, 417-18; Donald J. Orth, Dictionary of Alaska Place

Names, USGS Professional Paper 567 (Washington, GPO, 1967), 612-13; Albright to Riggs,

November 9, 1918, in File 42, RG 101, ASA.

61 Albright, as quoted in Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 7.

62 James B. Trefethen, Crusade for Wildlife (Harrisburg, Pa., Stackpole, 1961), 221.

63 Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 4-5; Horace M. Albright to Governor

Thomas C. Riggs, November 9, 1918, in File 42, RG 101, ASA. Griggs in a May 1918 letter

to Gilbert M. Grosvenor, noted that he had decided, on his own, what the various boundary

alternatives would be. If so, Charles Sheldon's claim that he had "suggested ... the limits of

the area occupied by this national monument" is false. Sheldon, of course, may have wanted

to operate on a sub rosa level in order to avoid any discussion of wildlife values. But he did

not know the Katmai area, so he was hardly in a position to provide information to Griggs,

an area expert. No evidence, moreover, has surfaced to suggest that Sheldon contacted Griggs

or tried to influence the location of Griggs's alternative boundary lines.

64 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 415.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

65 Ibid., 412-13.

66 Ibid., 413-14.

67 Ibid., 414. Sayre and Hagelbarger found no slackening in volcanic activity; they also found

two areas of mud pots that had not been noted before.

68 "By the President of the United States of America, A Proclamation [No. 1487, Sept. 24,

1918, 40 Stat. 1855];" Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 415.

69 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 416. According to the most current calculation, the area of the

original monument was 922,018 acres.

70 Proclamation No. 1487, Sept. 24, 1918; 40 Stat. 1855.

71 In a somewhat apologetic note to Governor Thomas Riggs, Acting NPS Director Horace

Albright mentioned that "The question of making a monument of the Katmai district was

brought to the attention of Secretary Lane about the time you left Washington and he

immediately approved of the project." Mather wrote Riggs about the matter on August 9, but

Riggs was on an extended trip around the territory. By the time Riggs was able to reply, the

monument was a reality. Albright to Riggs, November 9, 1918, and Riggs to Mather,

November 19, 1918; both in File 42, RG 101, ASA.

72 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 456; Riggs to Mather, November 19, 1918, in File 54, RG 101,

ASA.

Chapter 3

1 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 417.

2 Albright to Riggs, November 9, 1918, in File 42, RG 101, ASA.

3 Joan Antonson and William S. Hanable, Alaska's Heritage, Alaska Historical Commission

Studies in History No. 133 (Anchorage, Alaska Historical Society, 1985), 428, 432; Clarence

C. Hulley, Alaska, Past and Present, third edition (Portland, Binfords and Mort, 1970), 303.

4 Thomas C. Riggs to Stephen Mather, November 19, 1918, in File 54 (1917), RG 101, ASA;

U.S. Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Governor of Alaska for 1919 (p. 45)

and 1920 (p. 33).

5 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 420; USDI, Annual Report of the Governor of Alaska, 1918,

60-61.

6 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 421; Robert F. Griggs, "Our Greatest National Monument,"

National Geographic Magazine 40 (September 1921), 285-90; Griggs, Valley of Ten

Thousand Smokes, 79-80. Ivan Petroff, in 1880, had noted the existence of Brooks Falls, but

the first known generally-available information describing the Brooks River salmon runs

appeared in 1920 edition of the U.S. Bureau of Fisheries' Alaska Fishery and Fur-Seal

Industries. The 1921 National Geographic article was the first publication that was directed to

a broad, popular audience.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

7 Kirtley F. Mather, "Mineral Resources of the Kamishak Bay Region," pp. 159-182, and

Walter R. Smith, "The Cold Bay-Katmai District," pp. 183-208; both in the A. H. Brooks

and others, Mineral Resources of Alaska, Report on Progress of Investigations in 1932,

USGS Bulletin 773 (Washington, GPO), 1925. See especially Mather, pp. 172, 174, 180, and

Smith, p. 204.

8 Griggs, "Our Greatest National Monument," 289. Also see, Glimpses of Our National

Monuments, (Washington, GPO, 1926), 31, and Orth, Dictionary of Alaska Place Names,

364.

9 Arno Cammerer to Scott Bone, January 5, 1923, in File 42, RG 101, ASA.

10 USDI, Annual Report of the Governor of Alaska for 1922 (p. 13) and 1923 (p. 5).

11 NPS, Glimpses of Our National Monuments, 31; USDI, Annual Report of the Governor of

Alaska for 1924 through 1931.

12 Frank Norris, "Showing Off Alaska: The Northern Tourist Trade, 1878-1941," Alaska

History 2 (Fall 1987), 7; Norris, Gawking at the Midnight Sun: The Tourist in Early Alaska

(Anchorage, Alaska Historical Commission Studies in History No. 170), June 1985, 89-92.

13 Thomas H. Colby, "Katmai's First Tourists," Alaska 38 (April, 1972), 26; NPS, Public Use

of the National Parks; a Statistical Report, 1904-1940, 6; Anchorage Daily Times, August 28,

1925.

14 Kenneth W. Munden, The American Film Institute Catalog of Motion Pictures Produced

in the United States; Feature Films 1921-1930 (New York, R. R. Bowker, 1971), 12, 82, 834.

Robertson made a second trip to Alaska between 1926 and 1930; it is not known if he made a

second trip to Katmai.

15 Norris, Gawking at the Midnight Sun, 91; Alaska Travel Publications, Exploring Katmai

National Monument and the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes (Anchorage, the author, 1974),

26; Alaska Weekly,Januaryy 9, 1931; E. G. Moore to Director NPS, December 18, 1931, in

KNM Box 1, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC.

16 Ernest Gruening, The State of Alaska (New York, Random House), 1954.

17 NPS, "Superintendent's Monthly Report," Mount McKinley National Park (hereafter

known as SMR, MOMC), June 1921 through October 1928, at DENA.

18 NPS, Glimpses of Our National Monuments, 1926, 70; Hal Rothman, Preserving Different

Pasts: The American National Monuments (Urbana, University of Illinois Press, 1989), 127-

30, 138, 166-70; G. Frank Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time:" The National Park

Service and the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 (Denver, NPS,

September 1985), 18.

19 Arno Cammerer to Governor Scott Bone, January 5, 1923, and Stephen T. Mather to Rep.

Frank Murphy, February 13, 1925; both in File 42, RG 101, ASA.

20 O. A. Tomlinson to Director NPS, April 29, 1949, KATM; SMR, MOMC, passim.

21 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 421; Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska; A
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

History of Its Establishment and Revision of Its Boundaries, 7-8.

22 Hubbard, after his 1929 trip, presciently predicted that "Alaskan aviators will soon be

taking tourists by plane, into this remote but interesting region." Barrett Willoughby,

Alaskans All (Boston, Houghton Mifflin, 1933), 20-21, 41.

23 "Bernard R. Hubbard," Current Biography, 1943, 320-23. Major writings describing his

Katmai trips include Mush You Malemutes (New York, American Press, 1932), 71-98, 101,

103, 115; Cradle of the Storms (New York, Dodd, Mead, 1935), 186, 224; "Volcanoes

Packed in Ice: An Explorer's Adventures in Alaska," Saturday Evening Post 203 (August 23,

1930), 18-19; and "The Heart of Fire Mountain," Saturday Evening Post 209 (July 1932), 14-

15.

24 Peter Ward, A Bibliography of Katmai National Monument, Alaska (King Salmon, NPS,

February 1971), 5. No published record of his 1930 trip chronology is readily available, but

Griggs probably entered the valley by way of Naknek Lake.

25 Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 8-9; Griggs to Sawyer, November 22,

1930, in KNM Box 313, RG 79, NARA SB.

26 NPS, Glimpses of Our National Monuments, 1926, 31.

27 Stewart Edward White, "An Emergency is Declared to Exist," Saturday Evening Post 202

(April 12, 1930), 5; Stewart Edward White, "Parking the Brown Bear," Saturday Evening

Post 205 (March 7, 1931), 38; Anna Rothe, ed., Current Biography, 1946 (N.Y., H. W.

Wilson and Co., 1947), 637.

28 Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 9-10, 12.

29 Ibid., 10-11.

30 Ibid., 11.

31 Ibid., 13-14. The proposed monument was all public land except for two Orthodox Church

Mission Sites. The 2.07-acre site at Kaguyak village and the 3.20-acre at Kukak village had

both been patented in July 1914; neither site, however, had been occupied since June 1912.

U.S. Patent 423849 (Entry J 01278), at BLM State Office, Anchorage.

32 Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 15-17.

33 Ibid., 17-18.

34 Ibid., 18-19.

35 Proclamation No. 1950, April 24, 1931; 47 Stat. 2453.

36 Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 19. Ruth Griggs Higbie, in "In the Land

of the Fumaroles and Williwaws," New York Times, March 18, 1973, noted that Katmai had

the largest land area in the NPS system, if both land and water were included, Glacier Bay

was the largest NPS unit.

37 Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 19; Washington Star, May 20, 1931.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

38 New York Times, May 31, 1931, III:2.

39 Anchorage Daily Times, April 27, 1931, 1.

40 Seward Daily Gateway, April 29, 1931, 4.

41 E. G. Moore to Director NPS, December 18, 1931, and H. C. Bryant to Director NPS,

December 16, 1932; both in KNM Box 1, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC; Kauffmann, Katmai

National Monument, Alaska, 20.

42 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 423; John Monsen to Alaska Game Commission, September

10, 1936, in KNM Box 1, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC.

43 E. G. Moore to Horace M. Albright (Director NPS), December 18, 1931; HMA to EGM,

January 15, 1932; Frank Reedy to Horace M. Albright, May 19, 1933; HMA to FR, June 5,

1933; all in KNM Box 1, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC.

44 Norris, Gawking at the Midnight Sun, 91; Robert Stevens, Alaskan Aviation History (Des

Moines, Wash., Polynyas Press, 1990), 875, 907; Kay Kennedy, interview with author, June

7, 1991.

45 C. M. Carson Wildlife Agent, Alaska Game Commission) to Frank T. Been (Supt.

MOMC), June 15, 1940, in Box 312, RG 79, NARA SB. Soon afterward, Walatka

established his own air service; by the late 1940s he was working for Northern Consolidated

Airlines.

46 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 369. Natives gathered their herds in corrals on the Northwest

Arm of Naknek Lake; the remains of those corrals, and an adjacent reindeer herders' cabin,

can still be spotted along the lake shore. Mike Tollefson to Supt. KATM, March 21, 1977,

KATM.

47 Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 34; W. C. James to V. H. Cahalane,

"Master Plan Development Outline, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, Forestry," January

4, 1954, at KATM; Frank T. Been, Field Notes of Katmai National Monument Inspection

(McKinley Park, Alaska, NPS, November 12, 1940), 8.

48 Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 12; Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 423.

49 James W. McBurney (Surf Canneries) to Harold Ickes, February 4, 1936, in KNM Box 1,

Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC.

50 Commissioner GLO to Director NPS, March 17, 1936; Director NPS to Commissioner

GLO, March 28, 1936; both in KNM Box 1, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC.

51 Proclamation No. 2177, June 15, 1936; 49 Stat. 3523.

52 U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, Alaska Fishery and Fur-Seal Industries (Washington, GPO),

editions of 1920 through 1925; Ronald F. Lee to Director, Region Four, September 6, 1951,

in "Katmai Rules and Regulations" folder, Box 312, RG 79, NARA SB.

53 For specifics on these programs, see Harlan D. Unrau and G. Frank Williss, Administrative
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

History: Expansion of the National Park Service in the 1930s (Denver, NPS, September

1983), 75-106.

54 John C. Paige, The Civilian Conservation Corps and the National Park Service, 1933-1942

(Washington?, NPS, 1985), 125, 207; SMR, MOMC, June 1937 through September 1939,

and March 1940.

55 Joan M. Antonson and William S. Hanable, Administrative History of Sitka National

Historical Park (Anchorage, NPS, December 1987), 61; Unrau and Williss, Administrative

History: Expansion of the NPS in the 1930s, 235-38; SMR, MOMC, August 1926, July 1931,

and June 1936.

56 SMR, MOMC, June 1936.

57 Harry J. Liek to Director NPS, March 24, 1936, in KNM Box 1, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA

NC; Ernest P. Walker, Report of the Executive Officer to the Alaska Game Commission,

December 1, 1935 to October 31, 1936. Liek's report refers to "Weatherspoon." But local

historian John Branson (personal conversation, January 30, 1996) notes that there was no one

in the area by that name. Harry Featherstone, however, had a cabin at the time near the

Savonoski River, and was probably the person in question.

58 Frank Dufresne to Director NPS, April 1, 1936; Homer Jewell (Alaska Game Warden) to

Harry J. Liek, May 8, 1936; both in RG 79, Entry 7, KNM Box 1, NARA DC. Harry J. Liek

to Frank Dufresne, April 22, 1936, in "General Correspondence Concerning Katmai 1936 to

1946" file, KATM Annex.

59 Arno B. Cammerer to Harry J. Liek, February 18, 1936; Harry J. Liek to Director NPS,

March 24, 1936; Frank Dufresne to A. E. Demaray, May 6, 1936; all in KNM Box 1, Entry 7,

RG 79, NARA DC.

60 A. E. Demaray to Hillory Tolson, July 14, 1936; Jennings to A. E. Demaray, both in KNM

Box 1, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC; A. E. Demaray to Harry J. Liek, July 30, 1936, and

Hillory Tolson to Harry Liek, October 16, 1936, both in Hanable Research Notes, AKSORCR.

61 SMR MOMC, for October and November 1936 and June 1937; Supt. MOMC to Director

NPS, August 20, 1936, in Hanable Research Notes, AKSO-RCR Collection.

62 SMR, MOMC, June and July 1937; Frank T. Been (Supt. MOMC) to Victor H. Cahalane,

March 24, 1941, in RG 79, Box 312, File 201, NARA SB; Harry J. Liek to Director NPS,

March 1, 1938, in KNM Box 1, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC. Corbley was gone for 25 days

from his home park, and spent $305.85 of the $600 allotted to the monument's budget.

63 U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, Alaska Fishery and Fur-Seal Industries in 1921 (Washington,

GPO, 1922), 17l; George J. Eicher, "History of the Bristol Bay Investigation," unpublished

mss., Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, April 25, 1937, 1-3.

64 C. M. Carson to Supt. MOMC, March 4, 1948, at KATM.

65 The first known protest took place in 1993--long before the enforcement effort began--

when John J. Coffey, a Kodiak attorney, asked Anthony J. Dimond, the Alaska Delegate, to

take "whatever action you deem advisable" that would legalize the continuation of trapping,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

hunting, and fishing in the monument. John J. Coffey to A. J. Dimond, June 10, 1933, in

KNM Box 1, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC.

66 John Monson to Alaska Game Commission, September 10, 1936; Stephen M. Scott to

Anthony J. Dimond, December 2, 1937; both on KNM Box 1, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC.

Scott was locally known as "Portland Packer Scotty" because he worked for Portland Packers

in Naknek. (Several NPS documents have erroneously called him "Important Packer Scotty.")

John Branson, interview by author, January 30, 1996.

67 Anthony J. Dimond to Arno B. Cammerer, April 16, 1937 and December 16, 1937;

Director NPS to Anthony J. Dimond, April 21 and December 25, 1937; Gunnar Berggren,

etc. to Anthony J. Dimond, October 1, 1937; Fred M. Johnson (Commissioner GLO) to

Director NPS, January 18, 1938; all in KNM Box 1, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC.

68 S. M. Scott to Anthony J. Dimond, December 2, 1937, in KNM Box 1, Entry 7, RG 79,

NARA DC.

69 Frank Dufresne to A. E. Demaray, January 24, 1938, in KNM Box 1, Entry 7, RG 79,

NARA DC; Arno B. Cammerer to Anthony J. Dimond, November 8, 1939, in File 610, Box

312, RG 79, NARA SB.

70 A. C. Kinsley to Commissioner GLO, January 19, 1939; Antolnette Funk (Assistant

Commissioner GLO) to Director NPS, May 17, 1939; both in KNM Box 1, Entry 7, RG 79,

NARA DC.

71 Arno B. Cammerer (NPS Director) to Anthony J. Dimond (House of Representatives),

November 8, 1939, in Folder 610, Box 312, RG 79, NARA SB. Fure had a cabin in the Bay

of Islands area; Scott's cabin was just south of the Brooks River, between Brooks and

Naknek lakes; and Monsen lived on the south shore of Iliuk Arm, near the mouth of the

Savonoski River. Joaqlin Estus, Harvey M. Shields, and David Snow, Historic Structure

Report, Fure's Cabin, Bay of Islands, Naknek Lake, Katmai National Park and Preserve

(Anchorage, USDI, 1984), 10; Frank T. Been, Field Notes of Katmai National Monument

Inspection (November 12, 1940), 12-13.

72 Arno B. Cammerer to Anthony J. Dimond, November 8, 1939, in File 610, Box 312, RG

79, NARA SB. The GLO consistently spelled Paul Chukan's last name as "Chugan."

73 C. M. Carson to J. W. Kehoe, June 15, 1940; telegram, C. M. Carson to Ernie Allen, April

17, 1940; both in File 208-06, KNM Box 311, Entry 7, TG 79, NARA SB.

74 Arno B. Cammerer (NPS Director) to Commissioner GLO, November 8, 1939, in Folder

610, Box 312, RG 79, NARA SB; Appeal from the General Land Office, July 29, 1940, in

KNM Box 1, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC.

75 Arno B. Cammerer to Commission GLO, March 12, 1937; Fred R. Lucas to O. A.

Tomlinson, January 17, 1938; A. E. Demaray to Commissioner GLO, April 11, 1939; George

A. Parks to Harry J. Liek, April 22, 1939; Victor Cahalane to Files, March 29, 1940; all in

KNM Box 1, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC.

76 Been, Field Notes of KNM Inspection, 4; Frank T. Been to George A. Parks, December

11, 1940 and January 30, 1941; A. E. Demaray to Supt. MOMC, February 24, 1941; all in

RG 79, Entry 7, KNM Box 1, NARA DC. From 1925 through 1933, Parks had served as
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

Alaska's Governor.

77 SMR, MOMC, December 1939; Frank T. Been to Director NPS, April 15, 1940. Been had

been the assistant naturalist at Sequoia National Park; Liek left to become superintendent at

Wind Cave National Park, Alaska Weekly, June 23, 1939.

78 SMR, MOMC, February-March 1940; Frank T. Been to U.S. Deputy Marshal Allen, April

14, 1940, KATM; Anchorage Weekly Times, April 26, 1940, 4.

79 Frank T. Been to Director, NPS, April 14, 1940; Been to C. M. Carson, April 14, 1940,

both at KATM; SMR, MOMC, April 1940.

80 SMR, MOMC, May 1940; C. M. Carson to J. W. Kehoe, June 15, 1940, in File 208-06,

Box 311, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA SB.

81 Cahalane had entered national park work in 1934 via the Civilian Conservation Corps.

Two years later he became the Acting Chief of the NPS's Wildlife Division. In January 1940,

the work was transferred to the Biological Survey (soon to become the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service) and he became in charge with its Section on National Park Wildlife. In later years,

he became the chief NPS biologist. Victor Cahalane to Ernest Gruening, n.d. (c. 1942), in

File 40-10 (1933-52), RG 101, ASA; William E. Brown, A History of the Denali-Mt.

McKinley Region, Alaska, 199.

82 Been, Field Notes of KNM Inspection; "Discover 9995 Smokes Missing from Valley,"

Anchorage Daily Times, October 1, 1940; "Park Chief Visits Valley of Wonders," The

Alaskan (weekly), October 11, 1940.

83 Been to Director, NPS, April 15, 1940.

84 Been, Field Notes of KNM Inspection, 12, 30-31, 47.

85 Ibid., 39-40, 46; Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 424.

86 Been, Field Notes of KNM Inspection, 46-47.

87 Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 21-22.

88 Ibid., 22.

89 As Alaska Game Commission agent Jack Benson noted, Cahalane and Been were incorrect

in thinking that Talki Island did not have a fox-farming lease. Kauffmann, Katmai National

Monument, Alaska, 24.

90 Ibid., 22-25; SMR, MOMC, December 1940, 2.

91 Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 25; SMR, MOMC, January 1941.

92 Fred W. Johnson to Director, Division of Investigations, April 7, 1941, in RG 79, Entry 7,

KNM Box 1, NARA DC. Kinsley was the man who, in 1938, had investigated trapping

conditions on the west side of the monument.

93 Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 25-26. Jack Benson, the AGC agent, had
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

arrested Smith for taking fur within the monument in the fall of 1940. He was convicted on

December 21, and given a $150 fine and a 60-day suspended jail sentence. Alaska Game

Commission official Frank Dufresne charged that Smith "had used this island merely as a

blind to shield illegal trapping on the Monument." Frank Dufresne to Frank T. Been,

December 23, 1940, in KNM Box , Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC; "Kamishak Bay-Katmai

Region" map (with notations by Jack Benson), in KNM Box 2, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC;

SMR, MOMC, December 1940.

94 Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 27; Harold L. Ickes to Franklin D.

Roosevelt, January 24, 1942, KATM.

95 Proclamation No. 2564, August 4, 1942; 56 Stat. 1972.

96 Because of Smith's violation, his fur farm lease was canceled on May 9, 1942. Butler,

however, was allowed to keep his lease long after the monument's boundaries were

expanded. The BLM did not close his lease until October 30, 1950. W. S. Binley to Director

NPS, May 29, 1942, in RG 79, Entry 7, KNM Box 1, NARA DC; Chief, Land Planning

Division, NPS, to Supt. MOMC, June 11, 1942, in Box 312, RG 79, NARA SB; Historical

Index for T18S, R26W, S.M., BLM State Office, Anchorage.

97 SMR, MOMC, June 1940; Been, Field Notes of KNM Inspection, 31.

98 Frank T. Been to RD/R4, May 4, 1940, in Hanable Research Notes, AKSO-RCR

Collection; A. E. Demaray to Supt. MOMC, November 26, 1940; Frank T. Been to Director

NPS, December 19, 1940; Herbert Maier to Supt. Been, February 19, 1941, KATM.

99 Been RD/R4, March 13, 1941, KATM.

100 Dixon to Director, Region Four, March 25, 1941, KATM; H. Maier to Director, NPS,

March 26, 1941, KATM.

101 Superintendent to RD/R4, June 5, 1941, KATM.

102 SMR, MOMC, May 1941 and November 1941; Victor H. Cahalane to Thomas C. Vint,

March 30, 1942, in Folder 600, Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB.

103 Frank T. Been to RD/R4, January 14, 1942; Victor H. Cahalane to Mr. [Thomas C.] Vint,

March 30, 1942; both in File 600, Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB.

104 Been, Field Notes of KNM Inspection, 1940, 46; NPS, Glimpses of Our National Parks,

1926, 31.

105 Frank T. Been to RD/R4, March 16, 1942, in Box 312, RG 79, NARA SB; E. A.

Davidson to Director, Region Four, April 26, 1942; H. Maier to Superintendent MOMC,

April 30, 1942, both at KATM; Victor H. Cahalane to Thomas C. Vint, March 30, 1942, in

Folder 600, Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB.

106 Bernard F. Manbey (ARD/R4) to Supt. MOMC, August 5, 1942; Frank T. Been to

RD/R4, September 112, 1942, both at KATM; Hillory A. Tolson to RD/R4, June 29, 1944, in

Folder 600-03, KNM Box 2, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC.

107 The base was renamed King Salmon Air Station in the 1950s.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

108 Victor H. Cahalane, A Biological Survey of Katmai National Monument, 5; Ray

Peterson, interview by the author, August 9, 1990; Been, Field Notes of KNM Inspection, 1-

3, 19, 43; Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 425.

109 Raymond I. Peterson, interview by author, August 9, 1990; Michael Branham to author,

March 12, 1992.

110 Alaska Travel Publications, Exploring Katmai National Monument, 778, 83; Raymond I.

Peterson, interview by William Hanable and Janis Meldrum, November 23, 1988.

111 Grant Pearson, telegram to RD/R4, September 26, 1946, in Box 313, RG 79, NARA SB.

The U.S. Fisheries Commission, a Department of the Commerce agency whose workers had

blasted out the north end of Brooks Falls in 1921, was replaced in 1940 by the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, which was an arm of the Interior Department. As noted below and in

Chapter 8, the F&WS had erected facilities at the head of Brooks River in 1940 and 1941.

112 Kuehl, the regional office's landscape architect, accompanied the superintendent because

he was the de facto Alaska expert in Region Four. In that capacity he returned to Katmai in

August 1947, August 1948, September 1949, and June 1950. He served as a liaison between

the park, the regional director and the Washington office. Kuehl to RD/R4, April 20, 1948, at

KATM; O. A. Tomlinson to Director NPS, July 29, 1948, in KNM Box 2, Entry 7, RG 79,

NARA DC; SMR, MOMC, for September 1949 and June 1950.

113 Kuehl was so unimpressed with the monument's resources that he suggested, after a 1947

boundary reconnaissance, that Katmai's area be reduced by 25 percent by lopping off portions

at the west end of the monument. Three years later, he noted that "it would be a gross

exaggeration to call [the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes[ a tourist attraction." Note attached

to Oscar Chapman's letter to the Naknek Civic Club, June 9, 1950, in File 201; January 10,

1952 note in File 207; both in Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB.

114 Grant H. Pearson with Philip Newill, My Life of High Adventure (New York, Ballantine

Books, 1962), 200-02.

115 Charles L. Peterson (Acting Supt. MOMC) to Alfred Andree (Koggiung, Alaska),

February 26, 1946, at KATM; Alfred C. Kuehl, "Report on Katmai National Monument,

Alaska" [report on trip of August 19-30, 1945), 2, 4.

116 Benson may have been the same man who, as noted earlier in this chapter, had served as

the Kodiak Fish and Game agent in 1941.

117 R. R. Lyons to Grant H. Pearson, October 16, 1945, in Box 313, RG 79, NARA SB;

SMR, MOMC, September 1945; Alaska Weekly, November 2, 1945.

118 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time", 15; NPS, "Public Use of the National Parks"

for 1904-1940 and 1941-53.

119 SMR, MOMC, September 1945; Newton Drury to Ernest Gruening, March 23, 1945;

Alfred C. Kuehl (Landscape Architect) to Ernest Gruening, February 4, 1946, both in File 40-

10 (1933-52), RG 101, ASA. Old Kasaan, an abandoned Native village in southeastern

Alaska that had once had a large number of totems, was proclaimed a national monument in

October 1916. The park service, however, never funded operations there. A major fire,

weathering, and vandalism too their toll. By the late 1940s agency representatives recognized
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

that the site was no longer up to NPS standards, and the site was delisted in July 1955. Alan

Hogenauer, "Gone, But Not Forgotten: America's Delisted National Park Service Sites"

(unpub. mss., given at a meeting of The Travel and Tourism Research Association, Banff,

Alberta, June 1983), 47-48.

120 Newton B. Drury (NPS Director) to Ernest Gruening (Governor of Alaska), January 30,

1950; Arthur B. Demaray (Director NPS) to Assistant Secretary Dale E. Doty, June 29, 1951;

both in File 40-10 (1933-52), RG 101, ASA; Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time", 16-

17.

121 Neither the NPS nor any other agency had any idea of how much wartime trapping took

place in the monument. When Kuehl and Pearson made a brief visit in August 1945, they

encountered no trapping trails and were told that the only poacher in the area, probably

Stephen M. Scott, had left the area. Kuehl, "Report on Katmai National Monument, Alaska"

[trip report], 2.

122 Jack O'Connor (F&WS, Juneau) to Frank T. Been, March 26, 1947; Alfred C. Kuehl to

RD/R4, April 20, 1948, both at KATM.

123 Alfred C. Kuehl, "Report on Katmai National Monument, Alaska," September 1945, 3;

George A. Parks to Frank T. Been, September 22, 1947, KATM; Frank T. Been to RD/R4,

May 20, 1948; George H. Parks to RD/R4, April 19, 1950; both in File 602, Box 311, RG 79,

NARA SB.

124 Occasional calls for a boundary survey were made as late as the mid-1960s. No action,

however, resulted from those plans. Even today, virtually none of the pre-1978 monument,

and little of the present park and preserve, has been professionally surveyed. NPS, Master

Plan Brief for Katmai National Monument, September 3, 1965, 16.

125 C. M. Carson to Supt. MOMC, March 2, 1948; Carson to Supt., March 4, 1948; both at

KATM; SMR, MOMC, March 1948.

126 Frank T. Been to RD, May 19, 1948; Tolson to RD, April 23, 1948, both at KATM; G. B.

Kelez (Supervisor of Fisheries, USF&WS, Seattle to Chief, Branch of Alaska Fisheries,

USF&WS, Washington, D.C., February 17, 1950, in File 208, Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB.

127 USDI, "Katmai National Monument, Alaska, To Have Visitor Accommodations" (Press

Release), April 30, 1950, in "Katmai Concession Contract" binder, AKSO-EC files.

128 C. M. Carson, Enforcement Agent, USF&WS to Supt. MOMC, March 2, 1948; Carson to

Frank T. Been, March 4, 1948; Alfred C. Kuehl to RD/R4, August 23, 1948, all at KATM;

Raymond I. Petersen to Dave Morris [Supt. KATM], October 27, 1982.

129 Frank T. Been to RD, Region 4, December 13, 1948, at KATM.

130 C M. Carson to Supt. MOMC, March 14, 1948; Carson to Supt. MOMC, July 12, 1948;

both at KATM.

131 Hillory Tolson to RD/R4, April 21, 1948; Tolson to RD/R4, April 23, 1948; both at

KATM; Herbert Maier to Director NPS, May 4, 1948, and Hillory A. Tolson to RD/R4, May

17, 1948; both in KNM Box 2, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC.

132
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

 Alfred C. Kuehl to RD/R4, August 23, 1948, at KATM.

133 Frank T. Been to RD/R4, May 20, 1948; O. A. Tomlinson (RD/R4) to Dir. NPS, May 26,

1948; Tomlinson to Supt. MOMC, June 26, 1948; all at KATM.

134 Been to RD, Region 4, June 28, 1948; SMR, MOMC, June 1948, 5.

135 O. A. Tomlinson to Director NPS, July 14, 1948; Tomlinson to Supt. MOMC, August 18,

1948, both at KATM; SMR, MOMC, July 1948, 2; Tomlinson to Dir. NPS, July 28, 1948, in

Box 312, RG 9, NARA SB; Hillory A. Tolson to RD/R4, July 22, 1948, and O. A.

Tomlinson to Director NPS, July 29, 1948, both in Folder 801, KNM Box 2, RG 79, NARA

DC; Herbert Maier to Director NPS, November 18, 1948, in Box 312, RG 79, NARA SB.

136 E. L. Bartlett to Oscar L. Chapman (Sec. of Interior), February 1, 1950, at KATM.

137 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 424; J. C. Roehm, "Summary Report of Mining

Investigations in the Kvichak Precinct, Alaska, June 13 to July 6, 1941," Alaska Territorial

Department of Mines Report 195-31, 1.

138 Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 27-28; E. L. Bartlett to Julius A. Krug

(Sec. of Int.), May 21, 1947, in File 40-10 (1933-52), RG 101, ASA; Hillory A. Tolson

(Acting Dir. NPS) to E. L. Bartlett, December 31, 1948, at KATM.

139 Session Laws of Alaska, 1946, 179-81; Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 426.

140 Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 29; Williss, "Do Things Right the First

Time", 22; Newton B. Drury (NPS Director) to Fred M. Packard, February 12, 1947, in Box

312, RG 79, NARA SB; House Joint Memorial No. 1, in Session Laws of Alaska, 1947, 314-

15; C. L. Wirth to Mr. Slaughter, February 25, 1947; Conrad L. Wirth to Files, November 19,

1946; in both RG 79, Entry 7, KNM Box 2, NARA DC; Antonson and Hanable, Alaska's

Heritage, 286; Claus-M. Naske and Herman Slotnick, Alaska: A History of the 49th State

(Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1979), 148-49.

141 Jessen's Weekly, October 29, 1948; SMR, MOMC, October 1948, 2.

142 Helen C. Tibbetts (Naknek Civic Club) to E. L. Bartlett, January 3, 1950; Bartlett to

Oscar L. Chapman (Sec. of Interior), February 1, 1950; Gunnar Berggren, John Monsen, and

Mike Shapsnikoff to E. L. Bartlett, June 4, 1950; Bartlett to Netwon B. Drury (NPS Director),

June 14, 1950; all in Bartlett Collection, NPS/Box 1 (1946-52), UAF; Hussey, Embattled

Katmai, 427-28.

143 Newton B. Drury (NPS Director) to Fred M. Packard, February 12, 1947, in Box 312, RG

79, NARA SB; E. L. Bartlett to Helen C. Tibbetts (Naknek Civic Club), February 1, 1950,

Oscar L. Chapman (Secretary of the Interior) to E. L. Bartlett, June 9, 1950; both in NPS/Box

1 (1946-52), Bartlett Collection.

144 Conrad L. Wirth to Files, November 19, 1946, in KNM Box 2, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA

DC.

145 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 426-27. Also see Chapter 11.

146 Pearson replaced Frank Been as Mount McKinley's superintendent in February 1949.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

147 O. A. Tomlinson to Director NPS, April 29, 1949; Tomlinson to Director, May 6, 1949;

both at KATM; Raymond E. Hoyt (Assistant Regional Director, R4) to Roy Lindsley (Fish

and Wildlife Service, Kodiak), May 16, 1951, in File 208, Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB. Prior

to Pearson's action, aircraft landings in the monument had been prohibited during the

wintertime to discourage trapping operations; they were also prohibited during the summer

except for official or emergency purposes

148 Herbert Maier (Acting RD/R4) to Director NPS, November 18, 1948; "Monthly Report of

Field Obligations and Expenditures," June 30, 1949, both at KATM; Hussey, Embattled

Katmai, 426.

149 C. M. Carson to Grant H. Pearson, September 17, 1949; Tomlinson to Director NPS,

April 27, 1949; both at KATM.

150 The location of these improvements was not specified. Having only the 1942 PCP forms

as evidence, the structures would probably have been located in and around Geographic

Harbor, while the trails would have been in the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes.

151 O. A. Tomlinson to Director NPS, April 27, 1949; Tomlinson to Director, April 29, 1949;

both at KATM; Alaska Field Committee, A Six Year Integrated Program for the Department

of the Interior in Alaska, 1950-1955 (unpub. mss., July 1949), 61-62, 79-80, in Alaska

Administrative History Collection, Box 1, HFC.

152 Joseph T. Flakne (Chief, Alaska Branch, Division of Territories and Island Possessions,

Department of the Interior) to Gov. Ernest Gruening, October 13, 1949, in File 40-10 (1933-

50), RG 101, ASA.

153 O. A. Tomlinson to Supt. MOMC, January 18, 1950, at KATM; Newton Drury (Director

NPS) to Gov. Ernest Gruening, January 30, 1950, in File 40-10, RG 101, ASA.

154 NPS, "Statement Relating Appropriations Estimate [for Alaska Program] to Current

Appropriation" (c. April 1950), 3-6, in File 40-10, RG 101, ASA.

155 Charles A. Richey (Land Planning Division, WASO) to Conrad Wirth (Assistant

Director, NPS), December 19, 1949, in File 900, Box 313, RG 79, NARA SB; Raymond I.

Peterson to William Warne (Assistant Secretary of the Interior), January 21, 1950, in "Katmai

Concession Contract History" binder, AKSO-EC.

156 Concessions Permit No. I-34np-299 (draft), in "Katmai Concessions Contract History"

binder, AKSO-EC; Concession Permit NO I-34np-299, in File 900, Box 313, RG 79, NARA

SB.

157 Grant Pearson (Supt. MOMC) to Wyman R. Rice (Operations Manager, NCA), March 21,

1950, in "C38 - Concessions Contract & Permits, KATM 1949-1966" file, AKSO-EC;

Pearson to RD/R4, April 27, 1950, at KATM.

Chapter 4

1 O. A. Tomlinson (RD/R4) to Director NPS, September 26, 1950, at KATM; SMR, MOMC,

September 1950.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

2 Anchorage Daily Times, June 22, 1950; Willie (Nancarrow) to Marvin (?), July 6, 1950;

Grant H. Pearson (Supt. MOMC) to RD/R4, April 27, 1950; Herbert Maier (Acting RD/R4)

to Supt. MOMC, May 11, 1950; all in KATM files.

3 William J. Nancarrow (Ranger KNM) to Supt. MOMC, "Monthly Narrative Report for

Katmai for July 1950", July 27, 1950), in File A2827 (Reports to Chief Ranger, January

1950) to November 1954), DENA; William J. Nancarrow, interview by William S. Hanable,

August 1, 1988; Morton S. Wood to Supt. MOMC, December 3, 1951 and Photo C1, both in

File 207, Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB; Ginny Hill Wood, "Valley of Seven Smokes," Alaska

Sportsman 19 (January, 1953), 7.

4 Nancarrow, July 27, 1950); Nancarrow interview, August 1,1988; O. A. Tomlinson

(RD/R4) to Director NPS, September 26, 1950), in KATM files.

5 NPS, "Mission 66 Prospectus, Katmai National Monument," April 1956, 3, in KATM Box

2, HFC; Supt. MOMC to RD/R4, April 24, 1951, KATM.

6 Virginia Wood, telephone interview by Bill Tanner, May 10, 1983, in Melgenak Case File,

in Bill Hanable, "Brooks Camp" draft chapter, 23, in AKSO-RCR Collection; Wood, "Valley

of Seven Smokes," 7; Morton S. Wood to Supt. MOMC, December 3, 1951, in File 207, Box

311, RG 79, NARA SB.

7 SMR, MOMC, June 1948, 5; Wood, "Valley of Seven Smokes," 7; Grant H. Pearson to

RD/R4, May 28, 1952, KATM.

8 Lawrence C. Merriam to Supt. MOMC, February 27, 1952; Frank T. Hirst (Chief Ranger,

MOMC) to George B. Chaffee, June 23, 1952 and July 29, 1952; Charles E. Krueger (Park

Landscape Architect, WODC) to Chief WODC, July 21, 1955; all at KATM.

9 In Fiscal Year 1952, it requested $15,000 for a permanent ranger, a seasonal rangernaturalist, office space, a boat and airplane charter, and in FY 1953, it requested funds

sufficient to provide for a superintendent, park ranger, office space rental and airplane

charter, O. A. Tomlinson to Director NPS, September 26, 1950, KATM; Wirth to Gruening,

December 23, 1952, in File 40-10 (1933-52), RG 101, ASA; Wirth to Gruening, January 10,

1953, in File 15-14-a (1953-58), RG 101, ASA.

10 Director NPS to Dale E. Doty (Assistant Secretary of the Interior), June 29, 1951, in File

40-10 (1933-52), RG 101, ASA.

11 Conrad L. Wirth to Gov. Ernest Gruening, June 11 and December 23, 1952, both in File

40-10 (1933-52), RG 101, ASA.

12 Ann Lage, George L. Collins, The Art and Politics of Park Planning and Preservation,

1920-1979: An Interview Conducted by Ann Lage in 1978 and 1979 (Berkeley, University of

California Oral History Project, 1980), 177-78, 184.

13 Williss, 29; Russ Olsen, Administrative History: Organization Structures of the National

Park Service, 1917 to 1985 (Washington?, NPS, September 1985), 61, 69; Newton B. Drury

to Gov. Ernest Gruening, January 30, 1950, in File 40-10 (1933-52), RG 101, ASA; Annual

Report of the Secretary of the Interior (Washington, GPO, 1950), 338; Lage, George L.

Collins, 181, 183.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

14 Williss, 29-30; Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior for 1954 (p. 357) and 1955

(p. 358).

15 Collins, a career NPS employee, had worked in the Director's office from 1937 through

1945 before heading west to the Region Four office. During the late 1950s, he was involved

in new area studies; then, in 1962, he served as the Secretary-General of the First World

Conference on National Parks, which was held in Seattle that year. Lage, George L. Collins,

163, 169; April 5, 1962 letter in File 882, Series 41, RG 01, ASA.

16 SMR, MOMC, June 1950; Nancarrow to Supt. MOMC, July 27, 1950.

17 G. L. Collins to RD/R4, August 19, 1951, in File 609-01, Box 312; RD/R4 to Director

NPS, August 20, 1952, in File 600, Box 311; both in RG 79, NARA SB; Lage, George L.

Collins, 180-81.

18 George L. Collins to RD/R4, two memoranda dated July 19, 1950, in File 201, Box 311,

RG 79, NARA SB.

19 Chief, Alaska Survey, to RD/R4, July 18, 1952, in Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB.

20 Supt. MOMC to RD/R4, July 29, 1952, in File 600, Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB.

21 RD/R4 to Director NPS, August 20, 1952, in File 600, Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB.

22 E. L. Bartlett to Conrad L. Wirth, February 8, 1951, KATM; Ernest Gruening to Joseph T.

Flakne (Chief, Alaska Division, Office of Territories), June 1, 1951; Conrad L. Wirth to E. L.

Bartlett, February 16, 1951; Bartlett to Wirth, February 17, 1951; all in NPS/Box 1 (1946-

52), Bartlett Collection.

23 Lowell Sumner, "Recommendation for Boundary Revision, Katmai National Monument,

Alaska," October 21, 1952; George L. Collins to RD/R4, July 19, 1950; both in File 602, Box

311, RG 79, NARA SB.

24 Sumner, 1952, 2.

25 Sumner, 1952, 3.

26 Sumner, 1952, map.

27 Sumner, 1952, 23-24.

28 Sumner, 1952, 21.

29 Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 30-31.

30 Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 33-35; George L. Collins to Robert F.

Luntey, August 7, 1953, KATM.

31 B. Frank Heintzleman to Nils R. H. Gronn, December 17, 1953, in File 15-15 (1953-58),

RG 101, ASA; Gunnar Berggren to E. L. Bartlett, January 3, 1954, in NPS/Box 1 (1953-58),

Bartlett Collection; Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 35-36. The primary

reason that petition gatherers hoped to move the monument boundary eight miles east was the
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

"The beavers are taking over the spawning grounds of the salmon in the above mentioned

area," and "we wish to trap these beavers in the coming spring." One of the most avid

petition supporters was Gunnar Berggren; he was one of several local residents whose

trapping cabins would be outside the monument if the boundary had been moved.

32 E. L. Bartlett to Douglas McKay, December 18, 1953, in NPS/Box 1 (1953-58), Bartlett

Collection.

33 Gunnar Berggren to Rep. Howard W. Pollock, January 29, 1969, in File NR/1-2, Series 88,

RG 01, ASA.

34 Douglas McKay to E. L. Bartlett, February 1, 1954, in NPS/Box 1 (1953-58), Bartlett

Collection; B. Frank Heintzleman to William C. Strand (Director, Office of Territories),

October 26, 1953; Chief of Cooperative Activities to Director NPS, February 17, 1954; both

in File 15-15 (1953-58), RG 101, ASA; Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska,

36-37.

35 Conrad L. Wirth to B. Frank Heintzleman, April 29, 1954, in File 15-14a (1953-58), RG

101, ASA; Robert Luntey, Katmai Project, Interim Report, Katmai National Monument,

Alaska (Washington, NPS, March 1954).

36 B. Frank Heintzleman to Conrad L. Wirth, March 5, 1954, in File 15-14-a (1953-58), RG

101, ASA.

37 Orme Lewis to E. L. Bartlett, May 12, 1954, in NPS/Box 1 (1953-58), Bartlett Collection.

38 USDI, "Katmai Scientific Study Continued Another Year" (press release), August 4, 1954.

39 C. L. Wirth to B. F. Heintzleman, July 28, 1954, in File 15-14-a (1953-58), RG 101, ASA;

E. L. Bartlett to Fred A. Seaton, (Secretary of the Interior), February 16, 1959, in NPS/Box 1

(1959-64), Bartlett Collection.

40 E. L. Bartlett to Orme Lewis, January 3, 1955; Orme Lewis to E. L. Bartlett, January 26,

1955; both in RG 101, File 15-14-a (1953-58), RG 101, ASA; USDI, Annual Report of the

Secretary of the Interior for 1955, 358; Conrad Wirth (NPS Director) to RD/R4, May 9, 1957,

in KATM History Division Files, WASO.

41 Robert F. Griggs hatched the idea for the article in September 1953, in a letter to Lowell

Sumner; the story was based on a June 1954 Katmai visit of Mr. and Mrs. Gilbert M.

Grosvenor. Griggs to Sumner, February 9 and September 2, 1953, in Box 313, RG 79, NARA

SB; Elsie May Bell Grosvenor, "Alaska's Warmer Side," National Geographic Magazine 109

(June 1956), 737-775.

42 E. L. Bartlett to Fred A. Seaton, February 16, 1959, in NPS/Box 1 (1959-64), Bartlett

Collection.

43 Daily Alaska Empire (Juneau), February 17, 1959; Anchorage Daily Times, February 18,

1959, 8.

44 Leslie Yaw to E. L. Bartlett, March 21, 1959; John H. Lee to Bartlett, March 27, 1959;

both in NPS/Box 1, Bartlett Collection; Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 330, 338, 370-71.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

45 E. L. Bartlett to Charles F. Herbert, February 24, 1958, in Bartlett Collection.

46 Roy Selfridge to Ralph J. Rivers, September 27, 1961, in Folder 64, Box 7, Executive

Departments and Independent Agencies, Ralph J. Rivers Collection, UAF.

47 NPS, "Topography of Brooks Camp, NCA" (map), July 30, 1963, KATM file, AKSOEPD; Lawrence C. Merriam (RD/R4) to Director, NPS, December 14, 1960, in "C38 -

Concessions Contracts and Permits, KATM, 1949-1966" file, AKSO-EC.

48 RD/R4 to Director NPS, December 6, 1954, in "D18 Master Plan, Katmai, 1953-1959"

folder, KATM Box 1, HFC; Lawrence C. Merriam (RD/R4) to Director, NPS, December 14,

1960, in "C38 - Concessions Contracts and Permits, KATM, 1949-1966" file, AKSO-EC.

49 Thomas C. Vint (Chief, Division of Design and Construction) to Chief, Western Division,

Division of Design and Construction, October 11, 1955, in "Serendipity File," KATM Box 1,

HFC.

50 Charles E. Krueger (Park Landscape Architect, Region Four) to Chief, Western Office,

Division of Design and Construction, July 21, 1955, at KATM.

51 Herman Porter (Director, Alaska Department of Aviation) to Supt. MOMC, December 9,

1955; A. F. Ghiglione (Commissioner of Roads, Alaska Road Commission) to Supt. MOMC,

December 7, 1955; both in "D18 Master Plan, KATM, 1953-1959" folder, KATM Box 1,

HFC.

52 Merriam to Director, NPS, December 14, 1960; NPS, Contract No. 14-10-434-80,

February 20, 1956, in "Katmai Concession Contract History" binder, AKSO-EC. A second

three-year contract, Contract No. 14-10-434-212, was signed on March 31, 1958 for the 1958

through 1960 seasons.

53 NCA patented the airstrip on November 2, 1960. Raymond I. Peterson to Thomas H. Floyd

(Land Law Examiner), August 10, 1956, in Case File A-030370, FRC/Washington, DC;

BLM, "Application for Patent: Proof of Use," August 6, 1958, in same case file; summary

sheet, same case file, BLM Alaska State Office, Anchorage; Petersen interview, November

23, 1988, II/7; Charles E. Krueger (Park Landscape Architect, Region Four) to Chief,

Western Office, Division of Design and Construction, July 21, 1955, at KATM; Ernest

Gruening, "Lonely Wonders of Katmai," National Geographic Magazine 123 (June 1963),

804.

54 Annual Report of the Secretary of Interior for 1955, 331, 334-36; Annual Report for 1956,

307; Carleton Knight III, "The Park Service as Client: II," Architecture 73 (December 1984),

48.

55 Williss, 31; USDI Information Service press release, April 24, 1961, in File 311.2, Series

41, RG 01, ASA; Lage, George L. Collins, 169-70.

56 USDI Information Service press release, April 21, 1956, in NPS/Box 1, Bartlett Collection.

57 USDI Information Service press release, April 21, 1956, in NPS/Box 1, Bartlett Collection;

NPS, "Mission 66 Prospectus," April 1956, in KATM, Box 2, HFC; Supt. MOMC to RD/R4,

August 27, 1957, KATM.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

58 The report in its draft form, was written by the Mount McKinley staff in January 1957.

Supt. MOMC to Director NPS, Monthly Narrative Report, February 6, 1957, in DENA

Archives.

59 NPS, Mission 66 for Katmai National Monument (Washington?, the author, May 1957), 4,

in NPS/Box 1 (1959-64), Bartlett Collection; Conrad Wirth to RD/R4, May 9, 1957, in

KATM History Division Files, Box 1, WASO.

60 Mission 66 for Katmai National Monument, 5.

61 Mission 66 for Katmai National Monument, 6-8.

62 Conrad Wirth to RD/R4, May 9, 1957, in Katmai History Division Files, Box 1, WASO.

63 Supt. MOMC to RD/R4, August 27, 1957, KATM; NPS, "Master Plan Development

Outline, General Development," November 1957, 1, in KATM, Box 1, HFC.

64 Bob Peterson, interview by William S. Hanable, June 24, 1988.

65 NPS, "Master Plan for Katmai National Monument, Mission 66 Edition, Volume I, Master

Plan Narrative," 1960-61, in "D18 Master Plan and Correspondence 1960" file, KATM Box

1, HFC; NPS, "Master Plan Volumes I and III," in KATM Box 2, HFC.

66 USDI Information Service press release, April 21, 1956, in NPS/Box 1, Bartlett Collection.

67 NPS, Mission 66 for Katmai National Monument, 6-7; NPS, "Master Plan Development

Outline, General Development," November 1957, 3.

68 Supt. MOMC to RD/R4, February 22, 1958, in "D18 Master Plan, 1953-1959" file; Neil J.

Reid to Supt. MOMC, June 3, 1958; both in KATM Box 1, HFC.

69 Herbert Maier (Acting RD/R4) to Director NPS, April 16, 1958, in "D18 Master Plan,

KATM, 1953-1959," in KATM Box 1, HFC.

70 Lawrence C. Merriam to Director NPS, January 13, 1960, in "D18 Master Plan and

Correspondence 1960" file, KATM Box 1, HFC; NPS, "Control Schedule, Mission 66

Development Program, Roads, and Trails," December 1958, in Bartlett Collection.

71 The outline specifically suggested that the road "should be developed ... primarily for

administrative use." "Master Plan Development Outline, General Development," November

1957, 3, in KATM Box 2, HFC; NPS, Mission 66 for Katmai National Monument, 4, 7.

72 Supt. MOMC to RD/R4, June 24, 1957, in "D18 Master Plan, KATM, 1953-1959" folder,

KATM Box 1, HFC; NPS, "Master Plan Development Outline, General Development,"

November 1957, 3.

73 Neil J. Reid (Park Naturalist, MOMC) to Supt. MOMC, June 3, 1958, in KATM Box 1,

HFC.

74 George L. Collins to RD/R4, July 19, 1950, in File 201, Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB.

75 George L. Collins to RD/R4, two memoranda dated July 19, 1950, in File 201, Box 311,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

RG 79, NARA SB.

76 Chief, Alaska Survey, to RD/R4, July 18, 1952, in Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB.

77 RD/R4 to Director, NPS, August 20, 1952, in File 600, Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB.

78 Lawrence C. Merriam to Wirth, December 14, 1960; NPS, "Mission 66 for Katmai

National Monument," n.d. (c. March 1959), 4 6-8, in NPS/Box 2, Bartlett Collection.

79 "Ted" (Roeder, KATM Ranger) to "Jake" (Duane Jacobs), July 17, 1958; Supt. MOMC to

T.S. Roeder, July 25, 1958; both in "D18 Master Plan, KATM, 1953-1959," KATM Box 1,

HFC.

80 Robert L. Carper, List of Classified Structures Inventory, Katmai National Monument

(Denver, NPS, April 1976), 1; "Description of the Proposal" (for Brooks Camp Utility

System), in Box 13, NARA ANC; NCA, Brooks Camp Log Book, September 15, 1956.

81 Raymond I. Petersen to George L. Collins (Chief, Alaska Recreation Studies, Region

Four, NPS), September 26, 1950, in Box 313, RG 79, NARA SB; Lawrence C. Merriam

(RD/R4) to Supt. MOMC, February 27, 1952, at KATM; Raymond I. Petersen, interview by

William Hanable, November 23, 1988.

82 Petersen interview, November 23, 1988; Ray Petersen, interview by author, April 17, 1991.

83 Jackson E. Price (Assistant Director, NPS) to RD/R4, March 8, 1961, in "C38 -

Concessions Contracts and Permits, KATM, 1949-1966" file, AKSO-EC.

84 Ray Petersen interview, by Hanable and Meldrum, November 23, 1988; Evangeline

Atwood and Robert N. DeArmond, comp. Who's Who in Alaskan Politics (Portland, Binford

& Mort, 1977), 97; Katmailand, "Greetings from Katmailand" (Christmas brochure), 1985, 3.

85 Petersen was pleasantly surprised by Senator Gruening's reaction to his plight; he had

never been an active Gruening supporter. But the Senator had had long experience in

territorial affairs including the directorship of Territorial and Island Possessions as well as a

fourteen-year stint as the Governor of Alaska, and as a result, he "smelled injustice" when he

saw it. Petersen interview, April 17, 1991.

86 Robert L. Petersen to Supt. MOMC, April 3, 1961, in "D18 Master Plan Correspondence

1960," KATM Box 1, HFC.

87 Charles E. Krueger (Supervisory Landscape Architect) to Regional Director, Region Four,

September 12, 1961, in KATM Box 1, HFC; Raymond I. Petersen to Rep. Ralph Rivers,

December 23, 1965; Edward A. Hummel to E. L. Bartlett, November 22, 1968; both in

NPS/Box 2, Bartlett Collection; Petersen interview, November 23, 1988; Gruening, "Lonely

Wonders of Katmai," 812, 827-828, 831; NPS, "Project Construction Program Proposal,"

February 1, 1962, in KATM Box 1, HFC.

88 Lawrence C. Merriam (RD/WRO) to Supt. MOMC, December 3, 1962; Oscar T. Dick to

RD, WRO, March 19, 1963; both in "C38 - Concessions Contracts and Permits, KATM,

1949-1966" file, AKSO-EC; Raymond I. Petersen, Testimony in Palakia Melgenak

Transcript, II/136; Conrad Wirth (NPS Director) to Regional Director, Western Region,

December 10, 1962, in "D18 Master Plan Correspondence 12960," in KATM Box 2, HFC.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

89 NPS, Project Construction Program, n.d. (late 1962?), KATM; USDI, "U.S. Department of

the Interior Budget Justifications" books, passim.

90 Darrell L. Coe (Management Assistant, KATM), "National System of Trails, Memo L58,"

August 23, 1965, at KATM.

91 Gruening, "Lonely Wonders of Katmai," 828.

92 PCP for Windy Creek Trail Camp, 1962, in "D18 Master Plan and Correspondence 1960,"

KATM Box 1, HFC.

93 The cabins now serve as employed residences. The boathouse as a winter storage area for

agency water craft for the next year or two; by 1964, however, it was being used as a VIP

residence. Bob Peterson, interview by Bill Tanner, May 19, 1984, in Palakia Melgenak

Transcripts, I/128; Bob Peterson interview by William Hanable, June 24, 1988, 2; W.

Laubmann, "Katmai National Monument, Topography of Brooks Camp, NCA" (map), July

30, 1963, AKSO-EPD; Supt. MOMC, "Annual Report for Information and Interpretive

Services, KATM," 1962; Petersen (Jr. and Sr.) interview, April 17, 1991; PCP for Brooks

River-Windy Creek Trail Buildings, 1962, in KATM Box 1, HFC; Gil Blinn, interview by

author, May 24, 1993.

94 Been to RD/R4, January 14, 1942, in KNM Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB.

95 Joseph S. Dixon to RD/R4, February 2, 1942, in File 600, Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB.

96 House Resolution No. 14, in Session Laws of Alaska, 1959, 412-13.

97 House Concurrent Resolution No. 13, in Session Laws of Alaska, 1961, 232; Robert L.

Peterson (Ranger-in-Charge, KATM) to Supt. MOMC, April 3, 1961, in KATM Box 1,

HFC.

98 Ernest Gruening to William A. Egan, February 26, 1962; Ernest Gruening to Conrad L.

Wirth, February 26, 1962; both in File 883.1, Series 41, RG 01, ASA; Conrad Wirth to Ernest

Gruening, March 19, 1962, in "Geological Survey in Katmai National Monument Area"

folder, Box 73, General Subject File, Gruening Senatorial Papers, UAF.

99 House Resolution No. 6, in Session Laws of Alaska, 1963, 150.

100 E. L. Bartlett to Conrad L. Wirth, November 6, 1963; Bartlett to Jay Hammond,

November 6, 1963; A. Clark Stratton (Assistant Director NPS) to Bartlett, November 27,

1963; all in NPS/Box 1 (1959-64), Bartlett Collection.

101 No master plan was completed that year, only a patchwork revision of portions of the

1960 master plan. A year later, a Master Plan Brief was prepared. E. L. Bartlett to A. Clark

Stratton, December 4, 1963; Stratton to Bartlett, December 11, 1963; both in NPS/Box 1

(1959-64), Bartlett Collection

102 Jay Hammond to Bob Bartlett, January 17, 1964; Hammond to Bartlett, April 6, 1964;

Bartlett to Hammond, April 13, 1964; all in E. L. Bartlett Collection, NPS/Box 1 (1959-64),

UAF. Pearson, after a thirty-year career, had retired from the NPS in November 1956.

Department of the Interior Information Service, "Grant Pearson to Retire," October 19, 1956,

in NPS/Box 1 (1953-58), Bartlett Collection.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

103 Sumner, "Special Report on the Katmai Master Planning Field Study, September 5-13,

1963," KATM.

104 NPS, Master Plan Brief, 1965, 14, 21.

105 Senate Joint Resolution No. 41, Session Laws of Alaska, 1965, 126.

106A. F. Ghiglione (Bureau of Public Roads) to Ralph Soberg, March 17, 1967; C. S.

Matlock (Alaska Department of Highways) to Ralph Soberg, August 4, 1967; George

Sundborg to George B. Hartzog, February 28, 1967; all in NPS/Box 1 (1965-68), Bartlett

Collection; John Walatka (Camp Manager and Director, NCA) to George Hall, November

27, 1967, in "C38 - Concessions Contracts & Permits, KATM, 1967-72" file, AKSO-EC.

107 Howard W. Baker (Assistant Director, NPS) to Ernest Gruening, March 29, 1967, in

NPS/Box 1 (1965-68), Bartlett Collection.

108 Warren Gonnason to George B. Hartzog, November 30, 1967, in NPS/Box 1 (1965-68),

Bartlett Collection.

109 George B. Hartzog to Warren Gonnason, January 15, 1968, in NPS/Box 1 (1965-68),

Bartlett Collection.

110 Keith H. Miller to E. L. Bartlett, March 25, 1968; Senate Joint Resolution 37, 1968; both

in NPS/Box 1 (1965-68), Bartlett Collection.

111 Bristol Bay Borough Assembly Resolution No. 56; City of Anchorage Resolution No. 46-

R-68; Kenai Peninsula Resolution on July 2, 1968; Kodiak Island Borough Resolution No.

68-25-R; City of Homer Resolution No. 68-15; all in NPS/Box 1 (1965-68), Bartlett

Collection.

112 Edward A. Hummel (Assistant Director, NPS) to Keith H. Miller (Secretary of State of

Alaska), April 15, 1968, in File 883.1, Series 41, RG 01, ASA; Johannes E. N. Jensen

(Associate Director) to E. L. Bartlett, August 28, 1968, in NPS, Box 1, Bartlett Collection.

113 Frank T. Been to Regional Director, Region Four, January 14, 1942, in File 600, Box 311,

RG 79, NARA SB.

114 George L. Collins to RD/R4, two memoranda dated July 19, 1950, in File 201, Box 311,

RG 79, NARA SB.

115 King Salmon was not Collins's first choice, but he was pleased to find that when he

expressed interest in a site there to other agency heads, "it appeared that a location could be

obtained there if desired." Chief, Alaska Survey, to RD/R4, July 18, 1952, in Box 311, RG

79, NARA SB.

116 Supt. MOMC to RD/R4, July 29, 1952; Lawrence C. Merriam (RD/R4) to Director NPS,

August 20, 1952; both in File 600, Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB; Duane Jacobs (Supt.

MOMC) to RD/R4, June 3, 1959, in "Katmai Master Plan-1969" folder, KATM Box 1, HFC;

Grant H. Pearson (Supt. MOMC) to RD/R4, August 13, 1956, in "D18 Master Plan, 1953-

1959" folder, KATM Box 1, HFC.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

117 USDI Information Service press release, April 21, 1956, in NPS/Box 1, Bartlett

Collection.

118Lawrence C. Merriam (RD/R4) to Supt. MOMC, May 25, 1959, in "Katmai Master Plan1969" folder, KATM Box 1, HFC; Mission 66 for Katmai National Monument (1957), 4.

119 "Master Plan Development Outline," November 1957, 2.

120 Supt. MOMC to Director NPS, Monthly Narrative Report, March 5, 1957, in DENA

Archives; Supt. MOMC to Chief, Western Office, Division of Design and Construction,

April 22, 1957, in "D18 Master Plan, KATM, 1953-1959" folder, KATM Box 1, HFC.

121 NPS, "Superintendent's Annual Report," Mount McKinley National Park (hereafter

known as SAR, MOMC), for 1957; "Master Plan Development Outline, Developed Areas,

King Salmon Headquarters," November 1957, in KATM Box 1, HFC; Drawing NM-KAT

2100, June 19, 1957; Drawing NM-KAT 2104-A, August 1957.

122 Supt. MOMC to T.S. Roeder, July 25, 1958; RD/R4 to Supt. MOMC, March 25, 1958, in

"D18 Master Plan, KATM, 1953-1959" folder; both in KATM Box 1, HFC; USDI, Annual

Report of the Secretary of the Interior, 1958, 308; Supt. MOMC to Director NPS, Monthly

Narrative Report, July 6, 1959, in DENA Archives; KATM, "Management Prospectus," 1963

(Report TIC-127/D21), 2.

123 Supt. MOMC to RD/R4, February 22, 1958, in "D18 Master Plan, 1953-1959" folder,

KATM Box 1, HFC.

124 Merel S. Sager to Chief, Western Office, Division of Design and Construction, May 14,

1959, in "D18 Master Plan KATM 1953-1959," KATM Box 1, HFC; Lawrence C. Merriam

(RD/R4) to Supt. MOMC, May 25, 1959, in Katmai Master Plan-1969" folder, KATM Box

1, HFC.

125 Thomas C. Vint (Chief of Design and Construction) to Chief, Western Office of Design

and Construction), July 2, 1959, in "D18, Master Plan, KATM 1953-1959," KATM Box 1,

HFC.

126 Supt. MOMC to Regional Director, Region Four, March 22, 1961; Regional Director to

Supt. MOMC, March 31, 1961; both in "D18 Master Plan and Correspondence 1960,"

KATM Box 1, HFC.

127 Richard C. Young (Federal Aviation Agency) to Regional Director, Region Four, March

22, 1962, in D18 Master Plan Correspondence 1960," KATM Box 1, HFC.

128 Lawrence C. Merriam to Richard C. Young, March 27, 1962; Merriam to Supt. MOMC,

March 30, 1962; both in "D18 Master Plan and Correspondence 1960," KATM Box 1, HFC.

129 Samuel A. King (Supt. MOMC) to Regional Director, Region Four, April 2, 1962;

Charles Krueger to Regional Director, Region Four, April 13, 1962; Regional Chief of

Operations and Maintenance to Assistant Regional Director, October 26, 1962; all in "D18

Master Plan and Correspondence 1960," KATM Box 1, HFC; Federal Register, November 7,

1962, p. 10833; Bob Peterson, interview by William Hanable, June 24, 1988.

130 Sen. Ernest Gruening, Press Release of March 17, 1964, in NPS/Box 1 (1959-64), Bartlett
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

Collection.

131 NPS, Master Plan Brief for Katmai National Monument, 1965, 18; Supt. MOMC to

RD/WRO, Annual Narrative Report, May 26, 1965, at MOMC, in Hanable Research Notes,

AKSO-RCR Collection.

132 Oscar T. Dick to RD/WRO, April 23, 1963, in "D18 Master Plan Correspondence 1960,"

in KATM Box 1, HFC.

133Oscar Dick to Files, August 16, 1963, in "D18 Master Plan and Correspondence 1960,"

KATM Box 1, HFC; Larry Rice, Gathering Paradise; Alaska Wilderness Journeys (Golden,

Colo., Fulcrum, 1990), 1.

134 Supt. MOMC to Dave Bogart, KATM, August 26, 1963.

135 Lowell Sumner, "Special Report, Katmai, Master Plan Field Study, September 5-13,

1963" (Washington, NPS), October 1963; E. A. Hummel to Director NPS, October 24, 1963;

Joe E. N. Jensen (Assistant Director, Design and Construction) to RD/WRO, November 12,

1964; both in "D18 Master Plan and Correspondence 1960," KATM Box 1, HFC.

136 Stanley A. Cain, Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, "Trip Report ...

Accompanying the Advisory Board on National Parks, Buildings, Historic Sites and

Monuments on its Annual Field Trip -- July 30 to August 10, 1965, in Alaska," pp. 9-11, in

NPS/Box 2 (1965-68), Bartlett Collection.

137 NPS, Master Plan Brief, September 3, 1965, p. 18, in Box 13, NARA ANC.

138 NPS, Master Plan Brief, September 3, 1965, pp. 10-11.

139 NPS, Master Plan Brief for Katmai National Monument, May 1967, TIC; "Master Plans

for Katmai National Monument," January 1967, in NPS History Collection, Serendipity File,

HFC.

140 John Walatka (President, ACV, Inc.) to Lawrence Merriam, December 6, 1960; Lawrence

C. Merriam to Director, NPS, December 14, 1960; both in "C38 - Concessions Contracts and

Permits, KATM, 1949-66" file, AKSO-EC; Lawrence C. Merriam to Director NPS, January

13, 1960, in "D18 Master Plan and Correspondence 1960" file, KATM Box 1, HFC.

141NPS, Master Plan Brief, 1965, 14.

142 E. B. Martin (Acting ARD, Operations, WRO) to Supt. KATM and MOMC, July 28,

1967, in "C38 - Concessions Contracts & Permits, KATM, 1967-72" file, AKSO-EC.

143 George A. Hall (Supt. MOMC) to RD, WRO, November 16, 1967; John Walatka (Camp

Manager and Director, NCA) to George Hall, November 27, 1967; both in "C38 -

Concessions Contracts & Permits, KATM, 1967-72" file, AKSO-EC; Lee Svoboda (OAS

pilot), interview by author, February 27, 1992.

144 Wyman Rice (Vice President, Operations) to E. L. Bartlett, March 24, 1967; John

Walatka to Sen. Ernest Gruening, March 24, 1967; Sen. Ernest Gruening to George B.

Hartzog (Director NPS), April 3, 1967; all in NPS/Box 1 (1966-68), Bartlett Collection.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

145 Harthon Bill (Deputy Director, NPS) to Sen. Ernest Gruening, May 2, 1967, in NPS/Box

1 (1966-68), Bartlett Collection; George A. Hall (Supt. MOMC) to RD/WRO, December 18,

1967, in "C38 - Concessions Contracts & Permits, KATM, 1967-72" file, AKSO-EC.

146 NPS, Final Environmental Statement, Proposed Wilderness, Katmai National Monument,

Alaska, June 13, 1974, 3, 65.

147 Master Plan Brief, 1965, 6, 14, 21; Ralph J. Rivers to George Hartzog, August 27, 1965,

in NPS/Box 1 (1965-68), Bartlett Collection.

148 NPS, "Katmai D18 Master Plan Team Field Study Notes, September 1-9, 1965," in

KATM Box 1, HFC.

149 NPS, Master Plan Brief, 1967, 15.

150 NPS, Master Plan Brief, 1965, 6.

151 NPS, Master Plan Brief, 1965, 18.

152 O. T. Dick, Project Construction Proposal for Mortuary Cove jeep trail, May 16, 1966,

KATM Box 1, HFC; Management Assistant to Supt. MOMC, Monthly Narrative Report,

October 1, 1966, in DENA Archives; Acting Director, PNRO to Director, DSC, May 24,

1972, in NARA ANC, Box 13; Blinn interview.

153 NPS, "Mission 66 for Katmai National Monument," n.d. (May 1957), in NPS/Box 2,

Bartlett Collection; Supt. MOMC, "1956 Annual Report," in File A2621 (Annual Reports,

1953-1972), DENA.

154 John Walatka (President, ACV, Inc.) to Lawrence Merriam, December 6, 1960, in "C38 -

Concessions Contracts and Permits, KATM, 1949-1966" file, AKSO-EC.

155 W. Laubmann, "KNM, Topography of Brooks Camp, NCA" (map), July 30, 1963,

AKSO-EPD files; Project Construction Proposal for "220-foot steel frame suspension

bridge," May 16, 1966," in "Katmai Master Plan Engineering Data" file, KATM Box 1, HFC.

156 USDI, "USDI Budget Justifications," 1950-59, WASO-AB Collection; Monthly Narrative

Report, MOMC, for May 1959 and September 1960, both in DENA Archives. See Appendix

A.

157NPS, Master Plan for the Preservation and Use of Katmai National Monument, Chapter 4,

Section B, September 30, 1960.

158 Darrell L. Coe, interview by William S. Hanable, August 5, 1988.

159 USDI, "USDI Budget Justifications," FY 1964 through 1970; Chief, Information and

Education, PNRO to Asst. Dir., Cooperative Programs, PNRO, August 11, 1970, in Box 13,

NARA ANC.

160 O. A. Tomlinson (RD/R4) to Director NPS, September 26, 1950, 2, KATM.

161 William Nancarrow, interview by William Hanable, August 1, 1988; Frank T. Hirst

(Chief Park Ranger, MOMC) to George B. Chaffee (KNM Ranger), June 23, 1952, in KATM
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

files.

162 SAR, MOMC, 1957; Grant H. Pearson to RD/R4, May 7, 1952, in File 201, Box 311, RG

79, NARA SB.

163 Becharof National Wildlife Refuge (King Salmon, Alaska), Annual Narrative Report,

1979, 9, in F&WS-Alaska office files.

164 Bob Peterson, interview by William S. Hanable, June 24, 1988; Stanley A. Cain, "Trip

Report ... Accompanying the Advisory Board," 9-11, Bartlett Collection.

165 KATM Management Assistant, Monthly Narrative Report for October and November

1966, DENA archives.

166 Ranger-in-Charge, KNM, to Supt. MOMC, November 7, 1966, copy of memo in

personal files of Darrell Coe, Harding Lake, Alaska. Management Assistant, KNM, Monthly

Report for October 1966 and November 1966, both in File A2615, DENA archives; Christian

Science Monitor, August 2, 1969, 3.

167 Darrell Coe, interview by William S. Hanable, August 5, 1988, in AKSO-RCR

Collection.

168 Coe interview, August 5, 1988; George A. Hall to Bill Hanable, personal communication,

November 14, 1989.

169 Christian Science Monitor, August 2, 1969, 1; Christian Science Monitor, November 18,

1969, 22; Anchorage Daily News, June 4, 1971, 2; George A. Hall to William S. Hanable,

November 14, 1989.

170 Chief, Information and Education, PNRO to Asst. Dir., Cooperative Programs, PNRO,

August 11, 1970, in Box 13, NARA ANC.

171 Bailey Breedlove (Park Planner) to RD/WRO, Monthly Narrative Report, April 27, 1967,

Hanable Research Notes, AKSO-RCR Collection; Christian Science Monitor, August 2,

1969, 1.

172 Gilbert Blinn, interview by William Hanable, August 26, 1988, 9.

173 Cecil E. Rhode, "When Giant Bears Go Fishing," National Geographic 106 (August

1954), 198; Bill Sherwonit, "Battle of the Bears," Anchorage Daily News, September 6,

1992, K6-7; Bill Sherwonit, "McNeil River; Where the Bears Come First," Alaska

Geographic 16 (1989), 65; Alaska Planning Group, Final Environmental Statement, Proposed

Katmai National Park, Alaska, 1974, 32; Alaska Northwest Books, The Alaska Wilderness

Milepost (Bothell, Wash., the author, 1990), 222.

174 BLM, Case File Number A-054574 through A-054580 and A-054629, Alaska State

Office, Anchorage; State of Alaska, Session Laws, 1967, Chapter No. 108; Una G. Swain,

National Natural Landmarks in Alaska (Anchorage, Nature Conservancy, December 1990),

64-75.

175 Anchorage Daily News, September 15, 1991, A9; Anchorage Daily News, September 6,

1992, K13.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

176 Raymond I. Petersen to George L. Collins, September 26, 1950, in "Katmai-Concessions"

folder, Box 313; George L. Collins to RD/R4, July 19, 1950, in File 201, Box 311; both in

RG 79, NARA SB.

177 Chief of Cooperative Activities to Director NPS, February 17, 1954, in File 15-15 (1953-

58), RG 101, ASA.

178 Ernest Gruening to Phil Holdsworth (Alaska Department of Natural Resources), March

21, 1961; Holdsworth to Egan, March 27, 1961; Clarence L. Anderson (Commissioner of

Fish and Game) to Egan, April 17, 1961; Egan to Gruening, April 18, 1961; all in File 883.1,

Series 41, RG 01, ASA.

179 Supt. MOMC to RD/R4, March 22, 1961, in "D18 Master Plan and Correspondence

1960," KATM Box 1, HFC.

180 Stanley Cain, "Trip Report ... Accompanying the Advisory Board," 9-11, Bartlett

Collection; NPS, Master Plan Brief, 1965, 6, 8, in Box 13, NARA ANC.

181 George B. Hartzog to Walter J. Hickel, December 7, 1967, in File 882, Series 41, RG 01,

ASA.

Chapter 5

1 Claus-M. Naske and Herman E. Slotnick, Alaska: A History of the 49th State (Grand

Rapids, Eerdmans, 1979), 154-55.

2 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time", 61-67.

3 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time", 34-41; NPS (Alaska Task Force), Operation

Great Land, 1965, 6-8, in Box 1, Alaska Administrative History Collection, HFC; William T.

Ingersoll, "Lands of Change: Four Parks in Alaska," Journal of the West 7 (April 1968), 173.

4 NPS, Master Plan Brief, 1965, 6, 8, 10.

5 NPS (Alaska Task Force), Operation Great Land, 34; BLM, Case File Numbers A-054574

through A-054580 and A-054629, Alaska State Office, Anchorage.

6 Congressional Record 113 (1967), 8193; NPS, Master Plan Brief, 1967, 6.

7 Exceptions to the classification order were given for purposes of mineral appropriation,

mineral leasing, and Native land selections in designated areas. Raymond L. Freeman (Chief,

Division of New Area Studies and Master Planning) to Chief, Office of Resource Planning,

SSC, August 10, 1966, in KATM Box 1, HFC; Federal Register, March 8, 1967.

8 Federal Register, October 28, 1967 and November 22, 1967; File AA 818, BLM State

Office, Anchorage. A statewide land freeze, which formalized this and other BLM

regulations, was imposed by Secretary Udall during the waning days of the Johnson

administration. The incoming Interior Secretary, Walter Hickel, opposed the freeze, but

agreed to it in order to gain Congressional approval for his nomination. Williss, "Do Things

Right the First Time", 67.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

9 Raymond L. Freeman (Chief, Division of New Area Studies and Master Planning) to Chief,

Office of Resource Planning, San Francisco Service Center, August 10, 1966, in KATM Box

1, HFC.

10 George B. Hartzog to Walter J. Hickel, December 7, 1967, in File 882 (1967), Series 41,

RG 01, ASA; George B. Hartzog to E. L. Bartlett, December 7, 1967, in NPS/Box 1 (1965-

68), Bartlett Collection.

11 James H. Husted, History of the Johnson Proclamations, 1968-69, September 21, 1970, in

ANILCA Box 1, HFC.

12 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time", 57-59; New York Times, January 21, 1969, 1.

13 Anchorage Daily Times, January 24, 1969, 2.

14 Howard W. Pollock to Gov. Keith Miller, January 23, 1969; Miller to Pollock, February 3,

1969; both in File NR/1-3 (1969), Series 88, RG 01, ASA; Anchorage Daily Times, January

25, 1969, 2.

15 Alaska Environmental Fund, "Alaska, 1970, An Environmental Crisis" (pamphlet), 10, in

Box 2, Alaska Administrative History Collection, HFC; Anchorage Daily Times, January 27,

1969, 10.

16 Gov. Keith Miller to Pollock, February 3, 1969, in File NR/1-3 (1969), Series 88, RG 01,

ASA; Augie Reetz to Gov. Miller, January 23, 1969; Gunnar Berggren to Howard W.

Pollock, January 29, 1969; both in File NR/1-2 (1969), Series 88, RG 01, ASA.

17 Al Henson (Project Leader, ATF) to Asst. Dir., Cooperative Activities, WASO, March 13,

1973, in Box 13, NARA ANC; Ogden Williams, "Katmai and Its Future," National Parks and

Conservation Magazine 52 (March 1978), 6.

18 Williss, 41; "USDI Budget Justifications;" Christian Science Monitor, August 2, 1969, 3.

19 This office, which had jurisdiction over the Alaska park units, was created in January 1969

as a subsidiary of the Western Regional Office. That December, it became the Northwest

Regional Office, with Rutter at its head. The office was renamed the Pacific Northwest

Regional Office in August 1970, a name it retained until the mid-1990s.

20 Gil Blinn, interview by William S. Hanable, August 26, 1988; NPS, Historic Listing of

National Park Service Officials (Washington?, NPS, May 1, 1986), 106; Blinn, interview by

the author, May 24, 1993.

21 Gil Blinn, interview by William S. Hanable, August 26, 1988; Ogden Williams, "Katmai

and Its Future," 7-8.

22 Blinn interview, by Hanable.

23 Blinn interview, by Hanable; Ogden Williams, "Katmai and Its Future," 7-8; Blinn to

author, email, April 11, 1996.

24 Blinn interview, by Hanable.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

25 William S. Hanable and Carol Burkhart, The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill and the National

Park Service: A Report on the Initial Response (Anchorage, NPS, 1990), 5, 7; Federal Water

Quality Administration (USDI), "Kodiak Oil Pollution Incident February-March 1970,

Summary Report," May 1970, at KATM; Richard G. Prasil (Acting Supt. Alaska Group

Office) to Oscar E. Dickason (Federal Water Pollution Control Administration), March 17,

1970, in File N3617, KATM.

26 Ralph Root, "Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Proposed Lower

Cook Inlet Oil and Gas Lease Sale," August 24, 1976, in Box 14, NARA ANC; Gilbert E.

Blinn to RD/PNRO, "Important Issues Concerning Wilderness Proposal for Katmai National

Monument," February 24, 1977, in Box 13, NARA ANC; Pat Richardson, "$400 Million in

High Bids at OCS Sale," Alaska Construction and Oil 18 (December 1977), 34.

27 John Walatka (President, ACV, Inc.) to Lawrence Merriam, December 6, 1960; Lawrence

C. Merriam (RD/R4) to Director, NPS, December 14, 1960; both in "C38 - Concessions

Contracts and Permits, KATM, 1949-1966" file, AKSO-EC.

28 Chief Engineer, WODC, to RD/WRO, February 20, 1964, "Utilities Study, Brooks Camp

Area, Katmai," in NPS History Collection, Serendipity File, KATM, in Hanable Research

Notes, AKSO-RCR Collection.

29 Chief Engineer, WODC, to RD/WRO, February 20, 1964, "Utilities Study, Brooks Camp

Area, Katmai," in NPS History Collection, Serendipity File, KATM, in Hanable Research

Notes; note from "Glenn" to "Hal" attached to August 1971 Master Plan, in Box 13, NARA

ANC.

30 Office of Environmental Planning and Design, Western Service Center, "Design Directive,

Brooks Camp, Katmai" (draft), October 29, 1970, in File D18, AKSO; NPS, Drawing No.

NM-KAT 3028, October 1967, AKSO-EPD.

31 George A. Hall (Supt. MOMC) to RD, WRO, November 16, 1967, in "C38 - Concessions

Contracts & Permits, KATM, 1967-1972" file, AKSO-EC; George Hall to ARD, Operations,

WRO, January 30, 1969; George Hall to RD/WRO, March 25, 1969; both in "C58 -

Buildings & Other Facilities, KATM, Wien Air Alaska, Inc., 1967-1976" file, AKSO-EC.

32 John Walatka to George Hall, December 26, 1968; Gilbert E. Blinn (Supt. KATM) to State

Director, Alaska Group, June 15, 1972; both in "C38 - Concessions Contracts & Permits,

KATM, 1967-1972" file, AKSO-EC.

33 John Walatka to George Hall, December 26, 1968, in "C38 - Concessions Contracts &

Permits, KATM, 1967-1972" file, AKSO-EC.

34 NPS, Katmai National Monument, a Master Plan (preliminary working draft), August

1971, 14-17.

35 Stanley T. Albright (Acting RD/PNRO) to General Supt. Alaska Group, October 15, 1970,

in "C38 - Concessions Contracts & Permits, KATM, 1967-1972" file, AKSO-EC; Office of

Environmental Planning and Design, Western Service Center, "Design Directive, Brooks

Camp, Katmai." Draft was dated October 29, 1970; final was dated February 18, 1971. Both

located in File D18, AKSO-RCR.

36 Bennett T. Gale (Acting Director, PNRO) to Director, DSC, May 24, 1972, in Box 13,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

NARA ANC; Commerce Business Daily (Chicago, U.S. Dept. of Commerce), January 15,

1973; NPS, "Superintendent's Annual Report, Katmai National Monument" (hereafter known

as SAR, KATM), 1974, 8; NPS Drawing 127-41,001A, sheet 1, AKSO-EPD.

37 Blinn interview, by Hanable.

38 NPS, "Katmai National Monument," September 11, 1967; NPS, "Summary-Development

Concepts, Katmai National Monument, Alaska," 1969; both in "Katmai Master Planning

1968-70" file, KATM; NPS Drawing NM-KAT 3028, October 1967, AKSO-EPD.

39 Glenn O. Hendrix (Chief, Office of Environmental Planning and Design, WSC) to General

Supt. Alaska Office, November 10, 1970, 2, 13-14; Office of Environmental Planning and

Design, WSC, "Design Directive, Brooks Camp, Katmai," February 18, 1971, 2, 11; both in

"File D18 Design Directives KATM 1970," AKSO.

40 NPS, Drawing No. NM-KAT 3028, October 1967; NPS Drawing 127-41, 001A, sheet 26;

both in AKSO-EPD files.

41 SAR, KATM, 1974, 1.

42 Blinn interview; Ernest J. Borgman (Gen. Supt. Alaska Group Office, NPS) to RD, Alaska

Region, NMFS, April 23, 1971, in "Correspondence (General - Brooks Lake)" folder, in BCF

Collection, Auke Bay Station, NMFS; SAR, KATM, 1972, 3.

43 SAR, KATM, 1974, 3.

44 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time", 43-44; Howard W. Baker to Ernest Gruening,

March 20, 1967, in NPS/Box 1 (1965-68), Bartlett Collection.

45 Chief, Office of Resource Planning, SSC to RD/WR, April 29, 1968; Acting RD/WRO to

Supt. MOMC, June 28, 1968; both in KATM Box 1, HFC.

46 Raymond O. Mulvany (Acting RD/WRO) to Director NPS, January 10, 1968, in "C38 -

Concessions Contracts and Permits, KATM, 1967-1972" file, AKSO-EC.

47 Robert S. Luntey to Bailey Breedlove, Alaska Field Office, May 17, 1968, in KATM Box

1, HFC; SAR, KATM, 1972, 4.

48 Lowell Sumner, Special Report, Katmai, Master Planning Field Study, September 5-13,

1963 (Washington, NPS, October 1963. It may be recalled that Lowell Sumner had brought

up the value of wilderness in his boundary revision report of October 1952. He also wrote a

Sierra Club Bulletin article ("Magnificent Katmai," December 1952) on the subject. The

Mission 66 Prospectus of 1957 had also touted the monument's wilderness.

49 NPS, Drawing NM-KAT 3018-A, in Master Plan Brief, Katmai National Monument,

1965, 10.

50 Raymond L. Freeman (Acting Assistant Director, Cooperative Activities) to Chief, Office

of Resource Planning, SSC & WSC, April 10, 1968, in KATM Box 1, HFC.

51 Bailey O. Breedlove (Park Planner), Preliminary Draft, Basic Data, Advance Master

Plan/Wilderness Research, Katmai National Monument, Shelikof Strait-King Salmon,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

Alaska, (Anchorage, NPS, June 1969), in Box 13, NARA-ANC and KATM Box 2, HFC.

52 William L. Bowen (RD/WRO) to Supt. MOMC, February 6, 1969; John A. Rutter

(Director, Northwest District Office) to John Walatka, November 3, 1969; John Walatka to

John Rutter, January 13, 1970; all in "C38 - Concessions Contract & Permits, KATM, 1967-

72" file, AKSO-EC; Robert S. Luntey (Chief, Office of Resource Planning, SSC) to Director,

Northwest District, August 6, 1969, in KATM Box 1, HFC.

53 Breedlove may have gotten the idea of limiting Brooks Camp development from Robert

Hafferman, who wrote in 1967 that the camp was "nearing the saturation point." Robert T.

Hafferman to Supt. MOMC, October 18, 1967, in KATM Box 1, HFC.

54 NPS, Summary-Development Concepts, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, n.d. (1969),

in "Katmai Master Planning, 1968-70" file, KATM.

55 Edward Stondall, interview by William S. Hanable, September 15, 1989.

56 Supt. KATM to General Superintendent Alaska Office, April 1, 1971, in Box 13, NARA

ANC; Ernest J. Borgman to RD/PNRO, July 17, 1970; Thomas F. Flynn, Jr. (Deputy

Director, NPS) to RD/PNRO, January 7, 1971; both in "C38 - Concessions Contracts &

Permits, KATM, 1967-1972" file, AKSO-EC.

57 John A. Rutter (RD, PNRO) to Keith Miller, July 24, 1970, in File NR/1-6 (1970), Series

88, RG 01, ASA; Charles J. Gebler (Public Programs Officer, PNRO) to Assistant Director,

Cooperative Programs, PNRO, January 6, 1971, Box 13, NARA ANC; NPS, Katmai National

Monument, a Master Plan, March 1971, in Box 13, NARA ANC.

58 NPS, Katmai National Monument, A Master Plan, August 1971, 8, 11, 15, 17.

59 NPS, Katmai National Monument, a Master Plan, August 1971, 14-17.

60 Gil Blinn (Supt. KATM) to General Superintendent, Alaska Office, April 1, 1971; James

S. Rouse (Wilderness Coordinator, PNRO) to Director NPS, September 9, 1971; "Important

Issues Concerning Preliminary Wilderness proposal for Katmai National Monument," 1971;

all in NARA ANC 13.

61 NPS, "Wilderness Study, Katmai National Monument," August 1971.

62 NPS, "Wilderness and Master Plan Drafts Released on Glacier Bay and Katmai National

Monuments" (press release), September 17, 1971, AKSO-RCR Collection. The hearings were

originally scheduled for September 1970; they were apparently delayed because completion

of the two studies took longer than expected. Anchorage Daily Times, April 22, 1970, 2.

63 Blinn interview, by Hanable.

64 "Tabulation of responses, KNM wilderness proposal," n.d. (August 1972?), in Box 13,

NARA ANC; NPS, Final Environmental Statement, Proposed Wilderness, Katmai National

Monument Alaska, June 13, 1974, 64.

65 Hearings held at the same time as Katmai's generated 368 responses in support of

wilderness for Glacier Bay in comparison to the 256 responses for strong wilderness

protection at Katmai. Had similar hearings been held for Mount McKinley, the number of
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

responses would doubtless have exceeded those for both Glacier Bay and Katmai. NPS,

Wilderness Recommendations, GLBA, May 1972, 22; NPS, Final Environmental Statement,

MOMC, January 1975, 267.

66 Dave Bohn, Rambles in an Alaskan Wild: Katmai and the Valley of the Smokes (Santa

Barbara, Capra Press, 1979), 21-23, 165.

67 NPS, Final Environmental Statement, Proposed Wilderness, Katmai National Monument

Alaska, June 13, 1974, 64-65; Jay Hammond (Alaska Senate) to Egan, November 22, 1971,

in File NR/1-6 (1971), Series 88, RG 01, ASA.

68 B. A. Campbell (Commissioner, Department of Highways) to Gov. William A. Egan, July

8, 1971; Wallace H. Noerenberg (Commissioner, Department of Fish and Game) to William

A. Egan, November 1, 1971; Lloyd Pike (President, Igloo #4, Pioneers of Alaska, Fairbanks)

to Hearings Officer, NPS, November 8, 1971; all in Files NR/1-3 or NR/1-6 (1971), Series

88, RG 01, ASA; also Egan to J. W. Huff, Alaska Miners' Association, March 31, 1972, in

File NR/1-6 (1972), Series 88, RG 01, ASA.

69 "Statement of Raymond I. Petersen, President of Wien Consolidated Airlines, Inc.,"

December 17, 1971, in Box 13, NARA ANC; NPS, Final Environmental Statement, Proposed

Wilderness, Katmai National Monument, Alaska (FES 74-35), June 13, 1974, 76; Petersen

interview, April 17, 1991.

70 Blinn interview, by Hanable.

71 Blinn interview; Hammond to Egan, November 22, 1971, in File NR/1-6 (1971), Series 88,

RG 01, ASA.

72 Blinn interview.

73 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time", 68-69, 87-89.

74 Ibid., 87-88, 91-92. The Bureau of Sport Fisheries was asked to plan the national wildlife

refuges, while the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation was placed in charge of the wild and scenic

rivers studies as well as other recreation planning. In 1977, the BOR was absorbed into the

Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service in 1977; HCRS, in turn, was terminated in

1981, most of its functions being absorbed into the NPS.

75 Ibid., 92.

76 Ibid., 95-97.

77 Ibid., 76-79.

78 Ibid., 98-110.

79 Ibid., 104-09; William A. Egan to J. W. Huff (Alaska Miners' Association), March 31,

1972, in NR/1-6, Series 88, RG 01, ASA.

80 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time", 111-12.

81 The task force team members which investigated Katmai were Urban E. Rogers, John
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

Dennis, James Isenogle, and Keith Trexler. Gil Blinn, who was Katmai's superintendent at

the time, remembers that in "late May or early June" the team came out to the park and "we

spread out the maps at Brooks Camp and looked at possible additions to the park and, even

then, began to look at the proposals that might be developed." The Katmai staff, however,

was not involved in the proposal effort. Williss, 115; Al Henson, "Katmai - Briefing

Statement" (folder), September 12, 1972, 2, in Box 13, NARA ANC; Blinn interview.

82 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time", 120-22, 127.

83 Blinn interview, by Hanable.

84 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time", 124.

85 SAR, KATM, 1972, 4.

86 Bennett T. Gale (Acting Director, PNRO) to State Director, Alaska, July 6, 1972, in Box

13, NARA ANC; John A. Rutter (RD/PNRO) to Project Leader, Alaska Task Force, March

27, 1973, in Box 13, NARA ANC.

87 Al Henson, "KATM-Briefing Statement" (folder), September 12, 1972, 2, in Box 13,

NARA ANC.

88 Fifteen months earlier, before the passage of ANCSA, NPS planner Bailey Breedlove had

previewed a "twenty-year development plan" for Katmai to a meeting of the Alaska

Conservation Society. At that meeting, he mentioned that the NPS hoped that Katmai would

become a national park in order to give the place more prestige. "National park status,"

Breedlove noted, "would give Katmai the impetus it needs. We wouldn't administer Katmai

any differently as a national park. It would just let more people know about the place." The

1971 draft master plan was indeed a long-range development plan, but it gave no mention of

interest in a national park. Anchorage Daily News, June 4, 1971, 2.

89 Williss, 130-31.

90 Al Henson (Project Leader, Alaska Task Force) to Assistant Director, Cooperative

Activities, WASO, March 13, 1973, in Box 13, NARA ANC.

91 John A. Rutter (RD/PNRO) to Project Leader, Alaska Task Force, March 27, 1973, in Box

13, NARA ANC.

92 Gil Blinn, Katmai Superintendent, represented the NPS at several meetings in southwest

Alaska: in the Iliamna area, at Dillingham, Tununak (on Nelson Island), Holy Cross and Cold

Bay. In the Naknek-King Salmon area, opposition to the park service continued to run strong;

the Bristol Bay Borough passed several resolutions which opposed any additions to the park.

Williss, 138-39; Blinn interview, by Hanable.

93 Williss, 118, 137, 142-43, 149; Alaska Planning Group, Katmai National Park, Alaska, A

Master Plan, December 1973, 3, 45-46.

94 The terminology in the master plan and DEIS was skewed in that both documents treated

the expanded park as if it were a fait accompli. The master plan noted, for instance, that

"Katmai National Park comprises 2.8 million acres redesignated from Katmai National

Monument status on the upper Alaska Peninsula and 1.8 million acres legislatively added
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

from surrounding public lands. The 4.6 million-acre park is administered as a natural area by

the National Park Service." The introduction noted, by way of explanation, that the plan "was

prepared necessarily in the form of a completed action in order to provide a more definitive

basis for the required environmental statement. Its publication should not be construed as

representing either the approval or disapproval of the Congress or the Secretary of the

Interior." Alaska Planning Group, Katmai National Park, Alaska, A Master Plan, December

1973, ii, 1.

95 Alaska Planning Group, Katmai National Park, Alaska, A Master Plan, December 1973,

28-34; Edward J. Kurtz (Acting RD/PNRO) to Project Leader, Alaska Task Force, July 13,

1973, in Box 13, NARA ANC.

96 NPS, Final Environmental Statement, Proposed Wilderness, Katmai National Monument,

Alaska, June 13, 1974, 3, 65, 72.

97 NPS, Final Environmental Statement, June 13, 1974, 3; Bennett T. Gale (Acting

RD/PNRO) to State Director, Alaska, July 6, 1972, in Box 13, NARA ANC.

98 NPS, Final Environmental Statement, June 13, 1974, 64-65, 77; Jay Hammond (Alaska

Senate) to Egan, November 22, 1971; Kenai Peninsula Borough resolution #71-32R,

December 7, 1971; Bristol Bay Borough resolution #108, December 8, 1971; all in File NR/1-

6 (1971 or 1972), Series 88, RG 01, ASA.

99 In December 1971, B. A. Campbell, the Commissioner of the Alaska Department of

Highways, told Jay Hammond that in 1968, "we saw no purpose in writing then [Interior]

Secretary Udall [about a Katmai road] and have not pursued the matter further since that

time." NPS, Katmai National Monument, A Master Plan, August 1971, 3; NPS, Final

Environmental Statement, June 13, 1974, 40, 62, 64-65; B. A. Campbell to William A. Egan,

July 8, 1971; B. A. Campbell to Jay Hammond, December 2, 1971, in RG 01/88, NR/1-3 or

1-6 (1971), ASA.

100 Blinn interview, by Hanable.

101 Item 5 in Breedlove, 1969, in Box 13, NARA ANC.

102 NPS, Final Environmental Statement, June 13, 1974, 151-55; APG, Final Environmental

Statement, Proposed Katmai National Park, Alaska, 1974, 214-216.

103 NPS, Revisions to Preliminary Wilderness Plan, Katmai National Monument, Alaska,

May 1972, in Box 13, NARA ANC; Blinn interview, May 24, 1993.

104 NPS, Revisions to Preliminary Wilderness Plan, Katmai National Monument, Alaska,

July 1972, in Box 13, NARA ANC.

105 John H. Farrell (Environmental Project Review staff) to Director, Environmental Project

Review, August 30, 1972, in Box 13, NARA ANC.

106 John Rutter (RD/PNRO) to State Director, Alaska, October 25, 1972, in Box 13, NARA

ANC; NPS, Revised Draft Environmental Statement, Proposed Wilderness, Katmai National

Monument, Alaska, February 12, 1973.

107 Acting RD/PNRO to State Director, Alaska, May 25, 1973, in Box 13, NARA ANC.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

108 Richard Curry (Assoc. Dir., Legislation) to PNRO, February 26, 1974; Bea Thompson

(PNRO) to Al Henson, Alaska Task Force, March 25, 1974; both in Box 13, NARA ANC.

109 Ted Stevens to William A. Egan, June 13, 1974, in File NR/1-6, Series 88, RG 01, ASA.

110 Blinn interview, by Hanable; APG, Final Environmental Statement, Proposed Katmai

National Park, 1974, 185.

111 The fate of Battle Lake and its surrounding watershed was not decided until the last

minute. The NPS and the BLM both wanted it. Assistant Secretary Laurence E. Lynn ruled in

favor of the BLM, and placed the lake in the proposed Iliamna National Ecological Range.

APG, Proposed Katmai National Park, Draft Environmental Impact Statement, 3; Ted Swem

(Chairman, Alaska Planning Group) to Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks,

October 31, 1973, in Box 13, NARA ANC.

112 The AEC concept had first been suggested in July 1972 for boundary proposals of the

proposed Gates of the Arctic National Park; by December 1973, AECs had been suggested

for all but one of the proposed park areas. Land in each of the three Katmai AECs had been

claimed by other federal or state agencies. Williss, 118, 137, 142-43, 149; Alaska Planning

Group, Katmai National Park, Alaska, A Master Plan, December 1973, 3, 45-46.

113 Of the 162 letters from individuals, 116 were apparently generated by an environmental

organization and contained identical comments. APG, Proposed Katmai National Park, Draft

Environmental Impact Statement, December 1973, 1; APG, Final Environmental Statement,

1974, 186-87; Williss, 160.

114 Blinn interview.

115 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time", 160.

116 APG, Proposed Katmai National Park, Draft Environment Impact Statement December

1973, 3; APG, Final Environmental Statement, 1974, 1.

117 Williss, 159-60.

118 Williss, 155-59.

119 R. Gerald Wright, "The Issue of Sport Hunting in the Proposed Alaskan Parks, A Review

of Data, Philosophies, and Recommendations," April 28, 1977, in Box 13, NARA ANC.

120 Frank Norris, Tourism in Katmai Country (NPS, Anchorage, 1992), 156-57; "Registered

Bear Hunting Camps, 1973-1976, Proposed Katmai Additions," n.d. (c. 1976) in Box 15,

NARA ANC; "Briefing Paper, Existing and Potential Uses, Proposed Katmai Additions,"

February 8, 1977, in Box 13, NARA ANC.

121 Alaska Professional Hunters Association, "Proposals for Disposition of 80 Million Acres

Under Terms of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act," n.d. (1972-73), 21, 23, in Box 13,

NARA ANC.

122 "Notes for Bryan Harry for Talk Before the APHA," December 14, 1975, in Box 13,

NARA ANC.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

123 Williss, 122, 147, 153-54.

124 Williss, 166-68.

125 Ted Swem to Toby Cooper (National Parks and Conservation Association), December 31,

1974, in Box 13, NARA ANC.

126 Williss, 166-68.

127 Breedlove, 1969, Item 5, in NARA ANC, Box 13; APG, Proposed Katmai National Park,

Draft Environmental Impact Statement, December 1973, 292.

128 APG, FES, 116, 214-18.

129 "Additions, Katmai National Park, Areas of Conflict, Questions and Answers," November

1977, in Box 15, NARA ANC.

130 APG, Draft Environmental Impact Statement, 287-93.

131 Jules V. Tileston (Alaska Task Force Leader, BOR) to Al Henson (Project Leader, ATF,

NPS), November 6, 1972, in NPS, Katmai National Park, A Master Plan, December 1973,

60-63.

132 APG, Katmai National Park, A Master Plan, December 1973, 18, 46, 62; APG, Katmai

National Park Final Environmental Statement, 1974, 551-56; NPS, Alagnak Wild River

Management Plan, November 1983, 1.

133 As time would tell, he had good reason to worry. Only one of the three streams he

mentioned, Kamishak River, was included in what is now Katmai National Park and

Preserve. Ralph R. Root to Project Leader, ATF, January 26, 1976, in Box 14, NARA ANC.

134 Root to Project Leader, AAO, September 3, 1976, in Box 14, NARA ANC.

135 APG, Katmai National Park, A Master Plan, December 1973, 30.

136 Rollie Ostermick (ATF) to Ralph Root (Park Planner, ATF), November 14, 1975, in Box

13, NARA ANC.

137 Ralph Root to Project Leader, AAO, September 3, 1976, in Box 14, NARA ANC.

138 Gilbert E. Blinn (Supt. KATM) to State Director, Alaska, n.d. (mid-August 1972), in "C2823, Concessions Contracts and Permits, General Correspondence, 1968-1977," AKSO-EC;

Ralph R. Root to Project Leader, AAO, September 3, 1976, in Box 14, NARA ANC.

139 Edward Stondall, interview by William Hanable, September 15, 1989, 4.

140 As noted in previous chapters, shallow water was encountered at both the Lake Camp and

Brooks Camp ends of the trip. Carl C. Lamb (Concessions Manager, PNRO) to Russell E.

Dickenson (RD-PNRO), September 8, 1976, in "Wien Air Alaska, KATM, 1969-1978" file,

AKSO-EC.

141
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

 Carl C. Lamb (Concessions Manager, PNRO) to Russell E. Dickenson (RD-PNRO),

September 8, 1976, in "Wien Air Alaska, KATM, 1969-1978" file, AKSO-EC; NPS,

"Evaluation of Concessioner's Performance, Wien Air Alaska," 1976, Schedule 9.

142 In the summer of 1983, a company called Frontier Hovercraft briefly revived the concept,

when it instituted hovercraft operations between the western boundary of Katmai and Brooks

Camp. The company's boat, however, was ill-suited for the run. It was able to complete just

six of the eleven runs it attempted; even the successful runs were marred by equipment

breakdowns. The company pulled out of the market after its first season, and by 1984

regulations had been instituted prohibiting further hovercraft operations in the park. Petersen

interview, April 17, 1991; "Frontier Hovercraft" Commercial Use License file, AKSO-EC.

143 "Budget Estimates, Proposed Katmai National Park," January 1975, in Box 14, NARA

ANC; Ed Stondall, "Development Cost Estimate for Proposed Katmai National Park, Three

Year Staffing and Development Needs," October 27, 1976, in Box 13, NARA ANC.

144 NPS, Final Environmental Statement, Proposed Wilderness, Katmai National Monument,

Alaska, June 13, 1974, 51, 76.

145 Chuck Petersen to Gary Everhardt (Director, NPS), December 9, 1976, 2 in "Wien Air

Alaska, KATM, 1969-1978" file, AKSO-EC.

146 Edward J. Kurtz (Acting RD, PNRO) to Chief, Office of Legislation, NPS, October 21,

1976, in Box 13, NARA ANC; Chuck Petersen to Gary Everhardt (Director, NPS), December

9, 1976, 2 in "Wien Air Alaska, KATM, 1969-1978" file, AKSO-EC; Blinn to author, email,

April 11, 1996.

147 Russell Dickenson to Chuck Petersen, December 1, 1976; Chuck Petersen to Gary

Everhardt (Director, NPS), December 9, 1976, 2; both in "Wien Air Alaska, KATM, 1969-

1978" file, AKSO-EC. Also Gunnar Naslund to Gary Everhardt, December 14, 1976; Donald

T. Nuttall to Gary Everhardt, December 28, 1976; Sen. Ted Stevens to Gary Everhardt,

December 15, 1976; all in "Wien Air Alaska, Inc., 1973-1978" file, AKSO-EC.

148 Gary Everhardt (Director, NPS) to Chuck Petersen, January 7, 1977, in "Wien Air Alaska,

Inc., 1973-1978" file, AKSO-EC.

149 That usage has continued to the present day. ANILCA, passed in December 1980, gave

Congressional approval to the administratively-designated Katmai wilderness. Section 1307

of the act, however, ensured that services that were active on or before January 1, 1979, could

continue to operate if they were "consistent with the purposes for which such unit is

established or expanded." Katmai staff have interpreted that motorboat usage on the lake has

been consistent with the intent of that section.

150 Edwin W. Seiler to Jay S. Hammond, and Edwin W. Seiler to Gary E. Everhardt; both on

May 11, 1977, in File NR/1-3 (1977), Series 88, RG 01, ASA.

151 William J. Whalen to Edwin W. Seiler, August 26, 1977, in File NR/1-3 (1977), Series

88, RG 01, ASA.

152 SAR, KATM, 1977, 3, 5.

153 SAR, KATM, 1978, 6, 8-9.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

154 SAR, KATM, 1980, 6, 9.

155 Rebecca M. Anderson to PNRO, September 25, 1978; Temple A. Reynolds (ARD,

Management and Operations, PNRO) to Rebecca M. Anderson, October 5, 1978; Ed

Stondall, interview by William Hanable, September 15, 1989, 17-18.

156 David K. Morris, interview by William S. Hanable, November 2, 1989; SAR, KATM,

1979, 1.

157 Williss, 172-75.

158 Williss, 173-74.

159 John Wood (Wood's Alaska Sport Fishing) to Supt. KATM, January 13, 1977; John

Wood to Gov. Jay Hammond, January 14, 1977; both in File NR/1-3 (1977), Series 88, RG

01, ASA; South Naknek Village Council, Resolution No. 77-3, February 1, 1977; Bristol Bay

Borough, Resolution No. 77-3, January 17, 1977.

160 Glenn D. Gallison (Acting RD, PNRO) to Supt. KATM, etc., March 7, 1977, in Box 13,

NARA ANC.

161 Glenn D. Gallison (Acting RD/PNRO) to Supt. KATM, etc., February 25, 1977; Russell

E. Dickenson (RD/PNRO) to Chief, Office of Legislation, NPS, March 30, 1977; both in Box

13, NARA ANC.

162 Williss, 179-81; Ogden Williams, "Katmai and Its Future," National Parks &

Conservation Magazine 52 (March 1978), 8-9.

163 Williss, 184-85.

164 Ralph Root to Project Leader, ATFO, December 16, 1975, in Box 14, NARA ANC.

165 "Proposed Katmai National Park Briefing Paper, Lowland Tundra Addition," n.d. (1976?

), in Box 14, NARA ANC.

166 John Wood (Wood's Alaska Sport Fishing) to Supt. KATM, January 13, 1977, in File

NR/1-3 (1977), Series 88, RG 01, ASA.

167 William J. Briggle to John Wood, February 14, 1977; Acting Director, NPS to Gary D.

Bradford (Bristol Bay Borough), February 25, 1977; both in KATM subsistence files.

168 Blinn interview, by Hanable; G. E. Blinn to Assistant to Director, Alaska, May 18, 1977,

in Box 15, NARA ANC; SAR, KATM, 1977, 9-10. The Bristol Bay Borough resolution was

numbered 77-12; it passed May 16, 1977.

169 Williss, 185-86, 188; Director NPS to Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and

Parks, "Report on H.R. 39," August 12, 1977, pp. 14-15, in Box 15, NARA ANC.

170 Williss, 190-93; KATM maps 90,002 and 90,003; USDI press release on the Andrus

proposal, September 15, 1977, in Box 14, NARA ANC; "Briefing Statement, Proposed

Katmai National Park," September 9, 1977, in Box 15, NARA ANC.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

171 Williss, 201.

172 For a review of how the preserve concept developed, see Williss, "Do Things Right the

First Time", 122, 147, 153, and 166.

173 Roger Contor (Assistant to the Director for Alaska) to Director NPS, January 21, 1977, in

Box 13, NARA ANC; R. Gerald Wright, "The Issue of Sport Hunting in the Proposed

Alaskan Parks, A Review of Data, Philosophies and Recommendations," April 28, 1977, p.

10, in Box 13, NARA ANC.

174 John M. Kauffmann to Area Director, January 31, 1977, in Box 13, NARA ANC; Williss,

122, 166-68.

175 Williss, 174, 186.

176 Williss, 203-04.

177 Williss, 205-14; "Summary of Energy Committee's Decisions on Alaska Lands Bill,"

October 5, 1978, in Box 15, NARA ANC.

178 Williss, 217-21.

179 Williss, 231-35.

180 The House had called for the Battle and Kulik watersheds to be in the preserve; the

Senate called for the two watersheds to be in the park. Regarding lands south of the Alagnak

River, however, the Senate proposed a preserve while the House proposed a park.

181 Congressional Record, November 12, 1980, H10532, H10540, H10542, and H10550.

182 The acreages are as given in Congressional testimony. More recently, personnel at the

Alaska System Support Office have remeasured the areas involved using more exact

instrumentation, and found that slightly over 1,095,000 acres was added to the old monument

to create Katmai National Park, and that the size of the preserve is slightly over 423,000

acres.

Chapter 6

1 [NPS], "Assessment of the Environmental Impact of the Proposed Concession Contract,

Katmai National Monument," October 1974, in "Wien Air Alaska, Inc., 1973-1978" file,

AKSO-EC.

2 R. Phillip Parker (Acting ARD, Management and Operations, PNRO) to Associate Director,

Management and Operations, NPS, May 10, 1978, in "Wien Air Alaska, Inc., 1973-1978"

file, AKSO-EC.

3 SAR, KATM, 1980, 10; NPS, Combined Environmental Assessment and Development

Concept Plans for Concession Facilities, Operations and Services Within the Brooks Camp

and Grosvenor Camp Areas, Katmai National Monument, Alaska (October, 1980), 1, 3. It is

not known if this document was ever distributed outside of the Alaska Area Office.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

4 Richard J. Stenmark to Director, Alaska Area, November 14, 1980; Raymond I. Petersen,

interview by the author, April 17, 1991.

5 Robert Peterson (Associate Director, Management and Operations, ARO) to Ralph Stemp

(Vice President, Industrial Marketing, WAA), May 8, 1981; John E. Cook to Ralph Stemp,

May 29, 1981; Ralph Stemp, interview by the author, February 4, 1992.

6 NPS, Environmental Assessment, Draft Development Concept Plan, Brooks Camp and

Grosvenor Camp, Katmai National Park and Preserve, Alaska, January 1982, 29-31.

7 Frank Norris, Tourism in Katmai Country (Anchorage, NPS, 1992), 103-04.

8 Stondall interview; SAR, KATM, 1978, 6; "Brooks River Floating Bridge, Brooks Camp,

Katmai National Monument" (map), January 24, 1980, in AKSO-EPD; David Morris,

interview by William Hanable, November 2, 1989.

9 Dave Morris interview, by Hanable; SAR, 1983, 9.

10 SAR, 1980, 8; SAR, 1983, 1, 12; Management Assistant KATM to Supt. MOMC, Monthly

Narrative Report, July 4, 1967, in File A2615, "Chief Ranger's Monthly Report," 1957-

1968," DENA.

11 Blinn interview, by the author, May 24, 1993; Morris interview, June 1, 1993; SAR, 1983,

1-2. By 1984, the park staff had grown to 22 or 23 seasonal workers; budgetary cutbacks

between 1984 and 1987, however, resulted in a reduced seasonal staff.

12 John T. Graham to Gov. Jay Hammond, February 2, 1979, File NR/1-3 (1979); John Cook

(RD/ARO) to Sen. Ted Stevens, April 2, 1981, File NR/1-2 (1981); both in Series 88, RG 01,

ASA; Morris interview, by Hanable; SAR, KATM, 1984, 6-7; (King Salmon-Naknek)

Borough Post, November 24, 1989, 13.

13 Federal Register, April 6, 1983, 14980-81.

14 "Resolution of the Alaska Land Use Council Land Use Advisory Committee," April 13,

1983; Donald F. Neilsen (Bristol Bay Native Corporation) to John Cook, RD/ARO, April 15,

1983; Ken Owsichek to RD/ARO, April 30, 1983; all in File NR/1-2, Series 88, RG 01, ASA.

15 NPS, Draft General Management Plan, Land Protection Plan, and Wilderness Suitability

Review (hereafter known as Draft GMP), December 1985, 21-22.

16 Bristol Bay Native Association, "Resolution No. 83-27," September 9, 1983, in File NR/1-

2 (1983), Series 88, RG 01, ASA.

17 Bill Bradley (D-NJ) to Bill Sheffield, June 9, 1983; Dale Bumpers (D-AR) to Bill

Sheffield, June 15, 1983; both in File NR/1-2 (1983), Series 88, RG 01, ASA.

18 Congressional Record 129 (1983), pp. 3755, 8264, 20515.

19 NPS, King Salmon Headquarters Development Concept Plan/Environmental Assessment,

January 1983, 4; SAR, 1974, 3, and SAR, 1985, 1; Stondall interview, 30, 34; Janis Meldrum

(former KATM RMS), interview by the author, December 29, 1992.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

20 NPS, King Salmon Headquarters Development Concept Plan/Environmental Assessment,

January 1983, 5; Stondall interview, 28-29; SAR, 1982, 8.

21 SAR, 1982, 7; NPS, King Salmon Headquarters Development Concept Plan/Environmental

Assessment, January 1983, 2, 9, 21.

22 SAR, 1983, 10; Stondall interview. The duplex was intended for use as seasonal housing,

but permanent staff are the only ones who have lived there.

23 Williss, 218-24, 275-76, 279.

24 P.L. 96-487, Sec. 202(2).

25 Federal Register, June 17, 1981, 31836-64; Federal Register, April 6, 1983, 14978.

Regulations dealing with other CFR titles were issued in later years, but some regulations

were never enacted into the CFR.

26 Williss, 293.

27 NPS, "Application for Business License," n.d. (1980?), in CUL file, AKSO-EC; Alaska

Travel Publications, Exploring Katmai National Monument and the Valley of Ten Thousand

Smokes (Anchorage, the author), 41.

28 The 18 miles nearest to Kvichak Bay had already been conveyed to Levelock Natives

Limited; without management authority, the NPS had little reason to consider it in the wild

and scenic river system.

29 NPS, Alagnak Wild River Management Plan, November 1983, 4, 12.

30 Team Captain, Katmai General Management Plan (Kevin Apgar) to Supt. KATM,

"Alagnak River Trip Report," August 19, 1982, in KATM Annex Files.

31 NPS, Alagnak Wild River Management Plan, November 1983, 2.

32NPS, Alagnak Wild River Management Plan, November 1983, 12.

33 NPS, Alagnak Wild River Management Plan, November 1983, 18-20.

34 SAR, KATM, 1982, 7. One of the students, Joan Beattie (now Joan Darnell), currently

works in the agency's Alaska System Support Office.

35 NPS, "Alternatives Workbook," July 1983, 3-7.

36 NPS, "Alternatives Workbook," July 1983; SAR, 1983, 9; SAR, 1984, 2.

37 NPS, Draft General Management Plan, Environmental Assessment, Land Protection Plan,

Wilderness Suitability Review (for) Katmai National Park and Preserve, Alaska (Denver, the

author, March 1985), iii, 23-31, 72, 97-100.

38 NPS, Draft GMP, March 1985, iv, 57-60.

39
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

 SAR, 1985, 2; NPS, Draft GMP, March 1985, inside front cover.

40 NPS, General Management Plan, Wilderness Suitability Review, Land Protection Plan

(for) Katmai National Park and Preserve, Alaska (Denver, the author, October 1986), inside

front cover, iv; SAR, 1986, 2.

41 NPS, GMP, October 1986, iii.

42 IBLA, "Contest No. AA-7604," September 12, 1985, 4.

43 NPS, Draft Land Status Maps, KATM, at AKSO-EL.

44 BLM, "Alaska Native Allotment Application and Evidence of Occupancy," March 31,

1971; USDI, Interior Board of Land Appeals, "Katmailand, Inc. et al." (IBLA 83-508),

December 5, 1983, 349; Harlan F. Hobbs (Realty Specialist, PNRO) to Chief, Lands and

Mining, ARO; USDI, Office of Hearings and Appeals, Contest No. AA-7604, September 12,

1985, 2; all in File AA-7604, BLM, Alaska State Office, Anchorage. Trefon Angasan Sr.,

Melgenak's grandnephew, was determined to be her sole heir following a probate hearing on

September 28, 1976. But Trefon was 62 years old at the time of Melgenak's death, and by

February 1984, his son Ralph had also been included as an heir. Trefon died on May 12,

1988; since that time, Ralph Angasan has served as the primary heir. Ted Stevens to Curtis

McVee (Director, ASO, BLM), February 29, 1984; Anchorage Daily News, May 14, 1988.

45 IBLA 83-508, 349, 351.

46 IBLA 83-508, 350-51; IBLA, "Contest No. AA-7604," September 12, 1985, 11; Chief,

Branch of Lands and Minerals Operations, BLM to Supt. BIA, Anchorage, January 21, 1977;

Director BLM to State Director, Alaska, April 7, 1977; Donald Juneau and Bruce Twomley

(ALSC) to Robert E. Sorenson (BLM), March 2, 1977; all in AA-7604.

47 Terry R. Hassett (Acting Chief, Branch of Lands, BLM) to Bureau of Indian Affairs,

Branch of Realty, Anchorage Agency, March 7, 1983; IBLA 83-508, 350.

48 Michael V. Finley (Acting RD/ARO) to Raymond F. Petersen, June 3, 1986, in AKSO-EC

files.

49 Robert L. Peterson (Acting RD/ARO to Division of ANCSA and State Conveyance, BLM,

March 30, 1983; IBLA, Contest No. AA-7604, September 12, 1985, 2; both in AA-7604.

50 Albert D. Kahklen (Supt. BIA, Anchorage Agency) to Dave Morris, April 15, 1983;

Kahklen to RD/ARO, May 9, 1983; Craig Davis (Acting Chief, Division of Cultural

Resources) to RD/ARO, April 11, 1983; Alan D. Eliason (Supt. KATM) to Ralph Angasan,

August 6, 1990, all in AA-7604; also Raymond F. Petersen to Roger Contor, May 2, 1986, in

AKSO-EC files.

51 IBLA 83-508, 352, 360; IBLA, "Contest AA-7604," September 12, 1985, 3; Morris

interview, by the author, June 1, 1993. The first question was a point of contention because

the application was dated March 31, 1971, but BLM did not acknowledge its receipt until

April 13, 1972.

52 Robert W. Arndorfer (Acting State Director BLM) to Senator Ted Stevens, March 26,

1984; Mary Jane Clawson (Chief, Branch of Lands, BLM) to Heirs of Palakia Melgenak,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

February 10, 1984; both in AA-7604.

53 IBLA, "Contest AA-7604," September 12, 1985, 3; "Declaration of William Tanner," June

10, 1986; both in AA-7604.

54 IBLA, "Contest AA-7604," September 12, 1985, 5, 8, 15.

55 M. V. Finley (Acting RD/ARO), "Notice of Appeal," October 10, 1985; Garey Coatney

(Chief, ARO-OL) to Paul Hunter (ARO-OL), February 18, 1988; both in AA-7604.

56 Tred Eyerly (ALSC) to Will A. Irwin (IBLA), January 30, 1986, in AA-7604.

57 F. Christopher Bockmon (USDI Office of the Solicitor) to Tred D. Eyerly (ASLC), March

17, 1986; Eyerly to Bockmon, April 16, 1986; both in AA-7604.

58 John W. Burke to Harvey C. Sweitzer, November 28, 1988; IBLA, "Appeal to Contest No.

AA-7604," June 20, 1986; Garey Coatney to Paul Hunter, February 18, 1988; all in AA7604.

59 "Declaration of William Tanner," June 10, 1986; Gary M. Ahlstrand, "Age Determination

of a Brooks Camp Cabin Ruin, Katmai National Park and Preserve," September 1985; both

in AA-7604.

60 IBLA, "Order" on IBLA 86-32, May 11, 1988; Tred Eyerly (ALSC), "Memorandum in

Support of Motion for Expedited Hearing," May 17, 1988, in AA-7604.

61 John W. Burke (Interior Department Solicitor's Office), telephone call to Richard

Stenmark (Deputy RD/ARO), May 23, 1988; Richard O'Guin (Acting RD/ARO) to Burke,

June 3, 1988); both in AA-7604.

62 Burke to RD/ARO, June 21, 1988; Richard O'Guin, telephone call to Jack Burke, July 8,

1988; O'Guin to Burke, August 23, 1988; Gary M. Ahlstrand, "Age Determination of Brooks

Camp Cabin Ruins, Katmai National Park, Alaska," August 1988, 13; all in AA-7604.

63 Paul Hunter, telephone call to Jack Burke, November 29, 1988; Tred Eyerly (ALSC) to

Burke, December 8, 1988; Burke to Eyerly, February 21, 1989.

64 John Burke to RD/ARO, July 18, 1989; Paul Hunter, telephone call to David Meko, July

26, 1989.

65 Harvey C. Sweitzer, (USDI Office of Hearings and Appeals), "Amended Notice of

Hearing," July 10, 1989.

66 USDI Office of Hearings and Appeals, "Transcript of Proceedings Before the Honorable

Harvey C. Sweitzer, August 30, 1989;" John W. Burke, "National Park Service's Post

Hearing Brief, Findings and Conclusions," October 27, 1989, 5-9; Tred Eyerly, "Contestee's

Post Hearing Brief, Findings and Conclusions," December 7, 1989, 2, 4, 6; Harvey C.

Sweitzer, "Findings of Fact," January 4, 1990.

67 Tred Eyerly to Harvey C. Sweitzer, October 27, 1988; Eyerly, "Motion to Clarify Scope of

Hearing" and "Memorandum in Support of Motion to Clarify Scope of Hearing," both

August 22, 1989.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

68 Burke, "National Park Service's Opposition to Contestee's Motion to Clarify Scope of

Hearing," October 27, 1989; Eyerly, "Reply to National Park Service's Opposition to Motion

to Clarify Scope of Hearing," December 7, 1989.

69 NPS, "Brooks Camp Appeal, Case Status/Prognosis," August 24, 1990; IBLA, "United

States v. Palakia Melgenak, IBLA 86-32," September 24, 1993, 225, 244, in Melgenak File,

AKSO-EL.

70 "Alaska Native Allotment Application and Evidence of Occupancy," AA 6212, registered

March 5, 1971; BLM, "Native Allotment Held for Approval, Village Selection Rejected in

Part," March 1, 1984; both in AA-6212, BLM, Alaska State Office, Anchorage.

71 Jesse H. Johnson (Chief, Lands and Locatable Minerals Section, BLM) to Ms. Pamela [sic]

D. Peters, April 15, 1976, in AA-6212.

72 State of Alaska, "State of Alaska Protest Form," May 20, 1981; BLM, "Native Allotment

Held for Approval, Village Selection Rejected in Part," March 1, 1984; both in AA-6212.

73 Michael J. Thompson, Realty Specialist, BLM, "Native Allotment Field Report," January

10, 1980; BLM, "Native Allotment Held for Approval, Village Selection Rejected in Part,"

March 1, 1984; Chief, Branch of Southwest Adjudication, BLM to Chief, ARO-OL, January

27, 1992; all in AA-6212.

74 BLM, "U.S. Survey No. 9197, Alaska, and the Retracement of a Portion of U.S. Survey

No. 5712," October 16, 1987.

75 Supt. KATM to RD/ARO, July 6, 1981, in AA-6212.

76 Acting Supt. KATM to Chief, ARO-OL, Nov. 16, 1988, in AA-6212. In the 1986 General

Management Plan, Peters' parcel was proposed for acquisition, but the NPS considered it no

more or less important than Katmai's other native allotments. NPS, General Management

Plan, Wilderness Suitability Review, Land Protection Plan, Katmai National Park and

Preserve (Denver, NPS, 1986), 84-86.

77 Garey E. Coatney (Chief, ARO-OL) to Chief, Branch of Southwest Adjudication, BLM

State Office, April 6, 1990, in AA-6212.

78 Mary Jane Clawson (Chief, Branch of Southwest Adjudication, BLM) to Chief, ARO-OL,

April 23, 1990; Chief, Branch of Southwest Adjudication, BLM to Chief, ARO-OL, January

27, 1992; both in AA-6212.

79 The road from King Salmon to Naknek Recreation Site #2 had been roughed out in the late

1950s; the spur road to the Lake Camp dock had been constructed a decade later.

80 Garey E. Coatney (Chief, ARO-OL) to Chief, Branch of Southwest Adjudication, BLM

State Office, May 23, 1990, in AA-6212. Also see Robert E. Sorenson (Chief, Branch of

Lands and Minerals Operations, BLM) to Bob Baker, January 13, 1978, and Paul Hunter,

NPS, to Janice Yankus, Land Law Examiner, BLM, November 28, 1990, in same file.

81 Sandra Dunn (Assistant District Manager, Lands, BLM to Chief, Branch of Southwest

Adjudication, BLM, September 25, 1991, in AA-6212.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

82 Certificate of Allotment No. 50-92-0420, July 9, 1992; BLM, "Conformance to Plat of

Survey," January 24, 1992, both in AA-6212.

83 Charles Gilbert (Chief, ARO-OL) to Ray O'Neill, December 17, 1991, in AA-6212.

84 Morris interview, June 1, 1993.

85 SAR, 1972-1983.

86 SAR, 1978, 3.

87 SAR, 1982, 6.

88 SAR for 1983, 7-8; 1984, 5-6; 1985, 5-6; 1986, 5; and 1988, 3.

89 SAR, 1985, 5-6; 1986, 5.

90 Janis Meldrum, interview by the author, May 11, 1993; SAR, 1991, 7-8.

91 ANILCA (P.L. 96-487), Sec. 1317 (a).

92 NPS, Draft GMP, March 1985, 68; NPS, Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the

Wilderness Recommendation, Katmai National Park and Preserve (Denver, the author), April

1988, iii.

93 NPS, Draft GMP, March 1985, 68.

94 NPS, Draft EIS for Wilderness, 5-6, 90.

95 NPS, Draft EIS for Wilderness, 8, 93. The document was dated April 1988 but was not

released to the public until June 17.

96 NPS, Draft EIS for Wilderness, iii-vi.

97 NPS, Draft EIS for Wilderness, 20-23.

98 NPS, Draft GMP, March 1985, 65; NPS, Draft EIS for Wilderness, 23-26.

99 National Park Service, Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Wilderness

Recommendation, Katmai National Park and Preserve, Alaska (Denver, the author,

September 1988), 93.

100 NPS, Final EIS for Wilderness, i, iv.

101 Robert G. Hadfield (King Salmon) to Governor Steve Cowper, August 26, 1988; Bristol

Bay Borough, "Resolution 88-14," August 1, 1988; both in File 1004 (1988), Series 88, RG

01, ASA.

102 Dick Sellers to Sterling Eide, September 29, 1982; Dick Sellers to Carl Yanagawa,

October 12, 1982; both in KATM subsistence files.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

103 Superintendent KATM to RD/ARO, October 29, 1982.

104 In the Alternatives Workbook which had been distributed to the public the previous July,

a similar plan had been proposed; it called for the reopening of fishing areas closed by the

1969 monument expansion, the reopening of hunting and trapping areas closed by the Alaska

Lands Act, and the movement, five miles to the east, of the park's westernmost boundary.

105 Adelheid Herrmann to Dave Morris, January 13, 1984; "Proposed Kamishak-Katmai

Land Trade;" David K. Morris to Rep. Adelheid Herrmann, February 6, 1984; all in KATM

subsistence files.

106 Dick Sellers to W. Lewis Pamplin, Jr., March 20, 1984, in KATM subsistence files.

107 Lance Trasky to Norman Cohen and Lew Pamplin, May 9, 1984; Roger J. Contor

(RD/ARO) to Rep. Adelheid Herrmann, June 22, 1984; Debby Clausen to Lance L. Trasky,

July 10, 1984; all in KATM subsistence files.

108 Dennis D. Kelso (ADF&G) to Tom Hawkins (DNR), August 2, 1984; C. Wayne Dolezal

(ADF&G) to Veronica Gilbert (DNR), June 9, 1988; Dick Sellers to Wayne Dolezal, August

13, 1987; Larry Aumiller (ADF&G) to John Westlund, April 18, 1988; all in KATM

subsistence files.

109 Roger Contor (RD/ARO) to State Director, BLM, Alaska, September 5, 1984, in KATM

subsistence files. By 1988, all of the parcels which had been suggested for disposal had been

found unsuitable for that purpose. Debra Clausen (ADF&G) to Ray Bane, May 10, 1988, in

KATM subsistence files.

110 Larry Aumiller (ADF&G) to Dan Timm, March 20, 1985; Richard A. Sellers to Roger

Contor, May 10, 1985; both in KATM subsistence files.

111 G. Ray Bane (Supt. KATM/ANIA) to RD/ARO, April 19, 1988; Lance L. Trasky

(ADF&G) to Gary Gustafson (DNR), May 4, 1988; C. Wayne Dolezal (ADF&G) to Veronica

Gilbert (DNR), June 9, 1988; all in KATM subsistence files; Bane to author, email, April 19,

1996.

112 Stephen Hurd (Acting Supt. KATM) to Veronica Gilbert (ADNR), June 28, 1989; G. Ray

Bane (Supt. KATM/ANIA) to Gary Gustafson (ADNR), July 25, 1989; Charles Gilbert

(ARO-OL) to ARD Operations, et.al., October 18, 1989; all in KATM subsistence files.

113 SAR, 1991, 1; Morris interview, by Hanable.

114 Stondall interview; SAR, KATM, 1986, 1. The agency's space in their new facility was

expanded in 1987 and again in 1992. SAR, 1987, 2; SAR, 1991, 5.

115 Janis Meldrum, interview with the author, December 29, 1992; SAR, KATM, for 1985, 3;

1986, 3; 1988, 7; and 1991, 4; Stondall interview; Morris interview. The two Fish and

Wildlife trailers hauled to the property in 1988 were not set, skirted or provided utility

hookups until 1991.

116 SAR, 1991, 4; NPS Briefing Statement, July 22, 1992, in AKSO-EL files. Barrie Gilbert,

the Utah State University bear expert, had advocated the construction of such a platform as

early as 1985. Gilbert to NPS, "Draft Problem Analysis/Bear Behavior," August 3, 1985, in
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

File CX 9700-4-0019, at KATM.

117 Hanable and Burkhart, The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill and the National Park Service: A

Report on the Initial Response (Anchorage, NPS, 1990), 5.

118 The primary NPS historical documents dealing with the spill have been William S.

Hanable and Carol Burkhart's The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill and the National Park Service and

Rick Kurtz's Lessons to Be Learned: An Administrative History and Assessment of NPS

Activities Following the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill.

119 Hanable and Burkhart, The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill, 22.

120 Ibid., 2, 39, 40; Ray Bane to author, email, April 19, 1996.

121 Hanable and Burkhart, The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill, 39.

122 Ibid., 39, 43, 79; Ray Bane to author, email, April 19, 1996. The Superintendent's

Representative was Cordell Roy.

123 Hanable and Burkhart, The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill, 3, 43-45.

124 Ibid., 49-50, 56, 59.

125 Ibid., 77, 79, 88.

126 Ibid., 79.

127 Ibid., 80; Ray Bane to author, email, April 19, 1996.

128 Hanable and Burkhart, The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill, 3, 81.

129 Ibid., 49-50, 80-81.

130 Ibid., 81-82.

131 Ibid., 82; Kurtz, Lessons to be Learned, 40.

132 Hanable and Burkhart, The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill, 3, 82; Janis Meldrum interview, May

11, 1993.

133 Hanable and Burkhart, The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill, 82.

134 Kurtz, Lessons to be Learned, 50-51; Janis Meldrum interview, May 11, 1993.

135 Kurtz, Lessons to be Learned, 52-53.

136 FOSC Master Segment Files, located at FOSC office, Anchorage.

137 Kurtz, Lessons to be Learned, 56.

138 Ibid., 56.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

139 Ibid., 56-57.

140 Ibid., 58.

141 Ibid., 59; Master Segment Files, located in Anchorage FOSC office.

142 G. Ray Bane (former Supt. KATM), interview by author, February 7, 1991.

143 NPS, General Management Plan, Wilderness Suitability Review, and Land Protection

Plan, KATM, October 1986, iv-vi, 127.

144 NPS, GMP, iii, v, vi, 32, 43.

145 SAR, 1984, 6.

146 SAR, 1988, 5; Ray Bane, interview by author, June 13, 1991.

147 Bane's closure order hearkened back to a previously-established pattern. Until 1985, the

camp had closed on September 10, but in 1986 and 1987, it had remained open until the 17th.

David Manski (Acting RMS, KATM) to Supt. KATM/ANIA, December 24, 1987; G. Ray

Bane to Raymond F. Petersen, December 30, 1987; Bane interview, June 13, 1991; Bane to

author, email, April 19, 1996.

148 Compilation of statistics from CUL folders, AKSO-EC.

149 In 1988, the first year in which the tour package was offered, a side-trip was offered to

Naknek as well as Brooks Camp. The Katmai trip proved more successful, however, so the

Naknek excursion was eliminated after the 1988 season. Janis Meldrum, interview by author,

December 20, 1990.

150 Gil Blinn, interview by William Hanable, August 26, 1988, 23-24.

151 [NPS], Katmai National Park and Preserve, Resources Management Plan (draft), April

15, 1982, 68-69.

152 David K. Morris to Richard Mathews [sic], April 2, 1985, in American Creek Permit file,

AKSO-EC.

153 "Commercial Use License Superintendent's Directions, Aircraft Operations in the Vicinity

of Brooks Camp, KATM" (pilot's map), May 12, 1990; Bane interview, February 7, 1991;

SAR, FY 1988, 2, 8.

154 NPS, "Brooks Camp DCP Meeting Agenda," February 23, 1988, in BLM File AA-7604;

SAR, 1988, 5-6.

155 SAR, 1990, 3.

156 [NPS], Katmai National Park and Preserve, Brooks River Area Development Concept

Plan, Alternatives Workbook, Summer 1991, 19, 29, 39, 51.

157 SAR, 1991, 1; Larry Norris (DSC), "Analysis of Public Comments on the Brooks River
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

Development Concept Plan, Summer 1991 Alternatives Workbook," 3.

158 Office of Environmental Planning and Design, Western Service Center, "Design

Directive, Brooks Camp, Katmai," February 18, 1971; Bill Heubner, interview by author,

February 8, 1993.

159 Heubner interview, February 8, 1993; SAR, 1983, 10.

160 Heubner interview; NPS, "Archeological Clearance Survey Form No. 002-91-KATM,"

June 20, 1991, at AKSO-RCR.

161 Heubner interview, February 8, 1993.

162 Anchorage Daily News, January 11, 1993, A1, A8.

Chapter 7

1 George L. Collins to RD/R4, July 19, 1950, in KATM Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB;

Nancarrow to Supt. MOMC, July 27, 1950, Monthly Narrative Report for July 1950, in File

A2827 (Reports to Chief Ranger), at DENA.

2 "General Pictorial Report for KATM, Summer 1951," in File 207, Box 311, Entry 7, RG

79, NARA SB.

3 File 504, Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB.

4 KNM Box 2, NPS Archives, HFC.

5 Yeager to Biologist Lowell Sumner, SEKI, August 25, 1955, in File N1423 (Fish), 1946-

1959, at KATM. According to the NCA's Brooks Camp log book, Yeager arrived on July 17,

1955.

6 NPS, "Mission 66 Prospectus," April 1956, 9, in KNM Box 2, NPS Archives, HFC.

7 Richard G. Prasil, "Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Services, MOMC," 1956,

at KATM; Neil J. Reid, (Park Naturalist), "Annual Report on Information and Interpretive

Services, MOMC," 1957, at KATM.

8 Neil J. Reid (MOMC Park Naturalist), "Annual Report on Information and Interpretive

Services, MOMC," 1957, at KATM; Supt. MOMC to Director NPS, "Monthly Narrative

Report for May 1958," June 5, 1958, at DENA.

9 Reid to Supt. MOMC, June 3, 1958, in KNM Box 1, NPS Archives, HFC.

10 Reid, "Annual Report on Information and Interpretive Services, MOMC," 1957 and 1958,

both at KATM; NPS, Master Plan Brief for Katmai National Monument, 1965, 5.

11 Reid, "Annual Report on Information and Interpretive Services, MOMC," 1959; Supt.

MOMC, "Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Activity, KATM," 1960; both at

KATM.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

12 Reid, "Master Plan for the Preservation and Use of Katmai National Monument, Volume I,

Chapter 4, Park Operations Outline, Section E, Interpretive Operations," September 18, 1960,

9-12, at KATM.

13 Supt. MOMC, "Annual Report of Informational and Interpretive Activity, KATM" for

1961 through 1964, in File K-1819, KATM Annex.

14 Robert L. Peterson to Supt. MOMC, April 3, 1961; Gruening, "Lonely Wonders of

Katmai," National Geographic Magazine, June 1963, 828; Management Assistant, KATM,

Monthly Narrative Report, March 1967, KATM.

15 Former MOMC Superintendent George Hall recalled that women were chosen to work at

Brooks Camp because they were shorter in stature than men (and thus better qualified to

stand up in the concessioner's small bus) and because they were perceived to be naturalists

rather than protective personnel. Women continued to ride the buses through the early 1970s.

Hall to William Hanable, November 15, 1989; SAR, 1972, 1.

16 Supt. MOMC, "Annual Report, Information and Interpretive Activity, KATM," 1963, at

KATM.

17 Stanley A. Cain, "Alaska Trip Report," July 30 to August 10, 1965, 10, in NPS/Box 2,

Bartlett Collection; "Statement of Raymond I. Petersen, President of WCA," December 17,

1971, in Box 13, NARA ANC; NPS, Master Plan Brief (1965), 4.

18 Management Assistant KATM to Supt. MOMC, Monthly Narrative Report for June 1967,

at KATM; Darrell L. Coe, "Katmai National Monument," Alaska Sportsman 35 (March,

1969), 33; Chief, Information and Education, PNRO to Assistant Director, Cooperative

Programs, PNRO, August 11, 1970, 2, in Box 13, NARA ANC. Also see Stanley A. Cain to

Gov. William A. Egan, December 13, 1965, in File 883.1, Series 41, RG 01, ASA; and

Ranger in Charge, KATM, Monthly Narrative Report, May 1966, at KATM.

19 Supt. KNM, "Annual Report, Information and Interpretive Services, Katmai, 1969," at

KATM; Donald E. Dumond, "Prehistoric Dwellings in Katmai National Monument, Alaska,"

n.d. (1969?); Dumond, "Reconstruction of an Aboriginal Dwelling in Katmai National

Monument, Alaska," January 15, 1969; both in KATM files, History Division Collection,

WASO.

20 Gilbert Blinn, interview by Bill Hanable, August 26, 1988, 6; Chief, Information and

Education, PNRO, to Assistant Director, Cooperative Programs, PNRO, August 11, 1970, in

Box 13, NARA ANC. The process of greeting spread, for awhile at least, to every aspect of

the visitor's trip. In the summer of 1970, Charles Gebler noted that "the approximate 1400

visitors to Brooks Camp are probably personally greeted more than any other visitors in the

National Park System. Almost all visitors are greeted by a clerical employee at King Salmon

as they disembark from the airplane by the clerical employee. She does an amazingly

effective job at making them feel at home. All incoming plane flights to Brooks Camp are

then greeted by one of the park staff. As a third stage to the greeting procedure, the visitors

to the lodge are given a short talk after their first meal."

21 Lowell Sumner, Special Report, Katmai Master Planning Field Study, September 5-13,

1963 (Washington, NPS, 1963), 5.

22 NPS, Master Plan Brief for Katmai National Monument, 1965, 9, 12.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

23 Charles C. Schmid (Acting General Supt., Alaska Group Office), January 19, 1971, in File

22, KATM. The prospectus was not updated until 1991. SAR, 1991, 7.

24 Alaska Planning Group, Katmai National Park, Alaska, A Master Plan (Washington, D.C.,

NPS, December 1973), 37.

25 Since the prospectus was published, several Statements for Interpretation have been

prepared. NPS, "Interpretive Prospectus, Katmai National Monument," May 4, 1973, passim.;

SAR, KATM, 1991, 6; Mark Wagner, interview by author, March 3, 1993.

26 NPS, "Katmai National Monument" (brochure), editions of 1952, 1963, and 1968, in

KATM Box 2, NPS History Collection, HFC; "Alaska's Land of Steaming Volcanoes,"

Sunset 118 (April 1957), 32.

27 Keith Ryder, "On Foot in the Valley of Fire and Ice," Alaska Sportsman 30 (September

1964), 24; Darrell L. Coe, "Katmai National Monument," National Parks Magazine 40 (June

1966), 9.

28 "Item 18, Backcountry Visitor Use," in Bailey Breedlove, Advance Master Plan/Wilderness

Research, Katmai National Monument, Shelikof Strait-King Salmon, Alaska, June 1969, in

Box 13, NARA ANC.

29 John Henneberger, "Backcountry Use," Katmai National Monument Master Plan,

Preliminary Working Draft, August 1971, 36.

30 "Visitation Figures - Parks in Alaska," in File A2615 (inactive) at KATM shows that 98

people visited Katmai's backcountry in 1972. Another 80 did so in 1973.

31 During the late 1970s and early 1980s, bus-tour patrons may have been considered

backcountry users; during the mid-1980s, the only bona fide users were overnight campers.

Since then, it appears that both day-trippers and campers have been considered backcountry

users.

32 One indicator of the Katmai's popularity as an overnight destination has been the number

of licensed companies sponsoring camping, backpacking, mountaineering, and ocean touring

trips. Six such companies operated these trips in 1981. In 1985, seven companies were active,

and in 1989 the number of involved companies remained at seven. Many Katmai campers, of

course, are not affiliated with guiding companies, and park staff have had no reliable way of

tabulating the number of independent campers. Some campers fill out NPS backcountry

permits before commencing their explorations, but there is no requirement to do so and many

do not. Source: Commercial Use License statistics, AKSO-EC; Janis Meldrum, interview by

author, February 25, 1993.

33 See Larry Rice, Gathering Paradise: Alaska Wilderness Journeys (Golden, Colo., Fulcrum

Pub., 1990), 8; Janis Meldrum, interview by author, February 25, 1993.

34 Commercial Use License statistics, AKSO-EC; Norris, Tourism in Katmai Country, Tables

1 and 2.

35 SAR, passim.; Frankie Barker (ANHA), interview by author, February 24, 1993.

36 Frankie Barker interview; David K. Morris (Supt. KATM) to RD/ARO, November 4,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

1985, "Semiannual Report to Congress," in File A7221, KATM.

37 The Bear Facts, vols. 1-3; Mark Wagner to author, June 1995.

38 Chief, Information and Education, PNRO, to Assistant Director, Cooperative Programs,

PNRO, August 11, 1970, 2, in Box 13, NARA ANC; SAR, 1978-1979, 1; NPS, "End of

Season Interpretive Report, KATM," September 10, 1985.

39 NPS, "End of Season Interpretive Report, KATM," September 10, 1983.

40 SAR for 1973, 1; 1977, 1; and 1978, 1; Janis Meldrum, interview by author, February 25,

1993; Mark Wagner to author, June 1995.

41 Norris, Tourism in Katmai Country, 43, 71, 80, 85, 104.

42 Raymond F. Petersen to Roger Contor, May 2, 1986; SAR, 1986, 4. NPS staff may have

encouraged Petersen to complain about the matter to a wide range of officials both in and out

of the Service, in hopes that funding for the bus tours might be restored.

43 Gil Blinn to Bruce Jones (Wien Air Alaska), June 22, 1977, in "Wien Air Alaska, Inc.,

1973-1978" file, AKSO-EC; SAR, KATM, for 1978, 1; 1979, 2.

44 SAR, 1982, 1; NPS, "End of Season Interpretive Report, KATM" for 1983 through 1985,

at KATM.

45 SAR, 1977, 1.

46 Bruce Kaye (Park Ranger) to Robert A. Riggs, REDW, February 12, 1980, in File N615,

AKSO; NPS, "End of Season Interpretive Report, KATM," September 10, 1983, at KATM.

The handout was entitled "Alaskan Brown Bear of Katmai."

47 SAR, passim.

48 Chuck Peterson to Gil Blinn, January 14, 1977, in "Wien Air Alaska, Inc., 1973-1978"

file, AKSO-EC; SAR, KATM, 1977, 1.

49 SAR, 1979, 2; NPS, "End of Season Interpretive Report, KATM," September 10, 1987, at

KATM.

50 SAR, 1979, 2; SAR, 1980, 2; Janis Meldrum, interview by author, February 25, 1993;

Mark Wagner to author, June 1995.

51 SAR, 1987, 7; Morris interview; Janis Meldrum, interview by author, February 25, 1993.

52 SAR, 1986, 4; NPS, "KATM Parkwide Wayside Exhibit Proposal," September 26, 1991;

Chief, Division of Wayside Exhibits, HFC to RD/ARO, January 9, 1992, in File D6215,

KATM.

53 Mark Wagner (KATM Interpretive Specialist), interview by author, March 3, 1993;

Wagner to author, June 1995.

54 Loren Casebeer to RD/ARO, June 8, 1987, in "Katmai Concessions, vol. III, packet 2" file,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

AKSO-EC.

Chapter 8

1 Ross C. Kavanagh (ARO) and Charles P. Meacham (Commercial Fish Division, ADF&G),

interview by William F. Hanable, November 15, 1989.

2 Kavanagh and Meacham interview.

3 National Park Service, "Draft Environmental Assessment - Fishing Regulations, Katmai

National Park and Preserve," 7, ms. in files of AKSO-RCR.

4 Don E. Dumond, Archeology on the Alaska Peninsula: The Naknek Region, 1960-1975,

University of Oregon Anthropological Papers No. 21 (1981), 6, Table 6-13.

5 National Park Service, Draft Environmental Assessment, Fishing Regulations, Katmai

National Park and Preserve, August 15, 1986, 9.

6 NPS, Draft EA, Fishing Regulations, August 15, 1986, 7-8.

7 Robert F. Griggs, Leader, Katmai Expedition, November 22, 1930, to Ernest Walker

Sawyer, USDI, in Griggs Collection, National Geographic Society.

8 Patricia Roppel, Salmon from Kodiak; An History of the Salmon Fishery of Kodiak Island,

Alaska (Anchorage, Alaska Historical Commission Studies in History No. 216), 1986, 6;

Antonson and Hanable, Alaska's Heritage, 439.

9 Lewis G. MacDonald, "Chronological History of Salmon Canneries in Central Alaska,"

Alaska Fisheries Board Annual Report 3 (1951), 78, 83; U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, Alaska

Fishery and Fur-Seal Industries (Washington, GPO), various issues, 1923 to 1936.

10 Because of confusing Federal agency name changes, the following historical summary is

provided to assist the reader in understanding and tracking Federal involvement in Katmai

fishery management and research.

In 1871 the U.S. Fish Commission was established as an independent agency of the Federal

government. In 1903 the Commission was renamed the U.S. Bureau of Fisheries and placed

in the newly-established Department of Commerce and Labor. (The Bureau became part of

the Department of Commerce when the department split apart in 1913.) In 1940 the Bureau

of Fisheries merged with the U.S. Biological Survey, which had been in the Department of

Agriculture, to become the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The new agency was placed

within the Department of the Interior. In 1956 the Fish and Wildlife Service was reorganized

and two bureaus were created within it: the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries and the Bureau

of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. In 1970 the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries was renamed

the National Marine Fisheries Service, and it became part of the new National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration in the Department of Commerce. "100 Years of BCF and Its

Predecessors," Commercial Fisheries Review 32 (October 1970), 2.

11 U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, Alaska Fishery and Fur-Seal Industries, 1920 (Washington,

GPO, 1921), 31-32.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

12 U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, Alaska Fishery and Fur-Seal Industries (Washington, GPO) for

1920 (p. 32) and 1921 (p. 17); NPS, Draft Environmental Assessment, Brooks Falls Fish

Ladder, Katmai National Park and Preserve, May 1987, 16. Many sources have stated that

the original cut was located where the fish ladder was later built. Both the USBF and Frank

Been's Field Notes of Katmai National Monument Inspection (p. 11), however, confirm that

the 1920-21 activity took place across the river from the fish ladder.

13 U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, Alaska Fishery and Fur-Seal Industries (Washington, GPO),

1920-25 editions; Frank T. Been, Field Notes of KNM Inspection, November 12, 1940, 8;

Alaska Travel Publications, Inc., Exploring Katmai National Monument and the Valley of

Ten Thousand Smokes (Anchorage, the author, 1974), 76.

14 U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, Alaska Fishery and Fur-Seal Industries, 1936, 284; George J.

Eicher, "The Effects of Laddering a Falls in a Salmon Stream," n.d. (1956?), AKSO-RCR

Collection.

15 George J. Eicher, "History of the Bristol Bay Investigation," April 25, 1967, 1, ms. in files

of the Auke Bay [Alaska] Laboratory, National Marine Fisheries Service.

16 Eicher, April 25, 1967, 1. Later it was discovered that Brooks Lake was the least typical of

the Bristol Bay spawning and nursery areas.

17 F. A. Davidson, Director (Seattle office), Bureau of Fisheries, to National Park Service,

D.C., April 16, 1940, in File N1423, ("Fish 1946-1959"), KATM (also in File 205, KNM Box

311, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA SB); A. E. Demaray (Acting Director, NPS) to Acting

Commissioner, Bureau of Fisheries, May 14, 1940, in RG 79, Box 312, NARA SB.

18 Hillory A. Tolson (Acting Director, NPS) to Acting Commissioner, Bureau of Fisheries,

April 25, 1940; A.E. Demaray to Acting Commissioner, Bureau of Fisheries, May 14, 1940;

both in Box 312, RG 79, NARA SB. Also Supt. MOMC to Director NPS, April 23, 1941 and

George Eicher, telephone interview with Bill Tanner, August 18, 1984; both in Melgenak

Case File, AKSO-EL.

19 Eicher, April 25, 1967, 3.

20 Eicher, April 25, 1967, 4-5.

21 Revised figures are from Eicher, 1971, as quoted by Carl Burger, with James Lundeen and

Anders Danielson, "Biological and Hydrological Evaluations of the Fish Ladder at Brooks

River Falls, Alaska" (draft report), U.S. F&WS, National Fishery Research Center,

Anchorage, June 1, 1985, copy in AKSO-RNR files. No count is available for 1943.

22 Annual Reports of Alaska Fisheries Investigations, 1943-1944, 1944-1945; Section of

Alaska Fishery Investigations, September 1 to September 30, 1945, in Box 294, BCF

Collection, 1904-1960, RG 22, NARA Anchorage; George J. Eicher to William S. Hanable,

September 1, 1989, in AKSO-RCR files.

23 Eicher, April 25, 1967, 7.

24 The NPS did not know that Brooks Falls had been blasted by Bureau of Fisheries

personnel until Mount McKinley National Park Superintendent Frank Been visited the site in

September 1940. Been was matter-of-fact in reporting on the modifications to the falls. His
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

superiors, however, apparently felt that the falls had been blasted during the past few years.

They would have protested the action, but chose not to do so because the offending agency

(the Bureau of Fisheries) no longer existed. Been, Field Notes of KNM Inspection, 10;

Ronald F. Lee (Acting Director, NPS) to RD/R4, September 6, 1951, in "Katmai Rules and

Regulations" folder, Box 312, RG 79, NARA SB.

25 Annotated copy of "Kamishak Bay-Katmai Region" (map), USGS/1923, in File 601, KNM

Box 2, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC; Hillory Tolson (Acting Director NPS) to Edwin G.

Arnold (Director, Division of Territories and Island Possessions), April 12, 1946, at KATM;

William R. Heard, Richard L. Wallace, and Wilbur L. Hartman, Distribution of Fishes in

Fresh Water of Katmai National Monument, Alaska and their Zoogeographical Implications,

Special Scientific Report--Fisheries No. 590 (Washington, USF&WS), October 1969, 2.

26 U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, Alaska Fishery and Fur-Seal Industries (Washington, GPO),

1947 through 1955 editions.

27 Eicher, September 1, 1989.

28 Eicher, April 25, 1967, 9.

29 Ranger (Willie) Nancarrow to Supt. MOMC, August 26, 1950, in File A2827, Reports to

Chief Ranger, January 1950-November 1954, DENA archives.

30 Alfred C. Kuehl to Assistant Regional Director, Design and Construction, Region Four,

August 21, 1951, in File N1423 ("Fish, 1946-1959"), KATM; George J. Eicher to Dean

Paddock, March 21, 1987, in AKSO-RNR files.

31 Alfred C. Kuehl to Assistant Regional Director, Design and Construction, Region Four,

August 21, 1951, in File N1423 ("Fish, 1946-1959"), KATM.

32 George L. Collins to RD/R4, NPS, July 19, 1950, in "Katmai NM" folder, Box 312, RG

79, NARA SB.

33 O. A. Tomlinson (RD/R4) to Director NPS, July 31, 1950, in File 714, KNM Box 312,

Entry 7, RG 79, NARA SB.

34 O. A. Tomlinson (RD/R4) to Director NPS, July 31, 1950; Hillory A. Tolson (Acting

Director, NPS) to Director, F&WS, August 25, 1950; M.C. James (Acting Director, F&WS)

to Director NPS, September 27, 1950; all in File 208, KNM Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB;

Eicher, September 1, 1989.

35 Alfred C. Kuehl to Assistant Regional Director, Design and Construction, Region 4,

August 21, 1951, in File 208-06, Box 311, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA SB.

36 George L. Collins, July 19, 1950 letter; Eicher, September 1, 1989.

37 Raymond I. Petersen, Affidavit, May 31, 1983, in Melgenak Case File, AKSO-EL.

38 Subsequent Public Land Orders withdrawing land at the sites took place in 1944, 1945, and

1946. Historical Index for T17S, R43W and T18S, R44W, Seward Meridian.

39 R. R. Lyons (Captain, U.S. Navy, Commanding Officer, Kodiak Naval Operating Base) to
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

Supt. MOMC, October 16, 1945; Grant Pearson (Supt. MOMC) telegram, September 9, 1946;

both in File 901, Box 313, RG 79, NARA SB.

40 Grant Pearson (Supt. MOMC) to RD/R4, September 26, 1945 telegram, in "KNM-Permits"

file, KNM Collection, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA SB; Alfred C. Kuehl, Memorandum to RD/R4,

August 23, 1948, in "General Correspondence Concerning Katmai, 1946-1953," in KATM

Annex Files.

41 Lt. Col. Ernest B. Walters, USAF, to Regional Administrator, BLM, May 29, 1949; also

Charles P. Mead to Acting Director, Alaska State Office, BLM, October 23, 1986; both in

Case File AO 23000, BLM Anchorage.

42 Public Land Order 3700, in Federal Register, June 10, 1965, 7899.

43 U.S. Air Force, History of the Alaska Air Command, 1 January 1976-31 December 1976

(Anchorage, the author), 1977.

44 Frank T. Been (Supt. MOMC) to RD/R4, May 20, 1948, in File 710, KNM Box 312, Entry

7, RG 79, NARA SB; George B. Kelez (Supervisor of Fisheries, Seattle) to Chief, Branch of

Alaska Fisheries, Washington, D.C., February 17, 1950, in File 208, KNM Box 311, Entry 7,

RG 79, NARA SB.

45 Hillory A. Tolson (Assistant Director NPS) to RD/R4, April 23, 1948, in File 208, KNM

Box 311, RG 79, Entry 7, NARA SB.

46 Raymond I. Petersen to Dave Morris (Supt. KATM), October 27, 1982, in AKSO-EC;

Frank T. Been to RD/R4, December 13, 1948, at KATM.

47 Raymond I Petersen to George L. Collins (Chief, Alaska Recreation Studies, Region 4),

September 26, 1950, in Box 313, RG 79, NARA SB; George B. Kelez (Supervisor of

Fisheries, Seattle) to Chief, Branch of Alaska Fisheries, Washington, D.C., February 17,

1950, in File 208, KNM Box 311, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC.

48 Hillory A. Tolson (Assistant Director, NPS) to RD/R4, April 23, 1948, in File 208, KNM

Box 311, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA SB.

49 Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Sport Fish, Southwest Alaska Rainbow

Trout Management Plan (Juneau?, the author, December 1988), 3; Superintendent, Camp

Operations, Anglers Paradise, July 14, 1950, in Box 313, RG 79, NARA SB. In a May 16,

1951 letter from Raymond E. Hoyt (ARD/R4) to Roy Lindsley (F&WS, Kodiak), the

regulation was cited not as one treble hook but as two single hooks.

50 Clarence J. Rhode (Alaska Regional Director, F&WS) to Director, F&WS, July 25, 1951,

in File N1423 ("Fish, 1946-1949"), KATM.

51 Acting RD, Region 4 to Director NPS, August 3, 1951, in File N1423, KATM.

52 Acting RD, Region 4 to Director NPS, August 3, 1951, in File N1423, KATM.

53 A. E. Demaray (Director NPS) to Secretary of the Interior, September 19, 1951, in File

208, Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

54 Lawrence Merriam (RD/R4) to Director NPS, August 29, 1951, in File 208, KNM Box

311, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA SB.

55 RD/R4 to Director NPS, August 29, 1951, in "Katmai Rules and Regulations" folder, Box

311, RG 79, NARA SB.

56 A. E. Demaray (Director NPS) to Director F&WS, October 3, 1951, in File 208, KNM Box

311, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA SB.

57 Chief Counsel, NPS, to RD, Region 4, March 10, 1952, in File N1423, KATM.

58 Federal Register, May 28, 1952.

59 "APK" to Mr. (Douglas) McKay (Secretary of the Interior), July 13, 1953, in File N1423,

KATM.

60 John Greenbank (Fishery Management Biologist, F&WS), "Sport Fish Survey, Katmai

National Monument, Alaska," n.d. (c. 1955), in File N1423, KATM.

61 Greenbank, c. 1955, 30.

62 Dorr G. Yeager (Chief of Interpretation, Region 4) to Lowell Sumner (Biologist, SEKI),

August 25, 1955, in File N1423, KATM.

63 USDI, Annual Report of the Governor of Alaska, 1956, 69.

64 Neil J. Reid to Supt. MOMC, "Report on Katmai Visit, May 29 to June 1, 1958," in "D-18

Master Plan, Katmai, 1953-59" file, KNM Box 1, HFC.

65 Chief, Division of Design and Construction, NPS, October 11, 1955, NPS History

Collection, Serendipity File, KATM.

66 "Policies for the Protection and Management of Fishery Resources," in National Park

Service Administrative Manual;, Vol. IV, Ranger Activities, Part 2, Chapter 5, August 1959,

3-7.

67 William W. Redmond (Regional Solicitor, Department of the Interior) to Supt. MOMC,

May 23, 1961, in File N1423 ("Fish, 1960-74"), KATM; William A. Egan to Ernest

Gruening, April 18, 1961, in File 883.1, Series 41, RG 01, ASA.

68 Folder 45 (Naknek Advisory Committee), Series 556 (Local Advisory Committee files),

RG 11 (Fish and Game Records), ASA; SAR, KATM, 1986, 7.

69 Ranger-in-Charge, KNM, to Supt. MOMC, July 6, 1966, in DENA files.

70 Reetz to Keith Miller, January 23, 1969, in File NR/1-2, Series 88, RG 01, ASA; Alaska

Department of Fish and Game, Division of Sport Fish, Southwest Alaska Rainbow Trout

Management Plan, December 1988, 4; Bailey O. Breedlove (Park Planner, Alaska Field

Office) to RD/WRO, April 7, 1969, in File 22 (Professional Services Proposals, KATM),

AKSO files.

71 Gil Blinn, interview by William Hanable, August 26, 1988; Chief, Information and
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

Education, PNRO to Assistant Director, Cooperative Programs, PNRO, August 11, 1970, in

"Katmai NM Correspondence 1971-75" file, Box 13, RG 79, NARA ANC.

72 "Annual Aquatic Resources Report for 1973, Katmai, January 14, 1974," in File N1423

("Fish, 1960-74"), KATM; Alaska Travel Publications, Inc., Exploring Katmai National

Monument and the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes, 160.

73 SAR, KATM, for 1972, 2, and 1974, 2; ADF&G, Division of Sport Fish, Southwest

Alaska Rainbow Trout Management Plan (December 1988), 4. In 1974, the salmon returns

were so poor throughout the area that President Nixon declared Bristol Bay an economic

disaster area. NPS, Draft Environmental Assessment, Brooks Falls Fish Ladder, KATM

(May, 1987), 13, in AKSO-RCR files.

74 36 CFR 7.46 for 1972 and 1973.

75 Chief, Information and Education, PNRO to Assistant Director, Cooperative Programs,

PNRO, August 11, 1970, in "Katmai NM Correspondence 1971-75" file, Box 13, RG 79,

NARA ANC; Supt. KATM to State Director, Alaska, August 17, 1972, in Box 13, NARA

ANC.

76 Aleutian Island and Bristol Bay Order No. 11-2-74, May 16, 1974, ADF&G, Division of

Sport Fish, in File N1423 ("Fish, 1960-1974"), KATM; Alaska Department of Fish and

Game, Alaska Sport Fishing Seasons and Bag Limits, 1976 (Juneau, 1976), 39.

77 Eicher, April 25, 1967, 10-12.

78 Frank T. Been to Director NPS, April 23, 1941, in Box 312, RG 79, NARA SB; "Brooks

Lake Real Property" file, "Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, Brooks Lake" folder, AKSORCR Collection.

79 William R. Heard, Richard L. Wallace, and Wilbur L. Hartman, Distribution of Fishes in

Fresh Water of Katmai National Monument, Alaska and their Zoogeographical Implications,

Special Scientific Report--Fisheries No. 590 (Washington, USF&WS), October 1969, 1; F.

W. Stokes (BCF Administrative Officer) to GSA Seattle, March 31, 1960, in "Bureau of

Commercial Fisheries, Brooks Lake Files" folder, AKSO-RCR Collection.

80 NPS, Master Plan Brief for Katmai National Monument, 1965, 17 (map).

81 Most of the structures erected outside of the BCF's three main temporary camps were built

rudely and deteriorated quickly. Item 17, "Inventory of Backcountry Facilities and

Structures," in Breedlove, 1969; Robert L. Carper, List of Classified Structures Inventory

(Denver, NPS), April 1976; NPS, Final Environmental Statement, Katmai Wilderness,

Katmai National Monument, Alaska (FES 74-35), June 13, 1974, 31, 37; William R. Heard,

Richard L. Wallace, and Wilbur L. Hartman, Distribution of Fishes in Fresh Water of Katmai

National Monument, Alaska and their Zoogeographical Implications, Special Scientific

Report--Fisheries No. 590 (Washington, USF&WS), October 1969, 1-2; NPS, "Important

Issues Concerning Preliminary Wilderness Proposal for Katmai National Monument," in Box

13, NARA ANC.

82 NPS, Draft Environmental Assessment, Brooks Falls Fish Ladder, KATM, May 1987, 18.

But Superintendent Gil Blinn, who arrived in September 1969, recalled that the weir was

"discontinued about my first summer or so." Blinn interview, August 26, 1988.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

83 Ross C. Kavanagh interview, October 27, 1989; Richard Wilmot with Carl Burger and

Pierre Steinbeck, "Genetics of Sockeye Salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) in Katmai National

Park and Preserve, Alaska," report sponsored and funded by the NPS (Anchorage, F&WS,

Alaska Fish and Wildlife Office of Research, May 1, 1986), 18-19.

84 NPS, Final Environmental Statement, Katmai Wilderness, Katmai National Monument,

Alaska, June 13, 1974, 29; SAR for 1973 (p. 2) and 1974 (p. 2). Harry Reitz, the NMFS

Alaska Director, noted in 1978 that the agency "had not maintained an active research

program there since 1972." Reitz to RD/PNRO, March 20, 1978, in "Buildings" file, KATM.

85 Gilbert E. Blinn (Supt. KNM) to Area Director, Alaska, NPS, Memorandum on Salmon

Research by NMFS, August 2, 1976, in AKSO-RNR files; Ross C. Kavanagh, October 27,

1989; NPS, "Important Issues Concerning Wilderness Proposal for Katmai National

Monument," February 24, 1977, in "Wilderness Katmai" file, Box 13, RG 79, NARA ANC.

86 "Brooks Lake General Correspondence" file, BCF folder, AKSO-RCR Collection; SAR

1978, 6; Morris interview, November 2, 1989.

87 Carper, List of Classified Structures Inventory, 4-5; Janis Meldrum interview, June 9,

1993.

88 George J. Eicher's analysis, "The Effects of Laddering a Falls in a Salmon Stream,"

(unpublished mss., USF&WS), c. 1956. Eicher ascribed the post-ladder sockeye salmon

decline to overfishing in Bristol Bay and not to the presence of the fish ladder. He argued that

the population of three salmon species--pinks, cohoes, and chums--were healthier in the

1950s (after ladder construction) than in the 1940s. But the average numbers of those three

species (both before and after ladder construction) were less than one-tenth of one percent of

the red salmon population. Contemporary biologists consider any differences in the number

of pinks, cohoes, and chums to be so small as to be insignificant and inconclusive.

89 Darrell L. Coe (Management Assistant, KNM) to Supt. MOMC, March 27, 1967; George

A. Hall (MOMC) to Assistant RD, WRO, August 19, 1967; both in AKSO-RNR files.

90 Vernon C. Betts (Chief Ranger, KNM) to Management Biologist (Alaska Office, NPS),

July 21, 1970, in AKSO-RNR files.

91 Cahalane, A Biological Survey of Katmai National Monument, 178.

92 Samuel A. King (Supt. MOMC) to Dexter F. Lall (ADF&G, Kodiak), June 22, 1962;

Special Use Permit KATM-1-62; both in Item 13 ("Special Use Permits"), Breedlove 1962;

Robert F. Cooney, "Preamble to Master Plan for Katmai National Monument," September 10,

1963; Kathy Jope to author, email, April 8, 1996.

93 Gil Blinn (Supt. KATM), "Revised Statement for Management, KATM," June 7, 1976, 5;

SAR for 1977 (p. 4) and 1978 (p. 5).

94 Kavanagh interview, November 15, 1989.

95 Kavanagh interview, November 15, 1989; Eugene H. Buck et.al., "Bibliography, Synthesis,

and Modeling of Naknek River Aquatic System Information," September 1979, report

prepared for USDI, NPS, PNRO by AEIDC, Anchorage, in AKSO-RNR files.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

96 Morris interview, November 2, 1989.

97 Kavanagh, November 15, 1989; Louis A. Gwartney, "Naknek Drainage Rainbow Trout

Study in the Katmai National Park and Preserve," Anchorage, ADF&G Division of Sport

Fish and USDI, NPS, 1985, 75-78.

98 Kavanagh, November 15, 1989; Carl V. Burger and Louis A. Gwartney, "A Radio

Tagging Study of Naknek Drainage Rainbow Trout," December 1, 1986, report sponsored

and funded by the Alaska Regional Office, NPS; copies at AKSO-RNR.

99 Kavanagh, November 15, 1989; Wilmot, Burger, and Steinbeck, "Genetics of Sockeye

Salmon," May 1, 1986.

100 Carl Burger with James Lundeen and Anders Danielson, "Biological and Hydrological

Evaluations of the Fish Ladder at Brooks River Falls, Alaska" (Anchorage, NPS, June 1,

1985), 3, 19-21, in AKSO-RNR files; SAR 1985, 7.

101 William R. Heard to George R. Snyder, May 21, 1986, in AKSO-RNR files.

102 Theodore R. Merrell, Jr. to Carl Burger, December 1985, in AKSO-RNR files; Burger,

Lundeen, and Danielson, "Biological and Hydrological Evaluations," 1985, 19-20, 24, 35.

103 Heard to Snyder letter, May 21, 1986.

104 Burger, Lundeen, and Danielson, "Biological and Hydrological Evaluations," 1985, 36-

37.

105 Janis Meldrum interview, June 9, 1993.

106 G. E. Horton and J. Reynolds, "Effects of Jet Boats on Salmonid Reproduction in

Alaskan Streams," unpub. M.S. thesis (by Horton, with an executive summary by Reynolds),

University of Alaska Fairbanks, 1994.

107 Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Sport Fish, Southwest Alaska

Rainbow Trout Management Plan, December 1988, 3-4; Kathy Jope to author, email, April 9,

1996.

108 Barrie K. Gilbert to NPS, August 3, 1985, "Draft Problem Analysis/Bear Behavior," 1, in

"File CX-9700-4-0019 Bear Study," at KATM.

109 Federal Register, August 8, 1988, 29746-48; SAR 1986, 7; SAR 1987, 3-4; NPS, Draft

Environmental Assessment, Fishing Regulations, Katmai National Park and Preserve, August

15, 1986, in AKSO-RCR Collection.

110 SAR 1988, 2; "Katmai Country," Alaska Geographic 16 (1989), 60; Federal Register,

August 8, 1988, 29746; Federal Register, May 1, 1989, 18491-94; Alaska Department of Fish

and Game, Alaska Sport Fishing Regulations Summary, 1990, 46.

111 Edwin W. Seiler to National Park Service, February 9, 1952; Grant H. Pearson (Supt.

MOMC) to Edwin W. Seiler, February 18, 1952; both in KATM files.

112 Region 4 (NPS) telegram to Supt. MOMC, April 8, 1952; Supt. MOMC telegram to
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

Region 4, April 8, 1952; RD/R4 to Director NPS, April 16, 1952; all in File N1423 ("Fish,

1946-1959"), KATM and RG 79, Box 312, NARA SB. Also Ronald Lee (Asst. Dir. NPS) to

RD/R4 (telegram), April 7, 1952 and Supt. MOMC to RD/R4, April 10, 1952; both in File

208, Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB.

113 George M. Peters to Gunnar Berggren, July 5, 1953, in File N1423 ("Fish, 1946-1959"),

KATM.

114 Oscar T. Dick (Supt. MOMC) to Walter Kirkness (Commissioner, ADF&G), March 30,

April 23, and May 7, 1965; Howard W. Baker (Assistant Director NPS) to Hon. Ralph J.

Rivers, March 26, 1965, in File N1423 ("Fish, 1960-1974"), KATM.

115 Ralph Root and Fred Eubanks (Park Planners) to Project Leader, Alaska Task Force,

May 27, 1976, in Box 14, NARA ANC.

116 SAR, KATM, 1972, 2.

117 NPS, Environmental Assessment for Proposed Revision of Fishing Regulations for

Naknek River, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, n.d. (October 1975?), in Box 13, NARA

ANC; NPS, Environmental Review, Proposed Revision of Fishing Regulations for Naknek

River, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, January 13, 1976 (NPS Report 127/D-9, TIC).

118 36 CFR 7.46, effective July 1, 1977.

119 U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, Alaska Fishery and Fur-Seal Industries (Washington, GPO),

1914 through 1924 editions.

120 Richard B. Nickerson, A Critical Analysis of Some Razor Clam (Siliqua patula, Dixon)

Populations in Alaska (Juneau?, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, July 1975), 23; F. H.

Oliphant, "Report on Clam and Salmon Packing" (brochure), c. 1924; F. W. Weymouth, H.

C. McMillan, and H. B. Holmes, "Growth and Age at Maturity of the Pacific Ocean Clam,

Siliqua patula (Dixon)," Document No. 984, in Bulletin of the U.S. Bureau of Fisheries 41,

1925 (Washington, GPO, 1927), 69th Cong., 1st sess., House Doc. 230, 201, 208.

121 James McBurney (Surf Canneries) to Harold Ickes, February 4, 1936, in "General 1930-

38" file, KNM Box 1, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC.

122 U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, Alaska Fishery and Fur-Seal Industries (Washington, GPO),

editions from 1924 through 1936; F. H. Oliphant, "Report on Clam and Salmon Packing"

(brochure), c. 1924.

123 Robert F. Griggs to Ernest W. Sawyer, November 22, 1930, in National Geographic

Society Collection; Hillory A. Tolson (Acting Director NPS) to Director USF&WS, February

24, 1944, in RG 79, Box 313, "Katmai - Concessions" file, NARA SB; Herbert Maier (Acting

RD/R4) to Director NPS, December 14, 1949, in "Katmai-Permits" file, Box 313, RG 79,

NARA SB; Fred W. Johnson (BLM) to Director NPS, August 28, 1946, in File 601, KNM

Box 2, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC; A. C. Kinsley (USDI Division of Investigations) to Dale

B. Whiteside, August 11, 1941, in File 602, Box 311, Entry 7, NARA SB.

124 Frank L. Beals (Under Refuge Manager, Alaska Game Commission, Fish and Wildlife

Service) to Herbert Maier, NPS, November 1, 1944, in "General 1930-38" file, KNM Box 1,

Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC; Hillory A. Tolson (Acting Director, NPS) to Mr. Crouch,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

F&WS and Clinton H. Hartstrom, April 30, 1945, in "Katmai-Permits" File, Box 313, RG 79,

NARA SB.

125 Hillory A. Tolson (Acting Director NPS) to Joseph T. Jones, Cape Douglas Canning

Corp., March 27, 1946, at KATM.

126 Hillory A. Tolson to Jones, March 27, 1946; Tolson to Clinton H. Hartson, April 9, 1946,

at KATM.

127 Tolson to Jones, March 27, 1946; Warner W. Gardner (Assistant Secretary of the Interior)

to Director NPS, December 12, 1946; Cape Douglas Canning Corporation to Acting Director,

NPS, December 21, 1946; Warner W. Gardner, "Permit," January 28, 1947; all in File N1423

("Fish, 1946-1959"), KATM; also see File 40-10 (1933-52), RG 101, ASA.

128 "Authority of the Secretary to Administer Tidelands Adjoining Katmai National

Monument in Alaska," in Alaska Planning Group, Final Environmental Statement, Proposed

Katmai National Park, Alaska, 1974, 529-31. Also located in USDI, Decisions of the

Department of the Interior 59 (Washington, GPO, 1952), 360-63.

129 F. L. Ekholm (President, Cape Douglas Canning Corporation) to Warner W. Gardner,

September 8, 1947, in File N1423, KATM; Lewis G. MacDonald, "Chronological History of

Salmon Canneries in Central Alaska," Alaska Fisheries Board Annual Report 3 (1951), 83.

130 Walter A. Fuhrer to Julius A. Krug (Secretary of the Interior), September 2, 1948, in Box

313, RG 79, NARA SB.

131 William E. Warne (Assistant Secretary of the Interior), "Permit, January 1, 1949 to

January 1, 1954," January 6, 1949; Warne to Walter Fuhrer (President, Mainland Fisheries,

Inc.), October 6, 1950; both in File N1423, KATM. The permit was listed with the BLM as

serial number ANC 011285; it required a payment to the NPS of $50 per year.

132 Walter A. Fuhrer to Julius Krug, September 2, 1948, in "Katmai-Concessions" folder,

Box 313, RG 79, NARA SB.

133 Hillory A. Tolson (Acting Director NPS) to E. L. Bartlett, February 15, 1950; G. P.

Halferty (Whiz Halferty Canneries, Inc.) to E. L. Bartlett, February 23, 1951; both in Bartlett

Collection; Dale E. Doty (Asst. Sec. of Interior) to G. P. Halferty, March 16, 1951, in Item 3,

Breedlove, 1969; MacDonald, "Chronological History of Salmon Canneries in Central

Alaska," 83. Trade and Manufacturing Site Permit number 055515 was listed as BLM serial

number ANC 018180.

134 Lowell Sumner, "Magnificent Katmai," Sierra Club Bulletin 37 (December 1952), 39;

Darrell L. Coe, "Katmai National Monument," National Parks Magazine 40 (June 1966), 6;

Paul Schumacher (Regional Archeologist, WRO) to Supt. MOMC, July 30, 1965, in File

A2623, Ranger Patrol Reports, 1965-69, DENA. William C. King, of Kodiak, may also have

been an active Katmai clam digger in 1950. King to A.C. Kuehl, March 13, 1950, in File 208,

Box 311, KNM, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA SB.

135 BLM Permit 032198, at BLM State Office, Anchorage.

136 BLM, "Special Land-Use Application and Permit," number 051596, Alaska State Office,

Juneau.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

137 NPS, Master Plan Brief for Katmai National Monument, 1965, 17 (map).

138 Sumner, Special Report, Katmai Master Planning Field Study, 1963, 33.

139 Nickerson, A Critical Analysis of Some Razor Clam Populations, July 1975, 6.

140 Nickerson, A Critical Analysis of Some Razor Clam Populations, July 1975, 18, 28.

141 Jack Benson (Kodiak AGC agent), notes on USGS, "Kamishak Bay-Katmai Region"

(map), 1923, in File 601; also File 503 (photographs); both in KNM Box 2, Entry 7, RG 79,

NARA DC.

142 Everett L. Schiller, "Summary Report on Mammology," in Interim Report, Katmai

Project, Katmai National Monument, Alaska (Washington, USDI, March 1954), 112; Blinn

interview, August 26, 1988.

143 HFC photo; SAR, 1973, 4; Melanie Neuman and Kim Heacox, Katmai National Park and

Preserve, Katmai Coast Field Season Report 1985, 54. On Kukak Bay's north shore was also

found a one-room cabin constructed of plywood and gasoline cans. The cabin was thought to

have been constructed "by unknown individuals, probably fishermen." (It was probably

unrelated to the old cannery.) By 1969, NPS personnel had recommended that the eyesore be

destroyed and removed. What has become of it is unknown; it may have burned down at

about the time of the 1969 report. Item #17, "Inventory of Backcountry Facilities and

Structures," in Breedlove 1969. Scattered reports note that many crude structures have been

built by fishermen in recent years. NPS personnel, when they encounter them, have torn most

of them down.

144 SAR (KATM), 1972.

145 Blinn interview, August 26, 1988.

146 Wallace H. Noerenberg (Commissioner, Dept. of Fish and Game) to Gov. William A.

Egan, November 1, 1971, in File NR/1-6, Series 88, RG 01, ASA; SAR, 1972, 2.

147 SAR (KATM), 1973.

148 Blinn interview, August 26, 1988.

149 SAR, 1974, 2; Blinn interview, August 26, 1988.

150 Gilbert E. Blinn, "Statement for Management, Katmai National Monument," September

15, 1976, in File D18, AKSO.

151 SAR (KATM), 1977, 3-4; NPS, "Important Issues Concerning Wilderness Proposal for

Katmai National Monument," February 24, 1977, in "Wilderness Katmai" file, Box 13, RG

79, NARA ANC.

152 SAR (KATM), 1982; "Clam Digging" file, KATM; Morris interview, November 2, 1989.

153 Melanie Neuman and Kim Heacox, Katmai National Park and Preserve, Katmai Coast

Field Season Report, 1985, 2.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

Chapter 9

1 USF&WS, "Alaska Peninsula National Wildlife Refuge, Annual Report," 1985, 56, in

F&WS-Alaska Office files. The peninsula brown bear was formerly described as Ursos gyas

Merriam (Cahalane, A Biological Survey of Katmai National Monument, 158); more

recently, its variety has been designated as either middendorffi or horribilis.

2 Victor H. Cahalane, A Biological Survey of Katmai National Monument, Publication 4376

(Washington, D.C., The Smithsonian Institution, 1959), 158, 165-67, 173-74.

3 Pat McClenahan, Brooks River Archeological District National Historic Landmark

Nomination (draft), March 24, 1989, in AKSO-RCR files.

4 Proclamation No. 1950 (47 Stat. 2453), April 24, 1931. Glacier Bay National Monument

was expanded for provide more bear habitat on April 18, 1939.

5 Frank T. Been (Supt. MOMC) to Director NPS, April 15, 1940, in KATM files.

6 Cahalane, A Biological Survey of Katmai National Monument, 5.

7 Newton B. Drury to Col. Clifford C. Gregg, April 25,1947; J. D. Coffman (Acting Director,

NPS) to Clarence J. Albrecht, April 30, 1947; both in KATM files.

8 Clifford D. Gregg (Director, Chicago Museum of Natural History) to Director NPS,

September 19, 1947; Acting Director, NPS to Acting Director, F&WS, September 26, 1947;

both in KATM files.

9 Hugh M. Miller (Personnel Officer, NPS) to RD/R4, March 15, 1948, in KATM files.

10 Victor H. Cahalane (Acting Chief Naturalist, NPS) to Clarence Rhode (F&WS,

Anchorage), April 9, 1948, in KATM files.

11 Cahalane, A Biological Survey, 164. Some investigators have argued that the increase was

a simple result of changing population dynamics among the bear population. Given the fact

that bears roam across a broad territory, some researchers are unsurprised that they were

absent in the Brooks Camp area during the early 1950s. Others, however, have concluded that

those who visited Brooks River prior to 1950 hunted bears and wiped out the local

population.

12 William J. Nancarrow to Supt. MOMC, "Monthly Narrative Report for Katmai, July 1950,

Brooks River Ranger Station," July 27, 1950, in File A2827 (Reports to Chief Ranger,

January 1950-November 1954), DENA archives.

13 San Francisco Call-Bulletin, July 26, 1951.

14 Conrad L. Wirth (Director NPS) to RD/R4, April 7, 1952, in KATM files.

15 Elsie May Bell Grosvenor, "Alaska's Warmer Side," National Geographic Magazine 109

(June 1956), 761.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

16 Supt. MOMC to RD/R4, May 1, 1953; RD/R4 to Supt. MOMC, May 21, 1953; both in

KATM files.

17 Stanford E. Demars, The Tourist in Yosemite, 1855-1985 (Salt Lake City, University of

Utah, 1991), 99; Committee on the Yellowstone Grizzlies, Division of Biological Sciences,

Assembly of Life Sciences, National Research Council, National Science Foundation,

"Report of Committee on the Yellowstone Grizzlies," July 1974, 1-2, ms. in AKSO files;

John J. Craighead, J. S. Sumner, and John A. Mitchell, The Grizzly Bears of Yellowstone:

Their Ecology in the Yellowstone Ecosystem, 1959-1992 (Washington, Island Press, 1995),

35-36, 44-47; Alston Chase, Playing God in Yellowstone; the Destruction of America's First

National Park (Boston, Atlantic Monthly Press, 1986), 154; Kathy Jope to author, email,

April 8, 1996.

18 Everett L. Schiller, "Summary Report on Mammalogy," in Robert S. Luntey, comp.,

Interim Report on Katmai Project, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, March 1954, 112.

19 Cahalane, A Biological Survey, 177, 185.

20 Cahalane, A Biological Survey, 178.

21 Chief Ranger, MOMC to Supt. MOMC, Monthly Narrative Report on Ranger Activity

(File A2827), October 31, 1961, at DENA.

22 Gilbert E. Blinn to the author, email, February 23, 1996; Steve Shackleton, interview with

the author, February 23, 1996.

23 NCA, Brooks Camp Log Books, for 1953 to 1957, from Katmailand office files,

Anchorage.

24 Ray Petersen (Sr. and Jr.), interview by author, April 17, 1991.

25 Frank Singer (Wildlife Biologist, ARO) to Supt. KATM, March 19, 1982, "Review of

Case Incident Reports -- Bear Incidents," in File N1615 (Wildlife Management, Bear, 1976

to Present), KATM; Darrell L. Coe to Oscar Dick, July 1, 1965, "Supplement to Monthly

Narrative Report," in File A2615, "Chief Ranger's Monthly Narrative Report, 1959-1967,"

DENA; John Kauffmann, 1964 Memo on Alaskan Park Areas, in Box B, Alaska

Administrative History Collection, NPS Archives, Harpers Ferry; Don Dumond, interview by

the author, June 14, 1996.

26 Darrell Coe to Oscar Dick (Supt. MOMC), July 1, 1965.

27 Paul J. F. Schumacher (Regional Archeologist, Region Four) to Supt. MOMC, July 30,

1965, in File A2623 (Ranger Patrol Reports, 1965-69), DENA archives.

28 Monthly Narrative Report, May 1966, in File A2615 (Superintendent's Reports, 1957-

1968], DENA archives.

29 Monthly Narrative Report, June 1966, in File A2615, DENA archives.

30 Darrell L. Coe to Supt. MOMC, June 1, 1966, in File A2615, DENA; Supt.

MOMC/KATM to RD/WRO, September 27, 1968, in "Bear Management Documents" file,

AKSO-RCR Collection; Bruce M. Kaye (Park Ranger, KATM) to Robert A. Riggs, (Wildlife
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

Biologist, REDW), February 12, 1980, in File N1615 ("Wildlife Management-Bear, 1976-

present"), KATM.

31 Monthly Narrative Report for KATM, July 1966, in File A2615, DENA archives; Frank

Singer (Wildlife Biologist, ARO) to Supt. KATM, March 19, 1982, in File N1616, KATM.

32 Coe did not directly state that he shot the bear. The following June, however, he noted in

his monthly report that he had just performed the "first live trapping-transplanting of bears"

at the monument. Monthly Narrative Report for KNM for October 1966, February 1967, and

June 1967, all in File A2615, DENA archives; Purchase Order 126-301, June 2, 1967, in

"Brown Bear-Human Conflicts" file, KATM archives.

33 Darrell Coe, interview with William S. Hanable, August 5, 1988, on file at AKSO;

Anchorage Daily Times, August 29, 1968, 21.

34 Management Assistant, KNM, to Supt. MOMC, March 2, 1967, in File A2615, DENA

archives; Purchase Order 126-301, June 2, 1967, in "Brown Bear-Human Conflicts" file,

KATM.

35 Management Assistant, Katmai to Supt. MOMC, July 4, 1967, in File A2615, DENA

archives.

36 Richard G. Prasil (Research Biologist, MOMC) to Supt. MOMC, Monthly Report for July

1967, in File A26 ("Reports, MOMC, 1958-73"), DENA archives.

37 Darrell Coe interview.

38 Frederick C. Dean, "Preliminary Report - Brown Bear-Human Interrelationship Study,"

undated ms. (c. 1969) in file "Bears, etc.", KATM.

39 Research Biologist, Alaska Field Office, to Director NPS, August 16, 1967, in file "Bears,

etc."; George A. Hall to Marvin W. Balousek, Sr., October 17, 1967, in file "Bear

Management in Parks;" both at KATM.

40 Acting RD, WRO, to Administrative Officer, Katmai, July 24, 1968, in file "Bear

Management/Historical" file, KATM.

41 Supt. MOMC/KATM to RD, WRO, Annual Bear Report, January 17, 1969, in "Bear

Management/Historical" file, KATM.

42 Supt. MOMC/KATM to RD, WRO, September 27, 1968, in "Bear

Management/Historical," KATM.

43 Supt. MOMC/KATM to RD/WRO, September 27, 1968, in "Bear Management

Documents" file, AKSO-RCR Collection; Gil Blinn (Management Assistant, KATM) to

Supt. Alaska Field Office, October 30, 1969, in "Bear Management/Historical" file, KATM.

44 Management Assistant, KNM, to Supt. AFO, October 30, 1969, in "Bears, etc." file,

KATM.

45 Frederick C. Dean, "Brown Bear-Human Interrelationship Study," undated ms. (c. 1969),

in "Bears, etc." file, KATM.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

46 Dean, c. 1969, 22-28.

47 Dean, c. 1969, 34.

48 Dean, c. 1969, 37.

49 Management Assistant, KNM, to Supt. AFO, October 30, 1969, in "Bear

Management/Historical" file, KATM.

50 General Supt., Alaska Cluster Office, to District Director, Northwest Region, November 7,

1969, in "Bears, etc." file, KATM.

51 Gilbert Blinn, interview with William S. Hanable, August 26, 1988.

52 Frederick C. Dean, "Brown Bear-Human Interrelationship Study," n.d. (c. 1969), 22, in file

"Bears, etc.", KATM; Frank Singer (Wildlife Biologist, ARO) to Supt. KATM, March 19,

1982, "Review of Case Incident Reports--Bear Incidents," in File N1615 (Wildlife

Management, Bear, 1976 to Present), KATM; Gil Blinn, interview by William Hanable,

August 26, 1988.

53 Assistant Director, NPS, to Regional Directors, January 7, 1970, in "Bears, etc." file,

KATM.

54 General Supt., Alaska Cluster Office, to Regional Director, NWRO, January 29, 1970, in

"Bears, etc." file, KATM; Ernest J. Borgman (General Supt., Alaska Areas Group) to Mrs.

Paul V. Shell, June 30, 1971, in "Bear Management in Parks, 1967-1977" file, KATM.

55 Borgman to Shell, June 30, 1971.

56 [Gilbert Blinn], "Katmai National Monument, Bear Policy for Developed Areas," c. 1972-

73, in "Bear Management/Historical" file, KATM; Blinn to William Hanable, July 14, 1989.

57 Borgman to Shell, June 30, 1971.

58 Gilbert Blinn to Dick Prasil, September 9, 1971, in File N16 ("Bears-Katmai, 1965-77"),

KATM.

59 Kaye to Riggs, February 12, 1980.

60 Park Ranger, MOMC, to State Director, Alaska, November 11, 1972, in "Bear

Management/Historical" file, KATM; SAR 1972, 2.

61 "Grizzly Bears, Human Injuries, and Aggressive Encounters," July 20, 1973, in File N16

("Bears-Katmai, 1965-77"), KATM; Kathy Jope to author, email, April 9, 1996.

62 Steve Buskirk (KATM ranger) to Dick Prasil, Alaska State Office, September 18, 1973, in

"Bear Management/Historical" file, KATM.

63 Park Ranger (KNM), "Bear Management at Brooks Camp," November 29, 1976, in File

N1615 ("Wildlife Management/Bear, 1976 to present"), KATM.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

64 SAR, 1972, 2-3; SAR, 1973, 2, 7. The bear removed in 1975 was taken to Kukak Bay; two

months later, it reappeared at Brooks Camp. Christopher Cauble, "I Remember Mama,"

National Wildlife 17 (February-March 1979), 40.

65 Mike Tollefson (respondent), "Survey of Current Bear Problems and Related Management

Activities in the National Park System," January 1975, in "Bear Management/Historical" file,

KATM.

66 "Survey of Current Bear Problems and Related Management Activities in the National

Park System," copy of Katmai response, January 1975, compiled by Mike Tollefson, in "Bear

Management/Historical" file, KATM.

67 SAR, 1974, 3.

68 SAR, 1977, 3-5; SAR, 1978, 5; SAR, 1979, 5; Will Troyer, "Number, Distribution and

Composition of Brown Bear in Katmai" and "Movement, Behavior and Population

Characteristics of Brown Bear at Brooks River," both in AKSO-RNR Collection; Kaye to

Riggs, February 12, 1980.

69 SAR, 1979, 6; Kaye to Riggs, February 12, 1980.

70 SAR 1980, 4-5; David K. Morris (Supt. KATM) to Christina Neal, November 4, 1982, in

Inactive Files, KATM.

71 Kathy Jope to author, email, April 9, 1996.

72 Morris to Neal, November 4, 1982; SAR, 1982, 3; SAR, 1983, 7.

73 SAR, 1983, 4; SAR, 1984, 8.

74 Rangers used light bird shot (#9 shot) from 1977 until 1980. Either birdshot or cracker

shells were used from 1981 until 1985, when birdshot gave way to rubber shot. SAR, various

years; Al Lovaas (Chief Scientist, Alaska) and Frank Singer (Wildlife Biologist) to Supt.

KATM, etc., October 14, 1981, in File 1615, KATM.

75 Kaye to Riggs, February 12, 1980; Kathy Jope to author, email, April 9, 1996.

76 NPS, Katmai National Park and Preserve Resources Management Plan (draft), April 15,

1982, 25-33; SAR, 1983, 4; NPS, Bear Management Plan, Katmai National Park and

Preserve, 1983 and 1986, in "KATM-Bear Management" files.

77 Joan B. Beattie, "Brown Bear/Human Interactions at Katmai National Park and Preserve,"

n.d. (1982?), unpub. mss. in "KATM-Bear Management" files.

78 SAR, 1983, 4.

79 Katherine L. Jope to Albert Harting, December 6, 1985, in File A7221, at KATM; SAR

1984, 9.

80 SAR for 1985 (p. 7), 1986 (p. 7), and 1987 (p. 3).

81 Anne M. Braaten and Barrie K. Gilbert, Profile Analysis of Human-Bear Relationships in
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

Katmai National Park and Preserve (Logan, Utah State University Department of Fisheries

and Wildlife, 1987?), 74-80.

82 Susan H. Warner, Patterns of Brown Bear and Visitor Use of Brooks River and

Recommendations for Management (draft), December 1987; SAR, 1987, 3.

83 Tamara L. Olson, Barrie K. Gilbert, and Scott H. Fitkin, Brown Bear Behavior and Human

Activity at Salmon Streams in Katmai National Park, Alaska (Logan, Utah, Utah State

University Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, June 1, 1990), 106-07.

84 SAR, 1990, 2; Anchorage Daily News, July 26, 1991.

85 SAR for 1990 (p. 2), 1991 (p. 3), and 1992 (p. 4).

86 Exxon Valdez Trustee Council, State/Federal Natural Resource Damage Assessment Plan

for the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill, Public Review Draft (Juneau, the author, August 1989), 136-

37; SAR, 1990, 3; SAR, 1991, 3; SAR, 1992, 4.

Chapter 10

1 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 369; Been, Field Notes of Katmai National Monument

Inspection, 24, 42. Natives in the Naknek area still visit the area from time to time, and

groups have made several recent attempts to bury family members at Old Savonoski.

2 Frank T. Been to RD/R4, January 29, 1941, in Box 312, RG 79, NARA SB.

3 Been, Field Notes of Katmai National Monument Inspection, 9, 15-16. As noted in Chapter

6, dendrochronological studies carried out during the 1980s established that one of the cabins

was built in late 1931 or early 1932 and the other was built approximately 1936. One of the

cabins is still standing, though in a ruined state; the other was torn down by NPS personnel in

June 1966. Gary Ahlstrand, "Age Determination of Brooks Camp Cabin Ruins, Katmai

National Park, Alaska," Natural Resources Final Report AR-88/09 (Anchorage, NPS, August

1988), 1, in Palakia Melgenak land claim file (AA-7604), AKSO-EL; Monthly Narrative

Report (KATM), June 1966, at MOMC.

4 USA vs. Palakia Melgenak, Contest No. AA-7604, "Decision," September 12, 1985, 9-13,

in Melgenak file.

5 Item 3, "Stock Trails, Stock Control Devices, Grazing Permits," in Bailey O. Breedlove,

Advance Master Plan/Wilderness Research, Katmai National Monument, Shelikof StraitKing Salmon, Alaska (manuscript), June 1969), Box 13, NARA ANC.

6 Ales Hrdlicka, The Anthropology of Kodiak Island (Philadelphia, The Wistar Institute of

Anatomy and Biology, 1944), 131-33, 267-68; Dumond, 1981, 1.

7 Been, Field Notes of Katmai National Monument Inspection, 15, 24. Been's suggestion to

reconstruct Old Savonoski, discussed in Chapter 3, came from the following sources: Frank

T. Been to Regional Director, Region Four, January 14, 1942; Victor H. Cahalane to Thomas

C. Vint, March 30, 1942; both in File 600, Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB; E. A. Davidson to

RD/R4, April 26, 1942; H. Maier to Superintendent MOMC, April 30, 1942, both at KATM.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

8 Been, 1940, 10, 16; William J. Nancarrow to Supt. MOMC, August 26, 1950, in File

A2827, "Reports to Chief Ranger," at DENA.

9 Ben H. Thompson (Chief of Recreation Planning) to Ronald Lee (Asst. NPS Director),

October 16, 1952, in KNM Box 1, WASO History Division; Don E. Dumond, Archeology on

the Alaska Peninsula: The Naknek Region, 1960-1975, University of Oregon Anthropological

Papers No. 21 (Eugene, Ore., 1981), 1, 2; Luntey, The Katmai Project, 1954. The Katmai

project was jointly sponsored by ONR, NPS, the U.S. Geological Survey, the Public Health

Service, and the Quartermaster General, but most of the funding came from ONR.

10 Wilbur Davis and James W. Leach, "Archeological Investigations of Inland and Coastal

Sites of the Katmai National Monument, Alaska," March 4, 1954, in AKSO-RCR files; NCA,

"Brooks Camp Log Book," July 8 and August 7, 1953, in Katmailand Collection. The cellar

was located between today's Brooks Lodge and the manager's office. Mildred Walatka, one

of the camp managers, noted that "Not much of interest was discovered during the digging.

What appears to be part of an old pottery pot was found, and an arrowhead or two."

11 Dumond, Archeology on the Alaska Peninsula, 2-4.

12 Herbert Maier to Director NPS, June 1, 1953, in KNM Box 1, WASO History Division;

Wendell Oswalt, "Prehistoric Sea Mammal Hunters at Kaflia, Alaska," Anthropological

Papers of the University of Alaska 4 (December, 1955); Don Dumond, "Revised

Archeological Site Survey Sheets for Katmai National Monument and Surrounding Areas,"

July 1971, in AKSO-RCR collection; Dumond, Archeology on the Alaska Peninsula, 1, 3.

13 Herbert E. Kahler to RD/R4, May 14, 1953, in KNM Box 1, WASO History Collection.

14 Hussey apparently hoped that his work schedule would allow him to chronicle the post1918 period with the same thoroughness which had characterized his coverage of Katmai's

early history. No such opportunity was created, however, for the next fifteen years. In 1969,

officials in Anchorage and Washington saw a renewed need for historical information

pertaining to Katmai, and funds became available to publish his volume. Working with other

NPS officials, Hussey resurrected his notes of events which had taken place from 1918 to

1954 and combined them into a single undocumented chapter. Embattled Katmai, a 450-page

history study, was published by the agency's Western Service Center in August 1971. Ernest

Allen Connally to Director, Northwest District Office, December 4, 1969, in KNM Box 1,

WASO History Division; Hussey, Embattled Katmai, v-vi, 419.

15 Park Naturalist (Neil J. Reid) to Supt. MOMC, June 3, 1958, "Report on Katmai Visit,

May 29 to June 1, 1958," in File D-18, "Master Plan, Katmai, 1953-1959," KATM Box 1,

HFC.

16 Don Dumond, "Revised Archeological Site Survey Sheets for Katmai National Monument

and Surrounding Areas," July 1971, in AKSO-RCR Collection.

17 George Collins of the NPS had suggested just such a project four years earlier. George L.

Collins to Ivar Skarland, March 2, 1955; Skarland to John A. Hussey, March 23, 1959;

Bennett T. Gale to Skarland, April 7, 1959; all in KATM Box 1, WASO History Division.

18 Dumond, Archeology on the Alaska Peninsula, 3.

19 Dumond, Archeology on the Alaska Peninsula, 3-4. The search for quantifiable fish
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

remains, as it turned out, was less than successful because of the acidity of the Brooks Camp

soil. The Bureau of Commercial Fisheries was primarily interested in the data that might be

obtained from fish bones; the NSF, by contrast, had a broader interest, that of reconstructing

the cultural sequence in the area surrounding the mouth of Brooks River.

20 Dumond, Archeology on the Alaska Peninsula, 4.

21 Wilbur A. Davis, "Mt. Katmai, Alaska Eruption," in AKSO-RCR Collection. During the

1970s, Mike Tollefson and Carolyn Elder were also able to obtain interviews with

eyewitnesses of the eruption. Interviewees included Larry and Katie Ellenak, August

Heitman, George Kosbruk, Fred Shangin, John Larson, Eli and Walter Metrokin, and Eunice

Neseth.

22 Dumond, 1971; Dumond, 1981, 4-5.

23 Dumond, 1971; Dumond, 1981, 5; NPS Press Release, February 15, 1965, in NPS/Box 2,

Bartlett Collection.

24 Emil Haury (University of Arizona) to George Hartzog (Director NPS), November 14,

1966, in KNM Box 1, WASO History Division.

25 Dumond, 1981, 5; Supt. MOMC to Asst. Director, Policy and Program Analysis, January

5, 1968, "Park Highlight Briefing Statements, 1967 Calendar Year," at MOMC.

26 Supt. MOMC, "Annual Report of Information and Interpretive Activity, KATM," 1960, at

KATM; Dumond, Archeology on the Naknek Peninsula, 4; Darrell Coe to Oscar Dick,

Supplement to Monthly Narrative Report, July 1, 1965, in File A2615, DENA.

27 New York Times, August 22, 1965, X:17; Darrell L. Coe, "Katmai National Monument,"

National Parks Magazine 40 (June 1966), 6, 9; Coe, "Katmai National Monument," Alaska

Sportsman 35 (March 1969), 33.

28 Dumond, Archeology on the Alaska Peninsula, 18, 28.

29 Dumond, Archeology on the Alaska Peninsula, 6.

30 Dumond, Archeology on the Alaska Peninsula, 6, 22, 62.

31 Allen P. McCartney, "An Archeological Site Survey and Inventory of the Alaska

Peninsula, Shumagin Islands, and Other Islands South of the Alaska Peninsula," Anchorage,

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service/Refuges Branch, 1973, 7.

32 SAR, 1974, 3.

33 Don Dumond to John Ritter, August 12, 1974, in KNM Box 1; Don Dumond to John

Ritter, June 9, 1975; Edward J. Kurtz to Don Dumond, July 16, 1975; both in "KNM, 1975-

present" file; both in WASO History Division.

34 Fred Bohannan, "Archeological Resources Assessment, Katmai National Monument,"

October 6, 1975, in "Katmai National Monument, 1975-present" file, WASO History

Division; E.O. 11593, "Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment," May 13,

1971.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

35 Charles Bohannan, "Archeological Resources Assessment, Katmai National Monument,"

October 6, 1975.

36 National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers, et.al., National Register of

Historic Places 1966-1988 (Nashville, American Association of State and Local History,

1989), 16-17.

37 Robert L. Carper, List of Classified Structures Inventory, Katmai National Monument,

April 1976, in AKSO-RCR files; NPS, Cultural Resource Management Guideline (NPS-28),

December 1991, 27.

38 William S. Hanable to Gilbert Blinn, September 3, 1976; Charles F. Bohannon to Area

Director, Alaska, April 30, 1980; both in AKSO-RCR files.

39 Carper, List of Classified Structures; Michael J. Tollefson to Supt. KATM, "Area History,

Old Cabins," March 21, 1977, in File H14, KATM; SAR, 1983, 6.

40 SAR for 1977 (p. 3), 1980 (p. 6), and 1982 (p. 5).

41 SAR, 1983, 6; NPS, "Collections Management Report" (Form 10-94) for 1983, in AKSORCR files.

42 Joaqlin Estus, Harvey Shields, and Dave Snow, Historic Structure Report, Fure's Cabin,

Bay of Islands, Naknek Lake, Katmai National Park and Preserve (NPS, Anchorage), 1984.

43 SAR, 1987, 3; SAR, 1988, 6; Supt. KATM/ANIA to RD/ARO, December 18, 1987, in

AKSO-RCR files; Steve Peterson interview, March 13, 1996. The Moore Cabin, located in

Klondike Gold Rush National Historical Park, was reconstructed from 1985 to 1987 by two

cabin builders working on an NPS contract.

44 SAR, 1982, 5; "Fure's Cabin" NRHP nomination, May 2, 1983; Estus, Shields, and Snow,

Historic Structure Report, Fure's Cabin, 9-13.

45 Chief, ARO-RCR to Chief Historian, WASO, December 26, 1983, and Chief, ARO-RCR

to Chief Historian, WASO, August 4, 1984, both in "KNM, 1975-present" file, WASO

History Division; National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers, National

Register of Historic Places 1966-1988, 16.

46 NPS, "Fure's Cabin" registration form, November 21, 1988; NPS, "Weekly List of Listed

Properties, 5/22/89 through 5/29/89," in AKSO-RCR files.

47 Roger Harritt, "The Late Prehistory of Brooks River, Alaska; A Model for Analysis of

Occupations on the Alaska Peninsula," University of Oregon Anthropological Papers 38

(1988), iii; SAR, 1978, 4.

48 SAR, 1979, 4; Harvey M. Shields, "Research Design for Archeological Excavations in

Katmai National Park and Preserve, Alaska, 1982 and 1983," on file in AKSO-RCR.

49 Harritt, "The Late Prehistory of Brooks River, Alaska," iii-iv, 1-4; SAR for 1982 (p. 5),

1983 (p. 6), and 1984 (p. 10).

50
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

 S. Neil Crozier, 1983 Cultural Resource Management Inventory, 36 Native Allotments,

Bristol Bay Region (Juneau, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1983), AA-6204a; Acting Director,

NPS to Secretary of the Interior, March 8, 1993, in NHL file, AKSO-RCR Collection; NPS,

"Cultural Resource Site Inventory Form" for ILI-059, -060, and -061, in Cultural Resource

Mining Inventory and Monitoring files, AKSO-RCR collection.

51 SAR, 1979, 4; NPS, Archeological Compliance Reports/KATM (2 volumes), AKSO-RCR

Collection; Pat McClenahan, interview by author, March 23, 1993.

52 SAR, FY 1988, 6; Pat McClenahan interview, March 23, 1993.

53 Hanable and Burkhart, The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill and the National Park Service, 54-59;

William L. Sheppard and David P. Staley, Archeological Overview and Assessment of

Katmai National Park and Preserve (draft), (Anchorage, ENRI, 1992), 93-94.

54 Sheppard and Staley, Archeological Overview and Assessment, 93-94.

55 SAR, 1983, 6; Katherine L. Jope, "Collections Management Report" (NPS Form 10-94)

for 1983, March 12, 1984, in AKSO-RCR Collection.

56 SAR, 1984, 3, 10; SAR, 1986, 3.

57 NPS, "Collections Management Report (Form 10-94) for 1984-1987, in AKSO-RCR

collection.

58 NPS, "Collections Management Report" (Form 10-94) for 1984-1987, in AKSO-RCR

collection.

59 Automated National Catalog System list, AKSO-RCR Collection.

Chapter 11

1 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 280-81.

2 Ibid., 312-15.

3 Ibid., 323-28; n.a., "Oil Exploration Areas Surrounding Katmai NM," n.d. (1968?), in Item

9, Bailey O. Breedlove (Park Planner), Preliminary Draft, Basic Data, Advance Master

Plan/Wilderness Research, Katmai National Monument, Shelikof Strait-King Salmon,

Alaska, (Anchorage, NPS, June 1969), Box 13, NARA ANC.

4 G. C. Martin, "Notes on the Petroleum Fields of Alaska," in Report on Progress of

Investigations of Mineral Resources of Alaska in 1904, USGS Bulletin 259 (1906), 139;

Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 325-27.

5 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 317-19; William H. Dall, "Report on Coal and Lignite of

Alaska," Seventeenth Annual Report of the U.S. Geological Survey, 1895-96; Part I,

Director's Report and Other Papers (Washington, GPO, 1896), 799.

6 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 320, 326; Ralph W. Stone, "Coal Resources of Southwestern
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

Alaska," Report on Progress of Investigations of Mineral Resources of Alaska in 1904, USGS

Bulletin 259 (Washington, GPO, 1906), 161.

7 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 375; L. W. McFarland (James H. Rhodes and Co.) to National

Geographic Magazine, February 21, 1917, in Box 24, Griggs Collection, NGS.

8 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 417; Orth, Dictionary of Alaska Place Names, 612-13; Item 9,

"Status of Research on Mineral Claims," in Breedlove, Preliminary Draft, Basic Data,

Advance Master Plan/Wilderness Research, KATM.

9 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 410, 418; J. C. Roehm, "Summary Report of Mining

Investigations in the Kvichak Precinct, Alaska, June 13 to July 6, 1941," Alaska Territorial

Department of Mines Report 195-31, 1.

10 G. C. Martin, "The Alaska Mining Industry in 1918," in Mineral Resources of Alaska,

Report on Progress of Investigations in 1918, USGS Bulletin 712, (Washington, GPO, 1920),

35; A. H. Brooks, "Alaska's Mineral Resources and Production, 1923," in Mineral Resources

of Alaska, Report on Progress of Investigations in 1923, USGS Bulletin 773 (Washington,

GPO, 1925), 39; Walter R. Smith, "The Cold Bay-Katmai District," in USGS Bulletin 773,

pp. 206-07.

11 Antonson and Hanable, Administrative History of Sitka National Historical Park, 81;

William E. Brown, A History of the Denali-Mount McKinley Region, Alaska, 93.

12 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 411-12, 415, 456-57; Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument,

Alaska, 6-7; Albright, The Birth of the National Park Service, 75.

13 Thomas C. Riggs to Stephen Mather, November 19, 1918, in File 54 (1917), RG 101,

ASA.

14 USDI, Annual Report of the Governor of Alaska for 1921 (p. 30), 1922 (p. 37), and 1923

(p. 30); Kirtley F. Mather, "Petroleum on Alaska Peninsula; Mineral Resources of the

Kamishak Bay Region," in Mineral Resources of Alaska, USGS Bulletin 773 (1925), 174.

15 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 421; Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 7-8.

16 Mather, "Petroleum on Alaska Peninsula,", 174, 180; Walter R. Smith, "Cold Bay-Katmai

District," in Mineral Resources of Alaska, USGS Bulletin 773, (1925), 206.

17 Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 10, 12.

18Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 13-14.

19 Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 15-17.

20 Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 18-19.

21 J. C. Roehm, "Summary Report of Mining Investigations in the Kvichak Precinct, Alaska,

June 13 to July 6, 1941," Alaska Territorial Department of Mines Report 195-31, 5-6.

22 Roehm, "Summary Report of Mining Investigations," 1-3, 10.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

23 Item 9, "Status of Research on Mineral Claims," Breedlove 1969, in Box 13, NARA ANC.

24 Roehm, "Summary Report of Mining Investigations," 3, 5, 9; Alfred C. Kuehl, "Report on

Katmai National Monument, Alaska," 3.

25 Bernard F. Hubbard as told to Barrett Willoughby, "Volcanoes Packed in Ice," Saturday

Evening Post 203 (August 23, 1930), 18; Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 345.

26 Roehm, J. C., "Preliminary Report on Some Pumicite Deposits, Katmai National

Monument, Alaska" (Report MJ-126-1), Territorial Department of Mines, September, 1947,

1-2; J. L. McCarrey to E. L. Bartlett, April 16, 1947, in Pumice Bill File, Bartlett Collection.

As noted in the Territory of Alaska, Department of Mines, Report of the Commissioner of

Mines for the 1947-48 and 1949-50 biennia (pp. 15 and 17, respectively), the Katmalite

operation remained active through 1949.

27 J. L. McCarrey to E. L. Bartlett, April 16, 1947, in Pumice Bill File, Bartlett Collection;

Territory of Alaska, Department of Mines, Report of the Commissioner of Mines for the

Biennium Ended December 31, 1948, 14. J. C. Roehm, in his "Preliminary Report on Some

Pumicite Deposits," September 1947, p. 1, noted that samples had been taken from the

southwestern end of Geographic Harbor, five miles northwest of Takli Island.

28 J. L. McCarrey to E. L. Bartlett, April 16, 1947; Arthur B. Demaray (Associate Director) to

Director NPS, May 6, 1947, in File 732-01, KNM Box 2, RG 79, NARA DC.

29 E. L. Bartlett to J. L. McCarrey, May 7, 1947; Bartlett to Julius A. Krug, May 7, 1947;

both in Pumice Bill File, Bartlett Collection.

30 Julius Krug to E. L. Bartlett, May 19, 1947; Bartlett to Krug, May 21, 1947. Bartlett

protested Krug's delaying action, but to no avail.

31 J. C. Roehm, "Preliminary Report on Some Pumicite Deposits," September 1947, 1-8; J. C.

Roehm, "Summary Report of Mining Investigations," 1941, 7-9. Roehm had visited the

Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes twice before during Department of Mines investigations, in

1939 and again in 1941. He was well aware of the area's potential for commercial ash

production, and in 1941 he had noted that "via Katmai Pass, there exists a suitable caterpillar

route over which this pumice could be hauled to the beach in Katmai Bay." But he had made

no previous visits to the monument's eastern coastline before 1947, and rejected Katmai Bay

as a pumice extraction site because of access difficulties.

32 J. L. McCarrey to E. L. Bartlett, June 10, 1947; Ken Hinchey to Bartlett, January 22, 1948;

both in Pumice Bill File, Bartlett Collection.

33 Charles Richey (Land Planning Division, WASO) to Director NPS, June 3, 1947; Hillory

A. Tolson (Assistant Director, WASO) to Director NPS, May 29, 1947; both in File 732-01,

KNM, RG 79, NARA DC; Warner W. Gardner (Asst. Sec. Int.) to E. L. Bartlett, June 6,

1947, in Pumice Bill File, Bartlett Collection.

34 Ken Hinchey (Ken Hinchey Co., Anchorage) to E. L. Bartlett, January 22, 1948; Newton

B. Drury to Bartlett, February 11, 1948; both in Pumice Bill File, Bartlett Collection; Acting

Director, USGS to Newton B. Drury, February 24, 1948, in File 732-01, KNM, RG 79,

NARA DC.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

35 See March 12, 1948 and May 5, 1948 letters in File 732-01, KNM, RG 79, NARA DC.

36 Ken Hinchey to Hugh Dougherty, March 9, 1948; E. L. Bartlett to Newton B. Drury,

March 18, 1948; both in Pumice Bill File, Bartlett Collection.

37 Robert F. Griggs to Conrad L. Wirth, July 7, 1948; A. E. Demaray (Acting Director NPS)

to E. L.Bartlett, September 14, 1948; Demaray to Griggs, September 14, 1948; all in NPS

Box 1, Bartlett Collection.

38 E. L. Bartlett to A. E. Demaray, Demaray, December 21, 1948; Hillory A. Tolson to

Bartlett, December 31, 1948; both in File 732-01, KNM, RG 79, NARA DC.

39 O. A. Tomlinson (RD/R4) to Dir. NPS, April 29, 1949, in File 208, KNM Box 311, Entry

7, RG 79, NARA SB; Newton B. Drury (Dir. NPS) to RD/R4, December 16, 1949, in

"KNM-Permits" file, KNM Box 313, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA SB; E. L. Bartlett to Newton B.

Drury, December 20, 1949, in Pumice Bill File, Bartlett Collection.

40 SMR (MOMC), September 1948, 3; Arthur F. Waldron (Anchorage Sand and Gravel) to E.

L. Bartlett, November 22, 1949; Bartlett to Newton B. Drury, November 25, 1949; both in

Pumice Bill File, Bartlett Collection; Kenneth J. Kadow (USDI, Alaska Field Office) to

William E. Warne (Asst. Int. Sec.), December 6, 1949, in "KNM-Permits" file, Box 313, RG

79, NARA SB.

41 Newton B. Drury (Dir. NPS) to RD/R4, January 13, 1950, in "KNM-Permits" file, Box

313, RG 79, NARA SB. O. A. Tomlinson, Director of Region Four, suggested the idea to

Director Drury, noting that the pumice situation at Katmai was similar to an existing gravelremoval operation at Sitka National Monument. Tomlinson to Dir. NPS, January 11, 1950, in

File 609-01, Box 312, RG 79, NARA SB.

42 Oscar L. Chapman (Sec. Int.) to President (Truman), May 19, 1950, in File 205.01.1, Box

311, RG 79, NARA SB.

43 Kenneth Kadow to Arthur Waldron, January 24, 1950, in Pumice Bill File, Bartlett

Collection.

44 Conrad Wirth (Acting Dir.) to RD/R4, March 15, 1950; Maier to Supt. MOMC, March 21,

1950; both in File 602, Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB.

45 Oscar L. Chapman to President (Truman), May 19, 1950, in File 205.01.1, Box 311, RG

79, NARA SB.

46 Oscar Chapman (Sec. Int.) to E. L. Bartlett, June 9, 1950, in Bartlett Collection; George L.

Collins to RD/R4, July 19, 1950, in File 201, Box 311, RG 79, NARA SB.

47 Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 27-28.

48 Kenneth J. Kadow to Arthur F. Waldron, November 25, 1949, in Pumice Bill File, Bartlett

Collection; Newton B. Drury (Dir. NPS) to RD/R4, January 13, 1950, in "KNM-Permits"

file, Box 313, RG 79, NARA SB.

49 Oscar L. Chapman to President (Truman), May 19, 1950, in File 205.01.1, Box 311, RG

79, NARA SB.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

50 R. M. Moxham, "Pumice Deposits in the Alaska Peninsula-Cook Inlet Region, Alaska,"

USGS Open File Report #49, 1951, p. 19, in File 609-01, RG 79, NARA SB; USDI (USGS)

Press Release, January 21, 1952, in Pumice Bill File, Bartlett Collection.

51 Territory of Alaska, Department of Mines, Report of the Commissioner of Mines for the

Biennium Ended December 31, 1950, 17, 52; Report of the Commissioner of Mines for the

Biennium Ended December 31, 1952, 60.

52 Herbert Maier (Acting RD/R4) to Dir. NPS, August 7, 1951; George Collins, August 19,

1951 memo in pencil; Lawrence C. Merriam (RD/R4) to J. J. Grove, Anchorage, September

24, 1951; all in File 609-01, Box 312, RG 79, NARA SB; A. E. Demaray to E. L. Bartlett,

September 9, 1951, in Legislative Bill File, 83rd Congress, Bartlett Collection.

53 Congressional Record, 1951, p. 8176; HR 4794, in File 609-01, Box 312, RG 79, NARA

SB.

54 A. E. Demaray (Dir. NPS) to Charles G. Sauers (Chairman of the Advisory Board), July

30, 1951, in File 609-01, Box 312, RG 79, NARA SB; Dale E. Doty (Asst. Sec. Int.) to John

R. Murdock (Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, House of

Representatives), October 4, 1951, in Legislative Bill File, 83rd Congress, Bartlett Collection.

55 Ernest Gruening to George Sundborg (General Manager, Alaska Development Board),

December 29, 1951, in Legislative Bill File, 83rd Congress, Bartlett Collection.

56 Thola E. Noon (Pacific Pumice) to RD/R4, December 7, 1951, in File 609-01, Box 312,

RG 79, NARA SB; George Sundborg (ADB) to Mastin G. White (Acting Assistant Secretary

of the Interior), January 7, 1952, in Pumice Bill File, Bartlett Collection.

57 Congressional Record, 1952, part 12, p. 521; 82d Cong., 2nd sess., House Report 1384;

"Katmai Pumice bill passed by House yesterday" (teletype), March 4, 1952, in File 0.10, Box

311, RG 79, NARA SB; E. L. Bartlett to George Sundborg, March 11, 1952, in File 609-01,

Box 312, RG 79, NARA SB.

58 Conrad L. Wirth (Director NPS) to E. L. Bartlett, January 26, 1953, KATM Collection.

59 83rd Cong., 1st sess., House Report 71; 83rd Cong., 2nd sess., Senate Report 1136; E. L.

Bartlett to Nick Zimin, January 16, 1954; Bartlett to Marshall C. Hoppen, April 6, 1954; both

in Legislative Bill File, 83rd Congress, Bartlett Collection.

60 Congressional Record, 1953, part 1, pp. 378, 434; pt. 13, p. 772; Congressional Record,

1954, part 13, 645; Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, 28.

61 Item 1, "Review of Legislation, Proclamations, etc." in Breedlove, Preliminary Draft, Basic

Data, Advance Master Plan/Wilderness Research, 1969.

62 Arthur F. Waldron (President, Basic Building Products) to E. L. Bartlett, February 11,

1953, in Legislative Bill File, Bartlett Collection; Anchorage Daily Times, February 18, 1959,

8.

63 Herbert Maier (Acting RD/R4) to Dir. NPS, August 7, 1951; George Collins, August 19,

1951 memo in pencil; both in File 609-01, Box 312, RG 79, NARA SB; Melanie Neuman
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

and Kim Heacox, Katmai National Park and Preserve, Katmai Coast Field Season Report,

1985, (King Salmon, NPS, 1985), 50.

64 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time," 22.

65 O. A. Tomlinson to Director NPS, November 14, 1948, in File 609-01, Box 312, RG 79,

NARA SB. Tomlinson repeated his warning in an April 29, 1949 letter to the Director; see

same file.

66 C. M. Carson to O. A. Tomlinson (RD/R4), April 19, 1949, in File 609-01, Box 312, RG

79, NARA SB; Grant Pearson to C. M. Carson, April 27, 1949, in File 208, Box 311, RG 79,

NARA SB; O. A. Tomlinson to C. M. Carson, April 28, 1949, at KATM.

67 Roehm, J. C. (Associate Mining Engineer), "Preliminary Report on Some Pumicite

Deposits, Katmai National Monument, Alaska," Report MJ-126-1 (Juneau, Alaska Bureau of

Mines), September 1947, 6.

68 "Affidavit of Elmer S. Harrop," June 23, 1983, in BLM Melgenak File (AA-7604), AKSOEL.

69 NPS, Katmai Project, Interim Report, Katmai National Monument, Alaska (Washington,

NPS, March 1954), 9.

70 Director USGS to Director PNRO, May 15, 1973, in Box 13, NARA ANC.

71 A. Samuel Keller & Hillard N. Reiser, Geology of the Mount Katmai Area, Alaska, USGS

Bulletin 1058-G (Wash., GPO, 1959), 278-82, 291; Director U.S. Bureau of Mines to

Director PNRO, May 17, 1973, in Box 13, NARA ANC. Keller and Reiser's work was

reprised in Don J. Miller, Thomas G. Payne, and George Gryc, Geology of Possible

Petroleum Provinces in Alaska, USGS Bulletin 1094 (1959), 33.

72 Robert S. Luntey (Chief, Office of Resource Planning, San Francisco Planning & Service

Center) to Park Planner Breedlove, Alaska Field Office, January 28, 1969; George D. Gates

(Chief, Alaskan Geology Branch, USGS) to Bennett Gale (WASO), December 2, 1954; both

in Item 9, "Alaska Borough and Mining Districts," Breedlove, 1969.

73 E. L. Bartlett to Nick Zimin (South Naknek), January 16, 1954, in Bartlett Collection.

74 H.R. 8893 (83rd Congress, 2nd Session), April 27, 1954, at AHL.

75 H.R. 250 (84th Congress, 1st Session), January 5, 1955, in Legislative Bill File, 84th

Congress; Assistant Secretary of the Interior to Clair Engle (Chairman, House Committee on

Interior and Insular Affairs), April 19, 1955; E. L. Bartlett to Nick Zimin, April 22, 1955; all

in NPS/Box 1, Bartlett Collection.

76 B. F. Heintzleman to Nick Zimin, May 18, 1956, in File 15-14-a (1953-58), RG 101,

ASA.

77 Charles F. Herbert to E. L. Bartlett, February 19, 1959; Bartlett to Herbert, February 24,

1959; both in Bartlett Collection.

78 William A. Egan to Ernest Gruening, April 18, 1961, in File 883.1, Series 41, RG 01,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

ASA.

79 Ralph Rivers to George Hartzog, August 27, 1965, in NPS Box 2, Bartlett Collection.

80 G. Donald Eberlein (Chief, Alaska Geology Branch, USGS) to Dr. D. T. Griggs, July 3,

1963, in File A2021, at KATM; John Henneberger, "Factors Affecting Resources and Use,"

December 16, 1969 [draft section of 1971-73 master plan], in AKSO-RCR Collection.

81 Naske and Slotnick, Alaska, A History of the 49th State, 203.

82 Phil R. Holdsworth to William A. Egan, March 27, 1961, in File 883.1, Series 41, RG 01,

ASA.

83 Naske and Slotnick, Alaska, A History of the 49th State, 236-37.

84 Antonson and Hanable, Alaska's Heritage, 434; Bailey O. Breedlove (Park Planner, AFO)

to RD/WRO, April 7, 1969, in File D22, KATM.

85 Breedlove, "Oil and Gas Rights," Item 9, in Breedlove, Preliminary Draft, Basic Data,

Advance Master Plan/Wilderness Research, 1969.

86 Monthly Narrative Report, KATM, for June 1966 and July 1966, at MOMC; SAR,

KATM, 1972, 2.

87 Ralph Root (Park Planner, AAO) to Project Leader, AAO, September 3, 1976, in File D18,

Box 14, NARA ANC.

88 BLM, Alaska Outer Continental Shelf Office, Lower Cook Inlet Draft Environmental

Impact Statement (Anchorage, the author, July 9, 1976), i, 2.

89 G. Bryan Harry (Director, AAO) to RD, PNRO, August 24, 1976, in Box 14, NARA

ANC; Supt. KATM to RD, PNRO, February 24, 1977, in Box 13, NARA ANC; Pamela E.

Rich and Arlon R. Tussing, The National Park System in Alaska, an Economic Impact Study

(College, Alaska, University of Alaska Institute of Social, Economic, and Government

Research, 1973), 40.

90 BLM, Alaska Outer Continental Shelf Office, Proposed 1976 Outer Continental Shelf Oil

and Gas Lease Sale, Lower Cook Inlet Final Environmental Statement (Anchorage, the

author), December 1976; Supt. KATM to RD/PNRO, February 24, 1977, in Box 13, NARA

ANC; Pat Richardson, "$400 Million in High Bids at OCS Sale," Alaska Construction and

Oil 18 (December 1977), 34.

91 Russ Dickenson (Acting RD/PNRO) to Director AAO, August 29, 1977, in Box 13,

NARA ANC; Richardson, "$400 Million in High Bids," 34.

92 SAR for 1977 (p. 4), 1978 (p. 4), and 1980 (p. 7); Gil Blinn, "Revised Statement for

Management" (KATM), June 7, 1976, 5.

93 NOAA did not press forward with nominating eligible Alaskan areas for marine

sanctuaries until 1982. After some discussion, the agency nominated 18 of 42 Alaskan marine

sites; the four sites it identified off the Katmai coast were among the 24 sites which were not

recommended for nomination. Chelsea International Corporation, "Marine Sanctuary Site
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

Evaluation List," n.d. (August 15, 1982?), in "Marine Sanctuary" file, AKSO-RNR

Collection.

94 "Status of Research on Mineral Claims," Item 9, in Breedlove, Preliminary Draft, Basic

Data, Advance Master Plan/Wilderness Research, 1969.

95 John Henneberger, "Factors Affecting Resources and Use," December 16, 1969 (draft

section of master plan), in "Planning Documents" file, AKSO-RCR Collection.

96 NPS, Final Environmental Statement, Proposed Wilderness, Katmai National Monument,

Alaska (Seattle?, the author, June 13, 1974), 35-36.

97 NPS, Final Environmental Statement, Proposed Katmai Wilderness, 157-61, 167-71.

98 NPS, Final Environmental Statement, Proposed Katmai Wilderness, 81, 91.

99 Alaska Planning Group, Proposed Katmai National Park, Alaska, Draft Environmental

Statement, December 1973, 129-30; Alaska Planning Group, Final Environmental Statement,

Proposed Katmai National Park, Alaska, 1974, 97; NPS, "Distribution and Density of

Mineral Entries, Proposed Katmai National Park Additions," December 1, 1977, Box 15,

NARA ANC. Both the 1974 and 1977 reports noted that a small, active small gold placer

operation and gold-copper operation were located on Crevice Creek, 22 miles west of the

mouth of McNeil River. The mine site, however, was later discovered to be outside of the

proposed park.

100 Alaska Planning Group, Proposed Katmai National Park, Alaska, Draft Environmental

Statement, December 1973, 135; BLM, "Historical Index" sheets for various townships in the

area of the proposed addition, located at BLM State Office, Anchorage.

101 Alaska Planning Group, Final Environmental Statement, Proposed Katmai National Park,

Alaska, 1974, 33, 252-55, 259-63, 315-16, 394; Director USGS to Director PNRO, May 15,

1973, in Box 13, NARA ANC.

102 Al Henson (Project Leader, ATFO) to Asst. Director, Cooperative Activities, WASO,

March 13, 1973; NPS, "Katmai National Park, Statement on Special Problems," n.d. (1973);

NPS, "Minerals," in "Katmai EIS Comments" folder, n.d. (1974?); all in Box 13, NARA

ANC. Pfaff had first become known to NPS officials back in May 1949, when he wrote the

agency and asked if the monument was open to uranium prospecting. He received a kind but

firm negative reply. Jackson E. Price, (NPS Office of the Chief Counsel, WASO) to Ernest

Pfaff, July 25, 1949, at KATM.

103 "Sugarloaf Association Claim" file, in Inactive Mining Claim Collection, AKSO-RMM;

BLM, Serial Number AA-024382 through AA-024385, Alaska State Office, Anchorage.

104 "Dog V Claim" file, in Inactive Mining Claim Collection, AKSO-RMM; BLM, Serial

Number AA-030173, Alaska State Office, Anchorage.

105 H. C. Berg and E. H. Cobb, Metalliferous Lode Deposits of Alaska, USGS Bulletin 1246

(Washington, GPO, 1967), 14, B78-79.

106 SAR for 1985 (p. 7) and 1986 (pp. 6-7); BLM, Serial Number AA-025641 through AA025643, Alaska State Office, Anchorage.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

107 SAR, 1982, 8; "Permits/Geological/AMRAP" folders, AKSO-RMM files.

Chapter 12

1 Hussey, Embattled Katmai, 317, 327.

2 Ibid., 371, 385.

3 Ibid., 401; Peter L. Ward, A Bibliography of Katmai National Monument, Alaska, revised

edition (Palisades, N.Y., Lamont Geological Observatory), February 1971.

4 Frank T. Been to Victor H. Cahalane, March 24, 1941, in File 201, Box 311, KNM, RG 79,

NARA SB; SMR (MOMC), September 1949.

5 During the late 1930s, Cahalane had headed the NPS Wildlife Division; in January 1940,

however, the division was transferred to the U.S. Bureau of Biological Survey, where he

headed the section on National Park wildlife.

6 Arthur E. Demaray to Commissioner GLO, May 4, 1939, in "Katmai General, 1930-38"

file, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC; Cahalane resume, in File 40-10 (1933-52), RG 101, ASA;

V. H. Cahalane, "Birds of the Katmai Region," Auk 61 (1944), 351-75.

7 Chief Ranger, MOMC to George B. Chaffee, KNM, June 23, 1952, at KATM.

8 Ben H. Thompson (Recreation Planning Division, WASO) to Sidney S. Kennedy (State

Cooperation Branch, WASO), December 29, 1952, in KATM Correspondence, Box 1, in

History Division Office, WASO.

9 NPS, Katmai Project, Interim Report, Katmai National Monument, Alaska (Washington,

the author, March 1954), 9-10; USDI, "McKay Announces Alaska Volcanic Study at Katmai"

(press release), August 15, 1953, in File 15-15 (1953-58), RG 101, ASA.

10 NPS, Katmai Project, Interim Report, 9-10.

11 NPS, Katmai Project, Interim Report, 11-13; Lage, George L. Collins, 182.

12 NPS, Katmai Project, Interim Report, 11-12, 14.

13 NPS, Katmai Project, Interim Report, 11-12, 14. The papers were all contained in the

above report; they were also published in various academic journals. See Ernest H. Muller,

Werner Juhle, and Henry W. Coulter, "Current Volcanic Activity in Katmai National

Monument," Science 119 (March 5, 1954), 319.

14 Kirtley F. Mather, the USGS geologist who had surveyed the area north of the old

monument boundaries in the summer of 1923, met Fenner in the field that summer and

(according to a later remembrance) told Fenner at the time that he disagreed with his theory.

Kirtley F. Mather, "Biographical Notes for My Grandchildren and Great-Grandchildren,"

AKSO-RNR Collection.

15 Howel Williams, "Preliminary Notes on Geological Work Done on Mount Katmai and in
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes, Alaska," in NPS, Katmai Project, Interim Report, 55-

61; William T. Ingersoll, "Lands of Change: Four Parks in Alaska," Journal of the West 7

(April 1968), 173-93.

16 Ernest H. Muller, Werner Juhle, and Henry W. Coulter, "Current Volcanic Activity in

Katmai National Monument," pp. 62-66; George L. Snyder, "Trident Volcano Observations,"

pp. 72-74; both in NPS, Katmai Project, Interim Report; USDI, Annual Report of the

Secretary of the Interior for 1953 (p. 320) and 1954 (p. 364).

17 Conrad L. Wirth to B. Frank Heintzleman, March 3, 1954, in File 15-14-a (1953-58), RG

101, ASA; Cahalane, A Biological Survey of Katmai National Monument, 6.

18 USDI, "Katmai Scientific Study Continued Another Year" (press release), August 4, 1954,

in KATM Box 1, HFC.

19 "Wrong Volcano Blamed," Science News Letter 69 (April 21, 1956), 246; Ingersoll,

"Lands of Change: Four Parks in Alaska," 173-93.

20 George B. Schaller, "When the Earth Exploded," Alaska Sportsman 22 (June 1956), 8-9,

13; Cahalane, A Biological Survey of Katmai National Monument, 6.

21 Keller and Reiser's Geology of the Mount Katmai Area (USGS Bulletin 1058-G) was

released in 1959; project field work, however, was completed in 1954.

22 E. L. Bartlett to Ward Sims (Juneau) and United Press International (Seattle), telegram,

February 11, 1965, in Bartlett Collection; USDI, "Increased Research Activity Planned in

Katmai National Monument This Year" (press release), February 15, 1965, in Bartlett

Collection; Peter L. Ward, A Bibliography of Katmai National Monument, Alaska (Palisades,

N.Y., Lamont Geological Observatory), May 1966; Management Assistant (KATM) to Supt.

MOMC, Monthly Narrative Report for July 1966, at DENA; Peter Ward, interview by author,

May 18, 1993.

23 New York Times, June 22, 1965, 2; "Astronauts Make Geology Field Trips to Alaska and

Iceland," JSC Space News Roundup, July 23, 1965, 2; "Katmai is Out of this World," The

Midnight Sun (NCA newsletter) 5 (Summer 1965), 3.

24 New York Times, August 22, 1965, X:17.

25 Darrell L. Coe to Oscar Dick, Supplement to June 1965 Monthly Narrative Report,

MOMC File A2615, at DENA.

26 "Astronauts Train for Moon Landing," The Midnight Sun 6 (Fall 1966), 3.

27 USDI, "Increased Research Activity Planned in Katmai National Monument This Year"

(press release), February 15, 1965, in Bartlett Collection.

28 Keith B. Mather (Director, Geophysical Institute of the University of Alaska) to Oscar

Dick (Supt. MOMC), April 6, 1965, in Item 13, "Special Use Permits," in Breedlove, 1969;

MOMC Special Use Permit, issued April 14, 1965.

29 NPS, Master Plan Brief, 1965, 16. Later, a storage shed was constructed at Baked

Mountain and a third seismometer was installed in the Geographic Harbor area. Ed Stondall
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

interview, September 15, 1989; John Henneberger, "Factors Affecting Resources and Use,"

(draft portion of 1971 master plan), December 16, 1969, in "Planning Documents" file,

KATM.

30 Management Assistant (KATM) to Supt. MOMC, Monthly Narrative Report for June 1966

and June 1967, at DENA; NPS, Master Plan Brief, 16.

31 SAR for 1974 (p. 3), 1977 (p. 4), 1978 (p. 4), 1979 (p. 4), 1980 (p. 6), and 1982 (p. 3);

Roman J. Motyka, "Surveillance of Katmai Caldera and Crater Lake, Alaska: 1977"

(University of Alaska Geophysical Institute, 1978), in Box 15, NARA ANC; Blinn interview,

May 24, 1993; Morris interview, June 1, 1993.

32 NPS, Wilderness Study, Katmai National Monument, August 1971, 8; NPS, Final

Environmental Statement, Proposed Wilderness, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, June

13, 1974, 54.

33 Item 17, "Inventory of Backcountry Facilities and Structures," in Breedlove, Preliminary

Draft, Basic Data, Advance Master Plan/Wilderness Research.

34 Susan K. Hansen, "Valley of 10,000 Wonders," American Forests 83 (February 1977), 29.

35 SAR, 1984, 10; Ed Stondall interview, September 15, 1989; John C. Eichelberger, et. al.,

"Successful Completion of the second field season of the Katmai Project," in U.S.

Continental Scientific Drilling Program, 1990 Geophysical Expedition to Novarupta Volcano,

Katmai National Park, Alaska, AKSO-RNR Collection.

36 Richard G. Prasil, "Sea and Coastline Surveys, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, July

1969 to June 26,1971," Natural Resources Survey and Inventory Report (NRSIR) AR-71/02;

Prasil, "Notes on Observations Made Along the Katmai Coast During 1971," NRSIR AR71/01, AKSO-RNR; Ernest J. Borgman (Gen. Supt., Alaska Cluster Office) to RD/NWRO,

1/30/70, in "Wildlife Management" file, KATM.

37 Williss, 259.

38 SAR for 1972 (p. 2), 1973 (p. 3), and 1974 (p. 3).

39 S. B. Young and C. H. Racine, "Ecosystems of the Proposed Katmai Western Extension,

Bristol Bay Lowlands, Alaska," Contributions from the Center for Northern Studies #15

(Wolcott, Vt., Center for Northern Studies, March 1978), 21.

40 Ralph R. Root (Park Ranger) to Project Leader, ATFO, December 16, 1975; n.a. (John

Dennis?), "Proposed Katmai National Park Briefing Paper, Lowland Tundra Addition," n.d.

(1975?); both in Box 14, NARA ANC.

41 Steven R. Behnke, Resource Use and Subsistence in the Vicinity of the Proposed Lake

Clark National Park, Alaska and Additions to Katmai National Monument, Anthropology

and Historic Preservation, Cooperative Park Studies Unit, Occasional Paper No. 15

(Fairbanks, University of Alaska, October 1978), 142-57.

42 W. Troyer, "Distribution and Density of Bald Eagle Nests, Katmai Area, Alaska, July

1974," Natural Resources Survey and Inventory Report AR-74/02, AKSO-RNR Collection;

Judith Ayres, "Katmai's Eagle Beagle," Alaska 42 (June 1976), A2; SAR for 1977 (p. 4),
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

1978 (p. 5), 1980 (p. 6), and 1983 (p. 4).

43 SAR for 1977 (p. 4), 1978 (p. 4), 1979 (pp. 4-5), and 1980 (p. 6); NPS, Final

Environmental Statement, Proposed Wilderness, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, June

13, 1974, 29.

44 W. Troyer, "Moose Census, Katmai National Monument, 1/75-2/75," NRSIR AR-75/02,

AKSO-RNR files; Gil Blinn, "Revised Statement for Management," June 7, 1976, 5; SAR,

KATM, 1977, 4.

45 SAR for 1972 (p. 2) and 1978 (p. 4).

46 Ralph R. Root to Project Leader, Alaska Task Force, June 17, 1976, in Box 14, NARA

ANC.

47 In 1983, the RMP was revised and approved by the regional office. Ernest J. Borgman

(General Supt. Alaska Cluster Office) to RD/NWRO, January 30, 1970, in "Wildlife

Management" file, KATM; NPS, Katmai National Park and Preserve Resources Management

Plan, April 15, 1982, 8-17, 25-84; SAR for 1982 (p. 3) and 1983 (p. 4).

48 SAR for 1983 (pp. 4, 5) and 1984 (pp. 7-9); Natural Resource Survey and Inventory

Report file, AKSO-RNR Collection.

49 NPS, Resource Management Plan and Environmental Assessment for KATM, dated April

25, 1983, January 1985, and April 1987, in AKSO-RNR Collection.

50 SAR for 1978 (p. 4), 1985 (p. 7), 1986 (p. 6), 1990 (p. 3), 1991 (p. 3), and 1992 (p. 4).

51 SAR for 1985 (p. 7), 1988 (p. 6), 1990 (p. 3), 1991 (p. 3), and 1992 (p. 4).

52 SAR for 1986 (p. 6), 1990 (p. 3), 1991 (pp. 2-3), and 1992 (pp. 4-5).

53 John Power (Alaska Volcano Observatory, Fairbanks), interview by the author, May 18,

1993; SAR, 1991, 4; Anchorage Daily News, June 21, 1992, A7.

54 SAR for 1985 (p. 8), 1986 (p. 6), and 1991 (pp. 2-3); Peter Ward, interview by the author,

May 18, 1993.

55 The initial project entailed up to eight holes, but by 1991 project sponsors were requiring

only three. Plans call for two holes to be adjacent to Novarupta Volcano; the third will be

approximately four miles away.

56 Kathy Jope to author, email, April 9, 1996.

57 John C. Eichelberger (Geochemistry Division, Sandia National Laboratories) to Boyd

Evison (RD/ARO), September 25, 1985; SAR for 1985 (p. 7) and 1986 (p. 6).

58 SAR, 1987, 4; William B. Lawrence (Chief, ARO-REC) to ARO Directorate, etc.,

December 22, 1987, in AKSO-RNR files; Ray Bane to author, email, April 19, 1996.

59 David B. Ames (Acting RD/ARO) to Pete McKhann, September 1, 1988, in AKSO-RNR

files; USGS, "Scientists Return to Katmai to Study the 1912 Eruption," in AKSO-RNR files.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

60 Washington Times, October 12, 1990, 5; USGS, "Scientists Return to Katmai to Study the

1912 Eruption;" Resource Management Specialist, ARO to ARD/ARO, December 1990?,

AKSO-RNR files; John C. Eichelberger, Wes Hildreth, and J. J. Papike, "The Katmai

Scientific Drilling Project, Surface Phase; Investigation of an Exceptional Igneous System,"

Geophysical Research Letters 18 (August 1991), 1513-16.

61 Allan R. Sattler to Al Lovaas, etc., October 6, 1989, in AKSO-RNR files.

62 Bill Lawrence (ARO-EC) to RD/ARO, January 2, 1990, in AKSO-RNR files.

63 "Doing Science at the Gates of Hell," Science 249 (August 3, 1990), 475; SAR, KATM,

1991, 3-4; NAS, "Volcanic Studies at Katmai," 1989, 9 pp., in AKSO-REQ Collection.

64 Anchorage Daily News, April 15, 1992, B2 and April 19, 1992, A1, A6-A7.

65 John Quinley to Alaska Region Supts., December 14, 1992 (ccmail message), "Issues for

Decision Between January 20 and June 20, 1993, National Park Service, Alaska Region."

66 Bud Rice to author, June 4, 1993 and May 28, 1996, both in AKSO-RCR files; Joan

Darnell, interview by author, May 23, 1996; David P. Russ, William C. Luth, and Ian D.

MacGregor to John M. Morehead, March 28, 1994. Rice notes that the ICG was reluctant to

abandon the project; although the letter authorizing its withdrawal was dated on March 28, the

NPS did not receive it until June 19.

67 William S. Hanable and Carol Burkhart, The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill and the National

Park Service: A Report on the Initial Response (Anchorage, National Park Service, 1990), 16,

48-49, 52, 59.

68 Ibid., 56, 59.

69 Ibid., 80.

70 Ibid., 81.

71 Ibid., 82-83; Janis Meldrum, interview by author, May 11, 1993.

72 Rick S. Kurtz, Lessons to Be Learned: The National Park Service Administrative History

and Assessment of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill (Anchorage, NPS, in press), 61-62, 94-98.

73 Hanable and Burkhart, The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill, 83; Kurtz, Lessons to Be Learned, 51;

Meldrum interview, May 11, 1993.

74 Kurtz, Lessons to Be Learned, 53-54.

75 Kurtz, Lessons to Be Learned, 57-59; SAR, 1990, 2.

76 Kurtz, Lessons to Be Learned, 61-63; Joel Cusick, "NRDA Study List," AKSO-RCP files.

77 Joel Cusick, "NRDA Study List;" Exxon Valdez Trustee Council, State/Federal Natural

Resource Damage Assessment Plan for the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill (also known as NRDA

Plan), public review draft, (Juneau, the author, August 1989), 39-43, 65-68, 138-39; Trustee
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

Council, 1990 NRDA Plan (Juneau, the author, August 1990), 142-51; 261-66; Trustee

Council, 1991 NRDA Plan (Juneau, the author, April 1991), 58-59.

78 Kurtz, Lessons to Be Learned, 70-71, 74.

79 Joel Cusick, "Restoration Projects," AKSO-RCP Collection; Exxon Valdez Oil Spill

Trustees, Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Restoration, Vol. II, 1992 Draft Work Plan (Anchorage, the

author, April 1992), 278-79; EVOS Trustees, Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Restoration, 1993 Draft

Work Plan (October 1992), 154-57.

80 SAR, 1992, 4; Rick Potts, interview by the author, May 17, 1993.

81 Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (P.L. 96-487), Sec. 203; Behnke,

Resource Use and Subsistence in the Vicinity of the Proposed Lake Clark National Park,

Alaska and Additions to Katmai National Monument, 141.

82 Susan Savage (KATM Subsistence Manager), interview by the author, May 3, 1993.

83 NPS, Katmai National Park and Preserve Resources Management Plan (draft), April 15,

1982, 10-11.

84 NPS, Resource Management Plan and Environmental Assessment for KATM, dated

January 1985 and April 1987, in AKSO-RNR Collection.

85 Anchorage Daily News, May 9, 1990, A1; July 1, 1990, A1; July 9, 1990, A1; July 10,

1990, A1.

86 SAR, 1991, 1.

87 SAR, 1992, 4; Susan Savage interview, May 3, 1993.

88 James L. Ryan (Acting Supt. KATM), "Record of Meeting, 5-15-90," in KATM-RS files;

Richard Russell (ADF&G, King Salmon), interview with the author, May 18, 1993).

89 James A. Fall (ADF&G Subsistence Division, Anchorage), interview with the author, May

17, 1993; Ray Bane, interview with the author, May 18, 1993; Morris interview, June 1,

1993.

90 James L. Ryan (Acting Supt. KATM), "Record of Meeting, 5-15-90," in KATM-RS files;

Temporary Subsistence Management Regulations for Federal Public Lands in Alaska (Game,

Fish, and Shellfish), July 1, 1991-June 30, 1992, 100.

91 BBNA Resolution 92-43, April 14, 1992; Louis Waller (ARO-RS) to Terry Hoefferle

(BBNA), May 15, 1992; John M. Morehead to Ted Stevens, May 8, 1992; all in KATM-RS

files. State regulations continue to allow the subsistence redfish fishery. Those regulations,

however, are currently not being enforced.

92 BBNA, "Resolution 93-27," October 9, 1992, in KATM-RS files; John Quinley to Alaska

Region Superintendents, December 20, 1992 (email), "Issues for Decision Between January

20 and June 20, 1993, National Park Service, Alaska Region," 2; "Bristol Bay Residents

Target Fisheries, Hunting Rights," Alaska Natives Commission (newsletter) 2:2 (1993), 1;

Tim Cochrane, interview by author, March 20, 1995.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

Chapter 13

1 Public Law 96-487, Section 201.

2 Merry Allen Tuten, A Preliminary Study of Subsistence Activities on the Pacific Coast of

the Proposed Aniakchak Caldera National Monument, Cooperative Park Studies Unit,

Occasional Paper No. 4 (Fairbanks, University of Alaska, 1977), 14; Alaska Planning Group,

Final Environmental Assessment, Proposed Aniakchak Caldera National Monument, Alaska

(Washington, USDI), 32; Lidia L. Selkregg, Alaska Regional Profiles: vol. III, Southwest

Region (Anchorage, Alaska Environmental Information and Data Center, 1974-76), Figs. 5,

6, 18, 21.

3 Alaska Planning Group, Final Environmental Statement, October 1974, 54, 58-59; David

Manski, interview by author, May 30, 1996.

4 Roger Harritt, "A Model for Analysis of Late Prehistoric Occupation of the Naknek Region,

Southwest Alaska," in Robert Shaw, Roger Harritt and Don Dumond, ed., The Late

Prehistoric Development of Alaska's Native People, Aurora (Alaska Anthropological

Association, Monograph Series No. 4), 1988, 199. Svetlana G. Fedorova, in The Russian

Population of Alaska and California, Late Eighteenth Century to 1867, translated and edited

by R. A. Pierce and A. S. Donnelly (Kingston, Ont., Limestone Press, c. 1973), 162 indicates

that in the 1820s, Alaska Peninsula Natives were known only as "Peninsula Eskimos." Her

map is based on one published in Wendell H. Oswalt, Alaskan Eskimos (San Francisco,

Chandler, 1967), 7. Also see R. E. Ackerman and L. Ackerman, "Ethnoarchaeological

Interpretations of Territoriality and Land Use in Southwest Alaska," Ethnohistory 20 (1973),

315-334.

5 Don E. Dumond, "Archaeology on the Alaska Peninsula: The Naknek Region, 1960-1975,"

University of Oregon Anthropological Papers 21 (1981), Fig. 1.1; Michael E. Krauss, "Native

Peoples and Languages of Alaska" (map), 2nd edition (Fairbanks, University of Alaska,

Native Language Center), 1982.

6 Jeff Leer, in A Conversational Dictionary of Kodiak Alutiiq (Fairbanks, University of

Alaska, Alaska Native Language Center, 1978, 1-4) notes that although older Natives

consider themselves Sugpiaq, Alutiiq is the currently preferred term. They have also been

called Suk Eskimo, Pacific Gulf Eskimo, Sugcestun and Chugach Eskimo.

7 D. E. Dumond, L. Conton and H. Shields, "Eskimos and Aleuts on the Alaska Peninsula: A

Reappraisal of Port Moller Affinities," Arctic Anthropology 12:1 (1975), 52-53.

8 A. P. McCartney, "Prehistoric Cultural Integration Along the Alaska Peninsula,"

Anthropological Papers of the University of Alaska 16 (1), 1974, 59-84, as quoted in Roger

Harritt, "Historic Structure Assessment Report, Bunkhouse, Aniakchak National Monument

and Preserve, Archeology Section," unpublished draft report, NPS, Alaska Regional Office,

June 1987, (3).

9 David R. Yesner, "Cultural Boundaries and Ecological Frontiers in Coastal Regions; An

Example from the Alaska Peninsula," in S. W. Green and S. M. Perlman, ed., The

Archaeology of Frontiers and Boundaries (New York, Academic Press, 1985), 81-84.

10
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

 Donald W. Clark, "Pacific Eskimo Encoded Precontact History," in Shaw, Harritt and

Dumond, 211.

11 Harritt, 1987, (1).

12 NPS, "Archeological Clearance Survey Form," #001-87-ANIA, 1987, 2. Donald Orth, in

Dictionary of Alaska Place Names, p. 79 lists Aniakchak as an "Eskimo camp or settlement"

which in 1925 was "occupied only by a trapper's cabin." He does not, however, specify a

location of the camp or a source for his information.

13 Alfred Hulse Brooks, Geography and Geology of Alaska, A Summary of Existing

Knowledge (Washington, GPO, 1906), 109; National Park Service, Alaska History, 1741-

1910, The National Survey of Historic Sites and Buildings, Theme XXI, Political and

Military Affairs, 1865-1910, Special Study (Washington?, the author, 1961), 14-15; George

A. Parks, comp., "Early Exploratory Routes, Alaska" (map), c. 1930, in University of

Washington, Special Collections (hereafter referred to as UWSC).

14 Tuten, A Preliminary Study of Subsistence Activities, 16-18; NPS, Alaska History, 1741-

1910, 12.

15 Alaska Dept. of Community and Regional Affairs, "Chignik Lagoon" Community Profile

(Iliamna/Alaska Peninsula Region), December 1982; Tuten, A Preliminary Study of

Subsistence Activities, 16-17.

16 Alaska Department of Community and Regional Affairs, "Chignik" Community Profile,

December 1982; Donald W. Clark, "Pacific Eskimo: Historical Ethnography," in David

Dumas, ed., Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 5: Arctic (Washington, Smithsonian

Institution, 1984), 186.

17 Fedorova, The Russian Population of Alaska and California, 112.

18 Tuten, A Preliminary Study of Subsistence Activities, 22, 25; Clark, "Pacific Eskimo:

Historical Ethnography," 186.

19 Orth, Dictionary of Alaska Place Names, 16-17, 79. As part of the application which the

Koniag Incorporated Regional Native Corporation provided to the U.S. Bureau of Land

Management for a 240 acre Cemetery/Historical Site (Case File AA 011774), the "Statement

for Site #71" (p. 2) noted that "the village of Kujulik was first recorded on Russian

Hydrographic Department charts as 'Kizhulik'. Ales Hrdlicka noted in 1930 an uncertainty

about the location of the abandoned village. He was uncertain as to whether it was actually

located in Kujulik Bay, or was in Aniakchak Bay. It may be that there was actually a village

in each bay area, and that one is previously recorded."

20 W. R. Smith and Arthur A. Baker, "The Cold Bay-Chignik District," Mineral Resources of

Alaska, Report on Progress of Investigations in 1922, USGS Bulletin 755 (Washington, GPO,

1924), 151-52; Orth, Dictionary of Alaska Place Names, 41-42, 79.

21 In 1847, a Russian Hydrographic Department chart labelled the bay "Zal[iv] Aniakshak,"

while the first map known to label the bay "Aniakchak" was published in 1869. Capt. M. D.

Teben'kov, Atlas of the Northwest Coasts of America, translated and edited by R. A. Pierce

(Kingston, Ont., Limestone Press, 1981), 60; Orth, Dictionary of Alaska Place Names, 79;

U.S. Coast Survey, "Alaska and Adjoining Territory" (map), 1869, UWSC.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

22 Tuten, A Preliminary Study of Subsistence Activities, 28-29; U.S. Coast and Geodetic

Survey, "Alaska and Adjoining Territory" (map), 1887, UWSC. Robert P. Porter, Dept. of the

Interior, Census Office, Report on the Population and Resources of Alaska at the Eleventh

Census: 1890 (Washington, GPO, 1893), 73, also indicated a "Sutkum Village" on Sutwik

Island.

23 MacDonald, Lewis G., "Chronological History of Salmon Canneries in Central Alaska,"

Alaska Fisheries Board Annual Report 3 (1951), 71-84; Jefferson F. Moser, "The Salmon and

Salmon Fisheries of Alaska; Report of the Alaskan Salmon Investigations of the United

States Fish Commission Steamer Albatross in the 1900 and 1901," Bulletin of the U.S. Fish

Commission 21 (Washington, GPO, 1902), 173-398.

24 In 1888, the salmon fishery began at Chignik when 2,160 barrels of salted salmon were

packed. Willis H. Rich and Edward M. Ball, "Statistical Review of the Alaska Fisheries, Part

II: Chignik to Resurrection Bay," Bulletin of the Bureau of Fisheries 46, Bureau of Fisheries

Document No. 1102 (Washington, GPO, 1931), 645; MacDonald, 73; Selkregg, Alaska

Regional Profiles: vol. III, Southwest Region, Fig. 159.

25 In 1891, one of the Chignik canneries was operated by the Alaska Packers Association; the

following year by the Alaska Packing Association, and from 1893 to the 1970s the Alaska

Packers Association. Pat Roppel, Salmon From Kodiak: An History of the Salmon Fishery of

Kodiak Island, Alaska (Anchorage, Alaska Historical Commission Studies in History No.

216, 1986), 34; Richard A. Cooley, Politics and Conservation; the Decline of the Alaska

Salmon (New York, Harper and Row, 1963), 43-48; Laurence Freeburn, "The Silver Years of

the Alaska Canned Salmon Industry; an Album of Historical Photos," Alaska Geographic 3

(Anchorage, Alaska Northwest, c. 1976), 22.

26 H. C. Scudder, "The Alaska Salmon Trap: Its Evolution, Conflicts, and Consequences,"

Alaska State Library Historical Monographs, No. 1 (Juneau, Dept. of Education, 1970), 1-3;

Cooley, Politics and Conservation, 45.

27 MacDonald, "Chronological History," 74-75; Roppel, Salmon from Kodiak, 27; Howard

M. Kutchin, Report on the Salmon Fisheries of Alaska (Washington, GPO), editions of 1903

(p. 12) and 1904 (p. 13); Rich and Ball, "Statistical Review of the Alaska Fisheries, Part II,"

645; Scudder, "The Alaska Salmon Trap," 8, 15.

28 Selkregg, Alaska Regional Profiles: Vol. III, Southwest Region, Fig. 159.

29 Rich and Ball, "Statistical Review of the Alaska Salmon Fisheries," 1931, 646.

30 Willis H. Rich and Edward M. Ball, "Statistical Review of the Alaska Salmon Fisheries,

Part I: Bristol Bay and Alaska Peninsula," Bulletin of the Bureau of Fisheries 44, Document

1041 (Washington, GPO, 1928), 42. Before World War I, little demand existed for pink and

chum salmon. In 1900, "dog salmon" were regarded as waste, and a decade later certain

canneries paid fishermen seven to eight times more for sockeye salmon than for pink salmon.

Moser, "The Salmon and Salmon Fisheries of Alaska," 1902, 218; Cooley, Politics and

Conservation, 40-41.

31 Scudder, "The Alaska Salmon Trap," 9, 15-16.

32 Rich and Ball, "Statistical Review of the Alaska Salmon Fisheries, Part II," 646; Harold H.

Waller, "Map of Fish Trap Location, Territorial License No. 19-085, Situated North End
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

Aniakchak Bay on Small Island, Alaska Peninsula, Alaska," Columbia River Packers

Association, October 14, 1919, in CRPA Collection, Columbia River Maritime Museum. This

is the first source known to have named the Aniakchak River.

33 U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, "Location of Traps in Alaska Other Than Southeast," 1924-1958,

in Box 16, RG 22, NARA ANC.

34 U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, "Location of Traps in Alaska Other Than Southeast," 1924-1958,

in Box 16, RG 22, NARA ANC; A. K. Tichenor, "Traps Owned by Alaska Packers (Operated

and Leased) and Traps Operated for Other Companies in 1934," APA Collection, Box 6

(II/2), UAA; [Transfer Agreement, CRPA to APA], April 20, 1940, in CRPA Collection.

35 Waller, "Map of Fish Trap Location;" Scudder, "The Alaska Salmon Trap," 15; Rich and

Ball, "Statistical Review of the Alaska Salmon Fisheries, Part II," 646. The trap locations

were well within the legal limits of the period, which specified that all traps had to be at least

500 yards away from any red salmon stream less than 500 feet wide, and also had to be at

least 100 yards endwise from any other trap.

36 Osmund to Barker, January 8, 1926, CRPA Collection. The following year, an unknown

watchman inscribed "May 11 to Sept. 30, 1927 - 132 days in camp" on one of the cabin's

inside walls. George Stroud and Lynn Fuller, "End of Season Report, Aniakchak National

Monument and Preserve," September 1983, 7.

37 Alec Pedersen, interview by the author, September 19, 1990; Clemens Grunert Sr.,

interview by the author, September 19, 1990; Stan Lilian, "Fish-Trap Patrol," Alaska

Sportsman 6 (March 1940), 14.

38 Smith and Baker, "The Cold Bay-Chignik District," 168.

39 U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, Annual Report (Washington, GPO) for 1924 (pp. 53, 78),

1925 (pp. 58-59, 74), and 1926 (pp. 39, 55 and Map 14).

40 U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, U.S. Coast Pilot, Alaska, Part II: Yakutat Bay to the

Arctic Ocean, second edition (Washington, GPO, 1926), 172. The publication did not report a

detailed description of Aniakchak Bay until after World War II. Ibid., fifth edition

(Washington, GPO, 1947), 281.

41 Smith, "The Cold Bay-Katmai District," 143; Hubbard, "A World Inside a Mountain,"

National Geographic 60 (September 1931), 322; Pedersen interview; Grunert interview.

42 John Hillborn, "Chignik Trapper," Alaska Sportsman 3 (December 1937), 12-13.

43 Orth, Dictionary of Alaska Place Names, 62, 419, 430, 668; Smith and Baker, "The Cold

Bay-Chignik District," 164.

44 Tuten, A Preliminary Study of Subsistence Activities, 32; Smith and Baker, "The Cold

Bay-Chignik District," 154, Pl. XII; Orth, Dictionary of Alaska Place Names, 62; Smith,

"The Cold Bay-Katmai District," 143; Russell Knappen, "Geology and Mineral Resources of

the Aniakchak District, Alaska," Mineral Resources of Alaska, 1926, USGS Bulletin 797-F

(Washington, GPO, 1929), 167.

45 Tuten, A Preliminary Study of Subsistence Activities, 34.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

46 Tuten, A Preliminary Study of Subsistence Activities, 32; Pedersen interview; Grunert

interview.

47 Smith and Baker, "The Cold Bay-Chignik District," 152-53; Knappen, "Geology and

Mineral Resources of the Aniakchak District," 212-13. Two mines near Chignik also yielded

a small amount of coal; operations began in the 1880s and continued until 1913.

48 Knappen, "Geology and Mineral Resources of the Aniakchak District," 164; Smith and

Baker, "The Cold Bay-Chignik District," 163. Kanatak never did regain its former glory; in

1931, it was described as a Native village with a single store. Robert Dick Douglas, In the

Land of the Thunder Mountains: Adventures with Father Hubbard Among the Volcanoes of

Alaska (New York, Brewer, Warren and Putnam, 1932), 14.

49 A. G. Maddren, "Geologic Map of Alaskan Peninsula," in USGS Collection; George C.

Martin, "The Outlook for Petroleum Near Chignik," Mineral Resources of Alaska, 1923,

USGS Bulletin 773 (Washington, GPO, 1925), 209.

50 Smith and Baker, "The Cold Bay-Chignik District," 210.

51 USDI, Annual Report of the Governor of Alaska for FY 1922 (p. 37), FY 1923 (p. 40),

and FY 1924 (p. 27).

52 Smith and Baker, 209; Metcalf and Grefe surveyors, "First Preliminary Map of the

Aniakchak and Chignik District, Showing Approximate Position of Oil Locations, Compiled

from Data in U.S. Land Office," March 1922, in USGS Collection; BLM, Historical Index

sheets (various), in Alaska State Office, Anchorage.

53 Smith, "The Cold Bay-Katmai District," 139; E. D. Calvin, "Legend, Working Diagram,

Group 27, Showing in Solid Lines Public Land Surveys Executed in 1922," June 14, 1923, in

USGS Collection, Anchorage. Smith and Baker, "The Cold Bay-Chignik District," 210 noted

that "most of the claims [in the Aniakchak country] had been staked by one man." W. W.

French was probably the person most involved in the leasing activity, although BLM records

show that his interest was shared by many others.

54 Smith and Baker, "The Cold Bay-Chignik District," 164.

55 Smith and Baker, "The Cold Bay-Chignik District," 210-211.

56 Martin, "The Outlook for Petroleum Near Chignik," 213. Russell Knappen's report (pp.

162, 211), based on 1925 field work, reinforced the conclusions made in other USGS reports

and provided an elaborate rationale for the lack of petroleum potential in the area.

57 BLM, Historical Index File for Township 39S Range 52W of the Seward Meridian,

Alaska. Between 1956 and 1958, a new wave of interest in petroleum arose, and the BLM

issued a number of Oil and Gas Leases in the area, four of which were in the township

surrounding the mouth of the Aniakchak River. These were taken up by various Anchorage

bankers and financiers, one of which was Elmer E. Rasmuson. These lessees apparently had

no greater luck than their predecessors, however, and by 1962 all leases had been cancelled

or terminated by the BLM. BLM, Case Files for A-033942, A-033943, A-033950 and A04595; Directory Co., Kriss Kross City Directory of Anchorage, 1958 (Anchorage, the

author), c. 1957.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

58 See, for example, the following maps: Alaska Road Commission, "Alaska", 1912, scale

1:1,250,000, in UWSC, or Metcalfe and Grefe surveyors, "First Preliminary Map of the

Aniakchak and Chignik District Showing Approximate Position of Oil Locations, Compiled

from Data in U.S. Land Office," March 1922, in USGS Collection.

59 Smith and Baker, "The Cold Bay-Chignik District," 153; Smith, "The Cold Bay-Katmai

District," 139, 143; Knappen, "Geology and Mineral Resources of the Aniakchak District,"

167, 173-177. The nearest known "old trail" found by the 1922 USGS party led from Hook

Bay, 25 miles southwest of Aniakchak Bay, north to the Meshik River valley.

60 Knappen, "Geology and Mineral Resources of the Aniakchak District," 163, 210-212.

61 Smith and Baker, "The Cold Bay-Chignik District," 157; Smith, "The Cold Bay-Katmai

District," 140.

62 Smith and Baker, "The Cold Bay-Chignik District," 157; Smith, "The Cold Bay-Katmai

District," 141, 145. In a prophetic statement, Smith noted that "were it not so remote from the

usual paths of travel the setting apart of this crater as a national monument would be

justified."

63 Smith, "The Cold Bay-Katmai District," 141.

64 M. Woodbridge Williams, "Aniakchak: Kingdom of Genesis," National Parks and

Conservation Magazine 49 (June 1975), 8; "Aleutian Eruptions 1930-1932," The Volcano

Letter 375 (March 3, 1932), 1-3; Bernard R. Hubbard, S.J., Mush, You Malemutes! (New

York, America Press, 1932), 55-57.

65 Howard A. Powers, "Alaska Peninsula - Aleutian Islands," in Howel Williams, ed.,

Landscapes of Alaska, Their Geologic Evolution (Berkeley, Univ. of California Press, 1958),

64-65.

66 Seattle Times, May 2, 1931, 1; May 4, 1931, 2; Seward Daily Gateway, May 2, 1931, 8;

May 14, 1931, 1; Anchorage Daily Times, May 4, 1931, 1; May 14, 1931, 1.

67 Bernard R. Hubbard, S.J., Cradle of the Storms (New York, Dodd, Mead, 1935), 186;

Hubbard, Mush, You Malemutes!, 71-73, 138-139.

68 Bernard R. Hubbard, S.J., "Exploring the Alaskan 'Moon Craters'," New York Times,

October 12, 1930, V:8. The only known sources about Aniakchak previous to 1930 were

those by Baker and Smith (1924), Smith (1925) and Knappen (1929) of the USGS, and a

brief description of the area in a leading travel publication ("An Extinct Crater on the

Alaskan Peninsula," Travel 45 [September, 1925], 46). The "Mr. Sargent" he referred to was

R. H. Sargent, topographer for both the 1922 and 1925 expeditions.

69 Hubbard, "A World Inside a Mountain," 324; Alaska Planning Group, Final Environmental

Statement, October 1974, 71.

70 Hubbard, Mush, You Malemutes!, 55-68; Hubbard, Cradle of the Storms, 1-16. Several

accounts of the 1931 expedition have been recorded, including Douglas, In the Land of the

Thunder Mountains; William Regan, personal interview by Julie O'Keefe, February 8, 1965;

William Regan, [Untitled 1931 diary], University of Santa Clara archives; William V. Regan,

"Alaska Diary," Santa Clara Magazine 29 (Summer 1987), 10-17; Kenneth Chisholm, Guide
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

to the Kenneth Chisholm Papers/Photographs, including Alaska Expeditions with Father B. J.

[sic] Hubbard, 1930-1938, unpublished mss., Alaska Historical Library, c. 1974.

71 Hubbard, "Exploring the Alaskan 'Moon Craters'," V/8; Barrett Willoughby, "The Moon

Craters of Alaska," Saturday Evening Post 203 (December 13, 1930), 11; New York Times,

November 6, 1930, 27.

72 Hubbard, Mush, You Malemutes!, 57, 64.

73 The total number of fish caught in the "Aniakchak Beach" and "Aniakchak Pinnacle" traps

is as follows:

1929 - 26,084 1931 - 68,462 1933 - 186,899

1930 - 9,728 1932 - 377,311 1934 - 367,329

Source: A. K. Tichenor, "Fish Caught in Traps," in Box 6 (II/2), APA Collection, UAA.

74 Hubbard, "Exploring the Alaskan 'Moon Craters'," V:8; Willoughby, "The Moon Craters

of Alaska," 10-11.

75 Brooks to Cammerer, January 8, 1931; Arno B. Cammerer to A. E. Demaray and George

A. Moskey, January 10, 1931; Wallace R. Atwood to the Director, January 21, 1931; all in

"Aniakchak, Alaska" folder, in Box 658, File 0-35, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC.

76 Regarding Veniaminof National Monument, Atwood had difficulty drawing a plausible

boundary because portions of the proposed area had not yet been included on a detailed map.

"Proposed Aniakchak and Veniaminof National Monument" (map overlay), n.d., in

"Aniakchak, Alaska" folder, in Box 658, File 0-35, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC.

77 Horace M. Albright to W. C. Mendenhall (Acting Director, USGS), Henry O'Malley

(Commissioner, USBF) and Charles C. Moore (Commissioner, GLO), February 5, 1931, in

"Aniakchak, Alaska" folder, in Box 658, File 0-35, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC.

78 Henry O'Malley to Albright, February 6, 1931; Thomas C. Howell (Acting Commissioner

GLO), February 11, 1931; both in "Aniakchak, Alaska" folder, in Box 658, File 0-35, Entry

7, RG 79, NARA DC.

79 Julian D. Sears (Acting Director, USGS) to Horace M. Albright, February 18, 1931, in

"Aniakchak, Alaska" folder, in Box 658, File 0-35, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC.

80 Brooks to Albright, etc., February 25, 1931; "Proposed Aniakchak and Veniaminof

National Monument" (map overlay), n.d.; both in "Aniakchak, Alaska" folder, in Box 658,

File 0-35, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC.

81 Cammerer to Wirth and Moskey, February 26, 1931, in "Aniakchak, Alaska" folder, in

Box 658, File 0-35, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC.

82 Smith and Baker, "The Cold Bay-Chignik District," 161; Knappen, "Geology and Mineral

Resources of the Aniakchak District," 168.

83 H. C. Bryant, "Memorandum Relative to Proposed National Monuments in Alaska," March

17, 1931, in "General, 1930-38" folder, KNM Box 1, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

84 Horace M. Albright to Acting Director, USGS, April 8, 1931, in "General, 1930-38"

folder, KNM Box 1, Entry 7, RG 79, NARA DC; Kauffmann, Katmai National Monument,

Alaska, 1954, 17-19.

85 Tuten, A Preliminary Study of Subsistence Activities, 34, 58, 78; U.S. Bureau of Fisheries,

Alaska Fishery and Fur-Seal Industries (Washington, GPO, 1932), 54; Axel Olsen, "Notice

of Location Notice," July 20, 1932, in Miscellaneous Records, Unga Peninsula District,

October 1917-December 1935, in "Unga Peninsula Recording District #4" (microfilm roll),

Anchorage Recorder's Office, State of Alaska.

86 Alaska Planning Group, Final Environmental Statement, October 1974, 71; John Haile

Cloe, The Aleutian Warriors; a History of the 11th Air Force and Fleet Air Wing 4

(Missoula, Pictorial Histories, 1991), 53-57.

87 Tuten, A Preliminary Study of Subsistence Activities, 62-65, 78, 81.

88 R. M. Moxham, "Pumice Deposits in the Alaska Peninsula-Cook Inlet Region, Alaska,"

USGS Open File Report #49, 1951, pp. 16 and 19-20, in File 609-01, RG 79, NARA SB;

USDI (USGS) Press Release, January 21, 1952, in Pumice Bill File, Bartlett Collection.

89 BLM, Historical Index sheets for the Aniakchak area, in BLM State Office, Anchorage.

90 Tuten, A Preliminary Study of Subsistence Activities, 34, 38; Ernest P. Walker, Report of

the Executive Officer to the Alaska Game Commission, 1925 through 1936 editions; Alaska

Planning Group, Final Environmental Statement, October 1974, 77, 80, 82, 92; Stroud and

Fuller, "End of Season Report," 1983, 6; National Park Service, Final Environmental Impact

Statement and Wilderness Recommendations for Aniakchak National Monument and

Preserve (Denver, the author, c. 1988), 14; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Becharof National

Wildlife Refuge, Annual Narrative Report, 1979, 9, in USF&WS files, Anchorage.

Chapter 14

1 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time," 34-36; NPS, Operation Great Land, 1965, 33, in

ANILCA Box 1, HFC. Hartzog thought that Operation Great Land was controversial because

it suggested that the NPS had an interest in lands which other agencies might also wish to

manage. He therefore refused to circulate it. Even so, it remained as a blueprint for future

studies.

2 Roger W. Allin, Alaska: A Plan for Action, typescript, November 1966, in "Roger Allin

1966 Report" file, Box #6, Swem Collection, DPL. The NPS was responsible for both the

National Historic Landmark and the National Natural Landmark programs.

3 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time," 45, 50.

4 Alaskasearch, Ltd., "National Natural Landmark Study, Report I," 28 July 1967, 1, 3, 5, at

AHL and AKSO-RNR; Chief, Interagency Resources Division, NPS to Chief Historian, NPS,

May 29, 1985, in "KNM 1975-present" file, NPS History office, WASO; George B. Hartzog

(Director NPS) to Walter J. Hickel (Governor of Alaska), December 7, 1967, in File 882,

Series 41, RG 01, ASA; Una G. Swain, National Natural Landmarks in Alaska (Anchorage,

The Nature Conservancy, December 1990), 8; State Director BLM to RD/PNRO, July 9,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

1970; Boyd Rasmussen (Director BLM) to Director NPS, August 14, 1970. The area

contained within the NNL is unknown. Sources have variously claimed it to be 20,000 or

20,440 acres in extent. A status report on the site, however, noted that its boundaries were

unspecific and were probably never delineated.

5 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time," 51.

6 Ibid., 51-53, 76-79.

7 Ibid., 98-99.

8 Ibid., 104-05.

9 Ibid., 112-13.

10 Ibid., 110, 115.

11 Ibid., 122, 124, 127; "Team 4 Briefing Book, Aniakchak Caldera Proposal," in Box 15,

NARA ANC.

12 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time," 124, 131.

13 R. H. Sargent and W. R. Smith, in 1922, "discovered" and named Aniakchak Crater. Three

years later, however, Russell Knappen called it Aniakchak Volcano. Father Bernard Hubbard,

who popularized the area, used both terms. Early NPS proposals had called it a crater. During

1972 or 1973, however, the NPS discovered that the feature was properly termed a dry

caldera, and the name of the proposed NPS unit was changed to Aniakchak Caldera National

Monument. In 1977, the unit's name was changed again, to Aniakchak National Monument,

probably because the area under consideration as parkland covered far more than just the

caldera.

14 Alaska Task Force (USDI), Preliminary Draft Environmental Statement and Master Plan,

Aniakchak Caldera National Recreation Area (Washington?, the author, June 1973), 1, 5;

Urban Rogers, "Summary of Aniakchak Crater: D2-52 and D1-27," July 3, 1972, in Box 14,

NARA ANC.

15 ATF, Preliminary DES and Master Plan, ANIA NRA, June 1973, 5; Glenn Reed (PNRO),

"Mineralization Within the NPS Study Area Considered for the Proposed Aniakchak Caldera

National Recreation Area," March 1973, 4.

16 In February 1973, the Alaska planning units of the various Interior bureaus formed the

Alaska Planning Group. The APG remained active until 1977, when the legislative process

began. Williss, 130, 162.

17 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time," 137.

18 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time," 143, 145; Alaska Planning Group, Draft

Environmental Statement, Proposed Aniakchak Caldera National Monument and Aniakchak

Wild River, Alaska, December 1973, 1. Williss noted that only 440,000 acres were reserved

at that time. The boundaries on Williss's map and the DES map, however, are identical.

Comparison of the two maps with today's boundaries suggest that the 580,000-acre figure is

correct.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

19 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time," 143. AECs were defined as adjacent lands and

waters "that contain resources that are part of the total ecosystem and which, if compromised,

would endanger resources within the proposal."

20 Alaska Planning Group, Final Environmental Statement, Proposed Aniakchak Caldera

National Monument, Alaska (USDI, October 1974), 9.

21 M. Woodbridge Williams, "Aniakchak: Kingdom of Genesis," National Parks and

Conservation Magazine 49 (June 1975), 9.

22 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time," 125; Alaska Planning Group, Draft

Environmental Statement, Proposed Alaska Caldera National Monument and Aniakchak Wild

River, Alaska, (Washington?, USDI, December 1973), 1; APG, Final Environmental

Statement, Proposed Aniakchak Caldera National Monument, Alaska (USDI, October 1974),

47.

23 Jack Hession, of the Sierra Club, told the author (April 4, 1996) that the state had no legal

grounds for its suit, and it agreed as much when it settled out of court. The intent of the suit,

however, was partially successful because the suit brought the Interior Department to the

bargaining table, where it extracted some notable concessions in its September 2 agreement.

24 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time," 109-10, 121-22; USDI, "Alaska and Interior

Agree to Settlement of State's Land Selection Lawsuit" (press release), September 5, 1972;

Anchorage Daily Times, September 5, 1972, 1. NPS officials hoped that Aniakchak would be

the only new unit which would allow hunting. In 1976, however, the same controversy

erupted in regards to the proposed Lake Clark unit, and the NPS acceded to having a preserve

there as well. Finally, in 1977, the floodgates opened. When Congress began deliberating the

issue, the agency responded by allowing the preserve designation to be placed on several

additional areas. Today, ten of the fifteen NPS units in Alaska allow hunting within them.

Williss, 153-54, 166-68, 191.

25 "Team 4 Briefing Book, Aniakchak Caldera Proposal," in Box 15, NARA ANC; ATF,

Preliminary DES and Master Plan, Aniakchak Caldera NRA, June 1973, 3, 7, 10.

26 ATF, Preliminary DES and Master Plan, Aniakchak Caldera NRA, June 1973, 3, 7, 12.

27 APG, Aniakchak Caldera National Monument, Alaska, Master Plan, December 1973, 22-

25.

28 APG, DES, Proposed Aniakchak Caldera National Monument and Aniakchak Wild River,

Alaska, December 1973, 1-2, 7.

29 Patrick L. Dobey (DGGS) to Jules Tileston (BOR), July 25, 1973, in Box 14, NARA

ANC; APG, DES, Proposed Aniakchak Caldera National Monument and Aniakchak Wild

River, December 1973, 7, 167-68; APG, FES, Proposed Aniakchak Caldera National

Monument, October 1974, 22, 453-54; Williams, "Aniakchak, Kingdom of Genesis," 7-8;

William M. Lyle, "Geology and Mineral Evaluation of the Aniakchak River Drainage,

Alaska Peninsula" (Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, Open File

Report No. 26, 1973), 2a, 4.

30 APG, FES, Proposed Aniakchak Caldera National Monument, October 1974, 13-21.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

31 APG, FES, Proposed Aniakchak Caldera National Monument, 2; Ralph R. Root to Project

Leader, ATFO, December 16, 1975, in Box 14, NARA ANC.

32 Ralph Root to Special Assistant to the Director, Alaska, January 20, 1976; Root to Project

Leader, AAO, September 3, 1976; Root to Area Director, Alaska, October 6, 1976; all in Box

14, NARA ANC; Thomas P. Miller and Robert L. Smith, "Ash Flows on the Alaska

Peninsula: A Preliminary Report on Their Distribution, Composition, and Age," Geological

Society of America, Annual Meeting Abstracts, 1975, 1201; Dr. Robert Forbes, interview by

author, July 16, 1993.

33 Thomas P. Miller and Robert L. Smith of the USGS began working on the Alaska

Peninsula in 1975. Two years later, the two wrote a more substantial paper on the Aniakchak

ash flows; a year after that, Miller published a USGS Professional Paper on the caldera. See

Georef Disc 1, at UAF Geophysical Institute Library.

34 The impetus behind this study was probably Dr. John G. Dennis, and NPS biologist who

had just completed a brief study entitled "An Introduction to Vegetation of the Proposed

Aniakchak Caldera National Monument and its Environs on the Alaska Peninsula of Alaska,"

1976, in KATM RMS files.

35 Ralph Root to Project Leader, ATF, June 17, 1976; "Detail of Annual Operating

Requirements (Form 10-23), October 8, 1976; both in Box 14, NARA ANC; L. P. Glenn and

L. H. Miller, "Seasonal Movement of an Alaska Peninsula Brown Bear Population,"

International Association of Bear Research and Management 4 (1980), 307-12.

36 Alaska Professional Hunters Association, "Proposals for Disposition of 80 Million Acres

Under Terms of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act," (c. 1972), in Box 13, NARA

ANC; Arnold Shaul (ADF&G, Kodiak) to Nate Johnson, ADF&G, Anchorage, January 31,

1974, in Box 14, NARA ANC; APG, Final Environmental Statement, Aniakchak Caldera

National Monument, 280, 320, 347.

37 "Notes for Bryan Harry for Talk Before the APHA, Sunday, December 14" [1975], in Box

13, NARA ANC.

38 NPS, "Briefing Statement," for June 6, 1975, March 29, 1976, and November 5, 1976; all

in Box 14, NARA ANC.

39 R. Gerald Wright, "The Issue of Sport Hunting in the Proposed Alaskan Parks; A Review

of Data, Philosophies, and Recommendations," April 28, 1977, 10, 38, in Box 13, NARA

ANC.

40 APG, Final Environmental Statement, Proposed Aniakchak Caldera National Monument,

5; Tuten, A Preliminary Study of Subsistence Activities, 7-8, 88-89.

41 Ralph Root and S. Fred Eubanks to Project Leader, ATF, May 27, 1976; Root to Project

Leader, ATF, May 5, 1976; both in Box 14, NARA ANC.

42 See, for example, Smith and Baker (1924) and Knappen (1929). Also see Patrick L. Dobey

to Jules Tileston, July 25, 1973, in Box 14, NARA ANC.

43 Root to Project Leader, ATF, May 5, 1976; Glenn C. Reed (Mining Engineer, PNRO) to

Project Leader, ATF, June 28, 1976; Reed to Files, November 5, 1976, all in Box 14, NARA
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

ANC; Reed to A.G. Henson, April 7, 1977, in Box 15, NARA ANC.

44 APG, Final Environmental Statement, Aniakchak Caldera National Monument, 47, 49;

Root to Project Leader, ATF, May 5, 1976; Root to Area Director, Alaska, September 17,

1976; both in Box 14, NARA ANC; Glenn C. Reed to A. G. Henson, April 7, 1977, in Box

15, NARA ANC; P.L. 94-204 (passed January 2, 1976), Sec. 15(a).

45 Ralph Root, "Field Trip Notes for July 11-18, 1975;" Root to Project Leader, ATF, May 5,

1976; T. M. Grove (Skelly Oil Co.) to Bureau of Land Management, Anchorage, January 22,

1976; all in Box 14, NARA ANC.

46 APG, Final Environmental Statement, Aniakchak Caldera National Monument, 13, 19;

"Briefing Statement, Proposed Aniakchak Caldera National Monument," November 5, 1976.

47 Ed Stondall, "Development Cost Estimates for Proposed Aniakchak Caldera Staffing and

Development Needs," December 27, 1976; Root to Jim Pepper, September 8, 1976; both in

Box 14, NARA ANC.

48 "Recreational Visitation to the Proposed Aniakchak National Monument," n.d., in Box 14,

NARA ANC.

49 "Aniakchak National Monument, Areas of Conflict, Questions and Answers," November

1977, Box 15, NARA ANC; Root to Project Leader, ATF, August 2, 1976, in Box 14, NARA

ANC; Ben Guild, "Aniakchak Caldera, Wilderness World Within a Mountain," Anchorage

Daily Times, December 6, 1976, 15; Williams, "Aniakchak, Kingdom of Genesis," 7-8.

50 The language in the bill called for a 400,000-acre monument. NPS staff, however,

recognized that the acreage had not changed since December 1973, and the size called for in

the accompanying map suggests that it was 580,000 acres in extent.

51 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time," 174, 177; Root to Director AAO, January 31,

1977; Root to Project Leader, February 17, 1977.

52 Root to Project Leader, ATF, December 8, 1975, in Box 14, NARA ANC.

53 Congressional Record, June 30, 1977, 21751.

54 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time," 181, 183.

55 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time," 186. The NPS, which had proposed a 580,000-

acre monument in November 1976, had by January 1977 decided on the legitimacy of the

national preserve for Aniakchak as well as several other Alaskan park units. NPS planner

John M. Kauffmann apologized about the concept, noting that "They merely denote parks

where hunting is allowed, and we are using the preserve idea just to avoid the controversy

over parks with hunting permitted." Preserves, however, were valuable in that they could

permit other uses, such as hunting, mining, and recreation, while still maintaining an area's

basic scientific values. John M. Kauffmann to Director, AAO, "National Preserves in Alaska,

a Positive Approach," January 31, 1977, in Box 13, NARA ANC.

56 "Statement of Secretary of the Interior Cecil D. Andrus Before the Subcommittee on

General Oversight and Alaska Lands," September 6, 1977; "Department of the Interior

Proposed Additions to the National Park System," September 13, 1977; "Administration
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

Comments on H.R. 39, Proposed Additions to the National Park System," September 15,

1977; all in Box 14, NARA ANC. Williss (pp. 190-93) noted that the proposal called for an

monument addition of 340,000 acres and a preserve addition of 160,000 acres, perhaps

because that was the acreage of Federal land which had not been selected by the state or by

Native corporations.

57 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time," 203-04, 207; "Summary of Energy Committee's

Decisions on Alaska Lands Bill," October 5, 1978, in Box 15, NARA ANC.

58 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time," 216-19; Federal Register, December 5, 1978,

57013-14.

59 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time," 226, 230; Congressional Record, May 16, 1979,

H 11459; and November 12, 1980, H 10532. Acreage figures are for public lands only.

60 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time," 231-34.

61 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time," 235, 239. The approximate number of acres of

Federal land in the monument was 138,000; in the preserve, 376,000.

62 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time," 236-37.

63 Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (P.L. 96-487), sections 201 (1), 601 (27),

701, and 1317. Section 601, pertaining to the Wild and Scenic River System, noted that the

Aniakchak River's major tributaries were Hidden Creek, Mystery Creek, Albert Johnson

Creek, and North Fork Aniakchak River.

64 P.L. 96-487, Sec. 201 (1).

Chapter 15

1 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time," 224, 274; Federal Register, December 26, 1978,

60252-55, and June 28, 1979, 37732-51, 37784-85; SAR, KATM/ANIA, 1979, 7.

2 Williss, "Do Things Right the First Time," 274-79.

3 NPS, "Draft Statement for Management, Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve,"

May 1983, 16-18, in TIC.

4 NPS, Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve, Issues and Management Alternatives,

February 1984, Report 181/D2187, TIC Collection, 3; George Stroud and Lynn Fuller,

"Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve, End of Season Report," September 18, 1983;

SAR, KATM/ANIA, 1983, 9.

5 NPS, Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve, Issues and Management Alternatives,

February 1984. All three alternatives were less tilted toward development than the 1974 Final

Environmental Statement had been. The plans laid out in the FES were not considered

because "Although this type of alternative would meet minimum resource protection

requirements ... its likelihood of being achieved by the Park Service in the foreseeable future

would be very low [due to] budgetary limitations, a growing conservatism toward physical

development in remote parklands in Alaska, the unresolved question of wilderness
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

designation, and a history of extremely low public demand at Aniakchak." NPS, Draft

General Management Plan/Environmental Assessment, Land Protection Plan, Aniakchak

Wild River Management Plan, Wilderness Suitability Review, Aniakchak National

Monument and Preserve, Alaska (Denver, NPS, March 1985), 97.

6 George Stroud and Lynn Fuller, "Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve, Field

Season Report 1984," 1, in AKSO-RNR Collection; SAR, KATM/ANIA, 1984, 2.

7 NPS, Draft General Management Plan/Environmental Assessment, ANIA, March 1985, 9-

18, 104-05.

8 NPS, Draft General Management Plan/Environmental Assessment, ANIA, March 1985, 21-

47.

9 NPS, Draft General Management Plan/Environmental Assessment, ANIA, March 1985, 53-

55.

10 SAR, KATM/ANIA, 1985, 2.

11 NPS, General Management Plan, Land Protection Plan, Wilderness Suitability Review,

Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve, Alaska (Denver, NPS, December 1986), 36,

55, 58, 83-85.

12 NPS, Final Environmental Statement for the Wilderness Recommendation, Aniakchak

National Monument and Preserve, Alaska (Denver, NPS, September 1988), 13-20, 87-89.

13 NPS, FES for Wilderness, ANIA, 14, 60, 89-90.

14 Anchorage Daily News, April 3, 1992, B1, B3; Congressional Record, March 1, 1991,

H1325; August 3, 1992, H7212; Brian Miller (aide to Rep. Young), interview by the author,

August 12, 1993 and September 8, 1993.

15 Congressional Record, April 2, 1993, H1881; April 5, 1993, E897; and April 29, 1993,

S5227; Brian Miller interview, September 8, 1993.

16 Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (P.L. 96-487), secs. 805(a) and 808(a).

17 SAR, KATM/ANIA, for 1984 (p. 3), 1985 (p. 3), and 1986 (p. 3); Aniakchak National

Monument Subsistence Resource Commission, Recommendations AN-85-01 and AN-87-01.

18 SAR, KATM/ANIA, 1992, 4; Susan Savage (KATM Subsistence Specialist) to ARO Staff

Historian, August 30, 1993; Federal Register, October 26, 1992, 48526-27; NPS, "Aniakchak

National Monument Subsistence Resource Commission, 1992 Hunting Plan

Recommendations," in KATM subsistence files.

19 Despite the relatively small visitor total, park staff completed a non-official draft of an

interpretive prospectus in the early 1980s. NPS, Draft Statement for Management, May 1983,

8.

20 As the 1986 annual report noted, "It is difficult to monitor visitation in Aniakchak. No

visitor use data, other than that associated with commercial use licenses, was collected for

Aniakchak in 1986." SAR, KATM/ANIA, 1986, 4.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

21 Hanable and Burkhart, The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill and the National Park Service, 12, 56,

59.

22 Ibid., 80-82.

23 Ibid., 83.

24 Kurtz, Lessons to Be Learned, 56.

25 NPS, "Summary of Obligations and Program Evaluation, ANIA," January 27, 1993, in

AKSO-EEI files.

26 SAR, KATM/ANIA, 1991, 6, 7; Jean Bodeau, Katmai National Park and Preserve, Alaska

(Anchorage, Alaska Natural History Association), 1992.

27 SAR, KATM/ANIA, 1982, 6.

28 George Stroud and Lynn Fuller, "Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve, Field

Season Report 1984," 1.

29 SAR, KATM/ANIA, 1984, 1.

30 SAR, KATM/ANIA, for 1985, 8, and 1986, 7. Specific projects dealt with fisheries

management along American Creek and spruce beetle infestation in the Brooks Camp area.

31 SAR, KATM/ANIA, 1986, 1.

32 SAR, KATM/ANIA, for 1988, 3, 5, and 1991, 8; Frank and Penny Starr, "Aniakchak

National Monument and Preserve, End of Season Report 1988," 1; John and Shakti Eppling,

"End of Season Report 1991, Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve," September

1991, both in AKSO-RCR files.

33 SAR, KATM/ANIA, 1987, 8.

34 SAR, KATM/ANIA, 1992, 3.

35 As was noted in Chapter 14, the biological inventory, the geological study, and the cultural

resource inventory had first been proposed by keyman Ralph Root in 1976. NPS, Draft

Resource Management Plan, Aniakchak, April 29, 1982, in AKSO-RNR files. The RMP was

never signed by the regional director.

36 Koren Bosworth, "A Vegetation Reconnaissance of Aniakchak Caldera, Alaska," NRSIR

AR-87/18, 1987; Gordon H. Jarrell, "Small Mammal Survey of Aniakchak Caldera," NRSIR

AR-87/17, December 1987; Mahoney and Sonnevil, "Surprise Lake Fishery Investigation,

Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve, Alaska" (progress report), 1987; all in AKSORNR files; SAR, KATM/ANIA, 1987, 2-3.

37 SAR, KATM/ANIA, 1988, 6; Barbara A. Mahoney and Gary M. Sonnevil, "Surprise Lake

and Aniakchak River Fishery Investigation, Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve,

1987 and 1988 Final Report," May 1991; Kristine Sowl, "Investigations of the Flora and

Fauna Inside Aniakchak Caldera," 1988 (NRFR AR-88/19), 2; William A. Cameron and
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Notes)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/notes.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:35 PM]

Gary L. Larson (PNRO), "Baseline Inventory of the Aquatic Resource of Aniakchak National

Monument, Alaska," October 1992 (NRTR AR-92/03), 1; all in AKSO-RNR files.

38 David Morris, Supt. KATM/ANIA to Chief, ARO-RNR, November 6, 1986; Starr and

Starr, 24; Barbara A. Mahoney and Gary M. Sonnevil, "Surprise Lake and Aniakchak River

Fishery Investigation, Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve, 1987 and 1988 Final

Report," May 1991, in AKSO-RNR files.

39 SAR, KATM/ANIA, 1988, 6; E. P. Bailey and N. H. Faust, "Distribution and Abundance

of Marine Birds Breeding Between Amber and Kamishak Bays, Alaska with Notes on

Interactions with Bears," Western Birds 15 (1984), 161-74.

40 NPS, "Aniakchak Inventory and Monitoring Studies," Summer 1992, in AKSO-RNR files;

SAR, KATM/ANIA, 1992, 4; "A Description of the Vegetation of Aniakchak Caldera,"

1992, at KATM; Susan Savage (Subsistence Specialist, KATM) to ARO Staff Historian,

August 30, 1993, in KATM files.

41 SAR, KATM/ANIA, for 1988, (p. 5), 1990 (p. 3), and 1991 (p. 3); Sterling D. Miller and

Richard A. Sellers, "Brown Bear Density on the Alaska Peninsula at Black Lake, Alaska,"

July 1989 (NRPR AR-89/09) and March 1990 (NRFR AR-90/12).

42 SAR, KATM/ANIA, 1983, 8; NPS, General Management Plan, Land Protection Plan,

Wilderness Suitability Review, Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve, Alaska

(Denver, NPS, December 1986), 37; David Manski interview, May 30, 1996.

43 SAR, KATM/ANIA, 1987, 3; Roger Harritt, "Historic Structure Assessment Report,

Bunkhouse, Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve" (draft), June 1987; NPS,

"Archeological Clearance Survey Form number 001-87-ANIA," AKSO-RCR files; Sandra

M. Faulkner, "Father Hubbard, The Glacier Priest," unpub. mss., Alaska Historical Society

symposium, Fairbanks, October 1987; Faulkner, "Cultural Diversity Within Aniakchak

National Monument and Preserve," unpub. poster discussion (George Wright Society

symposium, Tucson, 1988).

44 "Aniakchak" photo folder, AKSO Chief Historical Architect's files; Frank Norris,

"Aniakchak Bay Historic Landscape District," NRHP form, 1991, in AKSO-RCR files.

45 Thomas P. Miller and Robert L. Smith, "Calderas of the Eastern Aleutian Arc," Eos

(Transactions, American Geophysical Union) 64 (November 8, 1983), 877; Miller and Smith,

"Late Quaternary Caldera-Forming Eruptions of the Eastern Aleutian Arc, Alaska," Geology

15 (1987), 434-38. See GeoRef disks 1, 2, and 3.

46 "Permits/Geological/AMRAP" folders, AKSO-RMM files; Susan Savage (Subsistence

Specialist, KATM) to ARO Staff Historian, August 30, 1993, in KATM files.

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

adhi/notes.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Appendix A)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/appa.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:45 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

Appendix A:

Growth in Katmai's Boundaries, 1918 to Present

Public

Acreage

Private

Acreage

Total

Acreage

September 24, 1918 -

(Proc. 1487, 40 Stat.

1855) 922,018 13.74 922,031.74

September 5, 1923 -

(Executive Order No.

3897) s/t

-10

922,008 13.74 922.021.74

April 24, 1931 -

((Proc. 1950, 47 Stat.

2453) ) s/t

+1,553,371

2,475,389

+215.27

229.01

+1,553,586.27

2,475,618.01

August 4, 1942 -

(Proc. 2564, 56 Stat.

1972) s/t

+3,008

2,478,397

0

229.01

+3,008.00

2,478,626.01

January 20, 1969 -

(Proc. 3890) s/t

+94,284

2,572,681

+459.87

688.88

+94,743.87

2,573,369.88

December 1, 1978 -

(Proc. 4619)

+125,719.00

+46,683.15

+2,161.06

+11.56

+96.51

(State)

(Native)

(Private)

(U.S. Air Force)

(easements and mining

claims)

s/t

+1,331,570

3,904,251

+174,671.28

175,360.16

+1,506,241.28

4,079,611.16

December 2, 1980 -

(P.L. 96-487)

12,683

gained

2,753 lost

+9,930 0 +9,930.00

present acreage 3,914,181 175,360.16 4,089,541.16

On 7/7/92, checked with John Myers (ARO-OL); he said that the

park acreage was 3,669,521 (3,365,233 which was in wilderness), 304,288 non-wild.

preserve acreage was 423,719 (60,578 which was in wilderness), 363,141 non-wild.

total acreage was 4,093,240 (3,425,811 which was in wilderness), 667,429 non-wild.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Appendix A)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/appa.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:45 PM]

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

adhi/appa.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Appendix B)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/appb.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:50 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

Appendix B:

Officials in Charge of the Katmai and Aniakchak

NPS Units

I. While Administered by Outside Units (1921-1971)

Mt. McKinley N.P. Superintendents with Authority over Katmai:

 Henry P. Karstens, 7/21-10/28

 Harry J. Liek, 11/28-5/39

 Frank T. Been, 6/39-5/43

 Grant H. Pearson (acting), 5/43-1/47

 Frank T. Been, 1/47-2/49

 Grant H. Pearson, 2/49-6/49

 Grant H. Pearson (acting), 6/49-8/49

 Grant H. Pearson, 8/49-11/56

 Duane D. Jacobs, 11/56-1/60

 Samuel A. King, 1/60-9/62

 Oscar T. Dick, 12/62-2/67

 George A. Hall, 3/67-6/69

Alaska State Office General Superintendents with Authority Over Katmai:

 George A. Hall, 7/69-10/69

 Ernest J. Borgman, 10/69-2/72

Mt. McKinley-based Seasonal Rangers:

 William J. Nancarrow, 1950

 William J. Nancarrow, then Morton Wood, 1951

 George B. Chaffee, 1952

 George L. Peters, 1953

 Dick Ward, 1954-55

 Richard Riegelhuth, 1956

Mt. McKinley-based Rangers-in-Charge:

 Warren Steenburgh, 1957

 Theodore E. Roeder, 1958-59

 Robert Peterson, 1960

Mt. McKinley-based Supervisory Park Rangers:

 Robert Peterson, also Robert Dewey, 1961

 Dave Bogart, 1962-64

King Salmon-based Supervisory Park Rangers:

 Darrell Coe, late 1964-5/66
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Appendix B)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/appb.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:50 PM]

King Salmon-based Management Assistants:

 Darrell Coe, 5/66-9/67

 Thomas E. Atwood, 1968-5/69

 Russ Cahill (acting), 6/69-9/69

 Gilbert E. Blinn, 9/69-3/71

II. While Under Independent Administration (1971-present)

Superintendents:

 Gilbert E. Blinn, 3/71-6/79

 Roy M. Sanborn (acting), 6/79-9/79

 David K. Morris, 9/79-4/87

 James R. Pepper (acting), 7/87-8/87

 Gilbert R. (Ray) Bane, 8/87-3/90

 James L. Ryan (acting), 3/90-6/90

 Alan D. Eliason, 6/90-7/93

 William Pierce, 12/93-present

Park Rangers (summer at KATM, winter at MOMC):

 Vernon C. Betts, 8/69-1/72

 Steven Buskirk, 5/72-10/72

Rangers (full-time at KATM):

 Mike Tollefson, 10/73-3/77 (park ranger)

 Bruce Kaye, 6/77-6/82 (park ranger)

 Hal Grovert, 11/82-3/88 (park ranger; became Supervisory Park Ranger in 1985, District

Ranger in 1987)

 Kim Speckman, 6/88-4/91 (ranger-pilot)

 Stanley Steck, late 1991-1995 (ranger-pilot)

Chief Rangers:

 Loren Casebeer, 1981-6/87

 Stephen Hurd, 2/88-1995

 Jim Hummel, 1995-present

Subsistence Pilot:

 Joel Collins, 1991-1995

Resource Management Specialists:

 Kathy Jope, 9/82-9/87 (trainee 1982-84)

 Janis Meldrum, 2/88-9/90

 Rob Squibb, 4/89-early 1992

 Rick Potts (Supervisory RMS/research), 1991-1995

Research Biologist:

 Tom Smith, spring 1992-1994

Fisheries Biologist:

 Don Bill, 1995-present

Resource Management Specialists (ANIA):

 David Manski, 11/84-9/88 (Anchorage-based trainee 11/84-10/86)
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Appendix B)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/appb.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:50 PM]

Cultural Resource Manager:

 Pat McClenahan, 1991-1994

 Jeanne Schaaf, 1996-present (based in Anchorage)

Subsistence Chief:

 Susan Savage, 1991-present

Interpretive Specialist:

 Mark Wagner, 3/91-present

Concessions Specialists:

 Susan Sonnevil (later Susan Joffre), 2/86-9/88

 David Nemeth, 1989-4/93

 Brenda Coleman, 1996-present (also LACL & KEFJ)

Management Assistants (based in King Salmon):

 David Nemeth, 4/93-7/93

 Cary Brown, 1993-present

Maintenance Mechanics/Maintenance Foremen/Facilities Chiefs:

 Bill Ross Jefford, 10/66-1968

 Bert James, 1968-10/70

 Hugh Nicholls, 3/71-8/71

 James R. Hepburn, 1/72-1975

 Carl Yoas, 1976-5/85

 Bob Wemple - 5/85-8/85 (acting)

 Ed Stondall, 8/85-10/92

 Richard Sherman, 10/92-5/93 (acting)

 Robin Leatherman, 5/93-present

Permanent Maintenance Workers:

 Richard Sherman, 1981-1985 (seasonal/King Salmon)

 Richard Sherman, 3/86-present

 Richard Proctor, 10/92-present

Administrative Technicians:

 Sally Huff (later Sally Orot), 1981-11/87

 Valerie Payne, spring 1988-11/88

 Lori Rummele, 3/89-9/89

 Elizabeth Copeman, 1989-present

Clerk-Typists:

 Bobbie Mitchell, 1969

 Claudia Baldwin, 1970

 Jeannette L. Patterson, 1971, 1974

 Lillie Jue, 1972

 Wilma McElhaney, 1973

 Patty Wood, 1975, 1976

 Deborah Tibbetts, 1977-5/78

 Augusta (Gus) Skillman, 5/78-6/79

 Peggie Huff, 11/79-8/80

 Betty Durand, 8/80-1981

 Karen Nye, 1982

 Jenifer Agee, 1983

 Ruby Werden, 4/84-7/84
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Appendix B)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/appb.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:50 PM]

 Karen Williams Agee, 11/84-8/85

 Jennifer Tanner, 9/85-11/86

 Kathy Johnson, 2/87-1988

 Elizabeth Copeman, 1988-1989

 Sally Backas, 1988-1990

 Jean Gansch, 1989-91

 Mary McQuity, 1990-1991

 Elizabeth Maynard, 1990-1991

 Sharon Hudon, 1991

 Carole Woodmancy, 1991-present

Superintendent's Representative, Kodiak:

 Jerry Hammond, summer of 1989

 Bill Miller, winter of 1989-1990

 Jerry Hammond, summer of 1990

 James L. Ryan (volunteer), summer of 1991

 Stan Young (volunteer), summer of 1992

Coastal Manager, Kodiak:

 Buddy Goatcher, 1993-present (Coastal Biologist, 1993-1994)

Criminal Investigator, Kodiak:

 Dennis Ziemann, 12/92-1995

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

adhi/appb.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Appendix C)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/appc.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:51 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

Appendix C:

Katmai/Aniakchak Budgets

(Budgets are for Katmai only prior to FY 1981.)

FY 1949-50: $500-$1000 budget; NPS gave it to F&WS for game protection.

FY 1951-55: Total Budget = Management and Protection (M&P) + Maintenance and

Rehabilitation (M&R). [Maintenance and Rehabilitation = Buildings and Utilities (B&U) +

Roads and Trails (R&T).]

Year M&P M&R Total

1951 2,042 0 2,042

1952 2,042 0 2,042

1953 2,962 0 2,962

1954 2,962 0 2,962

1955 4,342 0 4,342

1956-57 - no data

FY 1958-1970: Total Budget = Management and Protection (M&P) + Roads and Trails

(R&T) + Buildings and Utilities (B&U).

Year M&P R&T B&U Total

1958 6,443 0 0 6,443

1959 8,321 0 0 8,321

1960 8,316 0 2,250 10,566

1961 9,729 0 2,249 11,978

1962 10,398 559 3,240 14,197

1963 14,220 782 3,382 18,384

1964 16,300 800 3,400 20,500

1965 - no data

1966 26,300 8,700 15,200 50,200

1967 47,800 20,200 35,700 103,700

1968 52,500 21,400 35,900 109,800

1969 60,900 22,400 37,700 121,000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Appendix C)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/appc.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:51 PM]

1970 67,800 25,400 48,900 142,100

FY 1971-72: Total Budget = Park Management (PM) + Forestry and Fire Control (F&FC) +

Roads and Trails (R&T) + Buildings and Utilities (B&U).

Year PM F&FC R&T B&U Total

1971 59,100 4,500 27,300 54,700 145,600

1972 63,300 4,600 27,700 50,600 146,200

FY 1973-1980: Total Budget = Operations/National Park Service (ONPS)

Year ONPS

1973 177,300

1974 202,800

1975 202,400

1976 246,400

1977 276,300

1978 272,100

1979 294,900

1980 326,600

FY 1981-present: Budgets provided for both Katmai and Aniakchak. Total budget for each

= Operations/National Park Service (ONPS).

Fiscal

Year ANIA KATM

1981 61,400 355,100

1982 95,300 541,900

1983 65,800 681,500

1984 68,100 690,500

1985 67,300 672,900

1986 63,000 643,000

1987 101,000 685,700

1988 102,600 693,300

1989 99,800 689,100

1990 119,000 731,000

1991 123,000 989,000

1992 121,000 1,162,000

1993 152,000 1,262,000

1994 156,000 1,242,000

1995 160,000 1,353,000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Appendix C)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/appc.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:51 PM]

Source: USDI, U.S. Department of the Interior Budget Justifications volumes (later, U.S.

National Park Service Budget Justifications), various dates, at WASO-ABF.

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

adhi/appc.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Appendix D)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/appd.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:52 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

Appendix D:

Katmai Visitation Figures, 1966-1992

Year

Total

Park

Visitation

Recreational

Visitation

Brooks

Camp

Visitation

Attendance for:

Overnight

Backcountry

Stays

Receipts

from

Coop.

Assn.

Evening

Programs

Bus

Tours

Guided

Walks

1966 12 22 3

1967 26 23 7

1968 1584 1584 20

1969 7754 1407 194

1970 11816 1437 60

1971 10424 9611 1145 122 $ 285

1972 12670 11932 1182 98 365

1973 9054 8389 1250 80 846

1974 12483 11900 1319 847 624 1132

1975 9966 9729 1590 741

1976 10590 10423 1737 804 2684

1977 10107 9985 1684 2062 1093 782 1196 2480

1978 11445 11363 2108 2391 1273 985 1238 2300

1979 10706 10629 2656 2819 1471 1032 1703 3138

1980 11868 11824 2179 2584 776 808 1318 3922

1981 13140 13115 2329 2086 5765

1982 14466 14377 2886 3151 1322 915 1739 6218

1983 14105 11182 3033 2581 1227 1178 190 4739

1984 20329 20074 4295 2306 1150 849 367 4603

1985 25340 25142 3674 2337 885 938 387 5459

1986 41776 41663 3893 1852 1000 764 2564 5178

1987 38310 38212 4486 2319 1128 945 2038 7533

1988 45730 45710 6523 3079 8198

1989 49254 40247 5540 1759 8970
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Appendix D)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/appd.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:52 PM]

1990 42769 40778 5858 4400 450 5812 8858

1991 41568 41417 7420 645 5327 8874

1992 46313 46196 5424 18363

Sources: NPS, "Brooks Camp Recreational Use" charts, 1970-1990, KATM-OC; File A2615

(inactive), KATM; compilation of NPS, "Monthly Public Use Report" (Form 10-157), AROOIV; Frankie Barker (ANHA) to the author, March 11, 1993.

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

adhi/appd.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/bibliography.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:54 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

I. Archival Collections

Alaska Historical Library, Juneau:

 Kenneth Chisholm Papers

Alaska State Archives (ASA), Juneau:

 Records of the Territorial Governor, 1909-1958 (RG 101)

 Records of the Alaska Governor, 1959-present (RG 01)

Columbia River Maritime Museum, Astoria, Oregon:

 Columbia River Packers Association (CRPA) Collection.

Denali National Park and Preserve (DENA) Collection, Denali Park:

 Superintendent's Monthly Reports (MOMC)

 Chief Ranger's Monthly Reports (KATM)

Denver Public Library (DPL):

 Ted Swem Collection

Federal On-Scene Coordinator (FOSC-Coast Guard), Anchorage:

 FOSC Master Segment Files

Katmai National Park and Preserve, King Salmon:

 Active files (KATM)

 Museum collection (KATM Annex)

 Subsistence files (KATM-RS)

National Archives, Anchorage, Federal Records Center (NARA ANC):

 National Park Service/Alaska Task Force Collection (RG 79)

 Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, 1904-1960 (RG 22)

National Archives, San Bruno, California (NARA SB):

 National Park Service Collection (RG 79)

National Archives, Washington, D.C. (NARA DC):

 National Park Service Collection (RG 79)

National Geographic Society (NGS), Washington, D.C.:

 Robert F. Griggs Collection

National Marine Fisheries Service, Auke Bay (Juneau).

 Bureau of Commercial Fisheries (BCF) Collection
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/bibliography.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:54 PM]

National Park Service, Alaska System Support Office (AKSO), Anchorage:

 Concessions Division (EC):

 Commercial Use License files

 Katmai Concessions Contract History binder

 Cultural Resources Division (RCR):

 Hanable Research Notes

 National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) files

 Lands Division (EL):

 Melgenak Case files

National Park Service History Collection, Harpers Ferry, W.V. (HFC):

 Alaska Administrative History Collection

 Katmai Collection

National Park Service, History Division, Washington, D.C. (WASO):

 Katmai History Division Files

U.S. Geological Survey, Anchorage (USGS):

 USGS Alaska Archives

University of Alaska, Anchorage (UAA):

 Alaska Packers Association (APA) Collection

University of Alaska, Fairbanks (UAF):

 E. L. "Bob" Bartlett Collection

 Ernest Gruening Senatorial Papers

 Ralph Rivers Collection

University of Santa Clara Archives:

 Bernard Hubbard Collection

II. Theses, Dissertations, and Unpublished Reports

Chisholm, Kenneth, Guide to the Kenneth Chisholm Papers/Photographs, including Alaska

Expeditions with Father B. J. [sic] Hubbard, 1930-1938, unpub. mss., Alaska Historical

Library, Juneau.

Faulkner, Sandra M., "Father Hubbard, The Glacier Priest," unpub. mss., Alaska Historical

Society symposium, Fairbanks, October 1987.

Hogenauer, Alan, "Gone, But Not Forgotten: America's Delisted National Park Service

Sites," unpub. mss., given at a Travel and Tourism Research Association conference, Banff,

Alberta, June 1983.

Horton, G. E. and J. Reynolds, "Effects of Jet Boats on Salmonid Reproduction in Alaskan

Streams," unpub. M.S. thesis (by Horton, with an executive summary by Reynolds),

University of Alaska Fairbanks, 1994.

Northern Consolidated Airlines, "Brooks Camp Log Book," 1953-57, in Katmailand, Inc.

files, Anchorage.

IIIa. Government Reports (Federal)
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/bibliography.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:54 PM]

Alaska Field Committee, A Six Year Integrated Program for the Department of the Interior in

Alaska, 1950-1955, unpub. mss. in Alaska Collection, Box 1, HFC.

Alaska Planning Group, Aniakchak Caldera National Monument, Alaska, A Master Plan

(Washington, NPS), December 1973.

Alaska Planning Group, Draft Environmental Statement, Proposed Aniakchak Caldera

National Monument and Aniakchak Wild River, Alaska, (Washington?, USDI), December

1973.

Alaska Planning Group, Proposed Katmai National Park, Alaska, Draft Environmental

Impact Statement (Washington?, Department of the Interior), December 1973.

Alaska Planning Group, Final Environmental Statement, Proposed Katmai National Park,

Alaska (Washington?, Department of the Interior), 1974.

Alaska Planning Group, Final Environmental Statement, Proposed Aniakchak Caldera

National Monument, Alaska (Washington?, Department of the Interior), October 1974.

Alaska Planning Group, Katmai National Park, Alaska, A Master Plan (Washington, NPS),

December 1973.

Alaska Task Force (USDI), Preliminary Draft Environmental Statement and Master Plan,

Aniakchak Caldera National Recreation Area (Washington?, the author), June 1973.

Alaskasearch, Ltd., "National Natural Landmark Study, Report I," 28 July 1967.

Antonson, Joan M. and William S. Hanable, Administrative History of Sitka National

Historical Park (Anchorage, NPS), December 1987.

Beattie, Joan, "Brown Bear/Human Interactions at Katmai National Park and Preserve,"

unpub. mss., n.d. (1982?).

Been, Frank T., Field Notes of Katmai National Monument Inspection (McKinley Park,

unpub. mss.), November 12, 1940, in AKSO-RCR files.

Behnke, Steven R., Resource Use and Subsistence in the Vicinity of the Proposed Lake Clark

National Park, Alaska and Additions to Katmai National Monument, Anthropology and

Historic Preservation, Cooperative Park Studies Unit, Occasional Paper No. 15 (Fairbanks,

University of Alaska), October 1978.

Berg, H. C., and E. H. Cobb, Metalliferous Lode Deposits of Alaska, USGS Bulletin 1246

(Washington, GPO), 1967.

Bohannon, Fred, "Archeological Resources Assessment, Katmai National Monument,"

October 6, 1975.

Braaten, Anne M. and Barrie K. Gilbert, Profile Analysis of Human-Bear Relationships in

Katmai National Park and Preserve (Logan, Utah State University Department of Fisheries

and Wildlife), c. 1987.

Breedlove, Bailey, Preliminary Draft, Basic Data, Advance Master Plan/Wilderness Research,

Katmai National Monument, Shelikof Strait-King Salmon, Alaska (Anchorage, NPS), June

1969.

Brooks, Alfred Hulse, "Alaska's Mineral Resources and Production, 1923," in Mineral
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/bibliography.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:54 PM]

Resources of Alaska, Report on Progress of Investigations in 1923, USGS Bulletin 773

(Washington, GPO, 1925), 3-52.

Brooks, A. H., Geography and Geology of Alaska, A Summary of Existing Knowledge

(Washington, GPO), 1906.

Brown, William E., A History of the Denali-Mount McKinley Region, Alaska; Historic

Resource Study of Denali National Park and Preserve (Santa Fe, NPS), 1991.

Bureau of Land Management, Alaska Outer Continental Shelf Office, Lower Cook Inlet Draft

Environmental Impact Statement (Anchorage, the author), July 9, 1976.

Bureau of Land Management, Alaska Outer Continental Shelf Office, Proposed 1976 Outer

Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Lease Sale, Lower Cook Inlet Final Environmental Statement

(Anchorage, the author), December 1976.

Burger, Carl, with James Lundeen and Anders Danielson, "Biological and Hydrological

Evaluations of the Fish Ladder at Brooks River Falls, Alaska," draft report (Anchorage, U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service, National Fishery Research Center), June 1, 1985.

Burger, Carl V. (F&WS) and Louis A. Gwartney (ADF&G), "A Radio Tagging Study of

Naknek Drainage Rainbow Trout" (prepared for NPS), December 1, 1986.

Cahalane, Victor, A Biological Survey of Katmai National Monument, Publication 4376

(Washington, Smithsonian Institution), 1959.

Cain, Stanley A., "Trip Report ... Accompanying the Advisory Board on National Parks,

Buildings, Historic Sites and Monuments on its Annual Field Trip, July 30 to August 10,

1965" (typescript).

Carper, Robert L., List of Classified Structures Inventory, Katmai National Monument

(Denver, NPS), April 1976.

Crozier, S. Neil, 1983 Cultural Resource Management Inventory, 36 Native Allotments,

Bristol Bay Region (Juneau, Bureau of Indian Affairs), 1983.

Dall, William H., "Report on Coal and Lignite of Alaska," Seventeenth Annual Report of the

U.S. Geological Survey, 1895-96; Part I, Director's Report and Other Papers (Washington,

GPO, 1896), 771-908.

Dean, Frederick C., "Preliminary Report, Brown Bear-Human Interrelationship Study,"

unpub. mss., c. 1969.

Eicher, George J., "The Effects of Laddering a Falls in a Salmon Stream," unpub. ms., n.d.

(1956?), in AKSO-RCR files.

Eicher, George J., "History of the Bristol Bay Investigation," unpub. mss., Bureau of

Commercial Fisheries, April 25, 1967, in AKSO-RCR files.

Eppling, John and Shakti, "End of Season Report 1991, Aniakchak National Monument and

Preserve," September 1991.

Estus, Joaqlin, Harvey M. Shields, and David Snow, Historic Structure Report, Fure's Cabin,

Bay of Islands, Naknek Lake, Katmai National Park and Preserve (Anchorage, USDI), 1984.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/bibliography.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:54 PM]

Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council, State/Federal Natural Resource Damage Assessment

Plan for the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill, Public Review Draft (Juneau, the author), August 1989.

Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council, State/Federal Natural Resource Damage Assessment

Plan for the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill (Juneau, the author), editions of August 1990 and April

1991.

Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustees, Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Restoration, Draft Work Plan

(Anchorage, the author), editions of 1992 (April 1992) and 1993 (October 1992).

Federal Water Quality Administration, "Kodiak Oil Pollution Incident, February-March 1970,

Summary Report," May 1970.

Greenbank, John, "Sport Fish Survey, Katmai National Monument, Alaska," c. 1955.

Hanable, William S. and Carol Burkhart, The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill and the National Park

Service; A Report on the Initial Response (Anchorage, NPS), 1990.

Harritt, Roger, "Historic Structure Assessment Report, Bunkhouse, Aniakchak National

Monument and Preserve, Archeology Section," unpub. mss., June 1987, in AKSO-RCR

Collection.

Heard, William R., Richard L. Wallace, and Wilbur L. Hartman, Distribution of Fishes in

Fresh Water of Katmai National Monument, Alaska and Their Zoogeographical Implications,

Special Scientific Report--Fisheries No. 590 (Washington, USF&WS), October 1969.

Hussey, John A., Embattled Katmai (San Francisco, NPS), August 1971.

Husted, James H., History of the Johnson Proclamations, 1968-69, September 21, 1970, in

ANILCA Box 1, HFC.

Kauffmann, John M., Katmai National Monument, Alaska; A History of Its Establishment

and Revision of Its Boundaries (Washington, NPS), July 1954.

Keller, A. Samuel and Hillard N. Reiser, Geology of the Mount Katmai Area, Alaska, USGS

Bulletin 1058-G (Washington, GPO), 1959.

Knappen, Russell, "Geology and Mineral Resources of the Aniakchak District, Alaska,"

Mineral Resources of Alaska, 1926, USGS Bulletin 797-F (Washington, GPO), 1929), 161-

223.

Kuehl, Alfred C., "Report on Katmai National Monument, Alaska," 1945, in AKSO-RCR

Collection.

Kurtz, Rick S., Lessons to be Learned; An Administrative History and Assessment of NPS

Activities Following the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill (Anchorage, NPS), in press.

Luntey, Robert, comp., Interim Report on Katmai Project, Katmai National Monument,

Alaska (Washington, NPS), March 1954.

Martin, George C., "The Alaska Mining Industry in 1918," in Mineral Resources of Alaska,

Report on Progress of Investigations in 1918, USGS Bulletin 712 (Washington, GPO, 1920),

11-52.

Martin, George C., "Notes on the Petroleum Fields of Alaska," in Report on Progress of

Investigations of Mineral Resources of Alaska in 1904, USGS Bulletin 259 (Washington,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/bibliography.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:54 PM]

GPO, 1906), 128-39.

Martin, George C., "The Outlook for Petroleum Near Chignik," Mineral Resources of Alaska;

Report on Progress of Investigations in 1923, USGS Bulletin 773 (Washington, GPO, 1925),

209-13.

Mather, Kirtley F., "Petroleum on Alaska Peninsula; Mineral Resources of the Kamishak Bay

Region," in Mineral Resources of Alaska; Report on Progress of Investigations in 1923,

USGS Bulletin 773 (Washington, GPO, 1925), 159-182.

McCartney, Allen P., "An Archeological Site Survey and Inventory of the Alaska Peninsula,

Shumagin Islands, and Other Islands South of the Alaska Peninsula" (Anchorage, U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service/Refuges Branch), 1973.

McClenahan, Pat, "Brooks River Archeological District National Historic Landmark

Nomination," March 24, 1989.

Miller, Don J., Thomas G. Payne, and George Gryc, Geology of Possible Petroleum

Provinces in Alaska, USGS Bulletin 1094 (Washington, GPO), 1959.

Moser, Jefferson F., "The Salmon and Salmon Fisheries of Alaska; Report of the Alaskan

Salmon Investigations of the United States Fish Commission Steamer Albatross in the 1900

and 1901," Bulletin of the U.S. Fish Commission 21 (Washington, GPO, 1902), 173-398.

Moxham, R. M., "Pumice Deposits in the Alaska Peninsula-Cook Inlet Region, Alaska,"

USGS Open File Report #49, 1951.

National Park Service, Alagnak Wild River Management Plan, November 1983.

NPS, Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve, Issues and Management Alternatives,

February 1984.

NPS, Bear Management Plan, Katmai National Park and Preserve, 1983 and 1986.

NPS, Combined Environmental Assessment and Development Concept Plan for Concession

Facilities, Operations and Services Within the Brooks Camp and Grosvenor Camp Areas,

Katmai National Monument, Alaska, October 1980.

NPS, Cultural Resource Management Guideline (NPS-28), December 1991.

NPS, Draft Environmental Assessment, Brooks Falls Fish Ladder, Katmai National Park and

Preserve, May 1987.

NPS, Draft Environmental Assessment, Fishing Regulations, Katmai National Park and

Preserve, August 15, 1986.

NPS, Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Wilderness Recommendation, Katmai

National Park and Preserve, Alaska (Denver, NPS), April 1988.

NPS, Draft General Management Plan/Environmental Assessment, Land Protection Plan,

Anickchak Wild River Management Plan, Wilderness Suitability Review, Aniakchak

National Monument and Preserve, Alaska (Denver, NPS), March 1985.

NPS, Draft General Management Plan, Land Protection Plan, and Wilderness Suitability

Review, Katmai National Park and Preserve, Alaska (Denver, the author), March 1985.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/bibliography.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:54 PM]

NPS, "Draft Statement for Management, Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve," May

1983.

NPS, Environmental Assessment, Draft Development Concept Plan, Brooks Camp and

Grosvenor Camp, Katmai National Park and Preserve, Alaska, January 1982.

NPS, Environmental Assessment for Proposed Revision of Fishing Regulations for Naknek

River, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, n.d. (1975?).

NPS, Environmental Review, Proposed Revision of Fishing Regulations for Naknek River,

Katmai National Monument, Alaska, January 13, 1976.

NPS, Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Wilderness Recommendation, Aniakchak

National Monument and Preserve, Alaska (Denver, the author), September 1988.

NPS, Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Wilderness Recommendation, Katmai

National Park and Preserve, Alaska (Denver, the author), September 1988.

NPS, Final Environmental Statement, Proposed Wilderness, Katmai National Monument,

Alaska (Seattle?, the author), June 13, 1974.

NPS, General Management Plan, Land Protection Plan, Wilderness Suitability Review,

Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve, Alaska (Denver, the author), December 1986.

NPS, General Management Plan, Wilderness Suitability Review, Land Protection Plan,

Katmai National Park and Preserve, Alaska (Denver, the author), October 1986.

NPS, Glimpses of Our National Monuments, (Washington, GPO), 1926.

NPS, Historic Listing of National Park Service Officials (Washington?, NPS), May 1, 1986.

NPS, Katmai National Monument, a Master Plan (preliminary working draft), August 1971.

NPS, Katmai National Park and Preserve, Resources Management Plan (draft), April 15,

1982.

NPS, Katmai National Park and Preserve, Brooks River Area Development Concept Plan,

Alternatives Workbook, Summer 1991.

NPS, King Salmon Headquarters Development Concept Plan/Environmental Assessment,

January 1983.

NPS, Master Plan Brief for Katmai National Monument, September 3, 1965.

NPS, Master Plan Brief for Katmai National Monument, May 1967.

NPS, Master Plan for the Preservation and Use of Katmai National Monument, September

30, 1960.

NPS, "Mission 66 Prospectus for Katmai National Monument," April 1956.

NPS, Mission 66 for Katmai National Monument, May 1957.

NPS, National Park Service Administrative Manual: Vol. IV, Ranger Activities (Washington,

the author), August 1959.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/bibliography.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:54 PM]

NPS, The National Parks: Index 1989 (Washington, GPO), 1989.

NPS, Operation Great Land, unpub. mss., January 1965.

NPS, Public Use of the National Parks; A Statistical Report, 1904-1940 (Washington, the

author), 1963.

NPS, Public Use of the National Parks; A Statistical Report, 1941-1953 (Washington, the

author), 1963.

NPS, Resource Management Plan and Environmental Assessment, Katmai National Park and

Preserve, editions of April 25, 1983; January 1985; and April 1987.

NPS, Revised Draft Environmental Statement, Proposed Wilderness, Katmai National

Monument, Alaska, February 12, 1973.

NPS, Revisions to Preliminary Wilderness Plan, Katmai National Monument, Alaska, May

1972 and July 1972 versions.

NPS, Wilderness Study, Katmai National Monument, August 1971.

National Survey of Historic Sites and Buildings, Theme XXI, Political and Military Affairs,

1865-1910: Special Study, Alaska History, 1741-1910 (Washington?, National Park Service),

1961.

Neuman, Melanie and Kim Heacox, Katmai National Park and Preserve, Katmai Coast Field

Season Report (King Salmon, NPS), 1985.

Norris, Frank, Tourism in Katmai Country (NPS, Anchorage), 1992.

Olsen, Russ, Administrative History; Organizational Structures of the National Park Service,

1917 to 1985 (Washington?, n. pub.), 1985.

Olson, Tamara L., Barrie K. Gilbert, and Scott H. Fitkin, Brown Bear Behavior and Human

Activity at Salmon Streams in Katmai National Park, Alaska (Logan, Utah, Utah State

University Department of Fisheries and Wildlife), June 1, 1990.

Orth, Donald J., Dictionary of Alaska Place Names, USGS Professional Paper 567

(Washington, GPO), 1971.

Paige, John C., The Civilian Conservation Corps and the National Park Service, 1933-1942

(Washington?, NPS), 1985.

Porter, Robert P., Report on the Population and Resources of Alaska at the Eleventh Census:

1890 (Washington, GPO), 1893.

Rich, Willis H. and Edward M. Ball, "Statistical Review of the Alaska Fisheries, Part I:

Bristol Bay and Alaska Peninsula," Bureau of Fisheries Document No. 1041 (Washington,

GPO, 1928), from Bulletin of the Bureau of Fisheries 44 (1928), 41-95.

Rich, Willis H. and Edward M. Ball, "Statistical Review of the Alaska Fisheries, Part II:

Chignik to Resurrection Bay," Bureau of Fisheries Document No. 1102 (Washington, GPO,

1931), from Bulletin of the Bureau of Fisheries 46 (1930), 643-712.

Schiller, Everett L., "Summary Report on Mammalogy," in Robert S. Luntey, comp., Interim

Report on Katmai Project, Katmai National Monument, Alaska (Washington, USDI, March
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/bibliography.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:54 PM]

1954), 110-12.

Sheppard, William L. and David P. Staley, (draft) Archeological Overview and Assessment

of Katmai National Park and Preserve (Anchorage, Environmental and Natural Resources

Institute), 1992.

Smith, Walter R., "The Cold Bay-Katmai District," in Mineral Resources of Alaska; Report

on Progress of Investigations in 1923 (Washington, GPO, 1925), 183-208.

Smith, Walter R. and Arthur A. Baker, "The Cold Bay-Chignik District," Mineral Resources

of Alaska; Report on Progress of Investigations in 1922, USGS Bulletin 755 (Washington,

GPO, 1924), 151-217.

Starr, Frank and Penny, "Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve, End of Season

Report," 1988.

Stone, Ralph W., "Coal Resources of Southwestern Alaska," Report on Progress of

Investigations of Mineral Resources of Alaska in 1904, USGS Bulletin 259 (Washington,

GPO, 1906), 151-71.

Stroud, George and Lynn Fuller, "Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve, Field Season

Report," 1984.

Stroud, George and Lynn Fuller, "End of Season Report, Aniakchak National Monument and

Preserve," September 1983.

Sumner, Lowell, Special Report, Katmai, Master Plan Field Study, September 5-13, 1963

(Washington, NPS), October 1963.

Tuten, Merry Allen, A Preliminary Study of Subsistence Activities on the Pacific Coast of

the Proposed Aniakchak Caldera National Monument, Anthropology and Historic

Preservation, Cooperative Park Studies Unit, Occasional Paper No. 4 (Fairbanks, University

of Alaska), 1977.

Unrau, Harlan D. and G. Frank Williss, Administrative History; Expansion of the National

Park Service in the 1930s (Denver, NPS), September 1983.

U.S. Air Force, History of the Alaska Air Command, 1 January 1976-31 December 1976

(Anchorage, the author), 1977.

U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, Alaska Fishery and Fur-Seal Industries (Washington, GPO),

editions of 1914 to 1936.

U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, Annual Report, editions of 1924 through 1926.

U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, U.S. Coast Pilot, Alaska, Part II: Yakutat Bay to the Arctic

Ocean, second edition (Washington, GPO), 1926. Also fifth edition, 1947.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Governor of Alaska (Washington,

GPO), editions of 1918 through 1931.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Annual Report of the Secretary of the Interior (Washington,

GPO), editions of 1950 through 1958.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Decisions of the Department of the Interior 59 (Washington,

GPO), 1952.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/bibliography.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:54 PM]

U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Department of the Interior Budget Justifications,

various years, 1918 through 1995.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Fishery and Fur-Seal Industries (Washington, GPO),

editions of 1947 to 1955.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, "Alaska Peninsula National Wildlife Refuge, Annual

Report," 1985.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, "Becharof National Wildlife Refuge, Annual Narrative

Report," 1979.

Ward, Peter, A Bibliography of Katmai National Monument, Alaska (Palisades, N.Y.,

Lamont Geological Observatory), May 1966. Revised edition issued February 1971.

Warner, Susan H., Patterns of Brown Bear and Visitor Use of Brooks River and

Recommendations for Management (draft), December 1987.

Weymouth, F. W., H. C. McMillan, and H. B. Holmes, "Growth and Age at Maturity of the

Pacific Ocean Clam, Siliqua patula (Dixon)," Document No. 984, in Bulletin of the U.S.

Bureau of Fisheries 41 (1925), 69th Congress, 1st Session, House Document 230

(Washington, GPO), 1927, 201-08.

Williss, G. Frank, "Do Things Right the First Time:" The National Park Service and the

Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 (Denver, NPS), September 1985.

Wilmot, Richard, with Carl Burger and Pierre Steinbeck, "Genetics of Sockeye Salmon

(Oncorhynchus nerka) in Katmai National Park and Preserve, Alaska" (Anchorage, F&WS,

Alaska Fish and Wildlife Office of Research), May 1, 1986.

IIIb. Government Reports (State or Territorial)

Alaska Department of Community and Regional Affairs, "Chignik Lagoon" and "Chignik"

Community Profiles (Iliamna/Alaska Peninsula Region), December 1982.

Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Alaska Sport Fishing Seasons and Bag Limits, 1976

(Juneau), 1976.

Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Sport Fish, Southwest Alaska Rainbow

Trout Management Plan (Juneau?, the author), December 1988.

Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Alaska Sport Fishing Regulations Summary, 1990.

Alaska Department of Labor, Alaska Population Overview, 1990 Census and Estimates

(Juneau, the author), July 1991.

Buck, Eugene H. (AEIDC), "Bibliography, Synthesis, and Modeling of Naknek River

Aquatic System Information" (prepared for NPS), September 1979.

Gwartney, Louis A. (ADF&G), "Naknek Drainage Rainbow Trout Study in the Katmai

National Park and Preserve," prepared for ADF&G and NPS, 1985.

Lyle, William M., "Geology and Mineral Evaluation of the Aniakchak River Drainage,

Alaska Peninsula" (Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, Open File
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/bibliography.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:54 PM]

Report No. 26), 1973.

MacDonald, Lewis G., "Chronological History of Salmon Canneries in Central Alaska,"

Alaska Fisheries Board Annual Report 3 (1951), 71-84.

Nickerson, Richard B., A Critical Analysis of Some Razor Clam (Siliqua patula, Dixon)

Populations in Alaska (Juneau, Alaska Department of Fish and Game), July 1975.

Rich, Pamela E. and Arlon R. Tussing, The National Park Service in Alaska, an Economic

Impact Study (College, Alaska, University of Alaska Institute of Social, Economic, and

Government Research), 1973.

Roehm, J. C., "Preliminary Report on Some Pumicite Deposits, Katmai National Monument,

Alaska," Territorial Department of Mines, Report MJ-126-1, September 1947.

Roehm, J. C., "Summary Report of Mining Investigations in the Kvichak Precinct, Alaska,

June 13 to July 6, 1941," Alaska Territorial Department of Mines Report 195-31.

Selkregg, Lidia L., ed., Alaska Regional Profiles: Vol. III, Southwest Region (Anchorage,

Alaska Environmental Information and Data Center), 1974-76.

Territory of Alaska, Department of Mines, Report of the Commissioner of Mines, biennial

editions of 1947-48, 1949-50, and 1951-52.

Walker, Ernest P., Report of the Executive Officer to the Alaska Game Commission, editions

of 1925 through 1936.

IV. Public Documents

Code of Federal Regulations, Title 36, for 1972 and 1973.

Congressional Record 1951, 8176; 1952, 521; 1953, 378, 434, and 772; 1954, 645; 1967,

8193; 1983, 3755, 8264, and 20515; 1977, 21751; 1980, H10532, H10540, H10542, and

H10550; 1991, H1325; 1992, H7212.

Federal Register, May 28, 1952, 1475; November 7, 1962, 10833; June 10, 1965, 7899;

March 8, 1967, 3838-39; October 28, 1967, 14971-72; November 22, 1967, 16057; December

5, 1978, 57013-14; December 26, 1978, 60252-55; June 28, 1979, 37732-51, 37784-85; June

17, 1981, 31836-64; April 6, 1983, 14978-81; August 8, 1988, 29746-48; May 1, 1989,

18491-94; October 26, 1992, 48526-27; December 18, 1992, 60248.

Historical Index sheets and Master Title Plats, Bureau of Land Management, Alaska State

Office, Anchorage.

Proclamation No. 1487, September 24, 1918; 40 Stat. 1855.

Proclamation No. 1950, April 24, 1931; 47 Stat. 2453.

Proclamation No. 2177, June 15, 1936; 49 Stat. 3523.

Proclamation No. 2564, August 4, 1942; 56 Stat. 1972.

Public Law 94-204 (Alaska Native Claim Settlement Act amendments), January 2, 1976.

Public Law 96-487 (Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act), December 2, 1980.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/bibliography.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:54 PM]

Session Laws of Alaska, editions of 1946, 1947, 1959, 1961, 1963, 1965, and 1967.

United States Code, 1982 Edition, Titles 16 and 18 (Washington, GPO), 1983.

United States Patent Files, Bureau of Land Management: Alaska State Office, Anchorage,

and Federal Records Center, Suitland, Md.

V. Newspapers

Alaska Weekly (Seattle), January 9, 1931; June 23, 1939; November 2, 1945.

Alaskan, The (Anchorage), October 11, 1940.

Anchorage Daily News, June 4, 1971, 2; May 14, 1988, B5; May 9, 1990, A1; July 1, 1990,

A1; July 9, 1990, A1; July 10, 1990, A1; July 26, 1991; September 15, 1991, A9; April 15,

1992, B2; April 3, 1992, B1, B3; April 19, 1992, A1, A6-A7; June 21, 1992, A7; September

6, 1992, K13; January 11, 1993, A1.

Anchorage Daily Times, August 28, 1925; April 27, 1931; May 4, 1931, 1; May 14, 1931, 1;

April 26, 1940, 4; October 1, 1940; June 22, 1950; February 18, 1959, 8; August 29, 1968,

21; January 24, 1969, 2; January 25, 1969, 2; January 27, 1969, 10; April 22, 1970, 2;

September 5, 1972, 1.

Bear Facts, The (Katmai visitor newsletter), vols. 1-4 (1990-93).

Borough Post (King Salmon-Naknek), November 24, 1989, 13.

Christian Science Monitor, August 2, 1969, 1; November 18, 1969, 22.

Commerce Business Daily, January 15, 1973.

Daily Alaska Empire (Juneau), February 17, 1959.

Jessen's Weekly, October 29, 1948.

New York Times, June 8, 1912, 4; November 6, 1930, 27; May 31, 1931, III:2; June 22,

1965, 2; August 22, 1965, X:17; January 21, 1969, 1.

San Francisco Call-Bulletin, July 26, 1951.

Seattle Times, May 2, 1931, 1; May 4, 1931, 2.

Seward Daily Gateway, April 29, 1931, 4; May 2, 1931, 8; May 14, 1931, 1.

Washington Star, May 20, 1931.

Washington Times, October 12, 1990, 5.

VI. Books

Alaska Environmental Fund, "Alaska, 1970, An Environmental Crisis" (pamphlet), in Alaska

Administrative History Collection, Box 2, HFC.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/bibliography.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:54 PM]

Alaska Northwest Books, The Alaska Wilderness Milepost (Bothell, Wash., the author),

1990.

Alaska Travel Publications, Exploring Katmai National Monument and the Valley of Ten

Thousand Smokes (Anchorage, the author), 1974.

Albright, Horace M., as told to Robert Cahn, The Birth of the National Park Service; The

Founding Years, 1913-33 (Salt Lake City, Howe Brothers), 1985.

Antonson, Joan M. and William S. Hanable, Alaska's Heritage, Alaska Historical

Commission Studies in History No. 133 (Anchorage, Alaska Historical Society), 1985.

Atwood, Evangeline and Robert DeArmond, comp., Who's Who in Alaskan Politics

(Portland, Binford and Mort), 1977.

Blong, R. J., Volcanic Hazards; A Sourcebook on the Effects of Eruptions (Sydney,

Australia, Academic Press), 1984.

Bohn, Dave, Rambles Through an Alaskan Wild; Katmai and the Valley of the Smokes

(Santa Barbara, Capra Press), 1979.

Chase, Alston, Playing God in Yellowstone; the Destruction of America's First National Park

(Boston, Atlantic Monthly Press), 1986.

Cloe, John Haile, The Aleutian Warriors; a History of the 11th Air Force and Fleet Air Wing

4 (Missoula, Pictorial Histories), 1991.

Cooley, Richard A., Politics and Conservation; the Decline of the Alaska Salmon (New York,

Harper and Row), 1963.

Craighead, John J., J. S. Sumner, and John A. Mitchell, The Grizzly Bears of Yellowstone:

Their Ecology in the Yellowstone Ecosystem, 1959-1992 (Washington, Island Press), 1995.

Demars, Stanford E., The Tourist in Yosemite, 1855-1985 (Salt Lake City, University of

Utah), 1991.

Directory Co., Kriss Kross City Directory of Anchorage, 1958 (Anchorage, the author), c.

1957.

Douglas, Robert Dick, In the Land of the Thunder Mountains: Adventures with Father

Hubbard Among the Volcanoes of Alaska (New York, Brewer, Warren and Putnam), 1932.

Dumond, Don E., Archeology on the Alaska Peninsula: The Naknek Region, 1960-1975,

University of Oregon Anthropological Papers No. 21, 1981.

Fedorova, Svetlana G., The Russian Population of Alaska and California, Late Eighteenth

Century to 1867, translated and edited by R. A. Pierce and A. S. Donnelly (Kingston, Ont.,

Limestone Press), c. 1973.

Flexner, Stuart and Doris, The Pessimist's Guide to History (New York, Avon Books), 1992.

Griggs, Robert F., The Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes (Washington, National Geographic

Society), 1922.

Gruening, Ernest, The State of Alaska (New York, Random House), 1954.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/bibliography.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:54 PM]

Harritt, Roger, "The Late Prehistory of Brooks River, Alaska; A Model for Analysis of

Occupations on the Alaska Peninsula," University of Oregon Anthropological Papers 38,

1988.

Hrdlicka, Ales, The Anthropology of Kodiak Island (Philadelphia, The Wistar Institute of

Anatomy and Biology), 1944.

Hubbard, Bernard R., S.J., Cradle of the Storms (New York, Dodd, Mead), 1935.

Hubbard, Bernard R., S.J., Mush, You Malemutes! (New York, America Press), 1932.

Hulley, Clarence C., Alaska, Past and Present, third edition (Portland, Binfords and Mort),

1970.

"Katmai Country," Anchorage Geographic 16, 1989.

Lage, Ann, George Collins, The Art and Politics of Park Planning and Preservation, 1920-

1979; An Interview Conducted by Ann Lage in 1978 and 1979 (Berkeley, University of

California Oral History Project), 1980.

Leer, Jeff, Conversational Dictionary of Kodiak Alutiiq (Fairbanks, University of Alaska,

Alaska Native Language Center), 1978.

Munden, Kenneth W., The American Film Institute Catalog of Motion Pictures Produced in

the United States; Feature Films, 1921-1930 (New York, R. R. Bowker), 1971.

Naske, Claus-M. and Herman Slotnick, Alaska; A History of the 49th State (Grand Rapids,

Erdmans), 1979.

National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers, et.al., National Register of

Historic Places, 1966-1988 (Nashville, American Association of State and Local History),

1989.

Norris, Frank, Gawking at the Midnight Sun; the Tourist in Early Alaska, Alaska Historical

Commission Studies in History No. 170 (Anchorage, the Commission), June 1985.

Oswalt, Wendell, Alaskan Eskimos (San Francisco, Chandler), 1967.

Oswalt, Wendell, "Prehistoric Sea Mammal Hunters at Kaflia, Alaska," Anthropological

Papers of the University of Alaska 4, December 1955.

Pearson, Grant H. with Philip Newill, My Life of High Adventure (New York, Ballantine

Books), 1962.

Rice, Larry, Gathering Paradise; Alaska Wilderness Journeys (Golden, Colo., Fulcrum), 1990.

Roppel, Patricia, Salmon from Kodiak; An History of the Salmon Fishery of Kodiak Island,

Alaska (Anchorage, Alaska Historical Commission Studies in History No. 216), 1986.

Rothman, Hal, Preserving Different Pasts; the American National Monuments (Urbana,

University of Illinois Press), 1989.

Scudder, H. C., "The Alaska Salmon Trap: Its Evolution, Conflicts, and Consequences,"

Alaska State Library Historical Monographs, No. 1 (Juneau, Dept. of Education), 1970.

Sontag, William H., ed., National Park Service, The First 75 Years, Preserving Our Past For
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/bibliography.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:54 PM]

The Future (n.p., Eastern National Park and Monument Association), 1990.

Stevens, Robert, Alaska Aviation History (Des Moines, Wash., Polynyas Press), 1990.

Swain, Una G., National Natural Landmarks in Alaska (Anchorage, Nature Conservancy),

December 1990.

Teben'kov, Capt. M. D., Atlas of the Northwest Coasts of America, trans. and ed. by R. A.

Pierce (Kingston, Ont., Limestone Press), 1981.

Trefethen, James B., Crusade for Wildlife (Harrisburg, Pa., Stackpole), 1961.

Willoughby, Barrett, Alaskans All (Boston, Houghton Mifflin), 1933.

Young, S. B. and C. H. Racine, "Ecosystems of the Proposed Katmai Western Extension,

Bristol Bay Lowlands, Alaska," Contributions from the Center for Northern Studies #15

(Wolcott, Vt., Center for Northern Studies), March 1978.

VII. Articles

Ackerman, R. E. and L. Ackerman, "Ethnoarchaeological Interpretations of Territoriality and

Land Use in Southwest Alaska," Ethnohistory 20 (1973), 315-334.

"Alaska's Land of Steaming Volcanoes," Sunset 118 (April 1957), 32.

"Aleutian Eruptions, 1930-1932," The Volcano Letter 375 (March 3, 1932), 1-3.

"An Extinct Crater on the Alaskan Peninsula," Travel 45 (September 1925), 46.

"Astronauts Make Geology Field Trips to Alaska and Iceland," JSC Space News Roundup,

July 23, 1965, 2.

"Astronauts Train for Moon Landing," The Midnight Sun (NCA newsletter) 6 (Fall 1966), 3.

Ayres, Judith, "Katmai's Eagle Beagle," Alaska 42 (June 1976), A2.

Bailey, E. P. and N. H. Faust, "Distribution and Abundance of Marine Birds Breeding

Between Amber and Kamishak Bays, Alaska with Notes on Interactions with Bears," Western

Birds 15 (1984), 161-74.

"Bristol Bay Residents Target Fisheries, Hunting Rights," Alaska Natives Commission

(newsletter) 2:2 (1993), 1.

Cahalane, Victor H., "Birds of the Katmai Region," Auk 61 (1944), 351-75.

Cauble, Christopher, "I Remember Mama," National Wildlife 17 (February-March 1979), 40-

41.

Clark, Donald W., "Pacific Eskimo Encoded Precontact History," in Robert D. Shaw, Roger

K. Harritt, and Don E. Dumond, ed., The Late Prehistoric Development of Alaska's Native

People, Aurora (Alaska Anthropological Association, Monograph Series No. 4), 1988, 211-

23.

Clark, Donald W., "Pacific Eskimo: Historical Ethnography," in David Dumas, ed.,

Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 5: Arctic (Washington, Smithsonian Institution,
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/bibliography.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:54 PM]

1984), 185-97.

Coe, Darrell L., "Katmai National Monument," Alaska Sportsman 35 (March 1969), 27-34.

Coe, Darrell L., "Katmai National Monument," National Parks Magazine 40 (June 1966), 4-9.

Colby, Thomas H., "Katmai's First Tourists," Alaska 38 (April 1972), 26-28, 66-67.

"Doing Science at the Gates of Hell," Science 249 (August 3, 1990), 475.

Dufresne, Frank, "Katmai Adventure," Field and Stream 56 (February 1952), 42-45.

Dumond, Don E., Leslie Conton, and Harvey M. Shields, "Eskimos and Aleuts on the Alaska

Peninsula: A Reappraisal of Port Moller Affinities," Arctic Anthropology 12:1 (1975), 49-67.

Eichelberger, John C., Wes Hildreth, and J. J. Papike, "The Katmai Scientific Drilling

Project, Surface Phase: Investigation of an Exceptional Igneous System," Geophysical

Research Letters 18 (August 1991), 1513-16.

Glenn, L. P. and L. H. Miller, "Seasonal Movement of an Alaska Peninsula Brown Bear

Population," International Association of Bear Research and Management 4 (1980), 307-12.

Griggs, "Our Greatest National Monument," National Geographic Magazine 40 (September

1921), 219-92.

Grosvenor, Elsie May Bell, "Alaska's Warmer Side," National Geographic Magazine 109

(June 1956), 737-75.

Gruening, Ernest, "Lonely Wonders of Katmai," National Geographic Magazine 123 (June

1963), 800-31.

Guild, Ben, "Aniakchak Caldera, Wilderness World Within a Mountain," Anchorage Daily

Times, December 6, 1976, 15.

Hansen, Susan K., "Valley of 10,000 Wonders," American Forests 83 (February 1977), 26-

29.

Harritt, Roger K., "A Model for Analysis of Late Prehistoric Occupation of the Naknek

Region, Southwest Alaska," in Robert Shaw, Roger Harritt, and Don Dumond, ed., The Late

Prehistoric Development of Alaska's Native People, Aurora (Alaska Anthropological

Association, Monograph Series No. 4), 1988, 189-210.

Higbie, Ruth Griggs, "In the Land of the Fumaroles and Williwaws," New York Times,

March 18, 1973, 10:7, 23.

Hillborn, John, "Chignik Trapper," Alaska Sportsman 3 (December 1937), 12-13.

Hubbard, Bernard, "Exploring the Alaskan 'Moon Craters'," New York Times, October 12,

1930, V:8.

Hubbard, Bernard, "The Heart of Fire Mountain," Saturday Evening Post 205 (July 30, 1932),

14-15.

Hubbard, Bernard, as told to Barratt Willoughby, "Volcanoes Packed in Ice; an Explorer's

Adventures in Alaska," Saturday Evening Post 203 (August 23, 1930), 18-19, 96.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/bibliography.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:54 PM]

Hubbard, Bernard, "A World Inside a Mountain," National Geographic 60 (September 1931),

319-45.

"Hubbard, Bernard Rosecrans," Current Biography, 1943 (New York, H. W. Wilson, 1944),

320-23.

Huber, Louis R., "Flight to Katmai," Alaska Sportsman 16 (April 1951), 6-9, 38-41.

Ingersoll, William T., "Lands of Change; Four Parks in Alaska," Journal of the West 7 (April

1968), 173-93.

"Katmai is Out of This World," The Midnight Sun (NCA newsletter) 5 (Summer 1965), 3.

Knight, Carleton, III, "The Park Service as Client: II," Architecture 73 (December 1984), 48-

55.

Lilian, Stan, "Fish-Trap Patrol," Alaska Sportsman 6 (March 1940), 14-15, 20-25.

McCartney, A. P., "Prehistoric Cultural Integration Along the Alaska Peninsula,"

Anthropological Papers of the University of Alaska 16 (1), 1974, 59-84.

Miller, Thomas P. and Robert L. Smith, "Ash Flows on the Alaska Peninsula: A Preliminary

Report on Their Distribution, Composition, and Age," Geological Society of America

Bulletin, Annual Meeting Abstracts, 1975, 1201.

Miller, Thomas P. and Robert L. Smith, "Calderas of the Eastern Aleutian Arc," Eos

(Transactions, American Geophysical Union) 64 (November 8, 1983), 877.

Miller, Thomas P. and Robert L. Smith, "Late Quaternary Caldera-Forming Eruptions in the

Eastern Aleutian Arc, Alaska," Geology 15 (May, 1987), 434-38.

Muller, Ernest H., Werner Juhle, and Henry W. Coulter, "Current Volcanic Activity in

Katmai National Monument," Science 119 (March 5, 1954), 319-21.

Norris, Frank, "Showing Off Alaska; the Northern Tourist Trade, 1878-1941," Alaska History

2 (Fall 1987), 1-18.

"One Hundred Years of BCF and Its Predecessors," Commercial Fisheries Review 32

(October 1970), 2.

Powers, Howard A., "Alaska Peninsula-Aleutian Islands," in Landscapes of Alaska, Their

Geologic Evolution (Berkeley, University of California Press, 1958), 61-75.

Regan, William V., "Alaska Diary," Santa Clara Magazine 29 (Summer 1987), 10-17.

Rhode, Cecil E., "When Giant Bears Go Fishing," National Geographic Magazine 106

(August 1954), 195-205.

Richardson, Pat, "$400 Million in High Bids at OCS Sale," Alaska Construction and Oil 18

(December 1977), 32-36.

Ryder, Keith, "On Foot in the Valley of Fire and Ice," Alaska Sportsman 30 (September

1964), 24-26, 54-58.

Schaller, George B., "When the Earth Exploded," Alaska Sportsman 22 (June 1956), 8-13.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/bibliography.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:54 PM]

Sherwonit, Bill, "Battle of the Bears," Anchorage Daily News, September 6, 1992, K6-K7.

Sherwonit, Bill, "McNeil River; Where the Bears Come First," Alaska Geographic 16 (1989),

64-73.

Sumner, Lowell, "Magnificent Katmai," Sierra Club Bulletin 37 (December 1952), 29-51.

White, Stewart Edward, "An Emergency is Declared to Exist," Saturday Evening Post 202

(April 12, 1930), 5, 213.

"White, Stewart Edward," Current Biography, 1946 (New York, H. W. Wilson, 1947), 637.

White, Stewart Edward, "Parking the Brown Bear," Saturday Evening Post 203 (March 7,

1931), 38.

Williams, M. Woodbridge, "Aniakchak: Kingdom of Genesis," National Parks and

Conservation Magazine 49 (June 1975), 4-9.

Williams, Ogden, "Katmai and Its Future," National Parks and Conservation Magazine 52

(March 1978), 4-9.

Willoughby, Barrett, "The Moon Craters of Alaska," Saturday Evening Post 203 (December

13, 1930), 10-11.

Wood, Ginny Hill, "Valley of Seven Smokes," Alaska Sportsman 19 (January, 1953), 6-11,

29-34.

"Wrong Volcano Blamed," Science News Letter 69 (April 21, 1956), 246.

Yesner, David R., "Cultural Boundaries and Ecological Frontiers in Coastal Regions; An

Example from the Alaska Peninsula," in Stanton W. Green and Stephen M. Perlman, ed., The

Archaeology of Frontiers and Boundaries (New York, Academic Press, 1985), 51-91.

VIII. Interviews (by author unless otherwise noted)

Bane, G. Ray, February 7, 1991; June 13, 1991; May 18, 1993.

Barker, Frankie, February 24, 1993.

Blinn, Gil, by William S. Hanable, August 26, 1988.

Blinn, Gil, May 24, 1993.

Branson, John, January 30, 1996.

Cochrane, Tim, March 20, 1995.

Coe, Darrell L., by William S. Hanable, August 5, 1988.

Darnell, Joan, May 23, 1996.

Dumond, Don, June 14, 1996.

Eicher, George, by Bill Tanner, August 18, 1984.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/bibliography.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:54 PM]

Fall, James A., May 17, 1993.

Forbes, Robert, July 16, 1993.

Hession, Jack, April 4, 1996.

Heubner, William, February 8, 1993.

Kavanagh, Ross, by William S. Hanable, October 27, 1989; November 15, 1989.

Kennedy, Kay, June 7, 1991.

Manski, David, May 30, 1996.

McClenahan, Pat, March 23, 1993.

Meacham, Charles P., by William S. Hanable, November 15, 1989.

Meldrum, Janis, December 20, 1990; December 29, 1992; February 25, 1993; May 11, 1993;

June 9, 1993.

Miller, Brian, September 8, 1993.

Morris, David K., by William S. Hanable, November 2, 1989.

Morris, David K., June 1, 1993.

Nancarrow, William J., by William S. Hanable, August 1, 1988.

Petersen, Ray, Sr., by William Hanable and Janis Meldrum, November 23, 1988.

Petersen, Ray, Sr., August 9, 1990; April 17, 1991.

Petersen, Ray, Jr., April 17, 1991.

Peterson, Bob, by Bill Tanner, May 19, 1984.

Peterson, Bob, by William S. Hanable, June 24, 1988.

Peterson, Steve, March 13, 1996.

Potts, Rick, May 17, 1993.

Power, John, May 18, 1993.

Regan, William, by Julie O'Keefe, February 8, 1965.

Russell, Richard, May 18, 1993.

Savage, Susan, May 3, 1993.

Shackleton, Steve, February 23, 1996.

Stemp, Ralph, February 4, 1992.

Stondall, Edward, by William S. Hanable, September 15, 1989.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units (Bibliography)

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/bibliography.htm[3/19/2013 1:32:54 PM]

Svoboda, Lee, February 27, 1992.

Wagner, Mark, March 3, 1993.

Ward, Peter, May 18, 1993.

Wood, Virginia, by Bill Tanner, May 10, 1983.

<<< Previous <<< Contents>>>

adhi/bibliography.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map1.jpg[3/19/2013 1:32:58 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map2.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:01 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map3.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:03 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map3.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:03 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map4.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:05 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map5.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:08 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map6.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:10 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map7.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:12 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map8.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:14 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map9.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:16 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map10.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:17 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map11.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:19 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map11.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:19 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map12.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:21 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map12.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:21 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map13.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:23 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map14.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:26 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map14.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:26 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map15.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:29 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map16.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:32 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map17.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:34 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map17.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:34 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map18.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:36 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map18.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:36 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map19.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:40 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/map20.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:42 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo1a.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:42 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo1b.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:43 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo2a.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:43 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo2b.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:44 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo3a.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:44 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo3b.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:45 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo4.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:45 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo5a.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:46 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo5b.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:46 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo6.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:47 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo7.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:48 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo8.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:48 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo9a.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:49 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo9b.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:49 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo10.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:50 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo11a.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:51 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo11b.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:51 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo12a.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:51 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo12b.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:52 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo13a.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:52 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo13b.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:53 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo14a.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:54 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo14b.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:54 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo15a.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:55 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo15b.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:55 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo16a.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:55 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo16b.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:56 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo17.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:57 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo18.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:57 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo19.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:58 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo20a.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:58 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo20b.jpg[3/19/2013 1:33:59 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo21.jpg[3/19/2013 1:34:00 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo22.jpg[3/19/2013 1:34:01 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo23a.jpg[3/19/2013 1:34:01 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo23b.jpg[3/19/2013 1:34:02 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo24.jpg[3/19/2013 1:34:02 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo25.jpg[3/19/2013 1:34:03 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo26a.jpg[3/19/2013 1:34:03 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo26b.jpg[3/19/2013 1:34:04 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo27.jpg[3/19/2013 1:34:04 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo28a.jpg[3/19/2013 1:34:05 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo29.jpg[3/19/2013 1:34:05 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo30a.jpg[3/19/2013 1:34:06 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo30b.jpg[3/19/2013 1:34:06 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo31.jpg[3/19/2013 1:34:07 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo32a.jpg[3/19/2013 1:34:08 PM]
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/images/photo32b.jpg[3/19/2013 1:34:08 PM]
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/foreword.htm[3/19/2013 1:34:10 PM]

KATMAI / ANIAKCHAK

Isolated Paradise:

An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

Pictures cannot bring back the Valley of the Smokes. They have lost the

awesomeness that lies in the setting. You may build in memory, but never

reproduce the scenes which lie beyond the Katmai Pass. They seem too big

to be a part of the rest of the world. They do not connect up with the little

things which are built into our lives.

— Donovan B. Church, 1917, in Robert F. Griggs,

The Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes, p. 217.

Katmai National Monument serves no use and should be abolished.

— Thomas C. Riggs, Annual Report of

the Governor of Alaska, 1919, p. 45.

Katmai Monument is a principality in itself. It is substantially unknown

even to the federal service which theoretically administers it, but every time

an effort is made to do something constructive, the reminder is given that

we must keep on thinking of the generations yet unborn and must give no

thought to those now living. Of course, any sensible person will agree that if

Katmai possesses scenic resources such as we are told it does (although no

one knows very much about them), then perhaps a good argument can be

made for saving scenic values unspoiled for those who are to come, but I

submit this still can be done without applying such a heavy brush in the

withdrawal orders.

— Alaska Delegate E. L. Bartlett to

Secretary of the Interior Julius A. Krug,

May 21, 1947, in Bartlett collection

Katmai National Monument is first of all a wilderness landscape, a place

where the imprint of wildlife is greater than that of people, where clear

lakes and rivers abound, where nearly two hundred miles of coastline bear

little sign of man, and where steaming volcanoes rise above the entire

scene. It is a land of uncrowded spaciousness, a place where people can

experience wilderness on its own terms without the distraction of hordes of

other visitors. It is a place where time and change are measured by the sun,

the tides, and the seasons rather than clocks and calendars. Katmai, in short,

is an experience set in the wild, and perhaps it is even a frame of mind.
Katmai NP & Pres and Aniakchak NM & Pres: Isolated Paradise: An Administrative History of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Park Units

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/katm/adhi/foreword.htm[3/19/2013 1:34:10 PM]

— Supt. Gilbert E. Blinn, in Dave Bohn,

Rambles Through an Alaskan Wild: Katmai

and the Valley of the Smokes, 1979, p. 19.

Map. 1. Location of the Katmai and Aniakchak NPS units. Source: NPS, General Management

Plan for Katmai, October 1986, 4.

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

adhi/foreword.htm

Last Updated: 24-Sep-2000